HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.320 Lake Ave.0001.2012.ASLU0001.2012.ASLU 320 LAKE AVE
2735 12 4 01 002
PLAT AMENDMENT
,ua"eQ p 3/� � I
E
X
C"J
THE CITY OF ASPEN
City of Aspen Community Development Department
CASE NUMBER
PARCEL ID NUMBERS
PROJECTS ADDRESS
PLANNER
CASE DESCRIPTION
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE OF FINAL ACTION
0001.2012.ASLU
2735 12 4 01 002
320 LAKE' A VC
CHRIS BENDON
PLAT AMENDMENT
MIKE HOFFMAN
2.28.12
�uBAV�s �cN er 6yAV>T'rD?j
CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 3.14.12
0
27315-12— 01-002
File Edit Record Navigate Form Reports Format Tab Help
E
UbO l • 201 2 • A
A
A
1:1A0.PrIP1 :*4,ta1e.
Routing Status l Fees I Fee Summary Actans Attachments Routing History Valuation Arch ft Custom Fields Sub Permits ►
l Permit type aslu Aspen Land Use Permit # 0001.2012.ASLU
�I Address 320 LAKE AVE Apt�Suite
°o City ASPEN State CO Tip81611
0"
Permit Information
o Master perms Routing queue aslu07 Applied 1 i3I2012
c
b'
Q Project Status 1pending Approved
Description APPLICATION FOR PLAT AMENDMENT FOR 320 LAKE AVENUE Issued
Closed ftal
Submitted MIKE HOFFMAN 970 9251936 Clock Running Days 0 Expires 12I28f?012
Submitted via
Owner
Last name MARSHALL RONhJIE First name 320 LAKE AVE
Phone (970) 925-5551 Address ASPEN CO 81611
Applicant
{ [] Owner is applicant? 7 Contractor is applicant?
Last name GARFIELD 8 HECHT First name 601 E HYMAN
UNIT 2
Phone (970) 925-1936 Cust # 25185 Address ASPEN CO 81611
Lender
Last name First name
Phone ,O Address
I i—
Displaysthe perntit applicant's address
1r2(,0 -CZ)
�
AspenGo1d5 (wo) argdec ---Midi
J
DEVELOPMENT ORDER
of the
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070,
"Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen
Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to
the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall
also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall
expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building
permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension,
reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After
Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding
any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to
any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order.
This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific
development plan as described below.
Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number
320 Aspen, LLC, 2950 E. Broad St., Columbus, OH, 43209, with the consent of the current
property owner, Ronnie Marshall, 320 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO, 81611, 970-925-5551.
Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property
320 Lake Avenue, Parcel 1 of the Marshall Lot Split, City and Townsite of Asper
County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, PID# 2735-124-01-002.
Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing flan
City Council granted approval for Subdivision Amendment to remove a condition related
to setback requirements.
Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions)
Aspen City Council Ordinance #4, Series of 2012.
Effective Date of Development Order. (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.)
March 8, 2012.
Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from
expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City
of Aspen Municipal Code.)
March 8.2015.
Issued thi, 6th day of March, 2012 by the City of Aspen Community Development Director.
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
Avllll�j 0 0
.;tl
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306
ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
Aspen, CO
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of Pitkin )
I, -2�" -e L (name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E.) or Section 26.306.010 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
V Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fourteen (14)
days after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the
publication is attached hereto.
Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
Paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fifteen
(15) days after an Interpretation has been rendered. A copy of the publication is
attached hereto.
�T
Signature
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowled ed before me this day
of , 2W-, by
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
LMy mmission expires:ONDA M.
L
Notary Public c
My Cwms ssion Expires 03129/2014
ATTACHMENTS:
COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
PUBLIC NOTICE
Of
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Notice it hereby given to the general public of the
approval of a site specific development plan, and
the creation of a vested property right pursuant to
the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title
24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertain-
ing to the following described property: 320 Lake
Avenue, Parcel 1 of the Marshall Lot Split, City and
Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colo-
rado,PlD# 2735-124-01-002. 320 Aspen, LLC,
2950 E. Broad St., Columbus, OH, 43209 made an
application for Subdivision amendment with the
consent of the current property owner, Ronnie
Marshall, 320 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO, 81611.
The applicant received approval through Ordi-
nance number 4, series of 2012 of the Aspen City
Council, for a plat amendment to remove a condi-
tion related to setback requirements. The approv-
als are depicted in the land use application on file
with the City of Aspen. For further information
contact Amy Guthrie, at the Aspen Community De-
velopment Dept., 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, Colo-
rado (970) 429-2758.
City of Aspen
Published in The Aspen Times Weekly on March 8,
2012 [7645203]
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
0
\III I co
FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director A-m
RE: 320 Lake Avenue- Subdivision Amendment, Second Reading of Ordinance #4,
Series of 2012
DATE: February 27, 2012
APPLICANT /OWNER: 320 Aspen, LLC.
The current owner of the property,
Ronnie Marshall of 320 Lake Avenue,
Aspen, CO 81611, has consented to the
application.
REPRESENTATIVE: Michael Hoffman,
Garfield and Hecht, P.C.
LOCATION: 320 Lake Avenue, Parcel I
of the Marshall Lot Split, Aspen.
ZONING & USE: R-6, single family
home.
SUMMARY:
The Applicant requests that Council amend the
Marshall Lot Split Subdivision approval granted in
1987. The Subdivision, which split one large parcel
in half, included a condition of approval that created
more restrictive setbacks on Parcel 1 than required
by underlying zoning.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the amendment be approved
finding that circumstances on the site, as well as
City Land Use regulations, have changed since the
Subdivision approval.
Pagel of 3
•
LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURE:
In December, the Applicant received Conceptual HPC approval for a remodel to the existing
Victorian era home on the subject site. The remodel entails demolishing and replacing an older
addition to the building, and moving the house slightly closer to the street and towards the south.
HPC granted approval including variances from the standard setback requirements of the R-6
zone district. It was anticipated that the applicant would then approach Council to ask that the
standard setback requirements, rather than the setbacks established in the 1987 Subdivision, be
applied. Staff determined that it was best to have HPC conduct design review and make a
preliminary determination on the appropriateness of the project before Council was asked to
consider the Subdivision Amendment, rather than the other way around.
The ability for the applicant to move forward to Final HPC approval depends on Council's
determination regarding the setback condition, which appears as a note on the Marshall Lot Split
plat. Council is the review authority on this Subdivision Amendment.
SUBDIVISION REVIEW
Subdivision review was originally required to split what was once 13,000 square foot lot into two
approximately equal lots. The parcels both meet the minimum lot size for the neighborhood,
which is 6,000 square feet.
Section 26.480.080.13 of the City Land Use Code provides that Subdivision amendments which
are not insubstantial are reviewed and approved by City Council, "provided that the proposed
change is consistent with the approved plat."
Staff Response: Some of the original records for Council review of this Subdivision were
apparently not retained, and Council determinations were not always done by Ordinance at the
time this Subdivision was granted. The application includes the minutes from City Council's
Nov. 23, 1987 discussion. Planning Staff and Council were concerned with avoiding negative
impacts to existing trees on the property as well as Hallam Lake, and crafted a condition on the
Subdivision in that vein.
The 1987 Subdivision approval stated that all development on this property should be confined
to the footprint of the Victorian and the addition that was already in place at that time. It appears
that this was done in order to protect a row of three large cottonwoods in the south sideyard of
Parcel 1. Those trees have since deteriorated in health and have received Parks Department
approval to be removed. Without the trees, there is no clear reason to limit the buildable area on
the south side of Parcel 1 in a manner that is different than what is required of the rest of the
neighborhood.
Regulations to protect Hallam Lake from the impact of development on the bluff were adopted
after this Subdivision. The current redevelopment proposal is subject to these strict criteria,
particularly the requirement for setback from the top of slope. Staff believes that development at
the rear of the site is appropriately regulated through today's Environmentally Sensitive Area
regulations.
Staff cannot identify a rationale for restricting the front yard setback on this parcel in a manner
that is different than adjacent parcels.
Page 2 of 3
0 s
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the applicant's proposed plat amendment,
removing the 1987 condition, is accepted due to changed circumstances and changed Land Use
Codes since the time of approval.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance #4, Series of 2012."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance #4, Series of 2012
Exhibit A: Application
Page 3 of')
• 0
ORDINANCE #4
(Series of 2012)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO
APPROVING A SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
320 LAKE AVENUE, PARCEL 1 OF THE MARSHALL LOT SPLIT, CITY AND
TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-01-002
WHEREAS, the applicant, 320 Aspen, LLC, represented by Michael Hoffman, Garfield and
Hecht, P.C., has requested a Subdivision Amendment for the property located at 320 Lake
Avenue, Parcel 1 of the Marshall Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The current
owner of the property, Ronnie Marshall, has consented to the application; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.480.080.B of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for
Subdivision Amendment which may be approved by City Council, "provided that the proposed
change is consistent with the approved plat;" and
WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer, in her staff report to City Council,
performed an analysis of the application, found that the review standard for Subdivision
Amendment is met, and recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development
standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and
elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion
of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1: Subdivision Amendment
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
Aspen City Council hereby approves a Subdivision Amendment to remove a plat note which
imposes setback restrictions on Parcel 1 of the Marshall Lot Split plat and replaces it with the
following note:
The execution and recording of the Amended Plat memorializes the vacation of the first Plat
Note found on the Plat for Marshall Lot Split, recorded in the real property records of Pitkin
County on January 26, 1988 in Plat Book 20 at Page 54, as such vacation was approved by
the City of Aspen in Ordinance #4, Series of 2012. The Plat Note, which restricted
development into the existing sideyard and front yard for Parcel 1, is no longer needed as it
restricts development within the south sideyard because trees located on the south side of
Parcel 1 have become old and diseased. The City of Aspen Parks Department has issued
320 Lake Avenue
Ordinance #4, Series of 2012
Page 1 of 3
•
n
11
Tree Removal Permit 2009-109 to authorize the removal of those trees. Restriction of
development within the front yard and north side yard is governed by the dimensional
requirements of the R-6 zone district, except as those requirements have been or may be
varied by the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission or other authorized
representative of the City of Aspen.
Section 2: Recordation
A subdivision exemption plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and
approved by the Community Development Department and recorded in the office of the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of final approval by City
Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified
time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be
required for a showing of good cause.
Section 3: 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 4: Existing Litigation
This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein
provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 5: Vested Rights
The Land Use entitlements granted herein shall be 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 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, including Final Major Development and
Commercial Design Reviews by the HPC, 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
320 Lake Avenue
Ordinance #4, Series of 2012
Page 2 of 3
0 0
Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the
following described property: 320 Lake Avenue, Parcel I of the Marshall Lot Split, Aspen .
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.
Section 6: Public HearinE
A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 27d' day of February, 2012 in the City
Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing �a
public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of
Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the 23`d day of January, 2012.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2012.
ATTEST:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
John Worcester, City Attorney
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
320 Lake Avenue
Ordinance #4, Series of 2012
Page 3 of 3
• 0
OFFICE
601 Est liyman Avenue GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C.
Aspen, Colorado 81611RECr-11
���DTelephone (970) 925-1936 ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Facsimile (970) 925-3008
Since 1975
www.garficidhecht.cont . i'+ 1 7 2012
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPWK
E. Michael Hoffman
E-mail: rrrhoffrrrunl(a,,,,urFeldhec•ht.c•onr
Phone: (970) 925-1936
December 30, 2011
Ms. Amy Guthrie
Community Development Department
130 S. Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Amendment of Plat for 320 Lake Avenue, Aspen, Colorado.
Dear Amy:
This letter represents the next phase of the application of 320 Aspen, LLC (the "Applicant") for
development of 320 Lake Avenue in Aspen (the "Property"). As discussed below, the Applicant
seeks to eliminate a note found on the Marshall Lot Split Plat (the "Plat") which restricts
development along the south edge of the Property. It appears that the note was originally
included on the Plat to protect three large cottonwood trees, which have now become old and in
need of removal. The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission ("HPC") recently granted
conceptual approval to a development plan for the Property which requires use of some of the
land restricted by the plat note. To accomplish that development plan, the Applicant requests a
modification of the plat to remove the relevant note pursuant Section 26.480.080 B. of the City
of Aspen Land Use Code (the "Code").
The legal description of the Property is Parcel I, Marshall Lot Split, according to the Plat thereof
recorded January 26, 1988 in Plat Book, 20 at Page 54.Pitkin County, Colorado ("the Property").
In the late 1980s the City approved a subdivision exemption for a 13,603 square foot lot owned
by Ronnie Marshall. The City's decision authorized the filing of the Plat which created two
smaller parcels, designated Lots I and II. A copy of the original Plat is enclosed with this letter
as Exhibit A.
A note found on the original plat restricts development in an area which in 1988 was occupied by
three large cottonwood trees. While those three trees still exist, the City's Parks Department has
determined that the integrity of the three subject trees has been compromised by age and decay
•
Ms. Amy Guthrie
December 30, 2011
Page 2
and that the trees should now be removed. A permit for removal of the trees has been issued by
the City. Copies of a letter from the City Forester and an Addendum to the resulting permit,
which describe these findings, are enclosed with this application as Exhibit B.
The HPC granted Conceptual Approval to the Applicant's preservation and development
proposal for the Property on Wednesday, December 14, 2011. While this part of the application
does not involve the City's Historic Preservation Guidelines or the historic preservation
provisions of the Aspen Land Use Code (the "Code"), the request made in this letter is fully
consistent with the HPC approval.
Code Section 26.480.080 B. provides that a plat may be approved by City Council without
completion of an entirely new subdivision process when "the proposed change is consistent with
the approved plat." The original Plat was originally approved by City Council for the purpose of
permitting development of each of the two parcels resulting from the lot split in a manner
consistent with the Property's natural constraints. One of the most obvious of those natural
constraints was the existence of three cottonwoods near the south boundary of Lot I. Glenn Horn
was the City's planner who presented the application to Council on November 23, 1987. As
recorded in the minutes of that meeting,
Horn said it is doubtful there will be an addition on the south side as there are 3
tremendous cottonwoods which set the tone for the whole parcel. Horn said it is
unlikely the applicant would be permitted to remove those trees. Mayor Stirling
suggested adding a condition to preserve the existing front setback and the south
side setback.
Councilman Gassman moved to add condition 9 that an addition to the existing
house not encroach into the sideyard more than it does and not encroach more to
the south than it does on parcel 1; seconded by Mayor Stirling. All in favor,
motion carried.
A copy of these minutes is included with this application as Exhibit C. Unfortunately no copy of
the staff memorandum or the City Council resolution of approval survives. However, these
minutes appear to fully explain how the plat note at issue here was first authorized by Council.
The limitation added to the 1987 approval as condition 9 was memorialized on the Plat by the
following language: "An addition to the existing house will not encroach into the existing side
and front yard for Parcel I." An enlargement of that portion of the Plat which included this note
is found on Exhibit D, attached hereto. A proposed First Amended Plat for Lot I, Marshall Lot
Split (the "Proposed Amended Plat"), in both 24" x 36" (one copy) and I I" x 17" format (15
copies), has been filed with this application. The Proposed Amended Plat meets all of the City
Engineer's requirements for documents of this type. The only substantive change effected in the
Proposed Amended Plat is that found in the note found in the center bottom of the document:
Ms. Amy Guthrie
December 30, 2011
Page 3
The execution and recording of this Amended Plat memorializes the vacation of
the first Plat Note found on the Plat for Marshall Lot Split, recorded in the real
property records of Pitkin County on January 26, 1988 in Plat Book 20 at Page
54, as such vacation was approved by the City of Aspen in Resolution No. ,
Series of 2012. The Plat Note, which restricted development into the existing side
and front yard for Parcel I, is no longer needed as it restricts development within
the south side yard because the trees located on the south side of Parcel I have
become old and diseased. The City of Aspen Parks Department has issued Tree
Removal Permit 2009-109 to authorize the removal of those trees. Restriction of
development within the front yard and north side yard is governed by the
dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone district, except as those requirement
have been or may be varied by the City of Aspen Historic Preservation
Commission or other authorized representative of the City of Aspen.
We understand that you need to re -review the "common development review procedures" set
forth in Section 26.304 of the Code. Our responses to those procedures, which were also
included in our request for Conceptual Approval from the HPC, are included with this
application as Exhibit E. Copies of a letter of authorization and of the fee agreement are attached
hereto as Exhibit F. A copy of the proposed Amendment of Plat is also submitted with this
application.
Sincerely,
E. Michael Hoffman
Table of Exhibits
Exhibit A —
Original Plat of Parcel I, Marshall Lot Split
Exhibit B -
Letter from the City Forester and Addendum
Exhibit C —
Minutes of City Council Meeting of November 23, 1987
Exhibit D —
Enlargement from Original Plat Showing First Plat Note
Exhibit E —
Responses to Common Development Review Procedures
Exhibit F —
Letter of Authorization and Fee Agreement
LEGEND
• foJJv fl.e.,I_�/ H+s>TIr-UiP �•l� 6f �i.low/rJ
_ [s✓ss.o �.lq Ut�L
e cerfenlM/epp T[t« OtA. [>F TRJJ[L Af faOfJrA '
ca•.Itif.[.. Tsai _
fe+JeG •-I•IL
0 3t Rf 4[t w�P•AYftc of [.>. ir.ts/{ .
%lif-INITV "AD
ab.{i' as
MARSHALL LOT SPLIT
LOTS 10, II,&. THE NORTHWESTERLY. I/2 OF.LOT 12,
;BLOCK,103 HALLAM'S ADDITION TO ASPEN, PITKIN OWNER S. CERTIFICATE
r .
- . s[t•t ae eF[ 5
COUNTY,COLORADO.
ZONING R s 1111n[NT Al [... o..
C
' of �' •[->aio•f [a.m acnr[at
{bj'f0 DA•[• \ - _ s:�nw.uo„'c a.[Istc.,[ w e[..u.[m[°.a°e rc rw[�IMr _
- � '♦ 1 K Tb - - in mm� oI m Fsrl[[IA f[wl k
.. i..
rcy r • ' .`1 z � �+ 6 -: , - - .(On.en .cOn,�nti.i0 .
