Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutlanduse case.boa.SpringSt..003-83 " NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Case No.il83-3 BEFORE THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING OR USE VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to the Official Code of Aspen of June 25, 1962, as amended, a public hearing will 'be held in the Council Room, City Hall, Aspen, Colo- rado, (or at such other place as the meeting may be then adjourned) to consider an ap?lication filed with the said Board of Adjustment requescing authority for variance from the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 24, Official Code of Aspen. All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state. yo~views by letter, particularly if you have objection to such variance, as the Board of Adjustment will give serious consideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. The particulars of the hearing and of the requested variance are as follows: Date and Time of Meeting: Date: THURSDAY, MARCH 24, 1983 Time: 4:00 P.M. Name and address of Applicant for Variance: Name: J.R. WEDUM / HILL HOUSE CONDO Address: BOX 4153 ASPEN, CO., 81612 Location or description of property: Location: Parcel 1 - lot 7 Block Okalahoma Flats Description: Parcel 2 - Metes & Bounds Variance Requested: / APPLICANT APP~~E ASKING TO BUILD IN A FLOOD PLAIN AREA ----' Duration of Variance: (Please cross out one) tl~~~~~XtX Permanent THE CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BY 'R,::::.mn T.~.tT.::lgn inn Chairman By Joy Brooks ...j.. , APPE,CJ" TO r;OMW or zorWJG ^DJUr-'IrI r / CITY OF ASPEfl DA!E. JjJ 7/ ~ ~ . , ;" ','.' CASE NO. :f\" 53 -3 APPELLANT fl. rl (JA?cblN' I //11 /~c~DDRESS t&(7't itl)~5 iA~' , , . . . r ~ ,. . . PHONE 9.7)'-9;?3 ':t- OWNER l<;O..~ ADDRESS 5GV-<.. .-: LOCATION OF PROPERTY t.~ I 7 , ,qlcc~ , ab.Jc,~ ria h-' (? Number of Subdivis-i.(}n/Blk. 8. Lot No. , . Building Permit' Application and prints or any other pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made part of -, C^SE NO. . , THE BOARO WILL RETURN THIS.APPLICATION IF IT OOES NOT CONTAIN ALt THE FACTS IN QUESTION. . . DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED EXCEPTION SHOHING JUSTIFICATIOflS: $'0C.- 0<1&&..,;) r.&Jvt1 !fc,<--/v<ij 0;%<<- ~oLv. ,,:' Of; f't.--l'~e<:I' ~_. . 'Will you be represented by counsel ? YeSLNo -/li .I/J SIGNED: ~~~ . Appellant PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR 'to FORWARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REASON FOR NOT GRANTING: \ ~:J.t-vI..:(-3,Cc)(}) lJo 1~S~~-&'~ ~ OV?~ ~ tL._~d -?--o:;cuL. ~ ~ Iott'~\A,~~~~ 1 ~~~~~{~ ~ ~<n~~~~~_ .. . ~~~~ ~~~,~cL~~. ~\~c:JU--~ . .. ". " ' . ~ . 'Status . Signed . DECISION ~-.:.-DATE3 -51 .~ d1 DATE IF HEARING - SECRETARY . ." d ~d u . ~ . PERMIT REJECTED, DATE . APPLICATION FILED HAILED .. .IJo.. ~~r~~'w#';r-"""c~- ..n~~~_-,-':;~-~:!;;\'~~.nr;rjl'F .~~_-,~. ~.. .,-< <->".:":1::"''''-.~_"-"~_'_ ~ . . . ~"'~-'-.""'''''' +. ! -11 ~ > ij il R II f. ~ , , C DWNERSHIP AND ADJACENT REPORT ,.'" " ...., (,,- !", Ii < I;;.' ,H 1'1_ \~) I, Order- l\eferenceNo. 142 FEE: $50.00 THE COMPANY hereby certifies that fn;I1<1 ciCUICll of the company's property account (compiled from records cort11ned in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recoroer's Office) that the real property described below is vested of record as of the date of this report in the name of: <RECORD VEST! NG: James Lee Pardee III and Jcilll R. Wedum whose address is Box 4153 and Box 3511, Aspen, Co 81612; and 1].le Hi.ll House Homeowner's Assoc. ADDRESS: 655 Gibson and 606 N. Spring Street s, M:pcn, co 81611 ! I, DESCR I PTI ON OF REAL PROPERTY: That porti,,,] of Lot 2, Hill House Condominiums described as follows: Beginning at the Northwc:itcrlv Ccirner of said Lot 2 thence S 10027'30" W along the westerly line of said L,t 2 a distance of 22.16 fe~t. thence S 59046'16"E a distance of 163.30 feel tor puint; thence N 11041'E a'dis- tance of 74.00 feet to the northerly line of silld Lot 2 to a point on said line bearing S 78016'56" E 155.29 feet from the pdnL "I ["..ginning; thence N 78016'56" W a distance of 155.29 feet to the point of beginning. , " THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTIE~ APP~AR TO BE ADJACENT TO THE REAL PROPERTY ABOVE DESCRIBED. A~D ARE VESTED OF I\ECORD IN THE NAMEIS) SET FORTH IMMEDIATELY FCLLOWING EACH DESCRIPTION: DESCRIPTION OF ADJACENt REAL PROPERT/: That portion of real property lying across the river from subject