Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.rz.witz.A055-00�737-v7i-uu_U08 Witz Property Annexation A055-00 Split, 8040 705 N. Sp', eZone,Lot FAI 1-1 r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-5090 City of Aspen Land Use: 1041 Deposit 1042 Flat Fee 1043 HPC 1046 Zoning and Sign Referral Fees: 1163 City Engineer 1205 Environmental Health 1190 Housing Building Fees: 1071 Board of Appeals 1072 Building Permit 1073 Electrical Permit 1074 Energy Code Review 1075 Mechanical Permit 1076 Plan Check 1077 Plumbing Permit 1078 Reinspection 1079 Aspen Fire Other Fees: 1006 Copy 1302 GIS Maps 1303 GIS Fee 1481 Housing Cash in Lieu 1383 Open Space Cash in Lieu 1383 Park Dedication 1468 Parking Cash in Lieu Performance Deposit 1268 Public Right-of-way 1 164 School District Land Ded. TOTAL NAME: ADDRESS/PROJECT: PHONE: CHECK# CASE/PERMIT#: # OF COPIES: DATE: INITIAL: CASE NUMBER A055-00 PARCEL ID # 2737-071-00008 CASE NAME Witz Property PROJECT ADDRESS 705 N. Spruce St. PLANNER Chris Bendon CASE TYPE Annexation, Rezoning, Lot Split, 8040 Greenli OWNER/APPLICANT Witz Property LLC. REPRESENTATIVE Alan Richman DATE OF FINAL ACTION 8/28/00 CITY COUNCIL ACTION Ord. 31-2000 PZ ACTION ADMIN ACTION BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED 12/19/00 BY Chris Bendon • 0 PARCEL ID: 2737-071-00008 DATE RCVD: 4/26/00 # COPIES:F- CASE NO A055-00 CASE NAME: Witz Property PLNR:-� PROJ ADDR: 705 N. Spruce St. CASE TYP: Annexation, Rezoning, Lot Split, 804 STEPS: OWN/APP: Witz Property LLC. ADR 709 N Spruce St. C/S/Z: Aspen/CO/81611 PHN: 544-0745 REP: Fn Richman ADR: Box 3613 C/S/Z: Aspen/CO/81612 PHN: 920-1125 FEES DUEI 2310 D 330E FEES RCVD: 2640 STAT: F REFERRALS REF: BYr- DUE: -MTTGG DAAT�E-^-'REV -BODY PH NOTICED F 1 r t.. I e I REMARKS CLOSED: BY: PLAT SUBMITD: PLAT (BK,PG): DATE OF FINAL AC CITY COUNCIL: PZ: BOA: DRAC: ADMIN, U DEVELOPMENT ORDER of the City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Witz Property LLC, 709 N. Spruce Street, Aspen, CO 81611 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number 705 North Spruce Street Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property Zoning to R-30 and Lot Split Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Ordinance 31-2000, 8/28/00 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) September 9, 2000 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) September 10, 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 9`h day of September, 2000, by the City of Aspen Community D,ev�lopment Director. Ann Woods, Community Development Director PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 705 North Spruce Street, by Ordinance of the (City Council numbered 31 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. s/City of Aspen Account Publish in The Aspen Times on September 9, 2000 ORDINANCE NO.31 (SERIES OF 2000) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ZONING THE WITZ PROPERTY TO THE LOW -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-30) ZONE DISTRICT AND APPROVING THE WITZ PROPERTY LOT SPLIT, 705 NORTH SPRUCE STREET, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Witz Property, LLC, Camilla Auger, Managing Partner, owner and applicant, for a Lot Split on a parcel of land known as the Witz Property, located at 705 North Spruce Street, parcel No. 2737-071-00-008, intended to be divided into two development sites; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has petitioned the City of Aspen for annexation and said petition has been accepted by the Aspen City Council. All development approvals set forth herein are subject to annexation and shall be considered null and void if the property is not annexed into the City of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes annexation procedures, newly annexed property must be assigned to a Zone District within 90 days of annexation and the City of Aspen has historically administered this process as a "rezoning" application and processed a City initiated application according to the requirements set forth in Section 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, after a recommendation by the Community Development Department, a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission made during a duly noticed public hearing, and the comments made by the general public, the City Council may approve or deny an application for Rezoning based on the criteria that are set forth in said Section; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.480.030 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department and the comments made by the general public, the City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Subdivision Exemption application for Lot Split during a duly noticed public hearing 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 the property be included in the Low -Density Residential (R- 30) Zone District upon annexation into the City of Aspen and recommended approval of the Lot Split, with conditions; and, Ordinance No. 31, Series of2000 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Page 448741 11/13/2000 02:31P ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 1 of 5 R 25.00 D 0.00 N 0.-00 PITKIN COUNTY CO WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on June 20, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended by a seven to zero (7-0) vote the property be included in the Low -Density Residential (R-30) Zone District, upon annexation into the City of Aspen. WHEREAS, lot split parcels outside the Original Townsite are not eligible for an exemption from the Growth Management Quota System. WHEREAS, by virtue of the existing house the Witz property has one development right subject to a growth management exemption upon demolition and replacement of the existing home; and, WHEREAS, a series of fully transferable development rights (TDR) were created in the process of deed restricting the Smuggler Mobile Home Park to affordable housing that allow for an exemption of one single-family residence each within the City limits of the City of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the applicant is the owner of one of these referenced TDRs and the City has reviewed and accepted the TDR as exempting the development of one single- family residence from the requirements of growth management, including those related to affordable housing or cash -in -lieu thereof; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, as identified in Sections 26.310 and 26.480, has reviewed and considered the recommendations made by the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: Upon annexation of the Witz Property into the City of Aspen, the Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be amended by the Community Development Director to reflect the Witz property as included in the Low -Density Residential (R-30) Zone District. The Community Development Director shall use the annexation plat survey description as the basis for determining the zoning boundary. Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2000 Page 2 IIIIII 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 441741 11/13/2000 02:31P ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 2 of 5 R 25.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Section 2• The Witz Lot Split is approved, subject to the following conditions: A Lot Split Plat shall be recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of this Ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Commission signature area shall be removed from the proposed plat. The plat shall indicate all easements of record and shall depict a new easement for the portion of the Loni White Trail Head and the Hunter Creek Trail crossing the southwest corner of the property. The existing setback easement on proposed Lot B shall be amended to function for the life of the existing structure only. 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots in conformance with the R-30 Zone District regulations and shall include the following plat notes: The existing house need not be demolished to accommodate the newly created lot boundaries and the encroachments into the side yards may continue to exist for the life of the original structure only. Upon redevelopment, all structures on these two lots shall comply with the R-30 Zone District provisions with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. ■ The developer of Lot A shall seek an exemption from GMQS pursuant to Section 26.470.070(B), as amended from time to time. As indicated by the applicant, in the application materials dated April, 2000, an ADU shall be developed to meet this requirement. ■ The developer of Lot B is exempt from the Growth Management Quota System by virtue of extinguishing a Transferable Development Right pursuant to Ordinance No 31, Series of 2000. As indicated by the applicant. a voluntary ADU may also be developed. ■ Additional development of these parcels, other than for one single-family residence for each of the two lots, shall require an amendment of this Lot Split approval and the necessary growth management allotments. ■ This Lot Split was approved pursuant to Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2000. 3. The Lot Split Plat shall qualify as the Subdivision Exemption Agreement and satisfying the Agreement requirements of Section 26.480.030. 4. The two lots shall contain one single-family residence each, excluding Accessory Dwelling Units. 5. Both Lots do not have development orders and shall comply with all applicable development regulations prior to applying for building permits, including those regulations related to Residential Design Standards, Accessory Dwelling Units, Growth Management Exemptions, and 8040 Greenline Review. 6. The applicant shall provide evidence of title to one Transferable Development Right referenced herein to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2000 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Page 448741 11/13/2000 02:31P ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 3 of 5 R 25.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 7. The maximum building height (as defined under the current City land use code to be the midpoint height) of any portion of the roof of the proposed house located within the area highlighted on Exhibit C, Witz Property Pre -Annexation Agreement, for the Witz Lot B shall not exceed 20 feet above the 112 foot elevation line shown on Exhibit C of the Witz Property Pre -Annexation Agreement. Section 3: Upon application for a building permit for Lot B, the applicant shall provide to the City Zoning Officer a recorded document that describes the referenced Transferable Development Right, owned by the applicant and identified in Pitkin County records as reception no. 445621, as extinguished and void. Extinguishment of said TDR shall fully exempt the development of one single-family residence from the requirements of growth management, including those related to affordable housing or cash -in -lieu thereof. Section 4• All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. Section 5: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 6• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 7: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 8• A.public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 28`h day of August, 2000, at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2000 I IIIIII "III "III' IIIIII III 11111 HIM 111111111111111 Page 448741 11/13/2000 02:31P ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 4 of 5 R 25.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 24`h day of July, 2000. Attest: Kathryn.S. och, CityClerk Ra el E. Richards, Ma r FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this=day of 2000. \`Atte§t:a W M IM j 0 M� Kathryn $. I kh, City Clerk Approved as to form: 2&4&12L - City A orn 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 IN IN 448741 11/13/2000 02:31P ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI S of S R 25.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2000 Pa-e 5 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE WITZ PROPERTY BE INCLUDED IN THE LOW - DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-30) ZONE DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY OF ASPEN, 705 NORTH SPRUCE STREET, CITY OF ASPEN. Parcel No. 2737-071-00-008 Resolution 400-�3 oZ WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Witz Property, LLC, Camilla Auger, Managing Partner, owner and applicant, for an 8040 Greenline Review on a parcel of land known as the Witz Property, located at 705 North Spruce Street, intended to be divided into two development sites; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has petitioned the City of Aspen for annexation and said petition has been accepted by the Aspen City Council. All development approvals set forth herein are subject to annexation and shall be considered null and void if the property is not annexed into the City of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, during the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, the applicant withdrew the application for 8040 Greenline Review; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes annexation procedures, newly annexed property must be assigned to a Zone District within 90 days of annexation and the City of Aspen has historically administered this process as a "rezoning" application and processed a City initiated application according to the requirements set forth in Section 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, after a recommendation by the Community Development Department, a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission made during a duly notice public hearing, and the comments made by the general public, the City Council may approve or deny an application for Rezoning based on the criteria that are set forth in said Section; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on June 20, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission, by a seven to zero (7-0) vote, recommended to City Council include the property in the Low -Density Residential (R-30) Zone District upon annexation into the City of Aspen. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: Section 1 The subject property known as the Witz Property should be included in the Low -Density Residential (R-30) Zone District upon annexation into the City of Aspen. R • APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on June 20, 2000. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Crty Attorney ATTEST: ),ckie Lothian. Dep ty City Clerk C:\home\CHRISB\CASES\Witz\PZ—R-ESO.doc PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: oe Robert Blaich, Chair Saturday -Sunday, August 12-13, 2000 e ")Tie Aspen Times _.-0 purcha4er a Certificate of Purchase, all as pro- Split during a duly noticed public hearing based pendept provision and shall not affect the valid- on the criteria that are set lorth in said Section; ity of tree remaining portions thereof. PUBIJC N9I10E NOTICE. OF PUBLIC HEARING vided by law. PUBLIC Nfl llCL and. Section 7: A public hearing will be held before the Eagle THOMAS OKFN, WHEREAS. the Fire Marshall, Aspen That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adop- PLFASE TAKE WM(.E. -I'hat the Board of County CouunlssWnrrs (}punt C r nimisspx, ix:ginnilig at I I a ro rxe Public Tnistet of County of Pitkin Y �' B Carol L. Foote August 14, VAX) fn the Commissioners Y Consolidated Sanitation District, the City Water lion Department, City Engineering., City Parks p Y g 8•' Y of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance the office o[ the Pitkin County ul Pftkin Cuunly, Colorado will ctxiAucl a public p Iwaiing ,A a IttvAul loot at 2:t1) p m. rxt ilw 2Srd M!.eting Rrxrrn at S(if) Broadway in E g)e. CO Dated: July 24, 2fM a lu uxisider approval of a Service Flail uJlutg Frst publication date: July 29, 2(M. Department, the theAspPlI kitkin County Building Clerk and Recorder. Department, and the Pilltin County Community Section S. day of August, at the Board of County Cixnrnlsskxera Meeting Rtom 5:f0 Foal Main lot the formation of the Roaring Fork Open last Spare, Park anti Recreation D istrfr t SV publication date: August 26, 2000. P 8 Name of Publication: The Aspen Times Development Department reviewed the propos- P D al alit] provided ci)rrunenia, and the Community A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 281h day of August. 2(KK), at 5:00 In the City hirrs+�i, Asp!n, Colorado SI611, as whkie filet end plate. all otend,rrs of free ills may appear ,rat► per Y 1 I Ar'y persro ownlog properly Its lhr- plopob'al 5ytclal Dlatrlct who dexlres d,, rer urst exclu- 1 loupes I1. Ix,wnr y Attorney for the Owner of the Evidence of relit 1),evehi xoeset Ue partntenl recommended lhr 1 1 ' property be Included In the Low -Density Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado. fifteen (IS) days prior to which hear - rnA Le retard: alit) RLSOI.InION UP THE BOARD OF COUNTY COL, clan Irdxn the IHalrtci mull subrNt such a rerluest, In writing, to the Board of County 3aa West Hampden Ave.. Stifle 540 FJ, Lewrx,d, CO (SUI 10 8 Residential (R-30) Zone District upon annexa- tion Into the City of Aspen and recommended public notice of the same was published In of circulation within the COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, ORADO SUBMITTING TO THE ELECTORATE AT Commissioners at P.O. Box 050. Eagle CO 81631. (300) 788.9fi11U ITIC COMMUNICATION IS FROM A DEBT COO, approval of the Lot Spilt, with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on a e general Citya newspaper of Aspen. AN FJ.ECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 7, 2000 A PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE HOME RULE Published In The Aspen Times August 12. Published L[CC'I'OR. THE LAW OFFICE OF JAMES 11. DOWNEY IS ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT. June 20, 2000, the Planning and ZoningINTRODUCED, 8 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUB - LISHED as provided b law, CHART' TICLE If BY AMENDING SECTION (71755) ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL BE USED Commission recommended by a seven to zero (7-0) vole the property be Included in the Low- b the CityCouncil of the CI of Aspen on the Y (Y Pe 2.5 County of Pitkin In the State of PUBLIC NOTICE FOR THAT PURPOSE. ZECCOLA MONTE V ZECCOLA/MONTE V. ZEC- // Density Residential (R-30) Zane District, upon annexation Into the City of Aspen. day of July, 2000. Attest. Attest: Colors a duly created political subdIvlslon of the Slate, organized and operating as a home PUPPY SMITH PARCEL COWOP (CUNVF.- FNCE AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC) ELIGI- COLA Published In The Aspen Times July 29, August 5, WHEREAS, lot split parcels outside the Original from we are not eligible for an exeSystem. Kathryn S. Koch, CI Clerk Rachel E. Richards, or Y title charter county pursuant to the general statutes of the Stale and a county home rule BILITY REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing 12, 19, 26, 2000. (71316) the Growth Management Quota System. the Growth WI IERFAS, by virtue of the existing house the Published In The Aspen Times on August 12, 21N10. (71760) charter ("the Charter") adopted pursuant to the Colorado Ilome Rule Powers Act. will be held on August 28, 2(R)0 at a meeting to begin at S:00 P.M. before the As1en (,'fly Council, PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC TRUSTEE'S SALE Witz properly has one development right sulp- jest to a manageneul exemption upon 2. The members of the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Pltkln ("llte Council Chambers, ('ply flail 131) Soulb Gak•na, Aspen, to determine eligibility (if a poleolfal (-fly Aspen affordable housing project fur COWOP No. fill- IS To Whom It May Concern: Ilpls Notice Is given with regard to the following described Deed of growth deutulltlun and repbaceutenl of the existbig home; and, PUBLIC NOTICE IN TIIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Board") have been duly elected, chosen and of Review. The Properly Is commonly known as the 'Trust: WIIERFAS, a series of fully transferable develop In the FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO qualified. 3. Pursuant to Section 8.1.1 of Charter and Puppy Smith Parcel and Is described as Lots 1 :1. Block 4, Lakeview addition. of the City and Original Grantor (Borrower): Thomas R. Evans and Diana M. LeBlanc mend rights M)R) were created process of deed restricting the Smuggler Mobile Home Public Notice for Appointment of Part Time Magistrate Judge C.R.S. §30-11-506 the Board may by resolution propose changes and amendments to the Pltkln Townsite of Aspen. The parcel Is located just' of the Post Office. Original Beneliclar+y: Plymouth (:appal Company, Inc. Park to affordable housing that allow for an exemption of one single-family residence each On the Western Slope The United States District Court for the County Charter to be submitted to the qualified electors of Pitkin County. north For further information contact Joyce Ohlson at Current Owner of Evidence of Debt Secured by Trust: within the City limits of the City of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Is the owner of one of District of Colorado Is accepting applications for 4. The Board recognizes that It Is appro- the Aspen/ 1 Ilkin Community Development Department, 130 South Galena St., Aspen, CO the Deed of Residential Funding Corporation applicant these referenced TDRs and the City has the part time magistrate judge position on the Western Slope. prlate to amend Article 11 Sections 2.5 as follows: LANGUAGE (970) 920-5062. Date of Deed of Trust: October 21. 1997 reviewed and accepted the TDR as exempting Tile current annual salary of the position CURREN LE II 711E BOARD OF COUNTY COM ARTICLE s/Rachel E. Richards, Mayor Aspen City Council Recording Date of Deed of Trust: Oclnber 22, 1997 the development of one single•family residence from the requirements of growth management, Is $54,582.00. The term of office Is four years. A [tilt Public Notice and application forms NFR4 MI Compensation Published in The Aspen Times on August 12, County of Recording: Pitkin Reception acid/or Film Nos. of Recorded Deed of Including those related to affordable housing or, cash4n-lieu thereof; and, for the magistrate judge position are available in the Office of the Clerk The District at room C- a Conn ompensa for County Commissloners shal)CRE. 2000. (7176T) Trust: at Reception No. 409782 WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has 145, 1929 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado 80294, be 5000 per yearlintybeginningwith those tom missioners elected to office In 1998. Thercaller PUBLIC NOTICE RED BRICK SCHOOL PLANNED UNIT DEVEI. AMENDMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY Book and Page of Deed of Trust: _ YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the reviewed and considered lite development pro- posal under the applicable provisions of the Sections 26.310 at the U.S. Probation Office, 400 Rood Ave., Grand Junction, CO 81501, and via the Internet salary shall be increased ten percent (IOxPMENT every November of a general election year, but GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on owner of she evidence of debt, the original prin- cipal amount of which was Two Hundred Municipal Code, as Identified In and 26.480, has reviewed and considered the at www.co.uscourts.gov. Interested persons may contact the Clerk In no event will salary levels exceed the level Monday, August 28, 2000 at a meeting to begin at before the Aspen City Council, Council Fourteen Thousand One Hundred and by recommendations made by the Community of the District Court for additional Informatlory by establialked by statute for similarly classified coo aiary changes will not be retroactive 5:00 P.M. Chambers, City Hall 130 South Galena, Aspen, to No/100ths dollars, and which Is secured the Deed of Trust described above, has tiled written Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered pub- Ap Ifcalions must be submitted only potential nominees personally and must be nor salary of any commissioner be vat• consider an application submitted by the City of Recreation Department election and demand for sale as provided fit said Ile comment at a public hearing; and, received by September 25, 2000. led o nged during his or her term of office. PROPOSED AMENDMENT Aspen Parks and requesting approval to construct a new confer- Deed of Trust. The outstanding principal bal- arise due and owing upon the evidence of debt WHEREAS, the City Council (Inds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all Published In The Aspen Times August 12, 2000. 2.5 Compensation Salaries for County Commissioners shall comply ence room, and to build an extended snow -shed canopPyy next to the Gym. The Property is Located secured by the above -described Deed of Trust being foreclosed is $214,100.00 as of July 19. a tlicabfe development standards and that the appproval of the development proposal, with v PUBLIC NOTICE with state statutory standards for similarly clas- as these standards may change at 110 E. Hallam, and 1s on the corner of Garmisch and East Hallam Street. The Property 2000 The real property being foreclosed Is all of conditions, is consistent with the goals and ele RE: SBA ASPEN UMBRELLA SPECIAL REVIEW & mends of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and 1041 HAZARD REVIEW shied counties from time to time. Salary changes will not be nor well the salary of any commis- Is commonly known as the Red Brick School, and Is described as Lads A -I and KS, Block 64, aCitynd the property encumbered by said Deed of Trust anti is situate in the County of Pilkin, State of WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this furthers and is necessary for public (P137-99) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing retroactive shiner be varied or changed during his or her and Townsfte o[ Aspen. For further Information contact Fred Jarman at Colorado, send Is described as follows: See Exhibit2000 health, safety, and welfare. will be held on September 13, 200Ordinance at a regular term of office. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE tine Aspen /Pilkin Community Development Department, 130 South Galena St., Aspen, CO also known by street and nwnber as: 290 Lane, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, meeting to begin at 3:00 PM or as soon there - after as the conduct of business allows, before BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF Of 0) 9'2(L5102. Cherokee THE LIEN OF THE DEED OF TRUST BEING COLORAW as follows: the Board of County Commissloners, Plaza One PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, that the follow- C Ing proposed amendment to the Charter be sub- mend s/Rachel E. Richards, Mayor Aspen City Council FORECLOSED MAY NOT BE A FIRST LIEN. THEREFORE, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that I Section 1: Upon annexation of the Witz Property Into the Conference Room, 530 E. Main St.. Aspen to con- sider an application submitted by SBA, mRted to the q d electors Pitkin County pursuant to Section 8.1.1 of its Charter and Published in The Aspen Times on August 12, 71766) will at 10:00 o'clock A.M., oil the dale of September 13, 2000, at South Front Door of the City of Aspen, the Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be amended by the Inc./Wright & Preusch Mining, LTD, requesting approval for the construction a wireless C.R.S. §30.11-506, as a ballot question. SHALL THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC NO'nCF, PROPERTY ESTABLISHMENT OF R-30 rF Pitkin Count Courthouse, 5116 East Main SIreeL Y Aspen, Colorado, sell al public auction to file Community Development Director to reflect the Wilz property as Included in the Low-fensltY n telecommunications facility that Includes three 47 (apt poles with up to 10 antennae and associSTATE SALARIES BE INCREASED TO COMPLY WITHITZ STATUTORY STANDARDS? ZONING AND LOT SPLIT hearing highest and best bidder for cash, the real prop- erly descried above, and all interest of said Residential (R-30) Zone District. The Community Development Director shall use the aped round facilities. The property Is Located at the Smu ler Mine and is described as a parcel Copies of the entire Resolutionare avall- Ibhe for public Inspection at tree Clerk and NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public will be held on Monday, August 28. 20W at a Aspen Grantor, the heirs, successors and assigns lit said Granlor, for the purpose of paying the annexation plat survey description as Ilse basis for determining the zoning boundary. 88 of land sllualed In the EI/2 0l Section T, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 61h Recorder's Office, Jeanette Jones, at 530 Fast Main Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, during reg. meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. lodebledness provided In said evidence of debt and Deed of Trust, attorney's fees, and the Section 2: Ilse Witz Lot Split is approved, subject to the fop- PM. The application/resolution are available for ular business hours. Published In the Weekend Edition of The Aspen Galena St., Aspen, to establish the zoning of the Witz Property as Low penalty Residential (R30) expenses of sale, and will deliver to the pur- chaser a certificate of purchase, all as provided lowing conditions: 1. A Lot Spill Plat shall be recorded within 180 public Inspection In the Community Development Department, City Hall, 130 S. Times on August 12, 2000. (71778) and for a Lot Split In conjunction with its annex- ation Into the City of Aspen. Tree property Is by law Dale: July 25, 2100 days of the adoption dale of this Ordinance. The PlanubCommission and Zouing Comfission signature Galena St., Aspen CO 81611. For further Information, contact Gabe Preston at PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING cormnunly kuowu as the Witz Property and Is located at 705 N. Spruce Street and is described Thomas Carl Oken, Public Trustee County of Pftkin, Slate of Colorado area shall be removed from the proposed plat. The plat shall Indicate all easenieWs of record (970) 920-592. Jeanette Jones, Deputy County Clerk PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: as the Tract of Land In the C 1/4 portion of By: Carol L. Foote. Deputy Public Trustee and shall depict a new easement for the portion r Board of County Commissioners That the Board of County Commissinners Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 Went of First publlcatlnn dat,: July 29. 