The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.1125 Ute Ave.A066-99/ I l.7 0 11 11-UE duclj JUL.~UIVIBIUil, LUL ir J , . -1..& aLLUC>. and 8040 Greenline _J ' .14 4 1 - .% A LR 40,3 9 .L CASE NUMBER A066-99 PARCEL ID # 2737-182-68001 CASE NAME Hoag Subdivision, Lot #3, Fire Access and 8040 Greenline PROJECT ADDRESS Hoag Subdivision, Lot #3 PLANNER Chris Bendon CASE TYPE 8040 Greenline OWNER/APPLICANT Larry Winnerman REPRESENTATIVE Gibson Reno DATE OF FINAL ACTION 2/1/00 CITY COUNCIL ACTION PZ ACTION Reso. 6-2000 ADMIN ACTION Approved BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED 12/19/00 BY J. Lindt PARCEL lb: |2737-182-68001 DATE RCVD: |7/30/99 # COPIES:~ "~ CASE NO~A066-99 CASE NAME:~Hoag Subdivision, Lot #3, Fire Access and 8040 Greenline PLNR:~Chris Bendon PROJ ADDR:|Hoag Subdivision, Lot #3 ~ CASE TYP:~8040 Greenline STEPS:~ OWN/APP: Larry Winnerman ADR1570 S. Riverside Ave. C/S/Z: ~Aspen, CO 81611 PHN:| REP:~Gibson Reno ADR: Cis/z: 1 PHNi FEES DUE:~ 1110 (d) + 160 (e) FEES RCVD:~1270 STAT: F- REFERRALS~ REF:| BY| ' DUE:| MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED - DATE OF FINAL ACTION:I 2/1/00 CITY COUNCIL: REMARKS]counted 8/13/99 - PZ: Reso. 6-2000 BOA: CLOSED:|12/19/00 BY: |J. Lindt DRAC: PLAT SUBMITD: ~ PLAT (BK,PG):| ADMIN: Approved MEMORANDUM TO: Phil Overeynder, Water Director THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director---)~0 FROM: Christopher Bendon, Senior Planner 0* RE: Newfoundland Lode Water Extension Request DATE: October 31,2000 The City Planning Department has reviewed this water extension request and has the following comments: The parcel is not within the Urban Growth Boundary and is not recommended to become part of the City at this time. Planning staff does recommend. however, that an agreement to annex in the future be included regardless of the immediate intensions of the City or the existing contiguity of the parcel. There are two lots to be served by City water services in this area. One in the City (Hoag Subdivision Lot #3) and one in the County (Newfoundland Lode). Both parcels have gone through a rigorous planning review in the their respective jurisdiction and the fire access turnaround was jointly approved as it lies in both jurisdictions. The scale and character of the development approved on these two parcels is appropriate and staff does not suggest any substantial modifications to the size of these houses. Some minor aesthetic concerns have been discussed with the applicant and are reflected in the proposed conditions. The City Planning Department is primarily concerned about mountain-side development and its affect of the aesthetic and natural resource qualities of the mountain. The primary resource in this area is the significant vegetation and the ecologic and visual resource it represents. During the fire access turnaround review. the benefit o f the developer seeking a utility easement from the U.S Forest Service became apparent as the existing utility easement between Hoag Subdivision lots 2 and 4 is very steep and holds a substantial number of significant trees. Developing all the required utilities in this one easement would necessitate a clear cut approximately 25 feet wide whereas using the existing road cut would substantially minimize this disturbance, saving most of the trees. In response to this situation, the developer agreed to seek an easement from the U.S. Forest Service to install the utilities within the road. The process involved in acquiring this easement, however, has delayed the development. Planning staff still believes the 1 utility easement with the U.S. Forest Service represents the greatest interest to the community to be achieved in this Water Service Agreement and is recommending the applicant be required to continue pursuing this action. City Planning recommends the following language be included in the Newfoundland Lode parcel agreement for City water service: 1. The applicant shall continue to pursue an easement from the U.S. Forest Service for underground utilities to serve the Newfoundland Lode and Hoag Subdivision Lot #3. 2. The applicant shall not construct any physical barrier to the public trail easement crossing through the Hoag Subdivision, shall not discourage public use of this trail, shall not oppose the installation of trail signage by the City Parks Department and shall not oppose construction and maintenance of trails within dedicated trail and public access easements in the immediate area. The City will provide indemnification o f the applicant consistent with similar trail easements on private property. 3. The applicant shall maintain public access on public trails in the immediate area during construction and shall restore these trails to pre-construction condition after construction. 4. The applicant shall not construct a gate or other similar device on the access way. 5. Any disturbance to the natural terrain and areas of cut and fill shall be revegetated with native species after construction. Any areas too steep for adequate revegetation shall incorporate retaining walls of similar color to the natural vegetation to visually blend into the mountainside. The City Parks Department is available to address specific questions about vegetative species. 6. The existing vegetation outside the designated building envelope shall be preserved and maintained in its natural state. except as otherwise required by Pitkin County BOCC Resolution 99-186. 7. Exterior lighting shall be downcast and not used to accentuate architectural or landscape features o f the site. 8. The applicant shall not use highly reflective materials on the exterior of the structure, including the roof. MEMORANDUM TO: Phil Overeynder, Water Director THRU: Joyce Ohlson. Deputy Planning Director---1~~ FROM: Christopher Bendon, Senior Planner Miqu RE: Newfoundland Lode Water Extension Request DATE: October 31,2000 The City Planning Department has reviewed this water extension request and has the following comments: The parcel is not within the Urban Growth Boundary and is not recommended to become part of the City at this time. Planning staff does recommend, however. that an agreement to annex in the future be included regardless o f the immediate intensions o f the City or the existing contiguity ofthe parcel. There are two lots to be served by City water services in this area. One in the City (Hoag Subdivision Lot #3) and one in the County (Newfoundland Lode). Both parcels have gone through a rigorous planning review in the their respective jurisdiction and the fire access turnaround was jointly approved as it lies in both jurisdictions. The scale and character of the development approved on these two parcels is appropriate and staff does not suggest any substantial modifications to the size of these houses. Some minor aesthetic concerns have been discussed with the applicant and are reflected in the proposed conditions. The City Planning Department is primarily concerned about mountain-side development and its affect o f the aesthetic and natural resource qualities o f the mountain. The primary resource in this area is the significant vegetation and the ecologic and visual resource it represents. During the fire access turnaround review, the benefit of the developer seeking a utility easement from the U.S Forest Service became apparent as the existing utility easement between Hoag Subdivision lots 2 and 4 is very steep and holds a substantial number of significant trees. Developing all the required utilities in this one easement would necessitate a clear cut approximately 25 feet wide whereas using the existing road cut would substantially minimize this disturbance, saving most of the trees. In response to this situation, the developer agreed to seek an easement from the U.S. Forest Service to install the utilities within the road. The process involved in acquiring this easement, however, has delayed the development. Planning staff still believes the 1 utility easement with the U.S. Forest Service represents the greatest interest to the community to be achieved in this Water Service Agreement and is recommending the applicant be required to continue pursuing this action. City Planning recommends the following language be included in the Newfoundland Lode parcel agreement for City water service: 1. The applicant shall continue to pursue an easement from the U.S. Forest Service for underground utilities to serve the Newfoundland Lode and Hoag Subdivision Lot #3. 2. The applicant shall not construct any physical barrier to the public trail easement crossing through the Hoag Subdivision, shall not discourage public use o f this trail, shall not oppose the installation of trail signage by the City Parks Department and shall not oppose construction and maintenance of trails within dedicated trail and public access easements in the immediate area. The City will provide indemnification of the applicant consistent with similar trail easements on private property. 3. The applicant shall maintain public access on public trails in the immediate area during construction and shall restore these trails to pre-construction condition after construction. 4. The applicant shall not construct a gate or other similar device on the access way. 5. Any disturbance to the natural terrain and areas o f cut and fill shall be revegetated with native species after construction. Any areas too steep for adequate revegetation shall incorporate retaining walls of similar color to the natural vegetation to visually blend into the mountainside. The City Parks Department is available to address specific questions about vegetative species. 6. The existing vegetation outside the designated building envelope shall be preserved and maintained in its natural state. except as otherwise required by Pitkin County BOCC Resolution 99-186. 7. Exterior lighting shall be downcast and not used to accentuate architectural or landscape features of the site. 8. The applicant shall not use highly reflective materials on the exterior of the structure, including the roof. 2 October 30,2000 Allan Grimshaw USDA Forest Service 806 West Hallam Street Aspen, CO 81611 ASPE_Y.ITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTME>iT Re: Ute Parcel (a.k.a. Special Use Permit of New Hoag Road Association) Dear Allan: The City of Aspen supports the Special Use Permit to install underground utilities within the existing Newfoundland Road and encourages the Forest Service to approve the request. The City of Aspen believes approving this Special Use Permit will preserve the greatest number of significant trees in the project area and will retain, to the greatest extent practical. the visual and ecological value of this resource. The City of Aspen is dedicated to the preservation of natural landscapes and significant vegetation in all areas that contribute to the character and ecologic sustainability of Aspen and its surrounding environs and believes minimizing disturbance to the steep slope and the dense vegetation is in the best interests of all parties involved. The Newfoundland Road is the principal access to two development parcels adjacent to the National Forest. The owners of these lots have certain development rights and have expressed a desire to develop these parcels in the near future. There exists a public benefit in providing these properties with urban services. There also exists a significant public interest in minimizing disturbance to the steep slopes and significant vegetation in the area. Both o f these interests can be served by approving the Special Use Permit. The City of Aspen has a longstanding commitment to preserving significant natural vegetation in and around its urban environment. If this easement is not granted by the U.S. Forest Service, the developer of these lots will be forced to develop both "deep" utilities (water and sewer) in an existing easement between Hoag Subdivision Lots 2 and 4 heavily vegetated with several significant trees. The requirement to physically separate water lines from sewer lines will then necessitate the clear cutting of substantially all the trees in a.25-foot-wide path having significantly rriore impact than the installation of one deep utility. These trees, while not technically part of the Forest, have a certain ecological value and contribute to the visual resource of the Forest. The City of Aspen is very concerned about the loss of these trees and has made it expressly clear to the developer that a utility easement within the driveway (as proposed in the Special Use Permit application) is a highly preferred alternative. The City is - 130 SOUTH G.\I.ENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-1975 , PHONE 970.920.5090 FAx 970.920.5439 Printed m Reevcled Paper Â·iA*~ appreciative of Mr. Winnerman' s decision to pursue this utility easement, especially considering acquiring such an easement has delayed initiation of the project. By allowing the utilities to be placed within the existing road, the majority of the significant trees in the immediate area can be preserved. The new easement would allow the developer to install only one deep utility in the existing easement and significantly reduce the impact on trees within the easement between Hoag Lots 2 and 4. Furthermore, the land in question is already developed with a road and there does not appear to be any practical ecological value to this land. No trees exist within the road and an access easement across this land already allows the developer to construct and maintain the road. It does not appear that development of utilities within the already disturbed area will diminish the integrity of the forest resource. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this application and please contact me if you have any questions about the foregoing. 920.5072. Sincerely. NAM hm Chris Bendon, AICP Long Range Planner City of Aspen With copy to: Lawrence Winnerman Millard Zimet Steve Ban,~ick - IMU. OVOy r. L OCT. 16. 2000*10:27AM PITTIN COUNTY 0UBLIC WOQKS White River Aspen Ranger District 1 6. l<Lan) Department of Service National 806 West Hallam 'MBF Agriculture Forest Aspen CO 81611 (970) 925-3445 TTY (970) 945-3255 FAX (970) 925-5277 Reply to: 1950 Date: October 10,2000 0 Pitkin County Engineer 0076 Service Center Road Aspen, CO 81611 -. Dear Reviewer: The Forest Service is initiating National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis on a request to bury utility lines in an existing driveway located on National Forest land. The driveway serves two lots near Ute Trail at the south edge of Aspen, Colorado. Scoping is conducted at the beginning of a NEPA environmental analysis. It is a procedure by , which the Forest Service identifies important issues and determines the extent of analysis necessary for an infonned decision on a proposed action. A scoping statement is enclosed. The statement identifies the proposed project and what we currently know of the situation. I want to emphasize that this is just the first step in the analysis and no decisions have been made. All interested parties are encouraged to advise the Forest Service of issues that you believe should be examined. ' I would appreciate receiving your comments on this proposal before October 31. 2000, Comments should be sent to: USDA Forest Service, Attn. Allan Grimshaw, 806 West Hallam Street, Aspen, CO 81611. Please direct questions to Allan Grimshaw, Project Manager, at Aspen Ranger District (970/925-3445). Sincerely, 1 n ..1 0 14Â·- Al?A. UPCHURCh / Distkict Ranger U , Enclosures (I) 1-1 - 4 dJ -hai 14 wi -14 4 j I tle SUV -0Â»-8 5Â°h , 1- 7 A \,3 < 6.Â«3 1 , H ' 20 1 Caring for the Land and Serving People PAnled on %â€¢ycled Po- 199* 6 OCT, 16.2000 10:27AM PITwIN COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS NU, 0V07 r J SCOPING STATEMENT Project-Name: Ute Parcel Utilities. The Proposal The proposal is to bury utility lines in Newfoundland Road to server two building sites on private land. Newfoundland Road is a driveway that crosses a portion of the Ute Parcel (maps are attached), It has been authorized by the Forest Service in the past as a private road. It needs to be authorized to the current owners of the land served by the road, but a decision on road use is not needed. The two lot owners could share utility lines that could be placed in existing casements that cross adjoining private lands. However, to meet State codes for th& Separation of utilities, two trenches would need to bE- dug down steep slopes, A number of large trees would be lost. The applicants propose to bury a sewer line across the adjoining private land. The sewer line must be buried at least 3 feet deep. The sewer line ditch could be dug by light equipment and/or by hand. Thc waterline must be in a ditch at least 7 feet deep. This trench will require the use of heavy equipment. The applicants propose to bury the water line (plus electric power lines, telephones and cable television lines) in the existing driveway. They assert that this alternative will cause less environmental impact. Approval of the driveway as a utility route will require a new Forest ' Service decision. 3'he Decision The decision to be made is whethet or not to authorize the burial of utility lines on National Porcst land, in Newfoundland road. Analysis of the proposal may indicate the need for changes in the proposal. NEPA Documentation & Decision Docummt The analysis for this proposal may qualify for categorical exclusion from documentation in an Pr"ironmental Impact Statement or an Environmental Assessment under Chief of the Forest Service category 31.2 #3. That category is: Approval. modification. or continuation of minor special uses of National-Forest System lands that require less than five contiguous acres of land (ref. Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Ch. 30, at 31.2). If documentation of the NEPA analysis may be categorically excluded under thi6 category, a Project File must be prepared and the decision would be made in a Dccision Memo. The analysis may need to be documented in an Environmental Assessment (EA), In that case, the more lengthy EA process would be followed and the decision would be documented in a Decision Notice. Additional InformatioR Persons desiring additional information on this proposal are encouraged to call Allan Grimshaw, Project Manager, at Aspen Ranger District (970/925-3445). Comments Please submit comments to: USDA Forest Service, Attn. Allan Grimshaw, 806 West Hallam St., Aspen, CO 81611. Please submit comments before October 31. 2000. Â·OCT. 16.2000;-10:28ANIZ~PIT'(IN COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS"Â·:.):5 4. 4- -u --3 NO, 6 08 F 'PÂ· 4 ..4.......... . . . ..1. 4 r'. I ....... 7.... e 11' ...â€¢ ViN-â€¢.'41 --' . .... . Â·':Â· Â· 441 â€¢.6197;' 6 .2~ " 1,1 .1 , : 6,Med utte/ ' '~ ' ',~ ' .I#*di'4 j.elÂ¢k.61 -9 1 ilÂ« 9,26~12,9-1,1 - . a OLF C URSE 1% . ic. Ste'll #4*..1 r ..4 . .... Mt*< 5<dia~Pet-~b,1 'Osiâ€¢' 0.Â· I. :. : ," ; -i, .,i:*~~'*43'~,44$,~444.0:4, . f 1 1 â€¢1 1. . P 1 j : 9 12,:. . 1 ..h 6 1 rt":1~ '6 .t Â·~1~/Ed?~ep~~8 1 1 r. - 01 U. 0 ......,.,il-*t~~~f' b . ill'WL #LAW#<CiA'BA~07 . * 4,3: '1 , , r %, .1 .1 1 - 3" Le 4.N .# Mvmj~.' 1#.f - . /7- ,= 5 le'*k -brl , q .1.140 , 11 1 ..l, -19:-1 1- '.1~.~th . 4 IN Â® 2 ~I ~ 4 4 Â·~ 4 Ne' 72 ...9 ., f , :11 :; J 1 r . 1,161,1.64 4405%.1 ./ 1.42.-67%4 0 1 9 .- 4 .ISe, T'.1 -04 . 44.. " .. .' Â· 0/#fr.'-. 71T.<~4 ~~ c i,:~,Â·' F. . ..... a 40 4. 0 4 4, . 22. 4 1 , ... $.17 , IMI' i 0 VOIM|~|1~~6 /5~~ Reflectof x ...r r - , . Ir 111 ... .1 1 -- ... . 6 - 11 . - , . 7 FA--1 .4 %:0 . .. 1 4 ; 01.-- 4 . 000 - 4 -- 1 , .h- ..r . 1@ 1-4 â€¢ //50.77 1.9--- .:641 &-rif t. " .4 . 1 . ...-0 . t. 4,- -- b . 0 .... = 7.~ r r ./1 FAFM ti 1 r , 4-â‚¬' _ 1 - 4 - PA- 1/- .4 . 0 1 . 11 4 .14 %,1 0,4 ... . *64â‚¬6 PA' 4 ..:-. 4 1 :S 41*4* 1/ m . , 1% 4 1, '52 Ute Parcel 4' !1 -i , 0Â¥14>44 - I Â· 11 -6- -Ih 0 Â¥ 8797 - r , - -4 1 ./ A , 1.4 . .1 le, 11 1 4 Lot 46, T.lOS., R84W. 17 T- re .4 1. + . % e. .T Â· I . 4,1 1. 0. A .1 141â€ž.=p ~ 6, *- fj#-- . + T 1/ -El -1 . - t ,4%9 -2,- 7*:k< iiy-J#*f. . -2-/tr..2.317Â· =47-t r rl#. 1111:f- 1 -2 - 11. 9<42 - 1 -y-.4 7 4 ' e I .. .#f- ' 24.494- -t=4-tiiÂ·~+1-~' 1+ --=J,7, - -r- - - -) - 1 - * 11 .Â·.' 1,k .' *19* 1 4/ 1Ail-- . i*. .a. F - --- Sr)Â£. .7-E- ' 'h -~ 1, / 1/ 0 - I . 4-1 â‚¬ t / .1- 6- --1- ' 4- * -11 1. I 1 . 11 -1 -~- I 9, ~ ~ 1~+ 41 =- 49.-7-7 - -L e .4-, G 1 1 1 r -44- 2 . . ~1,9-tie , 41112~+ A- a 11 13 46~ -, I '*+ . I _ _ I 16 A= 91,= - 2 - 1-1 - '92 %./2 1 - Â·'th , . i .i - W 1 I &2.44 - 4* . -- ---- - I - : ' 41*F,Â£/ta F -26 *49 + tr- = ' _tll =Â·12Â· v ir*,1 4 . -5-War 1 ' 1 It;:b - 1 1-a'll,~ * 1 / 5 1.- J+1&8'*i '1 -31 , 04 1.~ AIX* 45 9 I L ..d- ir. 19 / 00-/ 15" -- - - - 11: 1 - Iâ‚¬ -ff: --1 ' / 1 / - 0-18 49 1-49 - P 11 --- / ./ - li-- . 1 Â£ 11 =6#2 -. 4,; *A 'N4Ji Y+-~1 .k. 1 21= ' 21-' r _p, 4.trpt.~/j~i= :'-4 It 9 -J 71=y - -~2 1 111 L~. . --/4 + r-P- 1 -4-17 -af.,1 + 1 -'L= r '' Â·Â·a#A-,11,L'=-*.+.19! I_ -q 4 - _ -C H.qli~1~90 m Itw-f-1*'4+4 + i.-lj# 1 -31 .1't'~-- S.1- / D - 1 4,1-Â¥ - f~14; , - . ~ ~ * 7+7Lt-iII- Vir WL L i.ry -irci .42 -4 1 5=270' 4 ' '' 1 4 1+4â€¢Â·- 4, ig. - - ' i i /2 1 ' ~ -1+ / AL tr'All- LOCATION MAP * - T Â·f f. ~U-'la- 410 - ~1 -6 ---- -1- 4:4 * '=iruÂ« - - -41 < I -- % , UTE PARCEL â€¢ 41&4-~+ : \' ~-- irl t * Section 12, T.103., R.@4W., Gth P.M. * â€¢ Pitkin County, Colorado * , , --1=-1-01*!4 4-1 3,1 ' e 4 -fr AF+74â€¢ek ' * * - I -arilit"-9*-Â¥* * TÂ¥ Scale: 1/24,000 * OCT. 16.2000 10:30AM PITTIN COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS NO. 6089 p, 5.- - --- - - 0- B 3OVlle. 7** a' 6 t4 C, ~ 517,21 ee# f 7'â€¢p'-,<6 ' ' h L S nok,fle J 4 c~t FS. agw.a c>.0.- 27~{ic roact . ~ ~- r ec.1~ -~~ A+123- la ,_ . } M Te/9.r- 1 07 4Â»? c 9 7-0 r .0. 4 0Â£ ,"A M -1--~lis f.54 c~ 9-d, 9 /ff Qu'l_ C /00 Environment Forest Service wants commei,ts on burying utility lines The U.S. roresi Service is asking for comments on plans to bury utility lines in a driveway that pass- es through National Forest land near the Ute Trail in the southeast corner ofAspen. -Owners of a mining claim called the Newfound- lai]dLo(le have proposed buryinga water line, elec- tric power lines, telephone lines and cable televi- sion lines under the Newfoundland Road, a drive- way to the claim. The Newfoundland Road crosses the Ute Parcela piece of Nadonal Forest land, from Ute Avenue part way to where it enters the New- foundland Lode. Â« The National Environmental Protection Act requires the Forest Service to ask for comments from the public to help determine the extent of environmental analysis necessary for any such pro- ject. The decision to be made is whether or not to authorize the burial of utility lines under the drive- way on National Forest land. - Comments should be sent to USDA Forest Ser- vice, Attn. Allan Grimshaw, 806 W Hallam St., Aspen, CO. 81611. Please submit comments by Oct. 31. Call 925-3445. FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET PC 970 925 8700 2000. -07 07:55 #893 P.02/07 t-* LAW OFFICES OF KLEIN-ZIMET PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 201 North Mill Street S.ite 203 Herbert S. Klein Aspen, Colorado 81611 Millani J. Zimer (970) 925â‚¬700 Phone (970) 928-3977 Fax Of Coun,el: Jacqueline L. Gardner *also â€¢dmitted in New York July 12, 2000 Allan R. Grimshaw United States Forest Service Aspen Ranger District 806 West Hallam Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Special Use Permit ADDlication of New Hoaq Road Association Dear Al: This law firm represents the owners of Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision and The Newfoundland Lode Mining Claim, both of which properties are served by a driveway (the "Driveway") off Ute Avenue in Aspen that crosses a small portion of Forest Service property; you have previously provided to me a "Decision Merna", dated October 6, 1998, from the Aspen Ranger District, granting approval to use the Driveway as the access route to these two properties. This law firm also represents "New Hoag Road AssociationÂ°, a Colorado non-profit corporation (the "Applicant") that has been formed by the owners of those two properties to administer and maintain that Driveway, in accordance with the suggestion contained in your letter to me, dated April 22, 1999, that accompanied the Decision Memo. Please accept this letter, and the enclosed materials, as constituting the Applicant's application for a Special Use Permit from the Forest Service that would permit the Applicant to install and maintain certain underground utility lines beneath the Driveway, specifically: {a) a water line to service the fire hydrant that would protect the residences to be constructed on the Hoag Lot 3 and Newfoundland Lode properties; (b) water lines that would supply potable water to those two residences; and (c) electric, telephone, and cable television lines that would service those two residences. Joining in this application will be: AT&=T Cable Television, US West, and Noly Cross Energy, as they are the reipective owners of the cable television, telephone, and electricity lines that will be buried beneath the Driveway (the water lines will be owned by the Applicant). 1.-1. 49.2 - ' 37 r-k' Rti- 4-+i j.i., ~ 1,03%Â·pÂ·.554<FL., :Vot 13*ltitÂ·-. ir.Â·- ''1 'F..9, A:.-29# 5 Â· i FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET PC 970 925 8700 2000 -07 07:56 #893 P.03/07 r â€¢ r Allan R. Grimshaw United States Forest Service July 12, 2000 Page 2 Please find enclosed a utility plan, prepared by High Country Engineering, that depicts the Applicant's plan for the burial of these utilities beneath the Driveway. It is my understanding that the City of Aspen has approved of the enclosed utility plan, as it meets the respective requirements of the Water Department, Parks Department, and the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. As you know, the Applicant has previously submitted a proposal to you regarding this Special Use Permit application. dated May 16, 2000. In reply, you have sent to the Applicant a letter, dated May 23, 2000, requesting further information. In addition, the parties participated in a site visit on JUne 13, 2000, at which time representatives of the Applicant and you met with officials from Che City of Aspen's Water and Parks departments. In response to concerns raised at that site visit, the owners of the two subj ect properties and the Applicant have modified their initial proposal that was previously sent to you, and those modifications are incorporated into the enclosed utility plan. Specifically, at the site visit the representative of the City of Aspen Water Department made it clear that the water line and the sewer line must be separated, and the City's Parks Department representative made it clear that they very much want to minimize t the disturbance to the rather dense foliage and steep slope that currently exists in the easement between Lots 2 and 4, Hoag Subdivision. In response to those concerns from the City, the utility plan was redesigned with the dual goals cf: (1) separating the water and sewer lines; and (2) minimizing the amount of foliage, slope, and enviromental disturbance. Accordingly, the enclosed utility plan contemplates running only the sewer line and gas line in the easement between Lots 2 and 4,- and to have the balance of the utilities run beneath the Driveway. It is estimated that the installation of those two utilities in the Lot 2/4 easement would require only a 3 foot deep ditch, and that some or all of that ditch could be dug by hand in order to minimize the disturbed area. By contrast, the water line requires a ditch that is approximately seven feet deep. Furthermore, Holy Cross Energy intends to run a three-phase electric line to these properties (in order to serve the fire hydrant and related pumping equipment, as well as the two projected residences), and that line would require a depth of at least four feet and a horizontal separation from any water or sewer line of at least four feet. The Applicant would like to make it clear that there will be two (2) separate residential properties to be served by the utility lines that are the subject of this Special Use Permit application. :UNS.fk. 2-- 1.. ft-3. trÂ¢4-Â· -' ':?.14$.... 7 .,9.*.if,â€žtri..%.- 1-JitÂ»4~ ~ FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET PC 970 925 8700 22 -07 07:56 #893 P. 04/07 V - Allan R. Grimshaw United States Forest Service July 12, 2000 Page 3 In your letter dated May 23, 2000, it was stated that the residence to be served by these utility lines-would only be the one to be built on Lot 3. Hoag Subdivision. However, the Applicant desires to make it clear that the Newfoundland Lode Mining Claim, and the residence to be constructed on that Claim, are also to be served by these utility lines. This is an important point. because the letter dated May 23, 2000 focused on the possibility of running the utility lines in the various easement areas depicted on the Plat of the Hoag Subdivision. However, no such right to run utility lines exists with respect to the Newfoundland Lode Mining Claim, becauae the Hoag Plat did not dedicate those utility easement areas to the general public; rather. only the lots within the Hoag Subdivision are benefitted by those easement rights. So at this time there is no way to run utility lines into the Newfoundland Lode property except across the Driveway. Furthermore, the owner of the Newfoundland Lode Claim has been negotiating with the owner of Lot 2, Hoag Subdivision, to obtain consent to run utility lines up the Lot 2 easement to serve the Newfoundland Lode Claim. The owner of Lot 2 has made it clear that no permission will be granted for a wide clear-cut, as would be necessary if all utilities were to be run up the Lot 2 easement. t Rather, consent will be granted only to run the sewer and natural gas lines for the Newfoundland Lode Claim up the Lot 2 easement, as the disturbance from those lines would be relatively minimal. Therefore, in order to provide service to the Newfoundland Lode Claim the remainder of the utilities to service that property must run beneath the Driveway, as there is no other point of access for those utilities to the Newfoundland Lode Claim. Turning now to the specific questions raised in the letter dated May 23, 2000: 1. Regarding the burial of all utilities in the easement area between Lots 2 and 4 of the Hoag subdivision, that is not possible given the City's instructions that the water and sewer lines must be separated, and that the disturbance to the surface area, slope, and foliage of the Lot 2/4 eadement must be minimized - If all of these utilities were to be run up the Lot 2/4 easement. it would require a clear cut of approximately 25 feet in width, and the elimination of substantially all of the trees currently growing in the Lot 2/4 easement. By contrast, running most of the utilities beneath the Driveway, as depicted on the enclosed utility plan, would require the elimination of very few (if any) trees. Aa you heard at the site visit'held on June 13, 2000, the City of Aspenrs Water Department and the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation . tff-*6.â€ž 7 13;39.. *44,3/./ 1 r ~.7.-4,1.7 lk' '9! .:, 1,Â· u ~Â· 1<f': ' ' =ROM :KLEIN-ZIMET PC 970 925 8700 2000 -07 07:57 #893 P. 05/07 Allan R. Grimshaw United States Forest Service July 12, 2000 Page 4 District each insist that there must be adequate separation between the water and sewer lines. In order for that separation to be created, the Applicant would have to displace substantially all of the trees and brush currently growing in the Lot 2/4 easement area. But the City's Parks Department is extremely concerned about that situation, and wants to minimize that displacement. SO the collective desire of the City' s Parks Department. Water Department, and Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District is to have the water line run under the Driveway, and the sewer line run in the Lot 2/4 Easement, as that would achieve the desired separation while minimizing the foliage displacement. Regarding the other utilities, the Applicant has been informed that due to the three phase nature of the electric line it must be separated horizontally from the water or sewer line by no less than four feet, and must be buried at a depth of at least four feet. So in order to minimize the surface disturbance in the Lot 2/4 easement area, the electric line must go UP the Driveway. Similarly, placing the telephone and cable tv lines with the electric line would minimize the disturbance in the Lot 2/4 easement area. 2. Regarding the utility easement between Lots 4 and 5, please note that the utility easement between Lots 2 and 4 is 15 feet wide, while that between the other lots in this subdivision are only 7.5 feet wide. So the easement between Lots 4 and 5 is simply not wide enough to service the various utility needs of the Hoag Lot 3 property and the Newfoundland Lode property. Furthermore, the City cf Aspen's Parks Department, as stated clearly at the site visit, very much wants to minimize the disturbance to the,existing foliage by using the shortest route possible -- the easement between Lots 2 and 4. IC a route other than the Lot 2/4 easement route were taken, it would result in a greater distance travelled to reach the sites of the two projected residences, and thus create a greater disturbance. 