properL:-, ,lile more commonly known as the Rio Grande Ball Park. I Ii I! ~ t I If RECORD VEST I~~:j County of Pitkin ADDRESS: 506 E. Hain, Aspen, Colorado E] ill ] DESCRIPTION OF ADJACENT REAL PROPERTY: Lot 1 and Lot 2 of Amended Plat, Hill House (>"-ldornill-iuT1ls r--/----- '''---- -, REC.ORD___V_~S_~I~he Hill House Homeowner's Assoc:jation ADDRESS: 655 Gibson and 606 N. Spring Sf re,_ ts THIS REPORT IS NOT A TITLE POLICY, NOR AN OPINION OF TITLE) NOR A GUARANTY OF TffiL NOR AN ABSTRACT Di: TITLE. AND IS ISSUED WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE THE INFORMATION SET FORTH HEREIN TO BE ACCURATE) THE COMPANY ASSUMES NOR WILL IT BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY WHATSOEVER ON ACCOUNT OF ANY INCOMPLETENESS OR EI\ROR IN THE INFORMATION CON- TAINED HEREIN. EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT OF THE FEE PAID HEREUNDER, SHOULD LIABILITY FOR THE INFORMATION BE DESIRED) THEN PLEASE MAKE APPLICATION FOR THE APPROPRIATE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY OR GUAR- ANTY 0 ri J ::pLJ UNDERWRITTEN BY SAFECO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY ~1tAG~ . -~>I~~ . TlTU IN5U\AHCE S REAL mAT[ QOItlG . .-..-. -- TP.ACY mu, lTD. 0 601 EAST HYMAN #1I)J!J ASPEN" COLO[\ADO 816110 (30:.1) 920-112:.1 - - lj... ;' / J .",,"'- . t 1J~ ~,Xr I r-N\f"'J?J y~ t' ~:... h ! , I '" ...., ci"i ~, '" to; '}. ~ , .< I( 1'Cj-24' I __ I t cD" 10' W ) I I I ( , 1 o Il. >- t'l g-'(P t- I: I o ::l ,,/// -l _ ..1 v/ I :I: t-I~o/ '- /" t~ ;:1NII 3JW7d~ :51: ~" -f.,:--.., r.j.. + / --::"~.;]:J~~,*rJ;,J . -__~r;l 1 ~_._' CI '- IN";;;" I ~ <-: I _\ \>. I I I o , I .I r , L :::l I hI, . ~' /" " " I ~:" / : .'. / <: " / I , I : ! " , lV~ I 'lld QJ. ~;Jd , l r .. 'I' ~---. ' ,CO P/ , A-\ <, J ',It;. I ~...... .. r c' . /~ ''-','> ',- " ' "'...., " '-. "'- , I I " ~'" "-, ", I ..;> ,-' '\ '" ' ' ,J' \ <)~~,,' <'~ \",- ,," " < O~;;"v~' '" <" I. __\,', ,~, ""; .02 ~. ,,,. ~ ... I.) ,,"', " ", ' "- .. ,'.J' ~ -----~'... f-~, ',', '- "\,-; " ' "'- ~ 1..... " -'. ....... :". fl' ~ " ',-," , " //1~- .' ~ t-,tn;..._ ...s;. /~" ql <' 'r>'~'~'~ ""(", \9 - ....J",,... ,,__,- 't"'"" /rS" rj" ,i! ~\Q 'A ../A ::>, " .'1', rI)' U' , ,r [Ll -, ".~ [I)' .....('d- f,.'f- J .:: ~)J'~'/ ~;O' (it! >'"'' \~ , ' :/ " " / 1 - !~v'6 I~V r .....;.,1 ,'" ']..6 Y'< l' ...... . I " ~ .T - , ~ MEMORANOUM TO, Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Alice Davis, Planning Of~ice RE: Pardee/Wedum Lot Line Adjustment and Stream Margin Review DATE; January lB, 1983 Location: 707 Gibson Avenue (Lots 1 and 2 Hill House Condominiums and the adjacent Wedum Tract). Zoning: R-30 (PUD) Applicant;s Request: Referral Comments: The applicants are requesting approval for a lot line adjustment between properties owned by Lee Pardee and Randy Wedum and are also requesting approval to a stream margin review. The results of the lot line adjustment will be to incorporate an existing 7,332 square foot lot owned by Wedum into the southeastern portion of Pardee's property while carving Wedum a new 7,449 square foot ._ parcel out of the western portion of Pardee's property. Both the existing lot owned by Wedum and the proposed lot to be owned by Wedum are in the 100 year floodplain and are therefore subject to Section 24-6.3 of the Code, Stream Margin Review. The Attorney's Office had no comment on the application. The Engineering Department commented that there are several advantages to the new building site and the proposed removal of fill which will increase the upstream floodplain. Even though the Code indicates that structures are,not allowed in the floodplain, the Engineering Department supports the request subject to the following: 1) Submission and approval of a detailed grading plan indicating the river's edge and proposed contours complimentary to the existing grades to the southeast and along the river. 2) The applicants should plant the regraded area adjacent to th~ river with species in keeping with the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan as well as existing plants in the area. 3) The applicant should specify for review and approval any trees within or adjacent to the new building envelope which are to be removed. 4) Locations of building pylons should be indicated as well as the minimum elevation of the superstructure. 5) The site plan for the proposed parcel should indicate how' on-site parking and access will be handled. 