Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20230919AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION September 19, 2023 4:30 PM, Pearl Pass Meeting Room 3rd Floor, 427 Rio Grande Pl, Aspen I.SITE VISIT II.ROLL CALL III.COMMENTS IV.MINUTES IV.A Draft Minutes 8/15/23 V.DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI.PUBLIC HEARINGS VI.A Resolution #___, Series of 2023_809 South Aspen Street - Shadow Mountain Village_8040 Greenline Review VII.OTHER BUSINESS VIII.BOARD REPORTS IX.ADJOURN minutes.p&z.20230815_DRAFT(2).docx 809 S Aspen Street_Draft Resolution with Exhibit A_8040 Greenline Review.pdf Memo with Exhibit A_809 S Aspen Street_LPA-21-093.pdf Exhibit B_8040 Review Criteria_809 S Aspen_Shadow Mountain Condos.pdf Exhibit C_Consolidated Application_Shadow Mountain Village Condos 8040.pdf TYPICAL PROCEEDING FORMAT FOR ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS 1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clarifications of applicant 7) Public comments 8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal/clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 11) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. 1 1 Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met or not met Revised January 9, 2021 2 2 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 City Attorney, James R. True officially moved the meeting to Council Chambers. Commissioners in attendance: Maryann Pitt, Marcus Blue, Eric Knight, Jason Suazo, Tom Gorman, Christine Benedetti, and Teraissa McGovern. Tracy Sutton and Ken Canfield are absent. Staff present: Ben Anderson, Deputy Community Development Director James R. True, City Attorney Luisa Berne, Assistant City Attorney Nicole Henning, City Clerk Tracy Terry, Deputy City Clerk COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. McGovern ask which Resolution number they are using, Nicole replied #7. STAFF COMMENTS:Mr. Anderson said it is great to see a full P&Z board. PUBLIC COMMENTS:None. MINUTES: Ms. Pi? mo?oned to approve the minutes for August 1st, 2023, and the mo?on was seconded by Mr. Knight. Ms. McGovern asked for a roll call: Ms. Pi?, yes; Mr. Blue, yes; Mr. Knight, yes; Mr. Suazo, yes; Mr. Gorman, yes; Ms. Benede? , yes; Ms. McGovern, yes; for a total of six (6) in favor – zero (0) not in favor. The mo?on passed. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: No Conflicts. SUBMISSION OF PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Mr. True said the notice is acceptable. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 333 E. Durant Ave. – Mountain Chalet – Resolution #7 Mr. Anderson said this is for Mountain Chalet Lodge. Minor amendment to a planned development and related reviews. He explained the basics of a planned development to the board. Mountain chalet received approval in 2001 for a planned development that continues to serve as the basis for the property’s current development rights. He went over the 2001 approvals regarding the phased project and dimensions. He went through the steps they took to get here and the history of the project. Applicant Presenta?on:Chris Bendon - Bendon Adams Mr. Bendon introduced himself and said he is here on behalf of the applicant 2021 Aspen Mountain Chalet LLC. Also in attendance are Zach Pepperman and Larry McGuire, principals of the ownership group, Craig Melville, previous owner of the chalet. Craig is now the minority owner and still general manager. Jodi Surfas is the owner’s rep and project manager. Dave Ryback is the local architect for the project. Lake Flato is the design architect out of Austin. Paul Squadrito is the principal from design workshop. Roaring fork engineering is not here but involved in the project. Chris gave the history of the property, including the phases of construction and prior approvals. He spoke about parking spaces, balconies, the transformer on Durant, trash facilities, and the commercial versus lodge amenity spaces. He described the affordable housing plan as five onsite units, three studios and two one bedrooms. He said they are overproviding on affordable housing in exchange for affordable housing credits. 3 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 Craig Melville spoke and gave his family history and their involvement in the project. Their family has been here for 70 years, and it has been a very living part of their family and he still works there. He mentioned they are struggling with problems, including leaking pipes. They have always had offers to buy the Chalet and always said no. Larry and Zach came and they turned them down, but then after they presented their vision, the family agreed to sell it. They wanted to respect its past and bring it into the future. They got the family to finally agree to sell it because it fit what they see as the Mountain Chalet. The family is very supportive of the project. Larry McGuire spoke and said they’ve been active in the Aspen hospitality market since opening Clark’s about 6 years ago and more recently Las Montañas and Louis Swiss bakery. They are based in Austin as MML Hospitality. They partnered with a good friend Liz lambert who started a boutique hotel company called the Bunkhouse, so they are a full-service development management group who pride themselves on going after unique properties. They have one other hotel that they own and operate in New Orleans. They seem to go after tough projects and enjoy a mix of preservation and enhancement. Zack Cupperman spoke and said thank you to Ben and his team at the city. It’s been a long complex project with a lot of nuances. He is based in New Orleans and does a lot of preservation and hotel reno work. He is grateful for the opportunity to carry on the legacy and honored to carry forward what the Melville family has built. Mr. Bendon spoke again about the resolution. He said it provides flexibility on parking and the net leasable which is important to them. There is a requirement for a development agreement and a new set of development plans. It took a lot of work to get here, and they are happy to get to this point and appreciate staff effort. Ms. McGovern asked if the east building redevelopment is the original building. Mr. Bendon said yes. Mr. Gorman asked if the transformer location is in the public right of way. Mr. Bendon said the transformer sits on a pad that will be in the row by one foot which will allow for clearances. Ms. Pitt asked about adding an addition floor instead of adding another bike or ski shop. Mr. Bendon said that area is best suited for back of house or commercial. He said the ski and bike shops would be a guest amenity. Ms. Sutton asked if the gym will be part of the commercial space or just guest amenity and will the restaurant space be a breakfast and lunch space. Mr. Bendon said the gym that is there will not be coming back. There is currently a spa that is in the basement that is guest amenity space, and it will increase in space, but it is not a commercial space. There are two formal restaurants that are open to the public and a guest amenity area that will do breakfast service and après ski service. Staff Presenta?on:Ben Anderson – Deputy Community Development Director Mr. Anderson recapped the reviews this project has already been through. He said a big topic was whether this project would trigger demolition and that if they were thinking that this review would have been much different. He said a lot of the things are to be confirmed at building permit, the approval in front of you is not approving a whole lot of new things, the restaurants as a conditional use, but we wanted to make sure as this project moves from its fairly far along conceptual schematic design to construction documents that it remains in conformance that will be confirmed during zoning and other reviews. Staff recommends approval of the resolution provided. 4 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 Mr. Gorman asked about the budget and what if they must go over. Mr. Anderson said there are allowances for these types of situa?ons regarding mold, etc. Ms. McGovern clarified that it must be put back in the same exact way. Mr. Suazo asked why the fifth floor wasn’t added to net leasable space and how does it change the GQMS, if it changes the pedestrian amenity, and if they could change it. Mr. Anderson said that was something they thought about, they tried to give definition to lodge amenity spaces and net leasable spaces in hotels and it’s a really difficult thing for staff to evaluate. If five years from now that space starts to be advertised as a separate space, that might get re-evaluated. We have some guard rails around it, but staff agrees with how its depicted. They had a conversation surrounding this topic. Mr. Bendon said there would be two big impacts to them. They did the audit to lessen the number of moving pieces. To the extent that was opened up it would open up other things. It’s also not something that they are proposing, they are proposing to have the space function as it does today, for guests to use and possibly a non-profit occasionally. Ms. Benedetti asked about a trigger in the future for something to be re-evaluated. Mr. Bendon said they plan on using the space in the same way as it has been used. If that is considered net leasable, it provides them more flexibility. He wanted to respect Ben and the process they have been through because it’s a benefit to arrive here both saying the same thing but said if they feel it’s net leasable and can be used that way in the future he won’t quarrel with that position. Ms. McGovern asked if there is a provision in the code to allow for a lodge audit in the future. Mr. Anderson said they can include that as a future provision, but he said those things are carefully evaluated by Zoning during any building permit review. Ms. Pitt asked if the five proposed APCHA units will be built and how many onsite employees will use those units. Mr. Bendon replied yes, they will be built, and they will be filled 100%. They wish they could have more. Ms. Pitt asked what the height of the elevator shaft is.Mr. Anderson replied that elevators get a 10-foot exemption and that it is not taller that the highest point of the building. Ms. McGovern asked if the commission is willing to extend this meeting or if they need to reschedule as they are getting close to 7pm. Commission said yes to extending. Ms. McGovern closed the presentation portion of the hearing and opened public comment. PUBLIC COMMENT: Ms. Susan MelvilleWarren, sibling of Craig, said this is an awesome project. She said if Ralph was here, he would be thrilled, he always loved to build. She said that Marian loved the presenta?on as well and would be thrilled to see this happening. Mr. Lex Tarumianz said this group will be great stewards of this building and of our community. He thinks it’s a great project and thinks the community is in full support of it too. Ms. McGovern closed the public comment por?on of the hearing and opened board discussion. 5 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 BOARD DISCUSSION: Mr. Suazo supports amending the proposal to include net leasable. He thinks it’s marketed and used as net leasable space currently. Ms. McGovern asks what they get from that. Ms. Sutton agrees with Teraissa that there is more benefit to leave it as is. Ms. Benedetti agrees that if they come back and ask for net leasable in the future, the community benefits from that. Mr. Blue agrees with the others. He said that right now, this isn’t their issue to decide. He loves the design and that it keeps and improves on the historical aspect. He appreciates the thoughtfulness of the whole design. Ms. Sutton said she likes the design and thinks staff has answered the questions she had. They are preserving an asset of the community that she agrees with. It’s keeping with the character of the town and is a nod to our history since the 50’s. Mr. Gorman said this is not an easy project, it’s complex. He’s looking forward to seeing what happens. Ms. Pitt agrees with the project. Ms. Benedetti agrees and thank you for all the work on this. Mr. Knight said he likes the design and how it respects the history of the building. Ms. McGovern said she has some issues with housing credits. They are over mitigating and asking for the ability to sell these credits on units that are not top-notch units. Mr. Knight and Mr. Suazo agree. Ms. McGovern doesn’t want to approve the affordable housing credits. She wants to see credits sold for great units. She asked if they as a board want to approve credits for below grade units all the time. Ms. Sutton asked what her solution for that is. Mr. Bendon said that these are killer units. He said we as a community have an affordable housing crunch and for a long time, we have looked for opportunity to squeeze in affordable housing units. They are not forever units but have great light and come with extra storage and a parking space. Ms. McGovern asked for a motion to extend the meeting. Ms. Benedetti motioned to extend the meeting to 7:15, Mr. Blue seconded, All in Favor, motion carried. Ms. McGovern said she is willing to accept the credits but would like to state that if we are going to over mitigate on site that there not be accommodations made. Mr. Suazo said he is ok leaving the amenity space as it. MOTION:Mr. Blue mo?oned to approve resolu?on #7. Mr. Gorman seconded. Jim True suggested a minor amendment that the numbering be corrected, there are two 8’s and two 12’s. 6 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 Roll call vote:Ms. Blue, yes; Mr. Knight, yes; Mr. Suazo, yes; Mr. Gorman, yes; Mr. Benede?, yes; Ms. McGovern, yes; Ms. Pi?, yes. 7-0 vote, mo?on passes. Ms. Pi? mo?oned to adjourn the mee?ng. Mr. Blue seconded. All in favor, mee?ng adjourned. ____________________ Tracy Terry, Deputy City Clerk 7 809 S. Aspen Street P&Z Resolution #__, Series 2023 Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION #___ (SERIES OF 2023) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GRANTING 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW APPROVAL FOR EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED AT 809 SOUTH ASPEN STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE, ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM MAP THEREOF RECORDED JULY 12, 1965, IN PLAT BOOK 3 AT PAGE 33 CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2735-131-24-800 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application for the land use review for the development of 809 S. Aspen Street, (the Application) from Karen Hartman; Shadow Mountain Village Condominium Association (Applicant), represented by Chris Bendon, BendonAdams, for 8040 Greenline Review; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable review standards; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Director recommends 8040 Greenline Review Approval; and, WHEREAS, The City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director and took and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on September 19th, 2023; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets the applicable review criteria and that approval of the request is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and, WHEREAS, The City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission approves Resolution #___, Series of 2023, by a ___ to ___ (___-___) vote, granting approval of the 8040 Greenline Review as identified herein. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Section 1: 8040 Greenline Review Approval Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the 8040 Greenline review standards, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the request for 8040 Greenline Review for exterior improvements to the site (As shown in Exhibit A to this Resolution). Prior to construction of the exterior improvements, the Applicant shall apply for the appropriate building permits. All calculations will be further reviewed at time of building permit submittal. The sit e drainage shall comply with all rules and regulations as deemed necessary by the Engineering Department. The Engineering Department conditions include but are not limited to the following: 8 809 S. Aspen Street P&Z Resolution #__, Series 2023 Page 2 of 4 1. Applicant will submit for a revised revocable permanent encroachment license with an exhibit that accurately shows all decks, stairs, railings, terraces, patios, wing walls, and retaining walls prior to Certificate of Occupancy permit close out. Lawn areas currently shown in the existing encroachment license will be removed. 2. Permanent revocable encroachments in the City ROW will be equal or decreased in size from the existing condition. 3. All permanent revocable encroachments will be constructed in a manner independent of on site improvements. If infrastructure needs to be removed within the ROW to accommodate future pedestrian, utility, or drainage improvements the encroachments shall be removed at Shadow Mountains cost. In the building permit show detailed information on how improvements will be constructed so all ROW improvements can be removed independently of onsite improvements. 4. Infrastructure located within the public right of way is a public amenity and open to public use. The Parks Department conditions include but are not limited to the following: 1. Existing (6) Spruce trees to the east of the property and adjacent to the stairway are to be protected, irrigated, and maintained regardless of future planned removal(s). 2. A TREE Permit for the (4) Aspen trees requested for removal has been submitted and is pendi ng City Forester review and determination. 3. Proposed species & location of planting plan in the R.O.W at a later date, following “Gorsuch Haus” site grading and construction, must be approved by the City Forester. 4. No storage of material or activity will be allowed in the driplines of trees that are to be retained 5. The Barbee Open Space area on the west side of the property shall be protected at all times and no activity is allowed within this area. 6. Proposed trees that lie in the dripline of existing trees will need to be approved by the City Forester. Section 2: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department or the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission 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 or an authorized authority. Section 3: Existing Litigation This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability 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 5: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the 9 809 S. Aspen Street P&Z Resolution #__, Series 2023 Page 3 of 4 development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, 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: 809 S. Aspen Street. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 19th day of September, 2023. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: _______________________________ ___________________________________ Katharine Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Teraissa McGovern, Chair ATTEST: _______________________________ Tracy Terry, Municipal Court Clerk EXHIBIT A: Proposed Site Plan 10 809 S. Aspen Street P&Z Resolution #__, Series 2023 Page 4 of 4 Exhibit A: Proposed Site Plan 11 809 S. Aspen Street – 8040 Greenline Review Planning and Zoning Commission Page 1 of 8 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611 | cityofaspen.com MEMORANDUM TO: City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jeffrey Barnhill, Planner II THROUGH: Amy Simon, Planning Director MEMO DATE: September 15, 2023 MEETING DATE: September 19, 2023 Re: 809 South Aspen Street – Shadow Mountain Village Condominiums – Development in Environmentally Sensitive Areas – 8040 Greenline Review, Public Hearing Applicant: Karen Hartman, Shadow Mountain Village Condo Association President, PO Box 49, Aspen, Colorado 81612 Representatives: Chris Bendon, BendonAdams, 300 S. Spring St. #202, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Location: 809 South Aspen Street Current Zoning and Use: Lodge (L) Summary: The Shadow Mountain Village Condo complex proposes exterior improvements, including but not limited to: additional air conditioning unit locations, repaving of the parking lot, stormwater and landscape improvements, reconstruction and expansion of deck areas, landscape remodeling, amendments to the Right-of- Way Encroachment License, removal of some trees, and proposed improvements to the western side of the property. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the proposed 8040 Greenline Review application for the exterior remodel and renovation of the Shadow Mountain Village Condominiums. Figure 1: Aerial Image of Site 12 809 S. Aspen Street – 8040 Greenline Review Planning and Zoning Commission Page 2 of 8 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611 | cityofaspen.com BACKGROUND: 809 S. Aspen Street is a multi-family residential development located adjacent to the Shadow Mountain ski lift. It is located in the Lodge (L) zone district and is located within the 8040 Greenline review area. 809 S. Aspen Street is home to the Shadow Mountain Village Condominium Association. The property is developed with 20 residential units. There are also a plethora of exterior improvements, including: a pool deck, various stair and walkways, a parking area, mechanical equipment, a tram, and other similar features. The Shadow Mountain Village Condo Association is in the midst of a whole renovation of the property. The proposed development of Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge have created some impetus for this project. Additionally, the property was built in the 1960s and the Shadow Mountain Village homeowners are interested in aesthetic improvements, safety enhancements, and resolution of long-term maintenance items. The property still contains much of what was developed in the 1960s. The applicant sees this as a way to improve their property, “to contribute to the overall enhancement of the neighborhood”. To this end, the City has approved various administrative approvals for the property in the last few years, some of which have been acted on. • 2020 – 8040 Greenline review exemption to install an air conditioning system, to relocate and redevelop a trash enclosure, to reduce roof overhang massing, reconstruct a stairwell, perform maintenance on several decks and other site improvements. (Reception #667844) • 2021 – 8040 Greenline review exemption to install new windows and doors, install new exterior siding, replace a few existing decks, and replace a retaining wall. (Reception #680963) • 2022 - Growth Management Quota System – Multi-family replacement to combine Unit 17 & Unit 18. (Resolution #14, Series of 2021, Reception #685453) • 2022 – 8040 Greenline review exemption to install a subsurface bracing system using helical piers. (Reception #687999) It is important to note that these previous 8040 Greenline review exemptions generally involved like-for-like work, or work that did not trigger full 8040 Greenline review. The current application involves some changes to existing configurations of existing improvements and will require some additional grading and impervious area. The fact that the property is located within a mudflow zone (a geologic hazard) pushes this application into Planning and Zoning Commission review. REQUEST OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION (P&Z): The Applicant requests the following Land Use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission has the final decision-making authority on the requests. • 8040 Greenline Review (Section 26.435.030) for proposed site improvements on the subject parcel. The parcel is located in a mudflow zone, a Geological Hazard area, which pushes the project scope into a full 8040 Greenline Review approval before P&Z. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes renovating and remodeling many of the exterior improvements located on site. Specifically, the applicant requests: 13 809 S. Aspen Street – 8040 Greenline Review Planning and Zoning Commission Page 3 of 8 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611 | cityofaspen.com • Eight new air conditioning condensers, • Repaving of the parking lot, • Stormwater and landscape improvements, • Maintenance and reconstruction of deck areas, • Enlarging the deck of Unit 16, • Landscape remodeling on the western side of the property, • Amendments to the Right-of-Way Encroachment License, • Removal of trees, and • Removal of a retaining wall. The applicant requests approval for eight additional air conditioning condensers on site. The previous 8040 Greenline exemption approval approved 14 condenser locations. (Reception #667844) This will allow air conditioning condensers for every unit on site. The applicant proposes repaving of the parking lot area. They are not proposing any changes to the number or size of the parking spaces. There will be limited grading required to repave the parking lot. This will be in conjunction with the stormwater and landscape improvements for the areas located adjacent to the parking lot. These changes will improve the stormwater management on site. The applicant proposes the reconstruction and expansion of deck areas. Several decks were already reconstructed pursuant to previous approvals by the City of Aspen. There will be limited changes to the footprint of the buildings and structures developed onsite. The exception to this is that the deck for Unit 16 will be increasing in size by approximately 25 sq. ft. Th is increase is within the properties floor area limitations; however, the deck calculations will be more closely reviewed at time of building permit. Figure 3: Unit 16 Deck Area The applicant proposes landscape remodeling along the western side of the property. The tram and stairways take up much of the western side of the property. The tram and stairways will Figure 2: Proposed Condenser Locations 14 809 S. Aspen Street – 8040 Greenline Review Planning and Zoning Commission Page 4 of 8 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611 | cityofaspen.com remain. Additionally, the railroad tie retaining system requires maintenance and may need to be reconstructed. The applicant requests several amendments to the Right-of-Way Encroachment License previously issued by the Engineering Department. The Engineering Department requires that the permanent revocable encroachments in the City Right-of-Way will be equal or decreased in size from the existing conditions. The existing encroachment into the public right-of-way is approximately 851 sq. ft. The proposed encroachment is approximately 832 sq. ft. The proposed encroachment area will enable the applicant to pursue “complete reconstruction of access stairs, outdoor areas, structural bracing for the pool, safe circulation around the pool, utility upgrades and rerouting, and landscape complementary of the adjacent Gorsuch Haus.” Additionally, all existing retaining walls that extend into the Right-of-Way will be removed. Figure 4: Existing Site Plan 15 809 S. Aspen Street – 8040 Greenline Review Planning and Zoning Commission Page 5 of 8 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611 | cityofaspen.com Figure 5: Proposed Site Plan Lastly, the applicant requests the removal of existing trees east of the Shadow Mountain property. The proposed plan would remove four trees on the eastern side of the property; however, the applicant proposes seventeen additional trees to be planted. Figure 6: Proposed Tree Removals 16 809 S. Aspen Street – 8040 Greenline Review Planning and Zoning Commission Page 6 of 8 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611 | cityofaspen.com DISCUSSION: 8040 Greenline Review (Exhibit B): The proposed project is consistent with the 8040 Greenline review approval standards. The parcel on which the proposed development is to be located is suitable for the exterior improvements in this application. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion or have consequent effects of water pollution. The design is thoughtful and compatible with the terrain on the parcel. While some grading will occur on the property, it represents a minimal amount of grading outside of pre-disturbed areas on the site. The new patio and stairs, and other infrastructure in the Right-of-Way will be available for public use as public amenity space, as required by the Engineering Department. Additionally, the proposed development is already serviced by the City of Aspen utilities, and has adequate ingress and egress available. Staff finds that all criteria are either met or not applicable for the scope of this project (Exhibit B – Review Criteria). The air conditioning condenser locations are appropriate for the site, and no condensers are visible from the street. The parking lot re-pavement will assist with other stormwater management improvements on site. The reconstruction and maintenance of the decks will help to ensure the longevity of the decks on site. The increase in deck area for the Unit 16 deck is a minimal change that is allowed by right on site. These deck calculations will be further verified for compliance at building permit by the Zoning Department. The removal of the existing trees will be reviewed by the Parks Department and a tree removal permit will be required. The Parks Department referral comments indicate that they are not likely to allow the removal of these trees. The Right-of-Way Encroachment License will be handled and enforced by the Engineering Department. Staff and the applicant worked extensively with the Engineering Department to ensure that the new development is appropriate for the site. The applicant shows a decrease in overall encroachment square footage in the Right-of-Way. The Engineering Department has the sole authority and discretion on what is allowed in the Right-of-Way. REFERRAL DEPARTMENTS: The application was reviewed by the Engineering and Parks Departments. The Parks Department requires that the existing Spruce trees to the east of the property and adjacent to the stairway be protected, irrigated, and maintained regardless of future planned removal(s). Tree removal permits will be required for all tree removals and must be reviewed and approved by the City Forester. There will be no storage of material or activity allowed within the driplines of trees that are to be retained. Additionally, the Barbee Open Space area on the west side of the property shall be protected at all times and no activity will be allowed in this area. The Parks department does support the requested amendments to the Right-of-Way encroachment license. The Engineering Department also indicated some concerns/requirements for this project; however, they support the project moving forward to P&Z and support the approval with some conditions. The applicant will need to submit for a revised revocable permanent encroachment license. The permanent revocable encroachments in the City ROW will need to be equal or decreased in size from the existing condition. Any future removal of infrastructure in the ROW shall be removed at the Shadow Mountain Condos cost. Lastly, all infrastructure located within the public Right-of-Way is a public amenity and open to public use. RECOMMENDATION: 17 809 S. Aspen Street – 8040 Greenline Review Planning and Zoning Commission Page 7 of 8 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611 | cityofaspen.com Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) approve this application as proposed, with the conditions listed in the Resolution, for the proposed exterior improvements at 809 S. Aspen Street. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve P&Z Resolution #___, Series of 2023 for 8040 Greenline Review approval with conditions.” (This reflects Staff’s recommendation) EXHIBITS: Resolution #___, Series of 2023 A. Proposed Site Plan (Recorded) B. Review Criteria – 8040 Greenline Review (Not Recorded) C. Land Use Application (Not Recorded) Exhibit A: Proposed Site Plan 18 809 S. Aspen Street – 8040 Greenline Review Planning and Zoning Commission Page 8 of 8 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611 | cityofaspen.com 19 Exhibit A 8040 Greenline Review Standards 809 S Aspen Street Review Criteria Exhibit A – 8040 Greenline Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 1 of 3 26.435.030.C – 8040 Greenline review standards 1. The parcel on which the proposed development is to be located is suitable for development considering its slope, ground stability characteristics, including mine subsidence and the possibility of mudflow, 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 Findings: The parcel on which the proposed development is to be located is currently developed with 20 residential units. The parcel also contains various exterior improvements including: a pool deck, stairways, a parking area, mechanical equipment, a tram, and other improvements. The proposed exterior improvements to the development are limited to: additional air conditioning unit condensers, parking lot repaving, stormwater and landscape improvements, the expansion of one deck attached to Unit 16, landscape remodeling, stair reconfigurations, and some amendments to the Engineering Right-of-Way Encroachment License. Staff and the applicant have worked diligently with the Engineering Department to ensure that these improvements are suitable for the site. As the applicant states, “The property does have history of ground instability.” These issues have been mitigated to the extent practicable with the installation of helical piers installed via a Notice of Approval recorded on June 1, 2022 (Reception #687999), and structural/foundational repair to several of the decks on site. The improvements in this application will not impact the structural/foundational systems of the buildings on site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion or have co nsequent effects of water pollution. Staff Findings: The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion or have consequent effects of water pollution. The improvements are minimal, and the impervious area will remain close to what is existing today. The applicant will be focused on the drainage from the parking area. Additionally, t he Engineering Department has not indicated that these improvements will have adverse affect on the watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion, or water pollution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the air quality in the City. Staff Findings: The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the air quality of the City. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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 Findings: The proposed development is designed and located to be compatible with the terrain on the parcel. The stairways and landscaping are being demolished and reconstructed to provide an upgrade to safety and an upgrade in aesthetics. The majority of the stairways are built into the hillside at grade. The lot is steep and the existing and proposed development is compatible with the terrain on the parcel. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 20 Exhibit A 8040 Greenline Review Standards 809 S Aspen Street Review Criteria Exhibit A – 8040 Greenline Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 2 of 3 5. Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. Staff Findings: The architectural plans show minimal grading disturbance on the site aside from the reconstruction of the various stair and walkways. The proposed development largely mimics what currently exists on the property. Grading will occur on the property but will generally be limited to pre-disturbed areas on the site. Any grading required on site will follow all applicable Engineering Department Standards. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. The placement and clustering of structures will minimize the need for roads, limit cutting and grading, maintain open space and preserve the mountain as a scenic resource. Staff Findings: The structures on site will remain largely unchanged in the proposed development. There will be no need for new roads, cutting and grading will be limited, open space will be maintained, and the mountain as a scenic resource will be preserved. The Engineering Department states that any infrastructure located within the public right of way is a public amenity and open to public use. This will likely increase the scenic usefulness of the development in the right-of-way for the public. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. Staff Findings: There is a negligible change in building height and bulk. The deck at unit 16 will increase by approximately 25 sq. ft. This increase in deck square footage is allowed in their floor area calculations and represents a minimal change to the look and feel of the development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed development. Staff Findings: The proposed development is already fully serviced with City of Aspen utilities. There are no proposed changes. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 9. Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development and said roads can be properly maintained. Staff Findings: The proposed development currently utilized South Aspen Street. There are no proposed changes. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 10. Adequate ingress and egress is avail able to the proposed development so as to ensure adequate access for fire protection and snow removal equipment. Staff Findings: Adequate ingress and egress already exists on site. There are no proposed changes. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 11. The adopted regulatory plans of the Open Space and Trails Board are implemented in the proposed development, to the greatest extent practical. Staff Findings: The adopted regulatory plans of the Open Space and Trails Board will be implemented into the proposed development, to the greatest extent practicable. To date, City staff 21 Exhibit A 8040 Greenline Review Standards 809 S Aspen Street Review Criteria Exhibit A – 8040 Greenline Review Criteria and Staff Findings Page 3 of 3 have been unable to locate any adopted regulatory plans that would affect this parcel. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 22 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM September 3, 2021 Updated March 13, 2023 Amy Simon Planning Director City of Aspen RE: Shadow Mountain Village Condominiums 8040 Greenline Review Ms. Simon, Please accept this amended application for an 8040 Greenline Review for the Shadow Mountain Village Condominiums, located at 809 South Aspen Street. The property, constructed in 1965, contains 20 condominiumized residential units used on a short and long-term basis in conformance with the Lodge Zone District. The design has been adjusted to reflect minimal encroachments into the public right-of-way along the east side of the property. The extent of these encroachments have been reviewed by City Engineering and accepted (conceptually) with a series of caveats which are addressed in this application. The Shadow Mountain Condominium Association is the applicant. Karen Hartman is the President of the Association and has authorized BendonAdams to submit this application. The South Aspen Street neighborhood is undergoing a substantial transformation. The “One Aspen” townhomes project along the west side of the street is complete. To the right is an image of the “One Aspen” Townhomes (above) The Gorsuch Haus development with Shadow Mountain Condominiums in the background (below) The Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge projects are fully entitled and moving forward with construction plans. The street has been rebuilt, stormwater systems have been installed, and a new ski lift is on the horizon. 