7•016 FW f(L J iJ > ss i•T W.. - - 1 �vtr na [
RA EL I '.'
�o .ro '
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
4 �., •t t. •nt... n..a. t•.i,a.° � [n.[T[n... �et.,r aArtt. °.,T r
�; .° MI [.[ataer > K •. nP , [m R r. n«T""
Pn•�a aitrw \ ��r ° .. ya,crown ss•'"`' iy"��[. o iipt. wn•:: rrrroT. [
-4y WWwJ
Atb. .-I` {�_ M .IaS `fJ o _.Nur. MJYr[r..n.'vQ. i000 r 4r
- ,.,�* Y 1 - ;. o, ;' �..,/ .: - - - - - •-" nor co
CITY ENGINEER'S APPROVAL
�o • • BUILOIN�ELO . [a
M T O� � .iA NTH YJ0�4-fV�' F/7
CITY APPROVAL 8 ACCEPTANCE
u or r_a n[ ..[[•vcc [m sntt [fs nrr•.co uo— ,
u{ 51A4 Q.
12
PLAT NOTES
®.�, �Ai` AJA•fT•wlTvaxL•x•TJo PaM(-vJK Jer V.&I-1A
fAfee : pLANNING.B� ZONING APPROVAL
A �> ..rTo +ae. en..n.rft y![�; AJv P•Alf.YARD fn•. ..
a. Ws we.cb_a i'Mt.JL; y(F+h.nletli MNa-N.. nos a�irtsa. siwna tur r•[ ite w•nns[[ [nr irtn t•a [wnw[o w ^.
.. - ;-: tw.1}'T•.srwYn e[irraF. T{[s s.in.ot.W r..1vc�:►t.e.:,. ruwue,wo ta•n� [aw�ssto[ rc nc cI[r s �v[. n°c�T ar
sw.AJo,.NwkNWI►c.iJnse+1•t[aMM{sWr W/iVua/.1;
•u'�:LOY 43 - T•fe[fY4•MK- • rirwn tl•F CerIFl[L A•ISAr +J'I, .
-; ®!J•rti.'tta[•, w gL[JIyJA,t Ati MlW ,
RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE
of4 - N Ito)�N•Rf]OLA [° IM �CTIW 3O- M tlniClPAI CfIDE 0
\ n C TY n•Pfll A9 A1FA>m (iGLGrK FlFCiAtdL"[ew
-.�' .°.d.�[ta ICTY[( 'T.[..fA.Tot66. tgRflrt Ot[V4T
. J : °r.T.s rnrs v ncp Tr p �:,.[RWw m .[r na aeot•r a swaat [[wr rn m nws.a[ [er vur Is [canm Tos
a" n[°[c °[an( utn ••c► Tr rA••n [� . wta t [ iK a > It[ nu .a acnszli a
III : - E .[w[ to To.A.r iPwi w[ [[ce i ('` I . t [mr,�r r,•[__
is - � w •w • -r[a ncPt[asarTv s �
- r°iresxvq trial [M.wvsv[T. TK Me
. �'t'w•o•vwr d tr.°vrno n f"°i9a } . _ ' o, uv [e s Teo. w n>E-
. - �•asa T° sssM.�'_/Tov(oe ro[t'MiaN c Sy.•.vrJrtlM 6 TIC - -
etAl .! e0 m �_ ,oT [ ___ _ .,'Aspen ;Survey Engineers, Inc. -
-.. _ _. N N •[•i[[ b r [fi - Yss�s- � m[nou• nR[A•LL•[ OAT[ . _ ... _ __
Exhibit B
ft
' PARKS & RECREATION
October 20, 2009
Rowland and Broughton Architecture and Urban Design
117 South Monarch Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: 320 Lake Avenue; 3 narrowleaf cottonwoods
To Whom It May Concern:
The purpose of this document is to summarize the findings by the City Forester upon
investigation of 3 narrowleaf cottonwoods (Populus angustifolia) on the south side of the
property located at 320 Lake Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. This investigation was
completed to determine the health and structural stability of these trees in response to the
request for them to be removed.
Each tree was investigated separately using a resistograph on the trunks as well as in the
canopies. The resistograph is a tool that allows the operator to measure and map internal
decay pockets without causing harm to the living tree. An arborist, chosen and hired by
the applicant, was used to conduct the investigation in the canopies with guidance from
the City Forester. Resistograph results will be attached to this document along with
written explanations/diagrams of these test areas in each tree. Formulas utilized to
determine strength loss and the threshold for labeling hazard trees come from Wagener
1963 and Mattheck and Breloer 1998, respectfully.
The strength loss formula is as follows:
strength loss = (diameter of decayed wood)"3 / (diameter of trunk)^3 x 100
The hazard tree threshold formula is as follows:
t= R; where t is the thickness of sound wood remaining in the thinnest remaining
wall and R is the radius of the decay pocket plus the remaining wall thickness.
East most tree; furthest from Lake Avenue
This cottonwood has an outside bark diameter of 35 inches, with approximately a 2 inch
bark layer. There have been some large wounds left behind in the canopy of this tree due
to past pruning. The upper most lead of this tree has a significant amount of decay due to
one of these old wounds. Just below this main leader, at the point where another large
scaffolding branch is located, the decay pocket ends. The resistograph was utilized at this
branch union to determine structural integrity, and adequate sound wood was found. It is
my recommendation that the above referenced upper leader be pruned at the branch union
of said scaffold branch. No other threatening issues were found in the canopy of this tree.
After a resistograph inspection of the trunk of this tree, 2 feet above grade, it was
determined that a decay pocket existed with an average diameter of 19 inches. This
decay pocket was off center inside the trunk, favoring the south east direction. The
thinnest strip of sound wood on this south east side is 3.5 inches in diameter. The
strength loss formula yielded a loss of 23%d in this trees strength as a result of this decay.
The hazard tree threshold formula resulted in 0.3, which indicates that this tree should not
fail due to this defect.
It is the Parks Department's position that this tree shall remain on site and continue to be
a major contributor to the community forest, with the consideration that the upper Iead
(described above) be removed as a safety precaution. The removal of that particular
branch is a decision to be made by the owner if they choose to do so.
Middle tree
This cottonwood has an outside bark diameter of 31 inches, with approximately a 2 inch bark
layer. Again, there have been some major wounds created in the central lead of this tree which
have lead to extensive decay. Unlike the east most tree, there isn't a good location to prune out
this decayed leader without taking the tree completely out. The resistograph results in this area
showed no sound wood on the west/north west side of the trunk, accompanied by several
woodpecker cavities.
The trunk of the tree was resistographed and a decay pocket was detected with a diameter of 18
inches. The thinnest strip of sound wood was on the south side of the tree and measured 3.5
inches. The strength loss formula resulted in a 29% loss, while the hazard threshold formula
resulted in 0.29. When the threshold formula results in anything less than 0.3, the tree is more
likely to fail.
Due to the extensive decay in the canopy with nowhere to prune back to, it is the Parks
Department's position that this tree should be removed before structural failure of the crown can
cause damage to the home.
West most tree; closest to Lace Avenue
This cottonwood has an outside bark diameter of 29 inches, with approximately a 2 inch bark
layer. There is one area where an old pruning cut has caused a large wound in one of the main
leaders of this tree. It was explored with the resistograph and no significant decay was detected.
All other areas of the canopy seemed normal.
The trunk was resistographed at 2 feet above grade, resulting in a decay pocket that averaged 16
inches in diameter. The thinnest strip of sound wood was on the east and south east sides of the
tree, measuring 3 inches in both places. The strength loss formula resulted in a loss of 26%,
while the threshold formula resulted in 0.26. This threshold reading, significantly less than the
0.3 level, indicates that this tree has a higher potential for structural failure.
It is the Parks Department's position that this tree be. removed to mitigate the possibility of
structural failure of the entire tree at the point of decay.
In summary, it was found that all three trees have pockets of decay in the trunks, though the
middle and west trees resulted hi a rating of `hazardous' according to Mattheck and Breloer's
L]
formula. The east tree has a hazard in the canopy in the form of one decayed lead which should
be removed if the owner chooses to do so. It is recommended that this'east tree be placed on a
monitoring plan, in which the Parks Department is happy to help with, to keep an eye on the
potential advancement of the decay pocket in the trunk. The middle and west trees should be
removed at this time to avoid potential failure.
Sincerely,
Chris Forman, City Forester
585 Cemetery Lane
Aspen, Colorado 81611
970-920-5120 p
970-920-5128 f
chrisf@ci.aspen.co.us
BOG r Logistics, LLC
Nv.w.blgrmfq.Cvm
Project: '4e �C'
By: Cr
Job No:
Date: 4:1 - 0
Subject:
Page: Of
Ir
r .41t.
CIF
10V
..
........
71
Yid7l—
..
..................
4
0
..........
Project: 3 Avc
By:
Job No:
Date:
Subject
. ....
..... -------
------ -
--
....
Page:
of
Logistics, LLC
wwwbigrmfg.com
Yl
Yam. .... ......... . .......
.......
76
lat.
Ad.
.....
.... . . ...... ... ....
Ilk
f
Z_
*h
t
--------
--
41—i
4Jos
IL
...............
ywe
A,
cr-
x
r"e
T
........
....
—
—
-----
........ ...
�I
i LJ--J�
-
� �/•; / _ Di'�/�Q� ,�-ram,,, Sv,�,�L. �_�� ! aydYt. i4.�[.G •Cs -� � ,` ,�d i-vim-P' .c�'i1V�
I
8
i .
�'�``-�•3—oft ��7_._�__{a.-�v-"�" �•..� 1 �t_____�� -�'/� I`-..eol.�.._ .
iI/e� .. ems -F ! c S. �< CIAA., , 6d7l.
J /a .4,
�.�Yowr
--- 3
e
� (a .`i o�vY2 �/c.� ��+� t� -� •�la ay.�%tJD�r)�.�.�.�:..::
i
a
� �T•/l� 7�a'f.. na.! �"'.;G ��C.�IP � lFt � 0�-.,?_`�l^sC__ /�'....y':�c"�._' �?'Tv� r(�'Q___�__-_•__---. _-�_,.
�,L�,,..f�'�� c[�c`]_.�p�Ec..--►� Cam./l)._a`-1..-.�?._.�g � ,� �� �.�_f�
1
- -
�
•
i
- � �if ! + � �,:fl. Rii � __...�-:..f � r�-_Ct�✓a'�-�2ti-- G�j,...,..G.�' S? �"-� V z,rr S-�•-�---•-
IP
- W....>r/llrcX. y_✓Or., _ rti- �'Yt��� _� .7"' 414"
�
�• �, .��r��l�;-�....�., :,.,�;�Tt��.r'�f�• =-.Z ��,�► ��.,.1� ! `�li�S� ��-��o,..,..6fw4+�...._..%/f~t,^ — —
iJ;:r, y '
__— ��-� �rw►_-__'•'tSG.�'Sd_'`-.�:_�', rit<SY �r / °T Se%u� c/�_�sc��_.�
t
• � � �r--l�� `k'� �r..."f`L'�Z� f �G�,�° �`el�`t�. 3.r�L �' �� .SOc,�v�___._.--.-_._.�.-_
ej
77
/ �j�./ 6 �(y:i ��/� . I""GI' }f"�` e -ti i'^ /4�LJ%'� l� G►� -
/14
. Id-
J`�✓rl _.�j� �!'.�'l _... trc+p[.J�.._ G'�f'�i 1`—�'�/G-'1 ' (�1�� � T '�t�GTiC �-..,,..._,..._—.
q�
i
--
s D -
ji
0
MUST BE POSTED ON PROPERTY
Addendum to Permit #2009-109, 320 Lake Avenue
The owner at 320 Lake Avenue has requested the removal of 3 large narrowleaf
cottonwood trees, on the south side of the property, in order to expand/relocate the
current structure. The expansion desired would require the removal of all 3 trees. Each
tree was investigated separately using a resistograph on the trunks as well as in the
canopies. After extensive review of the inspection outputs, the Parks Department has
permitted the removal of 2 of these trees due to their current condition of having an
unacceptable amount of decay within their boles and canopies. The third tree was
determined to be of borderline structural integrity and was originally required to be
preserved in an effort to maintain some of the valuable tree resources on this property.
Upon further extensive scientific investigation into the crown of this tree, it has been
determined that the tree has a Iimited life expectancy coupled with marginal structural
integrity. It is for these reasons that the Parks Department shall grant the removal of this
third narrowleaf cottonwood tree, as originally requested by the applicant. The
applicant must provide the City Forester copies of approved building permits at 320
Lake Avenue prior to the removal of the tree. At that time, this addendum shall be
validated and the tree may be removed with no further documentation required.
The original permit contains information regarding the middle and west trees and is
considered accurate and applicable to the project site. The original permit and this
addendum shall be kept onsite.
Propertyat In:
Chris Forman
Forester, City of Aspen Date
Stephen Ellspen n
Director Parks and Oped Space Date
Permit Valid for one year after approval date.
1
•
Exhibit C
app-.riation resolution, which is,a housekeepinq item. Abel
said t city has requested RFTA do the improvements to the
alley as rt of the Rubey park project. Abel said it is
necessary to a opriate revenues from the city and expenditures
for this project. Abel told Council early in the project it
became apparent it wo be appropriate to remove the trees off
the site and replace it zith new landscaping. Abel said this
resolution also incorporates e contributions from Hadid Aspen
Hest rli ngs to r, fund part of the t sportation study. Councilman
Tuite asked if the city has replaced ido's fence. Abel said it
has not been replaced. The project is o. old for the alley work
due to weather. Councilman Tuite said he °ld like the fence
repaired regardless.
Councilwoman Fallin moved to approve the supplemental n ropria-
tion for RFTA; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All. in •or,
LOT S Ej� - Marshall
Glenn Horn, planning office, told Council this is an application
for subdivision exception to create a lot exempt from growth
management. The existing parcel is about 13,000 square feet.
This parcel is located on Lake avenue overlooking Hallam lake.
Horn told Council the parcel is heavily wooded and has a small
Victorian house on it, which is historically designated. Horn
said the pertinent issue is the impact on Hallam lake and the
adjacent property owners. Horn told Council staff has worked
with the applicant in setting a complete building envelope on the
newly created parcel and a partial building envelope on the
existing parcel to protect Hallam lake and the neighbors. Horn
pointed out there are a lot of trees on the parcel, which the
applicant has committed to replanting or replacing. The appli-
cant has also committed to take a new house on parcel 2 through a
voluntary review of HPC. The applicant has met with Hallam lake
representatives, who has added conditions or the approval. Based
on the setbacks, the building envelopes and the conditions
outlined, P & Z and staff both recommend approval.
Jane Ellen Hamilton, representing the applicant, told council the
applicant acceded to every request from Hallam Lake. The
applicant has also voluntarily increased the setback quite
significantly from what the Code requires. Ms. Hamilton said the
applicant will commit to relocating the trees that will have be
to taken out to build the building.
Mayor Stirling opened the public hearing. Mayor Stirling read
into the record a telegram strongly opposed to this lot split
9
Aspen Citv Council ReaUlar Mee`.:inqNover.ber_2_!,--�-9K
from Victor Lundy. Bill Martin asked if the present home is to
be destroyed. Mayor Stirling said the house is a historic
landmark. Ms. Hamilton said the applicant has no intentions of
destroying the house. Councilman Gassman said he does not see a
building envelope on parcel 1. Horn said the applicant has
agreed to limit the setback on the rear yard to 20 feet. Horn
said he discussed with P & Z a front yard setback to maintain the
existing front yard. P & Z did not support the recommendation to
set the front yard setback in excess of the existing code. Horn
said it is doubtful there will be an addition on the south side
as there arr I tremendcus cottonwoods which set the tone for the
whole parcel. Horn said it is unlikely the applicant would be
permitted to remove those trees. Mayor Stirling suggested adding
a condition to preserve the existing front setback and the south
side :setback.
Councilman Gassman moved to add condition 9 that an addition to
the existing house not encroach into the sideyard more than it
does and not encroach more to the south than it does on parcel
1; seconded by Mayor Stirling. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Isaac said it is unfortunate what has happened along
Lake avenue. There has been a lot of development along the
street. Councilman Gassman said he does not want to approve
something in excess of the new P,-5 regulations. Horn said the
development will be subject to the new FAR regulations.
Mayor Stirling closed the public hearing.
Councilman Isaac moved to approve the Marshall subdivision
exception and growth management exemption for the purpose of
creating 2 lots with the 9 conditions listed in the planning
office memorandum; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor,
with the exception of Councilwoman Fallin. Motion carried.
Mayor Sti ng said this public hearing will be continued to set
the mill levy --",: December 9, 1987. Mayor Stirling opened the
public hearing.
Doug Carlson presented a prop 1 prepared by Dick Butera as an
alternative to spending $50,000 consulting fees for the
parking structure. The proposal shows story parking garage
on the Rio Grande property that has as ernative 24,000
square feet on top to be used for cit�an
/county "fices. 300
parking spaces could be provided in this parking garage. ouncil
suggested this be discussed December 9th. Mayor Stirling d
io
Exhibit D
L p AT. N
oTES"
•. '. • r •. _, ... _ e •� ` +' � _ '� _.�. _ J_ � i -.ire i� ,� *►. _ � -
'T •__ _ • •!• ' _ �, �: .•,ram.•'•+' � oaf 1.. •s ,•_i• •�e•`—
W. ;`''•►,tom
Qfc. TO
�i- �4�t �'�' �,� # A40P. o pir YAK.. i��*-, • ���;.Gl�..t.: � .,
Af
, e •1 :' • r e l• / .y •. 'r ♦ . 1 Its
�ry�YJl _ .• _ � Y
Exhibit E
PLANNER:
PROJECT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
Sara Adams, (970) 429-2778
sara.adams@ci.aspen.co.us
320 Lake Avenue, Parcel I of the
Marshall Lot Split
Rich Carr
CCY Architects
228 Midland Avenue
Basalt, CO
(970)927.4925
rcarr@ccyarchitects.com
DATE: 12.11.09
Certificate of Appropriateness for Major HPC Development, Demolition of historic property, Relocation
of historic property, Setback Variances, Residential Design Standard Variances, Hallam Lake Bluff
Review, Stream Margin Review, and Amendment to approved Subdivision Development Order.