3. Regarding the utility easement between Lots 1 and 2. substantially the same problems arise as with regard to the utility easement between Lots 4 and 5. The easement between Lots 1 and 2 is merely 7.5 feet wide, the distance to be travelled is substantially greater than the Lot 2/4 route. and the steepness of the area is an additional consideration that would complicate both the insertion of the utilities as well as the revegetation of the area. 4. Regarding bringing in the utilities over the utility and public trail easement that exists to the West of Lot 3, as was stated at the site visit there are no utilities to the West of Lot 3 to bring in until one reaches the ski slope area. The great PROM :kLEIN-ZIMET PC 970 925 8700 2000 -07 07:57 #393 P.06/07 I . Allan R. Grimshaw United States Forest Service July 12, 2000 Page 5 distance to be travelled, and the.resulting disturbance to the area in question, make this route impractical. S. Regarding purchase of a right-of-way, the owner of the Newfoundland Lode is now in the process of negotiating a right to run utilities on the Lot 2/4 Easement. Other than the owners of Lots 2 and 4, there are no adjoining property owners with whom the owners of the two subject lots can negotiate, because the City of Aspen's Parke Department has made it clear that it only wants the disturbance associated with the insertion of these utilities confined to the Lot 2/4 Easement. Similarly, a wider easement is not a possibility, because the City's Parks deparment wants to minimize the disturbed areas, and because the owners of Lots 2 and 4 are not inclined to increase the disturbed areas on their respective lots. The Applicant also desires to make the Forest Service aware of the following additional reasons why thisÂ·Special Use Permit should be granted: a. The Forest Service has previously granted to the Applicant a right to use the surface of the Driveway. Once the utilities are installed, the day-to-day use of the Driveway will be substantially identical to the use the Forest Service has already approved. Furthermore, it would be somewhat illogical for the Forest Service to approve a surface - use and deny a subsurface use of the same exact Driveway. b. The City of Aspen has made it clear to the Applicant that the enclosed Utility Plan is the only plan that will meet the City's two criteria of separating the water line from the sewer line, and minimizing the disturbance to the Lot 2/4 easement area. C. The Applicant has made a good faith investigation of all other possible methods of providing utility service to the subject properties, including the possibility of drilling a well in order to obviate the need to bring in the water line. Unfortunately, no other means of bringing in the utilities is feasible. d. The Applicant desires to act in a manner that will minimize the disturbance to the foliage and the environment of this area. The Drivewdy already exists today, and by placing most of the utilities underneath the Driveway the Applicant. would be minimizing the environmental impacts. The Applicant believes that protecting the enviroment is an important part of the Forest Service's mission, and that granting this Special Use Permit application would be in furtherance of that mission. . 91 ;63;2,4: '2%41 ./-' FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET PC 970 925 8700 29 -07 07:58 #893 P.07/07 . 2 Allan R. Grimshaw United States Forest Service July 12, 2000 Page 6 Ln support of this Special Use Permit application, please.also find enclosed the report of Steve Boyle, of Bio Logic Research & Consulting, pertaining to a ~Biological Assessment" and a "Biological Evaluationu of the Driveway area. It is my- understanding that Steve has previously contacted you to confirm that these are the reports you requested in order to process this applitation, and that he has submitted this report to Julie Grade, the USFS wildlife biologist, for her review. It is my understanding from my prior discussions with you that you will require letters from the various utility providers who will own utility lines that will be buried beneath the Driveway, in which they will join this application as co-applicants. By separate cover I will forward to you those letters as and when I receive them from these utilities (US West, Holy Cross Energy, ATT Cable Television). However, given the size of these utility providers, it may take me some time to get those letters to you. Accordingly, the Applicant requests that you commence processing this application at this time, with the understanding that the final special use permit shall not be issued in the absence of the letters from the respective utility providers. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding any of the foregoing. The Applicant would very much like to hear from you as soon as possible as to your analysis regarding the likelihood of the granting of this application and the requested Special Use Permit. Very truly yours, KLEIN-ZIMET PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ~CaÂ»--/--#*..7--UiR---9 Millar*13â‚¬ '~ zi:Fnet Enclosures - CC: Lawrence J. Winnerman 1 1 1 s ~Â· i - F - .Â·SS ./: + 4 Rebecca Schickling, 08:54 AM 8/4/00 -0600, Re: Hoag Lot 3 To: Rebecca Schickling <rebeccas@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Hoag Lot 3 Cc: davidho Bcc: Attached: Becca: That's not my recollection. In fact, they stated that the trail would remain untouched during construction. This was after questions by the P&Z about the impacts on the existing trail. For more assurance, we included a condition in P&Z Reso 00-6 "If the pedestrian trail below the proposed turnaround is proposed to be altered, plans must first be approved by the Trails Coordinator of the City Parks Department." Reso 00-6 was for the turnaround only and was approved on February 1, 2000. The previous 8040 approval considered the house and was approved (subject to the turnaround approval). Reso 96-28 was approved Dec. 17, 1996, and states as condition #7 "concurrent with the excavation and grading required for the residence, he applicant shall rough grade the section of the trail within the building envelope to the elevation and width established by the Parks department and shall construct retaining walls in areas of disturbance and excavation within the building envelope." There are no conditions of approval in either of these two 8040 resos that require vacating any trail easement nor was it ever discussed at the meetings or proposed in their application. Chris. t 06:00 PM 8/3/00 -0600, you wrote: Chris & David, We had a meeting today with Larry Winnerman, Augie Reno and some other of the people he has working on his Hoag Lot 3 development. Larry claimed that P&Z made a condition of ' ! approval to vacate a section of trail easement and to revegetate it. Is this true? Can P& Z require or recommend that the City vacate an easement? Do you have an approximate date of when they went to P&Z so we can confirm with the minutes of the meeting. Thanks. Rebecca Schickling Assistant Parks Director City of Aspen Printed for Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 ' 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 shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of the Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption from expiration, extension or reinstatement is granted or a revocation is issued by the City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Larry Winnerman, 317 Park Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number Lot #3 Hoag Subdivision, Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property 8040 Greenline Approval for Fire Turnaround Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Planning and Zoning Resolution 2000-06, 2/1/00 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) February 11,2000 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) February 12, 2003 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 11th day of February, 2000, by the City of Aspen Community Develepment DirectÂ°fÂ· C lu> d. c.0.'0-0-0.4:t- July%nn Woods, Community Development Director 1/ G.Planning.Aspen.forms.DevOrder J I 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: Lot #3, Hoag Subdivision of the City and Townsite of Aspen, by approval of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to resolution 6, series of 2000. For further information contact Julie Ann Woods, at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 920-5090. City of Aspen Account Publish in The Aspen Times on February 11,2000. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING AN 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW FOR THE VEHICULAR ACCESS AND FIRE DEPARTMENT TURN-AROUND LOCATED ON LOT #3, HOAG SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ASPEN. Parcel No. 2737-182-68-001 Resolution #00-06 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from WWH3, L.L.C. Larry Winnerman, Manager, for an 8040 Greenline Review for a fire access turn around to allow a fire apparatus to adequately maneuver while serving Hoag Subdivision Lot #3 and an adjoining parcel of land located in Pitkin County know as the Newfoundland Lode; and, WHEREAS, Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 96-28 granted 8040 Greenline approval for a single-family home and conditional use approval for an Accessory Dwelling Unit to be constructed on Lot #3, Hoag Subdivision. conditioned upon, among other conditions, a subsequent review and approval for a fire access turn around pursuant to the 8040 Greenline standards; and, WHEREAS, the fire access turn around is proposed to be partially located on, and to serve, a parcel of land located entirely within Pitkin County known as the Newfoundland Lode; and, WHEREAS, the Newfoundland Lode has been granted the necessary land use approvals by Pitkin County, pursuant to Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners Resolution 99-186, for the construction of a single-family residence and the improvements necessary to accomplish the Pitkin County portion of the proposed turn around; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.435 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, after a recommendation by the Community Development Department and consideration of comments by relevant referral agencies. the Planning and Zoning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for an 8040 Greenline Review based on the criteria that are set forth in said Section; and, WHEREAS, the Fire Marshall, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City Water Department, City Engineering, City Parks Department, the Aspen/Pitkin County Building Department, and the Pitkin County Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and provided comments, and the Community Development Department recommended approval of the application, with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on February 1,2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved by a to CO vote the 8040 Greenline Review for the fire access turn around on Lot #3 of the Hoag Subdivision, City of Aspen, with the conditions described herein. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: That the 8040 Greenline Review for the fire access turn around on Lot #3 of the Hoag Subdivision, City of Aspen, is approved with the following conditions. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 440388 02/11/2000 11:56A RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 1 of 3 R 15.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 1. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners Resolution 99-186, regarding development on the Newfoundland Lode, and shall comply with all provisions of City o f Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 96-28, unless specifically amended herein. References to the 1994 Uniform Building Code shall be amended to require conformance with the building code in effect at the time of building permit application. 2. To ensure conformance with the representations made in the application, requirements of the 8040 Greenline Review, and to ensure the improvement is built in a safe manner. a City building permit, a Pitkin County Earthmoving permit, and a Pitkin County Access permit shall be required for the construction of the turn-around. 3. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall: â€¢ Record an access easement, that includes public emergency access, across the portions of Hoag #3 and the Newfoundland Lode that correspond with the proposed turn-around location. â€¢ Record a construction agreement for all areas expected to be impacted by the construction of the turn-around that runs to the benefit of both the Hoag #3 parcel and the Newfoundland Lode parcel. â€¢ Obtain a utility easement across the Forest Service portion of the access road to accommodate the required service lines or submit a letter to the Community Development Department stating that any utilities developed on Forest Service lands will be relocated at the sole cost of the applicant if an easement is not eventually granted by the Forest Service. 4. The Building Permit application shall include: -9 8 â€¢ A revised Site Improvement Survey for both the Hoag #3 parcel and the Newfoundland Lode parcel documenting the easements of record established Z in condition #3 and showing existing trees that are subject to the tree removal ->0 --9 Ordinance. -0 z ...1 â€¢ A geologic assessment of areas affected during construction of the turn- --1 al around, including the stability of the slope above the turn-around, performed 0 by an Engineer registered in the State of Colorado. 10 Z â€¢ Construction details related to the foundation design, retaining walls. any underdrain systems, site grading, soil stabolization plan, and surface drainage . s plan signed and stamped by an Engineer registered in Colorado that addresses 00 the technical concerns raised in the geological assessment. The drainage plan G NÂ® must accommodate drainage on-site both during and after construction and must confirm any proposed drywells can be constructed without causing - damage to down gradient properties. A 2 year storm frequency should be used -00.9 in designing drainage improvements. A soil assessment must be provided if drywells are proposed. --N â€¢ A tree removal permit from the City Parks Department for the removal or relocation oftrees as per Section 13.20.020 of the Code. 1111111111111111 4038 2 1 â€¢ A water tap permit for a tap sized for the required fire suppression systems (for both the fire plug and suppression within the structure) and for the domestic use. A pump system may be required by the Fire Marshall to accommodate the required pressure for the fire suppression system. â€¢ A completed line extension request and collection service agreement with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. A tap permit from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District and a design for the line extension for review by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Engineer. 5. If evidence of mining activity is discovered during excavation o f the property for either the turn-around or the residence, all construction activity shall cease until a mitigation plan is approved by the City Engineer. 6. If the pedestrian trail below the proposed turn-around is proposed to be altered plans must first be approved by the Trail Coordinator of the City Parks Department. 7. City Water service for the Newfoundland Lode requires an extraterritorial water service agreement approved by the Aspen City Council. This Resolution shall not imply that water service will be extended to the Newfoundland Lode. 8. Amendments to the approved Accessory Dwelling Unit shall be in conformance with the current Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations. 9. These conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet ofthe building permit set and all other drawing sets used for construction. The primary contractor shall be provided with a copy of this Resolution and shall submit a letter as part of the building permit application stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. 10. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval. unless otherwise amended by other conditions. The applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on February 1,2000. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: /e CHy Attorney Robert Blaich, Chair -3 ATTEST: 111111111111111111 lilli 111111111 lill i" 111 lilli lili lili 440388 02/11/2000 11:56A RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 3 of 3 R 15.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ~ackie Lothian, Deputy, Deputy City Clerk C:\home\CHRISB\CASES\HOAG_3\PZ_RESO.doc RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE 3040 GREENLINE REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT FOR LOT 3 OF THE HOAG SUBDIVISION Resolution No. 96- ~ ~ WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.68.030(C) of the Aspen Municipal Code, no development shall be permitted at, above or 150 feet below the 8040 greenline, unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all the requirements of said Section; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.40.090 of the Aspen Municipal Code, accessory dwelling units may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission as conditional uses in conformance with the requirements of said Section; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Jim Valerio, Karen Johnson and Highland Investment, Ltd. requesting 8040 Greenline Review approval to construct a single family residence and Conditional Use Review approval to construct an attached, studio accessory dwelling unit; and WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, Housing Office, and the City Engineering, Parks, and Community Development Departments reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and continued the application at public hearings on September 3 and November 5,1996; and WHEREAS, during a public hearing at a regular meeting on December 17,1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved by a 3-2 vote the 8040 Greenline Review and Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit, subject to the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department, as amended during the meeting. NOW. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that it does hereby approve the 8040 Greenline Review for a single family residence and Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit for Lot 3 of the Hoag Subdivision, as shown on the revised plans dated 12/9/96, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Planning Commission shall review and approve the plans for the fire turnaround pursuant to the 8040 Greenline standards of the Code, prior to submission of any construction, excavation or building permits for Lot 3 ofthe Hoag Subdivision. 2. The residence shall be designed to withstand avalanche impact and deposition loads, as recommended by Art Mears in his avalanche analysis dated January, 1987. 3. No development. including grading and vegetation removal or landscaping, shall occur outside of the approved building envelope, except for utility and driveway extension and maintenance and grading and construction of a trail within the platted easement. The building envelope shall be staked and fenced prior to commencement of excavation. 4, A landscape plan and a tree permit shall be submitted for review and approval by the Parks Department prior to building permit submittal. Trees to be retained on-site shall be protected during construction with fencing around the dripline ofthe trees. 5. All exterior lighting shall be downcast. 6. All excavated material shall be removed from the site. A plan for deposition of the material shall be included with the building permit application for review and approval by the Community Development Department. 7. Concurrent with the excavation and grading required for the residence, the applicants shall rough grade the section of the trail within the building envelope to the elevation and width established by the Parks Department and shall construct retaining walls in areas of disturbance and excavation within the building envelope. 8. The applicants shall install a residential fire sprinkler system to be approved by the Aspen Fire Marshal prior to issuance of any building permits. 9. The unused driveway easement through the lot shall be vacated. The upper portion of the driveway easement shall be revegetated and the lower portion shall be retained solely as a trail easement. 10. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicants shall submit the appropriate deed restriction for an accessory dwelling unit to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office for approval. Upon approval of the deed restriction by the Housing Office. the applicants shall record the deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorders Office with proof of recordation to the Planning Office. The deed restriction shall state that the accessory unit meets the housing guidelines for such units, meets the definition of Resident Occupied Unit, and if rented, shall be rented for periods of six months or longer. 11. Prior to issuance of any building permits, kitchen plans shall be verified by the Housing Office to ensure compliance with specifications for kitchens in ADUs. 12. The ADU shall be clearly identified as a separate dwelling unit on building permit plans and shall comply with the 1994 UBC Sound Transmission Control guidelines. 13. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, Community Development and Housing staff shall inspect the ADU to ensure compliance with the conditions of approval. 14. All new surface utility needs and pedestals shall be installed on-site. 15. A drainage report and plan and a grading plan shall be provided with the building permit application for review and approval by the City Engineer. Historic drainage flows shall be accommodated on-site: any increase in storm run-off flows shall be routed and detained on-site. 16. The applicants shall agree to join any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of-way. The agreement shall be executed and recorded prior to issuance of any building permits. 9 17. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on December 17,1996. Attest: Planning and Zoning Commission: . A. /24-/2 01 'A vv w. V , 1 k G dv v w ~hckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Sara Garton, Chair 34,0 \ 0 1\9 \c-1- 3 ASPEN PLANNIO 2 ZONING COMMISSION February 1,2000 DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 1 MINUTES . 1 WEST END TRAFFIC AND TRANSIT STUDY. 1 330 LAKE AVENUE - HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION 5 * HOAG SUBDIVISION LOT #3 - 8040 GREENLINF 5 7â„¢ & MAIN STREET ADVISORY RESOLUTION 8 TRUSCOTT CONCEPTUAL PUD SCHEDULE & APPLICATION 9 10 ASPEN PLANNINI ZONING COMMISSION Februarv 1,2000 Bob Blaich opened the special meeting at 4:05 p.m. held with City Councilf~ Members: Tony Hershey, Tom McCabe, Jim Markalunas and Terry PaulsA. Planning & Zoning Members Roger Hunt, Roger Haneman, Steven Bug(~ow, Tim Mooney, Ron Erickson Jasmine Tygre and Bob Blaich were present. Â£ity staff in 4ttendance: Claude Morelli, Transportation; Chris Bendon, Julie Ar>dWoods, Coth~unity Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.~ DECI~RATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None werddisclosed. MINUTES \ MOTIO~ Roger Hunt moved to adopt th~ninutes of 11 January 2000. Ron â‚¬ickson second. APPROVE]~/1-0. PUBLIC HEARING:~ WEST END TRAFFIC AND TRANSIT STUDY Bob Blaich opened the publ~*earing fo~~e West End Traffic and Transit Study. Julie Ann Woods stated that P&0 would not take action until February 15th because this meeting was not noticed propJflyjor tonight. Claude Morelli, Transportation P14~h~tated that he was also the manager o f this project and introduced Jim Char*r, Tranbportation Consultant. Charlier stated that he had been working on t]~ts for about hâ‚¬ear and he said that he would be talking about the studies and*hat decisions iici come before the city. He said there were meetings with tlÂ¥& Music Associates\Rd the neighborhood; in the summer of 1999, they did~'some monitoring and fihtwork. Morelli explained the:4 decisions from page 2 of the Mqmo dated February 1,2000 and the slide presentation, which were the concepts of a hiulti-year MAA Transportation Plan, the direction to staff, funding for sumfer 2000 transit services and the marketing program. He said there was an overview af the study with Volume 1 - General framework for traffic; Volume 2 - TraffiAnitigation in the West End and Volume 3 - Small-scale transit vehicle options. Morelli stated that the cut-through traffic in the West End were serious and would be more serious in the future. He said the focus was on the MAA tonight. Morelli summarized the 1999 summer field survey, which included a two-week traffic count and a 4-day count of vehicle occupancies, pedestrians, bicyclist~ transit riders, and parked cars before and during concerts. 1 "20 h ASPEN PLANNIP c ZONING COMMISSION February 1,2000 The City Planning & Zoning Commission began the regular meeting after the West End Traffic Study presentation at 5:55 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: 330 LAKE AVENUE - HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION Bob Blaich stated that there was no notice provided. Julie Ann Woods stated that the application was withdrawn. MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to withdraw the public hearing at the request of staff for the landmark designation on 330 Lake Avenue. Roger Haneman second. APPROVED 7-0. NEW BUSINESS: HOAG SUBDIVISION LOT #3 - 8040 GREENLINE Bob Blaich opened the 8040 Greenline Review. Chris Bendon explained that this was for the Hoag Subdivision, Lot #3 fire access turn-around in response to the approved condition #1 from P&Z Resolution #96-28. Bendon illustrated the site on a blue line with the notation that the Newfoundland Lode was the adj acent parcel in the county but shared the fire access tum-around. At the time of the 1996 approval, there was concern for the safe turn-around of a fire truck. Bendon noted that the property had recently changed owners, which was good, since there were problems with the former owners of Hoag #3 and Newfoundland Lode reaching an agreement on the access turn-around. He said the Newfoundland Lode parcel (in the county) had just been approved for a residence; it went through a takings proceeding with Pitkin County which included the portion o f the turn- around that lies in Pitkin County. He said the remaining portion o f the turn-around was in the city, which was the last portion o f the approval process to be reviewed. Bendon said there was some concern for the aesthetics from Ute Avenue, looking up at the wall and trail easement. He said the applicant proposed to face the wall with rock and provide a landscape plan for the area in front of the wall. Bendon said the major concern was for the ability of a fire truck to be able to safely turn-around in a 50-foot radius. He said the fire department reduced the radius to 40-foot with the addition of a fire hydrant. This reduced the cut and fill considerably and the residence must be sprinkled. Pitkin County required an access and earthmoving permits. Bendon said that he had suggested that it was reviewed as one development with the city and county. 