The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFile Documents.630 W Hopkins Ave.0052-2020-BRES (33) 630 W. Hopkins Avenue Aspen , CO Tree Survey Report Prepared By: Chris Forman IBA Board Certified Master Arborist #RM-2352BM A S P E N TREE SERVICE February2o, 2019 Est.1982 15450 Hwy 82, Carbondale CO 81623(970)963-3070 RECEIVED 06/30/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT PURPOSE & SUMMARY The following report pertains to the property located at 63o W. Hopkins Avenue,within the city limits of Aspen, Colorado. There are numerous trees on this site within the landscaped area surrounding the home that have been requested for assessment and are presented in this report. Individual tree analysis included species type,tree diameter at breast height(DBH), overall condition, and maximum value as assigned by the City of Aspen Municipal Code. Trees located on the property were marked with aluminum tags at their bases. Trees outside the property boundary are noted in this report but were not marked onsite with aluminum tags. The trees identified within the landscaped area of the property were evaluated and assigned condition ratings of either excellent, good,fair, poor, or very poor. 9 trees received a'good'condition rating, 5 received a`fair'rating, and 5 were noted as`poor'. The trees with a poor condition rating are recommended for removal. Tree#3 should be considered for transplanting or manipulation of the adjacent wood deck to allow for future tree growth. Tree#11 should be root pruned to alleviate the girdling root that currently exists. All other trees within the project scope should be regularly monitored to control future potential insect and disease populations. They should also be monitored for appropriate soil moisture content at least 3 times per growing season. METHODOLOGY ASSIGNMENT Aspen Tree Service(ATS)was commissioned by Ryan Vugteveen with Lift Studio to inventory and assess the trees located on the property. The assignment was to do the following: • Inventory all trees within the property boundaries and a few select trees on the properties to the west and east of 63o W. Hopkins Avenue. Trees pertaining to this assignment can be seen in Appendix A. • Define trees that fall within the size parameters of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. The Municipal Code language can be found in Appendix B. • Assign numbers to all inventoried trees within the property boundary at 63o W. Hopkins and place aluminum numbered tags at the base of those trees. Provide a site plan showing location of inventoried trees. Trees with numbered tags is shown in Appendix C. • Collect data for each inventoried tree including species, diameter, condition, management recommendation/need, and tree tag number. • Document all of this information in a written report. RECEIVED 1q� g0/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT LIMITS OF THE ASSIGNMENT This tree assessment is based solely upon the information noted from the visit to the site on February 18, 2020. ATS has not performed any professional surveying, laboratory examinations, soil composition/compaction studies, or any other diagnostic techniques beyond ground level visual examination of the trees and the site. ATS has developed general conclusions of tree health and has provided a summary based upon these observations. At the time of the inventory,the site was covered with 12 to 3o inches of snow, depending upon location within the landscape. Snow was brushed away from the base of each tree for assessment purposes, but root crown and root structure were not entirely exposed for each tree. Only those trees found within the property boundaries at 63o W. Hopkins, as well as those trees in the adjacent right of way, were measured for true diameter sizing. Trees on the neighboring properties were not measured, and were only inspected from visual angles accessible from the right of way and from within the property boundaries of 63o W. Hopkins. A 6-foot-tall privacy fence along the eastern boundary of the property prevented any visual inspection of the bottom 6 feet of tree trunks located on the property to the east of 63o W. Hopkins. PURPOSE & USE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to provide current information regarding the identified trees within the property boundaries and other specified trees just outside the property boundaries. It is intended to be used by the property owners as an informative reference for developing a management strategy for their trees. In addition,this document may serve to inform planning efforts for potential future redevelopment of the site. INVENTORY An inventory of trees to be assessed was provided to Aspen Tree Service prior to starting this assignment. Aspen Tree Service used the survey to define tree ownership,then completed an inventory of the targeted trees on February 18, 2020. Trees located at 63o W. Hopkins were labeled with numbered aluminum tags placed at the bottom of their trunks.The numbers on the tags correspond to the tree numbers assigned on the tree inventory table found within this report. For purposes of this report, a tree stem is defined as a stem originating at the ground or attached with another stem within 41/2 feet from the ground. During the inventory process, each tree stem within the scope of this report was measured with a diameter tape (except for those located on private property to the east and west of 63o W. Hopkins)and visually evaluated from the ground.Tree data was collected for each stem including,tree#,the Diameter at Breast Height(DBH) measured to the lower 1/2 inch at approximately 4.5 feet above ground level,tree species, and condition. Individual trees were inspected from ground level only. No advanced assessment was done in tree canopies or below existing soil levels. Condition values(Excellent thru Very Poor/Dead)were assigned as a result of visual indicators such as the presence of dead limbs, signs or symptoms of disease/insects, or structural defects. Definitions N.rq 2q��g0/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT the condition scale are as follows: • Excellent-A healthy,vigorous tree, reasonably free of signs and symptoms of disease, with good structure and form typical of the species. • Good -Tree with slight decline in vigor, small amount of twig dieback, minor structural defects that could be corrected. • Fair-Tree with moderate vigor, moderate twig and small branch dieback,thinning of crown, poor leaf color, moderate structural defects that might be mitigated by regular care. • Poor-Tree in decline, epicormic growth, extensive dieback of medium to large branches, significant pathogen activity or structural defects that cannot be abated. • Very Poor/Dead -Tree is in severe decline, highly hazardous or is dead. MITIGATION CALCULATION Even though the