DESCRIPTION: Background: 320 Lake Avenue is located in the R-6 medium density residential zone district. There
is no alley access: the house fronts Lake Avenue and the rear of the property overlooks Hallam Lake.
Only one curb cut will be permitted for this parcel. The subject lot contains a 191h century designated
landmark and is defined as Parcel I of the Marshall Lot Split. An unoriginal addition is evident on the
north and rear (east) elevations of the historic house. The south and front (west) elevations appear to
be in the original condition. No documentation has been found to indicate whether the house is in its
original location and an inspection of the basement/crawl space has not been attempted. Staff
suggests the applicant check the maps and photographs at the Aspen Historical Society to possibly
determine the original location and appearance of the home.
The Marshall Lot Split was approved by City Council in 1987 that created Parcel I and Parcel II. A
plat was recorded, however an Ordinance was never drafted or recorded. The plat notes state the
following: 01. An addition to the existing house will not encroach into the existing side and front yard
for Parcel I; 2. No decks or similar structures shall be constructed outside the building envelope." The
plat indicates that the rear yard setback for Parcel 1 is 20' from the property line. The building
envelope for Parcel I is defined on the plat as the footprint of the existing building, with the exception
of the rear yard setback of 20'. As stated in the plat notes, no additions are permitted in the front and
side yards. An amendment to the subdivision plat and envelope will be required to permit
development in these areas of the lot.
Mature vegetation exists on the site that will require approval from the Parks Department to remove.
Staff understands that Parks granted approval to remove 2 of the 3 cottonwoods along the south
property line, and the applicant is appealing the denial of the 31d tree removal request.
Proposal: The applicant would like to relocate the historic home on Parcel 1 toward Lake Avenue,
construct an addition that includes a two car garage and a two story living space, and apply for the
500 square foot FAR Bonus for landmark structures. HPC has purview over any development on
Parcel I, including landscape, and will assess the proposal's compliance with the Aspen Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines for Landmarks (available at www.aspenpitkin.com.) The project is
required to meet the Residential Design Standards. Due to the landmark status of the building and
the confines of the lot, setback variances and Residential Design Standard Variances are probable
for this project, which can be granted by HPC. Hallam Lake Bluff and possibly Stream Margin
reviews are required for development at the rear of this parcel, which will occur at HPC as part of a
•
consolidated application. A recent survey should be undertaken to plot the areas on the parcel that
are subject to these reviews.
Setbacks: The combined side yard setback dimension for this property will be calculated based on
the entire lot size, which excludes any slope reductions for the property. The HPC will review the
requested setback variances for a property within the R-6 zone district; however, City Council review
is required to amend the subdivision plat to redefine the building envelope for Parcel I. If the proposed
changes are consistent with the approved plat, then the application will be processed as an "other
amendment" by City Council. If the proposed changes are found to not be consistent with the
approved plat, then the amendment is subject to review as a new development application for plat.
PROCESS: 1. Worksession with HPC.
2. Submit application for HPC review for items listed in 43.
3. HPC Conceptual Review of mass, scale, Iieight, location (public hearing.)
a. Relocation of historic house.
b. 500 square foot FAR bonus for a landmark.
c. Residential Design Standard variances.
d. Setback variances.
e. Hallam Lake Bluff Review (and Stream Margin Review if necessary.)
4, After HPC grants approvals listed in #3 above, submit application for Subdivision amendment.
5. City Council Amendment to a Subdivision Development Order, "other amendment" (public
hearing.)
6. After Council review is complete, submit application for HPC Final Review.
7. HPC Final Review of fenestration, materials, detailed landscape plan (public hearing.)
Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.410 Residential Design Standards
26.415.070 (D) Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development
26.415.080 Demolition of historic properties.
26.415.090 Relocation of designated properties
26.415,110 (B) Dimensional Variances for Historic Properties
26.415.110.E Floor Area Bonus
26.435.040 Stream Margin Review
26.435.060 Hallam Lake Bluff Review
26.480.080 (B) Amendment to Sudivision Development Order
26.575 Miscellaneous Supplemental Regulations
26.710.040 Medium -Density Residential (R-6)
Review by: Staff for completeness, HPC for compliance with review criteria. HPC Conceptual Review generally
addresses mass, scale, and height. Fenestration, materials, landscaping, and site lighting are addressed at
Final Review. City Council will address the proposed amendment to the approved subdivision plat and the
consistency of the proposed amendment with the original plat.
Public Hearing: Yes at HPC (both Conceptual and Final) and City Council.
Referral Agencies: None.
Planning Fees: $2,940 Deposit for 12 hours of staff time for HPC reviews (additional staff time required is billed at $245 per
hour); and $1,470 Deposit for 6 hours of staff time for City Council amendment to subdivision plat review.
Referral Agency Fees: None.
Total Deposit: $ 2,940 to submit application for HPC reviews;
$1,470 to submit separate application for City Council review.
To apply, submit the following information:
1. Proof of ownership with payment.
2. Signed fee agreement (all applications)
3. Completed City of Aspen application form (all applications).
4. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant, which states the name, address and
telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.
5. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current
certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, 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.
6. Total deposit for review of the application.
7. Copies of the complete application packet and maps: 13 for HPC reviews and 8 for Council review.
HPC =12; PZ = 10; GMC = PZ+5; CC = 7; Referral Agencies = Ilea.; Planning Staff =1
8. An 81/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
9. Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, including all easements and
vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. (This
requirement, or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not
to warrant a survey document.)
10. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development
complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as
proposed.
11. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing. The GIS department can provide this list on mailing labels for
a small fee. 920.5453
12. Copies of prior approvals.
13. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the
following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD) -preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text
format easily convertible to Word is acceptable.
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.
•
•
ATTACHMENT 2 -
PROJECT:
Name: 320 Lake Avenue Residence
Location: 320 Lake Avenue, Parcel I, Marshall Lot Split
Block 20, Page 54
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property)
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 273512401002
iPPLICANT:
(Name: Bill Guth, 320 Aspen, LLC
Address: c/o 320 Aspen, LLC, 2850 E. Broad St. Columbus, OH 43209
Phone #:
970-306-8757 Fax#: E-mail: bguth@stagecapito
REPRESENTATIVE:
[Name: E. Michael Hoffman
Address: Garfield & Hecht, P.C. 601 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611
970-544-3442 (866) 929-7870 mhoffman@garfieldhe
Phone #: Fax#: E-mail.
'IYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that
Amendment of Subdivision Plat
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
Historic home with several non -historic additions
PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
Remove restriction on south side yard to reflect removal of trees.
.com
t.com
ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form
(Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
Project: 320 Lake Avenue
Applicant: Ronnie Marshali / 320 Aspen, LLC
Project 320 Lake Avenue
Location: R - f;
Zone 7,075 SF
District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
(For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within
the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot
Area in the Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable: Existing: Proposed.•
Number of residential units: Existing: 1 Proposed.• 1
Number of bedrooms: Existing: 3 Proposed.• 5
Proposed % of demolition: -not calculated
DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area:
Existing: 1, 6 5 7 Allowable:
3, 7 9 8*
Proposed:
3, 7 9 8*
He—iv-ht
20' mid point
*With
500 s.f.
FAR Bonus
Principal Bldg.:
Existing: 2 5' R iewable:
2 5'
Proposed.
2 5'
Accessory Bldg.:
Existing. N/A - - A1lawabi'e. - - - --
On-Site parking:
Existing: 1 Required:
2
Proposed:
2
% Site coverage:
Existing: 2 4 o Required: 4 8. 5$ MaRroposed:
4 5 0
% Open Space:
Existing: - - - - - - Required:
N/A
Proposed.•
Front Setback:
Existing: 2 5 1 Required.•
10,
Proposed.•
10,
Rear Setback:
Existing: 51 . 5 ' Required.•
2 6 1
Proposed:
3 4 '
Combined Front/Rear:
Indicate N, S, E, W
Existing: N/A Required.•
- - - - Proposed:
- - - -
Side Setback: S
Existing: 18 ' Required:
51
Proposed.•
4 '
Side Setback: N Existing: 1 5 Required.• 5' proposed.. 1. 5
Combined Sides: Existing: 19 5 ' Required: 171 Proposed: 5. 51
*to face of cover porch 8.5' to building Tace * 10'combined)
Distance between Existing: N/A Required. - -' - - Proposed. - - - - -
buildings:
Existing non -conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed):
0
Aspen Division
Stewart title
620 East Hopkins Avenue
View your transaction progress 2417 via SureClose.
Aspen, Colorado 8t611
Phone: 970-925-3577
Ask its about your login today!
Fax: 866-277-9353
Date: August 22, 2011
Order Number: 949081--C3
Buyer: SC Acquisitions LLC, a Colorado limited liability company
Seller: Ronnie Marshall
Property 320 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611
Please direct all Closing inquiries to: Please direct all Title inquiries to:
Carolyn Ethridge
620 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone:970-925-3577 Fax:866-277-9353
Entail Address: carolyn.ethridge@stewart.com
SELLER:
Ronnie Marshall
320 Lake Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
LISTING BROKER:
Morris & Fynvald Sotheby's International Realty
Attn: Tracy Eggleston
415 East Hyman Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: (970) 925-6060 (970) 925-6060
Fax: (970) 920-9993
Email Address: tracyaspen@yahoo.com
Linda Williams
Phone: 970-766-0234 or 866-932-6093
Email Address: hvitliam3Qstewart.com
BUYERIBORROWER:
SC Acquisitions LLC, a
Colorado timited liability
company
SELLING BROKER:
Alta Properties
Attn: William Guth
P.O. Box 1444
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Phone: (970) 306-8757
Email Address: witliam.n.gutlt@gmail.com
0 •
ALTA Commitment (6/17/06)
ALTA Commitment For1n
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
Issued by
Stewart
title guaranty company
Stewart Title Guaranty Company, a Texas Corporation ("Company"), for a valuable consideration,
commits to issue its policy'or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the
Proposed insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest in the land
described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with
the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions of this
Commitment.
This Commitment shalt be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of
the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A by the Company.
All liability and obligation under this Commitment shall cease and terminate six months after the
Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided
that the failure to issue the policy or policies is not the fault of the Company.
The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request.
This commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by a validating officer or authorized
signatory.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to
be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A.
Countersigned::
�A, rizod Coumtcrsignaturo
Stewart Title
Aspen Division
620 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 970-925-3577
Fax: 866-277-9353
StE'wc
�titte guaranty company
L600y -�%
1900 0
. Z - ol4r
Senior Chairman oft6Board
Chakman or the Board
President
Order Numbcr: 949081-- ALTA Commitment (6117/06)
Title Officer: Linda Williams
0 a
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE A
1. Effective Date: July 11, 2011, at 8:00 a.m.
2. Policy or Policies To Be Issued:
(a) A.L.T.A. Owner's (Extended)
Pioposed Insured:
SC Acquisitions LLC, a Colorado limited liability company
(b) A.L.T.A. Loan
Order Number: 949081--C3
Title Officer: Linda Williams
Amount of Insurance:
$3,900,000.00
3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is:
Fee Simple
4. Title to the fee simple estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in:
Ronnie Marshall (SEE REQUIREMENTS HEREIN)
5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows:
PARCEL I, MARSHALL LOT SPLIT,
according to the Plat thereof recorded 7anuaiy 26, 1988 in Plat Book 20 at Page 54 as Reception No.
296875.
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
Purported Address: Statement of Charges:
320 Lake Avenue These charges are due and payable before a Policy can
Aspen, Colorado 81611 be issued:
Basic Rate
2006 Owner's Policy: S6822.00
Owner's Extended Coverage: $150.00
Tax Certificate: S20.00
E
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE B — Section 1
REQUIREMENTS
Order Number: 949081—C3
The following are the requirements to be complied with:
1. Payment to or for the account of the grantor(s) or mortgagor(s) of the full consideration for the estate
or interest to be insured.
2. Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured mast be executed and duly filed for
record.
3. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title Guaranty Company of payment of all outstanding taxes and assessments as
certified by the County Treasurer.
4. Execution of Affidavit as to Debts and Liens and its return to Stewart Title Guaranty Company.
NOTE: If work has been performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils testing,
foundation work, installation of materials), please notify the Company's escrow officer within 10 days of receipt of this
title commitment.
5. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title of Colorado, Inc. fiunished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen,
that the following taxes have been paid, or that conveyance is exempt from said taxes:
(1) The "Wheeler Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and
(2) The "Housing Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990).
6. THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENT IS FOR DELETION OF SURVEY EXCEPTIONS 2 AND 3 OF THE OWNERS
POLICY:
A SURVEY, meeting the minimum detail standards of the ALTA/ACSM, Survey LOCATION CERTIFICATE, prepared
by a registered Colorado surveyor, within the last TWO MONTHS, must be presented to Stewart Title Guaranty
Company, for its approval prior to the deletion of any survey exceptions from the OWNERS POLICY.
Stewart Title Guaranty reserves the right to take exception to any adverse matters as shown on said survey, or make
fiirther inquiry or requirements relative thereto.
Said Survey, must be certified to Stewart Title of Colorado and/or Stewart Title Guaranty Company.
7. Trust Agreement for the Ronnie Marshall Living Trust Dated January 17, 2000
NOTE: The Agreement will not be recorded.
8. Execution by Authorized Trustee of the Ronnie Marshall Living Trust Dated January 17, 2000, of statement
of Authority pursuant to the provisions of Section 38-30-172 C.R.S.
9. Deed from Ronnie Marshall, Trustee of the Ronnie Marshall Living Trust Dated January 17, 2000 conveying fee title to
Ronnie Marshall
NOTE: This Deed is needed because subject property or a portion thereof was conveyed to Ronnie Marshall, Tnistee of
the Romue Marshall Living Trust Dated January 17, 2000 by Quitclaim Deed recorded April 5, 2002 as Reception No.
465999 Said Deed used the prior legal description (one prior to the Marshall Lot Split Plat)
10. Release by the.Public Trustee of the Deed of Trust from Ronnie Marshall for the use of Wells Fargo Bank N.A. to secure
$450,000.00, dated April 29, 2004 recorded May 5, 2004 as Reception No. 497218.
•
E
This Deed of Trust secures an equity line of credit and/or revolving loan. The Company requires a satisfactory written
statement from the existing lender confinning: (a) the payoff amount; (b) that the line of credit has been closed or frozen,
and no further draws/advances will be permitted and/or the right to future advances has been terminated, and (c)
agreement to deliver a fiill Release of Deed of Trust upon payment of the outstanding balance.
11. Release by the Public Trustee of the Deed of Trust from Ronnie Marshall for the use of Wells Fargo Bank N.A. to secure
$200,000.00, dated September 12, 2008 recorded October 10, 2008 as Reception No. 553482.
12. ► ►Release by Aspen Grove Associates LLC of the Promissory Note in the amount of $48,924.00 recorded August 22,
2011 as Reception No. 582 (19.
13. Relating to SC Acquisitions, LLC, The Company requires for its review the following:
a) Copy of the Operating Agreement and the regulations of the limited liability company and any amendments thereof
b) Execution and recordation of Statement of Authority pursuant to the provisions of Section 38-30-172 C.R.S.
Note: The Colorado Secretary of State shows this company in good standing.
14. Deed from vested owner(s) vesting fee simple title in the purchaser(s).
Note: notation of the legal address of the grantee must appear on the deed as per 1976 amendment to statute on recording
of deeds CRS 38-35-109 (2).
• 0
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE B — Section 2
EXCEPTIONS
Order Number: 949081--C3
The policy or policies to be issued `will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are
disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company:
1. Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records.
2. Easements, or claims of easements, 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 laud and not
shown by the public records.
4. Any Iien, 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
the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon
covered by this commitment.
6. Unpatented mining claims, reservations or exceptions in patents, or In acts authorizing the
issuance thereof.
7. Water rights, claims or title to water.
8. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and unredeemed tax sales.
9. The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or
homeowners association or inclusion in.any water service or street improvement area.
10. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be
found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted, as reserved in United States Patents
recorded June 5, 1880 in Book 55 at Page 2 and in Book 55 at Page 32,
11. Easements, rights of way and all matters as shown on Plat of Marshall Lot Split recorded January 26,
1988 in Plat Book 20 at Page 54 as Reception No. 296875.
12. NOTE: Exceptions 1 and 4 may be deleted from the policies, provided the seller and buyer execute
the Company's affidavits, as required herein, and the Company approves such deletions. If work has
been performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils testing,
foundation work, installation of materials), and the Company has not reviewed and approved lien
waivers and indemnitor financials, Standard Exception 4 (mechanic lien exception) will not be
deleted and no mechanic lien coverage will be furnished. Exceptions 2 and 3 may be deleted from
the policies, provided the Company receives and approves the survey or survey affidavit if required
0
0
herein. Exception 5 will not appear on the policies, provided the Company, or its authorized agent,
conducts the closing of the proposed transaction and is responsible for the recordation of the
documents.
0
Order Number: 949081--C3
DISCLOSURES
Note: Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that:
A. The subject real property maybe located in a special taxing district;
B. A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the county treasurer or the
county treasurer's authorized agent;
C. 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.
Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 3-5-1, Subparagraph (7) (E) 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 Stewart Title 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
Lender's Title Policy when issued.
Note: Affirmative Mechanic's Lien Protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception
No. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the
following conditions:
A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single-family residence, which includes a
condonunium or townhouse unit.
B. No labor or materials have been famished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on
the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months.
C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's
and Materialmen's Liens.
D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.
E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased,
within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for
unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to .
the seller, the builder and/or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium; fully executed Indermnity
agreements satisfactory to (lie company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an
examination of the aforesaid information by the Company.
No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or
agreed to pay.
Note: Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-123, notice is hereby given:
A. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the
surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas,
other minerals, or geothennal energy in the property; and
B. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's
permission.
This notice applies to owner's policy comunihnents containing a nnhneral severance instrument exception, or exceptions,
in Schedule B, Section 2.
NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE COVERAGES
REFERRED TO HEREIN UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED.
STG Privacy Notice 1(Rev 01/26/09) Stewart Title Companies
WHAT DO THE STEWART TITLE COMPANIES DO WITH YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION?