6) The applicant should submit a plat to indicate the traded parcels and to serve as an amendment to the Hill House Condominium Plat. Planning Office Review: Section 20-19(a)(4) allows a lot line adjustment between adjacent properties to be excepted from subdivision review procedures provided the adjustment meets the following criteria: 1) Boundary changes must be between consenting landowners; 2) The adjustment cannot directly or indirectly affect the development rights or permitted density on the affected properties; .. "''', ."........ Memo; Pardee/Wedum Lot Line Adjustment/Stream Margin Review January 18. 1983 Page Two ...".,,".t: -i".'.>'1~:'-'''''T''~.~ ;;-,.. ;""""- .,.-......,-- ,'~ ~) Parcels affect~ must continue to conform to the under- lying area and bulk requirements of the zone district. Exist1ng nonconforming lots shall not increase their non- conformity as a result of the lot line adjustment. 4) The applicants must comply with all applicable zoning and subdivision regulations. The requested lot line adjustment. as proposed. meets all of these criteria. Since the development rights on the subject parcels cannot be affected, the applicants have agreed to deed restrict the allowed floor area on the new and larger Wedum parcel to the floor area allowed on the original Wedum parcel which is 117 square feet smaller. The original Wedum parcel is 7,332 square feet, a nonconforming lot in the R-30 zone district. The newly created parcel will not increase this nonconformity but will reduce it by 117 square feet. Section 24-6.3(c) of the Code. Stream Margln Review, lists six review criteria for guiding development within 100 feet of the . Roaring Fork River and its tributaries. The pertinant criteria related to this application are as follows: 1) No building shall be located so as to be within a flood hazard area. . 2) Vegetation shall not be removed nor any slope grade changes made that will produce erosion of the stream bank. 3) No activity shall be allowed which will increase stream sedimentation and suspension loads. Since part of the existing Wedum parcel and all of the proposed Wedum parcel fall within the 100- year floodplain, the applicant would have to develop either parcel in a manner which would mitigate any erosion or sedimentation problems or any other flood hazard area impacts. The Engineering Department feels that the requested land trade could be accomplished if development impacts on the new parcel are mitigated by putting any structure developed on pylons, removing them from the floodplain. Also, the applicant should provide information through a revegetation/regrading plan which shows that there will be no increased sedimentation or erosion resulting from any grading or vegetation removal necessary in developing the parcel. This regrading/revegetation plan should give all the information requested by the Engineering Department. The Planning Office believes that the newly created Wedum parcel will create less visual impacts than the original parcel. an important consideration since both sites are across the river from the designated Roaring Fork Greenway. The original parcel is devoid of vegetation and tree cover and any development would be highly visable and more subject to erosion and sedimentation problems. The new site is heavily vegetated and well screened from the Greenway, Special care will need to be taken to protect the natural vegetation and revegetate any disrupted areas. Planning Office Recorrrnenda t ion.: The Planning Office recommends that P&Z recommend the approval of the requested lot line adjustment and stream margin review subject to the following conditions: I I I , , " ....... -<, -,'/ Memo: Pardee/Wedum Lot Line Adjustment/Stream Margin Review January 18. 1983 Page Three . . '" - - . - _.- -.. --- - .'-- -- . ~ 1) The FAR on the new 7,449 square foot Wedum tract must be deed restricted to the FAR allowed on the original 7,332 square foot tract. 2) A regradirlg/revegetation 'plan must be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. This plan must include all of the information listed in the six items requested by Engineering which are given on page 1 of this memorandum. 3) The applicant should indicate the locations of building pylons as well as the minimum elevation of the superstructure. 4) The site plan must show how on-site pa~king and access to the parcel and structure will be handled. 5) The applicant must submit a plat to indicate the traded parcels and to serve as an amendment to the Hill House Condominium Plat. . -, .'1 ., .' -......... --'-- -.