5 ASPEN PLANNIN ZONING COMMISSION February 1,2000 any more signs. Blaich said the pedestrian shelters would be difficult for / pladement until after the surveys were done because there was no way of owing wherete people came from. Charlier stated that the survey coordinatio would be done witk~RFTA also. Hershey stated that ifthe busses were at capaci the number ori~solution would be to add more busses. Jake Vickery,)public, inquired about the management for load 1 eling. Morelli responded ther~as some load leveling with the Harris Hall ncerts. Werner Keuner, public, said that if there was a charge for arking in the lots then wouldn't the cars be fo ed out o f the lots and onto the treets, becoming more of an enforcement problem. harlier replied that the pr posal implemented paid parking and residential parki enforcement at the ame times. Robert Zupancis, public, stated th he owned shoe store in town for 20 some years and when it rained at the wine stival e need for umbrellas was great. He suggested the MAA use their logo to cr a tasteful umbrella to be sold at the concerts and ticket booths. He said the);ic t sales persons needed to be educated and posed questions for the ticket purehaser t be asked and the answers recorded. He noted that there could be incentiye rewards the ticket sellers. Zupancis stated one part o f the education process would be to nform the purchaser o f the transit alternatives and weather tonditions. He said th hotel employees would also need education. Zupancjlsaid it would be better to ave too many busses than too few, so that there 96uld not be bad experiences r those people riding the busses. Charlier respondpd that the point of sale was usefu information and there was additional information with the customers. Bill Stirling, public/stated that walking from the tent was treach rous at night on 4th, 5th or 6th Stregd He noted that lighting in the West End was i ortant and the light available ikthe West End was house lighting for walking. He hgted there was there was only one light stanchion at each intersection in the West End'.nd more lighting was needed maybe in the middle of each block for people to feeh@fe while walking. He agreed with Bob on the existing sign pollution in the Wdst End. Stirling noted that it was romantic walking in Aspen and said that sidewalks would not be welcomed. He said that pinpointing busses would make them frequent and consistent around the beginning and end of each concert. Stirling stated that it was a privilege to live in the West End; one of his favorite neighbors was the Music Associates of Aspen. He said that the MAA along with the Institute and Physics provide 52 weeks of a backyard that was unparalleled and for 41 weeks the West End was virtually traffic free. Stirling stated that as a West End resident he loved, as many of his neighbors also loved, the MAA. 4 2*1 ASPEN PLANNINâ‚¬ ZONING COMMISSION February 1,2000 Bendon said the fire department preferred that the water main for the fire hydrant be placed in the road, which was pre ferable because o f the steepness o f the easements between Lots 2 and 4. Bendon said the forest service easement required prior approval from the other review processes before granting or platting a forest service easement of the access road. He said that Phil Overyender summarized this in the memo (exhibit 4); the water and sewer utilities required separation in those lines (with the water in the road and the sewer in the current utility easements). He said that there were requirements o f the distance that the utilities needed to be apart from one another. The water service, which required a private service in-line pump system, also required a private water system. Roger Hunt commented that a cross-section and elevation of the wall for height and the relationship to the trail would have been helpful. He said that just because the wall was in the county, didn't mean that the city couldn't see the wall and trail easement. The City would be impacted by it visually. Augie Reno, Architect, stated that he has been involved with this property since 1990 with disagreement between the two property owners, now with one property owner there would be the ability to move forward with an agreement on the access. He said there were some wrongs done prior to 1990 that were being corrected now which included some road cuts and an existing retaining wall. Reno provided photos o f the cut on the Newfoundland Lode and the retaining wall, which was 44. pre-cast concrete with ties back into it. He proposed to take out that existing wall '3 and put up a new masonry unit wall with geo-tech style tent-style members going back into the earth in lifts piled up. Reno stated that the height of the wall will not be increased, but there will be a curvilinear point for strength and face the wall with a similar stone treatment like the one on the south side walls of the existing driveway. Blaich asked if it was a native stone. Reno replied that it was a native stone. Hunt asked the distance from the trail to the wall. Reno responded that it 4 averaged 12' to 17' (15' average). He said the landscape plan included protecting some large evergreen trees, adding new trees and adding some stacked boulders about 2-214 feet high. These boulders won't be on the trail but within the distance -h where the granular material was towards the wall; he said they would not touch the trail as it exists today. Julie Ann Woods asked if the construction would be accessed from the cul-de-sac above. Reno answered that it would be done above because the tiebacks would be done in layers. Reno said the turn-around itself had a 40-foot radius because the drive continued on to the Lot #3 proposed house that would be sprinkled and a fire hydrant was placed in the driveway. Blaich asked if the road would be maintained. Reno stated that it would be maintained. He said the road that was cut past and up high above 6 ASPEN PLANNIN ZONING COMMISSION February 1, 2000 that would be re-graded and re-vegetated to return it to the natural condition of the terrain and keep the house down as low as possible. Reno said the cul-de-sac would have an asphalt surface with a grass-creep center and landscaping. Steven Buettow asked if the trees in the center would impede the fire truck turn-around. Reno answered that he spoke to Ed Van Walraven from the fire department and the fire department said the smaller vehicles could make the diameter turn with the fire hydrant. He said there was enough room for a larger fire truck to pull in the driveway, back-up and go around the tree. Ron Erickson voiced concern for the size ofthe trees in the future with growth causing turn-around problems. Reno replied the trees could be trimmed up to the height of the vehicles at that time. Reno said the developer was placing another house on the uphill side of the cul-de- sac with the building envelope coming within 15 feet of the cul-de-sac, which required an easement. Reno said instead of a retaining wall required for the cut, there would be a building that will act as the retaining wall itself. Hunt reiterated that the building was then built into the hill at that level. Reno said the county had approved that building with the garage at the lower level. Reno said there was an in-line pump and explained as Bendon had previously described the utilities. The commissioners noted that they have reviewed this property many times over the years. Erickson was not sure that criteria 1,2,4,5 or 6 (exhibit 3) were met, but did not know what else could be done since the house was already approved. Reno said the house on Hoag 3 was 5,000 some square feet. Herb Klein, Attorney, stated that the Newfoundland Lode house was limited to 5930 square feet with a 750 square foot garage; he said that the county review was rigorous. Blaich stated this was an example o f the city/county requiring a joint review. Bendon responded that he had delayed any city review scheduling for Hoag 3 until after the county reviewed the Newfoundland Lode building site and turn-around. Erickson stated minutes from that county meeting would have been helpful and appropriate for city review. Klein said that they had a copy of BOCC Resolution #99-186. He said that he did the original 1990-91 review and the issues were based upon that review because the conditions had not changed; it was a vested rights issue. He said that it was a general review of the old approvals from 1990- 91 because of the takings hearing. Erickson stated that 1991 approval did not include a cul-de-sac. Klein replied that it was required from the fire marshal that there be adequate fire access; the previous owner disturbed the area with a huge excavation which required remediation or a house to stabilize the slope. Klein said that the unified building application would be a good approach. 7 ASPEN PLANNIN : ZONING COMMISSION February 1,2000 Roger Hunt moved to adopt P&Z Resolution #2000-06 approving the 8040 Greenline Review for Hoag Lot #3 with all the conditions and finding that it met the criteria on the sheet provided by the Attorney's Office. Steven Buettow second. Roll call vote: Mooney, yes; Tygre, no; Erickson, yes; Hunt, yes; Haneman, yes; Buettow, yes; Blaich, yes. APPROVED 6-1. Tygre stated that she did not feel that criteria 4 and 5 were met. Hunt agreed. NEW BUSINESS: 7TH & MAIN STREET ADVISORY RESOLUTION BRb Blaich stated that comments from the commission would clarify the resolution to ~forward. Chris Bendon said that the commissioner statements were listed ' and thEpurpose of the meeting was clarification to move the resolution onto 'ty council. 'Blflich commented that GQMS denied the project 7-0 because of e corner store. He said that city council could over rule the P&Z vote as eli as the GMQS denial. The commission dis ssed the resolution amendment considerin the location or a need for the store at this ocation. Was there a need for a train r bus stop on this site and what were the tran ortation issues. There were qu stions ofthe livability ofthe commercial unit as a re dential unit and how the d ign should be re-done. The employee mitigation for a c mercial unit resulte in the loss of 2 affordable units. The parking must be on-site r each unit and e neighborhood concerns for the parking problems were recognize . MOTION: Ron Erickson move o extend the meeting until 7:15 p.m. Jasmine Tygre second. APPB VE -0. Location. (D The 7th and Main Street parcel is a go location for an affordable housing project. Corner Store. Â©The Corner Store c cept is one that should not be pursued by City Council because it is the wrong locat n for such a use. Â® People will be forced to live above a commercial space rath than another residence. Â® "Giving-up" a residential unit for the corner stor is not a worthwhile trade-off. T~tommunity can't afford one fewer unit. There sh uld be a twelfth unit. The demand for affordable housing is too great for this unit n t to be used as affordable housing. @ A failed commercial unit would be too proble atic to convert to a residence and represent an additional cost to the taxpayers. The Commission questions the City being in the business of subsidizing comm cial rent. A question of legality was raised. Service. (D Accommodating deliver 8 ASPEN PLANNIN( ZONING COMMISSION February 1,2000 servih vehicles has not been well thought-out. Large semis need more space an*' will not be able to turn around on seventh street. Â® A commercial unit in this/ location should not be serviced from the alleyway because as this would dj,Kupt many residenth ip the area. Â® The commercial space will generate mop/frash than the dumpster area can easily accommodate. @ The store cannot be *tequately serviced from Main Street due to the current parking and traffic gl,69 problems. Parking. CD The projelt *hould provide one parking space py4nit on-site, Â® An off-site parking solution ihinacceptable for ownership ho,slng. Density. Â©The proposed density would be a~propriate if all parking wag proposed on-site. Architecture. (D The residentiaNesign is flawed beeilse ofthe commercial element. The Architecture was driven by the cowlftercial concept. Â® The scale of the building is too large for the entraritÂ¢ to AsFen and the neighborhood context. Site Planning. (D The plan was driven bk>?4 Commercial component. Â® City Council should reconsider the all-residefititconcept presented during pre- application work sessions. MOTION: Roger H#Iit moved to adoptthe amended P&Z Resolution #00-04. Jasmine TyÂ¢ife second. APPROVER 7-0. i MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to extend the *eting until 7:30 p.m. Jasmine Tygre second. APPROVED 7-0. INFORMATION ITEM: TRUSCO+T CONCEPTUAL PUD SCHEDULE & APPLICATION The Truscott meeting will be held February 15: Meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Uflt*li) rtift/RFO/LAC) ~*kie Lothiln, Deputy City Clerk 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director .~~j*O FROM: Christopher Bendon, Planner ~ /~ M A RE: Hoag Lot #3 Fire Turn-Around 8040 Greenline Review DATE: February 1, 2000 SUMMARY: The applicant, WWH3 - Larry Winnerman, Manager, has applied for 8040 Greenline approval for a fire access turn-around to serve a new house proposed on Lot #3, Hoag Subdivision. The new home was granted 8040 Greenline approval pursuant to P&Z Resolution No. 96-28 (attached). Condition #1 of this approval required the applicant to return to the P&Z for 8040 Greenline approval for a fire access turn-around to serve the new home. This application is in response to that condition. The application has taken a long time to come forward in a formal sense. Various owners have come to the City with various scenarios of constructing a turn-around, but have not formally applied due to ownership or technical design problems. This owner owns both the Hoag #3 parcel and the Newfoundland parcel, vastly simplifying the design approach. And, this owner has acquired the necessary approvals from Pitkin County for development on the Newfoundland Lode, including the Pitkin County half of the proposed turn-around. The 8040 Greenline standards primarily concentrate on the effects of site grading, the ability for the property to be served with utilities and fire protection, and the visual effects of the resulting development on the mountain backdrop of the City. Staffs preference for this turn-around has always been for the minimum radius necessary to meet all of the City's safety requirements, an engineered approach whereby the difficulties of the site were fully addressed, and for a solution to the aesthetics of the structure from the trail and from Ute Avenue. With respect to the 8040 standards and staff' s goals for this development, staff believes there are four primary issues for the Commission to consider with this proposal. A discussion of these issues is contained under the heading "Main Issues." Staff recommends approval of the 8040 Greenline Review for the Hoag Lot #3 fire access turn-around, with conditions. APPLICANT: WWH3, L.L.C. Larry Winnerman, Manager . Represented by Herb Klein, Attorney, and Reno Architects. 1 MAIN ISSUES: Fire Safety and Turning Radius. The most difficult aspect of development in this location has been addressing the need for a fire apparatus to turn around. The site's terrain does not lend itself well to a simple solution, as in most cases. Staff' s perspective has been to encourage the minimum turning radius while fully addressing the requirements for safety. The provision of a fire hydrant allows the Fire Department to use smaller trucks - requiring a smaller turning radius. This can be accomplished by installing slightly larger water lines and a pump system to ensure adequate pressure - a system that will also serve the fire sprinkler requirement for the residences. With the provision of a fire hydrant, the Fire Marshal has agreed to a forty (40) foot turning radius for the cul-de-sac. This allows adequate turning ability for the District's smaller vehicles. A letter from the Fire Marshal is attached. Aesthetics. A principal concern over this application has been the visual affect of this structured improvement from the trail easement and from Ute Avenue, both north of the turn-around. In staff s estimation, a cinderblock wall would not be an adequate solution. The applicant has proposed to face the wall with rock, much the same as the rock facing on the access road wall at the intersection with Ute Avenue. This softens the appearance and is a relatively attractive solution. The applicant has also proposed landscaping along the northern edge of the structure to help soften the appearance of the improvement. Staff believes this is an adequate solution. Dual Jurisdiction. Given the terrain, the existing access, the existing modifications to the slope, and the two parcels in which access is sought, the location of this improvement is very logical and is preferred by staff. The location, however, is both within the City and the County and raises several questions regarding jurisdiction. The applicant has obtained all necessary approvals to construct the county portion of the turn-around. These approvals were granted in conjunction with approval for a new residence to be constructed on the Newfoundland Lode. As part of the County approval, the applicant must acquire a County earthmoving permit prior to construction to ensure adequate construction and revegetation methods are used. The remaining portion of the turn-around is located within the City's 8040 Greenline Review area and this review represents the last threshold for these two houses. Forest Service Easement. The applicant has an existing access easement across a portion o f the National Forest located close to Ute Avenue. Utility easements are in place between Hoag Lots #2 and #4. However, the terrain in this location is rather steep and is not a preferable situation for both installation and maintenance of service lines. Both the City Water Department and the Aspen Consolidation Sanitation District prefer a utility alignment along the vehicular access easement. This requires a new easement be recorded on the Forest Service land. 2 The applicant has been in the process of acquiring a utility easement across the Forest Service parcel and staff has included this easement in the recommended conditions. The Forest Service easement process is fairly lengthy but all indications from the Forest Service, and from County Planners more familiar with the agency, are that the easement is only a matter of paperwork. LOCATION: Lot #3, Hoag Subdivision. Located just above (south) Ute Avenue across from Ute Cemetery. (See location map.) ZONING: Conservation (C). PREVIOUS ACTION: The 8040 Greenline for the residence was approved, pursuant to P&Z Resolution 96- 28 and the fire access turn around review was stipulated as a condition of that approval. The Commission has not previously considered this application for the fire access turn around. REVIEW PROCEDURE: 8040 Greenline Review. With a recommendation from the Planning Director, the Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a proposed development based on the corresponding criteria. STAFF COMMENTS: The Hoag #3 parcel has been approved for a single family residence. The approval, however, required an additional land use application and approval for the fire access way. The applicant is not proposing any amendments to the 8040 approval for the residence. The Newfoundland Lode, located entirely in Pitkin County, has been approved for a single-family residence. (BOCC Reso. 99-186.) The approval considered the turn- around and the applicant needs only to apply for an earthmoving permit and an access permit for the turn-around. The fire access turn-around will serve both of these residences and is proposed to be developed across both properties. The county portion of the development requires an earthmoving permit which has a review requirement by the County Engineer. Due to the structural complexities of the remaining City portion of the development, staff has recommended a building permit be required for the City portion. This has been recommended to ensure the turn-around has an engineering review for the full development and not just half of the development. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." A location Map has been included as Exhibit "C." The application has been included as Exhibit "D." 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the 8040 Greenline Review for the Hoag #3 fire access turn-around, with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners Resolution 99-186, regarding development on the Newfoundland Lode, and shall comply with all provisions of City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 96-28, unless specifically amended herein. References to the 1994 Uniform Building Code shall be amended to require conformance with the building code in effect at the time of building permit application. 2. To ensure conformance with the representations made in the application, requirements of the 8040 Greenline Review, and to ensure the improvement is built in a safe manner, a City building permit, a Pitkin County Earthmoving permit and a Pitkin County Access permit shall be required for the construction of the turn-around. 3. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall: â€¢ Record an access easement, that includes public emergency access, across the portions of Hoag #3 and the Newfoundland Lode that correspond with the proposed turn-around location. â€¢ Record a construction agreement for all areas expected to be impacted by the construction of the turn-around that runs to the benefit of both the Hoag #3 parcel and the Newfoundland Lode parcel. â€¢ Obtain a utility easement across the Forest Service portion of the access road to accommodate the required service lines or submit a letter to the Community Development Department stating that any utilities developed on Forest Service lands will be relocated at the sole cost of the applicant if an easement is not eventually granted by the Forest Service. 4. The Building Permit application shall include: â€¢ A revised Site Improvement Survey for both the Hoag #3 parcel and the Newfoundland Lode parcel documenting the easements of record established in condition #3 and showing existing trees that are subject to the tree removal Ordinance. â€¢ A geologic assessment of areas affected during construction of the turn-around, including the stability of the slope above the turn-around, performed by an Engineer registered in the State of Colorado. â€¢ Construction details related to the foundation design, retaining walls, any underdrain systems, site grading, soil stabolization plan, and surface drainage plan signed and stamped by an Engineer registered in Colorado that addresses the technical concerns raised in the geological assessment. The drainage plan must accommodate drainage on-site both during and after construction and must confirm any proposed drywells can be constructed without causing damage to down gradient properties. A 2 year storm frequency should be used in designing drainage improvements. A soil assessment must be provided if drywells are proposed. 4 â€¢ A tree removal permit from the City Parks Department for the removal or relocation of trees as per Section 13.20.020 of the Code. â€¢ A water tap permit for a tap sized for the required fire suppression systems (for both the fire hydrant and suppression within the structure) and for the domestic use. A pump system may be required by the Fire Marshall to accommodate the required pressure for the fire suppression system. â€¢ A completed line extension request and collection service agreement with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. A tap permit from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District and a design for the line extension for review by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Engineer. 5. If evidence of mining activity is discovered during excavation of the property for either the turn-around or the residence, all construction activity shall cease until a mitigation plan is approved by the City Engineer. 6. If the pedestrian trail below the proposed turn-around is proposed to be altered, plans must first be approved by the Trail Coordinator of the City Parks Department. 7. City Water service for the Newfoundland Lode requires an extraterritorial water service agreement approved by the Aspen City Council. This Resolution shall not imply that water service will be extended to the Newfoundland Lode. 8. Amendments to the approved Accessory Dwelling Unit shall be in conformance with the current Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations. 9. These conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit set and all other drawing sets used for construction. The primary contractor shall be provided with a copy ofthis Resolution and shall submit a letter as part ofthe building permit application stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. 10. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. The applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the 8040 Greenline Review, for the Hoag Lot #3 fire access turn- around, with the conditions included in Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 00-06." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Referral Agency Comments Exhibit C -- Location Map Exhibit D -- Development Application C:\home\CHRISB\CASES\HOAG 3\PZ MEMO.doc 5 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING AN 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW FOR THE VEHICULAR ACCESS AND FIRE DEPARTMENT TURN-AROUND LOCATED ON LOT #3, HOAG SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ASPEN. Parcel No. 2737-182-68-001 Resolution #00- d~ WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from WWH3, L.L.C. Larry Winnerman, Manager, for an 8040 Greenline Review for a fire access turn around to allow a fire apparatus to adequately maneuver while serving Hoag Subdivision Lot #3 and an adjoining parcel of land located in Pitkin County know as the Newfoundland Lode; and, WHEREAS, Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 96-28 granted 8040 Greenline approval for a single-family home and conditional use approval for an Accessory Dwelling Unit to be constructed on Lot #3, Hoag Subdivision, conditioned upon, among other conditions, a subsequent review and approval for a fire access turn around pursuant to the 8040 Greenline standards; and, WHEREAS, the fire access turn around is proposed to be partially located on, and to serve, a parcel of land located entirely within Pitkin County known as the Newfoundland Lode; and, WHEREAS, the Newfoundland Lode has been granted the necessary land use approvals by Pitkin County, pursuant to Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners Resolution 99-186, for the construction of a single-family residence and the improvements necessary to accomplish the Pitkin County portion of the proposed turn around; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.435 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, after a recommendation by the Community Development Department and consideration of comments by relevant referral agencies, the Planning and Zoning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for an 8040 Greenline Review based on the criteria that are set forth in said Section; and, WHEREAS, the Fire Marshall, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City Water Department, City Engineering, City Parks Department, the Aspen/Pitkin County Building Department, and the Pitkin County Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and provided comments, and the Community Development Department recommended approval of the application, with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on February 1,2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved by a to 00 vote the 8040 Greenline Review for the fire access turn around on Lot #3 of the Hoag Subdivision, City of Aspen, with the conditions described herein. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: That the 8040 Greenline Review for the fire access turn around on Lot #3 of the Hoag Subdivision, City of Aspen, is approved with the following conditions. 1. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners Resolution 99-186, regarding development on the Newfoundland Lode, and shall comply with all provisions of City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 96-28, unless specifically amended herein. References to the 1994 Uniform Building Code shall be amended to require conformance with the building code in effect at the time of building permit application. 2. To ensure conformance with the representations made in the application, requirements of the 8040 Greenline Review, and to ensure the improvement is built in a safe manner, a City building permit, a Pitkin County Earthmoving permit, and a Pitkin County Access permit shall be required for the construction of the turn-around. 3. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall: â€¢ Record an access easement, that includes public emergency access, across the portions of Hoag #3 and the Newfoundland Lode that correspond with the proposed turn-around location. â€¢ Record a construction agreement for all areas expected to be impacted by the construction of the turn-around that runs to the benefit of both the Iloag #3 parcel and the Newfoundland Lode parcel. â€¢ Obtain a utility easement across the Forest Service portion of the access road to accommodate the required service lines or submit a letter to the Community Development Department stating that any utilities developed on Forest Service lands will be relocated at the sole cost of the applicant if an easement is not eventually granted by the Forest Service. 4. The Building Permit application shall include: â€¢ A revised Site Improvement Survey for both the Hoag #3 parcel and the Newfoundland Lode parcel documenting the easements of record established in condition #3 and showing existing trees that are subject to the tree removal Ordinance. â€¢ A geologic assessment o f areas affected during construction of the turn- around, including the stability of the slope above the turn-around, performed by an Engineer registered in the State of Colorado. â€¢ Construction details related to the foundation design, retaining walls, any underdrain systems, site grading, soil stabolization plan, and surface drainage plan signed and stamped by an Engineer registered in Colorado that addresses the technical concerns raised in the geological assessment. The drainage plan must accommodate drainage on-site both during and after construction and must confirm any proposed drywells can be constructed without causing damage to down gradient properties. A 2 year storm frequency should be used in designing drainage improvements. A soil assessment must be provided if drywells are proposed. â€¢ A tree removal permit from the City Parks Department for the removal or relocation oftrees as per Section 13.20.020 of the Code. â€¢ A water tap permit for a tap sized for the required fire suppression systems (for both the fire plug and suppression within the structure) and for the domestic use. A pump system may be required by the Fire Marshall to accommodate the required pressure for the fire suppression system. â€¢ A completed line extension request and collection service agreement with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. A tap permit from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District and a design for the line extension for review by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Engineer. 5. If evidence of mining activity is discovered during excavation of the property for either the turn-around or the residence, all construction activity shall cease until a mitigation plan is approved by the City Engineer. 6. If the pedestrian trail below the proposed turn-around is proposed to be altered, plans must first be approved by the Trail Coordinator of the City Parks Department. 7. City Water service for the Newfoundland Lode requires an extraterritorial water service agreement approved by the Aspen City Council. This Resolution shall not imply that water service will be extended to the Newfoundland Lode. 8. Amendments to the approved Accessory Dwelling Unit shall be in conformance with the current Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations. 9. These conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet ofthe building permit set and all other drawing sets used for construction. The primary contractor shall be provided with a copy of this Resolution and shall submit a letter as part of the building permit application stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. 10. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. The applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on February 1, 2000. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Robert Blaich, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy, Deputy City Clerk C:\home\CHRISB\CASES\HOAG_3\PZ_RESO.doc Exhibit A Hoag #3 Access STAFF COMMENTS: 8040 Greenline Review 26.435.030(C) 8040 Greentine Review Standards. No development shall be permitted at, above, or one hundred fifty (150) feet below the 8040 greenline unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth 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 finding: The Hoag Subdivision was approved in 1971. On the Subdivision plat a note reads: "no building permit shall be issued on Lot #1 and #3 until it has been demonstrated that there is adequate avalanche protection to be engineered and certified by an individual or individuals with professional avalanche control experience." The 8040 Greenline Review for the approved Hoag #3 Residence included a report and recommendations from an Engineer registered in Colorado and the conditions of that approval require those recommendations be incorporated into the development plans for the house. The report also concluded that the driveway was not in an avalanche hazard area and required no special development methods in relation to avalanche concerns, The approval granted to the Newfoundland Lode requires the house to comply with the engineering reports and recommendations for development in avalanche hazard areas. The slope of this site does suggest that engineering considerations be incorporated into the development plans to accommodate slope stability above and below the turn-around. Pitkin County, in their referral comments on this application, has suggested a geologic assessment be performed to ensure the stability of the uphill slopes are not compromised during development. Staff has included this as a condition of approval. Staff has also included a condition requiring a drainage plan and report being submitted to the City Engineer for review. 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. Staff finding: Due to the steepness of the site, the development plans for the turn-around must incorporate adequate drainage mitigation measures for both during and after construction, The City Engineer has requested a drainage report and plan be submitted and approved prior to an application for a building permit be accepted by the Building Department. Staff has included the drainage requirement from the City Engineer as a recommended condition. Staff Comments page 1 3. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the air quality in the city. Staff finding: The development of this turn-around is not expected to have any affect on the area' s air quality 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. Staff finding: The slopes in this area are not conducive to development. The fact of the matter, however, is that the Hoag Subdivision was approved in 1971 and the applicant has a certain right to develop the property. In fact, the development approvals for the two house are recent and very well documented and access is an important component of those rights. Therefore, the access way and fire turn-around are essentially required elements of the overall development. Staff has approached this circumstance with the goal of minimizing the impacts of this access and turn-around. A significant reduction on turning radius and in the amount of cut and fill required for this turn-around has been accomplished with the provision of a fire hydrant. This allows the Fire Department to use smaller vehicles for protection of this area. Also important in considering this standard is the existing conditions of the property. The current access way and excavated areas are a condition of the property regardless of the manner in which they were originally developed. To reduce the impacts of further development on this property, use ofthe existing access and excavated areas is a logical approach. Staff does not encourage development on slopes of this magnitude. In fact, the Newfoundland Lode proceeded through a takings hearing with the BOCC due in large part to the steep slopes involved. This turn-around can be developed on this property, however, given the engineering recommendations that have been made. Staff believes that this turn-around incorporates the most compatible development practices that can be accomplished and is the most appropriate given this set of site circumstances. 5. Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. Stafffinding: Grading for this development will be fairly significant. A portion of the grading required for the turn-around location has been accomplished, although more excavation and structuring will be necessary. This approach, however, seems to be the least disturbing while accomplishing the requirements for fire access. In this light, staff believes the amount of grading and disturbance to the terrain has been minimized to the extent practicable. 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 Comments page 2 Stafffinding: The site is too small to accomplish clustering. This access way and fire turn-around will serve both homes and does represent an efficiency. 7. Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. Stafffinding: The proposed turn-around will have a visual impact. Staff has encouraged the applicant to minimize the appearance of the structured wall by applying rock facing similar to the retaining walls used on the lower portions of the access road. In this manner, staff believes the structured walls will blend as much as could be expected and the improvement will not be noticeable from a distance. 8. Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed development. Stafffinding: There exists sufficient utilities to serve this development. However, the fire suppression system and hydrant require a pump system to be installed. The applicant is aware of the pump requirement and has discussed the technical aspects of such a system with the Water Department. The applicant has worked with the Fire Marshal, City Water Director, and the Forest Service to implement the plan for utilities to be provided along the access way instead of the platted utility easement. 9. Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development, and said roads can be properly maintained. 10. Adequate ingress and egress is available to the proposed development so as to ensure adequate access for fire protection and snow removal equipment. Staff finding: The road as proposed is adequate to serve the development o f the two homes. The Fire Department has agreed to a forty (40) foot radius turn-around with the condition that a fire hydrant be installed near the cul-de-sac. Meeting this criteria has been the primary reason behind the delay in construction. Several ideas to accomplish adequate fire safety have been promoted, but this is the most- rational proposal to date. A letter from the Fire Marshal has been provided stating the adequacy of the proposed turn-around and staff believes this document directly, and sufficiently, addresses this standard 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: There are already platted trail easements on this property. The lower (northern) trail easement is currently developed and provides a connection to Aspen Mountain. The Parks Department has suggested that a condition be included that requires the applicant gain approval for any section of this trail that needs to be modified during construction. C:\home\CHRISB\CASES\HOAG_3\PZ_EX_A.doc Staff Comments page 3 I 6144[- t MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Planner From: Chuck Roth, Project Engineer aug- Reference DRC Caseload Coordinator Date: January 7,2000 Re: Hoag Lot 3 Fire Turn-Around 8040 Greenline Review (Parcel ID # 2737-182-68-001) The Development Review Committee has reviewed the above referenced application at their December 1, 1999 meeting, and we have the following comments: General (1) Sufficiency of Submittal: DRC comments are based on the fact that we believe that the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features, and that it is feasible. The wording must be carried forward exactly as written unless prior consent is received from the Engineering Department. This is to alleviate problems related to approvals tied to "issuance of building permit." (2) R.O.W. Impacts: If there are any encroachments into the public right-of-way, the encroachment must either be removed or be subject to current encroachment license requirements. Site Review (1) Improvement Survey - Requirement: The applicant has not yet completed the requirement of the previous referral memo which is restated below in its entirety: "The site improvement survey needs to be updated to reflect the current title policy that was submitted with the application. City Code requires that improvement surveys be performed within the past 12 months, and that includes easement information reflected in title policies. The Schedule B of the title policy was not included and needs to be provided, including copies of all easements that are January 7,2000 Hoag Lot 3 Fire Turn-Around 8040 Greenline Review Page 2 of 4 indicated. The Schedule B lists all encumbrances known or of record on the property." The City needs a graphic representation of the turnaround and construction easement on the Newfoundland Lode property in order to confirm that the easement matches the space needs of the proposed turnaround. It needs to be made clear that any construction activities necessary to construct the turnaround are included in the easement area or within a construction easement area. Given the date of the easement, it would not appear on an older title policy. This information needs to be shown on the improvement survey. The improvement survey needs to show existing trees that are subject to the City tree removal ordinance. (2) Drainage & Erosion Control - Requirement - The drainage report submitted with the application is insufficient. The site development approvals must include the requirement of meeting runoff design standards of the Land Use Code at Sec. 26.88.040.C.4.f and a requirement that, prior to the building permit application, a drainage mitigation plan (24"x36" size plan sheet or on the lot grading plan) and a report signed and stamped by an engineer registered in the State of Colorado, must meet the requirements of the Engineering Department Interim Design Standards and must be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. The mitigation plan must also address the temporary sediment control and containment plan for the construction phase. If drywells are an acceptable solution for site drainage, a soils report must be provided with percolation test to verify the feasibility of this type system. Drywells must have depths well below depth of frost (10' minimum) to function in cold weather. The drainage plan must contain a statement specifying the routine maintenance required by property owner(s) to ensure continued and proper performance. Drywells may not be placed within utility easements or public right-of-way. The foundation drainage system should be separate from storm drainage. Site runoff must be detained and routed on site, and must be shown on drainage plans prior to building permit drawings and application for permit. The drainage may be conveyed to existing landscaped areas if the drainage report demonstrates that the percolation rate and the detention volume meet the design storm. (3) Trails - Requirement - It is not yet clear that the proposed cul de sac will not interfere with the trail system. Compliance needs to be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Trails Superintendent. January 7,2000 Hoag Lot 3 Fire Turn-Around 8040 Greenline Review Page 3 of 4 (4) Open Space - Requirements - The improvement survey needs to show existing trees that are subject to the City tree removal ordinance. The City needs to know the proposed impact to trees in order to evaluate the application. A tree removal permit must be obtained prior to applying for a building permit. Neither excavation nor storage of materials is permitted within the driplines of trees to be saved. (5) Fire Protection - Information - The Fire Marshall stated that the smaller turnaround diameter will be permitted because the applicant will provide sprinklering of the structure and a fire hydrant on site. (6) Utilities: - WATER: City Water Department Recommendation - A portion of the turnaround is on property known as the Newfoundland Lode. The property is outside of City limits. The Newfoundland Lode is not guaranteed to receive City water service. Water service for properties outside of City limits requires an agreement and City Council approval. Requirement - The applicant will be required to provide detailed plans that receive City approval prior to applying for a building permit. A copy of the utility easement will also be required. Information - The waterline system extension required for this project will be a private system and will not be accepted by the City. - WASTEWATER: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Requirement - The applicant will be required to execute a line extension request, a collection system agreement, and easements on standard District forms. The applicant will have to pay fees for review, construction observation, and closed circuit television inspection. January 7,2000 Hoag Lot 3 Fire Turn-Around 8040 Greenline Review Page 4 of 4 -CONSTRUCTION: Work in the Public Right-of-way Requirement - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights-of-way adjacent to private property, we advise the applicant as follows: APPROVALS (1) Engineering: The applicant must receive approval from city engineering (920-5080) for design of improvements, including landscaping, within public rights-of-way. (2) Parks: Parks department (920-5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance. (3) Streets: Streets department (920-5130) for mailboxes, streets and alley. (4) Permits: Obtain permits for any work or development, including street cuts, landscaping, within public rights-of-way from the city community development department. DRC Attendees Staff: Karma Borgquist Phil Overeynder John Krueger Cindy Christensen Chris Bendon Ed Van Walraven Chuck Roth 99M184 Ed Van Walraven, 01:26 PM 1/25/00 , Hoag X-Sender: edv@pubsaf (Unverified) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 13:26:10 -0700 To: chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us From: Ed Van Walraven <edv@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Hoag Chris, I am sorry for the delay in sending this to you however I wanted to make sure all of the players were on the same page. "Provisions made for the turning around of fire department apparatus consist of a dedicated area with a forty foot turning radius and a 30 foot backing area." This only applies is the applicant provideds a fire hydrant on the upper level of the access road. Printed for Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 Aspen Consolidated Sanitation -Uistrict Sy Kelly * Chairman John Keleher Paul Smith * T reas Frank Loushin Michael Kelly * Secy Bruce Matherly, Mgr December 7, 1999 Chris Bendon Community Development 130 S. Galena St. DEC 1 01999 Aspen, CO 81611 COM!. .VA 02Â·.Â· 2.-'67&1ENT Re Hoag Lot #3 development Dear Chris: Lot #3 ofthe Hoag development lies within our service area. In order to provide service to this lot, a lin* extension request and collection~ystem-arcement will need to be completed. Both agreements will need to be approved by our Board of Directors at a regularly scheduled meeting. Standard forms are available at our office. Easements for the line extension, that comply with the District's rules and regulations, will also need to be granted. The design ofthe line extension will need to be reviewed and approved by our engineer. Funds will need to be deposited with the District to cover the expense of the engineering review for the design and construction ofthe line extension. A tap permit will need to be completed at our office once detailed plans are available. The permit will estimate the connection fees for the residence and must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit Sincerely, /-1 ~ L.~ -*- L h- UL--~'~ Bruce Matherly District Manager 565 N. Mill St.,Aspen, CO 81611 / (970)925-3601 / FAX (970) 925-2537 MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, City Planner FROM: Suzanne Wolff, Pitkin County Senior Planner RE: Hoag Lot 3 8040 Greenline Review DATE: November 30, 1999 I have reviewed the application and offer the following comments: â€¢ As you are aware, the driveway to Hoag Lot 3 also provides access to the Newfoundland Lode parcel, which is located within the unincorporated area of the County directly beyond the City's boundary. â€¢ On October 27, 1999, the BOCC granted 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission and Scenic Overlay approval to the Newfoundland Lode. This approval replaces the prior approvals, for which the vested rights had expired. â€¢ The BOCC Resolution requires the owner to obtain an access permit from the County Engineer to extend the driveway to the residence and to construct the portion of the required fire turnaround that will be located on the Newfoundland Lode, prior to submission of any building permit applications for development on the Newfoundland Lode. â€¢ Staff recommends that the Applicant provide a geologic assessment to ensure that the stability of the slope above the turnaround is not compromised during its construction, if excavation for the residence is not proposed to proceed immediately following construction of the turnaround. 1111111 lilli 11111111111111111 lilli 111111111111 lili lili 438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RES...FI DAVIS SILVI -1 of 20 R 0.00 0 0.00 N 0.00-!TKIN COUNTY CO RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, FINDING A TAKING AND GRANTING 1041 HAZARD REVIEW, CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION AND SCENIC OVERLAY APPROVAL TO THE NEWFOUNDLAND LODE Resolution No. 99- j *7 RECITALS I. Witi Win. LLC (-'Applicanf) has requested development approval following a stall deterniination that a previous approval had not been common law vested and that application ofeurrent Code btandards would result in a taking. The approval sought is to construct a single-family residence following a takings determination by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC'). 2. The property is located at the base of Aspen Mountain adjacent to the Hoag Subdivision on Ute Avenue, and is described as the Newfoundland Lode Mining Claim, M.S. 5190. j. The property contains approximately 10 acres and is zoned AFR-10. 4. The BOCC granted Scenic Foreground Overlay, General Submission and 1041 Hazard Review approval to construct a single family residence on the Newfoundland Lode, pursuant to Resolution No. 91- 87. 5. The BOCC subsequently granted an extension of vested rights pursuant to Resolution No. 94-198. 6. The vested rights expired on October 25. 1997. 7. The County Zoning Officer issued a notice of violation in 1996 for excavation of the building envelope on the Newfoundland Lode without permits. Section 7-20-030(E)(2) ofthe Land Use Code provides that "no land use approvals or building or other development permits shall be issued with respect to the property where the violation is believed to exist during the period o f such violation." Es outstanding violation has not been remedied. 8. The BOCC heard the Applicant's request at its regularly scheduled meeting of October 27, 1999, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application. 1 111111 lilli 11111[ 11111111111 lilli lilli Ill lilli 1111 lili Resolution No. 90-1_tie 438010 1'1/2~99 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI Page 2 2 of 20 R 0.20- 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 9. The BOCC finds that the application of Code criteria does constitute a taking ofall reasonable use - and economic return from tile subject property. since there are no developable areas on the subject property tliat avoid slopes in excess of 30%. or are located outside othsevere wildfire hazard and potential avalanche hazard areas. I (). 1-lie BOCC further finds that [he properly ownel has a reasonable investment backed expectation to wome residential development of the property. 1 L The BOCC finds that the property is not appropriate for :iny lise olher thall residential and that this application proposes development in the best possible location. given the hazards identified on the property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE [T RESOLVED by the BOCC that it does hereby grant I 041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission approval for the Newfoundland Lode. subject to the following conditions. which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: 1. This resolution repeals and replaces BOCC Resolution Nos. 91-87 and 94-198. 2. The Applicant shall submit a 24" by 36" 1041 site plan to the Community Development Department for approval and recording, prior to submission of any building permit applications. The site plan shall also be submitted in digital format for integration into the County's GIS system. The site plan shall comply with the provisions of Section 5-70-040 of the Land Use Code. 3. Prior to issuance ofany permits and within a reasonable amount of time. the Applicant shall: A. Pay $1,560 (8 hours at $185/hour) to the Community Development Department to satise the time spent inspecting and responding to the Code violations. B. Submit a financial security in an amount and form acceptable to the County Attorney's Office for remediation of the existing violation. If the site is not developed in accordance with the development approval and the violation remedied within 24 months ofthe date of this approval, the BOCC may use the security to remediate the violation on the property This does not limit the BOCC from choosing other additional remedies to address this or other violations of the Code. 4. Prior to submittal of any building permits, the Applicant shall: A. Obtain an access permit from the County Engineer to extend the driveway to the residence and to construct a portion o f the required fire turnaround, if necessary. B. Submit documentation that a fire hydrant was installed as part of the excavation for the driveway, as required. If a hydrant is not in place. the Applicant shall install a hydrant prior to issuance of any building permits. C. Provide documentation that the proposed residence complies with the recommendations made in the following reports: Dr. Nicholas Lampiris' letter of March 21, 1990. Chen 1111111 lilli mi ll'111111111111111111111 lilli lili lili Resolution No. 99'-24 438010 11/24/ 9 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI Page 3 3 of 20 R 0. 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Northern's [etter of.\pril 18, 1990. Dr. Arthur Mears letter of August 2.1990 and report - dated September 1990. Schmueser Gordon Meyer's report of September 25. 1990. and Design Structures' letter of October 15.1990 (attached as Exhibits B-F). D. Submit a drainage and erosion control plan for review and approval by the County Engineer. the plan shall address means of controlling drainage and erosion during as well as fullowing construction. The Applicant shall comply with the recommendations made 11>Â· Schinueser Gordon Meyer in tlie 'Gordon Miller Residence Drainage Report" dated September 25,1990 Gittached as Exhibit E) E. Submit a revegetation plan fur review and approval by Land Management. I'llc plan whall include an estiinate o filie cost ofthe revegemtion (labor and plants). Subinit an improvements itgreement to address crosion, rockfall and drainage isslies associated with the proposed access, excavation and Construction stages ot'tile development. The improvements agreement shall be reviewed and approved by tile County' Attorney, County Engineer and Community Development Director. G. Obtain Board of Adjustment approval for necessary setback variances. H. File a fireplace/woodstove permit with the Community Development Department. Submit a plan depicting the design and location for the required avalanche hazard warning signs, for review and approval by the Zoning Officer. J. Submit documentation that the property will be served by the City of Aspen Water Department. K. Submit documentation that the property will be served by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. L. Submit a fugitive dust control plan for review and approval by the Environmental Health Department. The Applicant shall ensure that mud and dirt is not carried out onto surrounding roads by vehicle traffic from the site during construction. M. Demonstrate proof of insurance to protect neighboring properties from potential water tlow and rockfall damage during construction of the residence to the satisfaction of the County Attorney. 3. Prior to issuance of any building permits. the Applicant shall: A. Post avalanche hazard warning signs along the driveway, as approved by the Zoning Officer. B. Submit financial security in a form acceptable to the County Attorney to ensure the successful revegetation of the property pursuant to the approved Revegetation Plan. Land Management shall specify the required amount of the financial security. The financial security shall be held for a minimum of one full growing season after the revegetation is completed, unless Land Management specifies a longer term. C. Submit financial security in a form acceptable to the County Attorney to ensure compliance with the improvements agreement. The County Engineer and Community Development Director shall specil> the required amount of the financial security. 6. All areas disturbed by construction shall be revegetated to limit water consumption and additional runoff within one growing season o f project completion. 7. No development activity, including grading, landscaping, and vegetation removal or disturbance shall occur outside the building envelope, with the exception of driveway and utility extension and maintenance and the performance of wildfire mitigation required as part of this approval. Native 111111111111111111 lilli '1111111111 mill '1111111 lili '111 Resolation No. 99-1-94 438010 11/24/ 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 4 of 20 R 0.0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Page 4 vegetation shall be maintained outside the building envelope (except for actions necessary to comply with the required wildfire mitigation). 8. No expansion of the approved square footage of the residence shall be permitted in the future. Development on the property is limited to a 5.930 square foot residence, all inclusive, and a 750 square foot garage. 9. The Applicant shall install an automatic fire sprinkler system in the residence. and shall comply witli the codes and requirements ofthe ,\spen Fire Protection District. including provision ofan adequate fire turnaround and installation oh fire hydrant. 1(). The,\pplic:int sliall comply with the followinu landscaping and wildfire defensible space mitigation standards to tile satisfaction of the Colorado State Forest Service. prior to issuance ofa Certiticate 01 Occupancy for the residence: Brush, debris, and non-ornamental vegetation shall be removed within a minimum 1 0 foot perimeter around the structure. B. Vegetation shall be reduced to break up the vertical and horizontal continuity of tile fuels a minimum of 45 feet uphill and to the sides of all structures. C. Spacing between clumps of brush and vegetation within the perimeter shall be a minimum of two times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the clumps shall not exceed 10 feet. All measurements shall be from the edges of the crowns of the fuel. D. All branches from trees and brush within the perimeter shall be pruned to a height o f 10 feet above the ground and ladder fuels from around trees and brush shall be removed. E. Tree crown separation within the perimeter shall have a minimum o f 10 feet between the edges of the crop.ins. F. All branches which extend over the roof eaves shall be trimmed and all branches within 15 feet of the chimneys shall be removed. G. The density of fuels within a 100 foot perimeter of all structures shall be reduced. H. All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed. I. Low vegetation shall be maintained within a10 foot perimeter around all structures. J. The Applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance ofthe defensible space vegetation requirements. 11. The Applicant shall comply with the following additional wildfire mitigation standards: A. An exterior sprinkler system shall be installed. B. Roofs shall have a Class A, non-combustible roof system. Wood shake/shingle roof coverings and flat roofs (up to a3:12 pitch) are prohibited in all wildfire hazard areas. C. Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh with mesh 14 inch maximum. D. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris. E. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter. slash, and flammable debris. F. All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from any structure. G. Weeds and grasses within the 10 foot perimeter shall be maintained to a height not more than 6 inches. H. Firewood/wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from the structure. I. Swimming pools shall be accessible to Fire Department vehicles. Resolution .Vo. 99- 124 1111111111111111111111]11111111111111111111111 lili lili 438010 11/24/ 1999I09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI Page 5 5 of 20 R 0.00 D I N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO J. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris. K. Wood fences shall not connect to tile structure. L. Any outbuildings or additional structures shall adhere to the same standards as structures. M. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground withan approved container. N. Propane tanks shall be installed according to NFPA 48 standards and on a contour away from the structure with standard defensible space vegetation mitigation around an>above- ground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall be constructed with materials approved for 2 hour fire-resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls. Each structure shall have aminimum ol one 10 pound approved ABC fire extiliguisher placed in a visible and accessible location. P Addresses shall be clearly marked with 2 inch lion-Combustible letters and shall be clearly, visible at the primary point olaccess from the public or common access road and installed on a non-combustible post. O. All utility lines shall be buried within the driveway or the utility easement. 12. The Applicant shall comply with the following *uctural design and construction options: A. Projections (Heat Traps): 1) Projections at the roof line (which include but are not limited to eaves. cornices, soffits and roofs over open decks) shall be sheathed with materials approved for 1 hour fire-resistive construction. a) For projections below the roof line (including, but not limited to. exterior balconies. decks, porches, cantilevered tloor projections, and bay windows. which extend over a flat or slopes surface) the open space between grade and the underside of projections below the roof line shall be enclosed by solid. vertical walls. These walls shall be constructed with materials approved for 1 hour fire-resistive construction on the exterior side of the wall and shall extend from the top of grade to the underside ofthe tloor decking or walls of the projection. b) An alternative construction method for such projections would require use of noncombustible building materials. or heavy timber or log wall construction, if the underside of the projecting portion is coveÂ·red with materials approved for one hour fire resistive construction and i f there are no inside angles of less than 75 degrees. Areas below such projections shall be void of vegetative or other combustible materials. These areas below projections shall be protected from accumulation of vegetative materials by placement of a vegetative barrier covered with rocks or gravel or by coverage with concrete or stone. There shall be no storage of combustible materials under projections. The walls underneath projections shall be constructed with materials approved for 1 hour fire-resistive construction on the exterior side of the wall. Window openings in walls below projections shall be tempered glass. Doors shall be noncombustible or 1 3/4" solid wood. B. Windows and Glass: Glazed openings shall be provided with close-able. solid. exterior non-flammable shutters or shall be tempered glass. Resolittion \0. 91)-1YG 11111111111111111111111111111 lilli lilli 11111111 lili I'll Page 6 438010 11/24/19 2:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 6 of 20 R 0.00 .00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO C. Exterior Walls and Siding: Siding and exterior wall construction shall have a minimum 1 hour fire-resistive rating ground level to roof line. Exterior doors shall be noncombustible or 1 3/4" solid wood. D. Foundations: Folindations. skirting and crawl space openings shall be fully enclosed and constructed with materials approved for I hour fire-resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls and shall extend from the top of grade to the underside of the tloor decking or walls. E. Stilt Construction: Ille underside oidecks and structures With stilt foundations shall be fully enclosed and constructed with materials approved for l hour tire-resistive construction on the exterior side o f the walls and shall extend from tile top of grade to the underside of the tloor decking or walls. 13. All trash/garbage shall be contained iii approved bear proof garbage containers. 14. The Applicant shall comply with the following standards for development within avalanche hazard areas: A. Tlie foundation shall be designed by a certified engineer. B. Structural avalanche defenses shall be designed by a certified engineer to withstand avalanche impact forces. C. The owner shall bear the costs of any avalanche control meaures that may be required to mitigate the hazard. 15. The Applicant shall comply with the following standards for development on slopes of greater than 15%: A. Adequate mechanical support shall be provided for cut slopes. B. Adding water which may decrease slope stability shall be avoided. C. Adding weight to the top of the slope shall be avoided. D. Disturbed slopes must be contoured so that they can be revegetated. E. Steepening of existing slopes shall be avoided. F. Confine cuts, fills. grading and excavation to the minimum area needed for construction. 16. Tile exterior of the residence shall be finished in earth tones, which blend with the colors ofthe natural surrounding environment. Roof materials, gutters, downspouts, flashing, etc. shall be non- reflective and ofearthtone colors. 17. Any exterior lighting on the residence shall be down-lighting and shall comply with the Code regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. Landscape and driveway lighting shall be prohibited. 18. If mine waste. waste rock or mine dumps are encountered during excavation ofthe property, the Applicant shall contact the Environmental Health Department. 19. For any free market residential structure of 5,000 gross square feet or greater, the Applicant shall comply with Section 4.01.01(B) of the Pitkin County Road Management and Maintenance Plan. 1111111 lilli 111111 lilli 111111 lilli lilli 11111111 lili lili Resolittion Nâ€ž. 09- [~..F 438010 11/24/19l2:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI Page - 7 of 20 R 0.00 ~00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO which requires the Applicant to provide construction trip and residential trip generation studies. The Applicant shall comply with this provision as it is in effect at the time of building permit issuance to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. 20. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made iii the application and iii the public meetings. 21. The vested rights for this approval shall expire on October -27,2002. APPROVED AND ADOPTED on the .27tli day of October, 1999. PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS iIi tile Aspen [lines Weekly on the *>day oY No V. . 1999. BOARD OF COU-NTY COMMISSIONERS, PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO ' j K ATTEST: 1 rÂ» f. 1 c~ c! ./ 4 6 11 L'(323-1 - Leslie J. Lamont Chair 6/Lyndee R. Dean. Clerk to the BOCC APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: 1 l /9 6 L . // Cindy Houben John ElY - - ---- Community Development Director Courity Attorney PID #2737-183-00-001 Exhibits A. Legal Description B. Nicholas Lampiris leter dated 3/21/90 C. Chen Northern's letter dated 4/18/90 D. Arthur :Vfears' letter dated 8/3/90 E. Arthur Mears' report dated 9/90 F. Schmueser Gordon Meyer's report dated 9/25/90 G. Design Structure's letter dated 9/25/90 11111'l lilli lilli' lilli lilli lilli lilli 111 11111 lili lili 4% 99-1 4 438010 11/24/1999 12:09 ESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 8 of 20 R 0.00 0 0.00 1 50 PITKIN COUNTY CO Exhibit "A" Legal Description: The Newfoundland Leda Mining Claim, M.S. 5190; excluding that portion of Newfoundland M.S. 5190 ouverlapping Hoag subdivision, City of Aspen, Colorado, Lot 3. Starting at point 03, S 04 degrees 49'48" W 227.9 feet, thence N 55 degrees 48'50" W 33.54 feet; thence N 65 degrees 31'10" W 37.97 feet; to rebar and plastic cap t9184 leaving line N 59 degrees 54 ' E 134.21 feet. CeNSULTING GEOLOGIST 0.:99-179 0793 yALLE< ROAD CAAECNDALE COLORADO 21 Exhibit B ocm 963<1600 Â£24 HOUP.Sl - . AIER-e *4'*:!*r -44*Mi f.,â€¢481-4,19Â· 4#f# *14:%$.4-..w.*. â€ž*~.*# 64 ..Ii,*I Jahn R. Wedum + 616 East Hyman, Suite 102 ~ Aspen CO 81611 RE: Newfoundland Claim Dear.Randy: I have completed my geologic investigation far sci-poses cf House Bill 1041 of the building site cn the Newfoundland . Mini.ng Claim on the. north-facing slcpe cf Aspen Mountain -- above Ute Avenue as shcwn on the acccmpanying mao. This is- along the southern edge of the Town of Aspen within the Aspen 7 1/2 minute quadrangld, Pitkin C=unty, Calcradc. There is a proposed driveway to another homesite beyont the proposed site which is on a steep, ccnifer-ccvered hillside. L There is nc bench or .cther break'in slcpe near the site and the cnly ether feature of note is an old portal intc the mcuntainside which can be seen about two hundred feet east C: the building site and below it. The geology cf the site consists cf a thin veneer cf colluvial depcsits ccntaining angular blocks of limest=ne, sandstone and some granitic rocks. The matrix is mostly silty sand. This surficial deposit has been macoed by Bruce Bryant, 1971, as a talus deposiz but I believe that the term colluvium is more accurate at tnts location. The underlying bed:ock cculd not be determined because of lack c nearby cutcrops, but is probably the Cambrian age Sawatch Quartzite cr one of the Lower Paleozoic carbenate units. Because cf the steep attitude of bed:cck units in t is area and the faulting present, the bedrock cculd even be the Precambrian age quartz manzcnite. AS.any rate, the appearance of the rocks within the czlluvium indicates that the-bedrock is near surface. Snow sliding and mincr rock faLl is a possibility cn this praperty but there are two well established chutes cn either side of the site which should contain most of these hazardous events. These paths can be well seen and their relationship - to the site eval uated from across the valley in the Smuggler area. 111111111111111111 lilli 1111111111111111 Ill lilli lili lili - 438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 9 of 20 R 0.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 1111111 lilli lilli lilli 11111111111 lilli 111111111111 lili 12. .' 99-14 - 10 of 20 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 438010 11/24/1999 12 :09P 780LUTI DAVIS SILVI 7his. in additicn to the extensive :ree c.ver above the site, shculd minimize the potential hazard te the site; nevertheless, the rear founcaticm wall shculd ne designed to - prctrude at least six reet above finished grade and be withcut dcors cr windows cn this unslcpe-facing side of the home. It shculd be strcng encugh. to withstand forces cf at least 200 pounds per square foot, cr the equivalent if the building can be designed to be p -ow-shaped up the hilly thereby reducing the- forces potentially aff-cting the prcpased hcme. . Slope stability is the most important ccns: deration fcr this site because of the steepness. ihere is n 1 indication c: Â·lang term instability on this site. The Uvistal-butting" cf some trees is prcbably due to down hill srcw pressure rather than instability of the colldvium, but a Â·Factor cf sdfety analysis is :efinitely in crcer. The nearness cf bedrock tc . the surface is a positive factor because presumably the 4 foundaticn can be anchered to it. Positive drainace arcund the home will be important and natural veâ‚¬2tarion jot requiring watering is advised ts furtner insure stability cf the site. Obvicusly, scils' engineering will be an impcrtant aspect c.f this . ...I + Nrc The faulting mapped in the area has been :nactive for thousands of years with na evidence in the field of recent. movement. The abcve-referenced portal trends well east cf the site but subsurface maps cf the area shculd be evaluated to be sure there is no near-surface tunnel or stage directly under the site. I believe that water and waste disposal systems will be available from municipal sources. In Greer to prevent the possible accumulation of radcn gas. adequate sub -â‚¬loor ventilation should be prcvided in the construction of the home. If there are further queetionsâ€ž please do not hesitate to ccntact me. Sincerely: 92 44. Nicholas Lampiris Consulting Geologist C.4616,4. ri . i." - - 2...11-/rk I IlllII lilli 11Illl lilli IllIMIIi lilli Ill 11Illl Ill lili Exhibit C 438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 11 of 20 R 0.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY Co April 13, 1990 Ratey Wein 616 East Hyman, Suite 102 Aspen CO 81611-1981 Subj ect: Review of Scil ani Geologic C:=c liticns, Newfacrriland Parcel, . -U.&-4 = i -1- 4 - County, Cblorade. Jcb No. 4 319 90 As requestal, we are .prov Zing c=nerrts regarding the sail. and geclegic conditicns at the subject: ite based cn aIr experience in the area. Cmen- Northern previcusly ocrEucted gectechnical studies cn the adj acent Lot 3, Hoag : Suhdivisicn, for feasibility and faundaticn design of a prcp=sed residerne and reported cur finiings under JcM Ne. 4 275 ag. A rEdderm is prcposed at the icwer end of the Nedccnilaxi Parcel which will use a carman driveway with Ict 3. The hillside tprrain is consistent in the e -ea am we expect: the subsoil and geologic corriiticns are al go similar to these identified cn Lot 3. The proposed building site lies within a potential avalanche zcne and cculd be iqzcted by debris flcws. Eased cn cur experience in t>a area, develccment crt the pmperty appears feasible frcm a geoted:nical viewpoint. Sere is a risk cf ccnst:ucticn induced slcpe instability. A design level geotachnical st:~2y shculd be ccrifucted to aÂ·idzess the site stability, fcundatica, dmirage and grading fcr the pmpcsed hui.dir'xg. The site should be evaluated fc= avalan:he and debris flcw risk and. ar:y needed mitigaticn. We are available to conduct the subsoil study at ycur request. If Fcc have am' questicrs or if we can be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, CIEN-NCK[HEN, INC. Zâ‚¬Ek Â»' 4> ;-1 GI S , c.9 .0.;1+N1 M k. 4, Â¢ ., IA Ot 11 -t -/1 0 l 1- 11* 3 15222 0 :*p FNL~ - r -/uru/ U :.d 875 A Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. 1 / f #7 9 kil; f?:Ap~t: 8%27 SU/ec * -4 or co.3,0, A me'nt- 5 11â€¢e~~~ g-,lod c,rowâ€¢el Exhibit D ARTHUR L MEARE, P.E., INC Naturai Hazarci Cor:suitant: 22-2 E.ut C.xkk. Aâ€ž. 303 - 641 -32 30 August 3, 1990 Mr. John Wedum Wedu= Design and Development 616 E. Hyman Ave. Aspen, CO 81612 Dear Mr. Wedum: cÂ· At your request, I conducted a site inspection of the lot identified as "Newfoundland MS 519cl above Ute Avenue on August 2, 1990. The purpose of this site inspect n was to evaluate the pot,ntial for snow avalanches at the build..:ig site and to ccnsider the feasibility of avalanche mirigation. AVALANCHE-HAZARD POTENTIAL Inspection cf the terrain and vagetaticn at and above the building site indicates the Fropcsed canstruction area is within range cf smaI 1 avalanches that fl a through the trees and can impact the prcposed building. Charazteristic avalanche damage near the site consists of bent and defcrmed main stems of fir trees, broken trees, and vegetative debris align i downslope. Small avalanches may reach the site at 10-year return periods, on the average. However, even during design-magnitude ("100-year") avalanche conditions, avalanches will be small and will not possess great destructive energy. AVALANCHE MITIGATION Avalanche mitigation at this site is feasible and can be achieved through "direct protection" of the building. This wculd be accomplished by reinforcing the uphill wall/roof system for avalanche static and dynamic loads. The magnitudes, directions, and areas affected by these loads cannot be determined at the present time. Loading characteristics can be determined given final architectural details about building size, shape, and orientation. The building should be designed to eliminate cr minimize activity on the uphill side. Reinforcement of the building for avalanche loads would stop the avalanche at the uphill side of the building and therefore would reduce the hazard on the ~ driveways be].ow the site which are now exposed to avalanches. E:*icerely, C .447.Id Hi,14 \1.leo,04 Arthur I. tÂ·tears, P.E. Avalanche-control engineer 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 12 of 20 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO A , Al-1 7~ Exhibit E 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 13 of 20 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO SNOW-AVALANCHE LOADING ANALYSIS PROPOSED BUILDING AT "NEWFOUNDLAND MS 5190" UTE AVENUE, NEAR ASPEN, COLORADO Prepared For Mr. John Wedum Prepared By Arthur I. Mears, P.E., Inc. Gunnison, Colorado September, 1990 r . 1 OBJECTIVES AND : 'TATICNS This analysis'cf inc - - --..4... - -oacs was requested by Mr. John W- 2 1.' m ' s " r- ~- O - . and Develcpmen=. "h p ..... Wed== c= wecum Design. *.. -- prcposed buil=_..* analy-ef 47 +~4= -epcrt is licated cn the lot identified as "Newicundland MS 5190," hbove U'a Avenue, near Aspen, Calcrado. The objectives of this study ara: a. Computaticn of design-magnitâ‚¬de ("100-vear") avalanche velocities and pressure potencials at the building site; b. Calculatz.on cf fcrces cn e:cpcsed building surfaces at the above-described lot; c. Description of the avalanche Icads and effects cf the avalanche on the struczure; and d. Description of the change in avalanche hazard resufting from the propcsed project. This analysis considers snow avalanches and snow-avalanche loads cnly. Cther geological and/cr menecrolcgical prccess and the interaction cf such processes cn the crcrosed structure have Act - 4 been considered. In particular, design sncw loads which usually are applied in design at this locaticn must he added to the avalanche loads given here. The loads camputed depend on building location, size, shape, and orientation as specified in the John Wedum drawings which were drawn on Sentember 18, 1990. Significant changes tc these plans may invalidate the loads given in this report. 2 DESIGN-AVALANCHE CHARACTERISTICS The design avalanche, or event with an estimated - - W UA I I I pericd cf 100 years (a constant 1% annual probability), will begin on the steep, northeast-facing slope approximately 400 feet above the building site, at an elevation of 8,500 feet. Although this slope supports a continuous co nifer forest, the spacing of trees in the forest is not sufficiently close to anchor the sncwpack prevent avalanche release. Damage to t ees above and at the site indicates avalanched have occurred in tae past. The design avalanche was computed by application of statistical and dynamic mc iels as described in Mears (1989) and Mears (in prep.). The design-avalanche parameters used in load computations are: velocity = 11.0 m/s (25 mph);- flow density = 400 kg/13 (25 lbs/ft3); flow depth = 1.0 m (3.3 ft). Soil and vegetative debris, includirig tree trunks, may be entrained in the avalanche debris and complicate loading characteristics, as discussed '.n Section 3. 1111111 lilli 111111 lilli 111111 lilli 11111111111111111 lili 438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 14 of 20 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO - KI 97 -/rk 2 TALANCEE LOADS AND L JAD 2 EARACTZIC.STICS Building surfaces expcsed ts avalanches and receiving avalanche leads are hown as surfaces "A" through NY" on Figure 1. Roof surfaces "A," "B ." and MDI' receive impact (deflecnion) loads as the avalanche flew direction is changed by the roof and receive depositional loads as the compressed avalanche debris is depcsized on the roof. The deflection and depositional loads are not simultaneous, however. The design case on these surfaces will be a static depositional load which is trapezoidal in crass section as shown c) Figure 2. This load may persist for the entire snow season, a pericd which may extendÂ· from December through April at this location. The "elevator wedce, fl surfaces "71' and "W" are vertical surfaces that receive avalanche impact loads. As shawn in Figure 2, unit- loads cn the elevator wedge have been resolved into 3 compcnents which are normal (P~) , horizcnzal shear (P<), and vertical sheer (15) Â· These are impact loads which will increase over the entire 10-fact height cf the wedge frcm zerc to the max -.4.-... specified in Figure 2 in 0.2-to-0.4 seccnds. Because they increase quickly, the strains prcduced by these loads may be greater than those resulting from an equivaledt static load of equal magnitude, a fact u..Clu shculd be considered by the structural engineer in final design. The cuide walls "X" and "Y" are intended to protect the slcping glass surface "C," as the avalanche expands laterally on the roof. As shcwn on Figure 2, the guide walls receive a uniform, horizantal impact load (16), as specified. These horizonnal Icads are assumed ts be constant to the top cf the guide walls which decra ise in height in the downhill directicn (north). These loads also increase frcm zero to maximum in 0.2-to-0.4 seconds and probably also must be treated as impact loads because they may produce strains in excess cf those resulting frcm an equivalent static load. All of the impact loads specified in this report have been computed assi .aing the avalanche is a homageneous "fluid" of a density cf 400 kg/m3 (25 1bs/ft3) at the instant of impact. In fact, the avalanche will probably contain small rocks, tree trunks, and other solid material which can produce pcint loads that may exceed the average loads given in this report. However, the loading surface areas for these point loads will be small (less than 1 ftz), therefcre would not precipitate general structural failure. They may, however, produce localized damage to the surface receiving impact, a fact that should be considered in design and maintenance. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 15 of 20 R 0.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 4 CEANGE IN AVALA E nZARD In ceneral avalanche "hazard" will increase in propertion to the number of persons exposed to the avalanche process. The proposed nrcject, -- 1.--=- to cther projects planned and/or built in c:-41 1- avalanche . reas thrcughout the United States, Canada, and Eurcpe, will draw an increased number of pdrsons into avalanche terrain, therefore may increase the overall hazard. The persons cne wishes to protect simply may not be in the specially-design building when the avalanche occurs. They would be exposed to avalanches if they were above the building or in the forest on the sides of the building. However, the proposed project does non plan exposed living areas or decks in the avalanche areas. Furthermore, this project will stop avalanches before they reach the access road. Therefore the exposure to avalanches below the building and on the read will be reduced as a result of this project. Because there may be a small increase in overall avalanche hazard simply because more people may be in avalanche terrain after building constructicn, this increase can be minimized if residenns educate themselves about the avalanche'phenomena and heed all official avalanche warnings and adviscries. Such self education is recommended fc= all those who plan to live in avalanche terrain. Reror* submitted bv, Ott/1Â« 4 OUL Arthur I. Hears, F.E. Avalanche-control engineer 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 16 of 20 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO - 11 cue- At 1 99 -/ 26 .. 3- = 300 122/.. - ~2 = 130 13: - r c <,2 V V' (Static leads) -- --- EEE Â·Â· . - - - < 1 4.21 . \ /1 . 000 -00 ... --- ... Surfaces V and W (elevator wedze) elÂ¢9~'4 C.i fUm- P] = 230 lbs/ftz (P , Pâ€ž/ and 'P 3 4 5 Â«17/ 3,1 = 130 lbs/f:2 are impact loads) 0 Pj = 130 lbs/ft- \Es\FAN P~ is vertical (upward) shear C -+4 M - 0 go on surfaces V and W. U) Z U, g =0 OZ Guide Walls X and Y 1- - a. 00 llc 16 = 100 lbs/ftz d LI Z , f& P,5 is a uniform, impact lead acting < td the upper edge of the guide walls, 31 0 . e whi ch are variable in heig>' * 2G 06 -0 . M â€¢ - 4. 0 00 0 '91- FIGURE 2. Directions and magnitudes of avalanche loads *1â€ž'garious . exposed building surfaces. These avalanche loads are in addition to other loads (including snow loads) usually considered in design at this location. See text for limitations and additional discussion. - - -i--i- - 111~11011111!lIlli'1111111111 lilli 11111111111111111 lili 09P RES LU D -4"-2127 :24:ULT:NG ENG;NEERS I , 3,0 R r f Â¥-:99 -lÂ¥1. . 8 Septenter 25, 1996 MZ Exhibit F 00 ..1 0 Mr. 212(7 Welum rl'O Sulte 102 616 East E:aan Ave AS,en, CO. 816 11 r =~ S RE: Goricn Miller Residence Dralnize Re'Der- 0 0 W . ae 0 .. a- z Dear Randy: e0 .e Thls letter 13 in follow-up to 'your requdst for a dralnage report for the Gordon -Mlller Property, also known as the Newfoundland X.S. -, 0 5190 Mining Claim, off of Ute Avenue m Aspen. This report 13 based - on our discussion Cf September 19, 1990, the schematlc bullding ==HS plans whlch you provided to me at that time, a alte vialt on September 24, 199C and the review of a dralnage Plan for the Hoag Subdlyls fon, Lot 3, located just to the west of. this bulldlng alta. It 13 my unders tandlng that this drainage report ls being requested -m 00 in or(leI' to verify that off-slte dralnage -wlll not impact the proposed structure and - tlat dral:age passing tlic,1-1 the bullting slte can te Clrected =-'6 4 - .... - *..7-I.-4 3 + 0 1Â¥,9 -1~ a - Â· Based predominantly cnmyÂ· fleld inspection'cf Septenter 24, 1990, I do not anticipate that off-5lte dralnage .epresents a slgnlflcant hazard to tile proposed bulldlng envelope. Durlng my slte inspectlcn I noted that there are no oIl-alte gullles which would appear to dlrect a significant stom flow into the bulldlng area. Tile area 19 generally well vegetated includlng numerous large fl: trees and glves no evldence of even seasonal dralnage Impacts. In addltlen, as noted in Nick Lamplrls' s letter to you of March 21, 1990, there exlsts two large chutes, one on elther slde of the building site, whlch would tend to Centaln the mcre slgnificant Enowsllde and rockfall events. As a result, dralnage whlch may impact the *1 ller , parcel wlll generally tend to te sheet flow from the areas immediately above the site. The s toI-2 drainage plan prepared for the Hoag SUMivlsion, Lot 3, by ilm Eeck c f Hlgh Country Engineering, provides several applicable condlt:cr.3 far a slte nearly identlcal to the Mrller Property. C.=parable calculations for upslope dralnage area, 8011 type, and run-off coefflclents indicate that dralnage impacting the Miller Residence should be in the range of 0.7 of a c'able foot rer seccnd (cfs) in a 100 year storm event. Because the upslope area is well vegetated and topography would not encourage a concentrated flow impacting the site, a debris flow event 13 ?lghly unlikely. For Durroges cf design, however, I would be inclined t. utilize a debrls flo., bulking factor of 50% resulting in a total 1CO year storm flow cf 1.05 cfs. Even with these conservative assumptions, 3 1.05 cfs flew does not represent a Significant concern. 1512 Grand Avenue, Suite 212 â€¢ Glenwood Springs, Colcrado 81â‚¬Cl â€¢ (203) 945-ICC4 PITKIN U R.: 9 9 -1 8-4 septenter 23, 1990 Er. ?.anfri W CU.-I- Page 2 Mitigation Recc=mendatcns Generally speaking, desired mitlgaclon cf the Lotentlal Storm run- off Impacting tals slte comprlses a series of swales that Will dlrect the flow arcurfl the structure to the uphill alde of Â·the entry drive. The proposed swale south of the Uphlll bullding wall, as shown on your plans dellvered to me on September 9, 1990, la more than adequate to intercept a 1 cfa flow. I would recommend that this swale- be contlnued around the structure Utillelng a trlangular section 4 feet wide by 1 foot deep on both sides of the building. 10!lis swale should be revegetated ut111zlng ercslon control mattlng, topsoil and seeding wlth Dative plant types that would net interfere with storm flows through the swale. As you had noted cn the building 311:1, des 10.7111 entail retal:11:LE walls immediately above the read. i Would Suggest 1ncludlng a 01(231 basin above the retaining walls cn each side of the structure to intercept storm flows before they over-tcp the wall. Flows would te routed behlnd the wall and then through the bottom of the wall to the uphill slde of the road. Along the uph111 slde of the rcad where the drlveways would be crosslag, I would recommend the placement of 18" dlameter culvert crossings connecting to the berrcw ditch on tile uphill Slde of the road. These culvert sizes are 81gnificantly larger than the flow would requlre but smaller culverts can be more easily plugged and pose a malntenance problem. AS a final note, the borrow ditch on the uphill slde of the new roadway should be carried downslope as far as necessar'/ to avoid impacts to adja 5 011 - Drocer:les. Where appropriate an addlt:.cnal culver: crossing to the south slde cf Ute Avenue may te nesded. I trust that this report will te adequate for County review purposes, feel free to contact me lf I may provlde further information or additional detall regarding design. Respectfully Butmitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. ~11\1111'Ul/,/114</42> y 0090, jiffls 49:4Â·*tr*4--4 791 -.; - It- May 4 W. Hammond, P.E. 1638078-4 jet Principal-Aspen Office y. \ 00., JH/Ja90203 '02:........:Iy:f "%7/ONAL V '/"mittitin,\ 4/411111\\U\% A : 49 -1,4 Willb M U. Ne-41~ 9-1 Prrk nt 8 25 Septenber 1990 > -1 ,- Exhibit G In Z 5: 8 Wedu= Design Develciment az 616 E. Hyman 0- Suite 102 me%2 Aspen, Colorado 81611 --518 Attn: Randy Wedum UlÂ· 2 e 0- z m Re: Gordon Miller Ge Building Envelope N Â· -0 . 0, a 00 O,0 Gen tlemen: -G . . e N We have reviewed the prcicsed house to be located cn the Newfoundland Parcel. Aspen. Coloradc. During our review and N . design of structural framing we reviewed the requirements for soil conditions and avalanche and debris flow agai: st 4- N the building. We have designed concrete foundation/retainin, walls to resist the lateral forces imposed by the slope of the scil against the building and the avalanche and debris flow forces. We have provided drawin:s showing the required reinforcement of the proposed walls. We have also designed the roof of the house to resist a 300 psi live load as required for avalanche. We feel that the proposed buildin,Â· is capable of being constructed, and that it will withstand the imposed loads noted above. , Please contact us if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, DESIGN STRUr":RES, INC. 0111!Mltfuu*,* Â»10-4-0 -~ - 4*# 2%:4% H. 42../44 02?90 REG/n/% - O 4 en. .......t., G.p-r-4:. 19â€¢#* cr M krpe William H. New,dil. P.E. #di:jf *. 44 & 1 crl -a--* 1 -4 r-t 1' 6&4 1,13'k l* President L 1-,i- 15681 ify:=- A . 4.4.2-\1 -44Â£,~e re..11 \1* /1 r â‚¬ZÂ·CÂ£9.93?isÂ» ' 91 & 1 A ~ WILLLAM H. NEWEL 1 4(.O heviÂ·,~terlith 51{elÂ·t â€¢ Suite 210 â€¢ Denver. Colorado (10202 â€¢ (3 01) 623-4927 â€¢ FAX (ZOJ) 6/D-Ft 111111111111111111111111111 Im..~.1 Exhibit ~0 4-â„¢f ./ -- r h J %-2 4 1 h . 4 4, J~lk *VI. s... E -: . Â¥@PW .1. 15 ; /~ .:t.. 1 vÂ»+I -Le~'ChA'r : nfl 1 *Rb AVE --9-9 0 9 f ... â‚¬ 4 1%?:....4 41 .. 7 1 1/1 1%6 %-/ - L 1 ... g In 4,0 ...: ' , 2 /1/j~ /1 --=. L . 1/\ 0 2 11 f ----- 1 ,puv 2 ~ Aspen Alps 4 \-2 / 01 *~~ %1 -~f\) 4.m // i / ' l 1 /1 I -\ 4 4 .... A , L) 'i 1 %% 1. 1Â¥10' R'.822/ 4.11 i / 44- 1,------l~-~ 2114 --14â‚¬11~ 1 4 96 Ute Cemetery i' ~ \ 1 -/ 1 \~ Hoag #12 -----Â»- ./2. 0 131. ' ' Ell Newfoundland Lode =====-- 11 \ + . d / 0 1 1 F me Aspen Clu67 \ / N Location 200 0 200 400 600 800 Feet W E Map S n L_ ~~ ~ _ 4-,0 *, July 27,1999 DAVID GIBSON AIA Mr. Chris Bendon, Planner Aspen Pitkin County AUGUST Community Development RENO 130 South Galena Street AIA Aspen, Colorado 81611 SCOTT SMITH RE: Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision AIA Proposed Driveway Turnaround Aspen, Colorado r.. WWH3, ]LLC Dear Chris: Please accept this Amendment to the previous application for the GIBSON RENO Valerio Johnson 8040 Greenline Review. As you know, there are new ARCH[TECTS,LLC. owners ofthe property, WWH3, L.L.C., a Colorado Limited Liability Ill Company. 210 EAST HYMAN We were directed by the City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning NÂ°2O2 Commission to address a few issues as part ofthe conditional approval. This Amendment, as well as our presentation for the Planning and A5PEN COLORADO Zoning Commission are intended to resolve their concerns. 81611 The following issues have been addressed: 970.925.5968 Driveway turnaround related to fire protection equipment. FACSIMILE A driveway turnaround is proposed with a forty (40) foot radius. 970.925.5993 The turnaround sits on Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision and the Newfoundland Lode lot. Please refer to the drawings enclosed. P.O. BOX 278 Retaining Wall: 101 E. COLORADO AVE SUITE 301 There is an existing stacked precast concrete block retaining wall that will be removed. In it's place, e are proposing a new TELLURIDE mechanically stabilized earth wall consisting ofbattered concrete COLORADO masonry units faced with stone veneer; fiber reinforced concrete 81435 leveling pad, geotextile reinforcement, and a drainage system located on 970.728.6607 the interior of the wall. Please refer to the drawings enclosed. FACSIMILE 970.728.6658 C. Bendon July 27, 1999 Page 2 Landscaping at the retaining wall: We are proposing extensive landscaping at the North side of the proposed retaining wall. This landscaping will include: double-stacked boulders to retain the existing slope and emulate a rock out-cropping; saving the two (2) existing fir trees; saving the existing Aspen clumps; saving the existing Maple trees; new Douglas Firs ranging from three (3) to five (5) foot in height; new Aspen trees; new Maple trees; new bushes consisting of woods rose and thimbleberry; various perennial flowers; hydro-mulch; and silverlace vine along the top of the retaining wall draping down over. The proposed landscaping softens the new stone faced retaining wall. Please refer to the drawings enclosed. Landscaping at the turnaround: The center portion of the turnaround will be constructed with a grasscrete type of products. This material will allow vehicles to drive over it, yet has grass growing within it. This material and grass will de- emphasis the hard surface of a vehicle turnaround. We also propose to locate additional vegetation at the very cent ofthe turnaround. These plantings will help to break-up the eighty (80) foot diameter of the turnaround. Please refer to the drawings enclosed. I have enclosed twenty (20) copies of the following for your review, distribution to the required referral agencies, and the Planning and Zoning Commission. 1. Disclosure of Ownership. 2. Letter authorizing Gibson Reno Architects L.L.C. to act on behalf of the applicants. 3. Updated improvement/topographic survey. 4. Proposed turnaround plan. 5. Proposed retaining wall detail and specifications. 6. Proposed landscape plan. 7. Sketch of retaining wall and landscaping. 8. Agreement to pay form. 9. A planning deposit check for $1,110.00. 10. A check for the $160.00 for the City of Aspen, Engineering Department review. 11. Grant of Easement with legal description for Newfoundland Lode property (adjacent property). 12. Land Use Application C. Bendon July 27, 1999 Page 3 Ifyou have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Also, if I have neglected to submit any other information you might need, please contact me at your earliest convenience. I will await confirmation from you regarding scheduling ofthis project before the Planning & Zoning Commission. Au*st Q Reno. ALA enclosures cc: L. Winnerman, H. Klein FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET TO :9255993 1999,07-14 12:36 #907 P.09/09 inSUrEC m 1,!IlgEI UU U 111 Vv t,19,1 611., .1,1.- ... -, - -1-, ~ LTG Policy No. LTFH380323 - ----~ Form AO/ORT , - Our Order No. Q380323 Schedule A Amount $850,000.00 Property Address: , ASPEN, CO 81611 1. Policy Date: July 02, 1999 at 1:16 P.M. 2. Name of Insured: WWH3, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Schedule and which is covered by this policy is: A Fee Simple 4. Title to the estate or interest covered by this policy at the date hereof is vested in: WWH3, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABE-ITY COMPANY 5. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: LOT 3, HOAG SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT FILED NOVEMBER 5, 1971 IN PLAT BOOK 4 AT PAGE 218. COUNTY OF PIT'K[N, STATE OF COLORADO This Policy valid only if Schedule B is attached. Land Title Guarantee Company Representing OId Republic National Title Insurance Company FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET TO :9255993 1999,07-14 12:35 #907 P.08/09 'UaIZn-Ux I"'r.. ... . .... I ~ C- -.-4/2 Owner's Policy NO. 4, len T TRIJÂ·29'V,9.2 1 1.,f.. --- P c American Land Title Association Owner's Policy 10-17-92 TIÂ« \Ps*lock ** -9060\\ * ** SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE 8 AND THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS, OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Minnesota corporadon, herein called the Company, insures, as of Date of Policy shown in Schedule A, against loss or damage, nor exceeding the Amount of Insurance stated in Schedule A, susrained or incurred by Ihe insured by reason of: 1. Thle to the estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested other than as stated therein: 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the title: 3. Unmarkerability of the title; 4. Lack of a righT of access m and from The land. The Company will also pay the costs, arromeys' fee and expenses Incurred in defense of the Ikie, as insured, but only to the extent provided in the Conditions and Stipulations. IN 1MTNESS WHEREOF. the said Old Republic National Title Insurance Company has caused irs corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by i[S duly authorized officers as of the date shown in Schedule A, the policy to be valid when countorsigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or darnage, costs, atmmeys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including, but not limited to, building and zoning laws, urdiiiances, or mgulations) resrricring, regulating, prohibiting cr relating to Ii) the occupancy. usc, or enjoyment of The land: (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (ilil a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the offect of any viclarion of thege laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent thata notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect. lien or encumbrance reaulting from a violation nr alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in me public records ar Date ofÂ·Policy. (b) Any governmental police power nci excluded by (a) above, except m The extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resuking from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in rhe public records at Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of The exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding froni coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Dare of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value withour knowledge, 3. Defects. liens. encumbrances, adverse claims, or other morters la) created, suffered. assumed or agreed m by Ihe insured claimant; (b) noI known to tile Company. nor recorded in the public records ar Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by rhe insured claimant prior zo the date the insured claimant became an insured under this Policy (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant Id) attaching or orealing subsequent m Date of Policy; or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for The estate or interest insured by this policy. 4. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting In the insured the esrate or interest insured by th js poricy, by reason of the operadon of federal bankrupIcy. state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws. that is based on (a] the transaction creating the esIate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a fraudulent conveyance or frandulent transfer: or (b) the IransaCTIon creating The estate Or interest insured by this policy being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential Iransfer results from Lhe failure: 0) m timely record the insuumenI of transfer; or (ii) of such recordation to impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgmenI or lien creditOf. Issued through the Office of: OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY A Stock Company 533 E HOPKINS, SUITE 102 400 Second Avenue Smizh, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 ASPEN, COLORADO 87611 (612)371-1111 (970) 925-1678 v:* - -- 1.3le -1 063 157,--4~r-3#17/C-* President / A 8.e/z~:,t---~LL 6' :311 -- ~<-7--7-- Al#torized Signatory Attest Uith=21 ~N; 1/)0 0 Setretel rleÂ¥ e..... /091'1 , i. 1- I. *** FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET TO :9255993 1999,07-14 12:33 #907 P.02/09 WI 1--r -,J, .1- 4-,- -r -1-, 11 1 ... CaMBENT AND AOTZORIZATION 70 PROCESS LAND USE APPLICATICDT The undersignedr with respect to its property located at the Lot 3 Hoag Subdivigien, Aspen. Colorador hereby authorizes Rerbart S- Klein, E,q., its attorney and Angie Reno. its architect, to process on its behalf an application for 8040 Review and ' any permits or other applications necessary for compliance with all conditions aseociated therewith. A facsimile of this authorization may be treated as an original. Dated: July 14, 1999 WWES, LLC r A Colcradc Limited Liability Company Ers WINWIN, T.,Le, A ado Limited Liability Con:pany, its Manager BY: - I. Mwrence Wi=merman - Manager -4-4/ TOTAL P. 01 FROM :KLEIN-Z I MET TO :9255993 1999,07-14 12:35 #907 P.07/09 June 29,1999-~ EXHIBIT B EASEMENT DESCRIFTION AN . -Â· , EASEMENT SITUATED IN A PORTION OF THE NEWFOUNDLAND LODE, MINERAL SURVEY No. 5190 LOCATED IN THE NW M OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, %#INGE 84 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. SAID EASEMENT BEING FURTHER DESRCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT CORNER No. 4 OF SAID NEWFOUNDLAND LODE; THENCE S 60Â°00'00" W 136.44 nET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT 3, HOAG SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4 AT PAGE 213 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE S 65Â°31'10" E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 3 21-59 FEET, THE TRUE POTNT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S 65Â°31'10" E l638 FEET; TMENCE CONTINUNG ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S 56Â°16'00" E 53.76 FEET: THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERY BOUNDARY S 55Â°48'50" E 20.00 FEET; THEINCE LEAVING SAm SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY 138.58 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 45.00 FEET AAD A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 176Â° 26'39" (CHORD BEARS S 57Â°50'36" 2 89.96 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINMING: SAID ACCESS EASEMENT CONTAINING 3,153 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION PREPARED BY: SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC MARK 5. BECKLEIL PLS. No. 28643 1 111111 lilli 111111 lili 1111111 lili '11111111 lilli lili lili 432978 07/02/1999 01:16P EASEMENT DAVIS SILVI 5 of 5 R 25.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 502 Main Street â€¢ Suite A3 ' Carbondale, CO 81623 Â· (970) 704.0311 Â· Fax (970) 704-0313~ SOPRIS ENGINEERING ' LLC civil consultants TOTAL P.02 *provemet Sumey Plat Lot i Hoâ‚¬ Subdivision - NOTM - 1) LOT BOUNDARY DIMENSIONS SHOÂ¥N HEREON ARE BASED ON IHE RECORDED PLAT OF HOAG SUBDIVISON. 2) THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON IS SUBJECT TO Al.1 EASEMENTS. RIGHTS-Of- Pitkin County, Colorado WAYS. BUILDING SETBACKS OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD, AND/OR AS NOTED ON A TITLE INSURANCE COMMIâ„¢ENT REFERENCED HEREON. AT CLIENT REQUEST. THIS PLAT WAS PREPARD SOLELY FROM DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN SAID TITLE COMMITMENT, AND DOCUMENTS PRO\IDED BY THE CUENT, AND NO ADDr IONAL RESEARCH WAS TO BE A PART OF THIS SURVEY. 3) NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIE SURVEY M THIN THREE (3) YEARS AFTER YOU DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. 4) THE EASEMENTS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 681, PAGES 873 THROUGH 885. AS ~ ~ ~ ANY DEFECT IN THIS CERTIOCAm RE COMMENCED WORE THAN TEN (10) YEARS RECORDED MTH THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, CONTAIN CONFUCnNG, ILLEGIBLE, AND APPARENTLY ERRONEOUS INFORMATION. THESE EASEMENTS HAVE BEEN DEPICTED AT THE]R APPARENT INTENDED LOCATIONS (AS BEST AS THOSE EASEMENTS CAN BE SHOWN). SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH WOULD // \ 40 D 40 BE NECESSARY TO BETTER SHOW THE PRECISE LOCATION OF THESE EASEMENTS. 5) NO INFORMATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE NOR WAS ANY RESEARCH PERFORMED lz./1.293.32Ym! CONCERNING BUILDING SETBACKS. 1HIS PROPERTY MAYBE SUBJECT TO 44 / 1 SETBACKS OF RECORD. ATKIN COUNTY SETBACKS, OR OTHER DOCUMENTED \ 2 SETBACK AGREEMENTS, ETC. 6) AS NOTED ON THE RECORDED PLAT OF HOAG SUBDMSION: \ ) \ ~ DNo BUILDING PER,AtT WILL BE ISSUED ON LOTS 1&3 UNFL IT HAS S - BEEN DEMONSTRATED THAT THERE IS ADEQUATE AVALANCHE -- - PROTECTION TO BE ENGINEERED AN[) CERTIFIES BY ' -- ------ -~~lt INDIVIDUAL OP? IM'n.1[4 315 Â¥?11}1 PROFESSIONAL AVALANCHE / ~-- ~ ~ CONTROL EXPERIENCE. ' < ii) NO BUILDING PERMIT WILL BE ISSUED BY THE CITY Of ASPEN FOR / ANY LOT MTHIN THS SU801MSION UNTL A COMMITMENT HAS BEEN .#BE$- /** . 2 /~ /' ~ \ ENTERED INTO MTH THE AFEN METROPOUTAN SANITATION DISTRtCT FOR AN EXTENSION OF A SEWER UNE TO SERVE THE LOTS "223'.00.6, MTHIN THIS SUBDIMSION. 27 4 0 7) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S,7102*33-E. r.oh . -- -â€ž. -- 4. / / - 11 1.9 3 \ BETWEEN CORNER NO. 4 OF M.S. NO. 5190, AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF : 0.2 . ,0~ //~ - 7.W -9 .. < -Â«-2.. ---- *0 LOT 6 OF HOAG SUBDIMSION, WONUMENTED AS SHOÂ¥,N HEREON. Rit Trol //12,â‚¬0&11::0~ 464 ~00\ 8) BOOK 656, PAGE 655 OF THE MTKIN COUNTY RECORDS REFERS TO AN //// L. %Â¥04 4~ .. rl - 3~~ APPROXIMATE ZOO FOOT ENCROACHMENT ALONG THE UNE COMMON TO LOT 3 OF HCAG SUBOMSION, AND THE 7001 LODE, MINERAL- SURVEY NO. 1741. NO t>. PREPARATON. ADDITIONAL RELD AND/OR OFFICE RESEARCH WAY BE NECESSARY 1/ ADD!nIONAL INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THIS PLAT 6 - \ P Rk. -u \ / 2:7 -fr .46/i : 5.0.0 - 0~ ~~** ~ TO CLARIFY ANY SUCH ENCROACHMENT AT AN ADOTIONAL CHARGE \ 44: : ~Â·y ~ \ A-0/ / \ \\0\- \ 4% , I / LOT 3 , 01--~f / 7 9X \ I ./ t':f \ 0-84 \ \ 3.058 Act . e , - - 'if g## A \ \ (133,219 Sq. Pt) 4% 4 0 00 --Â¥10% . Bill \ \ \ 60.61 Rt...Beariq,571Â·32'33 tE -- , 2 - - 37 \21\ 4/- 3,111# 4,4 5 \ 44 / / 47 e 1 1 ..%&!b * . 1 ' 0%%.5< ' , 1 \ ' W U.....â€¢/ 2 -2 40 L - - .3//~~42râ€¢ *m-9- -il- ..SEXE-- Ule'_-~1:UmP2:ULKE:AÂ® \ 5%72723050 438.56 * Found 4'484 1.4, #*#sfeeLM 4>,4 ip <y 005' # 35; d,1 A,mument 424% I Y D I.- I-- 4112 274*lot i i Fr :* e - / C... -*. - 8//R.Er/0~13 C!-TPC47! - - PÂ·Fril=airr t;eba<PnoN - 1. THEE UNDERSIGNED, BEING A REGtSTERED PRCEESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR. - - UCENSED IN THE STATE OF COLORADO, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS ' IMPROEMENT SURVEY PLAT WAS PREPARED BY PIVER CITY SURVEYS, LLC. LOT 3, HOAG SUBDIVISION FOR THOMAS COLEMAN, UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERMSION AND CHECKING AND THAT COUNTY OF' PITKIN IT IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KhOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. STATE DE COLORADO AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT FILED IT IS FURTHER CERTIFIED THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE A80\E DESCRIBED NOEMBER 5. 1971, IN PLAT BOOK 4 PARCEL ON THIS DATE JANUARY 6, 1999. EXCEPT Ulll]TY CONNECTIONS ARE ' AT PAGE 218, WITH THE PIll(IN ENnRELY WITHthi THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PARCEL, EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER. THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBED PREMISES BY IMPROEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS NDICATED, AND THAT THERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF Â» Y EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENiNG ANY PART OF SAID PARCEL EXCEPT AS SHOWN. 8/4/97 Add & Revise Notes, Misc.Revisions by DAC THIS NPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT DOES NOT REPRESENT A 11TLE SEARCH BY 8/21/97 Add Acreoge libel -- doc RIVER aTY- SURVEYS, LLC, TO DETERMINE OWNE}'SHIP OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD. ALL INFORMATION REGARDING OWNERSHIP, EASEMENTS AND OTHER ENCUMBRA+ICE OF RECORD WAS OBTAINED FROM AND SUBJECT TO A ITTLE /3 St]44 Pâ€¢REPAERED FORÂ·Â· INSURANCE COMMIâ„¢ENT ISSUED BY RTKIN COUNTY FTLE C0RP214110, ORDER NO. PCT11948, DATED JUNE 20, 1997. /36#21 / / C, le.,crz- 21~3 ~,\ Thomal Coleman 02aMC#k /2 7006:04% 'AI /1-\ 0 V\- R'$9&56*Catft,/*'Grry# j Jck . : 97147 0 1*%*Eb/7 ~oord Illa â€¢ ' .-22!2 1 / 6% by : D. COOPER of ~ /tone & 1~11/~ 971'7 d.g 1-6-99 1:43:03 pm 1 LOT 3 .-. # 44 / 4. --/ I. W xI. . \ .. b \ 1 /\ .Â·. Â·Â·. f I \ f, 3'0,0 1 . A HEON OF WALL V FkÂ· S TO 19 PRQPOSED USE INING .. â€¢ L j I : ./ 0.-1 \ \ FNO Re UEGIBLE \\ FID RC9175 . \ 0. -- i *:Â·x-4 -LOT 4 1 - ' N - f \ 0 70 LF.-TYPE 3 GUARDR :\ AS PER COOT 64*S STNICARD ~ 1 N PLAN 61-606 DETAL ~ Â· GRAPHIC SCALE . 4 \ 4 \ . FND RC20030 03.0<) 4 \ J '0.6 N.-/ . \ 061719'. 2\\ \ \1 c m m= 3 1 tf ,-' \ 1 inch - 10 16 1 . ~ ' 1- , 7 , 1 \ 7-*\ 'Ab \ \ too i 4 \ \ \ 1 .\ \X \ \ l \ \ I i \ \ 1 -- Ki \ \ d \\ 0 lit ''\ I Ft R(29030 \ \ \ 1 \ 1 \ 1 \\ 6. \ \ \\ \\ }\ \ 1 \ 1 01.00 11\ 1 \ i N -U-- - \ \ 40 4 \ 1 \ \Il \ \ 11 \ 93 ~ N 1. 1 - \ M I -1 1 \ \ ~ j FWD RC29030 - i . \ \ \ 4 0 - 2%%C 1 0 \ \ - 1 \ h \ 1 .1 \ - 03.00 /.. \- \ 4 \\\ / \ \ 4. . --I ... - -b~ \ \ I,\ \ 7 â‚¬ 7 1 \\ X . 4 1 4:- $ /\ 1 \. / 1 1- \ 0 \ \ . 1 0\ 3 \ \ .\ 2 1 1 I % - 40 RCO,51 UNDÂ¥ .s N - ~ \ \ \ 1 , i \ - \ \ --- , \ 1 Â£ r \ . 2\ --- - THIS AR@A REQUIRES 7 1 1 \ 1 4 420 RETAINING WALL TO BE 7 DESIGNED Rb PART OF .~7 BUILDING Err OhIERS. i \ 1 1 .. ' i 4 Â» 000 Ne i I - '- -%/ . \ \ 1 \ \ 1 Â« IND %2370 --' I 14 1 I \ Fk # .cs spu I i 4 1/\ \ \ lit W \ \ '04, 1 1 4 \. \ ,% ' \ 0 \ , 1 1 NO. DATE REVISION , D}' HOAG SUBDIVISION ASPEN. COLORADO HOAG SUBDIVISION PROPOSED DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND ~OPRZS ENGINEERING, UC. Â¥CIVIL CONSULTANTEA 502 M//STREET, SUITE /3 DES. YTN CK FILE NO. sHÂ£Â£, 1 CARBON[}ALE. CO 81623 (970) 704-0311 DR. SDA DilÂ·Â£ 06/02/94. 98035 OF / , . I - - -w - Il ..I-..)/i-/.L--.m /*6.--..*..-..Kil#.Il--Il.-.----- I -I .I- - .--I '~--il - --WI- -- - 4-*-*< -- Il---Il- .- LI.Ii - -1 nra ICD GRADE SEE ROADWAY DESIGN ~ FOR DETAILS L k / '**20**** 4- Â§U MECHANICALLY STABLIZED j i- EARTH WALL SCHEDULE 1. > SPAGNG HL i GEOTEXTU ~ ! i FEET FEET INCHES a81IER f 0 To 5-11- 5'-6* 16- o.c DRY STACKED n Â· - 6'-0- TO 8'-11 8'-0 16- o.c. 6 ~gALL ~ i .,l APPROVED MATL ~, - ~ 90-0 TO 11'-11 10'-0- 16- o.c. 1-l 12'-0 TO 14'-11- 12'-6- 8- o.c. 1 82 8 ft then 16 STONE VENEETÂ« U. r w/nES \fi ' 1 16'-0- TO 18'-0- 16'-O- 8- 0.c I st 8 ft then 16- PER ARCH'L L , _3'-0 OVER LAP' 1 1 1- f 44 - GEOTEXTILE RONFORCMENT 4800 Ibm WIDE STRIP TENSILE 1-33361 1 -0 . 4 ~ SEE SCHEDULE FOR SPAaNG, (1) LAYER AT TOP Or LEVELING PAD 4, E EXTEND ' ~ 308 =GHâ„¢ STRIZI INTO STONE l, .. Â·1_ SUTTE - 16- 0.6 OR - E o.c SEE 1 f SCHEDULE 2- Zf GUNIOOD 5PRONGS. CO 81/01 V70/946-1006 ~ 1-lo--=10=12, nAPPED llâ„¢ MARAFI 1 BACK FILL JOB: 9819-04 Ir i SLOPED TO OUTLET. 1 ~ ENGINEER RIO. AN'ISHED , -l DRAIN UY RIO. GRADE 6~ ~ ' Â· ~UMITS OF 1 1/2 ROAD BASE 8/0*&9ZI*EUL_J/&*sL CONSTRUCMON 8-15-08 L LEMLING PAD BACK FILL 21 1 16. ...2. FIBER REÂ»4FORCED CONSTRUCMON 7-6-98 MIN. 4 15 JEEP ROAD BELOW. MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH WALL , NOT TO SCALE ' NOIEL -0 NO SCALEE TIME 1 1% ROAD 8ASE BACKALL SHALL BEE PLACED AT 8- LIFTS AND CONPACTED TO 95% Of ..~ MAJOINUW STANDARD PROCTOR OENSTY. FOUNDATION CONDITIONS SHALL BE EmilIO IN FIELD AND REPORTED TO ENGINEER. - ; 28085 1 51= IF POOR SOIL CONDITIONS EBST 2'-0- OF SaECT MATERIAL SHALL BE USED BELOW WALL UX- 408 SITE WALL 4. FOR MSE WALLS GREATER THAN H-110-11', THE GEOTEXTILE SHALL BE PLACED AT 8- o.c. '%221:itÂ» 40# FOR THE FIRST 8%0* FROW THE LDELING PAD AND THEN 16' o.c. FOR THE REMAINDER. 'Â»*milm,03~ 5. CONCRETE SHALL BE A MINIMUN OF 3000 pei IN 28 DAYS STRENGTH WTH FIBER WESH 81.0 -1 1 '1 GRANULAR MATERIAL UITS OF' 1 1/2 ROAD BASE ORAINAGE FABRIC CONCRETE *E FIt-Â£: 9819-04/â€¢â€¢DICLE 1-24 x LOU NOISIAIaHaS DVOH 0aVN0100 'NadSV H JI IS N Fi Lot 3, HOAG SUBDIVISION Cul-De-Sac Retaining \Nail Planting Plan July 9, 1998 Scale: 1" = 10' Plant Schedule Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas Fir 3' 1 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas Fir 4' 4 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas Fir 5' 3 Pppulus tremuloides Aspen 5 Gal. 7 Pbpulus tremuloides Aspen 1" cal. 8 Polygonum aubertii Silver Lace Vine 5 Gal. 10 Acer glabrum Rocky Mt. Maple 5 Gal. 5 Acer ginalla Amur Maple 5 Gal. 4 - Rosa woodsii Woods Rose 5 Gal. 10 Rubus parviflorus Thimbleberry 1 Gal. 20 Epilobium angustifolium Fireweed FlaU32 2 Lupinus argenteus Lupine Flau32 2 Geranium viscossissimum Native Geranium FlaU32 2 Erigeron speciosus Aspen Daisy Flat/32 1 Grass Seed: Hydromulch with a two-step process. Use native bunchgrass seed. ( â€¢----- jo *i Wer lace vine awnq lopof wam 19'0-5. ~ .(te-7 9 Qal.4 1" R5pevi O.07 -al)/7 \43 (.-\<:22 4 1/.'P 0 2#3390 . =- 0 0 *4.1 ~ O 0 4*/// %7 Â· iy- *#/11\4- e' '~,-40/LI\\~'<,\11/ , O ..2*,1 1/7~' Save .S 5416 exiittrij -10;114 Â¢%(91.Fll 1 g 4.4*LL â‚¬ ' - =:2 fir COM-RiPIS, . -F- egg'Â« RMy~ z e; a '1\\fÂ¥~-5 ' s Â»/11\te -fEfiCat, r*C ply I 'CED~ 3& Q~* T 2 641,#%944 Fir -' o ap 47- L.--pbuDIe-*aaced Druiders to relÂ¤in slopg L- Save â‚¬ldÂ»,161 Set WlAUGÂ¥940 ewwlate YoordrAtoropy i v10 hka#KA malena\*,dlor color to 5Hvte veMeer ow retaipwnlu/214. Aovevt Glvilp Nole: A/1 -Aa,1-tvee a.wl Â·Phrub jocattlp,9 10 De -0#11925 4*te ledÂ«afe*,014-leGE - 49 X \ h LOT 3 DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND PLANTING PLAN , -3<, \ PLANT SCHEDULE -.* I Â£ ../-%-/%/i , - _RUBUS PARVIFLOf?US THIMBLEB ERRY 1 GAL 10 v \ \ Â·' .. . \ ROSA WOODSII WOODS ROSE S GAL 5 112:31221.-1.-~z- . . . PRCrOSED USE WALL. . ----r . 0 ~ !00,r OF WAU. FROM y TO 1 . EPILOBIUM ANGUSTIFOU FIREWEED FLAT/32 07*. / .. \ FNO RC UIGaE LUPINUS AAGENTEUS LUMNE FLAT/32 2 LOT 4 RlGERON SPECIOSUS DAISY FLAT/321 . -2 . 411-7/ DO 'Câ€¢75 - Â· ...<3 + 1 GERANIUM VISCOSS,SS.MUM NATIVE GERANIUM FLAT/32 1 1 1 g \ : GRASS SEED: HYDROMULCH WITH A TWO STEP PROCESS 0 -Il <' USE NATIVEE BUNCHGAASS SEED. i C \ 70 L.F.-r. 3 AS PER (DOr MaS ST,UÂ©ARD ~ 1 PLAN /-106 0[rALL .... L.. ..\ GRAPHIC SCALE -PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESI DOUGLAS AR 12â€¢ 4 1 . - 'â‚¬b ~ . ogin IpÂ· , .* L/-.\ 1 03.00 ..4 I M" \ 491: 1 Inch -10 1 ~ 11 1\ ~ /~ ~ ~ N \ 1-. - .. % ... \ I. \ ../06\ ~.. ~ 1./ill:/ jl{, C \ 1\ j,rvh 91.1 1,<.9 .ic. I . ... 1 2 . 0 0 - r'' . \ \ - 3<w #- 1 - .% \ \ ~\ - 1 \ - \ i \ \ I li \ \ 1 \\ 5 \ 1 . I ... \ 1 1 i.i I \ D , N N 2 Zi. , -'i i.i .. 1 1 / I '46 1 , \ \ \ - N \ >\ / 7 -: f "0902** \ \ \ \ \ 0100 1 - . \ 1 Sh 4 0 \ 494 \3\\\24\ i.\.\ 1 /.\ I \ \ \ \\ . 0~00 - #4 1 - 4 I \ 1 \I \ 1 -r \ \ 1... ..1 \ \\ \ \ \ \ / 1 \ \ t- --2 \ I I \ 43 .b \ \ - FID RC2O151 8140, IS ~ \ \ \ .2. 5.Â»-- , \ 1 <47 -N \ \ 4 -Al \ 1 \ -3 43> DESIGNED 25 PART OF ' . ..~ ~ ~ * ~ ' - - \ 1 \ BUILDING~'BY drHERS.. 'Â· 6 - _ - *b 45 \ 1 i .6 e \ \ \ -- \ 1 \ L \ \ 4 b \ \ ~ SLy USGS Sad :\ \ - /--NJ FND RC237G \ I. i . 1%, \ \ \ I .. . \ \ I $ I i \ , \ I , It) DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND LANDSCAPE PLAN \ * NO.DATZ REVISION Br HOAC SUBDIVISION ASPEN. COLORADO HOAG SUBDIVISION PROPOSED DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND t ~OPRIS ~NGINEEJUNG, LLC. Â¥21'VIL CONSULTANT* i. 502 ... SmEET, SUITE A.3 DES. rrN CK. ~1~ FILE NO. SHEE.- 1 CARBONDALL CO 81623 ...SITI.../2/*1 (970) 704-0311 DR. SDA DAGE 06/02/9~ 98035 OF 1 ... Â· ~ 4 ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Pavmentof City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITYOF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and WWH 3, L.L.C. a Colorado Limited Liability Company (hereinafter APPLÂ·ICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS. ' t. APPLICANT has submitted :o CITY an application for An Amendment to the 8040 Greenline for Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision (hereinafter. THE PROJECT). APPLICANT understands and agrees that City or- Aspen Ordinance No. 49 (Series of ! 9981 establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of afl processing fees is a condkion precedent to a determination of application compiereness. o. APPLICANT and CITY agree thar because of:he size, nature or scope o f the proposed project. it is riot possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree thar it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as CostS are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree thar it is impracticable for CITY staff to Complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable tile Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration. unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore. APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of itS right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness. APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of S 1 , 270 . a (Â¢hich is for 6 hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded COSIS exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for tile processing of the application mentioned above. including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. *$1,110.00, Planning deposit minor 160.00, Engineering minor CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT BY: 44-0~ By: 97 *Aie Ann Woods Lommunity Development Director Date: kil.Z/2 7, 199 Mailing Address: 570 South Riverside Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF.\SPEV{hereinafter (ZI-I'/) and WWEL3, L.L.C. aColorado Limited Liability Company (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE .AS FOLLOWS: APPLICANT has submitted :o CITY an application for An Amendment to the 8040 Greenline for Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision (hereinafter. THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 49 (Series of [998) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of afl processing fees is a condition precedent to a determinarion of application completeness. J. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of:he size, nature or scope of the proposed projecr. it is not possible at this time to ascermin the full extent of the costs involved in processing tile appiication. APPLICANT and CITY further agree :har it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional CoStS to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration. unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore. APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of itS right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness. APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of S 1 , 270 .0 QJhich is for 6 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 for the processing of the application mentioned above. including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such acerued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. *$1,110.00, Planning deposit minor 160.00, Engineering minor CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT By: 44-4 411 By: - >jlie Ann Woods CO, 0-ommunity Development Director Date: Â·Â·Â·,â€¢11 1*00'~ 7 , 1.>&.2.9/ Mailing Address: 570 South Riverside Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET TO :9255993 1' 07-14 12:33 #907 P.03/09 ~40Â» -- GRANT OF EASEMENT 6AgFLA>- KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: â‚¬46 Q . A FUL (*44 530'=L THAT, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) in hand paid and for other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the undersigned JOHN FORIER. NEAL CLARK, AND AJAY SHIRSHAT (collectively, the "Grantor") being the record owner of r'The Newfoundland Lode", USMS 5190, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado (the "Burdened Property"), the legal description of which Burdened Property is attached hereto as Exhibit A, for themselves and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns, hereby grant, transfer, sell, convey and assigns unto WW H3, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (the "Grantee"), and its successors and assigns, forever, a perpetual non-exclusive easement and right-of-way (the "Easement") over and across the following real property situated within the Burdened Property, to Wit: LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT - SET FORTH ON EXEIBIT B, ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN BY THIS REFERENCE. The Easement may be used by Grancee (and its contractors, employees, guests, and invitees) for purposes of : access, ingress, and egress for vehicular, bicycle, equestrian and pedestrian access to and from Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision, Aspen, Colorado (the "Benefitted Property"); construction of utilities, drainage improvements and a driveway and a fire truck turn around area for use by the Benefitted Property; temporary staging of construction materials and equipment and parking related to the construction of a residential structure on the Benefitted Property. The burdens and benefits of the Easement shall run with the title to the Burdened Property and the Benefitted Property as provided for herein. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, it is the agreement and understanding of Grantor and Grantee that: a. Both the Benefitted Property and the Burdened Property may use any driveway and fire truck turnaround area constructed on the Burdened Property; b. The initial construction expenses associated with the fire truck turnaround and driveway shall be at the sole expense of the owner of the Benefitted Property; c. The owner of the Benefitted Property shall have sole decision making authority with respect to: (i) construction of a driveway and/or fire truck turnaround on the Burdened Property, and ( ii) maintenance and snowplowing of said driveway and/or turnaround area; iverb *1 2 126 PL 1111111 lilli 11111111111111111 lili 111111111 lilli lili I'll 10 1 0. F),1 1 432976 07/02/1999 01:16P EASEMENT DAVIS SILVI 1 of 5 R 25.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO fbÂ·rn,eog/Lit FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET -0 :9255993 19 I7-14 12:34 #907 P.04/09 d. All reasonable costs associated with the maintenance, repair, and snowplowing of the Easement shall be shared equally by the owners of the Benefitted Property and the Burdened Property; provided however, such costs shall not be charged to a vacant lot. If either party fails to pay its share of costs, the non-defaulting party shall have right institule litigation to collect such sums as are due and shall also have the right to file a lien on the non- paying party's real property and may enforce said lien by a judicially authorized sale. In addition, any costs incurred by one party which are to be shared which are not paid by the other party within thirty (30) days of an invoice therefore, shall earn interest at the rate of eighteen (182) percent per annum. In any collection action or any other litigation instituted to enforce or interpret this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its attorney fees and costs. e. In the event that the owner of the Benefitted Property is informed by any governmental entity (including, without limitation, The City of Aspen and/or Pitkin County, and their respective agencies and departments) that the Easement must be relocated in order to develop the Benefitted Property, then the owner of the Burdened Property shall cooperate with the owner of the Benefitted Property in modifying the Easement as necessary to comply with such governmental requirements, provided, however, any modification does not unreasonably affect the ability to construct a residence within the building envelope of approximately 6000 sq. ft. in size. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantors have executed this Grant of Easement as of this #b day of June, 1999. GRANTOR: 0HN FORIER NEAL CLARK BY: *12 â‚¬2J,â‚¬7214<-Ia,O A John Forier, hi'13/attorney-in-fact AJAY SHIRSAT BY: 4.114 4+11/.-Â»j.Aff.,tritiger..../-.1.0 h John /Forier, his attdyney-in-fact 111'11111111 mi ll'11111111 lili 111111111 lilli lili '111 432976 07/02/1999 01:16P EASEMENT DAVIS SILVI 2 of 5 R 25.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO -2- FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET -0 :9255993 19 17-14 12:34 #907 P.05/09 STATE OF OUU-Â£2Â© SS. COUNTY OF -2~'Â£406 ) Subscribe~| and sworn to before me this ~C) day of June, 1999, by John Forier, individually and by Neal Clark and Ajay Shirsat by John Forier as their attorney-in-fact. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 74Â«6/44'jao (UÂ»-4- ALL Rub ARZANA RUCKER 2 Notari~b lic ) NOTARY PUBLIC t STATE OF COLORADO i ...0----*.*------------3 ' '|-Ar,t:/r,rec FÂ¥Â·7Â·Â·vÂ· 01,7f:/'Con winnerman\hoag\eas. 2 1111111 lilli 111111 lilli 1111111 lili 11111111111111 lili lili 432976 07/02/1999 01:16P EASEMENT DAVIS SILVT 3 of 5 R 25.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO -3- Ra FROM ?KLEIN-ZIMET 0 :9255993 19 37-14 12:35 #907 P.06/09 Our Order No. Q380328 LEGAL DESCRIPTION EEIBITA NEWFOUNDLAND LODE MINING CLAIM, U.S.M,S. 5190, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT NORTHEASTERLY TRIANGULAR PORTION OF SAID MINING CLAIM LYING AND SHOWN ON THE PLAT FOR THE HOAG SUBDIVISION. IN PLAT BOOK 4 AT PAGE 218. I AND FURTHER EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF THE NEWFOUNDLAND LODE MINING CLAIM, U.S.M.S. 5190 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ~ BEGINNING AT CORNER NO. 1 (NEWFOUNDLAND 5190) WHENCE THE U.S.L.M. "UTE NO. 4" BEARS N. 26 DEGREES 25'30" E 3114.76 FEET; THENCE S 4 DEGREES 48' W 362.0 FEET; THENCE N 60 DEGREES E 360.0 FEET; THENCE N 4 DEGREES 48' E 362.0 FEET; THENCE S 60 DEGREES W 360.0 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. COUNTY OF PI'IKIN, STATE OF COLORADO 111'111 lilli 111111 lili '1111111111111111111 lilli lili lili 432976 07/02/1999 01:16P EASEMENT DAVIS SILVI 4 of 5 R 25.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO , LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision, Plat filed November 5, 1971, Book 4, Page 128, County ot Pltkin, Colorado Location: Ute Avenue Aspen Colorado (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) APPLICANT: Name: WWH 3 , L.L,C. a Colorado Limited Liability Company Address: 570 South Riverside Ave Aspen CO. 81611 Phone #: 970 920-0020 REPRESENTATIVE: Herb Klein - Klein-Zimet Professional Corporation Name: Aligip meno - Gibson Reno Architects, LLC Address: Klein: 201 No. Mill St~ Aspen, CO. 81611 Reno: 210 E. Hyman Ave. Suite 202 Aspen, uu. 81611 Phone #: H, Klein 925.-8700 A, Reno 925-5968 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Conditional Use El Conceptual PUD El Conceptual Historic Devt Special Review ~ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ~ Final Historic Development Design Review Appeal U Conceptual SPA 01 Minor Historic Devt. GMQS Allotment Â£ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) El Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption E Subdivision El Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ~ Subdivision Exemption (includes U Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane El Lot Split El Temporary Use E Other: El Lot Line Adjustment El Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) Existing vehicular turnaround,and retaining wall has been in place for approximately three (3) yearsg PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) New driveway vehicular turnaround, retaining wall, and landscaping Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $1, 270.00 Â£ Pre-Application Conference Summary Planning deposit minor $1,110.00 El Attachment # 1, Signed Fee Agreement Engineering minor 160.00 ~ Response to Attachment #2, Dimensional Requirements Form ~ Response to Attachment #3, Minimum Submission Contents U Response to Attachment #4, Specific Submission Contents U RespOnse to Attachment #5, Review Standards for Your Application 21 El El El El El . 4464,3 2 4 ~0,00'~ uN TR y\~~ -. NG/NEERING ~1 - -UdeÂ« 12> 4.*tu e PA 04- Ex FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS FOR LOT 3, HOAG SUBDIVISION HCE JOB NO. 99057.01 September 23, 1999 Deric J. Walter, E.I. Â¢=53 Design Engineer , Reviewed by: C . Roger D. Neal, P.E. Project Manager LU - C - Ul 61- U CD k:\wp\99\05ndrahdoc 923 COOPER AVENUEâ€¢ GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORA[)081601 --- ~:-,j'- r Telephone [9701 945-8676.â€¢ Fax [9701 945-2555 .Cy'l 411% 'AG AlNO MJI/\311 1103 GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The proposed residential development for Lot 3 of the Hoag Subdivision is located off Ute Avenue in the City of Aspen, Colorado. The proposed residential development calls for the construction of one single-family residence, driveway and cul-cle-sac. See the enclosed Vicinity Map for the site location. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGN The development will be served by a proposed 8" water main that will extend from the existing 8" water main running parallel ro Ute Avenue. The main will run under the proposed drive and cease at a fire hydrant located approximately 70 feet above the existing water main. The enclosed preliminary calculations show that an inline pump will be required to meet the City of Aspen's fire flow design requirements. Modeling a proposed pump with a design pressure of 45 psi, it is High Country Engineering's- opinion that the existing water main should be able to maintain minimum residual pressures under fire flow demand. The Haestad Methods, Inc. Cybernet computer program outlines the method used for modeling the potable water distribution system. Demand calculations are based on informarion and test dara provided by the City of Aspen Fire Marshall and Water Departments. SUNIMARY The Fire Flow Calculations for Lot 3 of the Hoag Subdivision show that the site can be served by the existing water main through the construcrion and installation of components as indicated on High Country Engineering's Utility Plan dated September 23, 1999. PiLANIdiliINg *1,6* -::-: 9 r E KI. *iti * 07-1 â„¢MIM* 9 p 101Â¢IVI'lul',~â€¢,111#11,ul *. - 4Â» 1 % -* I . I I. .' * 2 . MEETING DATE: 02/01/2000 NAME OF PROJECT: HOAG Lot #3 CITY CLERK: Jackie Lothian STAFF: Chris Bendon WITNESSES: (1) Augie Reno (2) Herb Klein EXHIBITS: 1 Staff Report (X ) (Check If Applicable) 2 Affidavit of Notice C ) (Check If Applicable) 3 Board Criteria Sheet (X) (Check If Applicable) 4 Phil Overyender Memo MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to adopt P&Z Resolution #2000-06 approving the 8040 Greenline Review for Hoag Lot #3 with all the conditions and finding that it met the criteria on the sheet provided by the Attorney's Office. Steven Buettow second. Roll call vote: Mooney, yes; Tygre, no; Erickson, yes; Hunt, yes; Haneman, yes; Buettow, yes; Blaich, yes. APPROVED 6-1. VOTE: YES _6_ NO _1_ ROBERT BLAICH YES x NO JASMINE TYGRE YES NO _x ROGER HUNT YES x NO TIMOTHY MOONEY YES _x_ NO ROGER HANEMAN YES x NO STEVEN BUETTOW YES x NO RON ERICKSON YES x NO PZVOTE ACTION: 8040 Greenline Review The provisions of 8040 greenline review shall apply to all development located at or above eight thousand forty (8040) feet above mean sea level (the 8040 greenline) in the City of Aspen, and to all development within one hundred fifty (150) feet below the 8040 greenline, unless exempted by the Community Development Director. 8040 greenline review standards. No development shall be permitted at, above, or one hundred fifty (150) feet below the 8040 greenline unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth 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. 2. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse effect on the natural.watershed. runoff, drainage, soil erosion or have consequent effects of water pollution. 3. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse effect on the air quality of the city. 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. 5. Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. 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. - over - 7. Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. ill- r-i- 8. Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed development. 9. Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development, and said roads can be properly maintained. 10. Adequate ingress and egress is available to the proposed development so as to ensure adequate access for fire protection and snow removal equipment. 11. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan map is dedicated for public use. Provide access to natural resources and areas of special interest to the community. Phil Overeynder, 09:23 AM 1/31/00 , Lot 3 Hoag Subdivision Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:23:53 -0700 (MST) X-Sender: philo@water 61* copy To: chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us From: Phil Overeynder <philo@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Lot 3 Hoag Subdivision Cc: AandCcfc@aol.com, mweaspen@rof.net Chris, This will confirm our phone discussion this afternoon regarding the Aspen Water Department's review of the utility plans for the above referenced lot. I referred the plans to McLaughlin Water Engineers and discussed the proposed alignment of the deep utilities (water and electric) with Tom Bracewell of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. I have previously discussed alignment and service issues with High Country Engineers and easement issues with Alan Grimshaw of the Forest Service and fire protection issues with Ed Van Walraven of the Fire Protection District. I also have discussed maintenance issues associated with a private water main with Millard Zimmet and have refereed Millard to our water counsel for the purposes of drafting a private water main maintenance agreement. Finally I have discussed the relationship of service to this lot to that proposed on the adjoining Newfoundland Lode (in Pitkin County) with Millard Zimmet and informed him of the need for a water service agreement approved by ordinance by the Aspen Citry Council. The Sanitation District prefers that the alignment for the 2 sewer service lines follows the utility easement located between Lots 2 and 4. It is the opinion of McLaughlin Water Engineers as well as the Aspen Water Department that there is not sufficient room in the 14 foot wide roadway for both deep utilities considering the existing retaining wall on the upper slope, the 1:1 fill slope on the downslope side, required minimum depth of cover, required minimum separation between utilities, and requirement to bury utilities in native material. We looked at several different configurations and were unable to identify an alternative workable design. Given the Printed for Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 Sanitation District's preference, it is therefore our recommendation that the sewer line be located in the utility easement between Lots 2 and 4 and that the proposed water main be located in the roadway. A second alternative acceptable to the Water Department would be to leave the sewer service lines as proposed and install water service lines along the above referenced 15' wide utility easement. Note that we do not believe that this is a suitable location for the proposed private water main and that installing service lines only would mean elimination of the proposed fire hydrant, thus requiring a different solution for the fire turn around because of equipment requirements to respond in the event of a fire. Please also note that the plans indicate that the easement across Forest Service property is to be provided to the City of Aspen. If this is for purposes of utilities only, we would request that any easement be dedicated to either the individual properties or a homeowner's association, depending on which entity will be responsible for maintenance of the private water main. McLaughlin Water Engineers identified that there are no specifications or plans available for the proposed in-line pumping station and is contacting High Country Engineers to determine if details are sufficient to determine if water service can be provided given existing pressures and volumes available at the existing water main in Ute Avenue. In particular, it is not clear if the in-line station will include pumps for both domestic and fire flow delivery requirements. The City of Aspen will not accept maintenance responsibility for a pump station serving only 2 homes. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. Please feel free to contact me at x5111 if you have any questions regarding our position. Phil Overeynder Printed for Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> 2 Water Director Printed for Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> 31 1.1.00 +43 oulo -Ine--Tb m an.U . .Awk bod lo b<_ 4-EMed - 40:-c dite r â‚¬164 Ld Nouse b 1> bu 'LE- 116 Lt U 4 n 0 0 f ff< VOcl ll (2% oi,ect 4 eowadÂ· s Slcue -4Â«Q- 1 Uer9 1*'pl-C -1Â»-' A 1, ~â‚¬r *,8~6 k &#duE <dak"B. 16 2. 4, 4 Y W 1 UÂ«l - 1 6 - C ~. #~.. - - July 27,1999 DAVI D GIBSON AIA Mr. Chris Bendon, Planner Aspen Pitkin County AUGUST Community Development RENO 130 South Galena Street AIA Aspen, Colorado 81611 SCOT-[ SMITH RE: Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision AIA Proposed Driveway Turnaround Aspen, Colorado A WWH3, LLC Dear Chris: x540--_**~~~-_z==r Please accept this Amendment to the previous application for the GIBSON RENO Valerio Johnson 8040 Greenline Review. As you know, there are new ARCHITECTS.L.L.C. owners ofthe property, WWH3, L.L.C., a Colorado Limited Liability m Company. 210 EAST HYMAN We were directed by the City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning NÂ°202 Commission to address a few issues as part ofthe conditional approval. This Amendment, as well as our presentation for the Planning and ASPEN COLORADO Zoning Commission are intended to resolve their concerns. 81611 The following issues have been addressed: 970.925.5968 Driveway turnaround related to fire protection equipment. 1-ACSIMI[.[i A driveway turnaround is proposed with a forty (40) foot radius. 970-925.5993 The turnaround sits on Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision and the Newfoundland Lode lot. Please refer to the drawings enclosed. RO. BOX 278 101 E. COLORADO AVE Retaining Wall: SUITE 301 There is an existing stacked precast concrete block retaining wall that will be removed. In it's place, e are proposing a new rELLURIDE mechanically stabilized earth wall consisting of battered concrete COLORADO masonry units faced with stone veneer; fiber reinforced concrete 81435 leveling pad, geotextile reinforcement, and a drainage system located on the interior of the wall. Please refer to the drawings enclosed. 970.728-6607 FACSIMILE 970.728.6658 1. 11 1....-~. C. Bendon July 27,1999 Page 2 Landscaping at the retaining wall: We are proposing extensive landscaping at the North side of the proposed retaining wall. This landscaping will include: double-stacked boulders to retain the existing slope and emulate a rock out-cropping; saving the two (2) existing fir trees; saving the existing Aspen clumps; saving the existing Maple trees; new Douglas Firs ranging from three (3) to five (5) foot in height; new Aspen trees; new Maple trees; new bushes consisting of woods rose and thimbleberry; various perennial flowers; hydro-mulch; and silverlace vine along the top of the retaining wall draping down over. The proposed landscaping softens the new stone faced retaining wall. Please refer to the drawings enclosed. Landscaping at the turnaround: The center portion of the turnaround will be constructed with a grasscrete type o f products. This material will allow vehicles to drive over it, yet has grass growing within it. This material and grass will de- emphasis the hard surface of a vehicle turnaround. We also propose to locate additional vegetation at the very cent of the turnaround. These plantings will help to break-up the eighty (80) foot diameter of the turnaround. Please refer to the drawings enclosed. I have enclosed twenty (20) copies ofthe following for your review, distribution to the required referral agencies, and the Planning and Zoning Commission. 1. Disclosure of Ownership. 2. Letter authorizing Gibson Reno Architects L.L.C. to act on behalf ofthe applicants. 3. Updated improvement/topographic survey. 4. Proposed turnaround plan. 5. Proposed retaining wall detail and specifications. 6. Proposed landscape plan. 7. Sketch of retaining wall and landscaping. 8. Agreement to pay form. 9. A planning deposit check for $1,110.00. 10. A check for the $160.00 for the City ofAspen, Engineering Department review. 11. Grant of Easement with legal description for Newfoundland Lode property (adjacent property). 12. Land Use Application C. Bendon July 27, 1999 Page 3 If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Also, if I have neglected to submit any other information you might need, please contact me at your earliest convenience. I will await confirmation from you regarding scheduling ofthis project before the Planning & Zoning Commission. BegRectfully, ~ Â«P-LÂ»Jt>-=~ Au~ust Q Reno, AIA enclosures cc: L. Winnerman, H. Klein FROM :KLEIN-ZIMET :9255993 199 7-14 12:36 #907 P.09/09 inSUr30 |n lirlga.Unlll vvit,61, w., ........._, .. - ~ LTG Policy No. LTFH38i)323 Form AO/ORT Our Order No. Q380323 Schedule A Amount $850,000.00 Property Address: , ASPEN, CO 81611 1. Policy Date: July 02, 1999 at 1:16 P.M. 2. Name of Insured: WWH3, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Schedule and which is covered by this policy is: A Fee Simple 4. Title to the estate or interest covered by this policy at tile date hereof is vested in: WWH3, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 5. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: LOT 3, HOAG SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT FILED NOVEMBER 5, 1971 IN PLAT BOOK 4 AT PAGE 218. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO This Policy valid only if Schedule B is attached. Land Title Guarantee Company Representing Old Republic National Title Insurance Company FROM' :KLEIN-ZIMET :9255993 1995.07-14 12:35 #907 P.08/09 -L_ - ''' Owner's Policy No. 4 N. T TWI.rÂ·2941901 American L6nd Title Association Owner's Policy 10-17-92 TMÂ·Q, \999.*a; ** * 90601 { 92*; SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE BAND THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS. OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Minnesota corporarion, herein called the Company, insures, as of Date of Policy shown in Schedule A, against loss or damage, nor exceeding The Amount of Insumnce stated in Schedule A, sustained or incurred by The insured by reason of: 1. Title m the estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested other than as stated therein; 2. Any defectin or lien or encumbrance on the title 3. Unmarkerabilizy of The title: 4. Lack of a righT of access to and from the land. The Company will also pay Tile costs, attorneys' fees and expenses Incurred in defense of the tiTle, as insured, but only to the extent provided in the Conditiotis and Stipulations IN M-TNESS WHEREOF, the said Old Republic Nations! Title Insurance Company has caused irs corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by i[s duly authorized officers as of the date shown in Schedule A, the policy to be valid when countorsigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will nor pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1. Ca) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including, but not limited to, building and zoiling laws, urditiances, or mgulorions) resrricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating m m the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of The land: (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land: (iii) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the laird or any parcel of which Ihe land is or was 8 part or (iv) environmental protecliuri, or the offect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or govemmenzal regulations, except to the extent that a notice of [Ite enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect. lien or encumbrance resulring from a violation nr a|Ingcd violauon affecting tile land has been recorded in the publc records ar Dare ofÂ·Policy. (b) Any governmental police power nor excluded by (a) above, except zo the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in Ihe public records ar Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Dare of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Daze of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for Vallie without knowledge. 3. Defects. liens. sncumbrances, adverse claims, or othcr matters' 18) creared, suffered. assumed or agreed m by Ihe insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company. nOI recorded in the public records ar Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by rhe insured claimant prior ro the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy: (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant Id) attaching or crealing subsequent zo Date of Policy; or te) multing in loss or damage which would not have been suslairied if the insured claimant had paid value for the esrare or interest insured by this policy. 4. Any claim, which arises out of the tronsamion vesting In the insured Ihe estate Or interest insured by th2s policy, by reason of the operarion of federal bankrupICy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' righIS laws. thai is based on: (a] the transaction creating the estate or inrerest insured by this policy being deemed a fraudulem conveyance or fratidulent transfer, or (b) the transaction earning the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential Iralls fer restilts from Lhe failure: (i) m rimely record the instrumenr of transfer; or (ii) of such recordarion to impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgment or lien creditor. Issued through the Office of: OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY A Stock Company 533 1 HOPKINS. SUITE 102 400 Second Avenue Smith, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (6121371-1111 (9701 925-1678 P//44Â· - -erÂ©a67\ // Â¢Aer ~. y \97.. / *&Fl-y.Â» I By President U/*121 Adminred Signatory L / i 3 -~ 49. .0 -O ~ Arresr __Lihlt .4 -Eno A Seefetefy ne, e---- in,n 1/ ,- 1.1 FROM' :KLEIN-ZIMET :9255993 199 7-14 12:33 #907 P.02/09 VI -1 1,--- ..L â‚¬-0 - -7 -1- lili 1 1 .L-,1 1 ....... .....6.1 , . .. I .-, .......I-- ... , 1 CaMBENT AND ASTNORIZATION To PROCBSS I.Â»113 USE APPLICATION The undersigned, with respect to its property located at the Lot 3 Haas Subdivisian, Aspen. Colorador hereby authorizes Rerbert S. Klein, Emq., its attorney and Angie Rene. its architect, to process on its behalf an applicatian for 8040 Review and ' any permits or other applicationg necessary for campliance with all conditions associated therewith. A facsimile of thig authorization may be treated as an original. Dated= July 14, 1999 WWES , LLC, A Coloradc Liuited Liability Company Er: WINNIN. T.,Le. A-CeE=,ado Limited Liability Company, its Manager Mwrence *innerman - Manager -4-4â€¢ TOTAL P. 01 FROM ':KLEIN-ZIMET :9255993 199 7-14 12:35 #907 P.07/09 June 29,1996~ EXHIBIT B EASEMENT DESCRIFTION AN. - /EASEMENT SITUATED IN A PORTION OF THE NEWFOUNDLAND LODE, MINERAL SURVEY No. 5190 LOCATED IN THE NW 91 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, KANGE 84 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRD'CIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID EASEMENT BEING FURTHER DESRCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT CORNER No. 4 OF SAID NEWFOUNDLAND LODE; THENCE S 60Â°00'00" W 136.44 kEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT 3, NOAG SUBDYVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4 AT PAGE 213 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE S 65Â°31'10-E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 3 21.59 FEET, THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOIAHERLY BOUNDARY S 65'31'10" E 1638 FEET; THENCE CONTINUNG ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY S 56'16'00" E 53.76 FEET: THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERY BOUNDARY S 55Â°48'50" E 20.00 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY 138.58 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 45.00 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 176Â° 26'39" (CHORD BEARS S 57Â°50'36" E 89.96 FEET) TO TE[E POINT OF BEGINNING: SAID ACCESS EASEMENT CONTAINING 3.158 SQUARE FEET. MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION PREPARED BY: SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC MARK S. BECKLER, PLS. No. 28643 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 432976 07/02/1999 01:16P EASEMENT DAVIS SILVI 5 of 5 R 25.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 502 Main Street â€¢ Suite A3 Â· Carbondale, CO 81623 Â· (970) 704Â·0311 Â· Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING o LLC civil consultants TOTAL P. 02 Improvement Survey Plat ~,-~- -Nalm - 1.,ot 3, Hoag Subdivist(011 . - PLAT OF HOAG SUBDIVISJON. 2) THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON IS SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-oF- i WAYS, BUILDNG SETBACKS OR OTHER RESTRIC-nONS OF RECORD, AND/OR AS Pitkin County, Colorado NOTED ON A TITLE INSURANCE COUMITMENT REFERENCED HEREON. AT CUENT REQUEST. THIS PLAT WAS PREPARD SOLELY FROM DOCUMENTS REFERRED m IN SAID -nTLE COMMIâ„¢ENT, AND DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY THE CUENT, AND NO ADDITIONAL RESEARCH WAS TO BE A PART OF THIS SURVEY. 3) NOnCE. ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTiON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIE SURVEY MTHIN THREE (3) YEARS AFTER YOU DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACnON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS CERTIFICAEE BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN (10) YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. 4) THE EASEMENTS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 681, PAGES 873 THROUGH 885. AS RECORDED MTH THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, CONTAIN CONFUCTING, ILLEGIBLE. AND APPARENTLY ERRONEOUS INFORMATION. THESE OSEMENTS HAVE BEEN DEPICTED AT THEIR APPARENT INTENDED LOCATIONS (AS BEST AS THOSE EASEMENTS CAN Bâ‚¬ SHOWN). SOMEE ADDITIONAL RESEARCH WOULD i SETBACKS OF RECORD, PITKIN COUNTY SETBACKS, OR OTHER DOCUMENTED 40 40 BE NECESSARY TO BETTER SHOW THE PRECISE LOCATION of THESE EASEMENTS. \ 5) NO INFORMATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE. NOR WAS ANY RESEARCH PERFORMED ,~ CONCERNING BUILDING SETBACKS THIS PROPERTY MAY BE SUBJECT TO \ 1 : SETBACK AGREEMENTS, ETC. 01~~70'~' 46.- * - = ~M----\ \ INDIVIDUAL OP IM'n.,clt'It S wl-TH PROFESSIONAL- AVALANCHE \ 6) AS NOTED ON THE RECORDED PLAT OF HOAG SUBDIMSION: 44 \ \ D NO BUILDING PERMIT MLL BE ISSUED ON LOTS 1&3 UNPL IT HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED THAT THERE IS ADEQUATE AVALANCHE PROTE(11ON TO BEE ENGINEERED AND CERTIFIES BY -4*7,+J, ~ ~ CONTROL OPERIENC.E. - , E) NO BURDING PERMIT \Mll BE ISSUED BY THE CITY OF- ASPEN FOR / ~ ~ ENTERED INTO NTH â„¢E ASPEN METROPOUTAN SANITATICN /*001* ---- ==- -2- - 7--A- r-- - -- - ,6,4/ $ ANY LOT WITHIN THG SUBDIVISION UNm A COUMINENT HAS BEEN DISTRICT FOR AN EXTENSION OF A SEWER UNE TO SERVE THE LOTS \ WITHIN THS SUBDIVISION. - Nairr / 421 0 7) BASS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S.71-32'3yE. - BETWEEN CORNER NO. 4 OF M.S. NO. 5190, AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF - LOT 6 OF HOAG SUBDIVISION, MONUMENED AS SHO-1 HEREON. ge . 00 ./.- 7. 4) 1. 4 E,dithg Tro0 ~- ' - - %~1 187Â»ka .~ Râ€¢l-.0/U . 3 - . I 8) BOOK 656, PAGE 655 OF DE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS REFERS TO AN 2. y 215E Plrook - 4Â£-. I-- - --- $ j HOAG SUBOMSION. AND THE '1001' LODE, MINERAL SURVEY NO. 1741. NO \ APPROXIMATE ZOO FOOT ENCROACHMENT ALONG THE LINE COMMON TO LOT 3 oF / - I / 7 =%744-â€¢ \ ADDInIONAL INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE AT THE 11ME Of THIS PLAT / 4*, -- PE-13-= A. 3 1 :42~0'F - =*ac-V- 417 6: - \\ PREPARAMON. ADDIT}ONAL AELD AND/OR 0FF1G REIARCH WAY BE NECESSARY - TO CLARIFY ANY SUCH ENCROACHMENT AT AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE. 73'<i--3.-37:u /\ t==0* Â£'414 - 7.- 11 '.60: 0.04 e . t ./ , 8 \ 10 \ 4Â¥9 \ / LOT 3 9 - - ..336 kh \ : . 1 41 1 3.058 Acd: ' - ' 15#40 \4~ .244%8 . \ I % , , ..Lee@2Â·332 .\ (133219 Sq. Pt) - 0 // / t>. --Â« / 42- . y i \ 4 % 4/4 6.0 1 \ if / h , / //2 -4.3 't- - 2=--7. /"/ . -*\ 4-9 - 12 / 7,41#:~ \ , f f # 4 44 M \ / 1 - 4.t 4194, 4> N Â»,Â« 40.. -- /46 - \41\ ~ 4% -- *#4.. p' i - /4 \ / 129.- I - - \*44 - - B,2 \ 1 lp*/40~ . / 9* L - 1. or .2.- _ 2,EME_ 11250~-EK:=A~ f..# da9.5/bst'll/ 438* r ~230' Â· -- -t<- 4%:44.mume" / 42./ 44 ;$0>-,- / he.4. #r f - *.*.-- 222,27&64 e. 4< r*# # ~#* :0* lE'* .34 4- & / / )51 - at~,2,-2 C-7-/410 - 2 pizipwcry 99.Â£.rrc~- 1, THE UNDERSIGNED, BONG A REGISIRED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR, - UCENSED IN THE STATE OF COLORADO, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT WAS PREPARED BY RIVER CITY SURVEYS, LLC, LOT 3, HOAG SUBDIMSON FOR THOLAS COLEMAN, UNDER MY DIRECT SUP':RVISON AND CHECKING AND THAT COUNn OF PITKIN IT IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOVALEDGE AND BELIEF. ' STAnE JF COLORADO AS SHIWN ON THE PLAT FlLED IT IS FURTHER CERnFIED THAT THE IMPROVENEk,15 ON lHE ABOVE DESCRIBED NOW MIER 1 1971, IN PLAT BOOK 4 PARCEL ON THIS DATE. JANUARY 6. 1999. EXCEPT UllUTY CONNECTIONS. ARE AT PACE 218, MTH THE PrIKIN ENâ„¢ELY MTHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PARIL EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT COUNn~ CLERK AND RECORDER TIERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DE:CRIBED PREMISES BY IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS NDICATED, AND THAT THERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN Of ANY EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENING ANY PART OF SAID PARCEL EXCEP [ AS SHOWN. 8/4/97 Add & Reme Notes, Misc.Revislons by DAC 111IS Ik(PROVOENT SURVEY PLAT DOES NOT REPRESENT A 11TLE SEARCH BY 8/21/97 Add Acredge Label -- doc RIVER aPr SURVEYS, LLC, TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OIl EASEMENTS oF RECORD. ALL INFORMAT:ON REGARDING OWNERSÂ·liP, EASIENTS AND OTHER ENCUMBRANCE OF RECORD WAS OBTAINED FROM AND SUBJECT TO A TITLE Lasti# /Â°1â‚¬~WED ROR~ INSURANCE COMMITMENT ISSUED BY PITKIN COLUTY ITLE CORPORAIIQN. ORDER NO. PCT11948, DATED ,UNE 20,1997. -ddrgh / ~ ~Â» f.14 J'~ Thomas Coleman UP</88Ere,Â« ff 4959,744 . c\E 1 7.8 %\ ca.a Â£291 pa 4,Â·tao IM 4 CH BEMA'.F CF job * : 97147 sPest ' RMER CIrr fl,2Â¥ErÂ·S LLC *28) ~pocrd fileâ€¢ : _971471- 1 ~ ctun by : D. COOPER of . I f'Â· LLOT 3 \ \ . - <7# . i .. '0,0 -. -- ./ 'bil-1.-9 . '--2--;s/ .Ge - PRQPOSED USE INING .. ' L ' HEX* OF Â¥,ALL V $6.Â· 3' TO 19 \ \1074/ LOT 4 \ h 240 RC ILLEGIBLE \ Fw RC9173 -$ - L -/ i .. 0 X - 41 '04,. \ 1 \ 70 LE- YPE 3 GUARDR r. 1 AS PER COOT -S STANOARD ~ Â· PLAN 64- 606 DETAIL . \. FWD R(29030 Â· 03.00 .. \ \ 'OJO . 007 11.ler 'Â·-Â· i \l . 1 inch -10 1. j j. , , . â€¢ 0 - ' ' .10 \ \ :11\ 1*\Il \ /<40 \ . 0 41Â·00 1 \ - \ i \\ \\ \ \ 1 \ N \ \ 1'64 lt'/ li i i F.079030\ \/ 2 34\ \ \ 1 .. \ 10 >* \ \ i \ 5. \ . - 1 \ 11: \ h \ I \ \ Icil 1 .\ \ e--\4 \ \ 04 1 . \ 'Ck. \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ 4- \ 1 / \ N - - 1 \ N - 1 F.0 *c29030 \2.36\ \ X \ \ \\\ -3Â« \ 440 \ \\ \\\\ - 0100 -,- -- - A~ . / '60 \ \ \ 05.00 1 \ I \ . 94\ \\ 7\ \ \ m \ '493 14 \ 4/ \ /...r \ . /\\4 -y.f. 1 .4422/ 1 . 0 . \ / \ 1 1 --0 \ - ..I /1 \Lial <J \ \ - FNO *(20151 -Di MS 1 ~ % ~ ~>% ~ \ h \ - 1 . h \ \ . --5 , \ \ i - 0 *b THIS AREA REQUIRES - 1 \ i \2 2> RETAINIhit .WALL TO BE '~ .~ DESIGNED Ab PART OF -\ \ \ BUILDING aY obIERS. 1 j- ... /1 , -\ '00 S ... --- -- -- -- to \7 . \ 1 \ 7. 1 \ 11 4 \ \ \ I \\\ '4 \ 0 \ \ \ N % \ F Xe END 902376 \4> W Â® *0 \ \ . '0 \ 1 \ \ 1011 \ \ ,% Vt, 0fic,5 \ '6 \ 1 %\ i Dj +P 1 1 1 1 NO DATE REVISION iBY HOAG SURDIVISION A.#4 -T : IMI HOAG SUBDIVISION ASPEN. COLORADO PROPOSED DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND SOPRIS ENCINEEJUNG, UC. i WIVIL CONSULTANâ„¢ *14, 502 MA.IN STREET, SUITE A.1 DES. YTN CK. FILE NO. SHÂ£Â£7 1 2 07/89'DILE. CO 81023 (970) 704-0311 DR. SDA DA k 06/02/9 98035 0Â· 1 -1 -1 ntlISI o GRADE SEE ROADWAY DESIGN ~ FOR DETAILS L 9 1 1 492*44Â«44.-22 4-~YAX. MECHAN(CALLY STABLIZED . 1 EARTH WALL SCHEDULE 3/8. SPAaNG H L GEOTEXBLE FEET FEET iNCHES BAI12 - 0 TO 50-11" 5'-6 16- o.c. DRY STACKED -7 Â·, - C CMU WALL \I' 6'-0- TO 8'-11- 51-0- 16. O.C. OR OTHER \ Â·- APPROVED WAHL \ -- f 9'-0- TO 11'-11 10'-0" 16. o.c. X- 1 12'-0~ TO 14'-11- 12'-6- 8- o.c. 1 st 8 ft thon 16 rEER r.-==91 0Â¥ER LA21 15'-0' TO 18'-0- 15'-0" 2- c.c. b st 8 ft then 16â€ž i- 1 . 1 . 1/ 4800 lb/ft MOE SPIP lENSILE - GEOTEXTILE RE]NFORCMENT [33331 -** ULTIMATE STRENGTH MARV 1 SEE SCHEDULE FOR SPAaNG (1) LAYER AT TOP OF LEVEUNG PAD '-i' I nE-IN -' 0 - STRAP 4 -1 z-~ EXTEND r\ 302 UGHâ„¢ ST'REZT INTO STONE Â£ SUME 26 16- o.c OR ~ 8- o.c. SEE in SCHEDULE , --~- DRAIN PIPE W/ GLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO 81601 >//r f FREE DRAINING 770/946-1008 GRANULAR MATERIAL UMITS OF 1 1/2- ROAD BASE -1-.- RAPPED WIâ„¢ 614., 1 BACK FILL JOBÂ· DRAINAGE FABRIC Â· ' . 9819-04 SLOPED TO OUTLET. ~ + ENGINEER RAO. ANISHED . 4 DRAWN BY: R A.0 GRADE 4. UMITS OF 1 1/2 ROAD BASE Revtâ€¢ion/Ilâ€¢ueâ€¢ _ cdated L LEVELING PAD BACK Fill. CONSTRUCTION 8-15-08 21 L 16 . 2* ~BER REINFORCED Â·r ' MIN. ' CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION 7-6-98 15 JEEP ROAD BELOW. MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH WALL , NOT TO SCALE ' NOIEL NO SCALE 1. THE 1 1/r ROAD EASE BACKALL SHALL BE PLACED AT 8 UFTS AND CONPACTED TO 95% Of ~ MAXIUUM STANDARD PROCTOR OE>19TY. 2. FOUNDATION CONDITIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN FIELD AND REPORTED TO ENGINEER. 0 3. IF POOR SOIL COND,nONS DOST 2'-0- OF SELECT NATERIAL SHAL. BE USED BELOW WALL- ~- 4. FOR USE WALLS GREATER THAN H-11'-lf, â„¢E GEOTEXIBLE SHALL BE PLACED AT 8- o.c. SITE WALL , FOR THE ARST 8'-0' FROW THE LEVELING PAD AND THEN 16' o.c. FOR THE REMAINDER. 9744%\S, 5. CONCRETE SHALL BE A MIN1WUM OF 3000 psi IN 28 DAYS STRENGTH WITH FBER MESH. 81.0 nLEÂ· 9810-04/~*CU 1-24 .. - . 2-Â·./.Â·. iiI Â·Â· MÂ·Â·Â·'JJUS:Â¥k-k! 07 NOISIAIGHnS DVOH OGYNOrIOD 'NadSV H JI IS , Ra Lot 3, HOAG SUBDIVISION Cul-De-Sac Retaining Wall Planting Plan July 9, 1998 Scale: 1" = 10' Plant Schedule Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas Fir 3' 1 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas Fir 4' 4 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas Fir 5' 3 Pppulus tremuloides Aspen 5 Gal. 7 Populus tremuloides Aspen 1" cal. 8 Polygonum aubertii Silver Lace Vine 5 Gal. 10 Acer glabrum Rocky Mt. Maple 5 Gal. 5 Acer ginalla Amur Maple 5 Gal. 4 Rosa woodsii Woods Rose 5 Gal. 10 Rubus parviflorus Thimbleberry 1 Gal. 20 - Epilobium angustifolium Fireweed FlaU32 2 _ Lupinus argenteus Lupine FlaU32 2 Geranium viscossissimum Native Geranium FlaU32 2 Erigeron speciosus Aspen Daisy FlaU32 1 Grass Seed: Hydromulch with a two-step process. Use native bunchgrass seed. 4 10 eilver Oue Vine 0/ / al,7.9 10' Of wait, le'o-5. Â·097 9 91.41" Aspev] 0 0 0 617% -*~~- Â· 2 rn \\X 0 0 = ~ i.7 *#ill\* - r . . e' 46.44/ll\\94\] 2 51 18 - -11\ 1/2, - 7-- U 2 0 - 2 Fl.r ecaltivis, * 9/m\\4 5â€¢ve existin j RM MMe @ 11\\ 1 ext-9#-Flj Fly bÂ»~'111\*4 CP/'1,0- 10picz14 rv i ~0 * ' 2 ~%*DAÂ¢k dOWEEPOCKI) lj>5290%27 dx FbvMe.900*â‚¬61 19#Wders to retain slopg L- 5'*ve â‚¬xiS#,161 9et huU*540 emviate rucewtcroppiM A5Â¥en Glump Matow malâ‚¬rl'al *,dior color to *Mevekleer cm retai,1*M~ U/Alt- Nole: /111 Aal *Be *Mal 'Phrub jocatt419 127 ke -fagged 1) *te l ovwlÂ«afe a/toow-lat. \ .i , LOT 3 .-Â· 4, .- . ./. I DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND PLANTING PLAN . .... \ ROSA WOODSII WOODS ROSE 5 GAL 5 _RUBUS PARVIFLORUS THIMBLEBERRY 1 GAL 10 ~52& V - . N .. ' FROM y TO 1* \ 107Â® \ \ ; Flo Re ILLEDal LUPINUS ARGENTEUS LUPINE FLAT/32 2 GERANIUM VISCOSSISSIMUM NATIVE GERANIUM FLAT/32 1 DO *C9175 -Â· -- - - ...2 0.09 ' 1 < \ .GRASS SEED: HYDROMULCH WITH A TWO STEEP PROCESS \ . \ 1 USE NATIVE BUNCHGRASS SEED. h \ . I f AS " CDOT ..s STANDARD .. ill . Â· '1 PLAN -06 OCTAL GRAPHIC SCALE RSEUDOTSUGA MENZIES:I DOUGLAS AR 12 I. \ 'Ob \--- - .\ , 1 ./ \ ' I PLANT SCHEDULE i L EPILOBIUM ANGUSTIFOUUM FIAEWEED FLAT/32 2 - - LOT 4 ERIGERON SPECIOSUS ASPEN DAISY FLAT/321 \ 70 LF.-r,â€¢E 3 1 Inch - 10 1 \\ \ f s ..% \ lift-l':/ : - (MMg <*â‚¬12= f- 01 - . \ 61;03$4,4 ..1. \ 1 *rk#~ .NAmilt.' .f: 'Ab . \ \ . \11 ..54, Â· k.Â»tt ,-- \ .\ \\ 0/ l Â· 1 \ \ /\ \ b. 3, /) .* Â· ZZE 0 2 1.1:R': 1 - 1 % \ 1 - -. =.oo . 1 - ... \ 1 \ '46 . /1 / \ 11- A - \ \ .. \ \ 1 \ 1 \ h \ \\\ .%\ - \ \. 0100 7. 1 \ b < \ - B i. \ 1 -r\ i \\\ ... 0 \ ... ~ 0.00 4 4 4 -\ 0 . . . \ . % 926 9 -\ <r--\\ ~ 1 \ r -,/> \ t.- \ \ \ . .4 ., / Ap ..... \ /\ I. 1 . \ \ ~ Flo RC20151 eNDY MS \ , H \ \ \ / 1 \ 1 THi~AREA REQUIRES - -' . 7 \ 1 RETNNING .FALL TO BE, ' Â· ~-. f .x ~---- -- \ DESIGNED AS PART OF . , Â·Â· ~ I Â· \ BUILDING'-BY drHERS. '% '% 9 1 \.t ~1, . . \ 3 - 'tb ' \\\. 1. 1 - . %\ 4 \ 1. I \ \ 1 -\ % ~~FF-~ 0=370 *C, \ 42+7r=9 \ I %6 \ \ 1 1 \ :b .' . , '96 \ \ \ DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND LANDSCAPE PLAN I NO. DATE, REVISION IVY HOAC SUBDIVISION ASPEN. COLORADO HOAG SUBDIVISION PROPOSED DRIVEWAY TURNAROUND SOPRIS ENGINEERING. LLC. avIL CONSULTAN,51 502 MAN STREET. SurIE A.3 DES. m CK. ~FILE NO. SHEEr 1 CARBONDALE. CO 81823 -*UTI./ 6/2/- (970) 704-0311 DR. SDA DATE 06/02/9~ 98035 . 1 1 11 lili -1 -, 3(/14 90~1 -=&=4 41~.1 ellog - 53 4~47 | MÂ® 3 j lnDE'i . (*twe- 11*15% 0 00(65 *M . 44 47, '4/41 ho 41 1 , 6000 16% al,AN,Aill.-, AM L- 301 re - K-tur d L U rj-ki 2 1 6/ 4%4, 40\2 4 plO 44,9/4 3 j t 9, !\1 1191 N MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, Planner FROM: Stephen Ellsperman, Parks Forester Ben Dodge, Nordic Coordinator DATE: August 18, 1999 RE: Hoag Lot #3 Fire Turn-Around 8040 Green Line Review 1. All trees to remain on site shall be fully protected with a structural fence (before construction begins) placed outside the dripline. No excavation or storage o f materials will be allowed within this barrier. Trees shall be provided adequate moisture (irrigation) during periods o f construction. 