23 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 2 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License The Shadow Mountain Condominium owners have engaged in a wholesale renovation of their property focused on aesthetic improvements, safety enhancements, and resolving long-term structural and maintenance items. Much of the property is original 1965 vintage and in need of renovation. Pictures to the right show areas of the property slated for improvement Improvements include a structural bracing system involving helical piers drilled subsurface, refacing of the buildings, new windows and doors, replacing of deck surfaces, structure, and railings, installation of air conditioning, replacement of the trash enclosure, new roofing in select areas, reconstructed stairways, installing small awnings over entryways, and replacement of a retaining wall along the parking lot. The City granted 8040 Greenline exemptions (3) for this scope of work, finding the improvements complied with and satisfied the criteria for an administrative review. The prior 8040 approvals are attached. The map to the right highlights the location of the Shadow Mountain Condos 24 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 3 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License Existing improvements include several access and landscape improvements in the right-of-way along the eastern edge of the property. View from parking lot looking south. Property line is along western edge of stairs. View from base of stairs looking south. Right railing is the property line with stairs to the left located in the right-of-way. 25 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 4 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License View from top of stairs looking south. Construction barrier is located on the property line. Decking to the left of the construction barrier is within the right-of-way. View from top of stairs looking north. Stairs and decking right of the red dashed line are in the right-of-way. View from social deck looking south. Deck and lawn to left of red dashed line is public right- of-way. Deck is partially within right-of-way. 26 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 5 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License Components of this 8040 Greenline request include the following: Air conditioning condensers for the remaining seven units. The previous 8040 exemption approval allowed conduit and electrical service to be provided to the entire complex – all 20 units – but only approved 14 condenser unit locations. This application requests approval for the full complement of AC condenser units. These are ground-mount units which can be installed next to end units. Some units may be stacked depending on the specific location. None of the units will be visible from the street. Repaving of the parking lot. No changes to the extent of paving or number of spaces are proposed. The parking area needs a new surface. Limited grading is needed to cure some settlement and drainage conditions. Stormwater and landscape improvements to the areas adjacent to the parking lot. Reconstruction and expansion of deck areas. Decks for individual units are in need of repair/replacement. The deck for Unit 16 was truncated in its initial build to enable an adjacent stairway. A slight relocation of this stairway will allow the deck for Unit 16 to be increased to the size of other decks. The increase is approximately 25 square feet. The property can have up to 4,719sf of deck area exempt from the calculation of the Floor Area. The property currently has 2,549 square feet of deck area. The figure is expected to go down by a small degree due to reconfiguration of some stair areas. The plans to the right show the existing (left) and proposed configuration (right) and size of the Unit 16 deck. 27 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 6 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License Landscape remodeling along the western side of the property. Areas on the “back” side of the property adjacent to the stairways east of the tram system are proposed for landscape improvements. Amendments to the Right-of-Way Encroachment License. The City’s Engineering Department manages the encroachment license system allowing for various uses and improvements to occur within the public right-of-way. These areas are dedicated to the public by the landowner and held in trust by the City for the purposes of allowing the public a right of way. The City can authorize exclusive or non-exclusive use of rights-of-way, or a portion, through a revocable encroachment license. The shadow Mountain Condominium Association holds a revocable encroachment license for portions of the South Aspen Street right-of-way. The picture above is of the tram along the west side of the property Similar to other N/S streets in the area, South Aspen Street dead-ends into the side of Aspen Mountain as the grades become prohibitive. Platting of the area shows the street ending with no obvious intention of ever extending further. In fact, the 1896 City of Aspen map shows what appear to be homes built in the subject encroachment area. See map to the right. A primitive mountain access road extends to Summer Road. This road was relocated with the Gorsuch Haus approval. The Shadow Mountain Condominiums has an existing encroachment license reflecting areas of exclusive use and allowing ownership of improvements necessary for access to the property. Use of this area includes, paving, parking, retaining walls, stairs, landscaping, utility junctions and service pedestals, irrigation equipment, and decks. The entire license area is covered by the Association’s insurance and the entire area is maintained by the Association. 28 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 7 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License The map to the right highlights the area of the current encroachment license. The diagrams below highlight areas of routine use, maintenance and installed improvements. The existing condition is shown on the left, proposed on the right The current encroachment license area is approximately 7,402 square feet, with 4,928 square feet used on a routine basis and improved with landscape, structure, irrigation, and utilities. The remainder of the license area is maintained on an as-needed basis by the Association at their sole expense. The Association’s insurance covers the entire encroachment area. The proposed encroachment license area is approximately 3,276 square feet. Of this area, 1,251 square feet is planned for hard and soft improvements and to be used and maintained on a consistent basis. The remainder of the area will be maintained on an as-needed basis by the Association at their sole expense. The exact dimensions of the revised encroachment license can be adjusted. 29 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 8 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License The proposed right-of-way encroachment area does not include areas designated for the South Aspen Street improvements, the Gorsuch Haus development, and the associated drainage and mudflow infrastructure that is planned. The proposed area is much smaller. The proposed encroachment area will enable the complete reconstruction of access stairs, outdoor areas, structural bracing for the pool, safe circulation around the pool, utility upgrades and rerouting, and landscape complementary of the adjacent Gorsuch Haus. The proposed encroachment area avoids areas necessary for stormwater and mudflow control infrastructure planned between the Shadow Mountain property and the Gorsuch property. The image below is an illustrative plan of the proposed improvements to the eastern side of the Shadow Mountain property The proposed encroachments have been reviewed by the City Engineering Department. The Department is supportive of the planned improvements with a series of conditions listed in the January 11, 2023, email from City Engineering (see exhibit). All proposed infrastructure for the patio in the right-of-way could be demolished and removed if needed and required by the City of Aspen. There will be no grading constraints, retaining walls, or other impediments to removal. Retaining walls have been pulled back to be within the property boundary and improvements in the public right-of-way adjacent to the patio can be removed independent of any onsite improvements. The proposed patio removes the constraint point for the drainage swale proposed along the Gorsuch Haus property. The prior proposed “wing walls” in the right-of-way have been removed and the existing deck and deck piers will be replaced with an at-grade patio. This reduces the drainage/mudflow impediment. Public use of the patio and stairs will not be prohibited. A retaining wall along the eastern property line will be up to 30 inches tall. Existing retaining walls that extend into the right-of- way will be removed. To accommodate a 30- inch wall and slope conditions, grade changes from the current condition will exceed 30 inches. However, the grades in this area of the property, and extending off- property, have been manipulated extensively over the years. The proposed grading will be closer to native grade conditions. 30 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 9 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License Removal of Existing Trees The approved Gorsuch Haus development requires removing the stand of spruce trees just east of the Shadow Mountain property. The entire area will be affected by regrading activities, installation of drainage infrastructure, and various terraced walls. The map to the right highlights the trees planned (by Gorsuch) for removal. A grey “X” indicates each tree to be removed. The chart to the right highlights the size and mitigation costs of the trees to be removed. The map and chart are both from the Gorsuch Haus application. A report prepared by Aspen Tree Service provides analysis of all trees within the property boundary, including the Aspens on the South side of the property. 31 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 10 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License Proposed Improvements along Western Side of Property Improvements along the western side of the property are limited to redoing the planter areas. The existing vegetation is haggard and in need of an update. The older railroad tie retaining system needs to be redone. No re-grading activity is planned. The existing tram and stairs/walkway next to the tram will remain. The affected area extends from the building faces to the eastern edge of the tramway corridor. No work to the tramway is planned. The plan to the right highlights the area along the western side of the property planned for landscape improvements. The Shadow Mountain Condo owners are improving the property to complement the new properties and contribute to the overall enhancement of the neighborhood. The architectural theme, the rhythm of modules stepping up the hillside, and the sawtooth roof forms will remain while worn and tired materials and finishes will be upgraded. The entirety of the improvements, both ongoing and proposed in the application, are all oriented toward this goal. The applicant has attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Code and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application. A Draft encroachment license will be provided upon request. BendonAdams will gladly provide such additional information as may be required in the course of your review. We are also happy to organize a site visit at your request. Sincerely, Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams LLC 32 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 11 of 11 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License Exhibits – A 1. Response to Review Criteria 2. Proposed Landscape Plan 3. Southern Stair Detail Plan 4. Existing/Proposed Floor Area & Deck Area calculations 5. Proposed Civil Plan 6. Measured footprints of current and proposed improvements 7. Tree Survey prepared by Aspen Tree Service 8. Correspondence B 1. Land Use Application 2. Agreement to Pay 3. Pre-application Conference Summary 4. Proof of Ownership 5. Authorization Letter 6. HOA Compliance Form 7. Vicinity Map 8. Property Survey C 1. 2020 8040 Exemption approval – 667844 2. 2021 8040 Exemption approval – not recorded 3. 2022 8040 Exemption approval – 687999 4. License Number 2007 – E166 – 543674 33 Exhibit A1 Review Criteria page 1 Sec. 26.435.030 – 8040 Greenline Review (a) Applicability. The provisions of 8040 Greenline review shall apply to all development located at or above eight thousand forty (8,040) feet above mean sea level (the 8040 Greenline) in the City and all development within one hundred fifty (150) feet below, as measured horizontally, the 8040 Greenline, unless exempted pursuant to Subsection 26.435.030(b). Development on land located in the R-15B Zone District is not subject to the 8040 Greenline review. (b) Exemption. The Community Development Director may exempt the expansion, remodeling or reconstruction of an existing 8040 Greenline development if the following standards are met: (1) The development does not add more than ten percent (10%) to the floor area of the existing structure or increase the total amount of square footage of areas of the structure which are exempt from floor area calculations by more than twenty-five percent (25%); and Response – The proposal involves reconstruction of several landscape areas, repaving an existing parking area, adding stormwater improvements, adding air conditioning compressors, and replacement of a stairway and social patio located east of the property (within an encroachment license). Other than exterior updates, no changes to the buildings are proposed and no changes to floor area are proposed. Nominal changes to deck area are proposed. 4,719 square feet of deck area is allowed (as exempt area) and there is approximately 2,549sf existing. The proposal will remain below the exempt allowance and may slightly lower the deck area as some of the stairs will be set into the landscape (and no longer count as “deck”). (2) The development does not require the removal of any tree for which a permit would be required pursuant to Section 15.04.450 or the applicant receives a permit pursuant to said Section; and Response – The applicant will gain required tree-removal permits. (3) The development is located such that it is not affected by any geologic hazard and will not result in increased erosion and sedimentation. Response – No changes to the location, footprint, or orientation of the existing development is proposed. All erosion control measures and best practices will be put in place for the construction of these improvements. The applicant will provide a drainage plan with building permit documents. 34 Exhibit A1 Review Criteria page 2 (4) All exemptions are cumulative. Once a development reaches the totals specified in Subsection 26.435.030(b)(1), an 8040 Greenline review must be obtained pursuant to Subsection 26.435.030(c). Response – The exemptions allowances of criterion number 1 have not been exhausted. (c) 8040 Greenline review standards. No development shall be permitted at, above or one hundred fifty (150) feet below the 8040 Greenline unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. (1) The parcel on which the proposed development is to be located is suitable for development considering its slope, ground stability characteristics, including mine subsidence and the possibility of mudflow, 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 – The property is currently developed with 20 residential units and associated parking and landscape improvements. No changes to the existing program or basic layout of buildings and improvements are proposed. The application is limited to landscape improvements, rebuilding various accessways, stairways, and landings for aesthetic and safety reasons, improvements to stairs, retaining walls/systems, landings, and deck areas that are off-property and within an encroachment license, and improvements to stormwater management systems. The property does have history of ground instability. All ground stability issues have been successfully mitigated through implementation of various structural and foundation improvements over the years. The limited improvements in this application do not implicate structural or foundation systems of the buildings. (2) The proposed development does not have a significant adverse effect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion or have consequent effects of water pollution. Response – No changes to the location, footprint, or orientation of the existing development are proposed. The improvements to access ways, stairways, and landscape terraces will not affect runoff in any meaningful way. Improvements to stormwater management are focused on drainage from the parking area. (3) The proposed development does not have a significant adverse effect on the air quality in the City. Response – The property’s impact on local/regional air quality will not change with the improvement proposed in this application. No changes to the number or size of the residences are proposed. No additional wood-burning fireplaces are proposed. Vehicle trip generation will remain the same as previous. 35 Exhibit A1 Review Criteria page 3 (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. Response – No changes to the location, footprint, or orientation of the existing building are proposed. The stairways and landscape features are being rebuilt and upgraded for both safety and aesthetic reasons. (5) Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. Response – Disturbance to the existing man-made landscape areas is proposed. Minimal grading will be occurring to enable reconstruction of various walkways and stair systems. These areas are already disturbed, man-made features of the property and the planned disturbance will not affect natural land features. (6) The placement and clustering of structures will minimize the need for roads, limit cutting and grading, maintain open space and preserve the mountain as a scenic resource. Response – No change to the location, footprint, or orientation of the existing development is proposed. No additional roads or cut/fill grading is proposed. The items proposed in this application will not affect the open character of the mountainside. (7) Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. Response – No change to the height, bulk, location, footprint, or orientation of the existing development is proposed. The property’s blendinginness will be unaffected by the improvements proposed in this application. (8) Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed development. Response – No change to the location, size, or fixture counts within the property are proposed. The property is currently served with the full array of urban services. (9) Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development and said roads can be properly maintained. Response – The property is currently served by South Aspen Street, an adequate road that is properly maintained by the City of Aspen. 36 Exhibit A1 Review Criteria page 4 (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 – No changes to the access point or turning movements are proposed. (11) The adopted regulatory plans of the Open Space and Trails Board are implemented in the proposed development, to the greatest extent practical. Response – The Open Space and Trails Board does not have any adopted regulatory plans that affect this parcel. The Roaring Fork Greenway Plan does not appear to be effective or applicable. This plan is not referenced in the City of Aspen Municipal Code or the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan. A search of City ordinances reflects that this plan was not adopted as a regulatory document and the plan does not appear on the City’s website. City staff have not been able to locate a copy of this plan. If a copy of the plan is found, the applicant will review regulatory aspects for applicability to this property. 37 Exhibit A2 38 39 40 41 42 43 80 6 0 8055 8 0 5 0 80 4 5 80 4 0 80 5 5 80 5 6 8 0 5 7 80 5 8 + T W 5 7 . 5 0 + B W 5 5 . 0 0 +5 4 . 2 3 +4 2 . 5 6 +4 3 . 1 5 +4 3 . 7 3 +4 4 . 3 1 +4 4 . 9 0 +4 5 . 4 8 +4 6 . 0 7 +4 6 . 6 5 +4 7 . 2 3 +4 7 . 8 2 +4 8 . 4 0 +4 8 . 9 8 +4 9 . 5 6 +5 0 . 1 5 +5 0 . 7 3 +5 1 . 3 1 +5 1 . 9 0 +5 2 . 4 8 +5 3 . 0 6 +5 3 . 6 5 +5 4 . 7 6 30" SLOPED WALL + 3 4 . 8 9 + 3 5 . 4 8 + 3 4 . 8 9 + 3 6 . 0 6 + 3 6 . 6 4 + 3 7 . 2 3 + 3 7 . 8 1 + 3 8 . 3 9 + 3 8 . 9 8 + 3 9 . 5 6 + 4 0 . 