Federal and applicable state law and regulations give consumers the right to limit some but not all sharing. Federal and applicable state law regulations also
require us to tell you how«e collect, share, and protect your personal information. Please read this notice carefully to understand how Ave use your personal
information. This privacy notice is distributed on behalf of the Stewart Title Guaranty Company and its affiliates (the Stewart Title Companies), pursuant to
Title V ofdme Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act (GLBAj
The types of personal information we collect and share depend on the product or service that you have sought through us. This information can
include social security numbers and driver's license number.
All financial companies, such as the Stewart Title Companies, need to share customers' personal information to run their everyday business —to
process transactions and maintain customer accounts. In the section below, we list the reasons that we can share customers' personal information;
the reasons that we choose to share; and whether you can limit this sharing.
Xte ns->vac r s _are ofli�- ens"on813ao�ma o
Uo yveahare?
�. Car you lunit tills shams
For our everyday business purposes— to process your transactions and maintain your
account. This may include running the business and managing customer accounts, such as
Yes
No
processing transactions, mailing, and auditing services, and responding to court orders and
legal investigations.
For our marketing purposes— to offer our products and services to you.
Yes
No
For joint marketing with other financial; companies
No
We don`t share
For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your transactions and
experiences. Affiliates are companies related by common ownership or control. They can be
financial and nonfinancial companies. Our affiliates may include companies with a Stenvart
Yes
No
rranre; financial companies, such as Stewart 7711e Company
For our affiliates' everyday business purposes --information about your
No
We don't share
creditworthiness.
For our affiliates to market to you
Yes
No
For non -affiliates to market to you. Non -affiliates are companies not related by common
No
AVe don't share
ownership or control. They can be financial and nonfinancial companies
We may disclose your personal information to our affiliates or to non -affiliates as permitted by law. If you request a transaction with a non -
affiliate, such as a third party insurance company, we will disclose your personal information to that non -affiliate. [We do not control their
subsequent use of information, and suggest you refer to their privacy notices.)
rlAir p28es
41
How often do the Stewart Title Companies notify me
We must notify you about our sharing practices when you request a transaction.
about their practices?
How do the Stewart Title Companies protect my
To protect your personal information from unauthorized access and use, we use security
personal information?
measures that comply with federal and state law. 111ese measures include computer, file,
and building safeguards.
How do the Stewart Title Companies collect my
We collect your personal information, for example, when you
personal information?
• request insurance -related services
• provide such information to us
We also collect your personal information from others, such as the real estate agent or
lender involved in your transaction, credit reortin a encies, affiliates or other companies.
What sharing can I limit?
Although federal and state law give you the right to limit sharing (a.&, opt old) in certain
instances, we do not share your Eersonal information in those instances.
Contacftls" If you have anyquestions about this privacynotice, please contact us at: Stewart Title Guaranty Company,
1980 Post Oak Blvd., Privacy Officer, Houston, Texas 77056
Stewart Title
DISCLOSURE
The title company, Stewart Title•in its capacity as escrow agent, has bee►1 authorized to receive funds and disburse them when
all funds received are either: (a) available for immediate withdrawal as a matter of right from the financial institution in which
the funds are deposited, or (b) are available for inunediate withdrawal as a consequence of an agreement of a financial
institution in which the fiords are to be deposited or a financial institution upon which the funds are to be drawn.
The title company is disclosing to you that the financial institution may provide the title company with computer accounting
or auditing services, or other bank services, either directly or through a separate entity which -may or may not be affiliated
with the title company. This separate entity may charge the financial institution reasonable and proper compensation for these
services and retain any profits there from.
The title company may also receive benefits from the financial institution in the form of advantageous interest rates on loans,
sometimes referred to as preferred rate loan programs, relating to loans the title company has with the financial institution.
The title company shall not be liable for any interest or other charges on the earriest money and shall be under no duty to
invest or reinvest funds held by it at any time. In the event that the parties to this transaction have agreed to have interest on
earnest money deposit transferred to a fund established for the purpose of providing affordable housing to Colorado residents,
then the earnest money shall remain in an account designated for such purpose, and the interest money shall be delivered to
the title company at closing.
CONDITIONS
1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security
instrument.
2. If the proposed Insured has or acquired actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse
claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Conunitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such
knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or
damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure
to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the
Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of ally such defect, lien,
encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of
this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability
previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations.
3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and
such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for
and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with
the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or
create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such
liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such
liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and Stipulations and the Exclusions
from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured
which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as
expressly modified herein.
4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of
title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed
Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate
or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and
are subject to the provisions of this Conunitment.
5. The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of
Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured
as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at
rnyw.alta.orn.
IqrAtirantY company
All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be fumished the Company shall be
addressed to it at P.O. Box 2029, Houston, Texas 77252.
0 0
1
\ #
-
.
. /
°
%
.
r
\
\®\�
}/■
_ J
-
`
�e\
(
.
31
m¥ ---
}\ •
Lb
t
2 \
PROJECT LOCATION
320 LAKE AV E N U E
AS P E N, C O LO RA D O
»,-
IMPROVEMENT SURVEY
PARCEL I
MARSHALL LOT SPLIT
CITY OF ASPEN
4
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO—�
1" = 16'
NOTES
1
� •.q +q ytt34W NF l� ; uk `.G I+I �• Y
1 d• w. � '"m� q l qr�K ilri��� 'M.>," .�4gYO F 311uv
w x
K:w �.--'��"• I }\'. � "4�n I 11; w,......,.,. ..o .�ri,,.w 3iWa ai �,. .. n...�.�. cp nwa.n
' w.u':.3.`,:>< -� � � �" '� ' \ \ '�, t ` 1 sx . 3vNUKY •, +:+Qs KqQ Kr. ,,. III
�' d � ,� �'. � W Y,Ita� • fY0 f.. ' S C[x^yXL •: N w M '
PARCF.1..1 ` '.,' Qy�.. ••, \ N+a ue+mvo ae.�n ,.qa v: ,ar
,a:• sps x MYS3 w- nat fw r K o". > I, w.. .. "N
4
a.- aii°w., f t _ • \ �\ 3 y
< 1 , `t a � i `• \ -�� 11 •`` » s i - �tt`v`Q.. a•:u rim � qxs �. c :,,r,•yx
�",�
°° •f fit. 1 1 `' ��, `t 5' ` 83..^Y '✓i —M .. ...>. �� :e his aA n t' ., �a o., a,»xryc
r ., \ , an"r" �•` ' •i '; y. `` LEGEND
\ '�' • quc•xs -::!w u:Ygwalt. Ys xsfiYra
m n.rr•ov +ra ..ply
� 4 robe a lY Ys *.f NM
`K �` K ,1``\ � GSt4.0.5 Aft �•�
"A
\
SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE
\ >.vrtr,f sqq.::.: aY•.iwl��•:,i. .•.�.. �.t�. �;:w <N
qv.c u.•^.q, a. Y°q..icecr iu�rwii •o, Y Yam.: `" ..w
aca.�
ozY � e T9J2� ,
-------------
•
El
C7
Exhibit F
Ronnie Marshall
320 Lake Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
December 30, 2011
Ms. Amy Guthrie
Historic Preservation Officer, Community Development
City of Aspen
136 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Ms. Guthrie,
I am the owner of 320 Lake Avenue, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (the "Property"). Please accept the
enclosed application to amend the Plat for the Marshall Lot Split pursuant to Section 26.480.080
B. of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. 320 Aspen, LLC, represented by attorney Michael
Hoffman, Esq., Garfield & Hecht, P.C., 601 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, is authorized
to submit and prosecute this application.
ncerely,
Ronnie Marshall
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director0� " I
RE: 320 Lake Avenue- Subdivision Amendment, First Reading of Ordinance #,
Series of 2012
DATE: January 23, 2012
APPLICANT /OWNER: 320 Aspen, LLC.
The current owner of the property,
Ronnie Marshall of 320 Lake Avenue,
Aspen, CO 81611, has consented to the
application.
REPRESENTATIVE: Michael Hoffman,
Garfield and Hecht, P.C.
LOCATION: 320 Lake Avenue, Parcel I
of the Marshall Lot Split, Aspen.
ZONING & USE: R-6, single family
home.
SUMMARY:
The Applicant requests that Council amend the
Marshall Lot Split Subdivision approval granted in
1987. The Subdivision, which split one large parcel
in half, included a condition of approval that created
more restrictive setbacks on Parcel 1 than required
by underlying zoning.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the amendment be approved
finding that circumstances on the site, as well as
City Land Use regulations, have changed since the
Subdivision approval.
Page 1 of 3
LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURE:
In December, the Applicant received HPC approval for a remodel to the existing Victorian era
home on the subject site. The remodel entails demolishing and replacing an older addition to the
building, and moving the house slightly closer to the street and towards the south. HPC granted
Conceptual approval including variances from the standard setback requirements of the R-6 zone
district. It was anticipated that the applicant would then approach Council to ask that the
standard setback requirements, rather than the setbacks established in the 1987 Subdivision, be
applied. Staff determined that it was best to have HPC conduct design review .and make a
determination on the appropriateness of Conceptual approval before Council was asked to
consider the project, rather than the other way around.
The ability for the applicant to move forward to Final HPC approval depends on Council's
determination regarding the setback condition, which appears as a note on the Marshall Lot Split
plat. Council is the review authority on this Subdivision Amendment.
SUBDIVISION REVIEW
Subdivision review was originally required to split what was once 13,000 square foot lot into two
approximately equal lots. The parcels both meet the minimum lot size for the neighborhood,
which is 6,000 square feet.
Section 26.480.080.13 of the City Land Use Code provides that Subdivision amendments which
are not insubstantial are reviewed and approved by City Council, "provided that the proposed
change is consistent with the approved plat."
Staff Response: Some of the original records for Council review of this Subdivision were
apparently not retained. The application includes the minutes from City Council's Nov. 23, 1987
discussion. Planning Staff and Council were concerned with avoiding negative impacts to
existing trees on the property as well as Hallam Lake, and crafted a condition on the Subdivision
in that vein.
The 1987 Subdivision approval stated that all development on this property should be confined
to the footprint of the Victorian and the addition that was already in place at that time. It appears
that this was done in order to protect a row of three large cottonwoods in the south sideyard of
Parcel 1. Those trees have since deteriorated in health and have received Parks Department
approval to be removed. Without the trees, there is no clear reason to limit the buildable area on
the south side of Parcel 1 in a manner that is different than what is required of the rest of the
neighborhood.
Regulations to protect Hallam Lake from the impact of development on the bluff were adopted
after this Subdivision. The current redevelopment proposal is subject to these strict criteria,
particularly the requirement for setback from the top of slope. Staff believes that development at
the rear of the site is appropriately regulated through today's Environmentally Sensitive Area
regulations.
Staff cannot identify a rationale for restricting the front yard setback on this parcel in a manner
that is different than adjacent parcels.
Page 2 of 3
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the applicant's proposed plat amendment,
removing the 1987 condition, is accepted due to changed circumstances and changed Land Use
Codes since the time of approval.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance # 4, Series of 2012 on First Reading."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMEN S:
Ordinance # 4, Series of 2012
Exhibit A: Application
Page 3 of')
ORDINANCE #j
(Series of 2012)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO
APPROVING A SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
320 LAKE AVENUE, PARCEL 1 OF THE MARSHALL LOT SPLIT, CITY AND
TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-01-002
WHEREAS, the applicant, 320 Aspen, LLC, represented by Michael Hoffman, Garfield and
Hecht, P.C., has requested a Subdivision Amendment for the property located at 320 Lake
Avenue, Parcel 1 of the Marshall Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The current
owner of the property, Ronnie Marshall, has consented to the application; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.480.080.B of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for
Subdivision Amendment which may be approved by City Council, "provided that the proposed
change is consistent with the approved plat;" and
WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer, in her staff report to City Council,
performed an analysis of the application, found that the review standard for Subdivision
Amendment is met, and recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development
standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and
elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion
of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1: Subdivision Amendment
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
Aspen City Council hereby approves a Subdivision Amendment to remove a plat note which
imposes setback restrictions on Parcel 1 of the Marshall Lot Split plat and replaces it with the
following note:
The execution and recording of the Amended Plat memorializes the vacation of the first Plat
Note found on the Plat for Marshall Lot Split, recorded in the real property records of Pitkin
County on January 26, 1988 in Plat Book 20 at Page 54, as such vacation was approved by
the City of Aspen in Ordinance #_, Series of 2012. The Plat Note, which restricted
development into the existing sideyard and front yard for Parcel 1, is no longer needed as it
restricts development within the south sideyard because trees located on the south side of
Parcel 1 have become old and diseased. The City of Aspen Parks Department has issued
320 Lake Avenue
Ordinance #_, Series of 2012
Page 1 of 3
•
Tree Removal Permit 2009-109 to authorize the removal of those trees. Restriction of
development within the front yard and north side yard is governed by the dimensional
requirements of the R-6 zone district, except as those requirements have been or may be
varied by the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission or other authorized
representative of the City of Aspen.
Section 2: Recordation
A subdivision exemption plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and
approved by the Community Development Department and recorded in the office of the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of final approval by City
Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified
time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be
required for a showing of good cause.
Section 3: SeverabW
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 4: Existing Litigation
This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein
provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 5: Vested Rights
The Land Use entitlements granted herein shall be 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 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, including Final Major Development and
Commercial Design Reviews by the UPC, 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
320 Lake Avenue
Ordinance #_, Series of 2012
Page 2 of 3
0 0
Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the
following described property: 320 Lake Avenue, Parcel I of the Marshall Lot Split, Aspen.
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.
Section 6: Public Hearing
A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 27 h day of February, 2012 in the City
Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a
public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of
Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the 23`d day of January, 2012.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2012.
ATTEST:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
John Worcester, City Attorney
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
320 Lake Avenue
Ordinance #_, Series of 2012
Page 3 of 3
•
ASPEN OFFICE
601 East Hyman Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Telephone (970) 925-1936
Facsimile (970) 925-3008
Ms. Amy Guthrie
GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Since 1975
Community Development Department
130 S. Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
www.gatfieldhecht.com
RECEIVED
JAN 0 3 2012
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
E. Michael Hoffman
E-mail.• mhoffmanl(�,zarfieldhecht.com
Phone: (970) 925-1936
December 30, 2011
Re: Amendment of Plat for 320 Lake Avenue, Aspen, Colorado.
Dear Amy:
This letter represents the next phase of the application of 320 Aspen, LLC (the "Applicant") for
development of 320 Lake Avenue in Aspen (the "Property"). As discussed below, the Applicant
seeks to eliminate a note found on the Marshall Lot Split Plat (the "Plat") which restricts
development along the south edge of the Property. It appears that the note was originally
included on the Plat to protect three large cottonwood trees, which have now become old and in
need of removal. The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission ("HPC") recently granted
conceptual approval to a development plan for the Property which requires use of some of the
land restricted by the plat note. To accomplish that development plan, the Applicant requests a
modification of the plat to remove the relevant note pursuant Section 26.480.080 B. of the City
of Aspen Land Use Code (the "Code").
The legal description of the Property is Parcel I, Marshall Lot Split, according to the Plat thereof
recorded January 26, 1988 in Plat Book, 20 at Page 54.Pitkin County, Colorado ("the Property").
In the late 1980s the City approved a subdivision exemption for a 13,603 square foot lot owned
by Ronnie Marshall. The City's decision authorized the filing of the Plat which created two
smaller parcels, designated Lots I and II. A copy of the Plat is enclosed with this letter as Exhibit
A.
A note found on the original plat restricts development in an area which in 1988 was occupied by
three large cottonwood trees. While those three trees still exist, the City's Parks Department has
determined that the integrity of the three subject trees has been compromised by age and decay
•
Ms. Amy Guthrie
December 30, 2011
Page 2
and that the trees should now be removed. A permit for removal of the trees has been issued by
the City. Copies of a letter from the City Forester and an Addendum to the resulting permit,
which describe these findings, are enclosed with this application as Exhibit B.
The HPC granted Conceptual Approval to the Applicant's preservation and development
proposal for the Property on Wednesday, December 14, 2011. While this part of the application
does not involve the City's Historic Preservation Guidelines or the historic preservation
provisions of the Aspen Land Use Code (the "Code"), the request made in this letter is fully
consistent with the HPC approval.
Code Section 26.480.080 B. provides that a plat may be approved by City Council without
completion of an entirely new subdivision process when "the proposed change is consistent with
the approved plat." The original Plat was originally approved by City Council for the purpose of
permitting development of each of the two parcels resulting from the lot split in a manner
consistent with the Property's natural constraints. One of the most obvious of those natural
constraints was the existence of three cottonwoods near the south boundary of Lot I. Glenn Horn
was the City's planner who presented the application to Council on November 23, 1987. As
recorded in the minutes of that meeting,
Horn said it is doubtful there will be an addition on the south side as there are 3
tremendous cottonwoods which set the tone for the whole parcel. Horn said it is
unlikely the applicant would be permitted to remove those trees. Mayor Stirling
suggested adding a condition to preserve the existing front setback and the south
side setback.
Councilman Gassman moved to add condition 9 that an addition to the existing
house not encroach into the sideyard more than it does and not encroach more to
the south than it does on parcel 1; seconded by Mayor Stirling. All in favor,
motion carried.
A copy of these minutes is included with this application as Exhibit C. Unfortunately no copy of
the staff memorandum or the City Council resolution of approval survives. However, these
minutes appear to fully explain how the plat note at issue here was first authorized by Council.