~~~ . .1 ...,.. LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION GIDEON I. KAUFMAN BOX 10001 611 WEST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE AREA CODE 303 925-8166 DAVID G. EISENSTEIN January 27, 1983 Aspen Board of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Pardee/Wedum Variance Dear Board of Adjustment, I write this letter on behalf of my clients, Lee Pardee and Randy Wedum, who seek a variance from the prohibition of building in the 100 year floodplain. My clients have received Planning and Zoning Commission approval for a lot line adjustment and stream margin review. During this process, support for our variance was expressed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Planning Office and Engineering Department. The Planning Office and Engineering Department as well as the Planning and Zoning Commission feel that it would be beneficial to the property owners, the neighborhood and the community in general to allow a variance so as to permit construction in the floodplain. The Engineering Department feels that there are several advantages to the floodplain site and the proposed removal of fill which will increase the upstream floodplain. Even though the Code indicates that structures are not allowed in the floodplain, the Engineering Department supported the request because of the new locations' lack of visual vulnerability and the improvement of the floodplain situation. While from a technical point of view we would be building in the floodplain, from a practical point of view the new building site is less likely to flood and is much more desirable from a community standpoint. The floodplain is determined on a very large scale county wide and is not always very specific or extremely accurate. In our case, the applicant is trying to rectify an unfortunate sitation in which one building site, which does not appear to be in the floodplain, is potentially a more hazardous building site than the building site that is in the floodplain. # , Aspen Board of Adjustment January 27, 1983 Page Two The hardship to the applicant in trying to do the right thing for the neighborhood and for the river I believe is apparent. The hardship is not limited to the applicants. Your failure to grant a variance would be a hardship to the neighborhood and community in general. The present building site where the applicants have the ability to build is much more visually vulnerable both to town and the neighbors. It also creates potential problems to the Roaring Fork River. The new site will be less visually vulnerable and will enable the applicants to decrease the flood potential in the area. We feel that with the support of the Planning Office, Engineering Department, Planning and Zoning Commission and the community in general that a variance is most appropriate in this particular situation. We feel we meet all the requirements for a variance set forth for you in your regulations. I look forward to discussing this matter with you at your next meeting. Very truly yours, LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN, a Professional Corporation By ~~ i Gideon~tr::: Attorney for Lee Pardee and Randy Wedum GK kw r > rt rt >~O Ul ,... -g ~ ? 0.0 OM> OM> o > .....>Ul o 0.'0 ti~.Cb ~1ii;:l Ort (1) 00'1 .....Ul 13' ..... ..... o ,... ~ o ..... (1) * ~ Cl ~ ~ ~ ~ " J1" ~ ~ >13' Ul\J1 ~\J1 ;:lG) - ,... 0- OUl g.g 0- '1 ~~ o ~ _/~- ~ , / i' ; ,''-. ~ ....('\ \~? '" :J \~" of' ? ;.~ ., jl)o' - f) Al ~/ '~1)/ \ \ i " , " ) 1\ j 1 ,1 f, ~ :' 'l \ ~, '~~ \ 'I. \ i=l83.5 ,,,,,,'" . March 7, 1983 City of Aspen Board of Adjusters Aspen, Colorado 81611 Att: City Clerk Gentlemen: I am the owner of Unit "A", Hillhouse Condo's (655 Gibson) as an adjoin- ing property owner, tax payer, a contributor of open space funds and also, I might add, a supporter in principle of open space concept. I support the proposed lot split to accanplish this and to put the build- ing site in such a position that it would never be possible to block any views fran other buildings or other properties since to the rear would be the existing mountain that supports Gibson Street and which is un- buildable for any hanes. When we purchased two years ago it was our understanding, at that time, that there would never be a hane between us and the river. If you approve the lot split then we can be assured that this will never happen. ~<o'?J 1\ ~~~ \ ~~~S) ~~C; :./ ;II +/U/f 2. ~117 'is '?:> #B3.3 ,l/tOlll<.. ~P1J~7CIt IU 4701;0 Sf/RIV&, '5;; fhP~ Ufr-D, '6/~11 \\~ ~~~~ ~r:.,Cr:.,\'ir:.,O ;4l1V, ftp~ Or ,lJf)-Jvf>THfPtt/r J 5/12.