1 4 + 4 0 . 7 3 +4 0 . 8 2 +4 1 . 4 0 8 0 3 4 8 0 3 3 8 0 3 2 8035 8036 8037 8 0 5 9 80 6 0 8 0 6 1 80 6 2 8 0 6 3 + T W 5 7 . 5 0 + B W 5 5 . 0 0 +5 4 . 2 3 +4 2 . 5 6 +4 3 . 1 5 +4 3 . 7 3 +4 4 . 3 1 +4 4 . 9 0 +4 5 . 4 8 +4 6 . 0 7 +4 6 . 6 5 +4 7 . 2 3 +4 7 . 8 2 +4 8 . 4 0 +4 8 . 9 8 +4 9 . 5 6 +5 0 . 1 5 +5 0 . 7 3 +5 1 . 3 1 +5 1 . 9 0 +5 2 . 4 8 +5 3 . 0 6 +5 3 . 6 5 +5 4 . 7 6 18" HT. SLOPED WALL + 3 4 . 8 9 + 3 5 . 4 8 + 3 4 . 8 9 + 3 6 . 0 6 + 3 6 . 6 4 + 3 7 . 2 3 + 3 7 . 8 1 + 3 8 . 3 9 + 3 8 . 9 8 + 3 9 . 5 6 + 4 0 . 1 4 + 4 0 . 7 3 +4 0 . 8 2 +4 1 . 4 0 + T W 3 7 . 3 9 + T W 3 7 . 3 9 18" H T . S L O P E D W A L L 8 0 3 4 8 0 3 3 8 0 3 2 8035 8036 8037 80 5 5 80 5 6 8 0 5 7 80 5 8 8 0 5 9 80 6 0 8 0 6 1 80 6 2 8 0 6 3 +4 1 . 9 8 +54.76 +54.23 +53.65 +53.06 +52.84 +51.90 +51.31 +50.73 +50.15 +49.56 +48.98 +48.40 +48.28 +47.23 +46.65 +46.07 +45.84 +44.90 +44.31 +43.37 +43.15 +42.56 +41.98 +41.40 +40.82 +40.73 +40.14 +39.56 +38.98 +38.39 +37.81 +37.23 BW 55.00 + +TW 57.50 +58.00 0 2 4 8 26 . 2 6 " PROJECT TITLE PREPARED FOR REVISIONS ISSUE DATE SHEET TITLE SHEET INFORMATION DATE SEAL 207 221 3390 | ACETOLA.COM ACETO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS SH A D O W M T . V I L L A G E AS P E N , C O SOUTH STAIR STUDY PROPERTY LINE APRIL 15, 2022 8040 8041 8042 8043 8044 8045 8046 8047 8048 8049 8050 8051 8052 8053 8054 8055 8056 8039 +45.00 +50.00 PROPOSED GRADE SECTION A-A 1 4" = 1'-0" PLAN SETBACK HANDRAIL 30 " 8038 803737.00+ 26 . 2 8 " 40.00+ 24 . 8 4 " 8057 8058 +54.00 24 . 0 4 " 24 . 9 6 " EXISTING GRADE SLOPED WALL, 18" HT. 13 . 6 8 " SE T B A C K SECTION A-A 28 . 6 8 " 11 . 0 6 " 42 " 18 . 0 0 " Exhibit A3 44 © 2018 KA DesignWorks, Inc. These documents have been preparedspecifically for the 809 SOUTH ASPENSTREET.They are not suitable for use onother projects or in other locations withoutthe approval and participation of theArchitect. Reproduction prohibited without approvalof the Architect. SH A D O W M T N T O W N H O M E S - COPYRIGHT SHEET TITLE A1.005 PRINT DATE: 8/12/21 2:48 PM 80 9 S O U T H A S P E N S T R E E T AS P E N , CO 8 1 6 1 1 PERMIT #: EXISTING FAR CALCS DRAWING ISSUANCE INDEX ID 01 02 03 04 05 ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CD PERMIT REV 1 DATE 7/10/20, 10:16 AM 7/14/20, 11:04 AM 9/24/20, 1:42 PM 2/16/21, 1:48 PM 8/8/21, 12:51 PM 01/22/2019 UNIT 01 LOWER LEVEL A: 955 sq ft UNIT 08-10 LOWER LEVEL A: 1,749 sq ft UNIT 02-04 LOWER LEVEL A: 1,315 sq ft UNIT 05-07 LOWER LEVEL A: 1,315 sq ft UNIT 14-16LOWER LEVEL A: 1,315 sq ft UNIT 11-13 LOWER LEVEL A: 1,315 sq ft UNIT 19-20 LOWER LEVEL A: 881 sq ft UNIT 17-18 LOWER LEVEL A: 881 sq ft UNIT 21 LOWER LEVEL A: 444 sq ft POOL MECH A: 224 sq ft (EXISTING) TRASH ENCL. A: 83 sq ft UNIT 02-04 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,639 sq ft UNIT 01 MAIN LEVEL A: 793 sq ft UNIT 05-07 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,667 sq ft UNIT 08-10 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,636 sq ft UNIT 11-13 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,641 sq ft UNIT 14-16 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,676 sq ft UNIT 17-18 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,137 sq ft UNIT 19-20 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,101 sq ft UNIT 21 MAIN LEVEL A: 554 sq ft MACHINE BLG A: 68 sq ft DECK/STAIR 04 A: 166 sq ft DECK/STAIR 05 A: 296 sq ft DECK/STAIR 06 A: 421 sq ft DECK/STAIR 08 A: 71 sq ft DECK/STAIR 07 A: 103 sq ft FUNICULAR SHED A: 94 sq ft POOL DECK A: 787 sq ft UNIT 05 DECK A: 140 sq ft UNIT 17 DECK A: 109 sq ft UNIT 21 DECK A: 185 sq ft DECK/STAIR 02 A: 68 sq ft DECK/STAIR 03 A: 81 sq ft DECK/STAIR 09 A: 54 sq ft UNIT 16 DECK A: 68 sq ft UNIT 01 UPPER LEVEL A: 508 sq ft FAR EXISTING DECK/STAIR AREA CALCS ID DECK/STAIR 02 DECK/STAIR 03 DECK/STAIR 04 DECK/STAIR 05 DECK/STAIR 06 DECK/STAIR 07 DECK/STAIR 08 DECK/STAIR 09 POOL DECK UNIT 05 DECK UNIT 16 DECK UNIT 17 DECK UNIT 21 DECK ZONE TYPE DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR AREA 68 81 166 296 421 103 71 54 787 140 68 109 185 2,549 sq ft LEGEND: LIVABLE SF DECK/EXT STAIR FAR EXISTING FLOOR AREA CALCULATION ID FUNICULAR SHED MACHINE BLG POOL MECH UNIT 01 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 01 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 01 UPPER LEVEL UNIT 02-04 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 02-04 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 05-07 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 05-07 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 08-10 LAUND./CARETAKER UNIT 08-10 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 08-10 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 11-13 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 11-13 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 14-16 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 14-16LOWER LEVEL UNIT 17-18 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 17-18 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 19-20 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 19-20 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 21 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 21 MAIN LEVEL ZONE TYPE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE AREA 94 68 224 955 793 508 1,315 1,639 1,315 1,667 1,587 1,749 1,636 1,315 1,641 1,676 1,315 881 1,137 881 1,101 444 554 24,493 sq ft CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " UNIT 08-10 LAUND./CARETAKER A: 1,587 sq ft SCALE: 1" = 20'2FAR | EXISTING LOWER LEVEL SCALE: 1" = 20'3FAR | EXISTING MAIN LEVEL SCALE: 1" = 20'4FAR | EXISTING UPPER LEVEL SCALE: 1" = 20'1FAR | EXISTING CRAWLSPACE/SITE FAR DATA: (SEE ZONING SUMMARY A1.004) LOT SIZE (SEE SURVEY) FAR ALLOWABLE SF EXEMPT DECK SF = 15% OF ALLOWABLE 31,462 SF 1:1 31,462 SF 4,719 SF TOTAL EXISTING FAR TOTAL EXISTING DECK ALLOWABLE SF 31,462 sq ft EXEMPT DECK SF 4,719 sq ft (EXISTING) TRASH ENCLOSURE LIVING SPACE 24,576 sq ft 83 Exhibit A4 45 © 2018 KA DesignWorks, Inc. These documents have been preparedspecifically for the 809 SOUTH ASPENSTREET. They are not suitable for use onother projects or in other locations withoutthe approval and participation of theArchitect. Reproduction prohibited without approvalof the Architect. SH A D O W M T N T O W N H O M E S - P H A S E I I I COPYRIGHT SHEET TITLE A1.006 PRINT DATE: 8/13/21 2:58 PM 80 9 S O U T H A S P E N S T R E E T AS P E N , CO 81 6 1 1 PERMIT #: PROPOSED FAR CALCS DRAWING ISSUANCE INDEX ID 01 02 03 04 05 ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CD PERMIT REV 1 DATE 7/10/20, 10:16 AM 7/14/20, 11:04 AM 9/24/20, 1:42 PM 2/16/21, 1:48 PM 8/8/21, 12:51 PM 01/22/2019 UNIT 01 LOWER LEVEL A: 955 sq ft UNIT 08-10 LOWER LEVEL A: 1,749 sq ft UNIT 02-04 LOWER LEVEL A: 1,315 sq ft UNIT 05-07 LOWER LEVEL A: 1,315 sq ft UNIT 14-16LOWER LEVEL A: 1,315 sq ft UNIT 11-13 LOWER LEVEL A: 1,315 sq ft UNIT 19-20 LOWER LEVEL A: 881 sq ft UNIT 17-18 LOWER LEVEL A: 881 sq ft UNIT 21 LOWER LEVEL A: 444 sq ft POOL MECH A: 224 sq ft N AREAS OUTSIDE PROP LINE DO NOT COUNT TOWARD FAR CALC. THESE STAIRS ARE AT GRADE AND WOULD NOT COUNT TOWARD DECK CALC, NOT >30" THESE STAIRS ARE AT GRADE AND DO NOT COUNT TOWARD DECK CALC, NOT >30" UNIT 02-04 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,639 sq ft UNIT 01 MAIN LEVEL A: 793 sq ft UNIT 05-07 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,667 sq ft UNIT 08-10 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,636 sq ft UNIT 11-13 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,641 sq ft UNIT 14-16 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,676 sq ft UNIT 17-18 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,137 sq ft UNIT 19-20 MAIN LEVEL A: 1,101 sq ft UNIT 21 MAIN LEVEL A: 554 sq ft MACHINE BLG A: 68 sq ft (PROPOSED) TRASH ENCLOSURE A: 97 sq ft DECK/STAIR 05 A: 296 sq ft DECK/STAIR 06 A: 421 sq ft FUNICULAR SHED A: 94 sq ft POOL DECK A: 787 sq ft UNIT 17 DECK A: 109 sq ft UNIT 21 DECK A: 185 sq ft NEW DECK/STAIR TRAM A: 114 sq ft UNIT 05 NEW DECK A: 109 sq ft NEW DECK/STAIR TRAM A: 63 sq ft STAIR TO UNIT 02 NEW A: 50 sq ft STAIR TO UNIT 02 NEW A: 21 sq ft UNIT 16 DECK (NEW CONFIG) A: 93 sq ft SOCIAL TER. >30" ABV GRADE A: 275 sq ft SOCIAL TERRACE < 30" ABV GRADE UNIT 01 UPPER LEVEL A: 508 sq ft FAR PROPOSED DECK/STAIR AREA CALCS ID DECK/STAIR 05 DECK/STAIR 06 NEW DECK/STAIR TRAM NEW DECK/STAIR TRAM POOL DECK SOCIAL TER. >30" ABV GRADE STAIR TO UNIT 02 NEW STAIR TO UNIT 02 NEW UNIT 05 NEW DECK UNIT 16 DECK (NEW CONFIG) UNIT 17 DECK UNIT 21 DECK ZONE TYPE DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR DECK/FRAMED STAIR AREA 296 421 63 114 787 275 21 50 109 93 109 185 2,523 sq ft FAR PROPOSED AREA CALCULATION ID (PROPOSED) TRASH ENCLOSURE FUNICULAR SHED MACHINE BLG POOL MECH UNIT 01 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 01 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 01 UPPER LEVEL UNIT 02-04 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 02-04 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 05-07 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 05-07 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 08-10 LAUND./CARETAKER UNIT 08-10 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 08-10 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 11-13 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 11-13 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 14-16 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 14-16LOWER LEVEL UNIT 17-18 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 17-18 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 19-20 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 19-20 MAIN LEVEL UNIT 21 LOWER LEVEL UNIT 21 MAIN LEVEL ZONE TYPE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE LIVING SPACE AREA 97 94 68 224 955 793 508 1,315 1,639 1,315 1,667 1,587 1,749 1,636 1,315 1,641 1,676 1,315 881 1,137 881 1,101 444 554 24,590 sq ft CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " CR A W L S P A C E < 5 ' - 6 " UNIT 08-10 LAUND./CARETAKER A: 1,587 sq ft LEGEND: LIVABLE SF DECK/EXT STAIR SCALE: 1" = 20'2FAR | PHASE III PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL SCALE: 1" = 20'3FAR | PHASE III PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL SCALE: 1" = 20'4FAR | PHASE III PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL SCALE: 1" = 20'1FAR | PHASE III PROPOSED CRAWLSPACE/SITE FAR DATA: LOT SIZE (SEE SURVEY) FAR ALLOWABLE SF EXEMPT DECK SF = 15% OF ALLOWABLE 31,462 SF 1:1 31,462 SF 4,719 SF TOTAL PROPOSED FAR TOTAL PROPOSED DECK ALLOWABLE SF 31,462 sq ft EXEMPT DECK SF 4,719 sq ft 46 +B W 1 3 . 5 0 +1 3 . 2 6 +1 2 . 6 7 +1 2 . 0 9 +1 1 . 5 1 +1 0 . 9 2 +1 0 . 3 5 +9 . 7 6 +9 . 1 7 +8 . 5 9 +8 . 0 1 +7 . 4 2 +6 . 8 4 +4.59 +4.09 +3.59 +5.09 8013 8012 8011 8010 8009 8008800 7 80 2 0 80 1 9 80 1 8 80 1 7 80 1 6 +T W 5 . 5 9 +T W 7 . 5 9 +T W 5 . 5 9 +T W 1 6 . 0 0 +1 3 . 5 0 +1 4 . 0 8 3 +1 4 . 6 6 +1 5 . 2 5 +1 5 . 8 3 +1 6 . 4 2 +1 7 . 0 0 +1 7 . 5 8 +1 8 . 1 6 +1 8 . 7 5 +1 9 . 3 3 +1 9 . 9 2 +2 0 . 5 0 +2 3 . 4 0 +2 1 . 0 8 +2 1 . 6 6 +2 2 . 2 4 +2 2 . 8 2 +TW 16.00 +1 3 . 2 6 +TW 2 3 . 4 +BW 2 1 . 0 + 23 . 4 8014 8015 8016 TW + 1 6 . 0 0 8 0 1 9 8018 8 0 1 7 8 0 1 6 80 2 0 TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC 16 ' ' W L 16 ' ' W L 16 ' ' WL 16 ' ' WL 16 ' ' UE L U E L U E L U E L U E L GA S G A S G A S G A S GA S GA S S A N S A N GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS G A S G A S G A S GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS G A S GA S 8'' SA 8'' SA 8'' SA 16'' WL TE L T E L T E L T E L TE L TE L TE L TE L Ex Date Revision Sh a d o w M o u n t a i n V i l l a g e As p e n , C O 80 9 S o u t h A s p e n S t r e e t Exhibit # ph 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 4 4 f x 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 5 8 w w w . m o u n t a i n c r o s s - e n g . c o m 82 6 1 / 2 G r a n d A v e n u e G l e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 EN G I N E E R I N G , I N C . Ci v i l a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n s u l t i n g a n d D e s i g n MO U N T A I N C R O S S Co m b i n e d G r a d i n g Know what's below. before you dig.Call R Exhibit A5 47 G 80 7 0 8065 80 6 0 8055 8 0 5 0 80 4 5 80 4 0 803 5 803 0 80 3 0 8025 8025 8 0 5 5 8 0 5 5 8 0 6 0 8065 8055 805 0 80 4 5 804 0 8 0 3 5 8030 8 0 2 5 8 0 2 0 8 0 1 5 80 1 0 8005 8000 8001 8002 80 0 0 800 5 8 0 3 5 8 0 2 4 8 0 1 2 801 5 8020 8 0 2 5 8035 8003 G 80 7 0 8065 80 6 0 8055 8 0 5 0 80 4 5 80 4 0 803 5 803 0 80 3 0 8025 8025 8 0 5 5 8 0 5 5 8 0 6 0 8065 8055 805 0 804 5 804 0 8 0 3 5 8030 8 0 2 5 8 0 2 0 8 0 1 5 80 1 0 8005 8000 8001 8002 80 0 0 800 5 8 0 3 5 8 0 2 4 8 0 1 2 801 5 8020 8 0 2 5 8035 8003 EXHIBIT: COMPONENT PARTS AND HISTORIC USE WITHIN THE ENCROACHMENT AREA SHADOW MT. VILLAGE | ASPEN, CO FEBRUARY 23, 2022 PR O P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED SHADOW MOUNTAIN 207 221 3390 | ACETOLA.COM ACETO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 0 10 20 40 PR O P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINE EXISTING SHADOW MOUNTAIN ENCROACHMENT LICENSE AREA (1,284 SF) SHADOW MOUNTAIN 0 10 20 40 EXISTING COMPONENT PARTS AND HISTORIC USES SHADOW MOUNTAIN ENCROACHMENT LICENSE AREA (1,796 SF) PROPOSED COMPONENT PARTS (500 SF) EXISTING UTILITIES AND RETAINING WALLS (1,784 SF OF IMPROVEMENTS IN THE R.O.W.)(1,796 SF OF IMPROVEMENTS IN THE R.O.W.) Exhibit A6 48 809 S. Aspen Street Aspen, CO Tree Survey Report Prepared By: Chris Forman ISA Board Certified Master Arborist #RM-2352BM March 21, 2022 15450 Hwy 82, Carbondale CO 81623 (970) 963-3070 Exhibit A7 49 1 | Page PURPOSE & SUMMARY The following report pertains to 809 South Aspen Street, within the city limits of Aspen, Colorado. Trees in this report are large enough to be governed by the City of Aspen Municipal Code Language. Tree species within the targeted landscaped areas consist of aspen (Populus tremuloides) and Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii). Aluminum numbered tags were placed on the lower trunks of trees in order to provide clarity to the inventory findings. The numbered tags correlate with the numbers assigned to the trees in the aerial photo attached to this report as well as within the attached tree inventory spreadsheet. This report is designed to identify trees within the targeted landscaped area and provide individual analysis of those trees. Individual tree analysis included species type, tree diameter at breast height (DBH), overall condition, and maximum value as assigned by the City of Aspen Municipal Code. 3 trees within this inventory are in ‘Good’ condition, 5 are in ‘Fair’ condition, and 3 are in ‘Poor’ overall condition. The trees in Poor condition should be considered for removal regardless of any future construction activities. The mitigation value of the trees assessed per City code valuation methodologies totals $69,322.17. My suggested mitigation value based upon health condition ratings totals $34,764.90. Final mitigation values are defined by the City Forester during the formal tree removal permit process, and may or may not align with the reduced mitigation values that I have assigned in this report. METHODOLOGY ASSIGNMENT Aspen Tree Service has been asked by the property owner’s representative, Phillip Ring with Ring Development Services, to inventory and assess the landscape trees and provide a report on their condition, mitigation value, and management recommendations. The trees assessed included all code sized trees on the property. The assignment included placing numbered aluminum tags on the trees, which correspond to the aerial photo attached to this document. LIMITS OF THE ASSIGNMENT This inventory assessment is based solely upon the information noted from visits to the site in March 2022. I have not performed any professional surveying, laboratory examinations, soil composition/compaction studies, or any other diagnostic techniques beyond ground level visual examination of the trees and the site. At the time of my site visit, snow depths ranged from 2 to 18 inches across the property, preventing a thorough assessment of lower tree trunks and/or surface roots for trees located in deep snow. I developed general conclusions of tree health and have provided a summary based upon these observations. 50 2 | Page PURPOSE & USE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to provide current information regarding the trees within the project scope. It is intended to be used by the property owner as an informative reference for developing a management strategy for the tree resources on the property and to inform future redevelopment planning efforts. INVENTORY Aspen Tree Service completed an inventory of targeted landscape trees on this property in March of 2022 and tagged each code sized tree stem with numbered aluminum tags. The numbers on the tags correspond to the tree numbers assigned on the tree inventory table found as Attachment A of this report. Tags placed on the trees on site correlate to the numbers assigned to the trees on the aerial photo, found as Attachment B to this document. The aluminum tags start with #90 and run in sequence to #100. For purposes of this report, a tree stem is defined as a stem originating at the ground or attached with another stem within 4 ½ feet from the ground. During the inventory process, each tree stem within the scope of this report was measured with a diameter tape and visually evaluated from the ground. Tree data was collected for each stem including, tree #, the Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) measured to the lower ½ inch at approximately 4.5 feet above ground level, tree species, and condition. Individual trees were inspected from ground level only. No advanced assessment was done in tree canopies or below existing soil levels. Condition values were assigned as a result of visual indicators such as the presence of dead limbs, signs or symptoms of disease/insects, or structural defects. Definitions of the condition scale are as follows: Excellent - A healthy, vigorous tree, reasonably free of signs and symptoms of disease, with good structure and form typical of the species. Good - Tree with slight decline in vigor, small amount of twig dieback, minor structural defects that could be corrected. Fair - Tree with moderate vigor, moderate twig and small branch dieback, thinning of crown, poor leaf color, moderate structural defects that might be mitigated by regular care. Poor - Tree in decline, epicormic growth, extensive dieback of medium to large branches, significant pathogen activity or structural defects that cannot be abated. Very Poor/Dead - Tree is in severe decline, highly hazardous or is dead. MITIGATION CALCULATION Even though the purpose of this inventory report does not include applying for a tree removal permit with the City of Aspen, a discussion regarding mitigation should be considered. We understand the purpose and objectives of the City’s Tree Removal and mitigation requirements. Healthy trees are an asset to the property owner and the community. However, trees that are in poor health or structurally defected can present a safety and forest health liability for the property owner and the community. Therefore, we believe it is reasonable and appropriate to account for this liability by adjusting/devaluing 51 3 | Page the mitigation value of a specific tree based on the condition of the tree. This adjustment is made by multiplying the tree’s value per the City of Aspen Municipal Code Valuation Formula by a percentage based on the tree condition. The result is an adjusted mitigation value. The following narrative details our mitigation adjustment procedure. Final tree approvals and mitigation values are ultimately made by the City Forester or his designee. Each tree stem evaluated was entered into a tree inventory worksheet noting the tree#, DBH, condition rating, comments, and the adjusted mitigation DBH. The table showing these figures can be found as Attachment A. The adjusted mitigation DBH was calculated by multiplying the actual mitigation value by the assigned mitigation percentage. The mitigation adjustment percentage ranges from 0 to 100%. This percentage was assigned based on the condition of the tree, forest health and the wildfire risk the tree poses to the site and area. Structurally defective trees can present a safety risk to people and/or property. Dead or declining trees pose a threat to forest health, hosting and attracting insect pests and disease becoming a point source for the spread of these pest and disease problems. Dead and declining trees as well as conifers growing against the home can provide a fuel source for wildfire and provide a mechanism for the spread of wildfire into adjacent structures. The following are the mitigation adjustment percentages used to quantify all of these risks. We believe this a reasonable method to maintain the City’s tree removal mitigation objectives while achieving an appropriate and sustainable planting plan. Adjusted mitigation numbers can benefit the community forest by encouraging proper species, planting numbers, sizes, and spacing for site conditions, resulting in a long-term asset for everyone involved. 