The limitation added to the 1987 approval as condition 9 was memorialized on the Plat by the
following language: "An addition to the existing house will not encroach into the existing side
and front yard for Parcel I." An enlargement of that portion of the Plat which included this note
is found on Exhibit D, attached hereto. A proposed First Amended Plat for Lot 1, Marshall Lot
Split (the "Proposed Amended Plat"), in both 24" x 36" (one copy) and II" x 17" format (15
copies), has been filed with this application. The Proposed Amended Plat meets all of the City
Engineer's requirements for documents of this type. The only substantive change effected in the
Proposed Amended Plat is that found in the note found in the center bottom of the document:
0 9
Ms. Amy Guthrie
December 30, 2011
Page 3
The execution and recording of this Amended Plat memorializes the vacation of
the first Plat Note found on the Plat for Marshall Lot Split, recorded in the real
property records of Pitkin County on January 26, 1988 in Plat Book 20 at Page
54, as such vacation was approved by the City of Aspen in Resolution No. ,
Series of 2012. The Plat Note, which restricted development into the existing side
and front yard for Parcel I, is no longer needed as it restricts development within
the south side yard because the trees located on the south side of Parcel I have
become old and diseased. The City of Aspen Parks Department has issued Tree
Removal Permit 2009-109 to authorize the removal of those trees. Restriction of
development within the front yard and north side yard is governed by the
dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone district, except as those requirement
have been or may be varied by the City of Aspen Historic Preservation
Commission or other authorized representative of the City of Aspen.
We understand that you need to re -review the "common development review procedures" set
forth in Section 26.304 of the Code. Our responses to those procedures, which were also
included in our request for Conceptual Approval from the HPC, are included with this
application as Exhibit E. Copies of a letter of authorization and of the fee agreement are attached
hereto as Exhibit F.
Sincerely,
E. Michael Hoffman
Table of Exhibits
Exhibit A — Proposed First Amended Plat of Parcel I, Marshall Lot Split
Exhibit B - Letter from the City Forester and Addendum
Exhibit C — Minutes of City Council Meeting of November 23, 1987
Exhibit D — Enlargement from Original Plat Showing First Plat Note
Exhibit E — Responses to Common Development Review Procedures
Exhibit F — Letter of Authorization and Fee Agreement
Exhibit B
Asper City Council. _...__.._ Regular Neetiag November 23, 1987
app nriation resolution, which is a housekeeping item. Abel
said t city has requested RFTA do the improvements to the
alley as rt of the Rubey park project. Abel said it is
necessary to a opriate revenues from the city and expenditures
for this project. Abel told Council early in the project it
became apparent it wo be appropriate to remove the trees off
the site and replace it ith new landscaping. Abel said this
resolution also incorporates '�e contributions from Radid Aspcn
Holdings to ic:iund part of the t sportation study. Councilman
Tuite asked if the city has replaced ido's fence. Abel said it
has not been replaced. The project is o. old for the alley work
due to weather. Councilman Tuite said he ld like the fence
repaired regardless.
Councilwoman Fallin moved to approve the supplemental ropria-
tion for RFTA; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in or,
�a
LOT SPLIT - Marshall
Glenn Horn, planning office, told Council this is an application
for subdivision exception to create a lot exempt from growth
management. The existing parcel is about 13,000 square feet.
This parcel is located on Lake avenue overlooking Hallam lake.
Horn told Council the parcel is heavily wooded and has a small
Victorian house on it, which is historically designated. Horn
said the pertinent issue is the impact on Hallam lake and the
adjacent property owners. Horn told Council staff has worked
with the applicant in setting a complete building envelope on the
newly created parcel and a partial building envelope on the
existing parcel to protect Hallam lake and the neighbors. Horn
pointed out there are a lot of trees on the parcel, which the
applicant has committed to replanting or replacing. The appli-
cant has also committed to take a new house on parcel 2 through a
voluntary review of HPC. The applicant has met with Hallam lake
representatives, who has added conditions or the approval. Based
on the setbacks, the building envelopes and the conditions
outlined, P & Z and staff both recommend approval.
Jane Ellen Hamilton, representing the applicant, told council the
applicant acceded to every request from Hallam Lake. The
applicant has also voluntarily increased the setback quite
significantly from what the Code requires. Ms. Hamilton said the
applicant will commit to relocating the trees that will have be
to taken out to build the building.
Mayor Stirling opened the public hearing. Mayor Stirling read
into the record a telegram strongly opposed to this lot split
.0 gn City Council Reaular Meeting November 23, 1987
from Victor Lundy. Bill Martin asked if the present home is to
be destroyed. Mayor Stirling said the house is a historic
landmark. Ms. Hamilton said the applicant has no intentions of
destroying the house. Councilman Gassman said he does not see a
building envelope on parcel 1. Horn said the applicant has
agreed to limit the setback on the rear yard to 20 feet. Horn
said he discussed with P & Z a front yard setback to maintain the
existing front yard. P & Z did not support the recommendation to
set the front vard setback in excess of the existing code. Horn
said it is doubtful there will be an addition on the south side
as there arP 3 trerendcus cottonwoods which set the tone for the
whole parcel. Horn said it is unlikely the applicant would be
permitted to remove those trees. Mayor Stirling suggested adding
a condition to preserve the existing front setback and the south
side setback.
Councilman Gassman moved to add condition 9 that an addition to
the existing house not encroach into the sideyard more than it
does and not encroach more to the south than it does on parcel
1; seconded by Mayor Stirling. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Isaac said it is unfortunate what has happened along
Lake avenue. There has been a lot of development along the
street. Councilman Gassman said he does not want to approve
something in excess of the new R-0 regulations. Horn said the
development will be subject to the new FAR regulations.
Mayor Stirling closed the public hearing.
Councilman Isaac moved to approve the Marshall subdivision
exception and growth management exemption for the purpose of
creating 2 lots with the 9 conditions listed in the planning
office memorandum; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor,
with the exception of Councilwoman Fallin. Motion carried.
Mayor Sti ng said this public hearing will be continued to set
the mill levy December 9, 1987. Mayor Stirling opened the
public hearing.
Doug Carlson presented a prep prepared by Dick Butera as an
alternative to spending $50,000 consulting fees for the
parking structure. The proposal shows story parking garage
on the Rio Grande property that has as an ernative 24,000
square feet on top to be used for city/county fires. 300
parking spaces could be provided in this parking garage, ouncil
suggested this be discussed December 9th. Mayor Stirling a., d
10
Exhibit C
T A-Pj� &RECREATION
October 20, 2009
Rowland and Broughton Architecture and Urban Design
117 South Monarch Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: 320 Lake Avenue; 3 narrowleaf cottonwoods
To Whom It May Concern:
The purpose of this document is to summarize the findings by the City Forester upon
investigation of 3 narrowleaf cottonwoods (Populus angustifolia) on the south side of the
property Iocated at 320 Lake Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. This investigation was
completed to determine the health and structural stability of these trees in response to the
request for them to be removed.
Each tree was investigated separately using a resistograph on the trunks as well as in the
canopies. The resistograph is a tool that allows the operator to measure and map internal
decay pockets without causing harm to the living tree. An arborist, chosen and hired by
the applicant, was used to conduct the investigation in the canopies with guidance from
the City Forester. Resistograph results will be attached to this document along with
written explanations/diagrams of these test areas in each tree. Formulas utilized to
determine strength loss and the threshold for labeling hazard trees come from Wagener
1963 and Mattheck and Breloer 1998, respectfully.
The strength loss formula is as follows:
strength loss = (diameter of decayed wood)^3 / (diameter of trunk)^3 x 100
The hazard tree threshold formula is as follows:
t= R; where t is the thickness of sound wood remaining in the thinnest remaining
wall and R is the radius of the decay pocket plus the remaining wall thickness.
East most tree: furthest from Lake Avenue
This cottonwood has an outside bark diameter of 35 inches, with approximately a 2 inch
bark layer. There have been some large wounds left behind in the canopy of this tree due
to past pruning. The upper most lead of this tree has a significant amount of decay due to
one of these old wounds. Just below this main leader, at the point where another large
scaffolding branch is located, the decay pocket ends. The resistograph was utilized at this
branch union to determine structural integrity, and adequate sound wood was found. It is
my recommendation that the above referenced upper leader be pruned at the branch union
of said scaffold branch. No other threatening issues were found in the canopy of this tree.
• 0
After a resistograph inspection of the trunk of this tree, 2 feet above grade, it was
determined that a decay pocket existed with an average diameter of 19 inches. This
decay pocket was off center inside the trunk, favoring the south east direction. The
thinnest strip of sound wood on this south east side is 3.5 inches in diameter. The
strength loss formula yielded a loss of 23% in this trees strength as a result of this decay.
The hazard tree threshold formula resulted in 0.3, which indicates that this tree should not
fail due to this defect.
It is the Parks Department's position that this tree shall remain on site and continue to be
a major contributor to the community forest, with the consideration that the upper lead
(described above) be removed as a safety precaution. The removal of that particular
branch is a decision to be made by the owner if they choose to do so.
Middle tree
This cottonwood has an outside bark diameter of 31 inches, with approximately a 2 inch bark
layer. Again, there have been some major wounds created in the central lead of this tree which
have lead to extensive decay. Unlike the east most tree, there isn't a good location to prune out
this decayed leader without taking the tree completely out. The resistograph results in this area
showed no sound wood on the west/north west side of the trunk, accompanied by several
woodpecker cavities.
The trunk of the tree was resistographed and a decay pocket was detected with a diameter of 18
inches. The thinnest strip of sound wood was on the south side of the tree and measured 3.5
inches. The strength loss formula resulted in a 29% loss, while the hazard threshold formula
resulted in 0.29. When the threshold formula results in anything less than 03, the tree is more
likely to fail.
Due to the extensive decay in the canopy with nowhere to prune back to, it is the Parks
Department's position that this tree should be removed before structural failure of the crown can
cause damage to the home.
West most tree; closest to Lake Avenue
This cottonwood has an outside bark diameter of 29 inches, with approximately a 2 inch bark
layer. There is one area where an old pruning cut has caused a large wound in one of the main
leaders of this tree. It was explored with the resistograph and no significant decay was detected.
All other areas of the canopy seemed normal.
The trunk was resistographed at 2 feet above grade, resulting in a decay pocket that averaged 16
inches in diameter. The thinnest strip of sound wood was on the east and south east sides of the
tree, measuring 3 inches in both places. The strength loss formula resulted in a loss of 26%,
while the threshold formula resulted in 0.26. This threshold reading, significantly less than the
0.3 level, indicates that this tree has a higher potential for structural failure.
It is the Parks Department's position that this tree be removed to mitigate the possibility of
structural failure of the entire tree at the point of decay.
In summary, it was found that all three trees have pockets of decay in the trunks, though the
middle and west trees resulted in a rating of `hazardous' according to Mattheck and Breloer's
0
formula. The east tree has a hazard in the canopy in the form of one decayed lead which should
be removed if the owner chooses to do so. It is recommended that this'east tree be placed on a
monitoring plan, in which the Parks Department is happy to help with, to keep an eye on the
potential advancement of the decay pocket in the trunk. The middle and west trees should be
removed at this time to avoid potential failure.
Sincerely,
Chris Forman, City Forester
585 Cemetery Lane
Aspen, Colorado 81611
970-920-5120 p
970-920-5128 f
chrisf @ci.aspen.co.us
Project: 20" e E
By: CF
BIG PR
Job No:
Date. -
LogMcs. LLC
A,*v.blgrmfg.com
3�
Subject:
...... .... .
------- -------
.. . .... ........ .
Page: of
A.
1
L JO
S5
--- ----- -
....
...
.
...... ..... ... . . ........
X
V
dip+
........
..........
..
.....
..........
. .....
.....
0 0
Project: 37,0
Job No:
BY
Date: 10-7d- Of
Blki HLogistics, LLC
%-/YAY bigrmfg.com
-Z
Subject:
Page. of
N %t L
----- -----
j t>
4"
cor
cb, /Ve
44'(
Z'
'At
E
1(4n
ks
z
v q
.. ..... ...
'7
F
j .
'- �j
i
.-.n - — - .+� ....._�.}.-+.e.•.� -r..` .+..sue... .....�......_ - - - - - - ^-, ....._
.
j11 V JTy� Z J
1- f /[�R
74IL
--
�r�rY� ,Sdu..�v�.o�
M
� i V/{� �fj�j��y�f � ��� ! r` uc�! f ���.G is i� �z ,`� 6'w.t' 4'-v` % •C-4-. ��i^�/f:-2� -
r- f
��1`rn"1Y j'G L/� �(_ L-�.`y.( �//CI✓ �O • y� �i'�•�-%/a7t/� / ^�.� �/fi�/%zt�-�-----.-.-.._...___. ---._.
� �T•/l�o d'l++h. ne✓`� � �,r p�GJ�/L ��.4_� , �r � �f- ��.�`�."K_.__�..�•.� � �i2.--��J�r���.".�------ '--
_"•___........�._.,��
.--......—r-....-._.—�—..--.�t1����14
- - _ __"......�----�-�;
fft�
-ram—
�_ - - - ...._. .._._...�_�_._._ __" _-_—,�— ..�,-'- ___�`_..--�.�---•�---..-..
s
Cl-
t.
t. �.1b�y?-/' L✓� -vF� /+=�Et•C �.t—�`� G(QGsy-_ �Q=1L•CvlCc� �_ ` _ �._...-___-_____-__- --_-.- -
. £�_ €�____-.,._
: ! �C-r/` _ 1v ,:�. �Ps i �l �vcr'� 2•ti- �G `' � � /.� V er f ��
- -
_.....7.._.7.7
. �...�rlT`� 7+ipn-,_....+i�J�%�" +� ��'�ti`•�-�� .sJ�_/�A..ot Rr�; T's-•s+.'►`/--`��'='`.. `-` - -----
__----_ � �L et- �L v 4-�if'! e..eh�_.:__O � . Q �,..�� j.✓v+�Gt
,J7� Z.�'yo`�' �/�elr` J C� r,fv�, G(yW"La.__?'2',�
_
0
M�
r
_
!'�✓�
li?1��-f rr,�l �'f� �� ^��0-'7� l_,-c= t y �/r�.� .
r
j ,
4�
=.i
0
MUST BE POSTED ON PROPERTY
Addendum to Permit #2009-109, 320 Lake Avenue
The owner at 320 Lake Avenue has requested the removal of 3 large narrowleaf
cottonwood trees, on the south side of the property, in order to expand/relocate the
current structure. The expansion desired would require the removal of all 3 trees. Each
tree was investigated separately using a resistograph on the trunks as well as in the
canopies. After extensive review of the inspection outputs, the Parks Department has
permitted the removal of 2 of these trees due to their current condition of having an
unacceptable amount of decay within their boles and canopies. The third tree was
determined to be of borderline structural integrity and was originally required to be
preserved in an effort to maintain some of the valuable tree resources on this property.
Upon further extensive scientific investigation into the crown of this tree, it has been
determined that the tree has a Iimited life expectancy coupled with marginal structural
integrity. It is for these reasons that the Parks Department shall grant the removal of this
third narrowleaf cottonwood tree, as originally requested by the applicant. The
applicant must provide the City Forester copies of approved building permits at 320
bake Avenue prior to the removal of the tree. At that time, this addendum shall be
validated and the tree may be removed with no further documentation required.
The original permit contains information regarding the middle and west trees and is
considered accurate and applicable to the project site. The original permit and this
addendum shall be kept onsite.
PropertyLGe n:
Chris Forman
Forester, City of Aspen Date
Stephen Ellspeni n
Director Parks and Oped Space Date
Permit Valid for one year after approval date.
Exhibit D
.0-o- 4
1'. PLAT'NoTES ._� :'.�_' .-• .'� _ - ,4 '
. � � - .. � t - s � - �. r - - � t! � .• t �. _ •' ,� a , ' � it •.� t. t ,
PA • `• tiL hip - ��j4 r � � � � � . J -* I,� � air s' '' 4. s •'',. _ i �� ''�w �••
Exhibit E
PLANNER:
PROJECT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
•
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
Sara Adams, (970) 429-2778
sara.adams@ci.aspen.co.us
320 Lake Avenue, Parcel I of the
Marshall Lot Split
Rich Carr
CCY Architects
228 Midland Avenue
Basalt. CO
(970)927.4925
rcarr@ccyarchitects.com
RECEIVED
' N 0 3 2012
CITY OF ASPEN
n4OMMUNITY DEVELOPMEW1
DATE: 12.11.09
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Certificate of Appropriateness for Major HPC Development, Demolition of historic property, Relocation
of historic property, Setback Variances, Residential Design Standard Variances, Hallam Lake Bluff
Review, Stream Margin Review, and Amendment to approved Subdivision Development Order.
DESCRIPTION: Background: 320 Lake Avenue is located in the R-6 medium density residential zone district. There
is no alley access: the house fronts Lake Avenue and the rear of the property overlooks Hallam Lake.
Only one curb cut will be permitted for this parcel. The subject lot contains a 1 P century designated
landmark and is defined as Parcel I of the Marshall Lot Split. An unoriginal addition is evident on the
north and rear (east) elevations of the historic house. The south and front (west) elevations appear to
be in the original condition. No documentation has been found to indicate whether the house is in its
original location and an inspection of the basement/crawl space has not been attempted. Staff
suggests the applicant check the maps and photographs at the Aspen Historical Society to possibly
determine the original location and appearance of the home.
The Marshall Lot Split was approved by City Council in 1987 that created Parcel I and Parcel 1). A
plat was recorded, however an Ordinance was never drafted or recorded. The plat notes state the
following: "1. An addition to the existing house will not encroach into the existing side and front yard
for Parcel I; 2. No decks or similar strictures shall be constructed outside the building envelope." The
plat indicates that the rear yard setback for Parcel I is 20' from the property line. The building
envelope for Parcel I is defined on the plat as the footprint of the existing building, with the exception
of the rear yard setback of 20'. As slated in the plat notes, no additions are permitted in the front and
side yards. An amendment to the subdivision plat and envelope will be required to permit
development in these areas of the lot.
Mature vegetation exists on the site that will require approval from the Parks Department to remove.
Staff understands that Parks granted approval to remove 2 of the 3 cottonwoods along the south
property line, and the applicant is appealing the denial of the 31d tree removal request.
Proposal: The applicant would like to relocate the historic home on Parcel I toward Lake Avenue,
construct an addition that includes a two car garage and a two story living space, and apply for the
500 square foot FAR Bonus for landmark structures. HPC has purview over any development on
Parcel I, including landscape, and will assess the proposal's compliance with the Aspen Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines for Landmarks (available at www.aspenpitkin.com.) The project is
required to meet the Residential Design Standards. Due to the landmark status of the building and
the confines of the lot, setback variances and Residential Design Standard Variances are probable
for this project, which can be granted by HPC. Hallam Lake Bluff and possibly Stream Margin
reviews are required for development at the rear of this parcel, which will occur at HPC as part of a
n
0
consolidated application. A recent survey should be undertaken to plot the areas on the parcel that
are subject to these reviews.