~ ) .;::: T 1t/-79-<;;, LD-I'1L 7G:> -""v III-rr~/O;.v/ If Ib 0t:J { 19- /(./t1VOy' 01+[1;.T1JiJht/.s fNU;!JE./?,..../ I 1 "q. ~ L/il.TltJu./ ItoWl.E. . u Afl.-I f,p/Li- oJiJ IJ'E(p<- HA-'/ -Tf 15 or 14'-/ OPIlt.JlolU rH#1 IJO vlSw !kJulEs , fOJk.D Of. L-J-.,EAQ."-V UIS/13AR- bY T~A.. oP~ "S.DAG..C:' AA.1.ortt~ of iltE RID C:?t</JVDi... il2-A-Jl- . :.r 1<-\..)1.) DU IN I~ 'Tt2A1A CuE/<.v bll-Y ftV 't-/-IE 'BV1tt,l(t';.? 1T /+"..."::> A-hh.IA.J~t.(? D' ST7.<A<--T/ ow::' ~~iitV ~ PI-#!--5v/u"- TO HIJVE ,00 {;:...f'ct=:/lT Fo.e 14- c.. fI/,ej->/IV<' ~/~ , 'blo& Tf-/-1HJ/c l(' ocJ, S /IV CM-PN:;:-/ ~~/- it A.e/<- A'i)W'p:IV'S~ ! ~~ ~ ~t~ ~ cz.CD ~ ~ ~83'3 ~1tAG~ ,~. TITLE INSURANCE l5 REAL ESTATE ClO~NG .~. ""cr"~ LID Tl\ACY TllU. LTD. 0 601 EAST HYMAN, #103 0 ASPEN, COLOI'.ADO 81611 0 (303) 920-1123 March 28, 1983 Board of Adjustments City of Aspen re: Wedum/Hillhouse Application This letter is merely to further explain our Ownership and Adjacent Ownership report which is intended to be dated as of February 11, 1983. We found only one other ownership other than the ownership of James Lee Pardee III and John R. Wedum, and that is the County of Pitkin for the property lying across the river known as the Rio Grande Ball Park. Very truly yours, ~;:tEt Donald D. Veitch Vice President ,~ &.~ ~~ <v<::> <v <<:: ~ <<; .... .' - .. . ! 0 ~ JjY.2C, _)(1" ~ 9!!J- :,' \.!.I minlAtQ,? i)f. 3.3);..~ ~~-)'')' .. (Y"'f (~ No. 5/- fJJ.- CASELOAD SUMi'v\RY SHEET City of Aspen II 1. DATE CERTIFIED COMPLETE: 2. APPLICANT: Ne. IIl/tdt -f ~ STAFF:.i1i!LfD lwu'(jy C/d.-? - c?7-:;7 . 3. REPRESENTATIVE: 4. PROJECT NAI~E: fJa;,jJ; / JdrdlL/J'71/ JUhdW~rJ fi/p;r5tU)..J 5. LOCATION: iJUJ&tiYV {l/W4W..R../ / 6. TYPE OF APPLICATION: 4 Step: GMP ( PUD ( ) ) Subdivision vi Subdivision Exception GHP Exception ( Rezoning ( , (JJ)( ei~~) M11/ J(1(..eJ1-( (/ J ) 2 Step: ) SPA 1 Step: Use Determination Conditional Use Lspecial Review ( tJtI'u.tt'YY,_/!Wa~~ ) . tI HPC No. of Steps: Other: 7. REFERRALS (lLpl./ud II-!?f~ Y:J... / Attorney. Sanitation District .;1 Engineering Dept, -----Hountain Bell _____Housing Parks _____Water Holy Cross Electric _____City Electric ~Fire Marshal/Building Dept. 8. DISPOSIT\~O/ / P & Z Approyed ~ ' Denied _____School District _____Rocky Mtn, Nat. Gas '_____State Highway Dept. --"ire Chief -----Pther Date r(:ecornmer0. ~d 0. (2ff'c)UC(/ ~ to 10+--, ( inf ((oj U5fmarf....!.. ,.. ~o-M (\()CI~il'1 rflJi~l{) :illbJt7(-f- tr): ., ~tw' FAR 01 -+pI" r\,cw Ie LNq r:/l WP~ -trC/r+ m w1' be de::( rui:cldPri . -to -ft,f -Ff\12 oJ/o(tY'i'{. I'll'] -Ihf' ~igll"rtl (:'>'1') ltj-l.u+, "f!+-A--Jt4m-&iUfJlreveqg/p:frrt faf1~ t\1().)/- ~. <;1.0mr-ilm if rf'ui('c..Uf' . . [lp(!oual PtJ -fj1f' YI~:\ ..l)e.pt-. (hI) ~ t1lu"if iYldillL (/(/ ,j '{he ir{6rtJ:JJ!!.6"-. _ll)W 11\::fue.~ d-6rVl5 req(}i'51ccI hit frg. II :>-I.etl a" r~' Lr:I -fw' J{C{YIV\lnq _) ("') ,') .. (S~tr\ ,., , Q) "- "." \ \ . P~3 2~ 3) The.. ~l~ ..{hoe- O(-(.i c e IIY!B'nO cf.C{~ 1//8 ( ?l3 Cf01(on+-- sl-ouLJ ird1{ctk ~ loc~Gt s of- f~l(fl ~ ItS welL ~ +.e... n1Ill'\~ t'\'\~ . e.l-e ved1() V\ cf- Jvre'5trud~ , ce ~4-) IN.- ~ oJ__ ce:t?'7 ptN\. (Y1.u* '5kuJ to ~ p9f'ceL 1- hcx.u 01-- srte... rQN::cn3 ~ s-trucfure 0d( k h'i>rdfel, c..p 'J b) It-.'t:- ~ffl ((C7m- I/'Vlu* \ V\o...1 C Cl~ -/0e.-fro:k<f ~~ -Io-k suhotVlif a. flat-- --tv fCXlJce1.!> 'l- -io .serue a~ ~ -t-tlll +t:oU?t.. Cadu peo.::!, C7-i 1\,"',.(10 " \,1"- C) u, Cj" . (,,~ the cz.0?l\COf\1:- ffi0f::,-f- DbteAlf"\. '^- LJortC\VlCe --- ~ -fk \?Dard.. of :AJ.~ osi:m€Vli -((O{)I\ {)QL--t\Qr\ r;;-lP,')lf-''l--SU- ---fue.. cede uJVtI(~ J ~ -(-'(cz:d ~\lolf~ Iou -lld.i~ .7e ~rtlAiif\ htt'2--ord. a.r-ea.., lO__L.\:'! i i,~ "'- -, "-'r-->, _" .....) \ .1 ApeI'(~ D~inw.. <\. ua..rial'\ce.. -trDWl .5eL+ioVl. .:L'-l-l,.3(l.'t.) l>h (Y)anh ;)1. \q'i"). The.. LXArlanC€ UXl5 4""~ l:a..se:l cr- ~ Iefre.wrtl1..{lon~ ~-\-.fhe.rt. are...: no +Hlt?.. ft<'~lem~ oil ~ feo ~ .j- 01'\ -tk t?1d..'3 . ~p-t . ru li Iti 6'" -w.. .15 -ft:. mctX. l\e.i~N- -Prtlrr\ "'-ue..raq,e. ~r<1de._ A ffro041 i~ fill \:>Jtd- i:l: pc:, ~,. I~~p-e, rMlC-iMUI\'\ hciql\+ rA- ~e.. st-f"odu/'t ca.nr'\ot- ~e. . ! '3~r ~Y\ ~ +eeI--. -t1-om --the. aJ.l!l'aq~1 urdisturt>e:1 "rod>/'. f'lq ~__ Z ~ ~ {O~"'\JL:1Df\ 01- -t\-e.. ryl"n~ mOb+ k (erl-i-ftq Pc; . ,. .. ~ ~1r&Y1~ or 13ld.~ ~:I. -to. gUArM~ rnlr--if'l\tJ... \ ~ .ftc4). dis /,up{iOt\ wnslslenf- wi#. ~urd \ ~1~ri':S * ((Jnstrvcl-iu\ ('radiLe5. o ,,-.) l- ;) ..... .