2n00 of the leant White Trail crossing the south west Published to The Aspen Times on August 12. of Pitkin County, Colorado will conduct a public the 6th PM, Pftkin County, Colorado. last publication dale: August 26. 2000 corner of the properly. The existing setback 2000. (7►773) hearing on the following Ordinance at 2:00 p.m. For further Information, contact Chris Bendon at Name of Publication: The Aspen Times easement on proposed Lot B shall be amended on the 23rd day of August, 2000. In the Pitkin ounty Board Meeting Room, 530 Fast Main ' type Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena SL, Aspen, CO (970) Pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act You are advised that the Law Office of P.C. Is deemed to be a debt to function for the life of the existing structure only. V PUBLIC NOTICE Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, a1 which time and place all members of the public may appear 920-5072 chrisb0cLaspen.coms. Michael P. Medved, collector attempting to collect a debt and any 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots In,,, con- Iv kxmance with the R-30 Zone District regulans RE: SBA/WOODY CREEK/HAM SPECIAL. REVIEW Send be heard: s/Rachel E. Richards, Mayor Aspen City Council hdormallon obtained will be used for that put- and shall Include the following plat notes: & 1041 HAZARD REVIEW (P69.00) NOTICE. IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY e COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, Published In The Aspen Times tin August 12, mice. �vne and address of attorneyfor owner of evi- • The existinghouse need not be demolished to the newly created tut boundaries accurate will be held September 2000 at regular COLORADO, ACCEPTING QUIT CLAIM DEED COLORADO, A PORTION OF SMUGGLER MOUNTAIN 2000. (71764) PUBLIC N0110E deuce of debt: Michael 1! Medved N14fiti9, TAW OFFICE Of MICI IAEL P. MEDVED. PC., 3aR) and lie encroachments Into the aide yards may encre continue to exist for the Life of the original strut- M o - imeling to begin al 3:(!0 PM or as soon there a after as the conduct of business allows, before ROAD FROM WRIGHT & PREUSCH MINING, LTD. ORDINANCE No. -2000 RE: ASPEN HIGHLANDS ESTABLISHMENT OF CITY ZONING & LAND USE CODE AMENDMENT Yomiglleld Street, Suite 155, Lakewood, CO W21.5, (303) 23SS569 tore only. Upon redevelopment, all structures on these two lots shall comply with the R-30 Zone tine Board of County Commissioners, Plaza One Conference Room, 530 E. Mahn SO., Aspen to con - _ RECITALS TO SECTION 26.710 EXHIBIT A District provisions with respect to the newly sitter an application submitted by SBA /John & . I. Pitkin County has Initiated an action In NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing A tract of land situated In the South one -hail of created lot boundaries and setbacks. Rita Ham, requesting approval for the conalruc- the United States District Court for the District will be held on Monday, August 28, 2000 at a the Northeast one -quarter of Section 29, • The developer of [.of A shall seek an exemp- tion of a wireless telecommunications facility, of Colorado, to determine the status of Smuggler meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Township 9 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth tion from GMQS pursuant to Section Including a 70 toot tower. The properly Is local - Mountain Road. Wright & Preusch Mining, Ltd. is City Council, Council Chambers, (:fly Hall, 130 S. Principal Meridian, being Tract No 6 of the 26.470.070(B), as amended from time to time. As ed at 26801 Highway 82 and is described as part a named Defendant In that action. Galena St., Aspen, to establish the zoning of Crystal River Estates, a subdivision, recorded fit Indicated by the applicant, In the application of Tracts 73 & 74 of Section 27 formerly 2. Wright & Preusch Mining, Ltd. has ten- Aspen Highlands Village In conjunction with its Pitkin County Courthouse as Document No. materials dated April, 2000. an ADD shall be described as the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4. and buts dered to the County a Quit Claim Deed for a annexation into the Cflyy of Aspen and a Code 140792 and more particularly described as lot- developed to meet this retftdrement• 5, 9, 13 and 14 of Section 27, Township 8 South, sixty fool (60') easement, being thirty feet (30) Amendment to Section 26.710, Zone Districts to lows: • The developer of tut B Is exempt from the Range 86 West of the 6th PM. The on either side of the centerline of Smuggler create a new Zone District pertaining to ski Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Tract Growth Management Quota System by virtue of appllcatlon/resolution are available for public Mountain Road as existing and In place. 3. Subdivision documents for Smuggler area/tourist accommodations/retail for the base area. The property Is commonly known as the Nip. 6 from whence the East one -quarter corner of said Section 29 bears South 5211'32" East, extinguishing a Transferable Development Right pursuant to Ordinance No _, Series of 2000. As inspection In the Community Development Department, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen Mine Subdivision Indicate a dedication of a sixty pool (60) easement for Smuggler Mountain Road gg Aspen Highlands Village and is located on Maroon Creek Road. 1,796.51 feel; thence North I7°40'00" East, 150.00 feel; IndiI also be d by lope applicant, a voluntary ADD may also be developed. CO 81611. For further Information, contact Brian McNellis from Wright &Preusch Mining, Ltd. to I'ilkln County. However, It appears that this easement For further Information, contact Joyce Chilton at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development St., Aspen, CO970) thence South 72°20'00" Fast, 300.92 feed; thence South 17'40'00" West, 150.00 reel; West, 300.92 leer to tlpe Additional development of these parcels, other [Inert for one single-family residence for at (970) 920.5099. Jeanette Jones, Deputy County Clerk ver recorded as only a an book and mber are shown on the final plat. DePertmenL 130 S. Galena P 92(Y5062, joyceo®cpse/gc .co.us• E. Richards, Mayor thence North 72'20'00" Of Beginnln �,y 29, August 5, each of the two Iola, shall require an amendment of this Lot Split approval and the necessary Board of Count Commissioners Y In The Aspen Times August 12, Acceptance of the Quit Claim Deed from p Wr t &Preusch Ltd. conch-P s/Rachel Aspen City Council Y Publi Published In The pen Times July 12, 19,'t6, 2000. (71317) growth management allolmenta. This Lot Split was approved pursuant to p PI P Published on • (71775) lionMining, Smuggler lions of subdivision for Smuggler Mine Published In The Aspen Times on August 12, 2000.(71765) PUBLIC NOTICE Ordinance No. _, Series of 2000. Subdivision. It also eliminates one party from the pending federal action over Smuggler PUBLIC NOTICE ORDINANCE NO. 31 (SERIES OF 2000) 3. The Lot Split Plat shall qualify as the Subdivision Exemption Agreement and satisfy- PUBLIC NOTICE $COPING STATEMENT Mountain Road. S. The legal description for the centerline NOTICE OF PUBLIC TRUSTEE SALE NO. 00.14 THIS NOTICE is given with regard to the AN ORDINANCE OF 771E CITY COUNCIL, OF THE lug the Agreement requirements of Section .030. Name Project reconstruction Williams lake Troll reconstruction of Smuggler Mountain Road does not designate descriptions for the segments of the road within Deed of Trust executed by MONTE V. ZECCOLA (grantor) on October 29. 1999, and recorded CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ZONING T11ERFSIDEN- WITZ PROPERTY TO THE N• 4. The two Iota shag contain one single-family 4. Th residence eosin, excluding Accessory Dwelling The The proposal to 3 of Williams.lake specific private property. It Is necessary to have a surveyor prepare an accurate legal descrip• October 29. 1999, at Reception No. 437180, In the records of County of Pitkin, Colorado, to secure DISTRLOW-ICT AND A PROM I IE (TZ ZONE DISTRICT AND APPROVING I'I IE IAA SPLIT 705 NORTII Unfits. S. Bulh lots do now have development orlon Secti�olrpu troll ball is within In Section 33 0l T. 9 ea R. 87 W. i The trail Is one mile In length and reached via tloo of only Ile portion of the road that Is being deeded to County by Quit Claim Deed. The cur- deeded to ROCKY MOUNTAIN MORTGAGE GROUP; INC. (A COLORADO CORP.), the payment of a SPRUCE S EET, CITY STREET, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COON- and shall comply with all applicable develop o the Hell Roaring ball near Capitol Peak trail - rent Quit Claim Deed contemplates obtaining a promissory Note of even date therewith In tree Ty,COL WHEREAS, the Community Development tuent regulations prior to applying (or building 8 P 8 permits, Includingthose regulations related to head. The trail Is within the Maroon Wife - Wilderness. specific surveyed legal description subsequent pe Y 8 P di to acceptance of this feed and recording a 8 principal al amount of NOTIFIED original Y ARE THAT YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED T►TAT ROCKY Department received ail application from Witz Property, LLC, Camilla Au Auger, Mana In Partner, 8 8 8 esidential Design Standards, Assessor Y Management Proposed work beyond heavy maintenance la P• Correction Quit Claim Deed when the descrlthe tion is completed. MOUNTAIN MORTGAGE GROUP, INC. (A COI, ORADO CORP.), 198 Union Blvd., Suite '200, owuer and appllcanl, for a tut Spilt on a parcel Units, Growth , Faeem flora, and 8040 Greenline Review. Ex a Exemptions, p 800 construction of tour reroutes totaling St)O lln- the construction tools and techniques ear feet. Allaccordance NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED: Lakewood, CO 80228, as the owner of the evi- of land known as the Witz Property, located at 70S North Spruce Street parcel No. 2737a171-04 6. The applicant shall provide evidence of title to Transferable Development Right refer- Fe Se will be In accordance with Forest Service colic with Y I. That the Quit Claim Deed from Wright & Q 8 Preusch Mining, Ltd. to Pllkln Count Is accept- 8 Y P dense of debt which Is secured b the Deed of y Trust described above, has filed written election Intended to be divided Into two develop one enced herein to the satisfaction of the Cityof n llpe use of minimum tools within Wilderness. The Decision ed and that chair is authorized to sign the Deed and demand for sale as provided in said Deed of me and, CityAttorney. mend WHEREAS, the applicant has the WH The male is whether or not to lit and any other documents necessary to finalize this transaction, after approval of the form of PP Trust. The outstanding principal balance due and owing upon the evidence of debt secured by said yeti has of Aspen for annexation and said Coulon has spent been accepted by the Aspen City Council. All Section 3: Upon filing of a tut Spill Plat, the referenced construct tie proposed reroutes. tract p p NEPA Documentation and Decision Document such documents by the County Attorney. said Deed of Trust being foreclosed Is $2,260.42, development approvals set forth herein are sub- Transferable Development Rights owned by the The analysts for this proposal may quality for 2. That staff Is authorized to have the sur- veyor prepare a surveyed legal description of as of July 13, 2000. The real property beingforeclosed Is all of p y jest v annexation and shalt be considered null and void If floe properly is not. arr�ex,d Into the applicant and identified in Pllkln County records as reception no. _shall to considered epAlo- I categorical exclusion from documentation In an Environmental Impact or an Environmental th !asement conv et] b the Qult Claim Deed. ey y Upon the level the property encumbered by said Deed of Trust, described follows: City of Aspen; and, Colorado Revised gulsised and void. Section 4: Assessment. unless scoping Indicates exlraordt- receipt of surveyed lion, a Correction Quit Claim Deed shall and is as CONDOMINIUM UNIT 7, WINFIELD ARMS CON- WHEREAS, pursuant to Statutes annexation procedures, newly annexed All material representations and commitments nary circumstances, under Chief of the Forest category 3ral Nl• ConFtr and pared and the Chair Is specifically autho- rized to execute the Correction Quit Claim Deed DOMINIUMS, AS DEFINED AND DESCRIBED IN THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATIONS FOR WIN- property must be assigned to a Zone District within 90 days of annexation and the City of made by the developer pursuant to the develop- merit proposal approvals as herein awarded, reconsService Forest S tzells. (ref. Forest Service and any other documents necessary to finalize this transaction. after approval of the form of FIELD ARMS CONDOMINIUMS. RECORDED NOV. 9,1993, BOOK 456, PAGE 387 AND ACCORDING Aspen has historically administered this as a "rezoning" application and whether In public hearing or documentation before the Aspen City Council, are Handbook 1909.15, Ch 30, al 31.2). If documen- Handbook 190tion 15 tatlon of the NEPA analysis may be categorically such documents by the County Attorney. TO THE CONDOMINIUM MAP THEREOF FILED process processed a City initialed application according presented hereby Incorporated In such plan development excluded under this category, a Project File must be and the decision would be INTRODUCED, FIRST READ, AND SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 9th DAY OF AUGUST, FOR RECORD NOVEMBER 9,1983 IN PLAT BOOK 15 AT PAGE 59. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF to the requirements set forth In Section 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and, approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by prepared made In a Decision Memo. 2000. ' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED COLORADO. Which has the address of 119 E. Cooper, Unit 7, Aspen, CO 81611 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, after a recommends- other specific conditions. Sectloo S: The analysis may need to he documented In an Environmental Assessment (FA). In that case, IN THE WEEKEND EDITION OF THE ASPEN TIMES ON 12th DAY OF AUGUST, 2000. THE LIEN OF THE DEED OF TRUST BEING FORECLOSED MAY NOT BE A FIRST LIEN. The then by the Community Development tut- gatlThinand nr! shall mA to as any abatement gallon and shall not operate as an abatement of fret more I!n h FA rocs w„uld tie lolkrw!A, in Y V Notice. to a r,tclslnn A,,currtended fo a D►aldrxs APPROVED UPON SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 23rd DAY OF AUGUST, current or purported owner of the property ls: MONTE V. ZECCOLA Planning and Zoning Commission madeduringa any action or proceeding now pending under or duly noticed public hearing, and the comments fry virtue of the ordinances repealer] or amend- Addhkrseal Informselfoa 2000. THEREFORE, NOT'TCE IS HEREBY GIVEN made by the general public, the City Council as herein provided, and the same shall be Persons desiring additional Information on this PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION IN THE that I will at 1Q00 A.M. on the dale M September may approve or deny an application for c,,n and f.ImCL11AM1 under loci prior ro rsal are encana ed to call And Steele, gAppen WEEKEND EDITION OF THE ASPEN TIMES ON 13, 2000. at the south hold door of the Pilkin Rez,xting lased tire lie criteria that are set [,,role rkanceurled ordhwrues. Pr„ rt Manager, al Ranq!ryMstrict THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2000. County Courthouse. 506 E. Main, Aspen, in said Section; and. Copies of the entire Ordinance are available for Colorado 8161 I, sell al public auction to the WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.480.030 of the Section 6: II sentence, clause, (970/4253445). Caet>«nta noble inspection at the Clem and Recorder's highest and bat bidder for cash. the real prop.- City dA Aspen land tree Cede, alter crmsldering by the Community any section, suhaertirm, phrase, or p urt)on d this Ordinance is for any Please submit wrltteri uxnm!nta in,. District Office, Jeanette Jones, at S30 Fist Main Street, , erty described above, and all Interest of said a recommendation Aspen, Colorado 81611, during regular Dullness grantor, his heirs, successor and assigns, (or Lev I ment Department and the rnmmenis reaarxi held invalid nr unconstitutional In a Ranger, Aspen Ranger Dlstrlet, Attn. Andy City (:,,un.tl errt ,A ,omprt!nt ptAa,iktlrxp, uxh prnrtlnn 5kalle R06p Wesl Ilallsm St.. Aspen ,2WI Itcxrn, the of laying live Indebtedness mark fly rite genital VIIAk. 11v. t10, t �aK� k� Aspen •�'r Au�tt12 •fir Published M the weekend edition of The Alpert et] 1^ sad nmte and Deed of Trust, Attorneys may appprove, approve with cord0lons. or deny shall be deemed a upuate. dislMpct and trade- Published Times on August 12. 2000. (7177T) foes, and expenses of safe. and will deliver to the a Subdivision Exemption application for tut 1 i County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS State of Colorado } SECTION 26.304.060(E) I K LP" �� ���A ,being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the IS day of Porx"a , 200 a (which is t3 days prior to the public hearing date of 4I`Zg1 p9 ). 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the VL day of N"1"k , 200 0 , to the 2-1,6' day of hl)-47 , 200a . (Must be posted for at least ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. Signature (Attach photograph here) Signed before me this \1 day of C� , 200 v . by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My Commission expires: - a-\ - �\ Notary Public �� PUBLIC NOTICE RE: WITZ PROPERTY ESTABLISHMENT OF R-30 CITY ZONING AND LOT SPLIT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, August 28, 2000 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to establish the zoning of the Witz Property as Low Density Residential (R- 30) and for a Lot Split in conjunction with its annexation into the City of Aspen. The property is commonly known as the Witz Property and is located at 705 N. Spruce Street and is described as the Tract of Land in the C t/4 portion of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6`h PM, Pitkin County, Colorado . For further information, contact Chris Bendon at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5072, chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Rachel E. Richards, Mayor Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on August 12, 2000 City of Aspen Account G:/planning/aspen/notices/moorerezone.doc • • AUGER RAYMOND N & CAMILLA 709 N SPRUCE ST ASPEN, CO 81611 BIENKOWSKI ENRIQUE ALBERS KATHLEEN AS JOINT TENANTS PO BOX 8094 ASPEN, CO 81612 BALDERSON HERBERT P 1/2 INT BALDERSON MARTHA N 1/2 INT 708 SPRUCE ST ASPEN, CO 81611 BRAUNIG MARTHA J PO BOX 761 ASPEN, CO 81612 BARROW JUSTIN & AMY 325 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 CARNEY TIMOTHY J PO BOX 12190 ASPEN, CO 81612 CARROLL TWILA CLAYTON DOUGLAS W CRAWFORD PATRICIA C 314 TEAL CT MEDLIN MELINDA M AS JT TENANTS 412 TEAL CT #Q-104 ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 8813 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 CURRY CHARLES T DANFORTH ALISON C DEWOLFE DANIEL G PO BOX 8150 PO BOX 3763 502 WILLIAMS WAY ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 DRISCOLL JOE & REBECCA ERICKSON THOMAS W & CHERYL L FERGUSON ROBIN PATRICIA PO BOX 9995 210 TEAL CT PO BOX 2691 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 FORSEILLE JULIA S FRANCIS LESLEE K & ROBERT A FRIEDLAND MARK & HUNTER 315 TEAL CT 226 TEAL CT 387 SILVERLODE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2548 GANCSOS JOHN MARTIN GOKEY REED GOLLNER HERMANN ANDERSON MARILYN 327 TEAL CT 421 TEAL CT 223 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611-3256 ASPEN, CO 81611-1566 ASPEN. CO 81611-3262 GREENE JEFFREY E & KAREN GRINSTEAD LAURA L HARRISON RUTH REV TRUST BLOMQUIST HULEY MARC J PO BOX 2704 PO BOX 152 317 TEAL COURT ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 HINES SUSANNE HOGUE CAROLINE HOPKINS TRACY A 207 STEWART DR 101 WILLIAMS WAY #C302 400 SILVERLODE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 INNES JENNY A KENNAMER SANDRA KESSLER DIANE & CHUCK 1240 E COOPER AVE PO BOX 11947 420 TEAL CT #Q206 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-1566 KILLIAN LINDA H KINNEY MAUREEN MARY KINSMAN DINAH LEE 328 TEAL CT PO BOX 374 101 WILLIAMS WY #204D ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 KNUTSON BRUCE C & LISA LEDDY THOMAS A LEVERSON JANET V 104 WILLIAM WY #E104 704 SPRUCE ST 221 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 LEWITZ CECIL & NANCY LINEHAN RAMONA J LUTGRING TAZ MARIE 711 SPRUCE ST PO BOX 12258 PO BOX 11392 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 MAC DONALD CHRISTOPHER H MACBLANE EDWARD J JR MACKAY SANDRA L 301 WILLIAMS WAY 217 TEAL CT 423 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-1566 MARQUIS JANET L MARTIN MICHAEL C & CECELIA K MATTHEWS NANCY ANN PO BOX 2712 203 D3 WILLIAMS WAY PO BOX 1370 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 MCWILLIAMS TONI MINK KATHLEEN MORAN JAMES T AND MARY 319 TEAL COURT 224 TEAL CT 688 SPRUCE ST ASPEN, CO 81611-1568 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEVIN JOSEPH P & NANCY B NHL II LLC O'DRISCOLL KEVIN 415 SILVERLODE DR 295 SILVERLODE DR DRISCOLL JOSEPH ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 9995 ASPEN, CO 81612 OTTE GAIL D PARIS JOHN H PARKER ANNE LISE 329 TEAL CT 3200 SANTA MONICA BLVD #204 410 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 SANTA MONICA, CA 90404 ASPEN, CO 81611 PIERRE SALLY ANN PITKIN COUNTY PORATH FAMILY TRUST 101 WILLIAMS WAY 530 E MAIN ST STE 302 12400 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 1450 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 PRZYBYLSKI ALBERT L ROSENBERG CHARLES WILLIAM RYERSON LOREN & AMY 312 TEAL CT ROSENBERG JANICE MARY 501 WILLIAMS WAY ASPEN, CO 81611 322 TEAL COURT ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 0 • SANDBERG KATHARINE A 202 WILLIAMS WAY ASPEN. CO 81611 SCHUTTER NANCY PO BOX 11613 ASPEN, CO 81612 SMITH KENNETH M PO BOX 11334 ASPEN, CO 81612 STEWART CHRISTOPHER W 422 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 VERNIER JULIE & JOSEPH 504 WILLIAMS WAY ASPEN, CO 81611 WILLIAMS RANCH JOINT VENTURE C/O MARK IV INC 3214 CAMPANIL DR SANTA BARBARA, CA 93109 WINGERS JIM PO BOX 1530 ASPEN, CO 81612 ZUEHLKE WILLIAM M PO BOX 806 ASPEN, CO 81612 SCHATZ FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST PO BOX 9920 RANCHO SANTA FE, CA 92067 SCOTT WENDY E PO BOX 2213 ASPEN, CO 81612 SOYKA FREDERICK K HOBAN SONYA L 326 TEAL COURT ASPEN, CO 81611 TIMROTH ALBERT & DONNA PO BOX 89 ASPEN, CO 81612 WHEELER PATRICIA A WHEELER KEITH A AS JT TENANTS PO BOX 3513 ASPEN, CO 81612 WILLIAMS WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC C/O OATES HUGHES & KNEZEVITCH 533 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 WITZ PROPERTY LLC 709 S SPRUCE ST ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHEMBRI MARY ELLEN PO BOX 8866 ASPEN, CO 81612 SKARVAN ERIK 215 FREE SILVER ASPEN, CO 81611 STACHOWSKI KIMBERLY A PO BOX 28292 EL JEBEL, CO 81628 TOMASZCZYK CHET 420 SILVERLODE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 WHITE LANI N PO BOX 1033 ASPEN, CO 81612 WILSON DOUGLAS L & BEDRISHAH PO BOX 10092 ASPEN, CO 81612 ZACHARY MARC PO BOX 4494 ASPEN. CO 81611 PETITION FOR ANNEXATION COMES NOW LANDOWNER Witz Property LLC, this Aay of March, 2000, to Petition the City of Aspen, Colorado for Annexation of that certain parcel of land as described on Exhibit A, and as shown on the Annexation Map filed herewith. Landowner states as follows: 1. It is desirable and necessary that the subject parcel be annexed to the City of Aspen. 2. The requirements of Section 31-12-104 Colorado Revised Statutes exist or have been met in that: a. A community of interest exists between the territory proposed to be annexed and the City of Aspen, Colorado; and b. The territory proposed to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in the near future and is capable of being integrated with the City of Aspen, Colorado; 3. The requirements of Section 31-12-105 Colorado Revised Statutes exist or have been met in that no land held in identical ownership, whether consisting of one tract or parcel of real estate or two or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate: a. Is divided into separate parts or parcels without the written consent of the landowner thereof, unless such tracts or parcels are separated by a dedicated street, road or other public way; b. Is included within the territory proposed to be annexed without the written consent of the landowner that: (1) comprises twenty acres or, (2) has an assessed value for the land, together with the buildings and improvements situated thereon, in excess of $200,000 for ad valorem tax purposes for the year preceding the annexation; or C. Is more than three miles from any point on the municipal boundary, as such was established more than one year before this annexation will take place. 4. The area proposed to be annexed comprises fewer than ten acres of land, so an annexation impact report is not required. 5. The signer of the petition is the landowner of one hundred percent of the territory included in the area to be annexed, exclusive of streets and alleys. 6. Petitioner requests that the City of Aspen approve the proposed annexation by ordinance, as permitted by Section 31-12-107 (1)(g) Colorado Revised Statutes when one hundred percent of the owners of the area have petitioned for such annexation. 7. The full legal description of the proposed area of annexation is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 8. The mailing addresses of the owner of the proposed area of annexation is: Camilla Auger, Managing Partner Witz Property LLC 709 North Spruce Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 9. Accompanying this petition are four prints of the annexation map containing (a) a written legal description of the boundaries of the area proposed to be annexed; and (b) a depiction of: (1) the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed, (2) the municipal boundaries of the City of Aspen, and (3) the dimensions of the contiguous portions of these two boundaries. 10. The territory to be annexed is not presently a part of any incorporated city, city and county, or town. Cam, u. S . �-- Petitioner: Witz Property LLC (date) Camilla Auger, Managing Partner STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this ag"6-day of March, 2000 by Camilla Auger. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires Notary Public MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Deve_1Qpment Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director t� FROM: Chris Bendon, Senior Planner RE: Witz Property — 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2000. Initial Zoning Lot Split DATE: August 28, 2000 SUMMARY: The applicant, Witz Property, LLC, has submitted a petition for annexation into the City of Aspen and the petition has been accepted by the City Council as complete. The annexation process now requires a determination by City Council on the merits of annexing the property and that step will be administered via a separate Ordinance. As part of annexation, the City of Aspen is required to assign new property to an appropriate zone district. This initial zoning is a process originated by City staff, although applicants often follow the process and supply analysis as needed. In this case, the applicant has submitted analysis supporting the designation of this land as Low Density Residential (R-30). Based on staff analysis and the supporting information provided by the applicant, this R-30 designation is the most appropriate for this area of town and the most congruent with the existing R-30 designation in Pitkin County. Both staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission (7-0 vote) recommend this parcel be included in the R-30 Zone District, upon annexation. This application also includes a request to split the property into two development parcels via the City's Lot Split process. This is a process administered by the City Council and does not require an action by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Lot Split application meets all necassary requirements, subject to the recommended conditions of approval. Through a slight oddity in the Land Use Code, any parcel within the City may be split but only those within the Original Townsite are eligible for a GMQS exemption on the newly created lot. In order to gain a development right and a GMQS exemption on this non-Townsite land, the applicant intends to dispose of a Transferable Development Right (TDR) created from the Smuggler Mobile Home Park. The proposed Ordinance documents the disposal of this TDR. Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No 31, Series of 2000. MAIN ISSUES: Community Benefit: This project includes a request to annex into the City of Aspen. As such, there are certain actions necessary by the City Council in their legislative authority in which the Planning Department has little involvement. By virtue of the property being annexed into the City of Aspen, the City has more control over certain aspects of the development such as requiring affordable housing mitigation for replacement after demolition, more effective standards for site and house design, and more strict standards for drainage. In addition, the applicant has enumerated a series of community benefits to annexing this property, attached as Exhibit B. While these items are not all directly associated with the judicial responsibilities of the Lot Split review, these benefits should be considered in the overall picture of this project and the merits of annexation. In general, planning staff considers this package of community benefits to be much greater than with other annexations. Zoning: The annexation process includes a requirement that the newly acquired land be assigned to a Zone District. This is a staff function, however, applicants are typically very interested in the expected outcome of the zoning process. In fact, many annexation petitions are not finalized by the applicant until all requisite land use actions are approved, subject to annexation. In this manner, the applicant can evaluate the merits of finalizing the annexation. This property is currently within Pitkin County's "Suburban Density Residential" (R- 30) Zone District. The most similar City Zone District is the "Low -Density Residential" (R-30) Zone District. The minimum parcel size is 30,000 square feet. This City Zone District allows for single-family and duplex development by right. A table comparing the respective allowable floor areas in included under the heading "Floor Area." This area of town is essentially a transition from the high -density developments of Hunter Creek Condominiums and Centennial, the medium density development of Williams Ranch, and the rural -density areas of Smuggler Mountain and the Hunter Creek Valley on the edge of the Forest Service land. The immediate surrounding properties have been developed in either Pitkin County's R-30 zoning or in the City's more intensive R-15 and AH-PUD zoning. The Williams Ranch free-market lots have similar development allowances as the City's R-15 Zone District. The R-30 designation is the most compatible with the Pitkin County zoning, the surrounding area and its transition from high to low density, and the nature of the immediate area. The P&Z Commission reviewed this proposed zoning and recommended approval by a seven to zero (7-0) vote. Staff recommends the application of R-30 zoning to this parcel, upon annexation. Lot Split: Both the City and the County have a lot split exemption from Subdivision. Although the two processes differ, the differences are not germane to this property and the end 2 result is identical regardless of the jurisdiction. In either jurisdiction, the property may be split but the newly created lot is not eligible for an exemption from GMQS, hence the TDR. The County has a well established TDR system that allows for an exemption from growth management in this circumstance. The City does not a have a current TDR system although there exist fully transferable development rights that can be used within the City Boundaries. These City TDR's were the result of the Smuggler Mobile Home Park buy down and were legally created. These City TDR's explicitly grant a full exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for one free market residence each. The applicant has acquired one of these City TDR's and is intending to extinguish the right in order to gain a GQMS exemption. Because there is no specific process outlined in the Land Use Code for "landing" a TDR, the proposed Ordinance documents this action. The Lot Split criteria are essentially objective findings of fact rather than more typical evaluative criteria of most land use reviews. This "checklist" requires the property not be located in a subdivision, is large enough to be split, has not be previously split, won't be split again, is subject to Growth Management, that no more than three residences be developed in total, and that a proper plat be recorded to document the split. The application meets these first three criteria and the Ordinance documents the GMQS exemption, via the TDR, and requires a plat be recorded which indicates no further subdivision is allowed and limits the two parcels to containing three residences in total. Floor Area. Many of the questions raised by neighbors in the Commission hearing dealt with the potential house sizes in the City versus the County. This is a not a criteria of Lot Split although the information may be helpful in understanding the merits of annexation. Generally, if one house were developed it could be larger in the County than in the City. If two houses are developed, the houses could be larger in the City than in the County. This is due to the City's "sliding scale" FAR as opposed to the County's straight scale for FAR. Floor Area Comparison (Allowable Square footage) One House (w/o Lot Split) Proposed Lot A Proposed Lot B City of Aspen Pitkin County 6,973 8,925 5,631 4,401 5,688 4,524 Important in reviewing this table is that the applicant is allowed to split the lot in both the City and the County 8040 Greenline Review: 8040 Greenline Reviews consider both the technical aspects of development (geotechnical data, ground stability, ability for the property to be served by utilities) and aesthetic aspects of development (architecture, house size, exterior materials, revegetation plans). The 8040 jurisdiction is based upon the 8,040 foot elevation, including all properties within 150 feet (horizontally) of the line, and the review is administered by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Because the rezoning process requires a P&Z hearing, staff encouraged the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider the general suitability of development on this land through an "initial" 8040 Greenline Review (and subject to final). Staff believed the Commission's contribution would avoid future problems determining the best methods of development and would help inform Council on the general development parameters of the property. The Commission chose not to consider an "initial" 8040 and no building envelopes or development guidelines have been established as of yet. The 8040 Greenline Review will be required prior to development on both of the proposed lots. Drainage. There has been concern raised about the existing drainage situation in the North Spruce Street area and the best method of dealing with the issue. It is important to note that drainage is a criteria of the Planning and Zoning Commission 8040 Greenline Review and not part of zoning or Lot Split. However, drainage concerns may be considered in the annexation process. After visiting the site, the City Engineer has determined that the large drainage basin above the North Spruce Street neighborhood does not actually drain through the Witz property and is accommodated through the Williams Ranch PUD. This leaves the more common drainage condition of mitigating for increased impermeable surface areas such as roofs and decks. The last drainage issue relates to the manner in which surface drainage along North Spruce Street should be conveyed. This could be accomplished with a curb and gutter typical of more urbanized areas of town. Staff believes this area should remain rural in nature and urban treatments, such as curb and gutter, are inappropriate from a character perspective. There are many viable methods of treating drainage with less urban solutions such as drainage swales that could be utilized. These methods have been successful in other similar mountain towns and have been used in a few Aspen developments, notably the Williams Ranch PUD and the un-built Barbee PUD. Staff believes urban drainage solutions such as curb and gutter should not be used in this location if the applicant is willing to develop an alternative drainage swale. Jay Hammond, Schmueser Gordon Meyer Engineers, in consultation with the neighbor has recently developed a drainage plan that responds to the functional and aesthetic concerns noted above. APPLICANT: Witz Property, LLC. Camilla Auger, Managing Partner. Represented by Alan Richman, Alan Richman Planning Services. U LOCATION: 705 North Spruce Street. See attached location map. A petition to annex the property has been accepted by the City of Aspen. ZONING: Pitkin County Zoning: Suburban Density Residential (R-30). Proposed City of Aspen Zoning: Low -Density Residential (R-30). LOT SIZE: 1.8 acres. 78,046 square feet. CURRENT LAND USE: Single -Family house PROPOSED LAND USE: Two single-family homes with ADU's after a Lot Split. PREVIOUS ACTION: The Council passed this Ordinance, upon first reading, on June 26, 2000. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Initial Zoning. City Council shall, by Ordinance, approve or deny the application for initial zoning at a public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission made during a public hearing. Lot Split. City Council shall, by Ordinance, approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application for Lot Split at a public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Director. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff has comments on several "main issues" about this development in general. Information provided on Floor Areas, Drainage, and the 8040 Greenline Review process are not criteria of the zoning or Lot Split processes. This information is merely being provided to clarify many questions that are bound to be raised by neighbors. This additional information can be used in determining the merits of annexation, where the Council has greater legislative flexibility and the ability to include certain provisions in an annexation agreement. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." A letter from the applicant has been included as Exhibit `B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend City Council adopt Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2000. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance No 31, Series of 2000." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Letter from Applicant Exhibit C -- Development Application C:\iiomE\Cms\CASES\Wrrz\CCMEM02.DOC 2 MEMORANDUM ci TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: Chris Bendon, Senior Planner RE: Witz Property —1st Reading of Ordinance No., Series of 2000. Initial Zoning Lot Split DATE: July 24, 2000 SUMMARY: The applicant, Witz Property, LLC, has submitted a petition for annexation into the City of Aspen and the petition has been accepted by the City Council as complete. The annexation process now requires a determination by City Council on the merits of annexing the property and that step will be administered via a separate Ordinance. As part of annexation, the City of Aspen is required to assign new property to an appropriate zone district. This initial zoning is a process originated by City staff, although applicants often follow the process and supply analysis as needed. In this case, the applicant has submitted analysis supporting the designation of this land as Low Density Residential (R-30). Based on staff analysis and the supporting information provided by the applicant, this R-30 designation is the most appropriate for this area of town and the most congruent with the existing R-30 designation in Pitkin County. Both staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend this parcel be included in the R-30 Zone District, upon annexation. This application also includes a request to split the property into two development parcels via the City's Lot Split process. This is a process administered by the City Council and does not require an action by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Lot Split application meets all necassary requirements, subject to the recommended conditions of approval. Through a slight oddity in the Land Use Code, any parcel within the City may be split but only those within the Original Townsite are eligible for a GMQS exemption on the newly created lot. In order to gain a development right and a GMQS exemption on this non-Townsite land, the applicant intends to dispose of a Transferable Development Right (TDR) created from the Smuggler Mobile Home Park. The proposed Ordinance documents the disposal of this TDR. Staff recommends Ordinance No �1-1 Series of 2000, be adopted upon first reading. • • MAIN ISSUES: Community Benefit: This project includes a request to annex into the City of Aspen. As such, there are certain actions necessary by the City Council in their legislative authority in which the Planning Department has little involvement. By virtue of the property being annexed into the City of Aspen, the City has more control over certain aspects of the development such as requiring affordable housing mitigation for replacement after demolition, more effective standards for site and house design, and more strict standards for drainage. In addition, the applicant has enumerated a series of community benefits to annexing this property, attached as Exhibit B. While these items are not all directly associated with the judicial responsibilities of the Lot Split review, these benefits should be considered in the overall picture of this project and the merits of annexation. In general, planning staff considers this package of community benefits to be much greater than with other annexations. Zoning: The annexation process includes a requirement that the newly acquired land be assigned to a Zone District. This is a staff function, however, applicants are typically very interested in the expected outcome of the zoning process. In fact, many annexation petitions are not finalized by the applicant until all requisite land use actions are approved, subject to annexation. In this manner, the applicant can evaluate the merits of finalizing the annexation. This property is currently within Pitkin County's "Suburban Density Residential" (R- 30) Zone District. The most similar City Zone District is the "Low -Density Residential" (R-30) Zone District. The minimum parcel size is 30,000 square feet. This City Zone District allows for single-family and duplex development by right. A table comparing the respective allowable floor areas in included under the heading "Floor Area." This area of town is essentially a transition from the high -density developments of Hunter Creek Condominiums and Centennial, the medium density development of Williams Ranch, and the rural -density areas of Smuggler Mountain and the Hunter Creek Valley on the edge of the Forest Service land. The immediate surrounding properties have been developed in either Pitkin County's R-30 zoning or in the City's more intensive R-15 and AH-PUD zoning. The Williams Ranch free-market lots have similar development allowances as the City's R-15 Zone District. The R-30 designation is the most compatible with the Pitkin County zoning, the surrounding area and its transition from high to low density, and the nature of the immediate area. Staff recommends the application of R-30 zoning to this parcel, upon annexation. Lot Split: Both the City and the County have a lot split exemption from Subdivision. Although the two processes differ, the differences are not germane to this property and the end result is identical regardless of the jurisdiction. In either jurisdiction, the property 2 may be split but the newly created lot is not eligible for an exemption from GMQS, hence the TDR. The County has a well established TDR system that allows for an exemption from growth management in this circumstance. The City does not a have a current TDR system although there exist fully transferable development rights that can be used within the City Boundaries. These City TDR's were the result of the Smuggler Mobile Home Park buy down and were legally created. These City TDR's explicitly grant a full exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for one free market residence each. The applicant has aquired one of these City TDR's and is intending to extinguish the right in order to gain a GQMS exemption. Because there is no specific process outlined in the Land Use Code for "landing" a TDR, the proposed Ordinance documents this action. The Lot Split criteria are essentially objective findings of fact rather than more typical evaluative criteria of most land use reviews. This "checklist" requires the property not be located in a subdivision, is large enough to be split, has not be previously split, won't be split again, is subject to Growth Management, that no more than three residences be developed in total, and that a proper plat be recorded to document the split. The application meets these first three criteria and the Ordinance documents the GMQS exemption, via the TDR, and requires a plat be recorded which indicates no further subdivision is allowed and limits the two parcels to containing three residences in total. Floor Area. Many of the questions raised by neighbors in the Commission hearing dealt with the potential house sizes in the City versus the County. This is a not a criteria of Lot Split although the information may be helpful in understanding the merits of annexation. Generally, if one house were developed it could be larger in the County than in the City. If two houses are developed, the houses could be larger in the City than in the County. This is due to the City's "sliding scale" FAR as opposed to the County's straight scale for FAR. Floor Area Comparison (Allowable Square footage) One House (w/o Lot Split) Proposed Lot A Proposed Lot B City of Aspen Pitkin County 6,973 8,925 5,631 4,401 5,688 4,524 Important in reviewing this table is that the applicant is allowed to split the lot in both the City and the County 8040 Greenline Review: 8040 Greenline Reviews consider both the technical aspects of development (geotechnical data, ground stability, ability for the property to be served by utilities) 3 and aesthetic aspects of development (architecture, house size, exterior materials, revegetation plans). The 8040 jurisdiction is based upon the 8,040 foot elevation, including all properties within 150 feet (horizontally) of the line, and the review is administered by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 8040 Greenline Review is not part of the City Council's authority. Because the rezoning process requires a P&Z hearing, staff encouraged the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider the general suitability of development on this land through an "initial" 8040 Greenline Review (and subject to final). Staff believed the Commission's contribution would avoid future problems determining the best methods of development and would help inform Council on the general development parameters of the property. The Commission chose not to consider an "initial" 8040 and no building envelopes or development guidelines have been established as of yet. The 8040 Greenline Review will be required prior to development on both of the proposed lots. Drainage. There has been concern raised about the existing drainage situation in the North Spruce Street area and the best method of dealing with the issue. It is important to note that drainage is a criteria of the Planning and Zoning Commission 8040 Greenline Review and not part of zoning or Lot Split. However, drainage concerns may be considered in the annexation process. After visiting the site, the City Engineer has determined that the large drainage basin above the North Spruce Street neighborhood does not actually drain through the Witz property and is accommodated through the Williams Ranch PUD. This leaves the more common drainage condition of mitigating for increased impermeable surface areas such as roofs and decks. The last drainage issue relates to the manner in which surface drainage along North Spruce Street should be conveyed. This could be accomplished with a curb and gutter typical of more urbanized areas of town. Staff believes this area should remain rural in nature and urban treatments, such as curb and gutter, are inappropriate from a character perspective. There are many viable methods of treating drainage with less urban solutions such as drainage swales that could be utilized. These methods have been successful in other similar mountain towns and have been used in a few Aspen developments, notably the Williams Ranch PUD and the un-built Barbee PUD. Staff believes urban drainage solutions such as curb and gutter should not be used in this location if the applicant is willing to develop an alternative drainage swale. The applicant has recently developed a drainage plan that responds to the aesthetic concerns noted above and to the concerns of a downstream neighbor. APPLICANT: Witz Property, LLC. Camilla Auger, Managing Partner. Represented by Alan Richman, Alan Richman Planning Services. 4 • L_..] LOCATION: 705 North Spruce Street. See attached location map. A petition to annex the property has been accepted by the City of Aspen. ZONING: Pitkin County Zoning: Suburban Density Residential (R-30). Proposed City of Aspen Zoning: Low -Density Residential (R-30). LOT SIZE: 1.8 acres. 78,046 square feet. CURRENT LAND USE: Single -Family house PROPOSED LAND USE: Two single-family homes with ADU's after a Lot Split. PREVIOUS ACTION: The Council has not previously considered this application. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Initial Zoning. City Council shall, by Ordinance, approve or deny the application for initial zoning at a public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission made during a public hearing. Lot Split. City Council shall, by Ordinance, approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application for Lot Split at a public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Director. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff has comments on several "main issues" about this development in general. Information provided on Floor Areas, Drainage, and the 8040 Grenline Review process are not criteria of the zoning or Lot Split processes. This information is merely being provided to clarify many questions that are bound to be raised by neighbors. This additional information can be used in determining the merits of annexation, where the Council has greater legislative flexibility and the ability to include certain provisions in an annexation agreement. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." A letter from the applicant has been included as Exhibit "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend City Council adopt Ordinance No. 31 , Series of 2000, upon first reading, and schedule second reading for Augusty�, 2000. � Zg 5 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: 3 "I move to adopt Ordinance No 1 ,Series of 2000, upon first reading." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Letter from Applicant Exhibit C -- Development Application C:\HoNE\CHRis\CASES\WITZ\CCMEMOI.DOC is\CASES\WiTz\CCMEMO1.DOC R Exhibit A Witz Property Staff Comments: Rezoning Section 26.310.020, Standards Applicable to Rezoning In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed Low Density Residential (R-30) Zone District is compatible with other portions of the Land Use Code and with the Municipal Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: The AACP does not directly address this parcel. This parcel is within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) which generally preserves open space and discourages sprawl in areas not part of, or adjacent to, the urbanized areas of Aspen. The zoning proposed for this site largely reflects the Pitkin County zoning and does not represent a significant change in the amount of allowed development. In other words, staff does not believe the application of City zoning represents either an "up -zoning" or a "down -zoning" in the traditional sense, but rather a status quo. Staff believes this R-30 zoning to be the most consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The parcel in question and the immediate North Spruce Neighborhood represents a transition zone from the more densely developed Williams Ranch and Centennial Condominiums area and the rural areas of Smuggler Mountain and the Hunter Creek Valley. This neighborhood is essentially the last area of semi -urban development at the base of Smuggler Mountain. The neighborhood characteristic is modeled after this R-30 zoning and the City has proactively encouraged re -developing parcels to adhere to the more restrictive City R-30 zoning through water service agreements. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Witz Exhibit A Page 1 Staff Finding: The application of the City's R-30 zoning is the least dense City zoning that can be applied without creating an illegal non -conformity. The zoning does not necessarily allow for a greater amount of development, as the County has a similar process for creating tow development parcels. The maximum three units that are allowed through the City Lot Split process (a single-family and a duplex) will not over capacitate the road system and is not expected to create an unsafe traffic situation. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The proposed City R-30 zoning represents a development potential similar to that allowed for in Pitkin County's R-30 zoning. The utility and infrastructure needs for the project have been addressed in the 8040 Greenline application and there does not appear to be any infrastructure constraints that would indicate that this proposed zoning is inappropriate. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: Staff believes the proposed City R-30 and the proposed development do not represent adverse impacts upon the natural environment. The residential density is appropriate for the area and the City's jurisdiction over the land allows for impacts on the natural environment to be considered through the 8040 Greenline Review. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: The proposed City R-30 will result in development that is consistent and compatible with the character of the City of Aspen. The R-30 Zone District is very similar in nature to Pitkin County's R-30 zoning. The development potential of the parcel will not necessarily increase if the annexation is completed. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The property owner has applied for annexation into the City of Aspen and the City, upon annexation being completed, is required by law to apply zoning to the land. Witz Exhibit A Page 2 0 • I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: The City R-30 zoning is the most consistent with the existing Piktin County zoning. This zoning represents the most appropriate with regards to the general City structure of decreasing development potential further form the town center, the characteristics of the immediate neighborhood and the characteristics of the property itself. Staff believes the proposed zoning promotes the purpose and intent of this Title and is in harmony with the public interest. Staff Comments: Lot Split City Council shall exempt a Lot Split from the provisions of Subdivision if the following conditions are met: A. The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969. Staff Finding: The parcel is described as a metes and bounds parcel and is not part of a Subdivision. B. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c). Staff Finding: Both proposed Lots conform to the R-30 Zone District. The existing house may continue to exist on the newly created lot line for the life of the structure. Upon redevelopment, all structures shall conform to the required setbacks and the existing house shall not be construed to allow a continuation of a non -conformity. This shall be noted on the final plat. The above referenced affordable housing mitigation citing the Land Use Code is incorrect and should refer to Section 26.470.070(B). Because the property is located outside of the Original Townsite, the newly created lot is not eligible for this GMQS exemption. The existing house preserves a development right and may be replaced after provision of mitigation according to the noted Section. Recognizing the non-Townsite situation, the applicant has acquired a Transferable Development Right that is fully Witz Exhibit A Page 3 transferable in the City of Aspen for the purpose of developing a free-market home exempt from the Growth Management Quota System. This TDR was created legally and may be used to exempt the second Lot from the requirements of GMQS. Because there is no specific procedure for "landing" a TDR in the City, staff has included language in the Ordinance that extinguishes this TDR. C. The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.050 (C)(3)(a); and Staff Finding: This property has not previously received a Subdivision Exemption. D. A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100. Staff Finding: A Lot Split Plat shall be recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of the Ordinance. This plat shall depict two Lots in conformance with the R-30 Zone District and shall include the following plat notes: • The existing house need not be demolished to accommodate the newly created lot boundaries and the encroachments into the side yards may continue to exist for the life of the original structure only. Upon redevelopment, all structures on these two lots shall comply with the R-30 Zone District provisions with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. • The developer of Lot A shall seek an exemption from GMQS pursuant to Section 26.470.070(B), as amended from time to time. • The developer of Lot B is exempt from the Growth Management Quota System by virtue of extinguishing a Transferable Development Right pursuant to Ordinance No Series of 2000. E. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. Staff Finding: Staff has recommended the Plat serve as the Agreement. Witz Exhibit A Page 4 • • F. In the case where an existing single-family dwelling occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a lot split. Staff Finding: The existing house is not required to be demolished. It should be noted on the plat that the existing house does not create a vested encroachment into the (new) side yards and that the encroachment may only exist for the life of the building. G. Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single-family home. Staff Finding: The application implies that each lot will be for the purpose of a single-family residence. A condition of the approval restricts the two lots to a single-family residence each. Witz Exhibit A Page 5 V� WITZ PROJECT PUBLIC BENEFITS 1. Affordable Housing: Affordable at 6th and Main 2. Affordable Housing: Two ADUs Although Only One is Required 3. Retires one of the last four City TDRs 4. Easement for the Hunter Creek Trail 5. Revegitation/Enhancement of Entry to North Spruce Street 5.1 Stone bench at Hunter Creek Trailhead 5.2 plant trees, scrubs, flowers: makes an unattractive area an amenity, cures parking problem 5.3 facilitates transistion from Williams Ranch trail to Hunter Creek trail 5.4 solves problem of very unattractive Silverlode emergency entrance/exit 6. Two smaller houses rather than one large house 7. Voluntarily limits FAR from 5,631 and 5688 to 4950 per house 8. Voluntarily lowers density from one single family residence and one duplex to two single family houses 9. Provides a drainage system to prevent water/gravel run off from reaching Jim Moran's house • MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director r FROM: Chris Bendon, Senior Planner C� RE: Witz Property — Public Hearing Initial Zoning "Initial" 8040 Greenline Review DATE: June 20, 2000 SUMMARY: The applicant, Witz Property, LLC, has submitted a petition for annexation into the City of Aspen and the petition has been accepted by the City Council as complete. The annexation process now requires a determination by City Council on the merits of annexing the property and that step has not been completed. As part of annexation, the City of Aspen is required to assign property to an appropriate zone district. This initial zoning is a process originated by City staff, although applicants often follow the process and supply analysis as needed. In this case, the applicant has submitted analysis supporting the designation of this land as Low Density Residential (R-30). Based on staff analysis and the supporting information provided by the applicant, this R-30 designation is the most appropriate for this area of town and the most congruent with the existing R-30 designation in Pitkin County. This application also includes a request to split the property into two development parcels via the City's Lot Split process. This is a process administered by the City Council and does not require an action by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Although it is not within the Commission's purview, the Commission should be aware that the applicant intends to dispose of a Transferable Development Right (TDR) created from the Smuggler Mobile Home Park in order to gain a GMQS exemption on the newly created lot. Because this area is within the 8040 Greenline Review jurisdiction, staff believes the Planning and Zoning Commission's contribution to the manner in which the lot is split may avoid future problems determining the best methods of development. To that end, this application includes a request for an "initial" 8040 Greenline review to determine general suitability for development. As the detail of actual development are not available, a "final" 8040 Greenline Review will be necessary prior to construction. Staff recommends the initial 8040 Greenline Review be approved by the Commission and that a recommendation of R-30 Zoning for this land be forwarded to the City Council. • L� MAIN ISSUES: Zoning: The annexation process includes a requirement that the newly acquired land be assigned to a Zone District. This is a staff function, however, applicants are typically very interested in the expected outcome of the zoning process. In fact, many annexation petitions are not finalized by the applicant until all requisite land use actions are approved, subject to annexation. In this manner, the applicant can evaluate the merits of finalizing the annexation. This property is currently within the Pitkin County "Suburban Density Residential" (R-30) Zone District. The minimum parcel size is 30,000 square feet. This Zone District allows for single-family development by right and duplex development by Special Review. A single-family home of approximately 10,150 square feet is allowed with this zoning. (This is not accounting for reductions in Lot Area for access easements.) The most similar City Zone District is the "Low -Density Residential" (R-30) Zone District. The minimum parcel size is 30,000 square feet. This City Zone District allows for single-family and duplex development by right. A single-family home of approximately 7,161 square feet or a duplex of approximately 7,861 square feet could be developed on the parcel. With the contemplated Lot Split, each new parcel could be developed with a single-family home of approximately 5,941 square feet or a duplex of 6,361 square feet. (This is not accounting for reductions in Lot Area for access easements.) This area of town is essentially a transition from the high -density developments of Hunter Creek Condominiums and Centennial, the medium density development of Williams Ranch, and the rural -density areas of Smuggler Mountain and the Hunter Creek Valley on the edge of the Forest Service land. The immediate surrounding properties are typified by the R-15 Zone District which would allow for more density than the Williams Ranch development and the Rural Residential Zone District which would create a non -conforming situation for the property. The R-30 designation is the most compatible with the Pitkin County zoning, the surrounding area and its transition from high to low density, and the nature of the immediate area. Staff recommends the application of R-30 zoning to this parcel, upon annexation. 8040 Greenline Review: Typically, 8040 Greenline Reviews consider both the technical aspects of development (geotechnical data, ground stability, ability for the property to be served by utilities) and the projects aesthetics (architecture, exterior materials, revegetation plans). In this case only the first threshold issues will be contemplated in order to aid City Council in evaluating the merits of the Lot Split configuration. This "initial 8040" is an opportunity for the Planning and Zoning Commission to avoid future development problems that might be created by virtue of the lot configurations. This initial review will not consider specific aesthetic parameters of development and those criteria will need to be addressed prior to actual development. 2 The application meets the standards that can be adequately evaluated and the proposed parcels appear to be developable in a manner consistent with the remaining 8040 criteria. The remaining criteria include those related to siting of structures, architecture, and cut/fill impacts. It should be noted that the proposed building envelopes are more restrictive than the zoning setbacks. This allows for more concentrated development and less impact on the natural vegetation, a criteria of 8040 Greenline Review. Staff has raised a concern related to the upper portion of the building envelop on proposed Lot A. By further restricting development in this upper (northern) portion of the lot a significant number of small trees (that are not large enough to require mitigation) and the natural (dry) drainage -way could be preserved. The applicant has expressed interest in meeting staff s concern but not necessarily limiting the options a developer may desire or possibly require. The applicant has offered to describe this area of the proposed building envelope as a "conditional building envelope" (or some similar description) subject to further review during the final 8040 Greenline Review. This gives a future applicant the opportunity to present a better scenario to the Commission that either preserves the area, proves that it has no intrinsic value, or mitigates for the impacts on the area. In staff s perspective, this distinction gives the necessary "heads -up" to a purchaser that the area should be avoided if possible but can be part of the development if otherwise unavoidable. Staff believes this gives the area adequate protection and the Commission adequate flexibility. There has been concern raised about the existing drainage situation in the North Spruce Street area and the best method of dealing with the issue. After visiting the site, the City Engineer has determined that the large drainage basin above the North Spruce Street neighborhood does not actually drain through the Witz property and is accommodated through the Williams Ranch PUD. This leaves the more common drainage condition of mitigating for increased impermeable surface areas such as roofs and decks for which staff has added a condition. The last drainage issue relates to the manner in which surface drainage along North Spruce Street should be conveyed. This could be accomplished with a curb and gutter typical of more urbanized areas of town. Staff believes this area should remain rural in nature and urban treatments, such as curb and gutter, are inappropriate from a character perspective. There are many viable methods of treating drainage with less urban solutions such as drainage swales that should be prioritized. These methods have been successful in other similar mountain towns and have been used in a few Aspen developments, notably the Williams Ranch PUD and the un-built Barbee PUD. Staff has added a condition to the proposed Resolution that urban drainage solutions such as curb and gutter not be used in this location if the applicant is willing to develop an alternative drainage swale. APPLICANT: Witz Property, LLC. Camilla Auger, Managing Partner. Represented by Alan Richman, Alan Richman Planning Services. 3 LOCATION: 705 North Spruce Street. See attached location map. A petition to annex the property has been accepted by the City of Aspen. ZONING: Pitkin County Zoning: Suburban Density Residential (R-30). Proposed City of Aspen Zoning: Low -Density Residential (R-30). LOT SIZE: 1.8 acres. 78,046 square feet. CURRENT LAND USE: Single -Family house PROPOSED LAND USE: Two single-family homes with ADU's after a Lot Split. PREVIOUS ACTION: The Commission has not previously considered this application. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Initial Zoning. City Council shall, by Ordinance, approve or deny the application for initial zoning at a public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission made during a public hearing. 8040 Greenline Review. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall, by Resolution, approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for 8040 Greenline Review approval during meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: The application includes a request to divide the parcel into two new lots via the City's Lot Split process. This is a process administered through the City Council and is not within the Planning and Zoning Commission's jurisdiction. The initial 8040 Greenline Review, however, should consider whether or not the proposed lot configuration is the most conducive to development eventually meeting these 8040 Greenline standards. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the "initial" 8040 Greenline Review for the two proposed development parcels, with conditions, and 4 • • recommend to City Council the application of the City's Low -Density Residential (R- 30) Zone District to the Witz property, upon annexation. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No 00- approving the "initial" 8040 Greenline Review for the two proposed development parcels on the Witz Property, with conditions, and recommending City Council include this property, upon annexation, in the Low -Density Residential(R-30) Zone District." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Referral Agency Comments Exhibit C -- Development Application C:\How\CHRISB\CASES\Wrrz\PZMEMO.DOC Exhibit A Witz Property Review Criteria and Staff Findings: Staff Comments: Rezoning Section 26.310.020, Standards Applicable to Rezoning In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed Low Density Residential (R-30) Zone District is compatible with other portions of the Land Use Code and with the Municipal Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: The AACP does not directly address this parcel. This parcel is within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) which generally preserves open space and discourages sprawl in areas not part of, or adjacent to, the urbanized areas of Aspen. The zoning proposed for this site largely reflects the Pitkin County zoning and does not represent a significant change in the amount of allowed development. In other words, staff does not believe the application of City zoning represents either an "up -zoning" or a "down -zoning" in the traditional sense, but rather a status quo. Staff believes this R-30 zoning to be the most consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The parcel in question and the immediate North Spruce Neighborhood represents a transition zone from the more densely developed Williams Ranch and Centennial Condominiums area and the rural areas of Smuggler Mountain and the Hunter Creek Valley. This neighborhood is essentially the last area of semi -urban development at the base of Smuggler Mountain. The neighborhood characteristic is modeled after this R-30 zoning and the City has proactively encouraged re -developing parcels to adhere to the more restrictive City R-30 zoning through water service agreements. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The application of the City's R-30 zoning is the least dense City zoning that can be applied without creating an illegal non -conformity. The zoning does not necessarily allow for a greater amount of development, but annexation into the City of Aspen provides a Lot Split process not available to the applicant while the parcel resides in Pitkin County. The maximum three units that are allowed through the City Lot Split process (a single-family and a duplex) will not over capacitate the road system and is not expected to create an unsafe traffic situation. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The proposed City R-30 zoning represents a development potential similar to that allowed for in Pitkin County's R-30 zoning. The utility and infrastructure needs for the project have been addressed in the 8040 Greenline application and there does not appear to be any infrastructure constraints that would indicate that this proposed zoning is inappropriate. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: Staff believes the proposed City R-30 and the proposed development do not represent adverse impacts upon the natural environment. The residential density is appropriate for the area and the City's jurisdiction over the land allows for impacts on the natural environment to be considered through the 8040 Greenline Review. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: The proposed City R-30 will result in development that is consistent and compatible with the character of the City of Aspen. The R-30 Zone District is very similar in nature to Pitkin County's R-30 zoning. The development potential of the parcel will not necessarily increase if the annexation is completed, but the ease in achieving that potential is greater. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The property owner has applied for annexation into the City of Aspen and the City, upon annexation being completed, is required by law to apply zoning to the land. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: The City R-30 zoning is the most consistent with the existing Piktin County zoning. This zoning represents the most appropriate with regards to the general City structure of decreasing development potential further form the town center, the characteristics of the immediate neighborhood and the characteristics of the property itself. Staff believes the proposed zoning promotes the purpose and intent of this Title and is in harmony with the public interest. 26.435.03o 8040 Greenline Review. A. Applicability. The provisions of 8040 greenline review shall apply to all development located at or above 8040 feet above mean sea level (the 8040 greenline) in the City of Aspen, and all development within one hundred fifty (150) feet below the 8040 greenline, unless exempted pursuant to Section 26.435.030 (B). Staff finding: The property is within this area and is not eligible for an exemption. C. 8040 greenline review standards. No development shall be permitted at, above, or one hundred fifty (150) feet below the 8040 greenline unless the commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. 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: There are no known hazardous soils on this property. The geological report determined this property to be suitable for development. The applicant's Engineer has recommended specific site grading techniques to be used on this site and the applicant has agreed to accommodate those recommendations into the design of the structures. Those recommendations have been included in the proposed Resolution. If upon actual construction toxic soils are discovered, the contractor should immediately halt operation and contact the City Engineer. 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: The City Engineer has expressed concerns about the drainage patterns in the area. This is a general concern about the area and not specifically about this property, although this is the first property in this neighborhood to be presented to the City Engineer. After consulting with the applicant's Engineer and performing a site visit it has been determined by the City Engineer that the drainage through proposed Lot A described as "surface drainage" is actually a consistently dry area that probably only experiences flow during severe events. It was determined that the Witz property does not convey drainage from the large water shed above the North Spruce neighborhood as the majority of that drainage has been historically directed through the Williams Ranch PUD area. It was also determined that drainage along North Spruce Street could be managed by use of a drainage swale. This method is not typically endorsed by the Engineering Department as often as curb and gutter solutions. With respect to this last point, planning staff does want to make it clear that an urban treatment in this rural area will appear out of character and should not be done. There are very viable and appropriate solutions to conveying drainage along the road with the use of drainage swales, etc. that have been used in many mountain town effectively and the same approach should be taken in this area of town. Planning staff believes the applicant should be required to treat drainage with a drainage swale, or similar solutions, in -lieu of filing a curb and gutter agreement. 3. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the air quality in the city. Staff finding: The property is not expected to have any affect on the air quality in the area. 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: This standard applies to the two proposed driveway entrances. These entrances are both proposed on the upper (topographically) sides of the proposed lots which, in staff s expectation, will provide for greater ease in complying with the Residential Design Standards. It is difficult to evaluate the location of proposed development other than the driveway access and staff recommends this criteria be a criteria of the final 8040 Review. 5. Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. Staff finding: This criteria cannot be adequately evaluated with the level of information submitted. Staff recommends this criteria be evaluated when plans are more developed prior to actual development. A "follow-up review" will be necessary for this criteria to be evaluated. The applicant has proposed the requirement of each lot submitting a grading plan and a revegetation plan as part of the follow-up review. In addition, the applicant has proposed a set of general design principles to minimize the impacts from grading and allow for adequate revegetation. These principles are acceptable design practices and have been included in the proposed Resolution. The application includes a landscape plan for the entryway. The proposed vegetation will aid the closure of the existing loop driveway and are native species. The "stone and masonry features" appear to indicate a private enclave and should not include directional information as this is in contradiction to the City's sign code. Staff discourages these type of entry way markers as they may wrongly portray the need for enclaves protected from the public. Staff has included in the proposed Resolution the ability for stone pillars with no directional information and the provision of street number indicators at each driveway entrance. 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. 7. Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. Staff finding: These criteria require a final submittal that indicates an actual design. This level of detail has not been provided and the applicant has proposed submission of the requisite information as part of a final 8040 Review. 8. Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed development. Staff finding: There is sufficient water to serve this property and the proposed development. The area is currently served by the City via a private water system and a new main installed recently. An existing water service agreement would need to be amended to accommodate the new house. There is sufficient capacity and pressure to serve this development with both domestic water and fire suppression. The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District reports sufficient capacity to serve this development. There exists sufficient electric capacity supplied by Holy Cross. No other utilities are expected to be negatively impacted including those related to schools, parks, or governmental services. 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: North Spruce Street serves a limited number of homes and is sufficient for its purpose. No expansion of the road has been recommended. The proposed driveways have been placed to minimize the affects of limited sight distances in the area from the "switch- back" style road. The Fire Marshal did not report any difficulty the proposed access road may pose, only that the proposed residences may need to be fire sprinkled depending upon the size. The proposed driveway entrances do not pose any snow removal circumstances that require altering the plans or special operational attention. 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. Staff finding: The existing Lani White Trail is depicted in the AACP. Apparently, there is no easement corresponding with this trail across the applicant's property and the applicant has verbally represented the desire to grant to the City this easement. This easement will be accepted and should be reflected on the Lot Split plat. In addition, the applicant has expressed a desire to improve the trail entrance with possibly a bench and/or other aesthetic improvements. These improvements have not been fully conceived at this point, but appear to be well intentioned and are expected be a welcome addition to the area. These improvements can be considered by the Parks Department separately and do not necessarily require any type of Commission action. There are no trails suggested for the southern boundary of the property in the 2000 AACP. The Parks Department has indicated a desire for the development of a foot path along this property boundary to further aid the area's pedestrians. Staff does not believe this foot path is absolutely necessary for area residents as most people walk within the road easement, North Spruce Street is a dead end with no connection to trails, and there is very little traffic. Staff does not believe a footpath is necessary and is not recommending a requirement of the applicant. If the applicant wishes to construct this footpath, plans must be approved by the City Trail Coordinator prior to construction. C:\home\CHRISB\CASES\Witz\PZ Ex A.DOC Page 1 of 1 0 X-Sender: cindyc@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:40:46 -0600 To: Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Cindy Christensen <cindyc@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Witt Pre -Annexation Agreement Thanks!! Let me know if John Worcester says anything different. I will continue as if it is a Category 3 and sell for $100,000. Cindy At 11:29 AM 09/20/2000 -0600, you wrote: Cindy: It sounds like the substantive requirement is that the unit initially sell for no more than $100,000. The pre -annexation agreement referenced the application which talks about the unit selling for $100,000 and that price being the midpoint of Category 2 and 3. If that means your deed restriction has to be Category 3, then so be it - as long as the intended $100,000 price is facilitated. John: I don't know if the pre -annexation agreement needs to be changed. I don't have a copy of the final agreement, but the draft included a category 2 requirement. The application referenced in the agreement states the midpoint between Category 2 and 3. It looks like a Category 3 designation is necessary to allow the unit to sell for the agreed upon $100,000. At 11:14 AM 9/20/00 -0600, you wrote: Chris: I talked this over with Lee and we both agreed that the Category as stated in the Pre -Annexation Agreement is inaccurate. It can't be stated as a Category 2 at $100,000 since our maximum sales price for a Category 2 one -bedroom unit is $81,700. The reason they went with $100,000 is to have UNDER the maximum for a Category 3. Please let me know what can be done to rectify this situation. THANKS!!! Cindy Cindy Christensen Operations Manager, Housing Office Chris Bendon, AICP Long -Range Planner City of Aspen 970.920.5072 aspengov.com Cindy Christensen Operations Manager, Housing Office file://C:\TEMP\eud 10.htm 9/20/00 Page 1 of 1 From: "Millard Zimet' <millard@sopris.net> To: "Chris Bendon" <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Fw: Witz Pre -Annexation Agreement Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 11-14:04 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 Chris: John Worcester suggested I run this by you. Thanks, MZ. -----Original Message ----- From: John Worcester <johnw@ci.aspen. _co. us> To: Millard Zimet <millard@sopris.net> Date: Thursday, September 07, 2000 10:59 AM Subject: Re: Witz Pre -Annexation Agreement Millard Can you ask Chris Bendon of our Planning Dept. these questions? He worked with Camilla on these conditions and I would prefer that he make the interpretations. Thanks He can be reached at chrisb@ci.aspen. co. us At 10:34 AM 09/07/2000 -0600, you wrote: I John: I read the Witz Pre -Annexation Agreement this morning (on behalf of a client who is under contract to purchase Lot B), and I am writing to request an interpretation of some of its terms. Specifically, Section 2a (on page 2) states: a. Landowner shall, prior to receiving a building permit for either lot, purchase a single unit of approximately 575 sq. ft. in the Little Victorian complex at 6th and Main Streets in the City of Aspen and deed restrict the unit to a category 2 (to be re -sold at more than $100,000.00) in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. Landowners shall comply with the representations made at page 4 and in Exhibit #5 appended to the Witz Property Application for Annexation, Rezoning, Lot Split, and 8040 Greenline Review ("Witz Application"). Questions: 1. Does this mean that each of the two Witz lot owners must buy a unit at the Little Victorian in order to get a building permit? Or does it mean that only one such unit must be purchased, and that a "single unit' would apply to both Witz lots?,.< lC 2. Did the applicant already purchase (or contract for the purchase) of the unit(s)? If not, are such units available for purchase? What if they are not available in the future? �� .; f Y o /; ,,c / i 3. The parenthetical phrase regarding the unit resale price, "(to be re -sold atmorethan $100,000.00)" is somewhat confusing -- or is that merely a typo, and a "no" is missing before the "more"? Thanks, MZ John P. Worcester City Attorney Ph: (970) 920-5055 Fax: (970) 920-5119 file://C:\TEMP\eud 12.htm 9/7/00 AUG.28.2000 8:55PM PARWEPT -NO.566 -- P . 1-.- • Memorandum To: Mayor and City Council Parks and Recreation Department From: Rebecca Schickling, Assistant Parks Director Jahn Krueger, Trails Coordinator Date: 08 rysi!00 Re: Witz Annexation The Parks Department has been working with Camilla Auger on securing a trail easement for the Lani White trail. The existing trail begins on the Witz Property but no formal easement currently exists for this trail segment, We appreciate their cooperation on negotiating this important trail head and connection. They have been very helpful in planning some design concepts and look we forward to working with them on final designs for this area. This trail easement is a very critical link in the trails master plan and we appreciate the applicant's effort to improve and preserve this trail. 27/2000 11.05 9709232496 • D&E E PAGE 02 25, 2000 To Nftm It May Concern: As a-tyear resident of Aspen and a member of the Aspen and Snowmass business comet ies, I applaud Camilla's provision of additional affordable housing. As c"wner of D&E Snowboard Shop, I see first hand how difficult it is to find and keep qualified employees. Their major problem is finding housing that will fit into their budget. As a remit I have a tremendous employee turn -over rate. This situation transWetes into higher employee costs to my business in tarm of constant training and hiring. Add to this the high cost of retail rents and it becomes very difficult to run a profitable business. Being �a long time resident of Aspen, I have witnessed first hand the difficulty of finding ho . 1 is this town. Ahbough a successful business owner, I still do not own my own house r condo. I have entered my naxne Into Coumless affordable housing lotteries to no avail. currently am the resident of the Little Vic Unit Q, which Camilla is graciously co ' using to the pool of afFordable housing units. Hopefully I will have the oppor unity to be the future owner. I knui f that my experience is the same as marry in this town. I appreciate any effort to provic e additional affordable housing in this valley. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Eric kkrgstrom August 28, 2000 Members, Aspen City Council City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Witz Lot Split Application Dear City Council Members: Our home at 415 Silverlode Drive, Aspen is in the city limits and directly across Spruce Street from, and adjacent to, the Witz property. We have reviewed the Witz LLC proposal and support both (a) the proposed annexation of the Witz property into the City and (b) the proposed lot split that will result in two single family houses of 4,950 square feet each. We request that you approve the annexation, approval for two single family residences at th sizes of 4,950 square feet each. Joseph Nevin 415 Silverlode Drive Aspen e the lot split and requested house 08/27/2000 20:12 9709271665 AUG-27-00 MOH 6:25 PM ATH0 TIMROTH FA : NO, 9705051 PAGE 01 F. i Donna and ,Terry Timroth 0770 North spruce Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Aspen City Council 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 June 20, 2000 Dear City Council Members: We are the adjacent, uphill neighbors (one lot away) of the proposed house on the witz lot B. In getting to our house we will pass bath of the proposed 'houses on a regular basis. We have no objection to the application of the Witz Property, LLC for annexation of the property into the City, and For a lot split with one house of 4950 FAR on each lot. In addition, we strongly support the proposed revegitation and enhancement of the entry to North spruce Street and the Hunter Creek Trail, Yours truly, Jerry Timroth Donna Timroth Page 1 of l From: Batflapper@aol.com Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:47:48 EDT Subject: Witz Property rezoneing To: chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 110 I would like to go on record as opposing the Witz parcel split. the parcel is too small to split, and the split would create more traffic in an already high density neighborhood. Mr. Witz bought the property knowing that a split was unlikely, and there is no reason to allow the split now. If the pand z continues to allow everybodt to split there property,Aspen will soon become an ugly bunch of rubbish like Eagle county. Is this what We of Aspen want. We are already impacted by all of the lot spliters in Eagle and Garfield countys. Let's finally say no for once. thank You James A. Wingers 390 silver Lode Dr. RECEiV ED JUN ZO 2000 ASPEN! Pi i MN r+01NtM TYDFVELOPk1FV' file://C:\TEMP\eud24.htm 6/20/00 • Page 1 of I • X-Sender: johnw@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:30:11 -0600 To: Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> From: John Worcester <johnw@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Witz Property (Auger) She has a valid TDR. We should dispose of it as part of the land use process. I am assuming we will ultimately have an ordinance for her. In that ordinance we should state that they are using and extinguishing the TDR. I can give you some language when you get there to include in the ordinance so there is a "Chain of title" for the TDR itself. (Now you know why I'd like some kind of system for keeping track of any TDR's the City is planning to create as part of the AACP). At 09:13 AM 05/16/2000 -0600, you wrote: John: IN the Witz application, there is a letter from you stating that you cannot verify the chain of title but you will accept a assignment of title for the TDR. There is then an agreement to purchase the TDR between the owner stated in a previous assignment and Camilla Auger. I'm assuming Camilla has a valid TDR. Is this correct? And how should we dispose of the TDR? Cheers, Chris Bendon City Planning John P. Worcester City Attorney Ph: (970) 920-5055 Fax: (970) 920-5119 file://C:\TEMP\eud20.htrn 5/ 16/00 W }+ U U O cz D W CO cz cz w Q 70 2:% _ .� O L. O 44- w Q 0 0 0 0 CU cz CO a� 0 9 0 0 - 0 t. • • ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and LAr A Z �,2z'� L L C (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE .AS FOLLOWS: APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an a plication for tit S(IV � -A- o 0 611t . (hereinafter. THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 49 (Series of 1998) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project. it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved *in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that 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 Citv 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 a"3 ` ° which is for 1 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 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. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT By: .Kfl ie Ann Woods 7. ommunity Development Director By: rl.. Date: `,1 b1 C�o ]Mailing Address: N-� b l b ( I TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 1 Il. ANNEXATION/ZONING TO R-30/PUD ............................ 3 III. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR LOT SPLIT ....................... 5 IV. 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW ..................................... 7 V. VESTED RIGHTS ............................................ 11 VI. CONCLUSION ............................................... 11 EXHIBITS # 1. Title Insurance Commitment #2. Letter Authorizing Representative to Submit Application #3. Letter From Little Victorians Condominium Owner Authorizing Application #4. Pre -Application Conference Summary #5. Materials Submitted to Housing Authority on 4/5/00 #6. Transferrable Development Right (TDR) #7. Letter From City Attorney Verifying Legality of TDR #8. Geologic Report Prepared by HP Geotech #9. Engineering Report Prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer #10. List of Owners Within 300' of Subject Property MAPS/DRAWINGS Improvements Survey Proposed Site Plan Proposed Subdivision Exemption Plat Proposed Entry Enhancement Plan 1 0 • I. INTRODUCTION This is an application to develop two single family houses on a parcel of land located at 705 North Spruce Street. The property consists of approximately 1.792 acres of land (approximately 78,046 sq. ft.) located in unincorporated Pitkin County. The applicant has submitted, under separate cover, a petition to annex the property to the City of Aspen. The location of the site in relation to neighboring properties is shown on the vicinity map. P It shows that the site is surrounded by single-family and multi -family residential uses located at the end of Spruce Street. An improvements survey, depicting existing conditions on the property, has also been provided. It shows that the property presently contains a single-family house. The driveway serving this house is in a looped configuration, with an entry and an exit cut from North Spruce Street. The survey also depicts topography on the property. This is a relatively flat piece of land, with prevailing slopes in the range of 15% to 20%. Vegetation on the property includes an area of relatively dense trees surrounding the existing residence, with the remainder of the property covered with low lying brush. This application is being submitted by the Witz Property LLC (hereinafter, "the Applicant"), the owner of the property. Proof of the ownership of the property is provided by Exhibit # 1, the title insurance commitment. Authorization for Alan Richman Planning Services to represent the property owner for this application is provided by Exhibit #2. The Applicant proposes that concurrent with its annexation to the City, the property be split into two lots, each of which will contain well in excess of 30,000 sq. ft., so they will be conforming sized lots in the R-30 zone district. The existing house will be demolished and replaced with a new residence. A new residence will also be built on the second lot. In addition, upon approval of this project, a deed restriction will be placed on a Little Victorians Condominium, for which the Applicant is a contract purchaser. This one (1) bedroom free market housing unit is located at 634 W. Main Street, right along the City's main transit route. The Applicant is voluntarily offering to restrict this unit as Category 3 affordable housing. A letter from the owner of the unit authorizing the Applicant to make representations regarding this unit is included as Exhibit #3. A pre -application conference was held with a member of the Community Development Department on January 19, 2000 to discuss this project (see Exhibit #4, Pre -Application Conference Summary). Based on this meeting and subsequent contacts with City staff, it was confirmed that the Applicant would be subject to the following review procedures to accomplish this project: Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 1 I 11 1 1 t 1 1 1 l I 1 Annexation of the property into the City of Aspen and zoning of the property as R-30 (Low - Density Residential); Subdivision Exemption to split the property into two lots; and 8040 Greenline Review for development within 150' below 8040' in elevation. The following sections of this application identify and respond to the applicable standards of the Aspen Land Use Code for these review procedures. Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 2 5 0 • II. ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-30 0 -10;;;= The Applicant has submitted, under separate cover, the required number of copies of a petition to annex this property to the City of Aspen. The required number of copies of an annexation map have also been provided. The annexation map evaluates the contiguity of the subject property with the municipal boundaries of the City of Aspen. This map illustrates that the subject property has well in excess of the necessary one -sixth (1/6) contiguity with the municipal boundaries. The Applicant requests that the City zone the subject property Low Density Residential R- 9 tY J P P h' tY 30). It is our understanding that the City will initiate this zoning in conjunction with the annexation procedures. In support of the City's zoning activities, the Applicant offers the following reasons that R-30 would be the appropriate zoning for this property: 1. County Zoning. This property is zone ' R-3]in unincorporated Pitkin County. Historically, it has been the City's policy to apply a zoning designation to newly annexed properties that is similar to the property's former zoning in the County. An R-30 City zoning designation would be consistent with this past practice. 2. Neighborhood Compatibility. The neighborhood in which this project is located is a developing portion of the Aspen area. The Williams Ranch and Silverlode developments, which are presently nearing completion, are located immediately to the southeast of the property. Williams Ranch includes 35 affordable housing units, located on slightly less than 6 acres of land (a density of approximately 6 units to the acre). Silverlode contains 15 free market units, located on slightly less than 7 acres of land (a density of approximately 2 units to the acre), with lot sizes ranging from approximately 11,000 sq. ft. to 30,000 sq. ft. A new single family house is being built on a 1 acre lot located immediately above the subject property, while two other houses already exist on 1 acre parcels located adjacent to and above the subject property. Therefore, this project clearly represents an infill development and not one that extends the development limits of the Aspen area. It also represents a development being proposed at a density that is compatible to that of surrounding properties. 3. Surrounding Zoning. Properties located below North Spruce Street have been designated AH/PUD and R/MF-A, permitting multi -family affordable housing projects, such as Centennial, Williams Ranch, Williams Woods, and Hunter Creek, to be built. Properties located above North Spruce Street, in unincorporated Pitkin County, have been designated R-30, and AFR-10, allowing for lower density residential development. The R-30 designation for this property represents an ' appropriate transition between higher density zoning for lands along the valley floor, and lower density zoning for larger parcels that are at higher elevations. Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 3 �I 1 0 0 4. Residential Character. The R-30 designation will permit the Applicant to split the property into two lots, each of which complies with the minimum lot size requirements of the zone district and all of the other applicable portions of the Land Use Code. By splitting the property into two lots, the City can be certain that the resulting development will be more in character with house sizes in the surrounding neighborhood than if a single, much larger house were built on the entire property. 5. Affordable Housing. The Applicant is voluntarily offering, as a condition of annexation, to deed restrict a free market unit at the Little Victorian Condominiums as affordable housing. The addition of this unit to the community's housing inventory is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan, which seeks to increase the amount of affordable housing that is available to employees of the community. The condominium unit is a 1 bedroom loft unit that is approximately 575 sq. ft. in size. It is in excellent condition. The Applicant has agreed to replace the appliances in the unit with new ones and the current owner of the unit has agreed to make some minor repairs to the unit (a leak in the skylight, some exposed wiring in the bathroom, and a bathroom fan), as requested by the Housing Office . Access to the loft bedroom, which presently may not meet Code, will be changed to meet City building requirements. The proposal to deed restrict this unit was reviewed by the Housing Authority at their meeting on April 5, 2000. A copy of the staff memo concerning this proposal, with attachments from the realtors involved in the transaction, is attached as Exhibit #5. The Housing Authority voted unanimously to approve the proposed deed restriction, and to establish a sale price for the unit of $100,000, at approximately the midpoint rbetween Categories 2 and 3. In addition, an accessory dwelling unit will be built on each of the lots, which will provide an additional opportunity to house local employees. 6. Available Services. The low density residential development that would be permitted by zoning this property R-30 can be served by public facilities that are already in place in the North Spruce Street neighborhood. This low density of development will not overburden the road network, nor will it have adverse affects on road safety. It will have no adverse impacts on the natural environment. It is our understanding that annexation of the property will follow on a parallel track to the review of this land use application, with annexation and zoning occurring coincidental with the final action on this application. The Applicant hereby requests that the annexation of this property and its zoning to R-30 be finally adopted at the same time the other land use procedures addressed in this application are acted upon by City Council, so that the Applicant is fully aware of the land use implications of the annexation when it finally occurs. Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 4 • • III. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR LOT SPLIT Section 26.480.030 A.2 of the Aspen Land Use Code provides the opportunity for an applicant to split a parcel of land into two separate lots via an exemption from subdivision. To obtain the subdivision exemption, the applicant must comply with the following standards: a. The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board of Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969. Response: The land is a metes and bounds parcel that is not located in a subdivision approved by the City or the County and that has not previously been subdivided. b. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c). Response: As shown on the attached subdivision exemption plat, the applicant proposes to create two (2) lots with this lot split. Each lot will contain 39,023 sq. ft. Both lots will, therefore, be conforming -sized lots in the R-30 zone district, which has a minimum lot size of 30,000 sq. ft. for a single-family residence. The reference to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c) is incorrect. That reference is to a section of the former Aspen Land Use Regulations. The correct reference for that former section is to Section 26.470.070 B. of the Land Use Code, which provides a GMQS exemption to replace the existing single-family house on the property with a new residence. It requires the applicant to provide an accessory dwelling unit, or pay the applicable affordable housing impact fee, or record a resident -occupancy deed restriction for the single-family dwelling. The applicant agrees to provide an accessory dwelling unit with the replacement residence. Because this property is not a townsite lot, the Applicant is not eligible for a lot split growth management exemption (Section 26.470.070 I of the Code) for the second lot. The growth management exemption for the second lot is instead being created through the use of a "transferrable development right". A copy of this right is provided as Exhibit #6. A copy of a letter from the City Attorney verifying the legality of this right is attached as Exhibit #7. As stated in the recitals of the TDR, these rights were created as part of a land use approval ' that preserved the Smuggler Mobile Home Park as affordable housing. These rights are exempt from the allotment procedures of the Growth Management Quota System and require no additional mitigation by the Applicant in order to develop a single-family unit on the other lot. Nonetheless, the Applicant is voluntarily offering to provide an accessory dwelling unit on that lot as well, thereby exceeding the requirements of the land Use Code. t Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 5 F-1 D 1 1 C 1 I 1 1 11 A i 1 I C. The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this Chapter or a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.470.040(C)(1)(a). Response: The lot has not previously been subject to a subdivision exemption or a lot split. d. A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this Chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this Title, is submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Response: A proposed subdivision plat, conforming to the requirements of the Land Use Code, has been submitted with this application. The Applicant anticipates working closely with the City staff during the review of this application to perfect this plat before it is recorded. The plat contains the required note regarding further subdivision and growth allocations. e. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (I80) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City of Aspen will be required for a showing of good cause. Response: The Applicant will record the plat and any necessary agreement within the specified time frame. Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 6 1 0 • ' II. 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW This property is located generally between 8,000' and 8,040' in elevation. Since 8040 Greenline Review applies to any development that occurs above the 8040 elevation, or is within 150' below this elevation, the proposal is subject to this review procedure. However, it should be pointed out that no development is planned above the 8040 elevation. All Mdevelopment proposed for this property will be located below that line. The standards for 8040 Greenline Review are found in Section 26.440.030 of the Aspen Land Use Code. These standards address the suitability of the subject property for development, and also address the compatibility of the proposed development with the mountain terrain in which the property is located. 1 It is premature at this time however, for the Applicant t p pp o present complete plans for the development of the two single-family houses. The Applicant anticipates that such plans will be prepared subsequent to the annexation and subdivision of the property. Therefore, the Applicant has completed those engineering and geotechnical studies necessary to demonstrate that the subject property is suitable for development and, accordingly, should be subdivided. The Applicant agrees that prior to the actual development of either lot, the owner of that lot will have to demonstrate that the details of the proposed development (such as house massing and site grading) will comply with the 8040 review standards. The Applicant has, however, prepared a site plan illustrating how the property is proposed to be developed. The site plan depicts the building envelopes proposed for each lot. These building envelopes have been drawn so as to exceed the setbacks of the City's R-30 zone district (and to at least meet the setbacks of the County's R-30 zone district), as follows: I 1 11 1 1 City County Code Code Lot A Lot B Front Yard Setback 25' 30' 25'* 25'* Side Yard Setback (East) 10, 15' 20' 20' Side Yard Setback (West) 10, 15' 15' 20' Rear Yard Setback 15' 30' 30' 30' * Front yard setback is actually 55' from the edge of the property, but is listed as 25', as measured from the edge of the 30' utility and access easement. The footprint of the houses will fit well within the proposed building envelopes, so the actual setbacks for the homes will likely exceed some of these setbacks by an even greater degree. Considering this information, following are the Applicant's responses to the standards of the Land Use Code applicable to 8040 Greenline Review. Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 7 1 I Il I 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. Response: A geological report has been prepared by Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. The report is attached as Exhibit #8. It states that this is a moderately sloping property, with slopes in the range of 15% to 20%. It goes on to conclude that "Development of the property as proposed should be feasible based on geotechnical conditions. There are no geologic hazards that would make the proposed development infeasible." An Engineering report for the property has been prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer and is attached as Exhibit #9. In the report, Jay Hammond recommends that grading should slope away from the homes, and upslope swales should be created to direct upslope drainage around and away from the structures. The Applicant agrees to comply with these recommendations. 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. Response: There are no significant drainages that cross the property, nor does off -site runoff have a significant impact on this property. Therefore, the Applicant's primary objective with respect to drainage is to ensure that post -development drainage does not exceed that found in the pre -development condition. The Engineering Report provides a summary of the storm drainage improvements planned, to ensure the development will not have an adverse affect on the natural watershed or cause water pollution. The report proposes that a new-7- drywell(s) sized for the 100 year event be installed to detain any additional runoff generated by the development. Roof or deck areas and gutter systems would be directed to the drywell(s) for return of pre -development historic flows to the aquifer. Perimeter footer drains and any underslab drains would be routed to daylight. 3. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the air quality in the City. Response: The development should not have an adverse effect on air quality. The proposed residences will comply with all applicable City regulations regarding wood burning devices. Since there is already one single-family unit on the property, the net increase in travel from the development should be in the range of only 5-10 trips per day. Moreover, by deed restricting an existing dwelling to affordable housing in Aspen, close to where people work and recreate, this project will help to eliminate trips that otherwise would have occurred on Highway 82 as a result of commuting. Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 8 0 • 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 features. G. 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. Response: A detailed grading plan has not yet been prepared for the site. The Applicant agrees that a grading plan for the development of each lot will be submitted before a building permit application is issued for either house. The Applicant also agrees to follow the recommendations contained in the Engineering Report and the Geotechnical Report. This includes the following concepts: The driveways into the lots will be designed to follow the contours on the property to the maximum extent feasible, to limit the amount of cutting and filling necessary to build the accessways. • Foundation walls will act as retaining walls on the site slopes. • In general, cut and fill slopes steeper than about 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) will be retained. i• On -site granular soils (excluding oversized rock) should be suitable for use as structural fill and for retaining wall backfill. Excavated material from the foundation ' areas will be used to construct the driveway into the site or will be removed from the site for disposal. • Disturbed areas will be re -vegetated as soon as possible after construction. Although it is premature to present a complete landscape plan for the property, the Applicant has prepared an entry enhancement plan, illustrating how the looped driveway cuts that provide access to the existing residence will be re -vegetated. It shows that a considerable number of Spruce and Aspen trees will be planted, and ground cover will be installed, making for a much more attractive entrance into this neighborhood. Plans for re -vegetating areas disturbed by construction of the new driveways and the proposed houses will be submitted in conjunction with the review of the house designs. 7. Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. I Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 9 1 1 0 0 Response: Architectural elevations have not yet been prepared for either house. The Applicant agrees that proposed elevations for each house will be submitted to the City before a building permit application can be issued for either lot. These elevations will demonstrate that each proposed house will comply with this standard. 8. Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed ' development.,.., Response: The availability of a sufficient water supply and other utilities to serve the two ' houses is addressed in the Engineering report. The report describes the Applicant's plans for utilities for the two houses. Water will be supplied to the lots from the new water main that was recently installed in North Spruce Street. To obtain service from this line, the Applicant will submit a request to amend the main extension agreement established with the City. There is ample capacity in this line to serve this property, and connection to this line would provide a reliable supply to both houses for domestic and for fire fighting purposes. Four fire hydrants were installed with the new water lines, one of which is less than 200' from the proposed new homesite. If the City decides not to amend the agreement, then the Applicant would be able to acquire an in-house only well permit for the new house. The existing well would continue to supply the reconstructed house. Fire protection would be available from the nearby fire hydrants. Sewage disposal service is available from the sewer main extension in North Spruce Street that was constructed at the same time as the water line, and the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District has adequate capacity to serve these homes. Electric service will be provided by Holy Cross Energy. The electric lines that serve this area were improved and placed underground by Holy Cross when the new water and sewer mains were installed, and will be more than adequate to serve these homes. 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. Response: Access to the property is provided by North Spruce Street. Spruce Street is a public right-of-way to the north end of Centennial, approximately 400' from the subject property. Beyond that point, it intersects with a private driveway, known as North Spruce Street. Easements for this private access vary from 20' to 30' in width. The actual width of the pavement within the length of the easement varies from 12' to 18', wide enough to allow two vehicles to pass each other. Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 10 • 0 The Engineering Report states that North Spruce Street "essentially functions as a driveway accessing a total of six homes either in place or under construction at the present time". The report concludes that the minimum 20' easement that is in place is sufficient for this level of development. The Fire Department has reviewed other recent developments that have occurred along this street and has concluded that adequate access is available for emergency protection to be accomplished. The proposed residences will each require a new driveway cut to replace the "loop drive" that provides access to the existing residence. Since the loop drive has two cuts off of North Spruce Street, the new driveways will not change the number of cuts that are present. The existing loop drive will be closed, and it will be restored and re -vegetated by the Applicant, as shown on the attached entry enhancement plan. As shown on the proposed subdivision plat, the proposed driveways have been located to P P P P P Y ' offer an improved alignment and significantly improved sight distances as compared to the entry to the existing loop drive. The new driveways will take up much less of the property frontage along Spruce Street, allowing for a more natural appearance to the entry area. IL Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: ParkslRecreation/Open Spacel7Yails Plan map is dedicated for public use. Response: The referenced Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan map has been superseded by the pedestrian and bikeway maps in the Aspen Area Community Plan. Those maps do not show a trail in the vicinity of the subject property that would be required to be dedicated. It should be pointed out, however, that the prior owner of this property granted an easement to Pitkin County for a connection to the Hunter Creek trail, which has since been built and is widely used. This connection appears on the improvements survey and subdivision plat. 1 FJ V. VESTED RIGHTS Pursuant to Section 26.52.080 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant hereby requests that this development be granted vested rights status. VI. CONCLUSION In summary, the Applicant has submitted all of the materials requested during the pre - application conference. We have responded to the applicable standards of the Aspen Land Use Code and have demonstrated our compliance with said standards. Should any reviewing agency request additional information, or need for us to clarify any of the statements made herein, we will respond in a timely manner. Please feel free to contact us as necessary. Application for Lot Split and 8040 Greenline Review for Witz Property Page 11 11 EXHIBITS I I I 1 L� I I 7Tt1T►vTyI AL. I n 1 Ll 11 • F] 'L j a Our Order No. Q380790-6 LEGAL DESCRIPTION A TRACT OF LAND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SITUATED ENTIRELY WITHIN AND BEING PART OF THE ELLA SHERWOOD LODE, M.S. 5304 AM., SAID TRACT MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON LINE 1-4 OF THE ELLA SHERWOOD LODE, M.S. 5304 AM. SAID POINT BEING SOUTH 45 DEGREES 51' WEST 745.56 FEET FROM CORNER NO. 1. M.S. 5304 Atvl. A SLATE STONE MARKED AS INDICATED IN PAGE 60 OF THE ORIGINAL FIELD NOTES BY GEORGE W. NYCE, U.S. DEPUTY MINERAL SURVEYOR, DATED MAY 20, 1902; THENCE SOUTH 45 DEGREES 51' WEST 113.15 FEET ALONG LINE 104, M.S. 5304 AM., THENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 57' WEST 422.05 FEET ALONG THE QUARTER SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 7 TO LINE 203, M.S. 5304 AM., THENCE NORTH 45 DEGREES 51' EAST 410.54 FEET ALONG LINES 2-3. M.S. 5304 AM., THENCE SOUTH 44 DEGREES 09' EAST 299.47 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH A PERPETUAL EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN GRANT OF EASEMENT FROM BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO EUGENE WITZ RECORDED JUNE 4, 1985 IN BOOK 487 AT PAGE 171 AS RECEPTION NO. 268652. COUNTY OF PITKIN STATE OF COLORADO I Adlbk L� I n • I ALTA COMMITMENT (Exceptions) Our Order No. Q380790-6 The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: Rights of claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or clainLs of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes and assessments not yet due or payable and special assessments not yet certified to the Treasurer's office. 7. Any unpaid taxes or assessments against said land. 8. Liens for unpaid water and sewer charges, if any. 9. THE EFFECT OF INCLUSIONS IN ANY GENERAL OR SPECIFIC WATER CONSERVANCY, FIRE PROTECTION, SOIL CONSERVATION OR OTHER DISTRICT OR INCLUSION IN ANY WATER SERVICE OR STREET IMPROVEMENT AREA. 10. WATER RIGHTS OR CLAIMS TO WATER RIGHTS. 11. RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS CONTAINED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED JANUARY 11, 1909 IN BOOK 136 AT PAGE 349 AS FOLLOWS: THAT THE PREMISES HEREBY GRANTED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE SURFACE, MAY BE ENTERED BY THE PROPRIETOR OF ANY OTHER VEIN, LODE, OR LEDGE, THE TOP OR APEX OF WHICH LIES OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDARY OF SAID GRANTED PREMISES, SHOULD BE THE SAME IN ITS DIP BE FOUND TO PENETRATE, INTERSECT OR EXTEND INTO SAID PREMISES, FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXTRACTING AND REMOVING THE ORE FROM SUCH OTHER VEIN, LODE, OR LEDGE; AND RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES AND CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES. 12. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS OF EASEMENT AS SET FORTH IN AGREEMENT RECORDED APRJL 1, 1969 IN BOOK 240 AT PAGE 35 13. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN ALTA COMMITMENT I (Exceptions) Our Order No. Q380790-6 The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: AGREMENT RECORDED JUNE 30, 1970 IN BOOK 249 AT PAGE 201 14. TERMS. AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS OF AMENDED AND RESTATED EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED APRIL 19, 2000 AS RECEPTION NO. 442475. 15. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PURPOSES AS GRANTED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY EUGENE WITZ RECORDED JUNE 4, 1985 IN BOOK 487 AT PAGE 168 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 268651 16. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS OF EASEMENTS OF ACCESS AND UNDERGROUND UTILITY EASEMENT AS SET FORTH IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 IN BOOK 793 AT PAGE 342 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 385335 tI 17. TERMS. AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF GRANT OF EASEMENT FROM BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO EUGENE WITZ RECORDED JUNE 4. 1985 IN BOOK 487 AT PAGE 171 AS RECEPTION NO 268652 18. ANY AND ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY, LEGEND AND NOTES, AND DISCREPANCIES IN THE LOT LINES AS SHOWN ON THE IMPROVEMENT/TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. DATED 10/99 AS JOB NO. 22140. F� LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Required by C.R.S. 10-11-122 A) The subject real property may be located in a special taxing district. B) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained from the County Treasurer's authorized agent. C) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at lease one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 3-5-1, Paragraph C of Article VII requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conduct.-, the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available(typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material -men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvement.-, or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the inured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Nothing herein contained will be deemed to obligate the company to provide any of the coverages referred to herein unless the above conditions are fully satisfied. 1 EXHIBIT #2 Ms. Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: WITZ PROPERTY APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND LOT SPLIT Dear Ms. Woods, I hereby authorize Alan Richman Planning Services to act as my designated representative with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for the property located at 705 North Spruce Street. Alan Richman is authorized to submit an application to annex the property to the City of Aspen, to zone the property, and to split the property into two lots. He is also authorized to represent me in meetings with City of Aspen staff, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Aspen City Council. Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review of this application, you can contact me directly at the number below, or you can do so through Alan Richman Planning Services, whose address and telephone number are included in the land development application. Sincerely, C-- ---,u_ A--- Witz Property LLC Camilla Auger, Managing Partner ' 709 North Spruce Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-544-0745 C. EXHIBIT #3 • Sherie M. LeBlanc William E. Glasener 105 Ptarmigan Basalt, CO 81621 To Whom It May Concern; April 6, 2000 William E. Glasener and Sherie M. LeBlanc, current owners and Selling Principals of Little Victorian #2, also known as Little Victorian Condominiums, unit number two, 634 W. Main Street, Aspen, CO 81611, hereby authorize Camilla Auger and or assigns, Buyer, to submit subject property to be approved as an affordable housing unit. This approval would be implemented only after closing of the transaction. i SELLER / t /-��-� ` �.� /C C DATE l William E. Glasener SELLER ?y1 ' i' �'' �' �' Xs�f. DATE cz Sherie M. LeBlanc BUYER l / DATE `f Z2 U v Camilla Auger/ and or assigns EXHIBIT #4 • C�Y OF ASPEN PLAN-NE R: PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY Chris $endon. 920.5072 DATE: 2.8.00 PROJECT. Spruce Street parcel Rezoning REPRESENTAT]VFAlan Richman OWNER: Ravmond and Cantila At),,Lr TYPE OF APPLICATION: Rezoning - Two Step Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council (staff application) Lot Split - One Step City Council. DL•SCRiPTION: Owner will be seeking annexation into Aspen. Propert) wmatoned will most likely he toed to the R-30 Zone District after annexation consistent with the surrounding properties. Theinitial zoning process is administered by the City and the applicant need not pa}, forstaff time related to this process. Owner is contemplating redevelopment of the single-family residence; into a duplex by use of the GMQS exemption for older existing lots or subdividing (lot split) the lot into two new parcels. Newly created lot split parcels outside of the OriginalTownsite are not eligible for residential GMQS exemptions by the Director but may be eligible for a GAMS exemption by extinguishing existing City TDRs that were created from the Smuggler Mobile Home Park. Planner recommends the applicant provide documentation on the CityTDRs to the Planning Director and City Attorney for acceptance prior to applying for n Lot Split. Once the parcel is within the City jurisdiction, development will be subject to the Residential Design Standards and some portions of the parcel may be subjccl to tho 8040 Greenline Revie,.. Land Use Code Section(s) 26.310 Rezoning 26.410 Residential Design 26.435 8040 Greenline Review 26.520 Accessory -Dwelling Units ' 26.480 Subdivision Exemptions (Lot Split) ' Rezoning (staff application): Review by: Staff, Planning and Zoning Commision (PH), City Council (PH). Public Hcarinr: Yes, Applicant must post property and mail notice at least 10 days prior to hearing, or at least I5 ' days prior to the public hearing; if any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-��overnmental agency owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the propcny subject to the development application . ' Applicant will need to provide proof pf posting• and mailing frith an of daor ar the public hearing. Referral _ -encies: Zoning Total Deposit: No fees for City initiated zoning. Lot Split: Review by: Staff, DXC for technical considerations, City Council (PN). Public Hcaring: Yes, Applicant must post property and mail notice at least 10 days prior to hearing, or at least 15 days prior to the public hearing if any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi -governmental agency owns property 1vithin three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development applicattion. Applicant ivill need to proovide proof of posti�rg and mailing z+ ith an affidavit at the public hearing. • Referral Agencies: Engineering. «'ater, r1CSD, PitC'o Planning. City Attorney for Tf?R confirn1alion. I'Ianning tees. Planning Deposit. Major ($2,310 for 12 hours of staff time) Referral Agency Fee;: Engineering, Major ($330); Total TII posit: S',640 (additional hour; are billed at a rate of S 19511our) To apply, submit the following information (applies only to Lot Split application): 4 N 10 11 Notes: Proof of ownership Signed fee agreement. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado. lisling the names of al( owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to niggly for the Development Application, Total deposit for review ofi'the application 15 Copies of the complete application packet and maps. HPC = 12; PZ = 10; UMC = PZ+5; CC = 7; RefelTal Agencies = 1/ea.; Planning Staff = 1 An S 1/2" by 11" vicinity slap locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. Site improvc•nicnt curve)' including topography and vegetation showing the current status. including all easements and vacated rights of way, of thee parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. (This requirement. or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is dclermined not to warrant a survey document.) Proposed plat prepared by a Registered Surveyor. Call City Engineering about plat requirements. 920.5080. Additional materials as required by the specific review. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of ho\v the proposed development complies with the revicty standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as bell as proposed. Copies of pries approvals. 1. Annexation is administered through the Cit.) Attorney's Office. John Worucster, City Attorney. 920-5055, ' 2. Initial Zoning (fullowing annexation) is provided by the City through the sarne process as rezoning and can be scheduled concurrent Nvith the annexation process. ' Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to chance in the future. and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The strmmary does not create a ' legal Or vested right. EXHIBIT #S MEMORANDUM To: Housing Board From: Lee Novak Subject: Little Vic #2 Date: April 5, 2000 Background: Camilla Auger is proposing to deed restrict a single unit in the Little Victorian complex located at the corner of 6'' and Main Street. Ms. Auger is not required to deed restrict this unit for mitigation. She is offering the unit as an incentive to the City to annex another property she is developing. The unit is approximately 575 square feet. It is currently a one bedroom loft configuration. A bedroom is located at the loft level, but there is no door between it and the first floor. Currently, the access to the loft is with a much improved ladder. The applicant has promised to install a stair case so that the unit meets building code. The unit is otherwise in good shape. The applicant has prorm.sed to repair a leak in the skylight and some wiring in the bathroom. In addition, Ms. Auger has promised to update the appliances and the bath fan. The exterior of the building was painted in 1996 and the roof was installed in 1989. The carpet is in excellent shape. The heating system is a centrally located electrical heater. While not a very efficient system, it seems to be in working order. ' Ms. Auger would like to deed restrict the unit to a category 3 price of S 120,800. She is not requesting future mitigation credits for this deed restriction. The remainder of the units in the project are not deed restricted. Typically this raises a caution for the Housing Office because of potentially high dues that effect the affordability of the unit. This unit currently has very low monthly dues -$50 per month- and the HOA has a reserve of $3,000 for capital expenditures. Recommendation: ' Staff recommend that the Housing Board provide preliminary direction to staff to accept a deed restriction of this unit at a Category 2 price of $78,200, or at maximum S100,000. While staff are typically wary of single units located in free market projects, this unit looks to be an excellent ' opportunity for a starter unit. Staff believe the unit will be in acceptable condition to include in the inventory after the basic work mentioned above. Staff do not feel comfortable pricing the unit at a Category 3 price. The square footage of the unit is below the category 2 minimum for a one bedroom unit (600 square feet). While it is not often that a person would deed restrict a unit when not required to under the code, staff do not believe ' that this generosity or the unit's amenities warrant a sales price above $100,000. A structural engineer or certified building inspector should be retained to review the unit for ' structural problems before a deed restriction is accepted. ALES - R LES-RENAL AvS, Cdondo8197SSO1925.5757 -Fax 97M25.1405 - Wan 8881648.1368 n,w'.aven.comhnrlmghomn - e-mail: billxulmg®apw wm I 1 Reference: Little Victorian Condominiums Unit No. 2. 634 W. Main St., Aspen. To: Lee Novak From: Bill Stirling, selling broker. Date: April 5, 2000 Additional information about the complex and the apartment: 1. The building was constructed in 1965-66. 2. There are 8 units in the building Four of the units are owned by one owner. He rents all those units longterm. Because 50 % of the units are controlled by one owner, his local representative, who actually developed the complex in the mid 60's, handles most of the building's affairs. He charges minimal fees with an idea of keeping all the building expenses as low as possible. He hires a local bookkeeper to handle all the dues collections, profit and loss statements and bill paying. 4. Unit 2 has 576 s.f., as per the assessor. The property taxes are $555.08 per year. The unit is shielded from the ambient noise of Main St. by unit no. 1. It is a great location, walking distance to downtown and right on all the bus routes: in -town, West End shuttle, down valley and skier shuttles. There is a very pleasant landscaped yard, which is directly in front of unit 2, giving it the feeling of a private yard for Unit 2. The building was designed in a Victorian style, in keeping with the historic theme of Main St. 6. The various minor repairs pointed out to the Buyer by the Housing Officer will be accomplished by the Buyer and Seller. The access to the loft bedroom will be changed by the Buyer or Seller to a proper staircase before being offered as an affordable unit. Though all the appliances are in excellent working order, the Buye -, if required, will replace all appliances with brand new machines before being sold to a qualified local buyer. is W y Vlll o RENTALS & REAL ESTATE \�Pi N - ROARING FORK \'ALLEI - ST. BARTH'S - NANTUCKET - LYFORD CAN - STONE - HARBOUR ISLAND - ABACO Ref: Little Vic #2 Hi Bill: In answer to your questions. here is what I was able to find out. ' 1. There is no prepared budget, they have been billing the same utilities for 20 years. There is $3000.00 in reserve. 2. There are no copies of any meetings, there have been only 2 meetings since 1983. 3. Appliances were installed in 1988. 4. Roof was installed in 1989. Should be good for 35 years. 5. It was painted 1996. 6. The skylight is the owner's problem. 7. The carpet was installed last year. ' Mike Horn has been managing at least part of these condos since 1983, and knows most of what goes on. He is willing to answer any questions you have. His number is 925- ' 1100. There is an outside storage space for this unit. I'm guessing that it is 3'wide x 6' long x ' 7' high. The monthly HOA's are $50.00. ' opq this 1ps ' im Gil in 1 4 CHERRY STREET NANTL CKET. \IA 02ii4 ABACO/HARBOUR ISLAND/LYFORD CAN H.G. CHRISTIE BUILDING. MILLARS COURT 6kV E. COOPER A\'ENLT STONE/ST. BARTH'S ASPEN. CO S1611 PO BOX 1003, MAIN STREET ROARING FORK \'ALLEN' ORCHARD PLAZA, STE 106, EL JEBEL. i0s.•2S-SS40 or PO BOX N8164. NASSAL', BAHAMAS TEL 970.920-4700 STO\\'E,\'T M672 S02.2i3.8777 MAIL: 2IS E. VALLEYROAD SkV,W9.11ENT(7368) USA/CANADAS00-320-S777 or 802.2i3.S 77 SMS-621-C\'RR(2877) skX)-Q0-8777 SUITE 106,CARBONDALE,CO81623 FAX i0S-228.8804 BAHA161AS 242.322.1041 FAX 970-920.37 7 3 FAX S02.2i 3.2144 TEL 970.963•i99i. FAX 970.963.6730 ' E-MAIL: info®CVRandR.com WWW.CVRandR.com n 4-4 nVnt:ti , INC. 1 D-9�51 405 M It Um • Nf AU • PIOKM MAMMENt LV& mtow till-iwgssBJJit1fm ujimlo,w-qlI P91,-92 EXHIBIT #6 AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS BY CAMILLA AUGER FROM JOHN A. ELMORE AND LIONEL 'CVO I -I 13 W Date: March 20, 2000 Agreement: Buyer, Camilla Auger, agrooe to buy and the undersigned Sellers, John A. Elmore and Lionel Wow, agree to sell the Transfer of Development Rights in the City of Aspen (Herein after referred to as the TDR) on the terms and conditions set forth in this contract. 1. The PURCHASE PRICE AND TERMS as set forth below. Price shall be $160,000.00, payable in U. S,Dollars by Buyer as follows: Earnest money shall be $15,000, 00 (See paragraph 2 below) Cash at closing shall be $145,000.00 2 The EARNEST MONEY :shall be in the form of a personal or business check as pan payment of the purchase price and shall be payable to and held by STIRLING HOMES, INC. TRUST ACCOUNT, on behalf of both Sellers and Buyer. The first $10,000.00 of the earnest money shall be delivered to Stirling Homes, Inc. upon fwl execution of this agreement, but by no later than Wednesday March 22, 2000. The second $5,000.00 of earnest money shall be delivered to Stirling Homes, Inc. on or before May15, 2000, shall be immediately non -ref tadable and shall be deposited in the STIRLING HOMES, INC. TRUST ACCOUNT. Upon the check's clearing the bank, Broker WWI transfer this second earnest deposit directly to the Sellers, but in no case later than 10 days after receipt in Broker's account. SELLER'S DISCLOSURE. Sellers are hereby required to provide the Buyer with evidence of the TDR on or before Wednesday March 2.2. 2000, verifying that it is an acknowledged instrumettt by the City of Aspen Attorney and, therefore, able to be utilized by the Buyer in her subdivision application with the City of Aspen Buyer shall have until Friday March 24, 2000 to confirm and accept the TDR evidence provided by the Sellers. 1 03-21-60 09:13 TO:STIRLING HOMES, INC. FROM: Pei 93-29-99 09:35 STIRLING HOMES, INC. ID-9791495 P92/92 4. BUYER'S INSPECTION: Buyer shall have a period of 30 (thirty) days from exocution of this agreement before the earnest money becomes non-refundable. On or before the end of this 30 day period, Buyer shall notify Sellers in writing that this contract is terminated, then the $10,000.00 earnest money shall be returned to the Buyer, and this agreement shall become null and void. If written notice is not received by Sellers by or before the end of this 30 day period, this agreement shall be in full force and effect, and the earnest shall become non-refundable. The earnest money shall then be transferred by the Broker, minus any interest which will be payable to the Buyer, to the Sellers within 48 hours of satisfaction of Buyer's 30 day inspection 5. CLOSING: Delivery of the TDR, by whatever legal instrument is appropriate, from Sellers to the Buyer shall be at closing July 5, 2000. The hour and place of closing shall be as designated by Stirling Homes, Inc. Closing shall be on the date specified or by mutual agreement at an earlier date. 6. ASSIGNMENT: This agreement shall be assignable by Buyer without Seller's written consent. Except as so restricted, this agreement shall inure to the benefit of an be binding upon the heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns of both parties. 7. TWEE IS OF THE ESSENCE HEREOF. ' 8. EARNEST MONEY DISPUTE: Notwithstanding any termination of this agreement, both parties agree that, in the event of any controversy regarding the Earnest Money, Stirling Homes, Inc. shall not be required to take any action but m4y await any proceeding or at broker's sole discretion may interplead all parties and deposit any earnest money into the court. y9. NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE: Fascimiles are legal. This agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same document_ This proposal shall expire unless accepted in writing, by Buyer and Sellers, as evidenced by their signatures below on or before Monday March 20, 2000, 5:00 P.M_ RMT. If executed, this agreement shall become a binding agreement between Sellers and Buyer. IAA BUYER. Camilla Auger DATE: t SELLER: John A Elmore DATE: SELLER Lionel Wow DATE: 1 1 1 1 11 G C eJi20I2000 19:09 19*31267 1': YOW RES • �7':0Ft#e •1•:7a iT(rILtNQ M I p OMITS: INC a•vv`y�at4a5 I f I I h 4 AUYBR'9 iN$T3C7tOM� Auyas shall have a Petiad of 30 (thirty) day, from I �; atoov�tost of tie, a�roat�t Dlelbss dts osrtaNt ��, bawtstas no*-s.A�tui�le On a belbss the ead aftbns 31D day period, Savor &jk n noe9y S+rl aortasat is WwAnatad We sn wrninS that this tllb► tfie 510.000.00 esmetn nwoty al„H b# "tuned to the 8uyar, file shall beooala tut l ad Vold If*rfttea mono# is not reosr"d by 3Nlars by or Waive t►o end of this 3o day pwiod. this ag a.,1M ,lhsu b# in file Earw and eaRsot, ow the asrraw Shall bsconss role-radllndebla. The #cruet •toaey awl than ba trs wtwTod by tho drokar, "Onus any lowo,* which win b# Nyabk to the burs, to the 34"s wjthia 48 bours of utlat*ction ofbuyer's 30 day S CLOSING' Dalivwy 0114 TDk by what#vw to 1 I&Mul+►gt is S#Ras 10 the' Du uP&" of r c, broth rot shall b# At aiosinr July 7, 2000. Tbo hour atsd pta.. otclosisIS sWl be oe de+l�nMed b7 5tislinS Kowa, Irlo C tttareAA1 Ivsto� "I be on the data spslclftad bT a�ra+sear�t M'laa �arNer date- 6 A2S10 ,,FYI Thio arMrnunt tlball be •w►ikaabhs by &tyw wttthpg Sanei'a 1►liesrt aorssert(- Jsxoapt w ao r#strictsd, t!tis agnamoix (hall Inure to the bseatit of an be 1sil 4"S vpft the hSiM (WMw'Vrw& tativ$k w000s.ora WW "31,18118 of both partl#s. y TAW 13 OF TEW 6gSENCE E EMW S. fiAxNEST NOON EY AISYUT1S: NoTwithnujdity ttrty tttm?natiot 91thI6 Wool tellk b*tA W"" W" *Wtt.14 tba WOM Of Kay a°nUVMJr ' ►+i;ardia3 the Barnet MoVay, StirbaS Mostoo, Inc. shah riot be required to tat# any salon but I try await stay Pr0000din a at broker's sbl# discrctioa taut' intefpload all puliss and depoatt any ospoost aw"" ire* will oosft. 1 9 NOTICE OF ACCarTANCd, lWitttiior Ire l#S9 Tlfla W"nWnt may be exoouted in mAltips# at++eWparta, osoh orwbwb jW vowtituu an on wW, buT stt of whklA takon Wood or "I tea MUO 0" and the urno doawbam TWs psopooW sh&H ccpin vnlooa WoWcd In by Sayer and 9 krk as *"domed by their siArsaat»s WOW on or Brian Mvrdoy Mwoh Z0, 2000. 5.00 P.M. kw [f akeotaw, tAss aFeoar► M 0411 bwwrTst a bindmi s;ro#mett( bofw M Won and B*vtr II,YE]l: CATM ip n— o II i I I: r �►. Elelas Lion o; wow j PATb: 70� -� ATE- -3 �jt 40 a DATE PAGE 02 I03-21-00 09:13 TO:STIRLING HOMES, INC. FROM: P02 • 1 F-1 1 1 1 RONALD GARFIELD' ANDREW V. HECHV ,MICHAEL J. HERRON3 DAVID L. LENYO MATTHEW C. FERGUSON' CHRISTOPHER 1. LACROIX" CHAD J. SCHNIIT' Via Hand Deliverer John P. Worcester, Esq. City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 8 1611 GARFIELD & CIE CHT) F. C, ATTORNEYS AT LAW E-mail: atty@ aarfieIdhecht.com Website: www.garfieldhecht.com March 23, 2000 Re: Assignment of Free Market Development Rights Dear John: 601 EAST HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE (970)925-1936 TELECOPIER (970)925-3008 110 MIDLAND AVENUE SUITE '_01 BASALT. COLORADO 81631 TELEPHONE (970) 927-1936 TELECOPIER (970)927-1783 This office represents John A. Elmore, 11 in connection with his Assignment of two Free Market Development Rights dated February 6, 1989, between Aspen Mountain Park 11 and John A. Elmore, 11. 1 enclose a copy of the Assignment which was recorded at Book 586, Page 384. Please verify, by signing below, that these Free Market Development Rights are still valid and that they can be validly assigned to a third party. 1f you have any questions, please give me a call. Very truly yours, Michael J. Herron MJH:cf Enclosure Signed this day of March, 2000. John A. Worcester, City Attorney M:\cfreeman\AVH\Elmore\j.worcester.IEr.wpd al.0 aJnuueJ In -. A.., admttwu to 3. A— adauttcJ to 1 A- AJ In J to 5 ai. aJmmed w Nc Yu Bar Dt —, , CuIa t,u Bar Fh-di Bir Ilhnm, Bar C.mneou ( Bu ® Pnnted on recycled Papa 1 O L CD i r M rl LA 1 0AM Mlx' M At tclUM04 r.G Thud now Aupm ru: ]rASn* spa E— PApk m wapen Colorbp Y161 t 1 • W O o Ln — 4 c r' ASSIGNMENT OF � r � Y _J U • FREE MARKET DEVELOPMENT RIGHT XBIS ASSIGNMENT is given this day of February 19L9, h.?f ASPEN MOUNTAIN PARR 11, a Colorado general partnership ("Assignor"), to JOHN A. ELLMORE IT ("Assignee"), with refer- ence to the following: RECITALS A. By virtue of (i) the Precise Plan and Subdivision Agreement for Smuggler Mobile Rome Park recorded in Book 424 at Pages 780, et seq., of the Pitkin County, Colorado real proper- ty records ("Records") and the completion of the development activity contemplated therein, and (ii) the P.U.D. and Subdivi- sion Agreement for The Pitkin Reserve recorded in Book 423 at Pages 417, et seg., and amendments thereto recorded respective- ly in Book 447 at Pages 59, et seq., and in Book 468 at Pages 853, et seq., of the Records -collectively herein the "Land Use Agreements"), and the development activity contemplated therein and completed to date, Aspen Mountain Park, a dissolved Colorado partnership ("AMP") had conferred upon it by the City of Aspen, Colorado, nineteen freely transferrable and alienable free market development rights ("Development Rights"), which represent exceptions to and exemptions from the free market development allotment review processes of the Growth Management Quota System contained in Article 8, Sections 8-101, et seq_, of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen ("GMQS"). B. Six of the nineteen Development Rights were uti- lized in connection with the six single-family residential lots comprising The Pitkin Reserve Subdivision and one of the Development Rights was assigned by AMP to another. C. In connection with the subsequent dissolution of AMP, the remaining twelve Development Rights were assigned by AMP to Levin who, in turn, assigned the twelve evelopment Rights to Assignor, which has since assigned of the Development Rights to others. D. Assignee wishes to acquire from Assignor and Assignor is willing to transfer to Assignee two (2) of the Development Rights. W I T N E S S E T H: IN CONSIDERATION of the foregoing recitals and the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable considera- tion passing from Assignee to Assignor, the receipt, sufficien- cy and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, Assignor 1 03-21-00 19:21 TO:STIRLING HOMES, INC. FROM: PO1 � n r BOOK hereby assigns unto Assignee two (2) Development Rights and, in respect of the foregoing Assignment, Assignor warrants that: 1. It is the owner and holder of the Development Rights hereby assigned with full and free right to convey, transfer and assign them to Assignee; 2. The Development Rights hereby assigned represent valid and subsisting exemptions from or exceptions to the GMQS and are subject to no limitations except as may be expressed in the Land Use Agreements; 3. That which was required to be done under the Land Use Agreements in order fully to vest the Development Rights and render their use unconditional has been done, and Assignor will neither do or cause or suffer to be done, by commission or omission, any act or thing that would defeat, interfere with or impair the Development Rights hereby assigned; and A. The Development Rights hereby assigned will enable Assignee to build two free-market, dwelling units without having to (a) go through GMQS, or (b) provide any employee housing or cash in lieu thereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Assignment has been executed and given as of the day and year first above written. ASPEN MOUNTA PA II, a Colo ado gen ral Tartnership By Michael c ip n, General Partner STATE OF COLORADO ) 5S. COUNTY OF P-ITKIN } The for o na instrument was acknowledged before me this �ay of 989, by Aspen Mountain Park II, a Colorado general partne ship, by Michael B_ Lipkin, its General xr-' . WITNESS my hand and official seal. p AN• `r ;My commission expires: .LsErA�) o ar. -Public OATM H1,pM k '�G • ' .. .. rne0 Rom AVen Pk.