100% Mitigation – A tree scoring an Excellent or Good Condition Rating. 50% Mitigation – A tree scoring a Fair Condition Rating. 0% Mitigation – A dead tree or scoring a Poor or Very Poor Condition Rating. OBSERVATIONS & DISCUSSION SITE DESCRIPTION 809 South Aspen Street is a property at the base of Aspen Mountain on the south side of Aspen, Colorado. The property has multiple townhomes situated on a steep slope, and is the southern most developed property on South Aspen Street. The trees on this property were planted from nursery grown stock and have matured in the landscape, likely from the time the existing townhomes were built. TREE OBSERVATIONS Each tree was evaluated visually and entered into the attached tree inventory worksheet. This worksheet contains the tree species, condition, comments, maximum mitigation value based on the City of Aspen tree removal code language, and suggested mitigation value based upon tree condition. 52 4 | Page The following information pertains to the tree observations acquired in the field during the inventory process. There were only 11 trees inventoried, 7 of which were Engelmann spruce and the other 4 are aspen. The spruce are growing very close to one another in the eastern most portion of the property. There is a group of 3 aspen just south of the spruce cluster, and one aspen growing by itself at the top of the staircase leading to the upper townhomes. Overcrowding of the spruce trees has resulted in several trees competing for resources such as light, water, and nutrients. This is also the case for one of the aspen trees included in this inventory. Due to this competition, specifically for light, several trees have developed asymmetrical canopies and branch structures atypical for the species. The loss of live foliage in these asymmetric canopies can lead to mortality of outcompeted trees as well as overall very poor aesthetics when a neighboring tree is removed. Competition for resources has also led to several of the spruce trees showing signs of stress, evidenced by premature shedding of needles and twig dieback within their canopies. One of the spruce trees shows a spiral pattern of branch mortality within its canopy. This is typically associated with a problem with its root system, often times an indicator of root rot, girdling roots, and/or mechanical damage to the root system. DISCUSSION The following information pertains to the trees identified to have conditions that lend themselves to a reduction in mitigation value and/or are relevant to improving the overcrowded conditions that exist on the property. All other trees within the scope of this report can be found within the tree inventory table and have condition ratings of ‘good’. Trees #90, 92, and 94 are in Poor condition due to one or more of the conditions described in the tree observation section above. Comments for individual trees can be found on the tree inventory sheet attached to this document. Trees #91, 93, and 95-97 are in Fair condition. These trees have conditions that are a result of overcrowding and/or twig dieback in their canopies. Due to their current condition, these trees are not likely candidates for a 100% reduction in their mitigation value, but may be considered for a reduction in value of up to 50% if removal is requested. Trees in fair condition may not be viable candidates for preservation if future construction activities are proposed within their critical root zones. Critical root zones are generalized as the area around a tree where the majority of its roots can be found. Many factors play into defining this area, but as a general rule, this zone can be defined by a circle on the ground with a diameter in feet equal to 2 to 2.5 times the diameter of the tree in inches (Attachment C). Activities such as grade changes (cut or fill), disruption to supplemental irrigation, soil compaction, or significant root pruning for infrastructure installation within the critical root zone will likely result in a further decline in overall health, aesthetics, and structural stability. 53 5 | Page Trees slated for retention that will be encroached upon within their drip lines via excavation, may require an evaluation of their root systems to better understand their structural roots and long-term viability in the landscape. This investigation requires the use of pneumatic excavation (air spading) once the snow has melted and the soils have thawed. Soil is removed via high pressure air while preserving roots. Once the roots have been exposed, a trained arborist can evaluate the situation and make recommendations for remediation efforts or suggest tree removal if the defect is of that level of severity. Spruce trees that may be impacted by construction activities, as described above, are at elevated risk to be targeted by the Spruce Bark Beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis) and/or one of the species of Spruce Ips Beetle (Ips spp.). Bark beetle populations have increased in the Aspen area over the past 5 years, and have targeted mature spruce trees within the City boundaries when trees have been stressed by adjacent construction activities that negatively impacted the overall health of the spruce trees. Additional information regarding both of the bark beetle types listed can be found as Attachment D. The mitigation value for all the trees assessed in this report totals $69,322.17, per the City of Aspen’s tree valuation equation. The suggested mitigation value for the trees after applying the condition ratings that I’ve assigned totals $34,764.90. Final mitigation values are defined by the City Forester as part of the formal tree removal permit process. 54 6 | Page PHOTOS Photo 1. 809 S. Aspen Street at the base of Aspen Mountain; group of spruce inventoried at left side of photo 55 7 | Page Photo 2. Aspen tree being overcrowded by adjacent, more mature aspen 56 8 | Page Photo 3. Spruce on the left showing signs of stress as evidenced by the discoloration of its needles (yellowing) 57 9 | Page Photo 4. Twig/branch dieback in a spruce showing signs of stress 58 10 | Page Photo 5. Spruce with spiraling pattern of branch dieback within its canopy 59 11 | Page CONCLUSIONS Based upon my assessment, trees # 90, 92, and 94 are in Poor condition and should be considered for removal regardless of future construction planning. Spruce trees that are currently showing signs of stress or that will be impacted by future construction efforts may be targeted by bark beetles if construction activities are to occur within their critical root zones. Specific protection measures will be necessary for trees in Fair and Good condition if construction activities are to occur within these critical root zones. All tree removals require a permit from the City of Aspen and final mitigation requirements are determined by the City Forester or his designee. RECOMMENDATIONS I recommend removing the trees listed in Poor condition found within the property boundaries of 809 South Aspen Street. Mature spruce trees should receive a bark beetle preventative treatment prior to any construction activities commencing. Trees with proposed excavation within their drip lines should be evaluated via air spading for structural stability and based upon those findings, select trees removed to address structural failure concerns and the overcrowded condition of the remaining trees. During construction efforts, if the irrigation system is not functional, I recommend supplemental watering of trees within the landscape, at least monthly from May to October. Lastly, tree protection fencing for those trees being retained will be required by the City prior to the commencement of construction activities. . 60 Shadow Mountain Townhomes Tree Inventory Aspen Tree Service March, 2022 ATS Tree Tag # Species # of Stems DBH Mitigation Value Suggested Mitigation Value Condition Comments 100 Aspen 1 12 $ 5,199.84 $ 5,199.84 Good 99 Aspen 1 14 $ 7,077.56 $ 7,077.56 Good 98 Aspen 1 15 $ 8,124.75 $ 8,124.75 Good 97 Aspen 1 8.5 $ 2,608.95 $ 1,304.47 Fair Overcrowded 96 Engelmann spruce 1 12 $ 5,199.84 $ 2,599.92 Fair Overcrowded; asymmetric canopy; twig dieback 95 Engelmann spruce 1 15 $ 8,124.75 $ 4,062.38 Fair Overcrowded; asymmetric canopy; twig dieback 94 Engelmann spruce 1 7 $ 1,769.39 $- Poor Dominated by adjacent spruce, unsustainable 93 Engelmann spruce 1 12 $ 5,199.84 $ 2,599.92 Fair Discoloration of foliage; overcrowded; asymmetric canopy 92 Engelmann spruce 1 10.5 $ 3,981.13 $- Poor Overcrowded; twig dieback; declining overall health 91 Engelmann spruce 1 14.5 $ 7,592.13 $ 3,796.06 Fair Overcrowded; asymmetric canopy 90 Engelmann spruce 1 20 $ 14,444.00 $- Poor Spiral pattern of branch dieback in canopy; discoloration of foliage Totals 69,322.17$ 34,764.90$ Page 1of 1 Attachment A 61 1,128 188.1 Legend 1: WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet0188.194.04 Notes Shadow Mtn. TH Trees THIS MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content represented. Map Created on 10:06 AM 03/21/22 at http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com State Highway Road Centerline 4K Primary Road Secondary Road Service Road Rivers and Creeks Continuous Intermittent River, Lake or Pond Town Boundary Federal Land Boundary BLM State of Colorado USFS Attachment B 62 Attachment C 63 This Quick Guide was produced by the Colorado State Forest Service to promote knowledge transfer. August 2014 www.csfs.colostate.edu QUICK GUIDE SERIES FM 2014-1 Spruce Beetle An Agent of Subalpine Change The spruce beetle is a native species in Colorado’s spruce forest ecosystem. Endemic populations are always present, and epidemics are a natural part of the changing forest. There usually are long intervals between such events as insect and disease epidemics and wildfires, giving spruce forests time to regenerate. Prior to their occurrence, the potential impacts of these natural disturbances can be reduced through proactive forest management. The spruce beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis) is responsible for the death of more spruce trees in North America than any other natural agent. Spruce beetle populations range from Alaska and Newfoundland to as far south as Arizona and New Mexico. The subalpine Engelmann spruce is the primary host tree, but the beetles will infest any spruce tree species within their geographical range, including blue spruce. In Colorado, the beetles are most commonly observed in high-elevation spruce forests above 9,000 feet. At endemic or low population levels, spruce beetles generally infest only downed trees. However, as spruce beetle population levels in downed trees increase, usually following an avalanche or windthrow event – a high-wind event that topples trees over a large area – the beetles also will infest live standing trees. Spruce beetles prefer large (16 inches in diameter or greater), mature and over- mature spruce trees in slow-growing, spruce-dominated stands. However, at epidemic levels, or when large-scale, rapid population increases occur, spruce beetles may attack trees as small as 3 inches in diameter. Attacks also have been observed in krummholz – trees near timberline that exhibit stunted growth due to harsh conditions. Life History Spruce beetles have a life cycle of one to three years, and a two-year life cycle is the most common. Adult spruce beetles usually are dark brown to black with reddish-brown or black wing covers. They are cylindrical in shape and Figure 1. Engelmann spruce trees infested with spruce beetles on Spring Creek Pass. Photo: William M. Ciesla Figure 2. Spruce beetles are no larger than a grain of rice. Photo: William M. Ciesla Attachment D 64 2 approximately ¼-inch (6 millimeters) long and ⅛-inch (3 millimeters) wide, or about the size of a grain of rice. Each year, adult spruce beetles emerge from dead or dying trees between late May and July. Emerging beetles search for sufficient host material, such as a windthrow; freshly cut logs or stumps; or mature, standing trees. The females bore through the outer bark of the host tree to create galleries in the sapwood, or phloem, where they will lay their eggs. Spruce beetle eggs are minute, oblong in shape and pearly white in color. After the eggs hatch, the spruce beetle larvae spend the winter developing under the bark of their host trees. The larvae are creamy white and about ¼-inch (6 millimeters) long. They tunnel outward, away from the egg gallery, creating individual feeding galleries, or tunnels, in the phloem of the tree. The phloem layer, which transports nutrients created from photosynthesis throughout the tree, also provides food for the larvae. However, the feeding galleries created by the larvae prevent the flow of nutrients, ultimately killing the tree. The larvae turn into pupae approximately 18 months after the host tree is attacked. Spruce beetle pupae, like mature adults, have wings, legs and antennae, and turn a pale tan color as they mature. During the second year of the spruce beetle life cycle, some beetles spend the winter in pupal chambers at the end of larval galleries, while others emerge from their host tree and bore back into the same tree near the base to hibernate for the winter. Overwintering at the litter line, or base of the host tree, decreases the risk of predation by woodpeckers and the risk of beetle mortality due to cold winter temperatures, as accumulating snowpack adds an insulating layer around the lower trunk of the host tree. After the beetles have developed for 2 years, they will exit the host tree and look for a new host. Signs and Symptoms of Spruce Beetle Infestation Unlike some other dying and dead conifers infested by bark beetles, needles of infested spruce trees do not turn bright red or orange. Instead, after being attacked by spruce beetles, spruce needles slowly fade to a pale yellowish-green color before turning gray. Spruce trees often retain their needles for several years after being attacked by spruce beetle. Thus, loss of foliage is not readily apparent until a year or more after a tree has been attacked. After a tree has been infested by spruce beetles, early signs of attack may include: • Light reddish-brown boring dust accumulates in bark crevices and around the base of the tree, which is produced when beetles bore new entry holes. Figure 3. The spruce beetle life cycle. Graphic: U.S. Forest Service Figure 4. Spruce beetles in the pupal stage reside under the bark. Photo: William M. Ciesla Figure 5. Light reddish-brown boring dust at the base of a tree or in bark crevices can be a sign of spruce beetle infestation. Photo: William M. Ciesla Attachment D 65 3 • Pitch streamers – strings of resin that look similar to candle wax – generally visible 8 feet or higher on the tree trunk. • Small pitch tubes, or masses of resin, although these may not be present on an infested tree. These signs of infestation are most visible during the summer of initial attack and become less visible in the following seasons. Other signs of attack that may be observed later include: • Small, round holes in the bark of an infested tree. These holes usually are a result of mature beetles exiting the tree after they have completed their development under the bark, but they also may indicate spruce beetle entrance and/or ventilation holes. • Evidence of increased woodpecker activity. Woodpeckers will attempt to remove tree bark to prey on the underlying bark beetles, usually in the winter and spring, which often results in the accumulation of bark flakes on the snow or ground below the infested tree. • Pale green needles. As they begin to drop, these needles also will accumulate under the canopies of infested trees. Spruce beetle attacks also can be detected on the bottom surfaces of downed, windthrown trees or shady surfaces on trees, usually on the north side. For further assistance in identifying spruce trees attacked by spruce beetle, contact your local forester. Natural Controls Multiple natural controls keep spruce beetle populations in check when they are not at epidemic levels. Woodpeckers and other insects that feed on spruce beetles account for several of these controls. During epidemics, however, natural control agents, while abundant, do not have a significant impact on the beetle population. Extreme cold temperatures also can increase spruce beetle mortality. However, adult beetles will colonize around the base of a tree, or under the snow line, because the snow will insulate them from extreme cold. Management/Prevention One of the best ways to mitigate the effects of spruce beetle outbreaks is to manage for overall forest health and resiliency. Improving tree stand condition, by creating tree age and species diversity, will maintain and support forest health and reduce the potential impact of future spruce beetle attacks. Removing downed spruce also may prevent the build-up of large local spruce beetle populations. When considering any treatment for spruce beetles, choose an option that best meets individual management objectives. Treatments can be effective if directions are carefully followed, but can be time-consuming and costly, and may not be practical or effective for all situations. Also, it is important to note that spruce forests usually are present only at higher elevations, where access to sites is limited and may be restricted by snow. It is essential to research the best possible treatments for a specific area before taking action. Figure 8. Small masses of resin called pitch tubes sometimes can be seen after spruce beetles have infested a tree. Photo: CSFS Figure 7. Pitch streamers look like candle wax and usually are found above 8 feet on a tree. Photo: Lisa Mason, CSFS Figure 9. The accumulation of bark flakes on the ground indicates that woodpeckers have fed on spruce beetles living in this tree. Photo: CSFS Attachment D 66 4 Preventive Sprays Use of insecticides is a management technique that has proven effective in preventing spruce beetle infestation of individual trees. Certain formulations of carbaryl and pyrethroids that are registered and have been tested for effectiveness are the primary insecticide sprays used to help reduce the likelihood of attacks on individual, high-value trees. The Colorado State Forest Service (CSFS) recommends spraying only high-value trees, such as those near homes, businesses or recreation sites. Overuse of insecticide sprays may have negative environmental impacts on water supplies and wildlife. Also, these sprays are not cost-effective on a landscape scale. Before using preventive chemical sprays, consider the following guidelines: Insecticide sprays may be effective if applied to live, green trees: • in the late spring or early summer, before the next year’s flight • in the fall, before the next year’s flight, if access to the site is difficult in the early spring • in the proper dosage and mixture • annually • consistently, to cover the entire tree Insecticide sprays will NOT be effective if: • applied to trees already infested with spruce beetles • applied in improper dosages or mixtures • significant rainfall or very high air temperatures occur immediately after application • chemicals