~ .r=;\ \?J I l,. ~ ,.; . Council J ,d f prOI ()d (,\ Approved J Denied Date April ~S, ~ 10-1 Utle. ~1l5fMOlt ~uPJ'ec& -ft,: Thi> F~ M -/fe tlelU 7. m if i1Jpdo/Y1 *~c;f- mo# b,o ,-:lped ll"sE-d~-ki -/0 -#rF> -fAR ~b~ 0.. ..7.33>2';- lof- Itt.e.. ~;7L of -/he o6giM I f3('{(l I') I tz-"\ 1l-e * -b lle~itd1tf- rH~ --Imded pr(e)., -!hi' t\iIL.tlw~ :5l1bm,+ a.. fl;j.+ 10 ;ndi(~~ .,. 10 ~IY oc, an IltWItt~ CtJnrtn Pi q:& . ,I I' I 9. PRELIMINARY PLAT REFERRALS: _Attorney _Engineering Dept. -"ousing Water _City Electric _Sanitation District _Mountain Bell -"arks Holy Cross Electric ----Yire Marshal/Building Dept. _School District Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas _State Highway Dept. _Other :I I :1 I II .h II t I ,I .-...(l 'I !I :1 10. PRELIMINARY PLAT - PUBLIC HEARING P & Z Approved Denied Date , 11, FINAL PLAT Council Approved Denied Date I I I, I I I , " 12. ROUTING: I Attorney ./ Building ~Engineering I' Other -- Ller t"s ofti t.e- ~- {or M,cf Mj. m.lr-.,.j~s F'j P".\hl"{l\ - ,(or ~r+i/lll.s 01 wlJl\tilj ~frrOLl"'-1. '\ \ ) "\ , .~ - tA.D<6 ~ rnin\XUL),l' 3'01 '83d-; ""' '33.3 MEMORANDU~ d'~'s cq::uu> TO: Aspen Ci ty Counci 1 FROM: Alice Davis, Planning Office RE: Pardee/Wedum Lot Line Adjustment and DATE: April 25, 1983 Location: Zoning: Appl icant' s Request: Referra 1 COll111ents: P'" --:::;:::::-:-- ------- ,-- 707 Gibson Avenue (Lots 1 and the adjacent Wedum Tract)" and R-30 (PUD). The applicants are requesting approval for a lot line adjustment between properties owned by Lee Pardee and Randy Wedum and are also requesting approval to a stream margin review. The results of the lot line adjustment will be to incorporate an existing 7,332 square foot lot owned by Wedum into the southeastern portion of Pardee's property while carving Wedum a new 7,449 square foot parcel out of the western portion cf Pardee's property. Both the existing lot owned by Wedum and the proposed lot to be owned by Wedum are in the 100 year floodplain and are therefore subject to Section 24-6,3 of the Code, Stream Margin Review. The Engineering Department commented that there are several advan- tages to the new buil di ng site and the proposed removal of fi 11 whi ch wi 11 increase the ups tream fl oodp 1 ai n. Even though the Code indicates that structures are not allowed in the floodplain, the Engineering Department supports the request subject to the following: ',-, 1. Submission and approval of a detailed grading plan indicating tile river's edge and proposed contours compl imentary to the existing grades to the southeast and along the river. '.J 2. The applicants should plant the regraded area adjacent to the river with species in keeping with the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan as well as existing plants in the area. . , ~ 3. The applicant should specify for review and approval any trees within or adjacent to the new building envelope which are to be removed, 4.. Locations of building pylons should be indicated as well as the minimum elevation of the superstructure. ''''''; 5 . The site plan for the proposed parcel should indicate how on-site parking and access will be handled. ~ 6. The applicant should submit a plat to indicate the traded parcels and to serve, as an amendment to the Hi 11 House Condominium Plat. Planning Office Review: Section 20-19(a)(4) allows a lot line adjustment between adjacent properties to be excepted from subdivision review procedures provided the adjustment meets the followin9 criteria: 1. Boundary changes must be between consenting landowners. . 2. The adjustment cannot directly or indirectly affect the development ri ghts or permitted density on the affected properties. ,....'.,." f"''"\ ,.,.,;' .....,....~- Memo: Pardee/Wedum Page Two April 25, 19B3 . / \ . 3. Parcels affected must continue to'conform to the under- lying area and bulk requirements of the zone district. " Existing nonconforming lots shall not increase their 'nonconformity as a result of the lot line adjustment. 