= WO" C rwh �,0 . 4 2 SSA [a.H.Pkjm a1 wgrn cowrGe aYt bit ,In-1' -2- 03-21-00 19:22 TO:STIRLING HOMES, INC. FROM: P02 EXHIBIT #7 THE CITY OF ASPEN April 7, 2000 Michael Herron, Esq. Garfield & Hecht, P.C. 601 East Hyman Ave. Aspen, Colorado 81611 IRe: Smuggle Mobile Home Park Free Market Development Rights Dear Mickey: This is in response to your letter dated March 23, 2000, in which you asked this office to confirm that certain Free Market Development Rights (TDR's) created by the Precise Plan and Subdivision Agreement for Smuggler Mobile Home Park recorded at Book 424 at Pages 780, et seq. , are still valid. The City's records indicate that of the nineteen original TDR's created, nine (9) were used for the O'Block project (Subdivision Agreement for O'Block Townhouses recorded at Book 631 at Pages 504, et seq. ), six (6) were used for the Pitkin Reserve project (Second Amendment to PUD and Subdivision Agreement for the Pitkin Reserve ' recorded at Book 468 at Pages 853, et. seq. ). Thus, there are four (4) TDR's that have not been used to date. This office can not verify that the chain of title is as represented by your client, but will accept an assignment of title properly executed by Mr. John A. Elmore II as evidence of an assignment of the TDR's referenced in the Assignment of Free Market Development Rights, recorded at Book 586 at Pages 384. ' If you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, John P. Worcester City Attorney 1PW-04/07/2000-G:\iohn\word\letters\herron3.doc 130 5cx I II CIAr\A STRFFT • A,ri \, C o a cn:.\r o 81n11 • I'Fiom 970.920.5000 • F,\x 970.920.5197 EXHIBIT #8 • Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical. Inc. H 5020 County Road 154 ��h Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone:970-945-7988 Fax:970-945-8454 April 20, 2000 hpgeo@hpgeotech.com Camilla Auger 1 709 Spruce Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Job No. 198 147 Subject: Geotechnical Conditions for 8040 Greenline Review, Proposed Residential Development, 705 North Spruce Street (blitz Property) Pitkin County, Colorado. tDear Ms. Auger: As requested, we met with Raymond Auger and Alan Richman at the site on March 27, 2000 and made a reconnaissance of the proposed development area. The purpose of our work was to evaluate the geotechnical conditions with respect to the proposed development based on our observations and experience in the area. The work was performed in accordance with our agreement for professional services to you dated February 13, 1998. Proposed Development: The development will consist of subdividing the existing property into two residential units. We have been provided a plan with the existing site conditions. A two story wood frame residence currently occupies the property. The residence will be razed as part of the proposed development. One residential unit is proposed to be constructed in the area of the existing residence and the other one further uphill to the northeast of the existing residence. The units will be serviced by municipal water and sewer systems. The development area is proposed to be annexed into the City of Aspen. Geotechnical Conditions: The subsoils in the development area consist of glacial moraine containing poorly sorted gravel, cobble and boulder deposits in a silty sand matrix (Bryant, 1971). Boulders up to several feet in size are embedded in the deposits and are exposed throughout the property. The ground surface on the property slopes down to the southwest at grades between about 15 % and 20 % . A shallow ephemeral (dry) drainage is located along the northwest side of the property. The head of the drainage appears to terminate at the northern corner of the property. The hillside in the development area appears to have had a relatively stable, recent geologic history. Vegetation consists of cottonwood trees, sagebrush, grass and weeds. Some patches of snow were on the site at the time of our site reconnaissance. Conclusions and Recommendations: Development of the property as proposed should be feasible based on geotechnical conditions. There are no geologic hazards that would make the proposed development infeasible. The natural slopes should be considered by the site specific building and driveway development. In general, cut and fill slopes ' steeper than about 1 t/2 horizontal to 1 vertical should be retained. The on -site granular soils, excluding oversized rock, should be suitable for use as structural fill and as Camilla Auger April 20, 2000 Page 2 retaining wall backfill. Spread footings placed on the natural soils should be suitable for building support. Site specific subsoil studies should be conducted for individual building designs. We should review the proposed grading and drainage plans as part of ' the preliminary design of the development. The site is located within the Smuggler Mountain mining district and may be underlain by old mine works. Evidence of surface mining activity was not observed on the property. The risk of future surface subsidence due to underground mine works in the Aspen area is generally accepted as low, but the property should not be considered totally risk free. I L� I I E [I Limitations: This review was conducted according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either expressed or implied. Our findings are based on a site reconnaissance and review of published geologic maps. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for preliminary project evaluations. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. Additional geotechnical engineering studies should be conducted as project planning and design proceeds. If there are any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - Jordy Z. Adamson, J f , Rev. by: SLP JZA/ksm G �IIG Off;-: 'f.N A. ,.;• r'. cr..0707 '•-771 ZA cc: Alan Richman Planning Services - Attn: Alan Richman Schmueser Gordon Meyer - Attn: Jay Hammond REFERENCE Bryant, B., 1971. Geology Map of the Aspen Quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey Map GQ-933. H-P GEOTECH F 1 1 1 . ENGINEERS • EXHIBIT #9 SG SURVEYORS (970) 925-6727 SCHMUESER M P.O. Box 2155 FAX (970) 925-4157 GORDONMEYER Aspen. CO 81612 April 6, 2000 Mr. Alan Richman Alan Richman Planning Services P.O. Box 3613 Aspen, CO. 81612 RE: Witz Property Lot Split and 8040 Submission, Engineering Report Dear Alan: This letter comprises an engineering report regarding relevant aspects of the proposed Lot Split and 8040 Submission to build an additional single family home on property owned by the Witz Property, LLC at 705 North Spruce Street in Aspen, Colorado. The owner's are submitting an application to the City of Aspen for annexation, Lot Split and 8040 approval to replace the existing single family home on the property and construct one additional single-family residence within a designated building envelope on a newly created lot. I have endeavored herein to provide comments appropriate to the engineering -related criteria of the City of Aspen land use code, particularly Section 26.435.030 8040 Greenline review. Introduction The Witz property is a metes and bounds parcel located on North Spruce Street, northwest of the Williams Ranch Subdivision, in unincorporated Pitkin County. The site is currently zoned R-30 in the County. The proposed development plan will result in a replacement of the existing home and one new single-family residence located within a designated building envelope. This report focuses on the infrastructure, traffic and drainage requirements of the proposed development. All utility service will be from North Spruce Street, where new water and sewer mains as well as an upgraded electric line are in place and other utilities are currently under ground serving the existing residences in the area. The recently completed construction to extend water and sewer into the area was designed to meet the minimum sizing requirements of the City of Aspen Water Department and Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District to serve existing homes but will also be adequate to serve these additional residences. The property is accessed from a private drive (known as North Spruce Street) that intersects with Spruce Street and is subject to easements for use by the area property owners. I have spoken with representatives of the primary utilities and inspected the site with regard to the availability of all secondary utilities. 1 118 West 6th, Suite 200 • Glenwood Springs, Colorado • (970) 945-1004 April 6, 2000 Mr. Alan Richman Page 2 1 would offer the following comments relative to the City's 8040 submission requirements; Water Supply The Witz site is adjacent to a City water main that was recently completed in North Spruce Street pursuant to Ordinance #41, Series of 1997. Water main construction included a tie-in to the water line above the pump station on Silverlode Drive in the Williams Ranch Subdivision then routing a new main west in Silverlode to an easement between Lots 3 and 4 of the Williams Ranch. The water line runs north, in an easement between Lots 3 and 4 of Williams Ranch, then follows the upper extension of North Spruce Street to the Lichtenstein (formerly Dr. Richard Phillips) residence at the end of the cul-de-sac. At the point that the water line enters the North Spruce Street easement within the Porath property, it is adjacent to the Witz property. For the foreseeable future, the pump station in Williams Ranch and related water mains will remain the maintenance and operational responsibility of an association comprising those properties served by the lines above the pump station. Given that the area is served by a pump station facility, water pressure and fire flows will be more than adequate. Despite the fact that the proposed new homesite on the Witz property is near the 8040 elevation, it will be the lowest property served by the North Spruce Street waterline extension. As -built easements would be granted to the City of Aspen Water Department if the lines are conveyed to the City for maintenance purposes. Fire flow represents an important aspect of extending water service into the North Spruce Street i area. The design added a total of four fire hydrants on the main, including a hydrant near the proposed additional homesite on the Witz parcel where the water line enters the North Spruce Street easement, significantly improving water supply for fire protection throughout the area. There is also an existing fire hydrant on the gravity pressure zone below the pump station (No. 959) that provides additional fire protection to the existing, lower homesite. This hydrant is at the intersection of Spruce Street and North Spruce Street, about 300 feet from the existing home. The Ian for the Witz residences is to service a p each home individually from its own service tap to the street with a buried valve box accessible from the outside of the structure. Service to the residences will require the payment of tap fees, abandonment of the well serving the existing residence on the site, a reimbursement for the main construction as well as an amendment to the main extension agreement for the North Spruce Street line to accommodate the additional units. In the event an amendment to the main extension agreement were not approved by the City, it should be possible to acquire an in-house only well permit for the new site. The existing home is served by a domestic well and wells have been drilled successfully on all properties above the ' Witz property in the past several years. A well providing sufficient flow for domestic use should be feasible within the site if it becomes necessary. Fire flow would still be available from the fire hydrants installed on the main extension. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 1 1 1 April 6, 2000 Mr. Alan Richman Page 3 Sanitary Sewer The existing homesite on the Witz parcel is served by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) by a service line to Spruce Street. The project site for the new home on the upper portion of the property is also adjacent to an approved sanitary sewer main extension in North Spruce that was constructed simultaneously with the water line. ACSD System Superintendent Tom Bracewell indicates that service is available to the Witz project via connection to the new sewer line in the private street. The new homesite may be able to be served with a gravity service connection to the main. Sewer service to a replacement of the current home may require a pumped service line to the new main. Service from the ACSD would require payment of applicable tap fees to the District including a tap fee surcharge toward improvements to an existing collection line through the Hunter Creek condominium complex. Sewer service, like the water service in this area, will also require a reimbursement for the cost of the main construction. The agreement to extend the sewer main into the North Spruce Street area should be unaffected. Electric Service The North Spruce Street area is currently served with electric primary by the Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., the rural electric cooperative that serves areas outside downtown Aspen. I've met and spoken in the past with Field Engineer Jeff Franke of Holy Cross Electric regarding the availability of service in this area. The existing home on the Witz site is, of course, already served and electric service is available from Holy Cross for the additional residence on the Witz property. In performing my field inspections, I note that a new transformer has been installed for the Porath residence just east of the Witz property and the proposed new homesite. Improvements to the electric primary system in the area were completed in coordination with the construction of the new water and sewer main extensions and should be more than adequate to serve the residence proposed under the Witz 8040 application. Miscellaneous Utilities Telephone, gas and cable TV lines are also in place into the area buried in the North Spruce Street corridor. Service is available from each of these utilities to the proposed Witz residences. Fire Protection As indicated in the water service section above, fire hydrants were included in the water main extension design to serve the existing residences in the area. Four hydrants are in place SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC Cl L� fl 1 11 1 11 April 6, 2000 Mr. Alan Richman Page 4 including at the point where the main enters North Spruce Street, at the first switchback near the Lewitz and Auger driveways (above the proposed Witz homesite), at the second switchback near the Timroth driveway and at the top cul-de-sac near the Lichtenstein home. These hydrants will also be adequate to serve the proposed residence. The hydrant at the point where the water main enters North Spruce Street is located about 180 feet from the new homesite. The project site is just under a mile from the Aspen Fire District's station on Hopkins Avenue and should be within a 5 minute response time. Fire equipment access to the Witz site is good since the property is only a short distance up the North Spruce Street extension. Access and Traffic Impacts Access to the two single-family homes on the Witz property will be from private drives that will intersect North Spruce Street. Spruce Street is a public right-of-way to the north end of the Centennial Condominiums, approximately 400 feet from the project site. Beyond that point, it intersects with a private access (what is known as North Spruce Street) within easements varying between 20 and 30 feet in width. Most of the North Spruce street segment functions as a one - lane roadway with a pavement width of between 12 and 18 feet. The platform is sufficiently wide, particularly in the curves, to allow two vehicles to pass one another. North Spruce Street above the Witz property essentially functions as a driveway accessing a total of six homes either in place or under construction at the present time. I would suggest that, for a private driveway easement not intended for dedication to the public use, fire and emergency access is the principal concern and the minimum 20 foot easement is appropriate and applicable. From a traffic generation standpoint, Pitkin County, in their Pitkin County Road Management and Maintenance Plan as adopted in 1997, recommends using the trip generation figures from the publication Trip Generation by the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE). The ITE publication, 5th Edition, Section 210 offers a trip generation figure for Single Family Detached Housing of 9.55 trip ends per unit per day. The County code also permits a trip generation reduction for a single- family home of 1.5 trips per day for homes within a half mile of a transit stop. For purposes of traffic generation analysis, I have viewed the replacement of the existing Witz residence as a net "zero" impact as a replacement of an existing home. Based on the ITE trip generation figures and reducing the trip generation associated with the proposed Witz residence for being within one half mile of transit, the proposal could be expected to generate just 8.05 trip ends per day. Of this figure, 10% or less than 1 vehicle per day could be expected to impact area streets during peak hours in the morning and evening time periods. I have not been able to locate any specific recent traffic count information for the Spruce Street area near the Witz project site. I would suggest that, in any case, the proposed Witz residence represents minimal impacts to the area streets both in terms of total vehicles per day and in terms of peak hour since I have not observed that the Spruce Street corridor is suffering from any capacity problems evidenced by congestion conditions at any time of the day. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC April 6, 2000 Mr. Alan Richman Page 5 The Witz residences will require new driveway cuts to replace the 'loop" drive of the existing residence with new driveways for each of the two homes. By replacing the loop drive of the current residence with individual driveways for each of two homes, the number of driveways off of North Spruce Street on this property will be unchanged. The proposed driveways will also serve the two homes with accesses offering better alignment and sight distances than currently exist. The existing access drives will be restored and revegetated by the property owners. The Witz property residences will also provide for on -site parking spaces pursuant to City of Aspen Code requirements. Grading and Storm Drainage The existing North Spruce Street extension does not have curb and utter and appears ears to drain 9 well based on a combination of borrow ditches, swales and culvert crossings. The existing drainage and grade conditions appear to disperse area drainage in such a manner that erosion is minimized and flows are not concentrated in any areas. Area soils are generally granular sandy gravels with extensive cobble and boulders such that infiltration into the site aquifer is good where storm runoff is in contact with the ground. The applicant is not proposing to add curb and gutter where it does not currently exist. Adding curb and gutter in this area would serve to concentrate storm drainage in a manner that would be more difficult to disperse. The only new impervious surface associated with the Witz ' residence project will be the new driveway and the new home, new entries and small parking areas. It is proposed that a new drywell (or drywells) sized for the 100-year event would be installed to detain any additional runoff generated by the new structure. Roof or deck areas and gutter systems would be directed to the drywell(s) for return of pre -development historic flows to the ' aquifer. Perimeter footer drains and any underslab drains (if required based on soil conditions encountered during excavation) should be routed to daylight. Footer drains should not be routed directly into the drywells due to the potential for storm flows to then back up into the Tooter and underslab areas. Otherwise, the new residential structures of the Witz project would require only conventional design items to address drainage conditions. Adjacent grading should slope away from the structures and upslope swales should be created to direct upslope drainage around and away from the buildings. The existing drainage patterns and watershed characteristics will not be impacted as a result of the site design. The recommendations of a geotechnical consultant should be considered regarding soil conditions or geologic hazards that may effect the site. From a grading standpoint, the proposed site plan should require minimal disturbance to the site. The single-family homes are to be built onto the slopes on the site. Other than the immediate disturbance associated with the construction activity, minimal grading work is suggested for the - SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. i iNNW April 6, 2000 Mr. Alan Richman Page 6 project. Foundation walls will act as retaining walls on the site slopes and no significant areas of cut or fill disturbance are proposed. Excavated material from the foundation areas will be used to construct the driveway into the site or will be removed from the site for disposal. Minimal exposed cut and fill areas will also serve to minimize the potential for erosion impacts as a result of the construction. Disturbed areas will be revegetated as soon as possible after construction to prevent slope erosion following completion of the residence. I hope these comments are adequate for submission purposes for the Witz property Lot Split and 8040 application. Feel free to contact me if I may provide further information or assistance. ' Very Truly Yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. l � Jay VV Hammond, P.E. Principal, Aspen Office JH/jh 00157ER I r SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. -d WJ"il '- l%l LIST OI&'VNERS WITHIN 300' OF SUBJESROPERTY BALDERSON HERBERT P 12 INT BIENKOWSKI ENRIQUE ' AUGER R SPRUCE ST N & CAMILLA BALDERSON MARTHA N 11/2INT ALBERS KATHLEEN AS JOINT TENANT; 709 N SPRUCE 708 SPRUCE ST PO BOX 8094 ASPEN, CO 8161111 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 BIRD DONALD L BOLERJACK LISA BRAUNIG MARTHA J 304 WILLIAMS WAY PO BOX 811 PO BOX 761 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 CARNEY TIMOTHY J CARROLL TWILA CLAY -TON DOUGLAS W MEDLIN MELINDA M AS JT TENANTS PO BOX 12190 314 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 8813 ASPEN, CO 81612 ' CRAWFORD PATRICIA C CURRY CHARLES T DANFORTH ALISON C 412 TEAL CT #Q-104 PO BOX 8150 PO BOX 3763 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 DEWOLFE DANIEL G DRISCOLL JOE & REBECCA ERICKSON THOMAS W & CHERYL L 502 WILLIAMS WAY PO BOX 9995 210 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 FERGUSON ROBIN PATRICIA FORSEILLE JULIA S FRANCIS LESLEE K & ROBERT A PO BOX 2691 315 TEAL CT 226 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ' FRIEDLAND MARK & HUNTER GANCSOS JOHN MARTIN GOKEY REED 387 SILVERLODE DR ANDERSON MARILYN 327 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611-2548 223 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611-3256 ASPEN, CO 81611-3262 GOLLNER HERMANN GREENE JEFFREY E & KAREN GRINSTEAD LAURA L 421 TEAL CT BLOMQUIST HULEY MARC J ASPEN, CO 81611-1566 PO BOX 152 317 TEAL COURT ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 HARRISON RUTH REV TRUST HINES SUSANNE HOGUE CAROLINE PO BOX 2704 207 STEWART DR 101 WILLIAMS WAY #C302 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 HOPKINS TRACY A KENNAMER SANDRA KESSLER DIANE & CHUCK 400 SILVERLODE DR PO BOX 11947 420 TEAL CT #Q206 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-1566 rKILLIAN LINDA H 328 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 LEDDY THOMAS A 704 SPRUCE ST ASPEN, CO 81611 'LINEHAN RAMONA J PO BOX 11088 ASPEN, CO 81612 MACBLANE EDWARD J JR 217 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 MARTIN MICHAEL C & CECELIA K PO BOX 2387 BASALT, CO 81621 MINK KATHLEEN 224 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 NHL it LLC 295 SILVERLODE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 PARIS JOHN H 3200 SANTA MONICA BLVD #204 SANTA MONICA, CA 90404 ' PIERRE SALLY ANN 101 WILLIAMS WAY ASPEN, CO 81611 PRZYBYLSKI ALBERT L 312 TEAL CT ASPEN, CO 81611 • KINSMAN DINAH LEE • KNUTSON BRUCE C & LISA 101 WILLIAMS WY #204D 104 WILLIAM WY #E104 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 LEVERSON JANET V LEWITZ CECIL & NANCY 221 TEAL CT 711 SPRUCE ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 LUTGRING TAZ MARIE MAC DONALD CHRISTOPHER H PO BOX 11392 301 WILLIAMS WAY ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 MACKAY SANDRA L MARQUIS JANET L 423 TEAL CT PO BOX 2712 ASPEN, CO 81611-1566 ASPEN, CO 81612 MATTHEWS NANCY ANN MCWILLIAMS TONI PO BOX 1370 319 TEAL COURT ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-1568 MORAN JAMES T AND MARY NEVIN JOSEPH P & NANCY B 688 SPRUCE ST 415 SILVERLODE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 O'DRISCOLL KEVIN OTTE GAIL D DRISCOLL JOSEPH 329 TEAL CT PO BOX 9995 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 PARKER ANNE LISE PFEIFER PATRICK A 410 TEAL CT 1240 E COOPER AVE ASPEN. CO 81611 ASPEN. CO 81611 PITKIN COUNTY PORATH FAMILY TRUST 530 E MAIN ST STE 302 12400 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 1450 ASPEN, CO 81611 LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 ROSENBERG CHARLES WILLIAM RYERSON LOREN & AMY ROSENBERG JANICE MARY 501 WILLIAMS WAY 322 TEAL COURT ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ' SANDBERG KATHARINE A 202 WILLIAMS WAY ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHUTTER NANCY PO BOX 11613 ASPEN, CO 81612 SOYKA FREDERICK K HOBAN SONYA L 326 TEAL COURT ASPEN, CO 81611 TIMROTH ALBERT & DONNA PO BOX 89 ASPEN, CO 81612 VERNIER JULIE & JOSEPH 504 WILLIAMS WAY ASPEN, CO 81611 WILLIAMS RANCH JOINT VENTURE C/O MARK IV INC 3214 CAMPANIL DR SANTA BARBARA, CA 93109 'WINGERS JIM PO BOX 1530 ASPEN, CO 81612 ZUEHLKE WILLIAM M 'PO BOX 806 ASPEN, CO 81612 • SCHATZ FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST • SCHEMBRI MARY ELLEN PO BOX 9920 PO BOX 8866 RANCHO SANTA FE, CA 92067 ASPEN, CO 81612 SCOTT WENDY E PO BOX 2213 ASPEN, CO 81612 STACHOWSKI KIMBERLY A PO BOX 28292 EL JEBEL, CO 81628 TOMASZCZYK CHET 420 SILVERLODE DR ASPEN, CO 81611 WHEELER PATRICIA A WHEELER KEITH A AS JT TENANTS PO BOX 3513 ASPEN, CO 81612 WILLIAMS WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC C/O OATES HUGHES & KNEZEVITCH 533 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 WITZ EUGENE M 1920 N CLARK ST CHICAGO, IL 60614 SMITH KENNETH M PO BOX 11334 ASPEN, CO 81612 STEWART CHRISTOPHER W 422 TEAL CT ASPEN. CO 81611 TYLER MICHAEL & LISA PO BOX 10564 ASPEN, CO 81612 WHITE LANI N PO BOX 1033 ASPEN, CO 81612 WILSON DOUGLAS L & BEDRISHAH PO BOX 10092 ASPEN, CO 81612 ZACHARY MARC PO BOX 4494 ASPEN, CO 81611 LF MAPSJDRAWINGS � 11 • IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT OF THE WITZ PARCEL • PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO I U Q L 07 C C m O CU N m Ln CV L cu cn Q IV F-- 3 i O L0 LC7 O LO m ao i 0 L= a ]C Tn 0 Cn SUBJECT PARCEL P Ob \ VL � y gyBpDnSC" w1LLIAMS PANP1 CITY OF ASPEN VICINITY MAP LEGEND O FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 7158 0 =OUND THIS SURVEY. LS 2376 0 FOUNO THIS SURVEY. LS 13166 0 FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 20151 BENCHMARK: FOUND THIS SURVEY, BARE REBAR VA TH ILLEGIBLE RED CAP T.B.M. El EV. - 100.00 9.LM. BRASS CAP, AS DESCRIBED SET THIS SURVEY, 3/4- REBAR V1TH 2' DIAMETER ALUMINUM CAP MARKED. BANNER 25954 FOUND THIS SURVEY, 2 1/2- DIAMETER ALUMINUM PIPE NTH A 3 1/4" DIAMETER ALUMINUM CAP MARKED, BANNER 20632 - - - - - EASEMENT LINE DRAINAGE DITCH/PIPELINE MANHOLE D UTILITY BOX N B9.2F2Y W N 461wz` E4�­SIC� Lit322 BLM BRASS CAP FITB _ 21 _ N 69.w INL.M. BRASS CAP x6'2.0N SALVATION DITCH SP.M. 95" v.01S WITZ PARCEL IWERGROUMD- PIPE 978 DETAIL / SCALE. : - IV B L.Y BRASS CAP C :/4 E SPIN 9x J� .To N 69.2r22• W zn 3G• B.LN. BRASS CAP roT6 r�y 10 F� rn a IL (1)N n Q0 Jm N FEET 30 0 30 FEET GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: 1 INCH -30 FEET S �Yt'3>• 893 E A. 5 (� DETAIL 4 T.S- !EL DETAG PARCEL B SETaVCX EASEMENT RECDVWN NO. 255652 .y OUST ��,y �RANEl DRNE 10( E N T4.-.1Z E :: 61. 9RA11 CAP rox a i LOT 5 N 04• E / GBO ALUM DAP S/011 0 S; //0 700 ------------------------ `�---"------------------ ]0' UTLITY ANO ACCESS EASEMENT REGEPno IMo-9e ' N 64.4R•14• W NORTH SPRIICF STREET IPAVED PRrvATE ORtYE \\ \ 417.94' 1 \\ \\\ PARCEL A -SEE DETIL ROADWAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT / \\ RECEPTION .0. 