Setbacks: The combined side yard setback dimension for this property will be calculated based on
the entire lot size, which excludes any slope reductions for the property. The HPC will review the
requested setback variances for a property within the R-6 zone district; however, City Council review
is required to amend the subdivision plat to redefine the building envelope for Parcel I. If the proposed
changes are consistent with the approved plat, then the application will be processed as an "other
amendment" by City Council. If the proposed 'changes are found to not be consistent with the
approved plat, then the amendment is subject to review as a new development application for plat.
PROCESS: 1. Worksession with HPC.
2. Submit application for HPC review, for items listed in #3.
3. HPC Conceptual Review of mass, scale, height, location (public hearing.)
a. Relocation of historic house.
b. 500 square foot FAR bonus for a landmark.
c. Residential Design Standard variances.
d. Setback variances.
e. Hallam Lake Bluff Review (and Stream Margin Review if necessary.)
4. After HPC grants approvals listed in #3 above, submit application for Subdivision amendment.
5. City Council Amendment to a Subdivision Development Order, "other amendment" (public
hearing.)
6. After Council review is complete, submit application for HPC Final Review.
7. HPC Final Review of fenestration, materials, detailed landscape plan (public hearing.)
Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.410 Residential Design Standards
26.415.070 (D) Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development
26.415.080 Demolition of historic properties.
26.415.090 Relocation of designated properties
26.415.110 (B) Dimensional Variances for Historic Properties
26.415.110.E Floor Area Bonus
26.435.040 Stream Margin Review
26,435.060 Hallam Lake Bluff Review
26.480.080 (B) Amendment to Sudivision Development Order
26.575 Miscellaneous Supplemental Regulations
26,710,040 Medium -Density Residential (R-6)
Review by: Staff for completeness, HPC for compliance with review criteria. HPC Conceptual Review generally
addresses mass, scale, and height. Fenestration, materials, landscaping, and site lighting are addressed at
Final Review. City Council will address the proposed amendment to the approved subdivision plat and the
consistency of the proposed amendment with the original plat.
Public Hearing: Yes at HPC (both Conceptual and Final) and City Council,
Referral Agencies: None.
Planning Fees: $2,940 Deposit for 12 hours of staff time for HPC reviews (additional staff time required is billed at $245 per
hour); and $1,470 Deposit for 6 hours of staff time for City Council amendment to subdivision plat review.
Referral Agency Fees: None.
Total Deposit: $ 2,940 to submit application for HPC reviews;
$1,470 to submit separate application for City Council review.
0 •
To apply, submit the following Information:
1. Proof of ownership with payment.
2. Signed fee agreement (all applications)
3. Completed City of Aspen application form (all applications).
4. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant, which states the name, address and
telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.
5. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current
certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, 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.
6. Total deposit for review of the application.
7. Copies of the complete application packet and maps:13 for HPC reviews and 8 for Council review.
HPC =12, PZ = 10; GMC 7 PZ+5; CC = 7; Referral Agencies = 1/ea.; Planning Staff =1
8. An 81/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
9. Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, including all easements and
vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. (This
requirement, or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not
to warrant a survey document.)
10. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development
complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as
proposed.
11. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing. The GIS department can provide this list on mailing labels for
a small fee. 920.5453
12. Copies of prior approvals.
13. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the
following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD) -preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text
format easily convertible to Word is acceptable.
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.
0 •
ATTACHMENT 2 - — RECEIVED
JAN 0 3 2012
Ins rc�m. - - n ��•..
Name: 320 Lake Avenue Residence E.0PWw
Location: 320 Lake Avenue, Parcel I, Marshall Lot Split
Block 20, Page 54
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property)
Parcel ID# (REQUIRED) 273512401002
OPLICANT:
Jame: Bill Guth, 320 Aspen, LLC
address: c/o 320 Aspen, LLC, 2850 E. Broad St. Columbus, OH 43209
'hone #:
970-306-8757 Fax#: E-mail: bguth@stagecapitc
REPRESENTATIVE:
Jame: E. Michael Hoffman
address: Garfield & Hecht, P.C. 601 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 8161
970-544-3442 (866) 929-7870 mhoffman@garfieldhE
hone #: Fax#: E-mail.
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that
Amendment of Subdivision Plat
a,XISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
Historic home with several non -historic additions
'ROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
Remove restriction on south side yard to reflect removal of trees.
.com
ht.com
L]
E
ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form
(Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
Project: 320 Lake Avenue
Applicant: Ronnie Marshaii / 320 Aspen, LLC
Project 320 Lake Avenue
Location: R - r)
Zone 7,075 SF
District:
Lot Size: 6,418
Lot Area:
(For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within
the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot
Area in the Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable: Existing: Proposed.•
Number of residential units: Existing: 1 Proposed.• 1
Number of bedrooms: Existing: 3 Proposed.• 5
Proposed % of demolition _not calculated
DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area:
Existing: 1, 6 5 7 Allowable:
3, 7 9 8*
Proposed:
3, 7 9 8
Height
20'
mid point
*With
500 s.f.
FAR Bonus
Principal Bldg.:
Existing: 2 5 '
RiGdewable:
2 5 '
Proposed:
2 5 '
Accessory Bldg.:
Existing: N/A
- - Allowable.•- - - - - - - -Proposed.•-
- - -
On -Site parking:
Existing: 1
Required:
2
Proposed.•
2
% Site coverage:
Existing: 2 4 %
Required: 4 8. 5 % MaRroposed:
4 5 %
% Open Space:
Existing: - - - - - - Required..
N/A
Proposed.•
Front Setback:
Existing2 5 1
:
Required:
10
Proposed.
10,
Rear Setback:
Existing: 51. 51 Required.•
261
Proposed:
3 4 '
Combined Front/Rear:
Indicate N. S, E, W
Existing: NL Required.•
- - - - Proposed. - - - -
Side Setback: S
Existing: 18 '
Required:
51 Proposed.• 4 '
Side Setback: N
Existing: 1• 5
Required.•
5 Proposed. 1. 5
Combined Sides:
Existing: 19.5 '
Required:
171 Proposed: 5. 51
*to
face of coveredporch
8.5' to building face **10'combined)
Distance between
Existing: N A
Required:
- - - - - Proposed.• - - ---
buildings:
Existing non -conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed):
Aspen Division
Stewart title
620 East Hopkins Avenue
View your transaction progress 2417 via SureClose.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone:970-925-3577
Ask us about your login today!
Fax: 866-277-9353
Date: August 22, 2011
Order Number: 949081--C3
Buyer: SC Acquisitions LLC, a Colorado limited
liability company
Seller: Ronnie Marshall
Property 320 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611
Please direct all Closing inquiries to:
Carolyn Ethridge
620 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone:970-925-3577 Fax:866-277-9353
Email Address: carolyn.etltridge@stewart.cont
SELLER:
Ronnie Marshall
320 Lake Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
LISTING BROKER:
Morris & Fyrivald Sotheby's International Realty
Attn: Tracy Eggleston
415 East Hyman Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: (970)925-6060 (970)925-6060
Fax: (970)920-9993
Email Address: tracyaspen yahoo.com
Please direct all Title inquiries to:
Linda Williams
Phone:970-766-0234 or 866-932-6093
Email Address: hvillian,3@stewart.coui
BUYER/BORROWER:
SC Acquisitions LLC, a
Colorado limited liability
company
SELLING BROKER:
Alta Properties
Attn: William Guth
P.O. Box 1444
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Phone: (970) 306-8757
Email Address: william.n.guth@gntail.com
•
ALTA Commitment (6117106)
ALTA Cournutinent Fonn
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
Issued by
Stewart
title guaranty company
Stewart Title Guaranty Company, a Texas Corporation ("Company"), for a valuable consideration,
cornmits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the
Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest in the land
described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with
the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions of this
Commitment.
This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of
the policy or policies committed for bave been inserted in Schedule A by the Company.
All liability and obligation under this Commitment shall cease and terminate six months after the
Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided
that the failure to issue the policy or policies is not the fault of the Company.
The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request.
This commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by a validating officer or authorized
signatory.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to
be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A.
Countersigned:
A orizod Counttrsignature
Stewart Title
Aspen Division
620 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 970-925-3577
Fax: 866-277-9353
r:�stewc- t
title guaranty company
c°YOtir y�
'R. 19 a B /P
rF z'�s
Senior Chairman oft the Board
Chalrman of the Board
Order Numbcr. 949081-- ALTA Commitment (6/17/06)
Title Officer: Linda Williams
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE A
1. Effective Date: July 11, 2011, at 8:00 a.m. Order Number: 949081--C3
Title Officer: Linda Williams
2. Policy or Policies To Be Issued:
Amount of Insurance:
(a) A.L.T.A. Owner's (Extended) $3,900,000.00
Proposed Insured:
SC Acquisitions LLC, a Colorado limited liability company
(b) A.L.T.A. Loan
3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is:
Fee Simple
4. Title to the fee simple estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in:
Ronnie Marshall (SEE REQUIREMENTS HEREIN)
5. The land referred to in this Conunitment is described as follows:
PARCEL I, MARSHALL LOT SPLIT,
according to the Plat thereof recorded January 26, 1988 in Plat Book 20 at Page 54 as Reception No.
296875.
COUNTY OF PITKINT, STATE OF COLORADO
Purported Address: Statement of Charges:
320 Lake Avenue These charges are due and payable before a Policy can
Aspen, Colorado 81611 be issued:
Basic Rate
2006 Owner's Policy: $6822.00
Owner's Extended Coverage: $150M
Tax Certificate: $20.00
i 0
CON UTMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE B --- Section 1
REQUIREMENTS
Order Number: 949081--C3
The following are the requirements to be complied. with:
1. Payment to or for the account of the grantor(s) or mortgagor(s) of the full consideration for the estate
or interest to be insured.
2. Proper instrunient(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for
record.
3. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title Guaranty Company of payment of all outstanding taxes and assessments as
certified by the County Treasurer.
4. Execution of Affidavit as to Debts and Liens and its return to Stewart Title Guaranty Company.
NOTE: If work has been performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils testing,
foundation work, installation of materials), please notify the Company's escrow officer within 10 days of receipt of this
title comrmtinent.
5. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title of Colorado, Inc. furnished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen,
that the following taxes have been paid, or that conveyance is exempt from said taxes:
(1) The "Wheeler Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and
(2) The "Housing Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990).
6. THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENT IS FOR DELETION OF SURVEY EXCEPTIONS 2 AND 3 OF THE OWNERS
POLICY:
A SURVEY, meeting the minimum detail standards of the ALTA/ACSM, Survey LOCATION CERTIFICATE, prepared
by a registered Colorado surveyor, within (lie last TWO MONTHS, must be presented to Stewart Title Guaranty
Company, for its approval prior to the deletion of any survey exceptions from the OWNERS POLICY.
Stewart Title Guaranty reserves the right to take exception to any adverse matters as shown on said survey, or make
fiirther inquiry or requirements relative thereto.
Said Survey, must be certified to Stewart Title of Colorado and/or Stewart Title Guaranty Company.
7. Trust Agreement for the Ronnie Marshall Living Trust Dated January 17, 2000
NOTE: The Agreement will not be recorded.
8. Execution by Authorized Trustee of the Ronnie Marshall Living Trust Dated January 17, 2000, of Statement
of Authority pursuant to the provisions of Section 38-30-172 C.R.S.
9. Deed from Ronnie Marshall, Trustee of the Ronnie Marshall Living Trust Dated January 17, 2000 conveying fee title to
Ronnie Marshall
NOTE: This Deed is needed because subject property or a portion thereof was conveyed to Ronnie Marshall, Trustee of
the Roruiie Marsball Living Trust Dated January 17, 2000 by Quitclaim Deed recorded April 5, 2002 as Reception No.
465999 Said Deed used the prior legal description (one prior to the Marshall Lot Split Plat)
10. Release by the.Public Trustee of the Deed of Trust from Ronnie Marshall for the use of Wells Fargo Bank N.A. to secure
$450,000.00, dated April 29, 2004 recorded May 5, 2004 as Reception No. 497218.
This Deed of Trust secures an equity line of credit and/or revolving loan. The Company requires a satisfactory written
statement from the existing lender confirming: (a) the payoff amount; (b) that the line of credit has been closed or frozen,
and no further draws/advances will be permitted and/or the right to future advances has been terminated, and (c)
agreement to deliver a fiill Release of Deed of Trust upon payment of the outstanding balance.
11. Release by the Public Trustee of the Deed of Trust from Ronnie Marshall for the use of Wells Fargo Bank N.A. to secure
$200,000.00, dated September 12, 2008 recorded October 10, 2008 as Reception No. 553482.
12. ► ► Release by Aspen Grove Associates LLC of the Promissory Note in the amount of $48,924.00 recorded August 22,
2011 as Reception No. 582119,
13. Relating to SC Acquisitions, LLC, The Company requires for its review the following:
a) Copy of the Operating Agreement and the regulations of the limited liability company and any amendments thereof
b) Execution and recordation of Statement of Authority pursuant to the provisions of Section 38-30-172 C.R.S.
Note: The Colorado Secretary of State shows this company in good standing.
14. Deed from vested owner(s) vesting fee simple title in the purchasers).
Note: notation of the legal address of the grantee must appear on the deed as per 1976 amendment to statute on recordhig
of deeds CRS 38-35-109 (2).
i 0
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE B — Section 2
EXCEPTIONS
Order Number: 949081--C3
The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are
disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company:
1. Riglits or claims of parties in possession, trot shoivu by the public records.
2. Easements, or claims of easements, 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 Iien, 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
the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon
covered by this commitment.
6. Unpatented mining claims, reservations or exceptions in patents, or in acts authorizing the
issuance thereof.
7. Water rights, claims or title to water.
8. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and unredeemed tax sales.
9. The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or
homeowners association or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area.
10. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefiom, should the same be
found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted, as reserved in United States Patents
recorded June 5, 1880 in Book 55 at Page 2 and in Book 55 at Page 32.
11. Easements, rights of way and all matters as shown on Plat of Marshall Lot Split recorded January 26,
1988 in Plat Book 20 at Page 54 as Reception No. 296875.
12. NOTE: Exceptions 1 and 4 may be deleted from the policies, provided the seller and. buyer execute
the Company's affidavits, as required herein, and the Company approves such deletions. If work has
been performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils testing,
foundation work, installation of materials), and the Company has not reviewed and approved lien
waivers and indemnitor financials, Standard Exception 4 (mechanic lien exception) will not be
deleted and no mechanic lien coverage will be furnished. Exceptions 2 and 3 may be deleted from
the policies, provided the Company receives and approves the survey or survey affidavit if required
0 •
herein. Exception 5 will not appear on the policies, provided the Company, or its authorized agent,
conducts the closing of the proposed transaction and is responsible for the recordation of the
documents.
DISCLOSURES
Order Number: 949081--C3
Note: Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that:
A. The subject real property maybe located in a special taxing district;
B. A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the county treasurer or the
county treasurer's authorized agent;
C. 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.
Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 3-5-1, Subparagraph (7) (E) 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 Stewart Title 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
Lender's Title Policy when issued.
Note: Affirmative Mechanic's Lien Protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception
No. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the
following conditions:
A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment mist be a single-family residence, which includes a
condominium or townhouse unit.
B. No labor or materials have been Rimished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on
the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months.
C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's
and Materialmen's Liens.
D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.
E. If there has been constriction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased,
within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for
unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to
the seller, the builder and/or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium; fully executed Indenwity
agreements satisfactory to the company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an
examination of the aforesaid information by the Company.
No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or
agreed to pay.
Note: Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-123, notice is hereby given:
A. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the
surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas,
other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and
B. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's
permission.
This notice applies to owner's policy commitments containing a nuneral severance instrument exception, or exceptions,
in Schedule B, Section 2.
NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPA,N'Y TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE COVERAGES
REFERRED TO HEREIN UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED.
0 •
STG Privacy Notice 1 (Rev 01/26/09) Stewart Title Companies
WHAT DO THE STEWART TITLE COMPANIES DO WITH YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION?
Federal and applicable state law and regulations give consumers the right to limit some but not all sharing. Federal and applicable state law regulations also
require us to tell you how -we collect, share, and protect your personal information. Please read this notice carefully to understand how we use your personal
information. This privacy notice is distributed on behalf of the Stewart Title Guaranty Company and its affiliates (the Stewart Title Companies), pursuant to
Title V of die Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act (GLBA).
The types of personal information we collect and share depend on the product or service that you have sought through us. This information can
include social security numbers and driver's license number.
All financial companies, such as the Stewart Title Companies, need to share customers' personal information to run their everyday business --to
process transactions and maintain customer accounts. In the section below, we Iist the reasons that we can share customers' personal information;
the reasons that we choose to share; and whether you can limit this sharing.
1Ze�sans.tvecansbarepo persono ioforrna o t aw - �_
Doweah#re7
Cal�yoalfmitthlssh�ring?.`
�: ��x
_
_
For our everyday business purposes-- to process your transactions and maintain your
_
account. This may include running the business and managing customer accounts, such as
Yes
No
processing transactions, mailing, and auditing services, and responding to court orders and
legal investigations.
For our marketing purposes— to offer our products and services to your.
Yes
No
For joint marketing with other financial companies
No
We don't share
For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your transactions and
experiences. Affiliates are companies related by common ownership or control. They can be
Yes
No
financial and nonfinancial companies. Our of liales may include companies with a Stewart
irate; f nancial companies, such as Slewarl 7711e Company
For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your
No
We don't share
creditworthiness.
For our affiliates to market to you
Yes
No
For non -affiliates to market to you. Non -affiliates are companies not related by common
No
We don't share
ownership or control. They can be financial and nonfinancial companies.
We may disclose your personal information to our affiliates or to non -affiliates as permitted by law. If you request a transaction with a non -
affiliate, such as a third party insurance company, we will disclose your personal information to that non -affiliate. fWe do not control their
subsequent use of information, and suggest you refer to their privacy notices.]