2. No construction activity of any sort nor staging o f construction equipment on the utility and public trail easement between November 1 and April 1. 3. Existing grade and width of trail easement shall be maintained between November 1 and April 1. 4. Trail will be restored to its existing condition. I - Phil Overeynder, 11:12 AM 8/18/99 , DRC ADDITION--Hoag Lot 3 Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 11:12:29 -0600 (MDT) X-Sender: philo@water To: chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us From: Phil Overeynder <philo@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: DRC ADDITION--Hoag Lot 3 Cc: edv@ci.aspen.co.us, nicka@ci.aspen.co.us Chris, I see that this agenda item is up for review at DRC today. I have some background on lots in this area as a result of previous request for water service. Basically there are no water lines serving the area and without an easement to construct a water line, development of this lot may not be possible. A well may not work because under the terms of the municipal code, all uses in the city must connect to the municipal system. Before we finalize road improvements necessary for development, I would suggest that we also resolve how water will be provided to the lot. There are a couple of options for easements that the landowner could check out for either a main extension or a service line. We also need to resolve what type of fire protection will be acceptable to the Fire Marshall. If a hydrant is required near the turn around, this Will require a main line extension. The only route for this is up the existing access road, but I understand that this road is in part owned by the Forest Service. Hopefully we can discuss these issues today and get a common direction. Thanks, Phil >Received: from comdev.ci.aspen.co.us (comdev.ci.aspen.co.us [205.170.53.1]) > by water.ci.aspen.co.us (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA02548 > for <philo@water.ci.aspen.co.us>; Wed, 18 Aug 1999 08:17:14 -0600 (MDT) >Received: from catacombs (catacombs.ci.aspen.co.us [205.170.53.32]) by comdev.ci.aspen.co.us (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA02808; Wed, 18 Aug 1999 L_Printed for Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci. aspen. co. us> 1 V 08:16:52 -0600 (MDT) >Message-Id: <2.2.32.19990818132338.00964f80@comdev> >X-Sender: janicev@comdev >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 08:23:38 -0500 >To: CHUCKR@ci.aspen.co.us, JACKR@ci.aspen.co.us, NICKA@ci.aspen.co.us, > TIMW@ci.aspen.co.us, JULIEW@ci.aspen.co.us, PHILO@ci.aspen.co.us, > LINDACH@ci.aspen.co.us, CHRISB@ci.aspen.co.us, CINDYC@ci.aspen.co.us, > PARKS@ci.aspen.co.us, LEEC@ci.aspen.co.us, AMYG@ci.aspen.co.us, > EDV@ci.aspen.co.us, STEPHENK@ci.aspen.co.us, JACKIEL@ci.aspen.co.us, > KEVIND@ci.aspen.co.us, BOBC@ci.aspen.co.us, JANICEV@ci.aspen.co.us, > STEFANIE@ci.aspen.co.us, ACSDOFFC@ROF.NET, JOYCEO@ci.aspen.co.us, > saraho@ci.aspen.co.us >From: Janice Vos <janicev@ci.aspen.co.us> >Subject: DRC ADDITION >There is an addition to the DRC meeting today which is carried over from >last week, so the agenda will be as follows: > Light Ordinance, Stephanie Millar > E. Durant Street Confirguration discussion to set up Site Visit, Eng. > Hoag Lot #3 Fire Turn-Around 8040 Greenline Review, Chris Bendon > Pre-Application Review 335 W Hyman St., Michael Behrendt (Chris Bendon) >Thank you. Printed for Chris Bendon <9hrisb@ci .aspen._Co.US> 2 FARCEL ID: |2737-182-68001 DATE RCVD: ~7/30/99 # COPIES:~ CASE NO|A066-99 CASE NAME:~Hoag Subdivision, Lot #3, Fire Access and 8040 Greenline PLNR:|Chris BendAn PROJ ADDR:~Hoag Subdivision, Lot #3 CASE TYP:|8040 Greenline STEPS1 OWN/APP: Larry Winnerman ADR~317 Park Avenue C/S/Z: ~Aspen~ CO 81611 PHN:~ REP:~Gibson Reno ADR:| C/S/Z: PHNi FEES DUE:~ 1110 (d) + 160 (e) FEES RCVD:~1270 STAT: F REFERRALS~ REF:| BY~ DUE:| MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED r- 1 DATE OF FINAL ACTION:| CITY COUNCIL: REMARKS~ PZ: BOA: CLOSED:| - BY: ~ DRAC: PLAT SUBMITD: ~ PLAT (BK,PG):1 ADMIN: E-*huck Roth,-01:59 PM 11/15/99, Re:_ Hoag-16* 3 X-Sender: chuckr@comdev Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 13:59:30 -0600 \699 To: Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Chuck Roth <chuckr@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Hoag Lot 3 Chris, Sounds good. Could you send us a copy when you get it? Thanks. Chuck At 02:22 PM 12/14/99 -0700, you wrote: >No, I don't have anything in writing. From my memory and my notes, I recall >that a larger radius would be needed if there were not a fire plug. This >then started the discussion of the water main extension. At our last DRC, Ed >seemed to be o.k. with the current plans. Now that you mention it, however, >it would be good to have something in writing, especially if he has certain >requirements for landscaping in the center, maintainance, etc. I put a call >into Ed. > At 03:00 PM 12/14/99 -0600, you wrote: >>When I was up yesterday about Hoag Lot 3, I forgot to ask you if you had >>anything in the file in writing from the Fire Marshall approving the >>shorter turning radius in the cul de sac. >> >>Do you? >> >>Thanks. >> >> >> >Cheers, >Chris Bendon >City Planning Printed for Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 1 Phil Overeynder, 03:53 PM 8/24/99 , Re: Hoag #3 Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 15:53:29 -0600 (MDT) X-Sender: philo@water To: Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Phil Overeynder <philo@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Hoag #3 Cc: chuckr@ci.aspen.co.us, edv@ci.aspen.co.us Chris, I think we need a meeting with the applicant. We also need to know the elevation that they're planning to build at to determine if we can get water , Â·to the site by gravity or whether a pumped system would be necessary. This could be broken down into a further question of whether the pump only serves the house or the house plus the hydrant and we use a pumper truck to boost the pressure and flow in the event of a fire. We're not really interested in operating a pump station for a single dwelling and if required we would want the pump stationj to be a private facility. Also we need to resolve the question of easements and whether this poarcel is landlocked with regard to provison of water service. There is an access easement, but would this providse the ability to place a water line without a specific provision for utilities? One last issue is service to other properties. I know there is another lot (Newfoundland Lode property) on this road but it's in the County and we have no obligation to provide water. Does the City want to extend water mains past this property to gain some leverage on design of this additional structure similar to what we did on North Spruce, or do we want to run our lines in a way that would by-pass this lot? If we run our lines past the Newfoundland Lode (up the Forest Service Road) it would be difficult to say no on provision of service to an area outside the City. Phil Printed for Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 1 At 02:25 PM 8/24/99 -0600, you wrote: >Gentlemen: I'm looking for the correct balance of safety, utility >provision, and aesthetics for this turn-around. My department wants this >thing to have as little detrimental effect on the mountain side as possible >while providing adequate safety. >Ed needs to turn a truck around. The size of the truck can be reduced if >there is a fire plug. Phil needs to get water to the site within an >accessible easement and needs to know if there is going to be a plug for >sizing of his water line. >Due to the grade limitations of this site, my preference is for the >turn-around to be a small as possible. I think we are on solid ground to >require a fire plug be installed as a condition of the 8040 review. >So, the questions are: 1) is there an easement for Phil on the access road; >2)is it possible to develop a fire plug at this location; and, 3) if there >is a fire plug, what radius is required for the fire department. >Let me know if there needs to be a follow-up meeting with the applicant. >Cheers, >Chris Bendon >City Planning > Printed for Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> 2 MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Planner Thru: Nick Adeh, City Engineer ,*/7 From: Chuck Roth, Project Engineer (3-Â£ j Date: September 10, 1999 Re: Hoag Lot 3 Fire Turn-Around 8040 Greenline Review The Development Review Committee has reviewed the above referenced application at their August 18, 1999 meeting, and we have the following comments: General - (1) These comments are based on the fact that we believe that the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features without misrepresentation, and that it is feasible. The wording must be carried forward exactly as written unless prior consent is received from the Engineering Department. This is to halt complaints related to approvals tied to "issuance of building permit." (2) Ifthere are any encroachments into the public right-of-way, the encroachment must either be removed or be subj ect to current encroachment license requirements i f continuation of such encroachment would be acceptable to the City. 1. Site Improvement Survey - The site improvement survey needs to be updated to reflect the current title policy that was submitted with the application. City Code requires that improvement surveys be performed within the past 12 months, and that includes easement information reflected in title policies. The Schedule B of the title policy was not included and needs to be provided, including copies of all easements that are indicated. The Schedule B lists all encumbrances known or of record on the property. 2. Site Drainage - The application needs drainage design for the turn-around that meet runoff design standards of the Land Use Code at Sec. 26.88.040.C.4.f and Engineering Department's interim design and construction standards. In order to confirm that the proposed site development, turn around, and drainage are feasible, the application drawings need to include a drainage mitigation plan (24"x36" size plan sheet or on the lot grading plan), as well as a temporary sediment control and containment plan for the construction phase. The design and a report must be signed and stamped by an engineer registered in the State of Colorado. The drainage plan must be reviewed and accepted by the City Engineer prior to approval o f the application. 3. Water Department - The Water Director is continuing to meet with the applicant in order to determine water service and water pressure needs, including a new fire hydrant location. 4. Utility Easements - The applicant needs to demonstrate easements for any utility needs. The Engineering Department will examine the easement documents to ensure compliance. 5. Fire Marshall - There is concern about adequate water supply and pressure for the proj ect. The building will be required to be sprinklered, including concealed spaces such as attics. If there is a fire hydrant located close enough to the building, the site will not have to be accessed by a pumper truck which would require a larger turn-around radius. 6. Trail - The applicant needs to provide cross sections of the trails and the turn-around to ensure that the trail use is maintained. If trail modifications are needed to accommodate the turn-around, the design must be approved by the Parks Department. 7. Construction Feasibility - The applicant should provide letters of feasibility concerning the soils and structural design for the turn-around, both stamped and signed by Colorado registered engineers. 8. Work in the Public Right-of-way - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights-of-way adjacent to private property, we advise the applicant as follows: The applicant must receive approval from city engineering (920-5080) for design of improvements, including landscaping, within public rights-of-way, parks department (920-5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance, and streets department (920-5130) for mailboxes, street and alley cuts, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights- of-way from the city community development department. DRC Attendees Staff: Ed Van Walraven, Chris Bendon, Sarah Oates, Stephanie Millar, Karma Borgquist, Stephen Kanipe, Nick Adeh, Cheryl Christiansen, Jack Reid, Chuck Roth Applicants' Representatives: Michael Behrendt, Olafur Johannsson, Simon Elliot, Larry Winnerman 99M 1 13 % -bmprovement Survey Plat Lot 3, Hoag Subdivision 1) LOT BOUNDARY DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE RECORDED .* PLAT OF HOAG SUBDIVISION. , 2) THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON IS SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF- Pitkin County, Colorado REQUEST, THIS PLAT WAS PREPARD SOLaY FROM DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN WAYS, BUILDING SETBACKS OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD, AND/OR AS NOTED ON A TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENT REFERENCED HEREON. AT CLIENT SAID TITLE COMMITMENT, AND DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY THE CLIENT, AND NO I ADDITIONAL RESEARCH WAS TO BE A PART OF THIS SURVEY. 3) NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL REVESETATION PLAN ACnON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY -N â„¢REE (3) YEARS AFTER YOU DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON SUBMITTED 4-6-49 Â· 1 ANY DEFECT IN THIS CERTIFICATE BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN (10) YEARS . 1 FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. - 4) THE EASEMENTS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 681, PAGES 873 THROUGH 885, AS ~ RECORDED WITH THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, CONTAIN CONFUCnNG, ILLEGIBLE, AND APPARENTLY ERRONEOUS INFORMATION. THESE EASEMENTS HAVE BEEN DEPICTED AT THEIR APPARENT INTENDED LOCATIONS (AS Â· BEST AS THOSE EASEMENTS CAN BE SHOWN). SOME ADDInONAL RESEARCH WOULD 40 0 10 40 BE NECESSARY TO BETTER SHOW THE PRECISE LOCATION OF- THESE EASEMENTS. --- f \ --- - 5) NO INFORMATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE, NOR WAS ANY RESEARCH PERFORMED ' / BALE: 1 Â£Wâ€¢ 40 PET # ' ~ , CONCERNING BUILDING SETBACKS. THIS PROPERTY MAY BE SUBJECT TO / SETBACKS OF RECORD, PITKIN COUNTY SETBACKS, OR OTHER DOCUMENTED ~ ~ SETBACK AGREEMENTS, ETC. 491 /7 \ \ 6) AS NOTED ON THE RECORDED PLAT OF HOAG SUBDIVISION: 1) NO BUILDING PERMIT Will. BE ISSUED ON LOTS 1 & 3 UNTIL IT HAS (Zoe U INDIYIDUAL OR INDIVIDUALS WITH PROFESSIONAL AVALANCHE 4 1 0 1.- PCS, BEEN DEMONSTRATED THAT THERE IS ADEQUATE AVALANCHE Â°'4%2'dz./ PROTECTION TO BE ENGINEERED AND CERTIFIES BY 1 -t.*-......A- 4, t 'k r 0 Â·A9 1 1; 47'. 5,4. l ' 4 Â»Â£3:$5-isss:r / CLurl by : u. uuvt'E,it of *U-*1 a 4 ..10*a/ <4,1 *El.945.621>' 97147.dwg 1-6-99 1:43:03 pm ~ 1 7.. 0 1. 1 r Â·4-4- D .2. : . O3tz.3. 0, f . I -0.0 . 1 . . 3 .0 0 . 0 . 0 4.37.281'i~fâ‚¬2: - . 0. I : . 0 0. 1. 0 0 , 1 0 .. . 0 0 1 0 .0 -Â·tÂ·t : . . . . ..1 . . 0 I -A, 0 0 00 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 4 f .49'.F Vmh&/IN///A ./ 0 . N :' . 1 00 .1 2. . 0 0 .. 10 1 0- 0 .. 'D 0 , 1.-0 .... . Af . . - .. ID , ........k . I -4 41 â€¢ D -'' 4, . .. . VA '*lk: t . . . '0 0:' .444*./.rb.. .. . . 1 ., .I 4 . 4 ~49=WA k 1 . ' L 74)*.r .1.3.il/7.. .. /2. . -- I .. . -, I ,, ;4 0 5, I ..-=MP - : . I JA 0% 0. . 1,10, 1 + . , 2 . 41. 1 I ... 4 . ., l , 1. 9 ....../ . I . . 11.8, . I . F, I. ..* â€¢ ' I â€¢ Â· 1.â€¢ I . I ..... ... .... - . 1 -- 0 . .. I I . P- 0 -/ ./ .. . I - G. .... -1. - - - .. I ... ... ... . I - . . / I I. 21 : . . 1.21 ..0 ..2.. . . 1 , . ...'. 10 -; . . B... . ... . - .... , . I ....I: i '.* . '' ' 0 0 :1 .0 0. , .0 13. I - ...0 1.. D 0 0 . . D , :0 0, 1: = .- i < - - ' . . . .-: ' -- ..0 , . D I - . P ..0 1 :0 , .- I- I I - - ; .. . .- ... I .. . ..3 0 D .. ... . I :ID. 0 . 0 ./. . . I- I.-I . . . 3. . 1 .0 0. 1 .. ... , 0 .. . D 1 1 0 ..0 0. ...... - . 0 ....... ... .. p .-- . I ; . I. I .-. . . .. ... .-. . 0 . .11 . . . 10 .. : . I .... .. . . lilli . .. ... .0 ... .D - 0 . ... 0 .. . ...1 0 . . 0 . .. - -0-. .. . ....... 0: , : 0 D : . 1 0...:410 0.1 . : .. .. ..... . 8. - . .. ..... . 47 7 * .... . I. ...... .. ... . 0 ..MI,k,Le:- i '44 - . --i-/ I .---I' I - ... 6- . . 0 :/f d?r-.1~ $ .. ' 'tri . 1 , -0 0 + 0 :.4 LEGEND \ PROPOSED ASPHALT EXISTING TRAIL --8"W 8'W - EXISTING 8" WATER MAIN -12"W 12"W- EXISTING 12" WATER MAIN Ex-GETC EXISTING ELEC/TELE/CABLE/GAS CX 00 EXISTING SEWER MAIN - 8"W 8"w- PROPOSED 8" WATER MAIN - 4"W 4"w - PROPOSED 4" WATER SERVICE / PROPOSED ELEC/TELE/CABLE/GAS \ m = PROPOSED SEWER SERVICE \\ - 8"W 8"w - PROPOSED GAS LINE REPLACEMENT W- PROPOSED 6" WATER SERVICE LINE - ----- EXISTING EASEMENT m PROPOSED 2' CONTOUR EXISTING LOT LINE / / 1\ 1% - - - - - EXISTING 10' CONTOUR Â·- EXISTING 2' CONTOUR / \ \\ 40\ 9 PROPOSED 10' CONTOUR 4 1 .i. 0 1, \\ 9 1 3 GRAPHIC SCALE GENERAL WATER AND UTILITY NOTES / 0* .4 , D \ / 1\ 20 0 10 20 40 80 \ , \ ON UTILITY MAPS, CONSTRUCTION/DESIGN PLANS , OTHER 1 NFORMAT ION \ ~ SOME INSTANCES. THESE UTILIT~ES AS SHOWN MAY NOT REPRESENT 11\ \ 1 THE LOCATIONS OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN PLOTTED BASED PROVIDED BY UTILITY COMPANIES AND ACTUAL FIELD LOCATIONS IN \\\ LOT 2 E ' 1 . . CONTRACTOR TO CONTACT ALL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR FIELD LOCATION rÂ«n 1 4.. ( IN FEET ) ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE 4 l inch=20 ft. OF UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 4 il - 2. ALL WATER MAINS AND SERVICES SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH A 7'0" < LU - - 3 EXISTING UTILITIES, THE PROPOSED WATER MAIN GRADE CAN BE 1 1 MINIMUM DEPTH OF COVER. IF GRADE CONFLICTS OCCUR WITH Â« \ \ MAINTAINED. O VARIED PROVIDED THAT THE 7'0Â» MINIMUM DEPTH OF COVER IS 1 1 \ 1 , ~ 94*2 ALL MA INLINE AND HYDRANT VALVE BOXES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO 1/4" n.\ \ ~\ ~ 3 Z 411 L f- j ,,p ~ BELOW FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS, MAINTAINED IN CONTINUOUS SERVICE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE **zkT CD 15' UTILITY EASEMENT-7,/ / %04>c~'*85~ 4, ALL UTILITIES, BOTH UNDERGROUND OR OVERHEAD, SHALL BE w e ~ CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, EXCEPT AS NOTED OTHERWISE. THE 3-)031 2 ik CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE AND LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES 02\1 h- \ / TO, OR INTERRUPTION OF, SERVICES CAUSED BY THE CONSTRUCTION. Â«A 4.3. Ch 1 - \ / .Or 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTAIN HIS CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS TO THE w , OPERATE OUTSIDE THIS AREA WITHOUT THE PRIOR EXPRESS CONSENT OF O 0 0 0 C (/i . Â» L.j AREA WITHIN THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT LU Q5 2 4 -1 \ THE LAND OWNER. Â«~ILLI~~~~ 6. ANY DAMAGE TO PRIVATE PROPERTY BY THE CONTRACTOR OUTS I DE THESE 3 1 *- 7 \ - LIMITS WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE LAND OWNER WILL BE THE LOT 3 BUILDING 7 - ~-15' UTILITY EASEMENT ~ RESPONSIBILITY oF THE CONTRACTOR. PROPOSED 7. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PLAT ANFORMATION PROVIDED BY RIVER '.~ENVELOPE ~ ... \ /31- ~ ~ETAINING WALL LET -3 x h F. '.1.0 1 .% -- P 4 PROPOSED PLAN I METRIC INFORMATION PROVIDED BY SOPRIS \ - I CITY SURVEYS, LLC JOB NO. 97147 DATED JANUARY 6, 1999. ENGINEERING LLC JOB NO. 98053 DATED JUNE 2, 1998. *A \ 4 f i 1 1 1\\ 47 0 8, P N\\\\ \ \ .- - ~il / +4*D ANT ASSEMBL EXISTING \\\\ 4.4\\\ 2%\1 \ \ 4 PFNPOSED FIRE ~ 0 1 C \ i8 RETAINING WAC'b~ LOT 4 Â«Â°, i /-< r.. 4 . 2753 , \\. 0/ / 74Â®7&, . 9.// I . \\\\ 4 11 00% 1 - \ \.. e '4> 1 4,\ \\ 15' UTILITY dc PUBLIC / / ft '2Â·Â· \ 0'~ 1 J-- TRAIL EASEMENT 4 . - \.1 j it.:. 5/ 1 601\ 31\ 1 0 1 : . 3 15' UTILITY EASEMENT PROPOSED TRANSFORMER .,:/ hAN.Q~~LEPHONE PED.lk-AL / / Ch.Jk lep.>..Ii .,Â«Â· x k f . . . I 01 1 I . 4 0.\ I\. 2 .... X. 1 \ 1 ~ 0 \ i I \ . \ 4 .... i / A ~34 1 \ M.s. -No. Â»0 1 ; 3: .Â© , 43 - - Er-OEM 1* PROPOSED 8, 8 Â·Â· b EXI STING be WATER MAIN ~ ./.I * NEWFOUNDLAND] LbÂ¢E pot. h \\ , 49\\ , ~1 Â·' j ~.\<FASÂ·EMENT e \ / . /k him i 4 Â£ I /. 4 ' / LOT 5 I ..4, N \ 4\81*64 \ 4 6 f 11@~lil 4 \\// 4 \ a 1 1 Â·. it-. ho, ~. 1. ~ . . , j \ \. i \\\#,1 \ Ex-GETC ~ ~~~~ \ RETAINUNG 3814 - ~ -~ - - - PRO . \' 3. 4 4 i.41 a WATNUR~TCE N ~ = 46< I .~ -/ -A. 5 0 PROPOSEN ~ . ~ -- 4. 1 1 0 L \\ \ 4 - - <(TYP.) ~ ~ . ./hgf 44Â» DFFYWELL . PROPOSED , PROPOSED ELECTRIC/TELEPHONE/ 604\ 4 Â«\\ 4 \ P ./* 0..I \ \ \SEWER\SER*CE .U - -<*. I 1 IN CABLE/GAS SHARED TRENCH i 4. ..4 e Â·Â· \ I Ur.) \ I \.: - + Qi -51 * * â‚¬ F t<RI4\\ . . 1 , 1%, ,dE>(STINÂ«Q.*en,-PÂ·KR~lik MQ~ TURN-AROUND EASEMEIÂ« ~ ~ ~ - .34 :I .\ I 0 8..1, *..- 0 /.1 - --. I h - - - I Gob\\\\\ A\\ . \ I '. ./ I --0...0 ...1. . ... 6 -- 4 3 10 . :4Â« -'.- e.w PROPOSED INLINE PUMP-- 4Â»// %\ I,-4-0 ---Â» 1 . \ F - - Dr-Dr- - m. )-- U u (>\ ' .1 +% 8.'W 8,1. 0"W 8.'W ~ 8"w / \\ /04.s To @ 3Â¥ Ob * -s.,0,"Ii="I--It ---- 000 - glge Im- X ---z-_-= Â«T= .10 / A N\\ ja Â¥ in -ric - PROPOSED - --=====r= ... ====- 09 . C GETC 0 CLEANOUT , C/o - FYQi 4 \ (TYP.) 1< 1 B. L.M. TO CITY OF ASPEN FOR e ACCESS AND CUL-DE-SAC 9 0 (PROPOSED TO INCLUDE UTILITY) 0 J l. PROJECT NO. 99057.01 SHEET 1 ' OF 2 4 ' - 18 NOISIA3H \SDQ<PROJ<99\99057\DWG\MU-01.DWG Thu Sep 23 17- 05: 03 1999 GETC PROPOSED ELEC/TELE/CABLE/GAS 4 -4"W 4'w - PROPOSED 4" WATER SERVICE / \ \ 1 = PROPOSED SEWER SERVICE -8"W 8"W - PROPOSED GAS LINE REPLACEMENT // \ \ EXISTING LOT LINE \ \ -W W- PROPOSED 6" WATER SERVICE LINE \ I - -- - - - EXISTING EASEMENT ~ 4 - EXISANG 10' CONTOUR \\9 I. .0 - - O 6 \ PROPOSED 2' CONTOUR 1 .4 10 5 \ PROPOSED 10' CONTOUR \\\ Â·- EXISTING 2' CONTOUR \ ".4,- 11 - \\ 1 \ GENERAL WATER AND UTILITY NOTES 1 9 GRAPHIC SCALE / 9,1 4 l -0 , ' 2. 1. THE LOCATIONS OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAVE BEEN PLOTTED 8ASED 1 ~ ~ ~ ~\~~~ ~ SOME INSTANCES. THESE UTILIT~ES AS SHOWN MAY NOT REPRESENT T\\\ PROVIDED BY UTILITY COMPANIES AND ACTUAL FIELD LOCATIONS IN ON UTILITY MAPS, CONSTRUCTION/DESIGN PLANS, OTHER INFORMATION (IN FEET ) ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS. IT IS THE RESPONS; IBILITY OF THE \ p. LOT 2 / n./ / 1 inch = 20 ft CONTRACTOR TO CONTACT ALL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR FIELD LOCATION ' / Us\ OF UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 1 0 4 \ 2. ALL WATER MAINS AND SERVICES SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH A 7'0" -00 MINIMUM DEPTH OF COVER . IF GRADE CONFLICTS OCCUR WITH N / I I..los 0 EXISTING UTILITIES THE PROPOSED WATER MAIN GRADE CAN BE / 11 1 f VARIED PROVIDED THAT THE 7,0. MINIMUM DEPTH OF COVER IS 4> MAINTAINED. 4 1 \\ / / CO. 4 3. ALL MAIN LINE AND HYDRANT VALVE BOXES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO 1/4" 1 i -2-% , \ BELOW FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS. \ 1 4. ALL UTILITIES, BOTH UNDERGROUND OR OVERHEAD, SHALL BE / 1 1 \\ L N 15' UTILITY EASEMENT ~ 1 TO, OR INTERRUPTION OF, SERVICES CAUSED BY THE CONSTRUCTION. 4 4 MAINTAINED IN CONTINUOUS SERVICE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE \ \ 0 CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONS IBLE AND LI ABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, EXCEPT AS NOTED OTHERWISE. THE \~ / 1.-4.- / 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTAIN HIS CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS TO THE L thrill / AREA WITHIN THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT \ OPERATE OUTSIDE THIS AREA WITHOUT THE PRIOR EXPRESS CONSENT OF ~\- i &S 6. ANY DAMAGE TO PRIVATE PROPERTY BY THE CONTRACTOR OUTSIDE THESE THE LAND ONNER. j -LOT 3 BUILGNG Â»17.Â» PROPOSED ~-15' UTILITY EASEMENT RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. - . EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PLAT INFORMATION PROVIDED BY RIVER - - <a~ ENVELOPE -- -- ~ h.- ~ RETAINING WALL ~ 7 CITY SURVEYS, LLC, JOB NO. 97'47, DATED JANUARY 6, 1999. -.. 7 \3\\./3/ 11\\\ 8. PROPOSED PLANIMETRIC INFORMATION PROVIDED BY SOPRIS .\\ 4.2 - /'DOC, h f /2,141 0 ENGINEERING, LLC, JOB NO. 98053, DATED JUNE 2, 1998. 96 4 - p#QpokD FIRE<a *4Â· ~\ \\\ - -~-. * NX +1'<DkANT ASSEMBLA EXISTING '2Â· 7- T\\ 6 - F.# 7 \ ~ RETAINING WACt:~ LOT 4 4\ f -1 /00 < / C IF/ \ Â«069 ) -00 - - - 10. ...i.\ \ / / a. ~>.... \\\ \ 1 Â· 4/ 6-2 / 1 \\ 2. -I ' I \ 1 4 \-00 4.N 11 < 15' UTILITY & PUBLIC / / 4.- 4% %.k I 4 \\ N \ ~- TRAIL EASEMENT = f 0 Â»C ] 4 WATER tle / . ,\ r-PROPos ~ . \ '15 - & -- el . 2â€¢. / 4. PROPOSED TRANSFORMER ,\ Nx j XYPÂ·>. i . \ h. \ 4 4,4 33'<~ * hAN.Q~~EPHONE PEDIN.*L ~ . \1 I.\\ I . I 15' UTILITY EA':EMENT h / : > M.S. No. ~5190 V 4 29\ 12 - \\\ \% ~ \\\ 1 / A \ % \ PROPOSED 8" Ek-GETÂ¢ .\ \ 4.. EXISTING ble WATER MAIN ~ / 443 \~ASEMENT ~ 4 N\. IC - \ % 5\ \\ -43\\ / 6. LOT 5 *\\\\ \\ 4 -CE' EWF~OUNDL.TAN[~ L.~E:. :~.:::1:'~fi.~-- - ~ *t .41 -f \/ 2 Â« 4104 1// 11 4, \ 2-37_ . V ..9 6.4 . . '4, t h x - .1 \44\ L \ ...\ / Ex-GETC 1 ~ 4. .. 4 4. WA~SER~E ~ ~~ SED -' , .\ \\ - - 44.--. -ss-l R 'Â·-- PROPOSEJ' h\~ . 11 ..1060 - . - F ' DRYWELL \\\1 0 I I .thr\ I.- Â« <(TYP.) ~ ~ ~ \ PROPOSED N \ PROPOSED ELECTRIC/TELEPHONE/ c 4,% 64 ~C)POS D~ \ RETAINING mAL \ \~SEWER~SENÂ©k u - 414-2 \ 4\\ CABLE/GAS SHARED TRENCH --* rup , j LOT 4 *\\\ 141 lid. \ 1- Â»r 10 4 12%, ... ~ \E>(rs:fl.LE.VE.naÂ·-PKR<114 1--2-2 , ' * 1 0. uN< ~~ 00='--~~--r ' -- 1 :/ /' --/1- * 4 - 4*% 4 1 1.\ 14 14 \ A A-~ ~ rtc \ 1. il i o 1 . I \\ 0/.: \ <.1 0-- - 0 7 8.4- \P~ ~OPOSED INLINE PUMP 4 1 -ST \\ r-/r *' r.- - -00< '00 + 40(2,/I'ri///1#6//m/Flit-980 - \ \ 8"W--=mzhM 7,0. 1 66 ' -7- ~ 0 8'-W 8'Â·W t \ 6% \ .-I - allo --,-9/,c 8"W ~ 8"W 6 6 1 %,C/0 6 GEE--- GETC GETC OEIC GETC / .Coe O 49 1 PROPOSED -- oly ---- -rn 1 + *.,4.dâ€žM,#- 1Zillk=.Ji= == - == == - - 1 06 CLEANOUT -,9 -- N *** -~-(TYP.) e>,=~ UÂ»u flftin --1 ACCESS AND CUL-DE-SAC .Im, - 40 ve J *% \8\ O(0(L, .... 1/4 f.b (0 r 0 1801 4 1. Â· Improvement Survey Plat h - Lot 3, Hoes Subdivision .LOI**al. .904~~ai~\,aia. - PLAT OF HOAG SUBDIVISION. 2) THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON IS SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, WAYS, BUILDING SETBACKS OR 07HER RESmICIONS OF RECORD, A NOTED ON A TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENT REFERENCED HEREON. REQUEST, THIS PLAT WAS PREPARD SOLELY FROM DOCUMENTS REF SAID TITLE COMMITMENT, AND DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY THE CUEN ADDITIONAL RESEARCH WAS TO BE A PART OF THIS SURVEY, REVESETATION PLAN ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE ( 3) NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE AFTER YOU DISCOVER SUCH DEFECL IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACT10 p SUBMITTED 4-8-qq FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. ANY DEFECT IN THIS CERTIFICATE BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN 4) THE EASEMENTS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 681, PAGES 873 THROUGH RECORDED WITH THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, CONTA CONFLICMNG, ILLEGIBLE, AND APPARENTLY ERRONEOUS INFORMATION EASEMENTS HAVE BEEN DEPICTED AT THEIR APPARENT INTENDED L ' ~ BEST AS THOSE EASEMENTS CAN BE SHOWN).SOME ADDITIONAL RE / \ 40 0 10 40 BE NECESSARY TO BETTER SHOW THE PRECISE LOCATION OF THESE --- // 0 --= - 5) NO INFORMATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE NOR WAS ANY RESEAR( 444, I / / - 9.BACKS OF RECORD, PITKIN COUNTY SETBACKS, OR OTHER DOCU \ 0~1: LWNâ€¢ 49;Er CONCERNING BUILDING SETBACKS. THIS PROPERTY MAY BE SUBJECT 9 '4.1, 0# A.7.... 6) AS NOTED ON THE RECORDED PLAT OF HOAG SUBDIVISION: 4**4'* 14 \ SEmACK AGREEMENTS, ETC, r70~- ~-- > ),tj:#160Â© Coet *-- 41) / / I) NO BUILDING PERMIT WILL BE ISSUED ON LOTS 1&3 UNTII 07 15710 BEEN DEMONSTRATED THAT THERE IS ADEQUATE A \ INDIVIDUAL OR INDIVIDUALS WITH PROFESSIONAL A' 7.:N:.... ....::20.... PROTECTION TO BE ENGINEERED AND CERTIFIES Bt .......... 'Â·â€¢Â·â€ž7Â· . .. .. -- . CONTROL EXPERIENCE. '' 66 ./'~sboll 4 11) NO BUILDING PERMIT WILL BE ISSUED BY THE aTY OF ASP 42 / / \ ANY LOT MTHIN THIS SUBDIVISION UNTIL A COMMITMENT 00 ENTERED INTO WITH THE ASPEN METROPOUTAN SANITAT ,.,WA,.,,,...U.,...,.,.., .,,, â€¢Â· N82,1.00*W 'mot. 104.70' ' t.â€¢Â· ' DISTRICT FOR AN EXTENSON OF A SEWER LINE TO SER\ WITHIN THIS SUBDIVISION. 'Â·Â·AWNÂ·'Â·V... - . 47,-'*,......... .0 , Ii, 0 BETWEEN CORNER NO. 4 OF M.S. NO. 5190, ANO THE SOUTHEAST ( 44 4 /,0 -- -'.,~~ 6 - ~ 4 7) BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S.71'32 RCWOR*l ,,, -=i,~4Â¤2~e*_1%EL .Uncrati k =aÂ·... \ LOT 6 OF HOAG SUBDIVISION, MONUMENTED AS SHOWN HEREON. L - 2156' , ' four'b,Â¢'I, 0 00 8) BOOK 656, PAGE 655 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS REFERS , ~ /' R - 7.50' Extat64 -ftdi ...... . 49*0 00, 1. 0 V:. All=:... / \ APPROXIMATE 2.00 FOOT ENCROACHMENT ALONG THE UNE COMMON .P.6-- HOAG SUBDIVISION, AND THE '1001" LODE, MINERAL SURVEY NO. 11 / -2 &024,476 ...bew.A .Attt' ..F , 011/7 ~ . ADDITIIONAL INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THIS PL / â‚¬07 40:2........ / :f - TO CLARIFY ANY SUCH ENCROACHMENT AT AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE. PREPARATION. ADDITIONAL FIELD AND/OR OFFICE RESEARCH MAY B 0 ' '.... %. I I #J= 00 4 4* , AREA TO BE REVEGETATEO ~ ...... . . lie 4/8479 406,4 / AVA' .24% - jv V~A~\ 4/ 4 / /.......... 0 /.......... LOT 3 .*-Â· fi. 1.*010 / I -v /419 / // te 1 .. , c~ / Â·Â· Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· Â· r.~ ....ftie* 00 3.058 Ack :inÂ· / ,' .. .::.. L 4 ~ â€¢ . .vumg.t. 4/6 /..... -- 01 (133,219 Sq. Ft) ... 1 / i VI ./4'ri#/01*61*i * 00 qwa , / 0 -0 4 4,9 4 h : t. 4</00 4,5/8,/ / 0-.k.â‚¬21,2. 46"*3 / ... 40 00 *A .... / /.... 40 4* 0 0 I , ' dr , id,% 1 -%%., 04 - -*'402*:4= ldp / \ .* 50' 2----------------------- -- --- + 1 15 18 Utmt, El--t NDOW'00'E 1115' - -~ 0 0 Â»470,0, 0 '-Â·Â·Eâ‚¬â‚¬*hw.Â·....'-M.n..DEE*26. . .1 - 1%121 - N90'00'00'E 590'00'DOW 43&00' p 'Ped' , 1 B~ 0*1 Found ................. \ 1978 B.L M 4740 44 + 96 # 2 295. .:.'.MEÂ·> : 4 r 79.4 Brass Cap Standard Monum r %<4: a- 441 ~~1 42Â£401Â· 9/ueÂ· - ....4,1 6rghs Mixture / li - ent Hoag Subdivision Revegetation Plan ' 86â€ž~ Â£~~ *~ ~ .~~ ~~~~ 756, 00 Letterman Needlegrass Stipa lettermani 1596 .9. ... Mountain Brome Bromus marginatus 25% Sheep's Fescue Festuca ovina 20% Smooth Brome Bromus inermis 20% . -- Timothy erase Phleum pratense 20% - SufYIEYOR * C~TMC:470 - .- Specifications 1, THE UNDERSIGNED, BEING A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR, - PI,opmer Dix<2,IFTION - - A. Provide Fine grading, filling, topsoll, Fertilizer and seeding as Indicated on the UCENSED IN THE STATE OF COLORADO, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT WAS PREPARED BY RIVER CITY SURVEYS, LLC., drawings. . LOT 3, HOAG SUBDIVISON FOR THOMAS COLEMAN, UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND CHECKING AND THAT B. Deliver Fertilizer as specified. to site in original, sealed containers bearing ' COUNTY OF PITKIN IT IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUEF. manufacturer's guaranteed statement of analysis. STATE OF COLORADO AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT FILED IT IS FURTHER CERTIFIED THAT lHE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED C. Fertilizer: Super Phosphate 18-46-0 12 lbs per 1000 square feet NOVEMBER 5, 1971, IN PLAT BOOK 4 PARCEL ON THIS DATE JANUARY 6, 1999, EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS, ARE AT PAGE 218, WITH THE PITKIN ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PARCEL, EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT D. Nldflowers and grasses in non-irrigated areas: Sown between September 90 and . COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER. ' THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBED PREMISES BY _..iâ€ž=I,Ii November 15 while there is no snow cover. IMPROVEMENTSONANYADJOININGPREMISESEXCEPTASINDICAT1.. E. Areas to receive seed shall be loosened and fine raked to break up lumps and nrn/lin/.p A gmnnth pvp.,1 ArA,de Free Prom unnitihtlu variationg riaaee or derÂ·)reeelonG