were not properly stored before use If planning to use preventive sprays, carefully read all label precautions before application. The CSFS recommends that preventive sprays be applied only by a certified applicator. Solar Treatments Solar treatments also can be used to reduce spruce beetle populations in infested stands. These treatments involve felling infested trees and stacking logs in an area with full sun before covering them with clear plastic. Solar treatment of infested trees creates conditions unsuitable for survival of spruce beetles, forcing them to either relocate or die. The temperature under the bark must reach a minimum of 110 degrees F for this treatment to effectively reduce beetle populations. Remember that spruce beetles tend to reside on the bottom side of horizontal trees or logs, where the environment is cooler and moister. Turning the logs periodically is essential for all of the bark to reach 110 degrees F. Solar treatments in spruce forests can be challenging, because spruce forests tend to be cool, moist and shady, without ample sunlight. Talk to your local CSFS forester to determine if this is an appropriate treatment for your area. Trap Trees Trap trees are another management option that can prevent the spread of spruce beetle populations. These trees serve as traps for emerging, adult spruce beetles. Trap trees are intentionally baited with a spruce beetle attractant chemical that ideally will be selected as suitable hosts for emerging spruce beetles. After the Figure 10. Spraying insecticides is an effective management technique to prevent bark beetle attacks. Photo: CSFS Attachment D 67 5 trap trees become infested with beetles, they are removed and destroyed by forest managers while all of the spruce beetles are still inside, thereby reducing the population level of the next generation. This method is effective, but requires a significant amount of time and effort to plan, monitor and safely remove trees in a timely manner. Many variables must be considered, including the number of trap trees per acre, tree diameter and timing for tree cutting and removal. It is highly recommended that a local CSFS forester be contacted before using this treatment option. Pheromones Studies currently are being conducted on pheromones, including MCH (a successful anti-aggregate pheromone for Douglas-fir beetle), to determine whether they will serve as effective anti-aggregate treatments for spruce beetle. Anti- aggregate pheromones essentially are “No Vacancy” signs that communicate to beetles that specific trees are unavailable to more beetles. The CSFS will make information available on pheromone effectiveness as soon as sufficient research on its use has been conducted. Mechanical Treatments Mechanical treatments, such as felling trees and subsequently chipping the wood and/or burning the resulting slash piles, is another management option, but it often is difficult to get the proper equipment on steep, remote terrain where spruce forests exist. Debarking is another mechanical means to kill developing larvae under the tree bark. This is a labor-intensive method that involves peeling away the bark by hand or using machinery. Logs also can be buried under at least 8 inches of soil. However, debarking and burying logs often are not feasible options in native spruce forests because of the terrain. Contact a local CSFS forester for more information on best forest management practices to improve forest health and mitigate spruce beetle outbreaks. Figure 11. Solar treatments can be effective, but also challenging because spruce forests often are cool, moist and shady in the summer. Photo: CSFS Figure 12. The San Juan Mountains in southwestern Colorado have been heavily infested with spruce beetle. In the photo above, 70-90 percent of the mature Engelmann spruce trees have been killed by spruce beetle and have turned gray. Photo: Ron Klatt, USDA Forest Service (retired) It is important to remember that transporting infested wood can spread spruce beetles to other areas. Trees and logs are only safe to transport when a tree has lost all of its needles or has been dead for some time and the spruce beetles have long-since emerged. Attachment D 68 6 Potential Implications of Spruce Beetle in Colorado Colorado’s high-elevation forests provide clean air and water, wildlife habitat, world-class recreational opportunities, wood products and unparalleled scenery. These benefits contribute to quality of life and are vital to state and local economies. However, without careful management of forest resources, these assets and community safety are at risk. It is important to remember that the spruce beetle is a native insect in Colorado’s spruce forest ecosystem and a natural part of the changing forest. However, the potential impacts of these natural disturbances can be reduced through proactive forest management. Forests typically attacked and killed by spruce beetles are located at the headwaters of Colorado’s rivers, which provide water to 18 states. Water yields may be influenced by the death of so many trees, and the impacts to water quality and quantity may be significant when large wildfires occur in these forests. Spruce-fir forests provide important habitat to a number of wildlife species, including the red squirrel, snowshoe hare, pine marten, boreal owl, Clark’s nutcracker and three-toed woodpecker. Spruce- fir forests also are essential to the habitat matrix required by the reintroduced Canada lynx and one of Colorado’s most at-risk amphibians, the boreal toad, which inhabits open, high-moisture areas within spruce-fir forests. Seventeen of Colorado’s “Species of Greatest Conservation Need,” as identified by Colorado Parks and Wildlife, rely on spruce-fir forests for their primary habitat. Change in forest cover of spruce-fir forests could negatively impact the habitat of these species. Recreational opportunities, such as downhill and cross-country skiing, camping, hunting and fishing, also are predominant in areas of the state that could be impacted by the spruce beetle. It is critical to proactively manage spruce forests and for individuals and communities to remain informed about threats to forest health to ensure survival of vast, healthy forests for present and future generations. Figure 13. The Clark’s nutcracker is an important species in spruce-fir forests because it helps disperse tree seeds in the forest. Photo: Dave Leatherman Figure 15. Spruce beetle mortality in the upper Rio Grande Basin. Photo: Joe Duda, CSFS Figure 14. Spruce-fir forests provide habitat for many wildlife species. Photo: Dave Leatherman Attachment D 69 7 Wildfire Safety in Spruce-fir Forests When addressing spruce beetle concerns in high- elevation forests, it is important to understand historical wildfire occurrence in spruce forests. Unlike many other Colorado forest types, spruce-fir forests are not adapted to frequent fires. The interval between naturally occurring wildfires in Colorado spruce-fir forests may be 300 years or longer. If a wildfire does occur in a spruce forest, the trees’ thin bark and the persistence of many dead lower limbs increases their susceptibility to fire, as well as the likelihood of intense crown fires and widespread tree mortality. If a stand-replacing fire occurs in a spruce-fir forest where most or all of the trees in the stand are killed, it may take as long as 400 years for the forest to mature. When treating spruce-fir forests to mitigate wildfire risk, concentrate on reducing fuel loads. Heavier fuels, such as brush and trees, are more hazardous and produce more intense fires than light fuels, such as grasses. Fuels mitigation focuses on breaking up the continuity of fuels, with greater distance between trees and other vegetation. When managing spruce-fir forests for wildfire hazard reduction around homes or other structures, consider the following: • Remove dead and downed debris on the ground to break up the continuity of flammable material. This can help slow the spread of a wildfire. Leave rotting wood on the ground. • Prune off the dead lower branches of any spruce tree within 100 feet of the home or structure. This will reduce the likelihood of a wildfire traveling up the tree. • Remove all dead trees within one-and-a-half times the tree height around homes, structures or roads. Not only are they a wildfire hazard, they also are more apt to fall. • Spruce forests are susceptible to windthrow and thinning them can increase this risk. Before thinning spruce forests or designing a defensible space around a home or structure, it is advisable to talk with a forester. • For more information on reducing wildfire risk on your property, refer to the CSFS website at http://csfs.colostate.edu. Figure 17. Blowdown areas in spruce forests can increase the continuity of flammable material during a wildfire. Photo: Rio Grande National Forest Figure 18. Pruning the lower branches of a spruce tree can reduce the chances of a wildfire traveling up a tree. Photo: CSFS Figure 16. Spruce beetle mortality can contribute to high wildfire risk. Photo: Kent Grant, CSFS Attachment D 70 8 The Colorado State Forest Service (CSFS) is a service and outreach agency of the Warner College of Natural Resources at Colorado State University. This Quick Guide was produced by the CSFS. CSFS programs are available to all without discrimination. No endorsement of products or services is intended, nor is criticism implied of products not mentioned. 08201410000 www.csfs.colostate.edu Acknowledgements Thank you to the following CSFS personnel, who provided assistance on the text, graphics and production of this Quick Guide: Kent Grant, CSFS Durango District Kathryn Hardgrave, CSFS Salida District Ryan Lockwood, Outreach Division, CSFS State Office Lisa Mason, Outreach Division, CSFS State Office Adam Moore, CSFS Alamosa District Sam Pankratz, CSFS Gunnison District Courtney Peterson, Outreach Division, CSFS State Office Kelly Rogers, CSFS Grand Junction District Katherine Timm, Outreach Division, CSFS State Office Thank you to the following individuals for reviewing content and providing input during the development of this Quick Guide: Bob Cain, USDA Forest Service Bob Hammon, Colorado State University Extension, Tri River Area Sky Stephens, USDA Forest Service For More Information For more information on spruce beetles or forest management, contact a local Colorado State Forest Service district office or visit the CSFS website at www.csfs.colostate.edu. References Colorado Statewide Forest Resource Assessment: A foundation for strategic discussion and implementation of forest management in Colorado. 2008. Colorado State Forest Service. Field Guide to Diseases and Insects of the Rocky Mountain Region. 2010. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Holsten E. H., Thier R. W., Munson A. S., and Gibson K. E. 1999. “The Spruce Beetle.” Forest Insect and Disease Leaflet 127. U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. Note: The “Species of Greatest Conservation Need” referred to in this Quick Guide were identified by Colorado Parks and Wildlife as part of Colorado’s State Wildlife Action Plan, available online at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeSpecies/ ColoradoWildlifeActionPlan/Pages/ColoradoWildlifeActionPlan.aspx. Figure 19. Colorado’s spruce-fir forests provide clean air and water, wildlife habitat, world-class recreational opportunities, wood products and unparalleled scenery. Photo: William M. Ciesla Attachment D 71 Fact Sheet No. 5.558 Insect Series|Trees and Shrubs Quick Facts •Ips is a common group of bark beetles that infests pine and spruce trees. •Ips beetles rarely attack healthy trees. Most problems with ips occur to newly transplanted pines or when plants are under stress. •Several generations of ips can occur in a season. •There are 11 species of ips beetles found in Colorado. Ips beetles, sometimes known as “engraver beetles,” are bark beetles that damage pine and spruce trees. They develop under the bark and produce girdling tunnels that can cause dieback and kill trees. Eleven species of ips beetles occur in Colorado (see Table 1). Ips beetles are generally not considered as destructive or aggressive as bark beetles in the genus Dendroctonus (mountain pine beetle, spruce beetle, Douglas-fir beetle). Normally ips beetles limit their attacks to trees that are in decline due to root injuries, wounding, or other stresses. However, under widespread conditions which allow improved survival and large population build-ups, ips beetles are a considerable threat to living trees. Two factors that recently contributed to ips beetle problems in Colorado include: prolonged drought stress; and the creation of freshly- cut wood (which is a preferred breeding site) from forest homeowner efforts to reduce wildfire hazards. Ips beetles are small (1/8 to 3/8 inch long), reddish-brown to black beetles. They have a pronounced cavity at the rear end, which is lined with three to six pairs of tooth-like spines, depending on the species. The latter feature distinguishes them from other bark beetles (see Figure 1). Symptoms of Ips Beetle Injury As adult ips beetles enter trees and tunnel, a yellowish- or reddish-brown boring dust is produced and accumulates in bark crevices or around the base of the tree. When the larval tunnel, affected parts of the tree discolor (“fade”) and die. These symptoms may be limited to parts of the tree, such as a single branch or the top. However unlike mountain by W. Cranshaw and D.A. Leatherman* Ips Beetles *W. Cranshaw, Colorado State University Extension entomologist and professor, bioagricultural sciences and pest management; and D.A. Leatherman, Colorado State Forest Service entomologist. 6/2013 pine beetle, infestation by ips beetles does not necessarily mean the whole tree will die, but over time, attacks may progress as later generations “fill” the tree and then ultimately the host can die. Small round holes in the bark of infested trees indicate the beetles have completed development in that part of the tree and the adults have exited. The presence of these holes peppering the bark show the beetles have moved to another part of the same tree or to neighboring trees. Woodpeckers are common predators of ips beetles. Their presence may also indicate bark beetle activity. Woodpeckers often remove the tree bark in an effort to obtain this food source. This habit results in ragged holes or patches of missing bark on the tree. Generalized Life History Adults overwinter under the bark or in surrounding litter at the tree base. They begin to attack weakened trees in the spring. Initially the male enters the tree, constructs a © Colorado State University Extension. 12/02. Revised 6/13. www.ext.colostate.edu Figure 1: Adult Dendroctonus (top) versus Ips (bottom). Note gradually curved wing of Dendroctonus. Actual size of Dendroctonus from 1/8 to 1/3 inch, Ips 1/8 to 3/8 inch. Attachment D 72 cavity under the bark known as the “nuptial chamber.” Females are attracted to the tree by chemicals (pheromones) produced by the male. After mating, females (usually three) excavate egg galleries off the central chamber. The tunnels produced by the adults appear as a “Y”- or “H”- shaped pattern. These galleries are mostly free of boring dust, which is pushed out of the entrance hole as the adult beetles work. These “cleared out” galleries have a different appearance than the debris-filled galleries of Dendroctonus. Eggs are laid along the gallery and young larvae soon hatch and begin tunneling smaller lateral galleries that lightly etch the sapwood. They are small grubs, about 1/4 inch long when mature, white to dirty gray, legless, with dark heads. In Colorado, two to four generations of these beetles usually develop per year. Management To prevent ips beetle attacks, use practices that promote vigorous tree growth. Properly siting trees in landscape plantings is important to allow optimal growing conditions as the tree matures. Adequate – but not excessive – water may be needed. Root injuries caused by mechanical damage, compaction, or disease should be avoided. Freshly-cut material that results from pruning or thinning practices (called “slash”) should be removed from the vicinity of valuable trees. Never stack green or infested coniferous wood next to living coniferous trees. Such green woody material should be chipped or treated so that the inner bark area is destroyed. Ips larvae will not survive standard chipping or debarking treatments. Other treatments could include scattering (as opposed to piling) slash to promote rapid drying. Trees at risk of ips attack include newly transplanted trees, trees suffering root injuries from construction, and trees surrounded by large breeding populations of ips beetles. These types of trees can benefit from preventive insecticide applications. Insecticides are used as drenching preventive sprays on the trunks and larger branches. These insecticides need to be applied prior to adult beetle infestation. (Remember that overwintering beetles begin emerging in spring as soon as daytime temperatures consistently reach 50 F to 60 F.) However, timing can be difficult to determine since ips beetles can have multiple, overlapping generations and life cycles. Adults have been observed entering trees during warm days as early as late-February on through November. Because of this extended activity, two treatments (early spring and summer) may be needed to protect trees during high- risk conditions. Insecticides used to prevent ips include either permethrin, bifenthrin, or carbaryl (Sevin) as the active ingredient. There are many products currently on the market containing these active ingredients. Follow Figure 4: Top dieback of spruce from drought stress and ips attack. Figure 2: Boring dust at the base of a pine tree. Reddish boring dust is caused by ips beetles. The whitish dust is from ambrosia bark beetles. Figure 3: Tunneling by Ips hunteri in blue spruce. Table 1. Common ips beetles (Ips species) affecting pines and spruce in Colorado. Species Hosts Comments Ips hunteri Spruce This is a common species affecting Colorado blue spruce in landscape settings. Upper portions of the tree are typically infested first. Ips pilifrons Spruce A forest species often called the “spruce ips”; tends to infest the upper part of fallen trunks. Ips pini Ponderosa, lodgepole The most common species associated with other pines in Colorado. Ips knausi Ponderosa pine Common at base of trunk and in fresh stumps. Ips calligraphus Ponderosa pine Largest ips species in Colorado; often in main trunk. Ips confusus Piñon, rarely other pines Periodically kills piñons over large areas. Ips latidens 3- and 5-needled pines Ips borealis Engelmann spruce Ips integer Primarily Ponderosa pine Ips woodi Limber pine Ips mexicanus Lodgepole and limber pines Attachment D 73 the manufacturer’s recommendation for the proper rate for bark beetle treatment. Bark beetle applications at the labeled rate should provide at least three months control of ips beetles. When a preventively-sprayed tree later dies of beetle attack, it is usually for one of the following reasons: 1) the tree was sprayed after it was attacked; 2) the spray was applied at too dilute a rate; 3) the entire bark surface of the susceptible part of the tree was not sprayed; or 4) the material wore off and was no longer effective. Insecticide applications are not needed when ips beetles do not pose a serious risk to healthy trees. Ips problems are often an issue for a few years, then lessen naturally to non-threatening levels. This is the normal condition in Colorado. A rule of thumb when deciding if preventive treatments are needed is to survey for infested groups of bark beetle-killed trees (as determined by dead foliage) within sight of the live trees in question. Also, transplants or recently disturbed trees in natural forest areas or near other known sources of ips may warrant protection. Tree value, of course, is always a consideration. There is often more interest in protecting high-value trees such as those around residences, golf courses, or in other highly visible settings. No chemical treatment exists for trees or wood already infested by ips beetles. In rare cases where it is feasible to reduce the threat to live trees by killing beetles within infested trees before they exit, treatments involve bark removal, chipping the wood into small pieces, covering piles with a double-layer of 6-mil thick clear plastic sealed around the edges with soil to heat (solarize) the wood, or physical removal of infested material from the site to an area a mile or more from susceptible trees. Figure 5: Storing cut firewood near susceptible trees greatly increases the risk of ips beetle attack. Figure 7: Ips pini egg galleries under bark of ponderosa pine trunk. Figure 6: Ips confusus pitch tubes on infested pinyon pine trunk. This fact sheet was produced in cooperation with the Colorado State Forest Service. Colorado State University, U.S. Department of Agriculture and Colorado counties cooperating. CSU Extension programs are available to all without discrimination. No endorsement of products mentioned is intended nor is criticism implied of products not mentioned. Note: Concentrations of insecticides used to control bark beetles are often considerably greater than those used for insects on foliage. To avoid needle burning, try to limit the application to the bark, particularly when using liquid (emulsifiable concentrate) formulations that have increased risk of causing plant injuries. Attachment D 74 1 From: Hailey Guglielmo <hailey.guglielmo@aspen.gov>  Date: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 at 8:42 AM  To: Phillip Ring <phillip@rds‐aspen.com>, Trish Aragon <trish.aragon@aspen.gov>  Subject: RE: Shadow Mountain Townhomes ROW request  Phillip,   Thank you for taking the time to meet and discuss. After reviewing all information we have concluded that the COA  Engineering Department could support the ROW encroachment if the following can be demonstrated.   (1)All infrastructure for the patio in the ROW could be demoed and removed from the ROW without grading constraints making it infeasible. Retaining walls lock in grading and create constraints for any future uses. If it is demonstrated that the improvements in the ROW can be easily removed than the encroachment is more justified. a.The retaining walls in the ROW could be removed and regraded without significant demo extents. The area could be regraded to an acceptable slope. (2)Improvements in the ROW can be removed independent of any onsite improvements. a.The ROW retaining walls should be independent of the onsite retaining walls. So if the ROW retaining walls need to be removed there will be no negative impact onsite. (3)Could the upper retaining wall be a repair/replacement of the existing railroad tie retaining wall? A repair of existing may be better supported than new infrastructure. (4)Show that the Shadow Mountain proposed plan and removal of the existing deck creates a better condition for the proposed grading for the swale that will support drainage and mudflow in the future. a.The piers of the deck are constraint points for the Gorsuch Haus proposed swale. Show that removal of this deck and installation of the at grade patio provides a better condition for grading of the swale. (5)The patio and stairs will be available for public use. The area is viewed as a public amenity space on public right‐ of‐way. One item that I just thought of that we haven’t discussed is to check the proposed plan meets zoning requirements  for grading in a setback. The grade cannot change more than 30”.   Thanks.   Hailey Guglielmo  Senior Project Manager | Engineering   (C): 970.309.0771  www.cityofaspen.com   Our Values: Stewardship | Partnership | Service | Innovation Exhibit A8 75 2 From: Phillip Ring <phillip@rds‐aspen.com>   Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 10:37 AM  To: Trish Aragon <trish.aragon@aspen.gov>  Cc: Hailey Guglielmo <hailey.guglielmo@aspen.gov>  Subject: Shadow Mountain Townhomes ROW request  Trish and Hailey – Ahead of tomorrow’s meeting, I’ve prepared the attached letter documenting the history of this  project for your review. We look forward to discussing the HOA’s request further.  Thanks,  ‐phillip  ‐‐  Phillip M Ring LEED AP Ring Development Services 970.948.3464  76 1 From: Hailey Guglielmo <hailey.guglielmo@aspen.gov>  Date: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 2:19 PM  To: Phillip Ring <phillip@rds‐aspen.com>  Cc: Chris Hale <Chris@mountaincross‐eng.com>, Jeffrey Barnhill <jeffrey.barnhill@aspen.gov>  Subject: RE: Shadow Mtn grading in the ROW and setback  Phillip and Chris,   After speaking with Bob Narracci with the Zoning Department, there is some leeway to allow removal of the retaining  wall that currently sits in the property setback, as it returns the area to more natural grade. This proposed plan will be  reviewed and approved through the 8040 Greenline review. It appears Shadow Mountain has an open 8040 Greenline  Review. This retaining wall and grading scope could be incorporated into the existing, open 8040 Greenline Review. Jeff  Barnhill is the planner on that existing landuse review. I have cc’d him here. When plans are finalized please work with  Jeff to submit any outstanding items as well as the proposed grading and wall removal to the 8040 Greenline to close it  out.   Thanks   Hailey Guglielmo  Senior Project Manager | Engineering   (C): 970.309.0771  www.cityofaspen.com   Our Values: Stewardship | Partnership | Service | Innovation 77 2 From: Phillip Ring <phillip@rds‐aspen.com>   Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 8:54 PM  To: Hailey Guglielmo <hailey.guglielmo@aspen.gov>  Cc: Chris Hale <Chris@mountaincross‐eng.com>  Subject: Shadow Mtn grading in the ROW and setback  Hailey – Thanks again for taking the time to meet with Chris and me today. As we discussed, we think we can improve  the grading along the S Aspen St property line and ROW by removing the deteriorating RR tie walls and replacing with a  30” retaining wall that would turn up the slope at the side yard setback. However, in order to do so, we would need to  affect the existing grade by as much as 51” along the south edge of the patio. We’d also need to grade the slope in the  setback and ROW as steep as 2:1 in some areas.  I’ve attached the plan we reviewed, which still shows the existing BBQ deck as it extends into the ROW and encroaches  upon the Gorsuch Haus grading plans. I’ve also included a few pictures that show the existing retaining walls. They’re  not great shots but you can see they aren’t in good condition and will certainly look out of place once the Shadow  Mountain renovation project and Gorsuch Haus are complete.  Really appreciate your discussing this with Kevin Rayes. Let me know if there’s anything else we can provide.  ‐phillip ‐‐  Phillip M Ring LEED AP Ring Development Services 970.948.3464  78 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTIVATIVE: Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions Review: Administrative or Board Review Required Land Use Review(s): Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields: Net Leasable square footage Lodge Pillows Free Market dwelling units Affordable Housing dwelling units Essential Public Facility square footage Have you included the following? FEES DUE: $ Pre-Application Conference Summary Signed Fee Agreement HOA Compliance form All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary Name: Address: Phone#: email: Address: Phone #: email: Name: Project Name and Address: Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) Shadow Mountain Village Condominiums 8040 Greenline 2735-131-24-800 Shadow Mountain Village Condominiums PO Box 49; Aspen, CO 81612 630.988.2230 karen@kabert.com BendonAdams 300 So. Spring St. #202; Aspen, CO 81611 970.925.2855 chris@bendonadams.com Landscape and site improvements to existing 20-unit residential condominium building na na 20 existing na na x x x x 4,225 Exhibit B1 79 Exhibit B2 80 Page | 1 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY DATE: July 16, 2021 PLANNER: Kevin Rayes, 970.429.2797 PROJECT NAME AND ADDRESS: 809 S. Aspen Street | 8040 Greenline Review PARCEL ID#: 2735-131-24-800 REPRESENTATIVE: Chris Bendon | Bendon Adams | chris@bendonadams.com DESCRIPTION: 809 S. Aspen Street is located in the Lodge (L) zone district & within the 8040 Greenline Review area. The property contains twenty-one condominium units and common area improvements including decks, an inground pool, walkways, landscaped areas and retaining walls. The applicant recently received two administrative 8040 Greenline Review approvals for various improvements onsite. The first approval included the installation an air conditioning system, the redevelopment of a trash enclosure, and the redevelopment of several external stairwells, and other small improvements (Reception No. 667844). The second approval included the installation of windows & doors on certain residential units, the replacement of exterior siding and the maintenance or replacement of certain decks and retaining walls on the property. (This Notice of Approval has not yet been recorded but is on file with the City.) The applicant is now interested in obtaining a third administrative approval for 8040 Greenline Review. The proposed scope of work includes the following: •Repave the existing parking area for maintenance purposes. No changes to the parking area footprint are proposed. •Upgrade stormwater infrastructure in the landscaped area adjacent to the parking lot •Landscape the slopes along the western side of the property (between the buildings and the stairs/tram). •Reconfigure the existing stairwell along the eastern most side of the lot. The stairwell currently encroaches into City right-of-way and the new stairwell would do the same. An encroachment license memorializes the existing stairwell (License Number 2007-E166 & Reception No. 543674). To maintain the encroachment license, the dimensions of the new stairwell should be the minimum necessary to meet Building Code Compliance.1 This application will be referred to the Building Department for comments. •Replace the existing BBQ deck and social terrace. Both improvements currently encroach into City right-of-way and are memorialized via the encroachment license mentioned above. Only “like-for-like” replacement of the social terrace and BBQ deck will be permitted to maintain the encroachment license. The location, footprint and height of these improvements should not be altered. Although the proposed improvements do not increase floor area or require the removal of any trees, the property is located within a mudflow zone, which is considered a geological hazard. This application will need to be reviewed for compliance by the Planning & Zoning Commission pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.435.030.c, 8040 Greenline Review Standards. RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: Section Number Section Title 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.435.030 Environmentally Sensitive Areas- 8040 Greenline Review Exhibit B3 81 Page | 2 For your convenience – links to the Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below: Land Use Application Land Use Code REVIEW BY: Community Development Staff for complete application and administrative review PUBLIC HEARING: Yes, Planning & Zoning Commission. PLANNING FEES: $3,250 deposit for 10 hours of staff time (additional hours will be billed at $325/hr) REFERRAL FEES: $650 flat fee for City Parks Department review. $325 deposit for Engineering review (additional hours will be billed at $325/hr) TOTAL DEPOSIT: $4,225.00 APPLICATION CHECKLIST – PLEASE EMAIL THESE ITMES IN A PDF FORMAT TO: KEVIN.RAYES@CITYOFASPEN.COM  Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.  Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).  HOA Compliance form (Attached to Application).  Applicant’s name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to action on behalf of the applicant.  Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.  An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.  A written description of the proposed work.  Drawings depicting the locations dimensions of all improvements currently located within the City right-of-way, including the BBQ grill, social terrace, and stairwell.  Drawings depicting the locations and dimensions of all proposed improvements within City right-of-way, including the BBQ grill, social terrace, and stairwell.  An explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the project complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property. If the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:  Total deposit for review of the application. Depending on further review of the case, additional items may be requested of the application. Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the applicant/applicant’s representative will receive an e-mail requesting submission of an electronic copy of the complete application and the deposit. Once the deposit is received, the case will be assigned to a planner and the land use review will begin. 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 change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 82 INVOICE Land Title Guarantee Company 5975 Greenwood Plaza Blvd Suite 125 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 970-925-1678 BENDONADAMS CHRIS BENDON 300 S SPRNG ST SUITE 202 STE 202 Aspen, CO 81611 Invoice Number:ASP-4591 Date: July 28, 2021 Order Number:62013163 Property Address:809 S ASPEN ST # 3 ASPEN 81611 Parties:To Be Determined Invoice Charges Service: TBD Commitment Ref: 62013163 Addr: 809 S ASPEN ST # 3 Party: KABERT INDUSTRIES, INC., AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION Total Amount Invoiced: Less Payment(s): Balance Due: $217.00 $217.00 $0.00 $217.00 Due and Payable upon receipt Please make check payable to Land Title Guarantee Company and send to the address at the top of Page 1. Please reference Invoice Number ASP-4591 on your Payment Page 1 invoice.odt 14420 07/2015 07/30/13 11:06:43 AM Reference Your Reference Number:TBD Commitment - 62013163 Our Order Number:ASP-4591 Our Customer Number:79636.1 Invoice Requested by:CHRIS BENDON Invoice (Process) Date:July 28, 2021 Transaction Invoiced By:Web Services Email Address:system@ltgc.com Exhibit B4 83 Land Title Guarantee Company Customer Distribution PREVENT FRAUD - Please remember to call a member of our closing team when initiating a wire transfer or providing wiring instructions. Order Number:Q62013163 Date: 07/28/2021 Property Address:809 S ASPEN ST # 3, ASPEN, CO 81611 PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CLOSER OR CLOSER'S ASSISTANT FOR WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS For Closing Assistance For Title Assistance Land Title Roaring Fork Valley Title Team 533 E HOPKINS #102 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 927-0405 (Work) (970) 925-0610 (Work Fax) valleyresponse@ltgc.com Seller/Owner KABERT INDUSTRIES INC Delivered via: No Commitment Delivery BENDON ADAMS Attention: CHRIS BENDON (970) 925-2855 (Work) chris@bendonadams.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail 84 Land Title Guarantee Company Estimate of Title Fees Order Number:Q62013163 Date: 07/28/2021 Property Address:809 S ASPEN ST # 3, ASPEN, CO 81611 Parties:TO BE DETERMINED KABERT INDUSTRIES, INC., AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION Visit Land Title's Website at www.ltgc.com for directions to any of our offices. Estimate of Title insurance Fees "TBD" Commitment $217.00 Total $217.00 If Land Title Guarantee Company will be closing this transaction, the fees listed above will be collected at closing. Thank you for your order! Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These documents, such as covenants conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and use of the property. You may wish to engage legal assistance in order to fully understand and be aware of the implications of the effect of these documents on your property. Chain of Title Documents: Pitkin county recorded 05/30/1995 under reception no. 381734 at book 782 page 197 Plat Map(s): Pitkin county recorded 07/12/1965 under reception no. None at book 3 page 33 85 Copyright 2006-2021 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Property Address: 809 S ASPEN ST # 3, ASPEN, CO 81611 1.Effective Date: 07/16/2021 at 5:00 P.M. 2.Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured: "TBD" Commitment Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED $0.00 3.The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: A FEE SIMPLE 4.Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: KABERT INDUSTRIES, INC., AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION 5.The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3, ​ SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM APARTMENTS, ​ ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM MAP THEREOF RECORDED JULY 12, 1965 IN PLAT BOOK 3 AT PAGE 33, AND AS FURTHER DEFINED AND DESCRIBED IN THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION FOR SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE APARTMENTS RECORDED APRIL 1, 2009 AS RECEPTION NO. 557704 AND FIRST AMENDMENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 11, 2009 AS RECEPTION NO. 562681 AND SECOND AMENDMENT RECORDED AUGUST 26, 2020 AS RECEPTION NO. 667409, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:Q62013163 86 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: Q62013163 All of the following Requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. 1.EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TRANSFER TAX HAVE BEEN SATISFIED. 2.THE COMPANY WILL REQUIRE A CERTIFICATION SIGNED BY A PROPER REPRESENTATIVE OF SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE STATING THAT THERE HAS BEEN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE FIRST REFUSAL PROVISIONS OF THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATIONS AS REFERENCED IN ITEM NO. 10 OF SCHEDULE B. 3.CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING OF KABERT INDUSTRIES, INC., AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION, ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF ILLINOIS. 4.DULY EXECUTED AND ACKNOWLEDGED STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY SETTING FORTH THE NAME OF KABERT INDUSTRIES, INC., AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION AS A CORPORATION. THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST STATE UNDER WHICH LAWS THE ENTITY WAS CREATED, THE MAILING ADDRESS OF THE ENTITY, AND THE NAME AND POSITION OF THE PERSON(S) AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE INSTRUMENTS CONVEYING, ENCUMBERING, OR OTHERWISE AFFECTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF THE ENTITY AND OTHERWISE COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 38-30- 172, CRS. NOTE: THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST BE RECORDED WITH THE CLERK AND RECORDER. 5.WARRANTY DEED FROM KABERT INDUSTRIES, INC., AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION TO TO BE DETERMINED CONVEYING SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POLICY WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT HERETO. 87 This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore 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 of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8.RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE THEREFROM SHOULD THE SAME BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED AUGUST 26, 1949, IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 208. 9.TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF CONTRACT FOR WATER SERVICE BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE RECORDED JANUARY 11, 1965 IN BOOK 211 AT PAGE 158 AS RECEPTION NO. 119704. 10.RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, WHICH DO NOT CONTAIN A FORFEITURE OR REVERTER CLAUSE, BUT OMITTING ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED UPON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS, MARITAL STATUS, DISABILITY, HANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCE OF INCOME, AS SET FORTH IN APPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED APRIL 1, 2009 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 557704 AND FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED SEPTEMBER 11, 2009 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 562681 AND SECOND AMENDMENT THERETO RECORDED AUGUST 26, 2020 AS RECEPTION NO. 667409. 