4. The applicants must comply with all applicable zoning and subdivision regulations. The requested lot line adjustment, as proposed, meets all of these criteria. Since the development rights on the subject parcels cannot be affected, the applicants have agreed to deed restrict the allowed floor area on the new and larger Wedum parcel to the floor area allowed on the original Wedum parcel which is 117 square feet smaller. The original Wedum parcel is 7,332 square feet, a nonconforming lot in the R-30 zone district. The newly created parcel will not increase this nonconformity but will reduce it by 117 square feet. Section 24-6.3(c~'6f the Code, Stream Margin Review, lists six review criteria for guiding development within 100 feet of the Roaring Fork River and its tributaries. The pertinant criteria related to this application are as follows: 1. No building shall be located so as to be within a flood hazard area. 2. Vegetation shall not be removed nor any slope grade changes made that will produce erosion of the stream bank. 3. No activity shall be allowed which will increase stream sedimentation and suspension loads. Since part of the existing Wedum parcel and all of the proposed Wedum parcel fall within the 100 year floodplain, the applicant would have to develop either parcel in a manner which would 'mitigate any erosion or sedimentation problems or any other flood hazard area impacts. The Engineering Department feels that the requested land trade could be accomplished if development impacts on the new parcel are mitigated by putting any structure developed on pylons, removing them from the floodplain. Also, the applicant should provide information through a revegetation/regrading plan which shows that there will be no increased sedimentation or erosion resulting from any grading or vegetation removal necessary in developing the parcel. This regrading/revegetation plan should give all the information requested by the Engineering Department. The Planning Office believes that the newly created Wedum parcel will create less visual impacts than the original parcel, an important consideration since both sites are across the river from the designated Roaring Fork Greenway. The original parcel is devoid of vegetation and tree cover and any development would be highly visable and more subject to erosion and sedimentation problems. The new site is heavily revegetated and well screened from the Greenway. Special care will need to be taken to protect the natural vegetation and to revegetate any disrupted areas. The major issue in evaluating the ~pplicants' stream margin request is determining whether or not building a structure on pylons actually removes the structure from the floodplain. The Code specifically states that no building shall be allowed in the floodplain. However, if the structure is on pylons and all development impacts are mitigated, it may be desirable to allow the structure (on pylons) to be built in the floodplain so that the new Wedum parcel can be used, since the new parcel would create less visual impacts and be less subject to erosion and sedimentation problems. Memo: Pardee/Wedum Page Three Apri 1 25, 1983 ,'.' ..... r""," '-" , Planning Office and P&Z Recommendation: Due to the difficulty P&Z had making the interpretation that a structure built on pylons is a structure no longer located in the floodplain, the Commission ~dded a condition to their approval requi ri ng the app 1 i cant to obtain a va ?i' ance froll! the Board of Adjustment prior to Council's review. The condition stated that he Board of Adjustment must grant the p icant a variance f[om Section 24-6.3(c)(1) at a public hearing. Section 24-6.3 1) ~ states " .. . \! r',. - """, a ood ea desi nated b S. Corp of Engineer~'._~ 00 ain Re Fork River. . \~ The applicants were granted such a variance fr m the Board of Adjustment on March 31, 1983. The variance was granted based on the representations that there were no title problems on the property and on the Building Department ruling on the 25 foot maximum height from average grade. ,Approval was subject to the foll owi ng conditi ons: '-.c_, "-=- ~l. The maximum height of the structure cannot be greater tha 25 feet from the average, undisturbed grade. ", 2.) The construction of the pylons must be certified by th~ ~j Enqineerinq and Building Departments to guarantee minimum stream flow,disruption conslstent with sound engineering and construction practices. ~~ The Planning Office and the Planning ~ Zoning Commission recommend the approval of the requested lot line adjustment and stream margin review subject to the following conditions: '~l. The FAR on the new 7,449 square foot Wedum tract must be deed restricted to the FAR allowed on the original 7,332 square foot tractJwith the deed restriction documents subject to the Atforney's Office review and approval. fqZ ~I " ~z. -.:a P't,.e. J '*4 I II II::tt <:. , It) ~ 2. A regrading/revegetation plan must be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. This plan must include all of the information requested by Engineering, including the following: ........a. Submission