2666a \ i \ 1 r' 1 \ 1 \ \ \ LOT t 1 \ \ h/ 1 1 \ \ `- 1 I \\ A 1 \ A / I CENTENNIAL CONDOMINIUMS ! \ 1 I \ -------- XI NNNT-a-WY PECEPTION ND. 134665 AID Mlp LOT 2 SILVERLODE SUBDIVISION T 4 TE N 3a-xlw E A'® 21. t\ DETAIL SCALE: . 5' �,41 �aC -SEE DETAL 7� ,D. h IN b S BT46'M• E NaSr I ELEV. = 100.00 I I I I I I I t I I LOT 3 0. Al BRASS CAI' MIT, 2-3 5304AM AID C 1/4 LINE SEC T 9x .aM YMHN b IM EM I­�eN C­M,nNN III— Nn 5304 AM b IN RaNMp FWM NnMq gFM1kt, IowVA. w "e T .naFd C, St ... R4 W al IM SIIM PrlMbs wsagn. PIMA "'"" Calor e•« 1 1 lalb.•: SCN,NNAg .1 a, Bwaw„ .L on 1. W4 ea :a 05«Ibll 1 C., a anM S.- OCANI nl 9acMn T a � 1AON roT6 .M1k• HW G/4 el FaIA ••H1Hq 4 aN Map cgralamaW NITS •.N• N 69. b - W. _ NMI. THMN asp aaN 01. Mm N W N 22- W. 322 III b In• 2-3 el FNA EM SIHW.•N .eM .mau • Fo1 Nap cq n SP.M, p04lRTB Marc S ♦5• !4' 2T W 113 1-1, 2 TM•ce al•„q 1M 2-1 Cl I" EM SnM. LN• N CO' 562T E, 40915 1••I: 3 TA«p S 4. .1' WE 19413 IN, Feb S 44. 09. 42- E. OSN CA6 Mm 4� 0EIM III LNN S. T 1C, 1114 cad Nm -1 S 46. 1' CO' W Na2TS I— ,a FVM CV4 N,,C 6TP . N,c• alpq as4 G/4 I4• N 65. 4B l4 W, M7.94 I— to Ma •omr Cr MGMan•. Sod nett •1 1- .F .-I..N Non ...I- I T92 « m N I - NOTES None. A_ft, 1. COI... I.. , TIN an, Rqa «rbn a4mwP.NrN •pN.a ncn ql««, wmp anmr to rulMa ea Ml•er rF•r • Ns• men ten pare n«n P. PC 01 .N nRcan•n nn.I' mr•,M. E Baab nr BwMH wn IM C 1/4 CCI ar s.,,_ T ana IM .-I_ ni a2-3 ctl. E. SVW Laaa GNe, Y.S. SSC4vm q :fi•N•N ar IM BM DgNHNnr Nuw 1980 n NMwn9 el S 69• 21 22- E aF 1. omar a fig. con,an,w M.w -NA. as 11- N Apr1 O3. 2000.n 4 .e4. ,ana n4 GwrmM•. tOraN :.­4 . 0360T90-6s CVIN 419-00 aM wc_ 1N ­­C epptba•� 9. THE EFFECT OF INCLUSIONS N ANY GENERAL ON SPECIFIC WATER CONSERVANCY. FIRE PROTECTON, SOL CONSERVATION OR OTHER DISTRICT ON nICLl1510M N ANY WATER SERVICE OR STREET IMFIDVEMENT AREA D, RAVEN RIGHTS OR CLAIMS TO WATER RIGHTS 'L RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS CONTAINED IN UNTIED STATES PATENT RECORDED JANUARY 1. 1" N NOW LE6 AT PAGE 149 AS FOLLOWS: THAT THE PREMISES H 131Y GRANTED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE SLRFACE. MAY BE ENTERED BY THE PROPRIETOR OF ANY OTHER VEX. LOG, OR LEDGE, THE TOP OR APE. OF WITCH LIES D SCDE OF THE BONDARY OF SAID DRANTED PREMISES. SKOULD GE THE SAME M ITS DIP BE FOUND TO PENETRATE INTERSECT OR EXTEND INTO SAID PRElNSE5, FOR THE PURPDSE OF EXTRACTING AM REMOVING THE ORE FROM SUCH OTHER VEX, LOB ON LEDGE. AND R04T OF WAY FOR DITOHES AM CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE ANTED STATES. Iz TERMS, ABREEMENT5, PROVISONS. QDNGTONS. AND 06LIDATIONS OF EASEMENT AS SET FORTH IN AMELEEIT RECORD APAL 1. pp N BODN 240 AT PAGE 3S. '.S TERMS, AGREEMENTS. PROVISIONS. CONDITIONS. AHD OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN ABNDE REEMET RECORD JUKE 30. ISM IN BO24 OR S AT PAGE M. 14. TERMS, AGEEMENT5• PROVISIONS, CWpTXP6, AND OBLIGATIONS OF AMEMgED AM RESTATED EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED APRL A. 2000 AS RECEPYNHI NO M24TO. 16 TERMS A-.- PROV61daS. f�NGTD OBLIBA ONi AND, OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY, DRANAGE AND UTILITY PUNPOSE! AS GRANTED TO THE BOARD OF CO TT COMWSSSNDNERS BY EVOENE V RECORDED NE 4, SCIE IN BOON 4B7 AT PAGE All UNDER RECEPTION ND 26BNSI. 16_ TERMS. AOREEMENTS, PROVISION5. CONGnONS AM DBLIGAnIONS OF EASEMENTS OF ACCESS AND UNDEROROUNO UTLRY EASE ENT AS SET FORTH IN IFIGTRUIENT RECORDED SEPTETAER IS 1995 Al BOON T9.1 AT PAGE N42 UNDER RECEPTION NO 1A6S56 T. TERMS. AGI EEIENT3. PROVISIONS. COROITONS, AHD OBLIGATIONS OF GlAYT OF EASEMENT FROM SOARO OF COUNTY COMMSSIOIERS TO EUGEME WITZ RECORDED NNE 4 IND IN BOON 46T AT PAGE IT AS RECEPTION NO, 266652 18. ANY AND ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY. LEGEND AM NOTES, AND LESCREPIMXE3 N THE LOT LINES AS SHOWN ON THE IMPROVEMEMT/TOPOORACH SUEVEY BY ASPEN SJRYTY 'ENGINEERS ANC. DATED I0/99 AS JOB NO UAO S TTCIN,, c w�Wp FF HWR1IEmr•N .W ev1aG r en1n•s•, u m M. mio avlN D/99. 6. Bw a Hmme gonA M1——oTPq__. In w.wnaa •+ 1.. .0 rgArry ureN. SIMVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE L Jammq M INN!. N aR4WM P1 Gann 1N OFF« Inc. as PralpabFs aM Swa.1N, qw • e µ„ v 4raN a ��Gan m: N.. M 'pout FI m, kno.Mdq•Dana e•M1^~ N WITNESS WHEREOF I IMINCII CHI, fi, nqa 1.4 oHIc,N pN _ N, 0 A. D. 2000 _ CWVA M KNYIWM. PL3. 25264 SC 4E JOB N2 DAi: IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT OF THE WITZ PARCEL I' F 30• 83605501 4-25-00 3 PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADOT"° ^ ^+°=,-\' 64NER Assoc.. INc. 1 Of U • WITZ PROPERTY L.L.C., SITE PLAN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO L • 1 11 1 1 1 i 1 N a3 ro U 0 Ln Ln a L a) c c Eo m O O O C\i Q CD Ln C11 L CZ Q w LLJ cn C" 3 i 0 LC7 LC] 0 Lo m m i 0 Q a Y Cn 0 m U SUBJECT PARCEL `, aID � _�IAMSRANCN. SNRDNV140I CITY OF ASPEN VICINITY MAP i CITY OF ASPEN GIS CONTOURS " / o Q oo 0 0 / op i euf0«c EMYElOPE / y {•Ey`i, / �� �e�j M10 / /'o SOy LOT a xi tiN00 , LOT A /��-BUILORe ENVELOPE �T 39,023 S.F. 0.896 AC. e LOT B \ I zp7 / r 39,023 S.F. \ / zo' / 0.896 AC. u!�mEeD�RouOocH� / � \ Px•E \ / / + - - .5s• -` - / L - . - - N 4C4Bw' III_ Nw.a lie - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - y- - - - - - - - - - - 30' UTILITY AMEN ACCESS EASEMENT - - - - - - Y SID b No. 1, AA$4Y5 N BS•48'14' w NORTH SPRUCE STREET [PAVED PMATE DRIVE) \ Z R-T-OF-RAY 417-94' I \ RECEPTION w0. i3ABB5 AND wRB T.B.M. ELEV. = 100.00 \\ LOT 1 I I r . 4•q ��, ,I I LOT 2 I LOT 3 SILVERLODE SUBDIVISION I CENTENNIAL CONOOMMIIUTAS \ I BANNER ASSOI- Re. N FEET 3, 0 30 FEET GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: 1 !NCH =30 FEET LEGEND - - - - - EASEMENT LINE - - - - SET BACK LINE/BUILDING ENVELOPE DRAINAGE DITCH PIPELINE MANHOLE 0 UTIUTY BOX BENCHMARK: FOUND THIS SURVEY. BARE REBAR MATH ILLEGIBLE RED CAP T.B.M. ELEV. = 100.00 NOTE: THE PROPOSED SETBACKS ARE SHOWN HEREON AM ARE 'JIEATCR TMN REONR© 2 THE ONENSNlRS SHOMN M PARENTHESES REFERENCE T1L REOURED SET BACKS - THE ASPEN SAND USE CODE. ]. BENCHMARK SUPPLIED By ASPEN SURVEY ENOMEERS. INC R AN ASSUMED ELEVATION OF 100.00 OY THE SOUTHEAST PROPERTY CORNER. WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.C., SITE PLAN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO ZALi. 1 JOB NCI, I DAIL 1' = 30' 183605501 4-21-00 �-a? ND 1 of 1 cn C0 cn I U 0 O 0 cv Lo [Y-I (D c\J CV L Q Q Q J d a Lu X LLJ i Q7 3 i O In Ln CD 1D m co i 0 Q a /n 0 cn SUBJECT PARCEL _U;;,NM3'R�MLTI s.MNDTrt31D'N CITY OF ASPEN VICINITY MAP NOTES' I ACCOMIKI TO C,X ADD LAW YOU MAT COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT N T16 SURVEY WTHM1 THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FRST DISCOVER SLKH DEFECT N .0 EMT MAY ANY ACTION BASED WON A DEFER N THIS NIRVEY SE CAdREXi WANE THAN TIE. YEWS FWOM THE DATE OF QRTFICATNM SHOWN HEREON. 2 BASK OF BE-dRYK THE LINE BETTrtEM THE C V4 DOWNER OF MOTION T AND THE I.TERSLCTION OF LWE 2-3 OF THE ELLA BIERw000 LODE CLAW, M.S. 6304AM AS DETERNINED By THE ILN DEPENDENT RESURVEY OF MIND 5 ASSUMED TO HAVE A BEFRNO OF $ NM• a Zr E Ili ALL OTHER SEARNOS CONTANED HEREN BENIG RELATIVE TEZRETD. 3, NO FURTHER SUBDIVISION NAY BE GRANTED FOR THESE LOTS. WIN li ADDITIONAL UNITS BE BOLT WRNKi RECEPT OF f1VIDIVOOM APPROVALS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 21440 AND MD- MANAgSENT ALLOCJTCNS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER M470, OF E THE ASPEN LAND USE COOF. 4. RESEARp1 FOR EASEMMNTS W RECORD WAS PDEFONNED BY LAND TITLE 6UMAidi W ORDER NO. 03111d 4. GATED 4# 00. LEGEND O FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 7168 O FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 2376 A FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 13166 • FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 20151 FOUND THIS SURVEY, BARE REBAR VATH ILLEC#BLE RED CAP B.LM. BRASS CAP, AS DESCRIBED SET THIS SURVEY, 5/8' RE13AR VATH ■ 1 1/2' DIAMETER ALUMINUM CAP MARKED, BANNER 25954 FOUND THIS SURVEY, 5/8' REBAR VATH A 1 1/2' DIAMETER ALUMINUM CAP MARKED, BANNER 20632 ----- EASEMENT LINE BL.M. MC V4 ASS CAP ed s.v N T 1 **i� _ M M'XxF W BASH Or i .J.Y MASS w YBT20' I 1 I M 4SM•xr E I I I M OB'xfxZ w I D Ly BLAE MASS W �° w I BLHL MASS w ZK.W 070 I I ll .. MASS CAP "AL WITZ PARCEL IBM I DETAIL scALE: r . 6• 1 I I I I I I I I I N FEET 30 0 30 FEET ........... I GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: 1 INCH = 30 FEET WITZ PROPERTY L.L.C., SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO 1;E A ILIZ� PARCEL B SETBACK EASEMENT RFLEFIION N0. 268652 LOT A 39.023 S.F. 0.896 AC.t v TA BLAA MASS W �Ne4S-0 �' MB4 S� /1 TITLE STATEMENT Lafe TIN. --IAA Da -,dew NWwr a«111, Na, 1 Ar daaNNM m. rlk re di Imb •N..n IN.. rol. Sbmm,*d EAdddndn Pkl Naal WIT2 PROPERTY LL.C- . C Ada L- Lkdb11 Od1Radlia� . e.n.. . Iw Nldu. I,.d wa ado: s1 .. Mau dM membonaa LAIC TITLE NNARANTEE -ANY :,K.Rr ENaNW. TIb 01Ra of Cakrob ) I r C.w11 al MYk I Fdd TNN S1•fa.W.1 w dabN•WH..aw Ad1ae N. Nw .m aw y Kdnb EwrA ml .W..-, IIa" I«id r.ww NrodR dlw 011kd, 1 L« 1. OU ml- C•ddwy. N WITNESS WHEREOF. I wom. dtla ,lR AW •od .111ua •.W. My -da ..p.di LOT 5 LOT 4 TE / N SME /s TIE 30' E DETAIL / LOT B JrJ.//��•io 39,023 S.F. , (# 0.896 AC.t _ } Al / fn 1------\ ----- 2- ------- \ zo• RlBlfr-llF-w4v \ RECEPTION M. 134M6 AND A" '� MII00' ---- ----------- ------------ - NORTH SPRUCE STREET 3C UTLITY AID ACCESS EASEMENT PAVED PRNAr! pRNF1 R[CEPTON M0. 4424T5 AND 3ISSl6 - - - - - 6 SC N 6B'46'14' W 417.y4' \ P L A `SEE DETAK \ \\ ROADWAY, MANAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT / RECEPTION .0. MGAS / EV 1 \\� 1, LOT 1 / OUi i I \ {y 1 4t It a n i \\ gticy l `\ I A \ In, � I CENTENNIAL CONDOMINIUMS Q) I I I \\ \ LOT 2 SILVERLODE SUBDIVISION LOT 3 S W"* E .NEST -- DETAIL I B.L.N BRASS CAP I IQT4A . 2-S 530M AND ( /A LINE SEC T I pia I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CLRTRRATE DF orynRMr AND 'MAT" KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS IHI•I WIZ P1d..11y, LLC., o Csbrwa Ldd- ubRty CWa«atkn ddi IINd oak •..a al Ir WN, Paid- N ... WN. Paul I. I.. - al A-- N. 4«TYB kW .Inn �aW C �c«w PN. -I)M CalerWq der wdA1 PW ,.d ry r .ad. «M fw d,M ..a. DESDRIPTCN OF WITZ PARCEL A I1ocI .t : WNM m N• Eh SINN,- Lob C-1 .awfW Sarw Ma. 5304 AM ld IAd R.«mo Fart MMM. -.kl, IwNw R Sadden T, T.-AN" D SouN4 Rd,pd B4 Wwf M Ild Sum Am.Iaaa Md1Mon, PNNm Canty. C«add.. -b- Ad He- -da-d al a - 1 m No W-Od .1 •oW SNcrn T bola a W. $1.1. DdM11daR of «, Ba.w el Lwd NWdWdN.Ilf WMI aw .1wa.d M1I N.Y.n.d INN W4 Ad- M -1 SK1an T Aka Map . o.M Wr. - .1Ww.d NTS AM. N - Y ar W. 261•SO hap lTMne. .kal •w O/. - N W N W w, 3 M1 Id h. 2-3 .1 •Wd Edo SNdr..e. ed. WINN, d ..W Ww• aw .1WIWN SPx 95"TI INK, c 4r DA' xC w, U3 MI: 2 Tn..w clap M 2-3 N .Nd Eft SNrWw. Lib M 4Y 06' w E. 4011LI6 tad.; 3. TNRN.• S M' M' 46- E. I*&d M; 7AdN,' S H• OW 4r E. IO64B twf fa Uw 4a a1 oab EN $NM.wd LW: i TMncd aWa .Wa rd 4-I s ♦6• ► CO' IN 12T3 1w1 fo .add Cl/. Nd: 6 TMnn Wens dad, W4 M N w 4E M- W. WT.94 MI IN IM Rant .1 a•MNbR Said 11«I .f land ad ..d,WM di- wnlw LTS2 Nam, met• a, M•. WITZ PROPERTY, Ll.C., a CANKab LilHdd LIMN, CINWad.n CalNdl. S. ANOH, NAaAi Pafw• - ACNNONLEDREAENT DF OWNERSHIP Slah .1 COMvdo 7 CadIty d. PNkn 1 TM 1«daalna N.no1'. coomorH..w ded-nowe d MW. NA Nb I x000, 11 CSIMa ANpa w Width., W-MRI M WITZ PROPCRTv « LIC., a CA.- LMIN LIM' CwWWd' - al - WN. PWCM- IN WTTESS WHEREOF, I wAdae *Hk my NdNd .Id H"ktd A.r. My wNIYd- ARN.. Notary PUAYC TNS WITZ PgOPEP TY, LLC.. SnbMkidn E~ad .Id1 dw dw,ewd by lN• PI) .r A- LenN.dNry 0wdloaN.n1 W- IN. NT a 2000. -1. AN. Waad•, W.I., CITY ENGINEER APMOVAL TIN WITZ PROPERTY. L1C. 3.bdN'klon E•naallan Rat .a, aaal.rcd by 1N, dry E4bdW .1 IM CII, .I A- Nod aey a• 200o. err ARaROV< ` ACLG rA.=• TM WITZ PROPERTY. L1C., SNWWrkkn EAOIIWIW Pie/ A wNf wNNdod A, Ir 011 CaNW el 1N• 0" dl AWdn m IN _ dry « 2000. dw mi fW dM dl 2000 w O'Wma c• N.. GO- RaN•I Rkbard., Nay« A11•.f: TM WITZ PROPERTY, -C, SubdrNion ElId W1W Pkl w. wRoda A, NW W, N A- Plamma •n4 Z-, C-..- m NN MY al 2000, aW M- rN. dw of 2000 A. Rw. li DO - ACCEPTANCE FOR RELDRDM6 TW PM' r Md.n wom dd. Ka..f.. I« INw N N. .H- at I. D.1Y and Rw«da •I nIm Comry. Ceknwe « ro• Nq aI AD lODO .M .o. .Vy HIM . PM Said. W P- IRNa•I Roo1W NWWN SIREVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I, Amelwn M. KINYINa I, w a,dleyd. a1 Bmn.1 A•.PCW.•. Ina- aw P al..Nle.al Ladd WYdy«, - IM He.. .1 1H. SMI. al CWndad, N ww, aaNly -1 IM Sidi .-II- Pdt aM -.a - .a. ' «.d md. N, boat NaaW.dn e.amdBWry, . andwna 1. Kw add -dal 1e iN Awl 0 , Yw-ip aW bdE•1. THh w a-- WIN applic 1. •«Nan. at CR,S. 3F& IN IN TESS WHEREOF. 1 waddle .HI. my N.•a dad 'Ift- .wl tNd my « A.O. 2000. U...IN.R . KddPWL PLI xeee4 I I I ( WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.C., SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT s� 30' 83605501 J4,25-00 PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO ISHEET1 1 of 1 I I'll I \ I \ t \ \ I II KV DRtVE WAS &MD ' \ br+o PARING gE AF,nNUDN E V ANP ` REVEGETA"TEt7 � \ 1 I 1 IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT OF THE WITZ PARCEL PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO SUBJECT PARCEL I� N* CITY OF ASPEN VICINITY MAP N FEET 30 0 30 FEET 11,111it'l1 I GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: 1 INCH = 30 FEET S 789 '37•- E 3, / B.L.M. BRASS CAP 1^i / 1954 o� PJ �PaPJP /0 O 01 J 5 Py t;� �paPO�Q � h O o GOPP �� 190 I! IV 1.) J 40 LEGEND0-0 '6 vv / IE � 0 74°2 '04" E iv rn / 2 0 FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 7168 ° - 0 FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 2376 / 0 FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 13166 / DETAIL , �- _ s Ir / NT; O LOT 5 FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 20151 7 BENCHMARK: FOUND THIS SURVEY, BARE REBAR- WITH ILLEGIBLE RED CAP T.B.M. ELEV. = 100.00 SEE DETAIL / / "•« '"r " d • f B.L.M. BRASS CAP, AS DESCRIBED PARCEL B SETBACK EASEMENT RECEPTION NO, 268652 SET THIS SURVEY, 3/4" REBAR WITH i j �/ C 2" DIAMETER ALUMINUM CAP MARKED, BANNER 25954 FOUND THIS SURVEY, 2 1/2" DIAMETER o,• LCT 4 ALUMINUM PIPE WITH A 3 1/4" DIAMETER ALUMINUM CAP l \ TIE MARKED, BANNER 20632 Del N 'S9°14'04" E / 0E / N 38°31'38" E - - - - - EASEMENT LINE >Q/ 2.70' � / a P DRAINAGE DITCH/PIPELINE ` ALUM CAP S/O/j IRS MANHOLE n UTILITY BOX ��6 /✓ F\ \ \ R�, DETAIL o0 �, e�P SCALE 1 - 5 P Po/ xoI .._✓/�, Os \/�O�N 45°53.28" N 89°21'22" W y� a 3.22o� Mal B.L.M. BRASS CAP 1978 N 89°21'22" W B.L.M. BRASS CAP 254.08' 1978 B.L.M. BRASS CAP SALVATION DITCH 5 S.P.M. P.O.B. UNDERGROUND 0° u 1954 WITZ PARCEL PIPE \ N ' GRAVEL SEE DETAIL 1978 p\ �, DRIVE 770 DETAIL �$ �\ � o / \ rk GRAVEL O JO ALc \ DRIVE I O 11�' 41 o1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - `` •- - - - - - - - =+- - - - - B.L.M. BRASS CAP C f/4 S.P.M. 1954 -- -\ - - - ------ -- - ---- -- - k� O =c-- O u'�pT� 1978 2 j fa fl-------------'•-_.-------- �10 a-F N 89'21'22" W BASIS OF BEARINGS 20' RIGHT -OF- AY 30' UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT RECEPTION NO. 1346r35 AND 141119 fli.R�, _-__ __. I RECEPTIO 31 257.30' B.L.M. BRASS CAP I \ N 88*48'14W " RIVATE DRIVEI --- S 88-46.39" E ^ 1978 I \ \ � 417.94' I \ \ \ \ SEE PARCEL A 418.57' ' DETAIL l_ DESCRIPTION OF WITZ PARCEL A tract of Land situated in the Ella Sherwood Lode Claim, Mineral Survey No. 5304 AM in the Roaring Fork Mining District, located in Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado, described as follows; Beginning at a point on the Cl/4 line of said Section 7 being a United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management brass cap stamped 1978 whence the Cl/4 corner of said Section 7 also being a said brass cap stamped 1978 bears N 89° 21' 22" W, 257.30 feet; 1. Thence along said Cl/4 line N 89° 21' 22" W. 3.22 feet to fine 2-3 of said Ella Sherwood Lode whence a said brass cap stamped S.P.M. 1954,1978 bears S 45° 56' 28" W, 1.13 feet; 2. Thence along line 2-3 of said Ella Sherwood Lode N 45° 56' 28" E, 409.15 feet; 3. Thence S 44° 01' 48" E, 194.13 feet; 4. Thence S 44° 09' 42" E, 105.45 feet to line 4-1 of said Ella Sherwood Lode; 5. Thence along said line 4-1 S 46° II' 00" W, 112.75 feet to said Cl/4 line; 6. Thence along said Cl/4 line N 88° 48' 14" W, 417.94 feet to the point of beginning. Said tract of land as described above contains 1.792 acres more or less. NOTES: 1. Notice: According to Colorado law you must commence any legal action based upon any defect in this survey within three years after you first discover such defect. In no event may any action based upon a defect in this survey be commenced more than ten years from the date of certification shown hereon. 2. Basis of Bearings: The line between the C 1/4 Corner of Section 7 and the Intersection of line 2-3 of the Ella Sherwood Lode Claim, M.S. 5304am as determined by the Bim Dependent Resurvey of 1980 is assumed to have a bearing of S 89' 21' 22" E with all other bearings contained herein being relative thereto. 3. This map is based on' o field survey performed by Banner Associates, Inc. dated April 03, 2000. 4. Research for easements of record was performed by Land Title Guarantee, Order No. 0380790-6, dated 4.19-00 and includes the following exceptions 9. THE EFFECT OF INCLUSIONS IN ANY GENERAL OR SPECIFIC WATER CONSERVANCY, FIRE PROTECTION, SOIL CONSERVATION OR OTHER DISTRICT OR INCLUSION IN ANY WATER SERVICE OR STREET IMPROVEMENT AREA 10 WATER RIGHTS OR CLAIMS TO WATER RIGHTS. 11. RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS CONTAINED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED JANUARY 11, 1909 IN BOOK 136 AT PAGE 349 AS FOLLOWS: THAT THE PREMISES HEREBY GRANTED. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE SURFACE, MAY BE ENTERED BY THE PROPRIETOR OF ANY OTHER VEIN, LODE, OR LEDGE, THE TOP OR APEX OF WITCH LIES OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDARY OF SAID GRANTED PREMISES, SHOULD BE THE SAME IN ITS DIP BE FOUND TO PENETRATE, INTERSECT OR EXTEND INTO SAID PREMISES, FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXTRACTING AND REMOVING THE ORE FROM SUCH OTHER VEIN, LODE, OR LEDGE; AND RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES AND CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES. 12. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS OF EASEMENT AS SET FORTH IN AGREEMENT RECORDED APRIL I, 1969 IN BOOK 240 AT PAGE 35. 13. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN AGREEMENT RECORDED JUNE 30, 1970 IN BOOK 249 AT PAGE 201. 14. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS OF AMENDED AND RESTATED EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED APRIL 19. 2000 AS RECEPTION NO. 442475. 15. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PURPOSES AS GRANTED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSSIONERS BY EUGENE WITZ RECORDED JUNE 4. 1985 IN BOOK 487 AT PAGE 168 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 268651. 16. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS OF EASEMENTS OF ACCESS AND UNDERGROUND UTILITY EASEMENT AS SET FORTH IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 IN BOOK 793 AT PAGE 342 UNDER RECEPTION NO, 385335, 17. TERMS, AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS, AND OBLIGATIONS OF GRANT OF EASEMENT FROM BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO EUGENE WITZ RECORDED JUNE 4, 1985 IN BOOK 487 AT PAGE 171 AS RECEPTION NO. 268652. 18. ANY AND ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY, LEGEND AND NOTES, AND DESCREPANCIES IN THE LOT LINES AS SHOWN ON THE IMPROVEMENT/TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. DATED 10/99 AS JOB NO. 22140. 5. Topographic features as shown hereon were provided by Aspen Survey Engineers. Inc. Job No. 22140, dated 10 / 99. 6. Benchmark supplied by Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. is an assumed elevation of 100.00 on the southeast property corner. ROADWAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT I I B.L.M. BRASS CAP T.B.M. ELEV. = 100.00 INT. 2-3 5304AM RECEPTION N0. 268651 / I AND C 1/4 LINE SEC. 7 1954 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I \ I I, Jonathan M. Kobylarz, an employee of Banner Associates, Inc. and a Professional Land Surveyor, licensed under the lows of the State of Colorado do hereby certify I I I that this Improvement Survey Plat shown hereon was prepared under my supervision I \\ \ I and is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ! Lo I \ \ \ LOT 1 ( I IN WITNESS WHEREOF I hereunto affix my hand and official seal CY) I \ \ \ \ \ I I I� I� I \ I I this day of A. D., 2000. iLLJ I \ \\ I I I W Q LOT 2 I LOT 3 Jonathan M. Kobylarz, P.L.S. 25954 o \ I -j m I \\ /T-A \\\ i SILVERLODE SUBDIVISION I I I I CENTENNIAL CONDOMINIUMS \ 9� I ! \ C \\ I I I I I f I \ \ II I BANNER ASSOC., INC. IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT OF THE WITZ PARCEL PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO SCALE: JOB NO: DATE: I" = 30' 83605501 4-25-00 SHEET NO: 1 o f 1 WITZ PROPERTY L.L.C., SITE PLAN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO SUBJECT PARCEL \ CITY OF ASPEN VICINITY MAP CITY OF ASPEN GIS CONTOURS \ �\ LUI 1 r \ C',y I � � r CENTENNIAL CONDOMINIUMS \ CFI �� 1 \ � 1 \ ,y LOT 2 SILVERLODE SUBDIVISION LOT 3 N FEET 30 0 30 FEET GRAPHIC SCALE • SCALE: 1 INCH = 30 FEET O • LEGEND - - - - - EASEMENT LINE - - - SET BACK _INE/BUILDING ENVELOPE DRAINAGE DITCH PIPELINE < MANHOLE O UTILITY BOX BENCHMARK: FOUND THIS SURVEY, BARE REBAR WITH ILLEGIBLE RED CAP T.B.M. ELEV. = 100.00 NOTE: I. THE PROPOSED SETBACKS ARE SHOWN HEREON AND ARE GREATER THAN REQUIRED. 2. THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN IN PARENTHESIES REFERENCE THE REQUIRED SET BACKS UNDER THE ASPEN LAND USE CODE. 3. BENCHMARK SUPPLIED BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. IS AN ASSUMED ELEVATION OF 100.00 ON THE SOUTHEAST PROPERTY CORNER. BANNER ASSOC -.INC. WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.C., SITE PLAN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO SCALE: JOB NO: DATE: I" = 30' 83605501 4-21-00 SHEET NO: 1 o f 1 n 0 WITZ PROPERTY L.L.C., SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND DEDICATION SUBJECT PARCEL 0� �O WILL AN ` `t 1:- CI TY OF ASPEN VICINITY MAP NOTES: I. ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON A DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON, 2. BASIS OF BEARINGS THE LINE BETWEEN THE C 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION 7 AND THE INTERSECTION OF LINE 2.3 OF THE ELLA SHERWOOD LODE CLAIM, M.S. 5304AM AS DETERMINED BY THE BLM DEPENDENT RESURVEY OF 1960 IS ASSUMED TO HAVE A BEARING OF S 89' 21' 22" E WITH ALL OTHER BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE THERETO, 3. NO FURTHER SUBDIVISION MAY BE GRANTED FOR THESE LOTS, NOR WILL ADDITIONAL UNITS BE BUILT WITHOUT RECEIPT OF SUBDIVISION APPROVALS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 26.480 AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOCATIONS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 26.470, OF THE ASPEN LAND USE CODE. 4. RESEARCH FOR EASEMENTS OF RECORD WAS PERFORMED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE, INC ORDER NO. 0380790-6, DATED 4-19-00. LEGEND O FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 7168 E) FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 2376 FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 13166 © FOUND THIS SURVEY, LS 20151 FOUND THIS SURVEY, BARE REBAR WITH ILLEGIBLE RED CAP B.L.M. BRASS CAP, AS DESCRIBED SET THIS SURVEY, 5/8" REBAR WITH ■ 1 1/2" DIAMETER ALUMINUM CAP MARKED, BANNER 25954 FOUND THIS SURVEY, 5/8" REBAR WITH 1 1/2" DIAMETER ALUMINUM CAP MARKED, BANNER 20632 - - — — EASEMENT LINE B.L.M. BRASS CAP C 1/4 'Z S.P.M. IS " 1978 i i9 y, F .9 Au', B.L.M. BRASS CAP 1978 N 89.21'22" W BASIS OF BEARINGS 257.30' N 45'56'28" E N 89'21'22" W t.13' 3.22' B.L.M. BRASS CAP 1978 N 89'2122" W B.L.M. BRASS CAP 254.08' 1978 B.L.M. BRASS CAP S.P.M. P.O.B. 1954 WITZ PARCEL 1978 DETAIL S('ALE, I" - 51- N FEET 30 0 30 FEET GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: 1 INCH = 30 FEET 0P / P / SEE DETAIL 2 PARCEL B SETBACK EASEMENT RECEPTION NO. 268652 AlB.L.M. BRASS CAP 1^i p4N/ 1954 ?p csQ P4 /± TITLE STATEMENT Q O Land Title Guarantee Company does hereby certify that it has examined the title /��� aCo to all lo ados shown upon Limited Liability1SCorporrlationn is the Exemption twnerr n fee simple, and that WITZ freePROPERTY, L.L.C., yO�,�y00� P�Qc7 of all liens and encumbrances. LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY PPS P � hyp GOQ� IV� Kathie English, Title Officer State of Colorado ) County of Pitkin 1 This Title Statement hereon was acknowledged before me this day / of , 2000, by Kathie English, on authorized signatory (for the purposes thereof) and Title Officer of Land Title Guarantee Company. TIE N 74'27'04" E 11.12' so O� S' sr. R� F LOT 5 A LOT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto affix my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public TIE / N 39'14'04" E / / 8.95, / "S1 ro LOT A sr91Q;r 39,023 S.F. 0.896 AC.f\ ✓ nr LOT B v'ib-1 ti39,023 S.F. ,-4 0.896 AC. f CK 0' / / \ ro a\\ '. \�o1 \ — — — — — — — — -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — �p —----------------— — — — — — — — — — — — \ 20' RIGHT-OF-WAY 0 _ ro 125 \ RECEPTION NO. 134665 AND 141119 M� NORTH SPRUCE STREET 30' UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT �20 b 00' IPAVED PRIVATE DRIVE) RECEPTION NO. 442475 AND 385335 87. 7' N 88'48'14" W 205.66' 417.94' \ PARCEL A SEE DETAIL \\ \ \ ROADWAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT I RECEPTION NO. 268651 N I \\ \\\ LOT 1 I \ Q \\ 1 v� M i \\\ �/�cy \ \ I A \\ I \ \\ It J o I \\ A i I CENTENNIAL CONDOMINIUMS i y I \ I \ LOT 2 SILVERLODE SUBDIVISION �O s \Acj`. LOT 3 TIE N 38'31'38" E F A 2.70, / /All DETAIL ��,�t o� SCALE: 1" = 5' `s ,5 O P P /o 0 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that Witz Property, LLC., a Colorado Limited Liability Corporation being the sole owner of the Witz Parcel, as sold Witz Parcel Is recorded at Reception No. 441728 in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado, does hereby Plat said real property in accordance with the plot shown hereon: DESCRIPTION OF WITZ PARCEL A tract of Land situated in the Ella Sherwood Lode Claim, Mineral Survey No. 5304 AM In the Roaring Fork Mining District, located in Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian. Pitkin County, Colorado, described as follows; Beginning at a point on the Cl/4 line of said Section 7 being a United States Department of Interior. Bureau of Land Management brass cop stamped 1978 whence the Cl/4 corner of sold Section 7 also being a sold brass cap stamped 1978 bears N 89' 21' 22" W. 257.30 feet; I. Thence along said Cl/4 line N 89' 21' 22" W, 3.22 feet to line 2-3 of said Ella Sherwood Lode whence a sold brass cap stomped S.P.M. 1954,1978 bears S 45' 56' 28" W. 1.13 feet; 2. Thence along line 2-3 of said Ella Sherwood Lode N 45' 56' 28' E, 409.15 feet; 3. Thence S 44' 01' 48" E, 194.13 feet; 4. Thence S 44' 09' 42" E, 105.45 feet to line 4-1 of sold Ella Sherwood Lode; 5. Thence along said line 4-1 S 46' it' 00" W, 112.75 feet to said Cl/4 line; 6. Thence along said Cl/4 line N 88' 48' 14" W, 417.94 feet to the point of beginning. Said tract of land as described above contains 1.792 acres more or less WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.G., a Colorado Limited Liability Corporation Camilla S. Auger, Managing Partner ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF OWNERSHIP State of Colorado ) County of Pitkin I The foregoing owner's certificate was acknowledged before me this day of 2000, by Camilla Auger as Managing Member of the WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.C., a Colorado Limited Liability Corporation, owner of the Witz Parcel. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto affix my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL This WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.C., Subdivision Exempiton Plat was approved by the City of Aspen Community Development. Director this day of 2000. Julie Ann Woods, Director CITY ENGINEER APPROVAL This WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.C., Subdivision Exemption Plat was approved by the City Engineer of the City of Aspen this day of , 2000. Nick Adeh, P.E., City Engineer CITY APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE The WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.C., Subdivision Exemption Plat is hereby approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2000, and signed this day of , 2000 as Ordinance No. 00 Rachel Attest: City Mayor PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVAL The WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.C., Subdivision Exemption Plat was approved by the City of SEE DETAIL Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on the day of 2000, and signed this T day of 2000 as Res. No. 00- S 88.46'39" E 418.57' B.L.M. BRASS CAP INT 2.3 5304AM AND C 1/4 LINE SEC. 7 1954 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,an CCEPTANCE FOR RECORDING This Plat as shown hereon was accepted for filing in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado on the day of A.D. 2000 and was duly filed in Plat Book at Page under Reception Number Clerk and Recorder SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I, Jonathan M. Kobylarz, on employee of Bonner Associates, Inc., and Professional Land Surveyor, licensed under the laws of the State of Colorado, do hereby certify that the Subdivision Exemption Plat shown hereon was prepared under my direct responsibility, supervision and checking and is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. This survey complies with applicable sections of C.R.S. 38-51. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto affix my hand and official seal this day of , A.D. 2000. Jonathan M. Kobylarz, PLS 25954 BANNER ASSOC., INC. WITZ PROPERTY, L.L.C., SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO 0 SCALE JOB N0: I DATE: I" = 30' 83605501 4-25-00 SHEET NO 1 o f 1 r