11.TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION RECORDED JULY 26, 1965 IN BOOK 214 AT PAGE 178. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: Q62013163 88 12.EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS SET FORTH ON THE MAP FOR SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM APARTMENTS RECORDED JULY 12, 1965 IN PLAT BOOK 3 AT PAGE 33. 13.TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF NOTICE OF HOUSE RULES RECORDED JULY 30, 1979 IN BOOK 373 AT PAGE 343. 14.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF CERTIFICATE RECORDED MAY 7, 2003 AS RECEPTION NO. 482445. 15.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN REVOCABLE ENCROACHMENT LICENSE RECORDED OCTOBER 31, 2007 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 543674. 16.TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF STATEMENT OF ELECTION TO ACCEPT COLORADO COMMON INTEREST OWNERSHIP ACT RECORDED APRIL 01, 2009 AT RECEPTION NO. 557703. 17.EASEMENTS, NOTES, RIGHTS OF WAY AND ALL MATTERS AS SHOWN ON IMPROVEMENT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 2018 IN PLAT BOOK 124 AT PAGE 59. 18.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN NOTICE OF APPROVAL RECORDED SEPTEMBER 4, 2020 AS RECEPTION NO. 667844. 19.ANY EXISTING LEASES AND TENANCIES. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: Q62013163 89 LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 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 least 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 8-1-2 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 conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the 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: No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A) A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property). (B) 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. (C) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. (A) 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. (B) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. (C) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. (E) 90 Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-11(4)(a)(1), Colorado notaries may remotely notarize real estate deeds and other documents using real-time audio-video communication technology. You may choose not to use remote notarization for any document. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and (A) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. (B) 91 JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY OF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY OF SUMMIT COUNTY LAND TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based transaction management system; your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others; a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non-affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction. We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 92 Commitment For Title Insurance Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. . COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: 4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. “Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(a) “Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (b) “Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law.(c) “Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (d) “Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(e) “Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) “Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (g) “Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A.(h) the Notice;(a) the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b) the Commitment Conditions;(c) Schedule A;(d) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g) The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: (a) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (b) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. (c) The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (d) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e) 93 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory. Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Craig B. Rants, Senior Vice President This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Land Title Insurance Corporation. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (f) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy.(g) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment.(b) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (c) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (d) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f) 94 Exhibit B5 95 Exhibit B6 96 Exhibit B7 809 South Aspen Street – Vicinity Map 97 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 G E EE E E (BASIS OF BEARINGS) P = 150.00' S75°09'11"E 150.13' S1 4 ° 5 9 ' 3 1 " W 2 0 9 . 8 3 ' P = S 1 4 ° 5 0 ' 4 9 " W 2 1 0 . 0 0 ' N75°06'55"W 149.83' P = N75°09'11"W 150.00' P = N 1 4 ° 5 0 ' 4 9 " E 2 1 0 . 0 0 ' N1 4 ° 5 4 ' 3 1 " E 2 0 9 . 7 3 ' SITE BENCH MARK FOUND REBAR & 1-1/4" ORANGE PLASTIC CAP LS28643 ELEVATION 7997.81 FOUND REBAR & 1-1/4" ORANGE PLASTIC CAP LS28643 FOUND REBAR & 1-1/4" YELLOW PLASTIC CAP LS19598 FOUND REBAR & 1" RED PLASTIC CAP LS25947 FFE 8002.25 FFE 8004.11 FFE 8008.62 RIDGE 8025.0 45.6' 45.6' 21 . 4 5 ' 21 . 4 5 ' 23. 4 ' 6 8 . 5 ' F F E # 1 0 8 0 2 6 . 1 1 F F E # 9 8 0 2 5 . 9 8 F F E # 8 8 0 2 5 . 7 4 F F E # 7 8 0 2 5 . 0 5 F F E # 6 8 0 2 4 . 6 9 F F E # 5 8 0 2 4 . 9 2 23. 0 ' 6.4' 1 1 . 9 ' 8007.98 FFE-LAUNDRY 1 2 . 2 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 6.0' 5.8' 6.3' 5.8' 5.8' 6 . 0 ' 6 . 0 ' 6 . 0 ' 6 . 0 ' 6 . 0 ' 6 . 5 ' 23. 5 ' SL I D E R 80 2 5 . 0 5 WOO D D E C K COB B L E S T O N E WOOD DECK EL:8023.5 P L A N T E R P L A N T E R 1 2 . 2 ' 6.0' 6 . 2 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 6.2' 6 . 0 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 6.4' 6 . 0 ' 23. 6 ' 6 8 . 7 ' 6 8 . 3 ' 23. 6 ' F F E # 2 8 0 1 2 . 1 5 F F E # 3 8 0 1 2 . 4 7 F F E # 4 8 0 1 2 . 5 2 RID G E 802 3 . 2 3 RID G E 802 3 . 3 7 RID G E 802 3 . 5 5 S T O N E R E T A I N I N G W A L L STONE RETAINING WALL PLAN T E R PL A N T E R TRAS HENCL O S U R E CONC R E T E W A L L CONCRETE WOOD DECK F F E # 1 1 8 0 3 6 . 2 3 F F E # 1 2 8 0 3 6 . 3 3 F F E # 1 3 8 0 3 6 . 2 8 F F E # 1 4 8 0 3 5 . 1 7 F F E # 1 5 8 0 3 5 . 1 8 F F E # 1 6 8 0 3 5 . 0 9 F F E # 1 7 8 0 5 4 . 8 6 F F E # 1 8 8 0 5 4 . 7 3 F F E # 1 9 8 0 5 5 . 6 3 F F E # 2 0 8 0 5 5 . 6 7 F F E # 2 1 8 0 6 9 . 8 8 SL I D E R 80 3 5 . 0 0 SLI D E R 805 4 . 8 6 SLI D E R 80 6 9 . 7 8 WOO D D E C K WOO D DEC K WOO D D E C K W O O D D E C K 1 2 . 3 ' 6.2' 6 . 0 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 6.0' 6 . 0 ' 1 2 . 3 ' 6.4' 6 . 3 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 6.0' 6 . 0 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 6.0' 6 . 0 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 6.0' 6 . 2 ' 23. 5 ' 23. 3 ' 23. 3 ' 6 . 0 ' 6.0' 1 2 . 2 ' 6.4' 6 . 1 ' 23. 3 ' 1 2 . 2 ' 6 . 2 ' 1 2 . 4 ' 6 . 0 ' 6.0' 1 2 . 3 ' 6.2' 6 . 3 ' 1 2 . 3 ' 6.4' 23. 2 ' 23. 0 ' 2 3 . 3 ' WO O D D E C K LA N D I N G LA N D I N G LA N D I N G L A N D I N G FFE 801 7 . 0 3 WO O D W A L K WO O D W A L K WO O D W A L K W O O D W A L K WO O D W A L K C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K C O N C R E T E S I D E W A L K CO N C R E T E S I D E W A L K CON C R E T E S T E P S R. R . TI E R E T A I N I N G W A L L R . R . T I E R E T A I N I N G W A L L ( T Y P I C A L ) PAVED PARKING AREA UTILITY ACCESS LID STORM DRAINAGE GRATE: 8000.00 36"CMP:7990.0 8003.1 WOOD DECK STORAGE 8004.76 INGROUND POOL TILED POOL DECK EL:8013.5 8015.0 8012.4 8005.8 8015.480 1 5 . 4 80 1 3 . 5 8022.7 802 4 . 9 8 0 3 4 . 2 80 3 4 . 2 80 4 3 . 4 8047.4 80 5 3 . 9 8069.4 8066.0 8 0 6 6 . 0 8 0 5 4 . 7 805 4 . 6 8055.4 8041.5 8041.7 8035.7 8035.7 8035.4 8030.1 8030.1 8025.6 8025.7 80 1 4 . 2 80 1 2 . 9 80 1 6 . 9 80 0 8 . 8 80 0 2 . 1 8 0 0 2 . 2 801 0 . 4 STE P S C O N C R E T E D R A I N P A N C O N C R E T E D R A I N P A N C O N C R E T E D R A I N P A N STO R A G E STO R A G E STO R A G E FUNICULAR BUILDING FU N I C U L A R BU I L D I N G FU N I C U L A R R A I L W A Y 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 20 19 18 1721 1 3 - STORY WOOD & STUCCO BUILDING 2 - STORY WOOD & STUCCO RESIDENCE (TYPICAL) R E T A I N I N G B O U L D E R TWO-T R A C K D R I V E SE E R E V O C A B L E E N C R O A C H M E N T L I C E N S E RE C E P T I O N N O . 5 4 3 6 7 4 FO R I M P R O V E M E N T S WI T H I N S O U T H A S P E N S T R E E T AS P E N ST R E E T UN D E V E L O P E D S T R E E T 80 0 7 . 0 RIDGE 8036.49 RID G E 803 6 . 1 6 RID G E 803 5 . 5 3 RID G E 803 6 . 1 6 RID G E 803 6 . 2 9 R I D G E 8 0 3 6 . 4 9 R I D G E 8 0 4 6 . 8 3 R I D G E 8 0 4 7 . 3 3 R I D G E 8 0 4 7 . 1 7 R I D G E 8 0 4 5 . 3 2 R I D G E 8 0 4 5 . 7 2 R I D G E 8 0 6 5 . 5 4 R I D G E 8 0 6 5 . 7 6 R I D G E 8 0 6 6 . 6 7 R I D G E 8 0 6 6 . 7 1 R I D G E 8 0 8 0 . 5 7 BUILDING IS 0.10'± EAST OF PROPERTY LINE BUILDING IS 0.30'± EAST OF PROPERTY LINE 9.8'4. 3 ' BUILDING IS 0.80'± EAST OF PROPERTY LINE BUILDING IS 0.75'± EAST OF PROPERTY LINE 5. 2 ' 23.2' 6 8 . 5 ' 6 8 . 8 ' 4 6 . 0 ' 4 5 . 9 ' STEPS LOT 2 AMENDED & RESTATED SOUTH ASPEN STREET PUD CO N S E R V A T I O N P A R C E L BA R B E E F A M I L Y P U D CONSERVATION PARCEL BARBEE FAMILY PUD 5.0' SETBACK 5.0' SETBACK 5. 0 ' SE T B A C K 5. 0 ' SE T B A C K STONE RETAINING WALL D R A I N 8 0 3 3 . 9 D R A I N 8 0 2 3 . 1 4"DRAIN 8013.31 4"DRAIN 8013.26 80 7 0 8065 80 6 0 8055 8 0 5 0 80 4 5 80 4 0 80 3 5 803 0 80 3 0 8025 8025 8 0 5 5 8 0 5 5 8 0 6 0 8065 8055 805 0 80 4 5 804 0 8 0 3 5 8 0 3 0 8 0 2 5 8 0 2 0 8 0 1 5 8 0 1 0 8005 8000 8001 8002 80 0 0 800 5 8 0 3 5 8 0 2 4 8 0 1 2 80 1 5 8020 8 0 2 5 8035 8003 CITY OF ASPEN GPS MONUMENT #2 N71 ° 2 9 ' 1 5 " E 129 5 . 9 6 ' N 0 2 ° 3 3 ' 4 8 " E 7 5 0 . 1 0 ' CITY OF ASPEN GPS MONUMENT #3 WATER SHUTOFF TELEPHONE PEDESTAL ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER GAS METER ELECTRICAL METER/PANEL G LEGEND E SURVEYOR 'S CERTIFICATION SURVEY NOTES: 5.THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT, THEREFORE, ANY EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE THAT MAY AFFECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED BY TRUE NORTH COLORADO, LLC. 6. ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88) REFERENCED FROM NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY (NGS) BENCHMARK STATION Q 159 HAVING AN ELEVATION OF 7911.98. (NGVD29=7906.67) 7. CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS 1 FOOT. 8. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LIES FLOOD ZONE X, AREAS OF MINIMAL FLOOD HAZARD ACCORDING TO FEMA FIRM MAP NO. 08097C0362E WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF AUGUST 15, 2019. SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE CONDOMINIUMS SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6TH PM CITY OF ASPEN-COUNTY OF PITKIN-STATE OF COLORADO IMPROVEMENT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC. A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY PO BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3 NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647 (970) 984-0474 www.truenorthcolorado.com PROJECT NO: 2018-113 DATE: AUGUST 29, 2020 DRAWN RPK SURVEYED LDV SHEET 1 OF 1 TRUENORTH A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY 10' 5'20' SCALE: 1" = 10' N PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 0 CLEAN-OUT PROPERTY ZONED: LODGE (L) PROPERTY AREA 31,462± SQ.FT. 0.722± ACRES P = PLATTED MEASUREMENT VICINITY MAP N SITE CITY OF ASPEN Exhibit B8 98 Exhibit C1 99 100 101 102 103 Page | 1 NOTICE OF APPROVAL APPROVING AN 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW EXEMPTION TO MAKE VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING INSTALLING WINDOWS & DOORS, INSTALLING NEW EXTERIOR SIDING, REPLACING EXISTING DECKS AND REPLACING AN EXISTING RETAINING WALL AT THE SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAS, 809 SOUTH ASPEN STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE, ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM MAP THEREOF RECORDED JULY 12, 1965 IN PLAT BOOK 3 AT PAGE 33 CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Parcel ID No. 2735-131-24-800 APPLICANT: Shadow Mountain Villas COA, c/o Susan Spalding, COA Manager REPRESENTATIVE: Phillip Ring, Ring Development Services SUBJECT & SITE OF APPROVAL: 8040 Greenline Review Exemption (Land Use Code Section 26.435.030) at 809 South Aspen Street (The Shadow Mountain Condominiums). The applicant received administrative approval for 8040 Greenline Review to make various improvements on site (Reception No. 667844). The full scope of work was not memorialized in the original Notice of Approval and was later identified during zoning review of a building permit application (Permit #0111-2020-BRES). This document serves as an addendum to the previous Notice of Approval to memorialize the remaining scope of work proposed for the property. SUMMARY: The subject property is located in the Lodge (L) zone district and within the 8040 Greenline review area. 21 condominium units exist on site. In addition to the scope of work identified in the previous Notice of Approval, the applicant plans to make the following improvements: •Replace existing windows and doors on Units 1 through 21, add new fenestration and doors: o Some window dimensions will be changed to meet Building Code requirements and to increase natural light and ventilation. Additional fenestration may be added to some units. o Door dimensions will be replaced like-for-like. o Folding doors will be installed on the west-facing, upper levels of Unit 2 and Unit 20. o Upper-level windows on the north elevations will be replaced in the same locations with floor-to- ceiling windows. o A small west-facing window will be installed on the lower level of Unit ten. o An east-facing window will be added to Unit 16. o Any changes to street-facing fenestration is subject to RDS review. •Replace existing siding on all buildings: o Existing exterior board-and-batten siding on all buildings will be replaced with new horizontal wood siding. o Exterior stucco on lower units will be replaced with veneer stone, wood siding or contemporary stucco finish. Building footprints may nominally increase (by 1 -2 inches) to accommodate building code requirements related to continuous rigid insulation and exterior wall assemblies. NOT YET RECORDED Exhibit C2 104 Page | 2 • Replace Limited Common Element wood decks on Units 1, 6, 16, 17 and 21: o All decks will remain in the same configuration and footprint. Post and beam structures as well as deck materials and railings will be replaced. Existing pier foundations may be used. o New railings will be an open metal design, similar to the railings used at the adjacent One Aspen Townhomes. o The decking and railings located on Unit one will be replaced with natural wood. New railings will consist of an opaque glass with steel frame. • Replace an existing site retaining wall along the south border of the parking lot: o The new wall will be located close to the existing and will be the minimum size necessary for retaining purposes. o A new veneer finish will be installed on the wall. STAFF EVALUATION: Staff finds that this scope of work meets the criteria to qualify for an 8040 Greenline Review Exemption, per section 26.435.030.B, Exemption. • The new decks will be no larger than what currently exists and will remain within the existing building footprint. Any addition to square footage for structures or areas exempt from Floor Area calculations will be minimal and well below the maximum thresholds established in the Land Use Code. • Replacing some decks may require minimal excavation as some existing pier foundations may not be reusable. This work will not require the removal of any tree. Any impacts to erosion or sedimentation will be fully mitigated during construction. DECISION: The Community Development Director determines that the proposed scope of work listed above meets the requirements of an 8040 Greenline Review Exemption. Any additional work not listed in this document will require a new 8040 Greenline Review. APPROVED BY: _______________________________________ ________________________ Phillip Supino Date Community Development Director Attachments: Exhibit A – Application (On File) Phillip Supino 4/6/21 NOT YET RECORDED 105 Exhibit C3 106 107 108 Exhibit C4 109 110 111 112 113 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM June 5, 2023 Jeffrey Barnhill Planner City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Pl. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Supplemental Information Shadow Mountain Village Condominiums 8040 Greenline Review and Amendment to ROW Encroachment License Mr. Barnhill: Please accept this supplemental information regarding the 8040 Greenline Review application for the Shadow Mountain Condominiums. You requested we respond to comments provided by City Parks and City Engineering departments. Response to Parks Department. The landscape plan and tree removal plan have been updated to reflect retention of the spruce trees east of the property adjacent to the stairway. Please refer to Exhibit A2.1. We do want to make sure the City fully realizes that these trees have been approved for removal in connection with the Gorsuch Haus project. The spruce trees will eventually be removed, assuming the Gorsuch Haus project moves forward as planned. The Aspen trees planned for removal have been identified on a tree removals plan. See Exhibit A2.2. We remain available to discuss the proposed removals or conduct a site visit if beneficial. Response to Engineering Department. We have updated the maps showing existing and planned encroachments into the So. Aspen St. right-of-way with distances and areas of hardscape features (not counting landscape areas). The map to the right highlights the area of the current encroachment license. The diagrams below show updated areas of ROW encroachment, measuring hardscape improvements. The existing condition is shown on the left, proposed is on the right 114 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Page 2 of 2 Shadow Mountain 8040 & Encroachment License The current fixed encroachments represent approximately 851.5 square feet. The Association’s insurance covers the entire 7,204 square foot license area. The proposed fixed encroachments represent approximately 832 square feet. The applicant is amenable to providing appropriate mapping, dimensions, and/or descriptions of improvements in an update encroachment license. We hope our responses address the questions of the Parks and Engineering departments and clear the path for the project to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. We are available to address other questions that may arise in the course of the City’s review. Sincerely, Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams LLC Exhibits – A 1. Response to Review Criteria 2. Proposed Landscape Plan 2.1 Landscape Plan updated May 31, 2023 2.2 Tree Mitigation Plan May 31, 2023 3. Southern Stair Detail Plan 4. Existing/Proposed Floor Area & Deck Area calculations 5. Proposed Civil Plan 6. Measured footprints of current and proposed improvements 6.1 ROW Encroachments Plan updated May 31, 2023 7. Tree Survey prepared by Aspen Tree Service 8. Correspondence B 1. Land Use Application 2. Agreement to Pay 3. Pre-application Conference Summary 4. Proof of Ownership 5. Authorization Letter 6. HOA Compliance Form 7. Vicinity Map 8. Property Survey C 1. 2020 8040 Exemption approval – 667844 2. 2021 8040 Exemption approval – not recorded 3. 2022 8040 Exemption approval – 687999 4. License Number 2007 – E166 – 543674 115 Exhibit A2.1 11 6 11 7 Exhibit A2.2 11 8 Exhibit A6.1 11 9