and approval of a detailed grading plan indicating the river's edge and proposed contours complimentary to the existing grades to the southeast and along the river. ~ b. The applicants should plant the regraded area adjacent to the river with species in keeping with the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan as well as existing plants in the area. " c, Pet Z ~ :3 ~ " ill 4 "".l0 I' ~5 ~0 . The applicant should specify for review and approval any trees within or adjacent to the new building envelope which' are to be removed. Locations of building pylons should be indicated as well as the minimum elevation of the superstructure. The site plan for the proposed parcel should indicate how on-site parking and access will be handled. The applicant should submit a plat to indicate the traded parcels and to serve as an amendment to the Hill House Condominium Plat. f*I"..." ....... ." ,oJ Memo: Pardee/Wedum Page Four April 25, 1983 , 3. The applicants must meet the conditions of the variance from Section 24-6.3(1) of the Code granted by the Board of Adjustment which include: a. The maximum height of the structure cannot be greater than 25 feet from the average, undisturbed grade. b. The construction of the pylons must be certified by the Engineering and Building Departments to guarantee minimum stream flow disruption. Counci 1 Action: If you agree with the Planning Office and P&Z recommendation, the appropriate motion is as follows: "I move to approve the requested lot line adjustment and stream margin review subject to the 3 conditions stated in the Planning Office memorandum dated April 25, 1983." . . /' "-"------"------"'-" . of", "_, /"\ /,j" t I_....:.....:.~ ~ ,,. . - - " . - , .' '-''"" ~~ -0 _ . __ c ...~ --,:' ,,~:::- :;-'0"'-:: ....;.... ~.;:.,. ~ . . ..- ',,_.' ~~--.-..- ---- - --~- -..- Ms. A1ic'e Davis" -, .: City & County Planning Office 130 SO. Galena St.. __ _. A CO 81612= -- -- - spen, _ :_" 0" :'-'-0: ,,- ," , . = November 2,' 1982 = rir.i::-:-';- s:,-.:;.::r .::: --r,", __or Dear Alice, This is an app!Jcation. for cQotha stream margin review and ~ lot line 'adjustment. Both the citizens of Aspen'and th~=apolicants will benefit by approval of this ,appUcati.on. .1;. b_r_ief history of the. land in quest,i..C>~JS:=.::lIJj):r-o~r;Lft~:==~:~u~~ :;. . _____: __ _ :'~ :, C'i)~ I;t.:iUl~F:t977:.the Aspen P&Z gave approval in a stream margin review to allow the place- ment of excavated earth on the subject property. A condition was that after completion of construction the earth be leveled and the area cleaned uP. 2) In October 1979 the Aspen P&Z in another stream margin review approved the construction of a tennis court on the property in question. Randy Wedum, one of the applicants owns a 7332 sq. ft, parcel of land that boarders the Roaring Fork River. The expected building envelope is on the bank of the river where there are no trees or bushes to hide a structure from view from the public area across the river. The building envelope also happens to interrupt the view of the Hill House Condominiums across Spring St.. Therefore the applicants propose to trade equal sized parcels of land so that a new building envelope would be created. This site would be surrounded by large trees and bushes and would be almost invisible from the public area across the river. Although the new lot has 7449 sq. ft. Mr. Wedum would agree to deed restrict the FAR of any structure to what it would have been on the original parcel. Additionallv, Mr. Wedum would agree to place the building envelope at the far end of the parcel away from the river. The question of flood plain must be addressed. Jay Hammond of the Engineering Deot. believes that this trade could be accomplished IF the applicants agree to .put any structure on pylons so that it won't be in the flood plain and IF the applicants compensate for the small intursion into the flood plain (the pylons) by agreeing to increase the flood plain upriver (on the 7332 sq. ft. parcel) by excavating and removing earth near the river. Jay agrees that the new building site would be very much in the public's interest in that a visually obtrusive site would be replaced by a sheltered site much further , , I , ''''",- , I :t I / . "-'" /"""'. , " ,...,.... -- . from the river. Other than the above all Code requirements for the Stream Margin Review and the Lot Line Adjustment have been met and the applicants request approval. . John Randall Wedum J es Lee Par ee III President Hi~l House Homeowners Assn. . , I -.., t!