��liatin rataces' "'_
We must notify you about our sharing practices when you request a transaction.
How often do the Stewart Title Companies notify me
about their practices?
How do the Stewart Title Companies protect my
To protect your personal information from unauthorized access and use, we use security
personal information?
measures that comply with federal and state law. These measures include computer, file,
and building safeguards.
How do the Stewart Title Companies collect my
We collect your personal information, for example, when you
Personal information?
. request insurance -related services
• provide such information to us
We also collect your personal information from others, such as the real estate agent or
leader involved in your iransaction, credit re ortin a encies, affiliates or other companies.
What sharing can I limit?
LAIthough federal and state law give you the right to limit sharing (e.g., opt out) in certain
nstances, we do not share your personal infonnation in those instances.
�- - --, :t-
CgnIf you have any questions about this privacy notice, please contact us at Stewart Title Guaranty Company,
vim.I'mi
b - 1980 Post Oak Blvd., Privac Officer, Houston, Texas 77056
0 •
Stewart Title
DISCLOSURE
The title company, Stewart Title in its capacity as escrow agent, has beep authorized to receive funds and disburse them when
all fiords received are either: (a) available for inunediate withdrawal as a matter of right from the financial institution in which
the fiords are deposited, or (b) are available for immediate withdrawal as a consequence of an agreement of a financial
institution in which the fiords are to be deposited or a financial institution upon which the funds are to be drawn.
The title company is disclosing to you that the financial institution may provide the title company with computer accounting
or auditing services, or other bank services, either directly or through a separate entity which -may or may not be affiliated
with the title company. This separate entity may charge the financial institution reasonable and proper compensation for these
services and retain any profits there from.
The title company may also receive benefits from the financial institution in the form of advantageous interest rates on loans,
sometimes referred to as preferred rate loan programs, relating to loans the title company has with the financial institution.
The title company shall not be liable for any interest or other charges on the earnest money and shall be tinder no duty to
invest or reinvest funds held by it at any time. In the event that the parties to this transaction have agreed to have interest on
earnest money deposit transferred to a fund established for the purpose of providing affordable housing to Colorado residents,
then the earnest money shall remain in an account designated for such purpose, and the interest money shall be delivered to
the title company at closing.
0 •
CONDITIONS
The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security
instrument.
2. If the proposed Insured has or acquired actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse
claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such
knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or
damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure
to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the
Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien,
encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of
this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability
previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations.
Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and
such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for
and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with
the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or
create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such
liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such
liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and Stipulations and the Exclusions
&•om Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured
which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Comnutment except as
expressly modified herein.
4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of
title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed
Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate
or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and
are subject to the provisions of this Conunitment.
The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of
Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured
as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at
Nvnvw.alta.org.
sIqwretirantY company
All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall be
addressed to it at P.O. Box 2029, Houston, Texas 77252.
,ab
low
0
�o
!,
At, tar
_..
-
a ..
Sner'Yto
s;„r,
y ,
p
ha��
o
s
y +?
St
wy
_
i t
a �
v
N
1.
4r
w +
-
_
147 N
4
�b
O
S
�y, titer
4 s1
PROJECT LOCATION
320 LAKE AVENUE
ASPEN, COLORADO
IMPROVEMENT SURVEY 4!
PARCEL I
MARSHALL LOT SPLIT
CITY- OF ASPEN
PI'TKIN COUNTY, COLORADO 'ems
r Io•
NOTES
1
au w u.
��= _ � � � i � •lt \ Mt t..w... �.. .•wn yy�M � -� �I1. Krc
f }
PAM P1.1 - \T,. ii \ij!i! ya ✓<+.eono � ,r.._.tR ,.r
.a<" -:. _ t• x. ; te.�1 � \' t' l�la 14� 1 ` P : asa! M.. ��w� r i. � .- � K
\1` 1i1 �` h- �r e"e!.a*w w ,rs •ra
• 2 �� � , ' C t! I { '�IS •' � �' FH�rf[i �» \ U.. '-4P C 'tl� K< d[ 'N K.H L t•4 [W.'t ••< ',.
`!C R # ♦t . -^uw. a[4i[n+o aQ.�.+, �!
IAGEND
i'yQ�/ /fit. '�1�� ®J'n� ` � i �'.m .i�� •\\ �.f�e� v [0' r. V b �. _
t � t �,'\ .A. J • �/" • M�.Tl t':.:!.q V:MtMAI A) YS:1C»'O
Q' n,li..'4 ttYil
SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE
1 \� ww.i'n s:.i. '',': n ��..!ei*."•'w`e%."i.i: �°w �;vwr :.
•c �r.r+. nevi: •¢rw'�:.o � k. y'. A .,, . „'s..:. .,
t\
•
0
u
Exhibit F
Ronnie Marshall
320 Lake Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
December 30, 2011
Ms. Amy Guthrie
Historic Preservation Officer, Community Development
Citv of Aspen
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Ms. Guthrie,
I am the owner of 320 Lake Avenue, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (the "Property"). Please accept the
enclosed application to amend the Plat for the Marshall Lot Split pursuant to Section 26.480.080
B. of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. 320 Aspen, LLC, represented by attorney Michael
Hoffman, Esq., Garfield & Hecht, P.C., 601 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, is authorized
to submit and prosecute this application.
ncerely,
Ronnie Marshall
Land Use Review Fee Policy
The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or
deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted.
A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications which normally take a minimal and predictable
amount of staff time to process. Review fees for other City departments reviewing the application (referral
departments) will also be collected when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative — meaning an application with
multiple flat fees must pay the sum of those flat fees. Flat fees are not refundable.
A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required.
Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff may also charge their time spent on
the case in addition to the case planner. Deposit amounts may be reduced if, in the opinion of the Community
Development Director, the project is expected to take significantly less time to process than the deposit indicates.
A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre -application conference by the case planner.
Hourly billing shall still apply.
All applications must include an Agreement to Pay Application Fees. One payment including the deposit for
Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the City of
Aspen. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required application fee.
The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the
processing of a land use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at
the applicant's request. The applicant will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the
processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes more time or expense than is
covered by the deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a project review shall be billed to the applicant with no
additional administrative charge. In the event the processing of an application takes less time than provided for
by the deposit, the department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited fee to the applicant. Fees shall be
due regardless of whether an applicant receives approval.
Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final, and
recordation of approval documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purposes of billing. Upon
conceptual approval all billing shall be reconciled and all past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director
accepting an application for final review. Final review shall require a new deposit at the rate in effect at the time
of final application submission. Upon final approval all billing shall again be reconciled prior to the Director
accepting an application for review of technical documents for recordation.
The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid
invoice is 30 or more days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 or more days past due may be assessed a late fee of
1.75% per month. An unpaid invoice of 120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be
assigned by the Municipal Court Judge. All payment information is public domain.
All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements
and plats. The City will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits
already accepted, an unpaid invoice of 90 or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or
issuance of a stop work order until full payment is made
The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use
application for the property. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing
the owner (e.g. a contract purchaser) regarding payment of fees is solely between those private parties.
Agreement to Pay Application Fees
Agreement between the City of Aspen ("City") and
Property Phone No.:
Owner ("I"): SC Acquisitions LLC Email: , I
Address of Billing
Property: 320 Lake Avenue Address:
(subject of (send bills here)
application)
I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. , Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications
and the payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand
that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application.
For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these
flat fees are non-refundable.
$ flat fee for
$ flat fee for
flat fee for $ flat fee for
For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed
project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I
understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is
impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable
legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full.
The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not
returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30
days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services.
I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for non-payment.
I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment
of a deposit does not render an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs
exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the
processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated.
$ 1,260* deposit for 4 hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time
�ve the deposit amount will be billed at $315 per hour.
* The typical deposit for this type of land use application is $4,410 for 14 hours of work. Due to the limited nature
of this project, the Community Development Director authorizes the acceptance of a lower deposit amount of
$1,260 for 4 hours of work. Please not that any time over 4 hours will be billed at the regular rate of $315/hour.
$ 0 deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the
deposit amount will be billed at $265 per hour. RECHVED
j f� 0 3 20i2
CITY OF ASPEN
City of Aspen:
Chris Bendon
Community Development Director
City Use:
Fees Due: $ Received: $
Property Owner:
Name:
Title:
�� J
No%entber. 201 1 Cite of Aspen 1130 S. Galena St. (970)9220-5090
C]
Exhibit A
LEGEND,
PE[.orP.fe�fY i..,.,G
o coWe - )
- GOJ�Jv Fe-ewF_W� pt•ASrlc,ewP .may.; AP. 14P.V.J,
o Lotfof.ivJ p0 TKE DIA. OF Yg-+H.1EC Al *'ww j .
o Go.1 f P'6L TKGA<
�— Pt�.IC-L 41.tL
µ ovf-- "e Ev Lj rl L-ITY u. e-
o ser r 4AR w�P�wxw ear L--p. i�Ivt
%/11`INITV AAAD
MARSHALL
LOT SPLIT
LOTS 11. a. THE NORTHWESTERLY 1/2 OF", LOT 12,
OWNERS.: CERTIFICATE
BLOCK 103, HALLAM/S ADDITION TO ASPEN, PITKIN twu PLL N[M IE IY TSE ►RESENTS TMT RD*UC KV&*V-L ff116 THE FEE S(WEE W ER
COUNTY, COLORADO. of nE PIEIPERtT tERt1N DFSGSRED Mw BY THESE PIEStNTS WD an N.O PLArTEO TfE
SNE INYO PAACaS t E it TMBfALL SOT 4LIT. CITT STER• RF APtTNIN Cd Tr.
COLOPAW AND DOES HEREBY DEDICATE THE -PRIVATE UNDERGROUND UTILITY
ZONING R ^ - E/SEHENT AS 9HONN HEREON.
_ EIRCUTEO TH1,41rY aF 19ia
ADWaE HOW"
t.4 L11fi A4✓.4. CAT.,.l. Ga-IG.
•�
srerE" OF CoLwv IOI
e L4116* ('
LgMT OF PITIIM I
tt'E FORES401a ^_4TES•S kRT!fSCATE VAS AClNO'AEQrED BETNE AE TNTS-�LM1TT tF_
IS�BT MMtE AWANLL AS 064ER. . .
(Qjyyy��� ua-
'A TP4LTff
_
_ "In"sTM. HN4;ND EFctf:tAl SEAI.
•- ESI
a .-r_♦
.
it. VOe• An
zesty.
NT gm SStDY opl
.. _.
!
� 118gdF_
�r
{y.t4
ii 0.(}.4�A iCOn.✓rz7.4n11v.
TEatc
rarllRr
0 •
AMENDMENT OF MARSHALL L 0 T SPLIT -PARCEL I
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT RONNIE MARSHALL. IS THE OWNER
OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN PITON COUNTY, COLORADO AND
DESCRIBED ON THIS MAP AS MARSHALL LOT SPUT-PARCEL E CITY AND
TOWNSTE OF ASPEN, DATED THUS_ DAY OF 2012.
RONNE MARSHALL
STATE OF COLORADO)
)SS
COUNTY OF PTKIN )
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS
DAY OF 2012 BY RONNIE MARSHALL
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
NOTARY PUBLIC
ASPEN CITYC Cx
THIS AMENDMENT OF MARSHALL LOT SPUT-PARCEL I HAS BEEN RENEWED
AND APPROVED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL THIS DAY OF
2012 AS MEMORIALIZED IN RESOLUTION NO.
(SERFS OF 2012).
ASPEN CITY COUNCIL
CITY ENGAWEER
THIS AMENDMENT OF MARSHALL LOT SPLIT -PARCEL I WAS REVIEWED BY THE
CITY ENGINEER OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN THUS DAY OF
2012.
CITY ENGINEER
CITY OF ASPEN
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
PURPOSE OF PLAT:
THE PURPOSE OF THIS PAT IS TO AMEND THE PLAT OF MARSHALL LOT SPUT AS IT
DEFINES THE PARAMETERS OF PARCEL
1 THEREOF, ONLY, TO ELIMINATE THE FIRST
PLAT NOTE FOUND IN SAD PLAT, THE PLAT OF THE MARSHALL LOT SPLIT WAS
RECORDED IN THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS OF PITON COUNTY ON JANUARY 26.
I MEL IN PLAT BOOK 20 AT PACE 54.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PARCEL 1 AS DESCRIBED IN THE PLAT OF THE MARSHALL LOT SPUT, RECORDED IN THE
REAL PROPERTY RECORDS OF PITKIN COUNTY ON JANUARY 26, 1988 IN PLAT BOOK 20 AT
PAGE 54.
LOT 1
HUME LOT SPIT
PUT 9K 29 PG 55
TITLE CERTIFICATE
THE UNDERSIGNED. A DULY -AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF STEWART TITLE
AUG
p.s
GUARANTY COMPANY (THE -COMPANY-). A TITLE COMPANY REGISTERED TO DO
'
W 2576
a,
BUSINESS IN POTION COUNTY, COLORADO. HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT RONNIE
fENOWNARK-7877.0
WAR ALL HOLDS FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY, FREE µ0 CIFµ OF
P
ALL MONETARY LIENS AND ENCUMBRANCES EXCEPT THOSE IDENTIFIED N THE
TITLE COMMITMENT ISSUED BY THE COMPANY UNDER ORDER NO. 9490B1-C3
\
SC \
DATED 07/11/2011.
r
ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE THE FACTS STATED ON THIS Mµ ARE TRUE, THIS
\
CERTIFICATE IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS AN ABSTRACT OF RILE NORµ
OPINION OF TITLE, NCR A OUµµTY OF TITLE, AND IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND
GRAVEL
D IWINAY
1 U\
TISTORY
SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE
THAT PTKIN COUNTY TITLE INC, NEITHER ASSUMES NOR WILL BE
e+NY�7q.y
CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY WHATSOEVER ON µY
STATEMENT CONTAINED HEREIN.
J
By:
J
COHC' WNW
DATE
`f,
WOOD a \
ADDRESS: 620 UST HOPKNS. AVE. ASPEN COLORADO 51611
k
1
\\
5
STATE OF COLORADO)
COUNTY OF PITKIN
E r
j
CT
kN
SHED
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS
DAY OF 2012 BY
\
AS OF STEWART TITLE OUµµTY COMPANY.
\
1\Q \
/
\
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
\ J 31/24
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
\
`
/
\
\\
UTILITY EA
un EASEMENT
fPARCEL 2
®'27 C
h
\
PUTT BIC 20 PG 54\
;
/
\
�\ e•/E
NOTARY PUBIC
``
\ ®
7-1W
ACCEPTANCE
,\
\
,•�
\\
FOR RECORIJ6WG
\
THIS AMENDMENT OF MARSHALL LOT SPLIT -PARCEL i HAS BEEN ACCEPTED
FOR FRUNG IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF THE COUNTY
OF PITKN. STATE OF COLORADO, AT_0'CLOa(____ML THIS DAY OF
\\
IN PLAT BOOK _ AT PAGE_ AS RECEPTION
\
YPC P.O.B.
\\
NUMBERLS/
16129
\
CLERK h RECORDER
VICINITY MAP 1"=40(Y
\ " CJn OF
j� ��ASPEN
�TY OF ASPEN
CPS /6
sr
ESA
(NOTE 10)
125 00 �
8'
\ 1
YOB \
DECK \�
1
4 1
1a5 \ 11.
\ 1
PARCEL I
\ry9 otG�ACx 1
as 1
Wom TOP OF SLOPE J
DECK (� Aa()
7'/6'
1,6Ti \
\6 G,�n; \
PARCEL I
MARSHALL LOT SPOT
PUT SIC 20 PC 54
ASPEN CENTER
FOR ONNRCANENTAL STUDIES
TOP OF SLOPE
(NOTE 12)
LEGEND
®
INDICATES FOUND MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED.
RPC RED PLASTIC CAP
'MCYELLOW PLASTIC CAP
ALC ALUMINUM CAPm
RISER ER
YAM WATER METER
ov0
FENCE LINE
SC SEWER CLEAN40UT
10,
POWER POLE
EM ELECTRIC METER
DECIDUOUS TREE
GM GAS METER
EVERGREEN TREE
6'/8'
TREE DIAMETER/DRIP LINE
CURVE TABLE
CURVE
LENGTH RADIUS ANGENJ CHORD BEARING 1 DELTA
CI
48.18 358.05 24.13 48.14 S13.33'59'E 7'42'35'
C2
65.00 483.05 32,551 64.95 N13'33'59'V 7.42'35-
PARCEL ID/ 273512401002
0 5 10 ED
1' = 10'
NOTES
1) THE EXECUTION AND RECORDING OF THIS AMENDED PUT MEMORIALIZES THE VACATION
OF THE FIRST PLAT NOTE FOUND ON THE PLAT FOR MARSHALL LOT SPLIT, RECORDED IN
THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS OF PITH(N COUNTY ON JANUARY 26. 1988 IN PUT BOOK
20 AT PACE 54. AS SUCH VACATION WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN IN
RESOLUTION NO. SERIES OF 2012 THE PLAT NOTE" WHICH RESTRICTED
DEVELOPMENT INTO THE EXISTING SIDE AND FRONT YARD FOR PARCEL 1, IS NO LONGER
NEEDED AS IT RESTRICTS DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE SOUTH SIDE YARD BECAUSE THE
TREES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIOE OF PARCEL 1 HAVE BECOME OLD AND DISEASED.
DIE CITY OF ASPEN PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS ISSUED TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2009-109
TO AUTHORIZE THE REMOVAL OF THOSE TREES. RESTRICTION OF DEVELOPMENT THIN
THE FRONT YARD AND NORTH SIDE YARD IS GOVERNED BY THE DIMENSIONAL
REQUIREMENTS OF THE R-6 ZONE DISTRICT, EXCEPT AS THOSE REOUIREMENTS HAVE
BEEN OR MAY BE VARIED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OR OTHER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN.
2) BASIS OF
BEARING:
A BEARING OF N13.33'59"W BETWEEN A FOUND REBµ AND YPC LS/ 16129 AT THE S.W.
PROPERTY CORNER AND A FOUND REBAR AND ALC LSO 2376 AT THE N.W. PROPERTY
CORNER.
3) THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY THIS SURVEYOR. TITLE
INFORMATION RELIED UPON FOR THE PREPARATION OF THIS SURVEY FURNISHED BY
STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY ORDER NO. 949081-C3. DATED 07/11/2011.
4) ELEVATIONS BASED UPON CITY OF ASPEN CPS MONUMENT /8 (7687.99').
BENCHMARK- 7877.07' AT N.W. PROPERTY CORNER. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS i(ONE) FOOT.
5) ACCORDING TO FIRM MAP 08097CO203, PANEL 203 OF 325, DATED JUNE 4. 1987. SAID
PARCEL IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN ZONE X AND OUTSIDE THE 500 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN.
5) CITY OF ASPEN BUILDING RESTRICTIDNS.
SETBACK RESTRICTIONS: R-6 ZONE DISTRICT REGULATIONS EXCEPT AS THOSE
REOUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN OR MAY BE VARIED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN.
SIDE YARDS:
REAR YARD:HALLAM LAKE BLUFF RENEW STANOARDSLANO USE CODE 26.435.060.
FRONT YARD: 10.0' RES. 15.0' ACCESSORY
7) DISTANCE TO NEAREST INTERSECTING STREET: 88't
8) ACCORDING TO THE SURFACE DRAINAGE MASTER PUN FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN 2001
PREPARED BY WFiC ENGINEERING, INC., SAID PARCEL IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN THE
MUDLOW HAZARD AREA.
9) NO UNDERGROUND UMITY LINES WERE LOCATED FOR THIS SURVEY.
10) ESA (ENWROMENTALLY SENSTVE AREA) INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF
ASPEN GIS DEPµTMENT.
11) PARCEL IS SUBJECT TO THE HALLAM LAKE BLUFF RENEW STANDARDS 26.435.1360 OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE 15.0' SETBACK
FROM TOP OF SLOPE SHALL BE AT GRADE ALL DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE THE 15.0'
SETBACK FROM TOP OF SLOPE SHALL NOT EXCEED A HEIGHT DELINEATED BY A LINE
DRAWN AT A FORTY-FIVE (45) DEGREE ANGLE FROM THE GROUND LEVEL AT THE TOP OF
SLOPE HEIGHT SHALL BE MEASURED AND DETERMINED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR USING THE DEFINITION FOR HEIGHT SET FORTH AT SECTION
26.104.100 AND THE METHOD OF CALCULATING HEIGHT SET FORTH AT SECTION
26.575.G20. SITE SECTIONS SHALL BE DRAWN BY A REGISTERED ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT. OR ENGINEER SHOWING ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED SITE ELEMENTS, THETOP OF SLOPE AND PERTINENT ELEVATIONS ABOVE SEA LEVEL
12) ORIGINAL TCP OF SLOPE SCALED FROM MARSHALL UINU SHALL LOT LIT PT PT BOOK 20
AT PAGE 54 AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT.
13) 20.0' REAR SETBACK DEPICTED ON THE MARSHALL LOT SPLIT PUT IN PUT BOOK
20 AT PAGE 54 6 NOT SHOWN ON THIS PLAT AS THE TOP OF SLOPE SETBACK IS MORE
RESTRICTIVE
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFIC4TE
I, MIC HAEL P. LAFFERTY, BONC A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF
COLORADO. DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE PREPARED THIS AMENDMENT OF MARSHALL
LOT SPUT-PARCEL L THAT THE LOCATION OF ALL PARCEL BOUNDARIES ARE
ACCURATELY AN
ACCURATELY SHOWN HEREON, THAT THE SAME ARE BASED UPON FIELD
SURVEYS AND CONFORM TO THOSE AS STAKED UPON THE GROUND. ERROR OF CLOSURE
IS LESS THAN 1/15,D00.
N WITNESS THEREOF, I HAVE SET MAY HAND AND SEAL THIS DAY OF
2012.
MICHAEL P. LAFFERTY PLS/ 37972
DATE
Rocky 111-tai, S-yinp
w��w PP.4�a b
slay
1-1
Iu 110.14)4F1) I
DATE SURVEYED: 09/2009. 06/2011
REVISED: 12/2011
FaE NO: 09528
OWNER: RONM F. MARSHALL AND RONNIE NIARSHALI.
LTYING TRUST DATED JA.WARY 17.
NOTICE Aa dv,T n Culwtlo l m. my KP amn 4W
-
,�.
0
Amy Guthrie
From: John Worcester
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 3:41 PM
To: Michael Hoffman forward; Amy Guthrie
Subject: RE: Amendment of Subdivision Exemption Plat, Marshall Exemption Plat
Great, Thanks
From: E. Michael Hoffman [mailto:mhoffman@garfieldhecht.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 3:31 PM
To: John Worcester; Amy Guthrie
Subject: RE: Amendment of Subdivision Exemption Plat, Marshall Exemption Plat
John
Parks has looked at this issue exhaustively and has issued the attached letter and Addendum. I understand that the
resulting tree removal permit is still current.
--- Mike
E. Michael Hoffman
Of Counsel, Garfield and Hecht, P.C.
601 E. Hyman Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 544-3442, ext. 232; (866) 929-7870 Telefax
This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
attorney work -product, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
telephone and return the original message to us at the above address via email or the United States Postal Service.
From: John Worcester [mailto:John.Worcester@ci.aspen.co.us]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 3:23 PM
To: E. Michael Hoffman; Amy Guthrie
Subject: RE: Amendment of Subdivision Exemption Plat, Marshall Exemption Plat
I think we need to confirm with the Parks Dept. that the tress are no longer in need of protection....
From: E. Michael Hoffman [mailto:mhoffman@garfieldhecht.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 2:49 PM
To: Amy Guthrie
Cc: John Worcester
Subject: Amendment of Subdivision Exemption Plat, Marshall Exemption Plat
Amy:
I talked to John about the above -referenced plat amendment. He said that a plat amendment for Lot I only was
acceptable, but that we should include a note which clearly states that the first plat note on the original Plat was
vacated because the trees the note was intended to protect have now become old and decayed.
We will proceed in that manner.
--- Mike
E. Michael Hoffman
Of Counsel, Garfield and Hecht, P.C.
601 E. Hyman Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 544-3442, ext. 232; (866) 929-7870 Telefax
This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
attorney work -product, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
telephone and return the original message to us at the above address via email or the United States Postal Service.
Email secured by Check Point
Tax Advice Disclosure: Any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this
communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used,
and cannot be used or relied upon, for the purpose of avoiding penalties under
the Internal Revenue Code or promoting, marketing or recommending any entity,
investment plan or other transaction.
Tax Advice Disclosure: Any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this
communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used,
and cannot be used or relied upon, for the purpose of avoiding penalties under
the Internal Revenue Code or promoting, marketing or recommending any entity,
investment plan or other transaction.
2
• i
THE CITY OF ASPEN
Land Use Application
Determination of Completeness
Date: January 5, 2012
Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant,
We have received your land use application and reviewed it for completeness. The case number
and name assigned to this property is 001.2012.ASLU — Subdivision Amendment. The planner
assigned to this case is Amy Guthrie.
❑ Your Land Use Application is incomplete:
We found that the application needs additional items to be submitted for it to be deemed
complete and for us to begin reviewing it. We need the following additional submission
contents for you application:
Please submit the aforementioned missing submission items so that we may begin reviewing
your application. No review hearings will be scheduled until all of the submission contents listed
above have been submitted and are to the satisfaction of the City of Aspen Planner reviewing the
land use application.
Your Land Use Application is complete:
If there are not missing items listed above,
to begin the land use review process.
then your application has been deemed complete
Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed necessary by
the Community Development Department. Please contact me at 429-2759 if you have any
questions.
Thank You,
Je > er Phe ,Deputy Director
ty of Aspe , Community Development Department
For Office Use Only:
Mineral Rights Notice Required
Yes No
GMQS Allotments
Yes No�
Qualifying Applications:
SPA PUD COWOP
Subdivision (creating more than 1 additional lot)
Residential Affordable Housing
Commercial E.P.F.
0
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 320 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: February 27, 2012
STATE OF COLORADO )
SS.
County of Pitkin )
I, E. Michael Hoffman (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of
Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice
requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
Q Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
IF] Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable,
waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide
and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not
less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the 10t' day of
February, 2012, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. Two
photographs of the posted notice (sign) are attached hereto.
0 Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of
property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing.
Copies of the notice and the list of owners and governmental agencies so noticed
are attached hereto.
t. Michael Hoffman
0
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice' was acknowledged before me this 27�h day of
February, 2011, by E. Michael Hoffman.
SASH LYN
SEMPLE
� CLN's
;y Expires 0711812012
ATTACHMENTS:
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires: 0 f/
Notary Public
TWO (2) PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
COPY OF THE NOTICE
LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL
1
C�tBLIC'NOTWl
I
i-t—V
PL .` Council Chambers, Cite Hall 130 S.
_
PURPOSE: Aspen ity Council will revie an
applications b by 320 Aspen, LLC, 2950 E. Bro,
o urnbus, OH, 43209 with the consent of the cu
perms owner, bonnie Marshall, for Subdivisi n
Am c m the property located at 320 Lake
venue spen, Colorado, legally described as Parcel 1
of the 'Ma hail Lot
Splij, City and Townsite of Aspen,
County of P�.tate of Colorado, P1D# 2735-124-01-
02. A lica e nests approval of a fat amendment to
f'p q pp p
remove a condition fated to setback requirements. For
further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of
open Community Development Department, 130 S.
Galena St., Aspen. CO, (970) 429-2758, or by E-mail at
ay,uthrie'cz:i..co,us.
f
r
w X
.. .�(.L �sv wYw,
.�....Awvzs�'++b
J yq
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 320 LAKE AVENUE- SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, February 27, 2012,
at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130
S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application for Subdivision Amendment affecting the property
located at 320 Lake Avenue, Parcel 1 of the Marshall Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen,
County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, PID# 2735-124-01-002. The application is submitted by 320
Aspen, LLC , 2950 E. Broad St., Columbus, OH, 43209 with the consent of the current property
owner, Ronnie Marshall, 320 Lake Avenue, -Aspen, CO, 81611. The applicant requests approval
of a plat amendment to remove a condition related to setback requirements. For further
information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130
S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2758, amy.guthrie@ci.aspen.co.us.
s/Mayor Michael C. Ireland
Aspen City Council
Published in the Aspen Times on February 9, 2012
City of Aspen Account
Easy PeelO Labels 10A Bend along line to AVERYO 51600
Use Avery® Template 51600 Feed Paper �� expose Pop -Up Edge'"' 1 j�J 1
335 LAKE AVE LLC ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ATCHLEY MARK AMES 50%
715 W MAIN ST #101 STUDIES 292 RIVERSIDE DR #5A
ASPEN, CO 81611 100 PUPPY SMITH ST NEW YORK, NY 10025
ASPEN, CO 81611
BELL 26 LLC BLOCK FAMILY TRUST CONOVER CATHRINE M
PO BOX 1860 311 W NORTH ST 2715 M ST NW #300
BENTONVILLE, AR 72712 ASPEN, CO 81611 WASHINGTON, DC 20007
COTSEN 1985 TRUST D W RINGSBY ENTERPRISES LLC E A ALTEMUS PARTNERSHIP LLLP
12100 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 905 1123 AURARIA PKWY # 200 PO BOX 5000
LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 DENVER, CO 80204 ASPEN, CO 81612
EFH HOLDINGS LP GREENBERG ASPEN LP 50% GREENBERG RONALD K TRUSTEE 50%
PO BOX 8770 #3 BRENTMOOR 3540 WASHINGTON
ASPEN, CO 81612 ST LOUIS, MO 63105 ST LOUIS, MO 63103
HUNT ELLEN 12.8066% JOHNSON STAN L REV TRUST LAND TRUST
PO BOX 8770 6120 S YALE AVE #813 1650 TYSONS BLVD #900
ASPEN, CO 81612 TULSA, OK 74136 MCLEAN, VA 22102
LEYDECKER SUZANNE LYNNE LUBAR SHELDON B & MARIANNE S LUNDGREN WIEDINMYER DONNA TRST
710 N THIRD ST UNIT A 700 N WATER ST #1200 PO BOX 6700
ASPEN, CO 81611 MILWAUKEE, WI 53202-4206 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
LUNDY NICHOLAS BURWELL 50% MARSHALL RONNIE MUSTANG HOLDINGS LLC
292 RIVERSIDE DR #5A 320 LAKE AVE 3131 S VAUGHN WY #301
NEW YORK, NY 10025 ASPEN, CO 81611 AURORA, CO 80014
NITZE WILLIAM A OAK LODGE LLC 87.1934% PERROS DIMITRI & DIANE
1537 28TH ST NW CIO WILLIAM O HUNT 79 LOCUST RD
WASHINGTON, DC 20007 PO BOX 7951 WINNETKA, IL 60093
ASPEN, CO 81612
PHELPS MASON PINES DAVID & ARONELLE S TRST RICHARDS ANN K.
PO BOX 2429 PO BOX 576 1537 28TH ST NW
LA JOLLA, CA 92038 TESUQUE, NM 87574 WASHINGTON, DC 20007
SCHIFF DAVID T
C/O ATLANTIC TRUST CO
1177 AVE OF THE AMERICAS, 42ND FL
NEW YORK, NY 10036
SMUGGLER 326 LLC
326 W SMUGGLER ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
TATEDAISY LLC
600 N THIRD ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
ttiquettes faclles A peter ; A Repliez 6 la hachure afin de ; www,avery.com
Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160" i chargement r6v6ler le rebord Pop-UpTM i 1-800-GO-AVERY 1
A-14-11 0
0
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
3 ZO poke_ A%v,-� Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
5 =Go, ,,n , 20 1-2--
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of Pitkin )
I,(name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof
materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six
(26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in
height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing
and was continuously visible from the _ day of , 20 , to
and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted
notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of
property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A
copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(Continued on next page)
•
•
Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in
any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision
of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such
revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use
regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and
addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be
waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing on such amendments.
4,46
Signature
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this % day
of &1 , 20fL, by
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires -
Public
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:
x COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
* PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
* LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED
BY MAIL
* APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3
t
' O
2 .6i COca?�.lmo0
t va$aouoi
mao $ o.o
cc ? >^
-�
an
oc�ia��o�Qa=�Pa>aEa��'
"$S�m-Soa�j'c�n�3`ocN
�' LL`o w
UQ..VLU
OUCCa
W
MN
COC(n mO
'm��miOumoV�o«m�coi
O m N
0C. 3
am
oommp�00
�_
i O
22
2mri�D14mcmnm
Wti Ec�>m-nuicmc>LL mU
>
C7m�Ucoima�_NiON��uEuimE-
TZ2-�VYU .F OI sLGm CL Odd
c w
Q LL
W
aY
ACc �j=C
m5=2
¢�c'o nEo a^apO..�m�mO m<m�
y <
W C mU Na NN'-OJL
Sc E',E
w
o'=
y�o'u �; o•.�oo c� �C
Ni
Um��c.L me4v¢mm�N -Ecm£N
V
W�
¢<
Un m�ttl�U WOnN=;U iO�p OAFF
23 EQOU)220amO 00-a--L)O
aN
am
Land Use Review Fee Policy
The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or
deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted.
A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications which normally take a minimal and predictable
amount of staff time to process. Review fees for other City departments reviewing the application (referral
departments) will also be collected when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative — meaning an application with
multiple flat fees must pay the sum of those flat fees. Flat fees are not refundable.
A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required.
Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff may also charge their time spent on
the case in addition to the case planner. Deposit amounts may be reduced if, in the opinion of the Community
Development Director, the project is expected to take significantly less time to process than the deposit indicates.
A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre -application conference by the case planner.
Hourly billing shall still apply.
All applications must include an Agreement to Pay Application Fees. One payment including the deposit for
Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the City of
Aspen. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required application fee.
The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the
processing of a land use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at
the applicant's request. The applicant will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the
processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes more time or expense than is
covered by the deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a project review shall be billed to the applicant with no
additional administrative charge. In the event the processing of an application takes less time than provided for
by the deposit, the department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited fee to the applicant. Fees shall be
due regardless of whether an applicant receives approval.
Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final, and
recordation of approval documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purposes of billing. Upon
conceptual approval all billing shall be reconciled and all past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director
accepting an application for final review. Final review shall require a new deposit at the rate in effect at the time
of final application submission. Upon final approval all billing shall again be reconciled prior to the Director
accepting an application for review of technical documents for recordation.
The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid
invoice is 30 or more days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 or more days past due may be assessed a late fee of
1.75% per month. An unpaid invoice of 120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be
assigned by the Municipal Court Judge. All payment information is public domain.
All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements
and plats. The City will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits
already accepted, an unpaid invoice of 90 or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or
issuance of a stop work order until full payment is made.
The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use
application for the property. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing
the owner (e.g. a contract purchaser) regarding payment of fees is solely between those private parties.
Agreement to Pay Application Fees
An agreement between the City of Aspen ("City") and
Property Phone No.:
Owner ("I"): SC Acquisitions LLC Email
Address of Billing
Property: 320 Lake Avenue Address:
(subject of (send bills here)
application)
I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. , Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications
and the payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand
that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application.
For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these
flat fees are non-refundable.
$ flat fee for
$ flat fee for
$ flat fee for $ flat fee for
For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed
project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I
understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is
impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable
legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full.
The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not
returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30
days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services.
have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for non-payment.
I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment
of a deposit does not render an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs
exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the
processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated.
$ 1,260* deposit for 4 hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time
above the deposit amount will be billed at $315 per hour.
4 * The typical deposit for this type of land use application is $4,410 for 14 hours of work. Due to the limited nature
of this project, the Community Development Director authorizes the acceptance of a lower deposit amount of
$1,260 for 4 hours of work. Please not that any time over 4 hours will be billed at the regular rate of $315/hour.
$ 0 deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the
deposit amount will be billed at $265 per hour.
Con-
City of Aspen:
Chris Bendon
Community Development Director
City Use:
Fees Due: $ Received: $
PropertyOwner:
Name:Ci��"tc���
Title: l�� J