purpose of this inventory report does not include applying for a tree removal permit with the City of Aspen, a discussion regarding mitigation should be considered. We understand the purpose and objectives of the City's Tree Removal and Mitigation requirements. Healthy trees are an asset to the property owner and the community. However,trees that are in poor health or structurally defected can present a safety and forest health liability for the property owner and the community. Therefore, we believe it is reasonable and appropriate to account for this liability by adjusting/devaluing the mitigation value of a specific tree based on the condition of the tree.This adjustment is made by multiplying the tree's value per the City of Aspen Municipal Code Valuation Formula by a percentage based on the tree condition.The result is an adjusted mitigation value. The following narrative details our mitigation adjustment procedure. Final tree approvals and mitigation values are ultimately made by the City Forester or his/her designee. Each tree stem evaluated was entered into a tree inventory worksheet noting the tree#, DBH, condition rating, comments, and the adjusted mitigation DBH. The table showing these figures can be found below in the'Tree Inventory Table'section of this document. The adjusted mitigation DBH was calculated by multiplying the actual mitigation value by the assigned mitigation percentage. The mitigation adjustment percentage ranges from o to a00%.This percentage was assigned based on the condition of the tree,forest health and/or the wildfire risk the tree poses to the site and area. Structurally defective trees can present a safety risk to people and/or property. Dead or declining trees pose a threat to forest health, hosting and attracting insect pests and disease becoming a point source for the spread of these pest and disease problems. Dead, declining, and overcrowded trees can also provide a fuel source for wildfire and if they are tall, provide a mechanism for the spread of a wildfire. The following are the mitigation adjustment percentages used to quantify all of these risks. We believe this a reasonable method to maintain the City's tree removal mitigation objectives while achieving an appropriate and sustainable planting plan. Adjusted mitigation numbers can benefit the community RECEIVED 3q� g0/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT forest by encouraging proper species, planting numbers, sizes, and spacing for site conditions, resulting in a long-term asset for everyone involved. i. i00% Mitigation—A tree scoring an Excellent(1)or Good (2)Condition Rating. 2. 5o%Mitigation—A tree scoring a Fair(3)Condition Rating. 3. o%Mitigation—A dead tree or scoring a Poor(4)or Very Poor(5)Condition Rating. OBSERVATIONS & DISCUSSION SITE DESCRIPTION 630 W. Hopkins Avenue is a residential property in Aspen, CO populated with aspen, blue spruce, and narrowleaf cottonwood trees throughout the site.The property is bordered to the south by Hopkins Avenue/Pedestrian trail, and is bordered to the north by a public alleyway. Private property is located on the east and west sides of this property, 6i6 and 634 W. Hopkins respectively. The site has a single- family home with manicured landscaped areas and turfgrass surrounding the home. An irrigation ditch, owned by the City of Aspen, is found within the right of way adjacent to the southern boundary of the property. The site has limited resources for sustainable above and below ground tree growth due to hardscape and infrastructure built within the property boundaries. OBSERVATIONS & FINDINGS The trees evaluated in this report are either blue spruce(Picea pungens), aspen (Populus tremuloides), or narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia). Each tree was evaluated visually and entered into the attached tree inventory worksheet. This worksheet contains the tree species, condition, comments, and maximum mitigation value based on the City of Aspen tree removal code language. The following information pertains to individual trees identified within the scope of this report that have resulted in a condition rating of anything other than `excellent'or`good'. Trees#1 and io are blue spruce with diameters of 4.5 and 4 inches respectively. Tree#1 is in fair condition and is located on the adjacent private property to the west of 63o W. Hopkins. The tree has had several branches removed, likely due to snow loading falling from the roofline above this tree. In addition to the snow loading impacts,the tree is not sustainable in this location due to inevitable impacts to the adjacent home as the tree matures. Tree#io is located within the right of way near the southeast corner of 63o W. Hopkins. This tree has a significant lean to the west, is overcrowded by adjacent trees, and has had its top broken out at least once in the past. The tree has very poor structure and is likely to continue the cycle of having its top broken out due from snow loading. Tree #2 is an i8-inch diameter aspen tree growing on private property to the east of 63o W. Hopkins. This tree had 2 codominant stems originating at grade level, one of which has been removed. At the point of codominance and removal of one stem,the tree has succumbed to decay organisms. During the site visit, signs of fungal fruiting bodies were noted at the base of the tree. Further investigation would need to be conducted to determine specific fungal identification and extent of decay withNE i h /1 4q /g0/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT trunk. The fruiting body on the trunk of the tree appeared typical of Phellinus, a heart rot typical of aspen trees with wounding created by pruning/removal of large diameter stems. Phellinus can negatively impact the structural integrity of trees, increasing the likelihood of failure during wind and snow loading events. Tree#3 is a 7-inch diameter spruce planted adjacent to the wood deck on the southern boundary of 63o W. Hopkins. The tree shows appropriate growth and needle color. The lower canopy is stunted due to the close proximity to the deck. The tree is unsustainable unless the adjacent deck is modified or the tree is transplanted elsewhere. If left in its current location,with no modifications to the adjacent infrastructure,the tree will likely cause damage to the deck and privacy fence. Due to the unsustainable nature of this planting site, a fair condition rating was given to this tree. Tree #6 is an ii-inch diameter blue spruce growing within the wood deck at 63o W. Hopkins. The tree has a significant lean to the west and its canopy is touching the second-floor balcony of the home. The tree has a raised planter around its trunk. During the site assessment, I partially removed the snow within this planter and discovered soil against the tree's trunk approximately 2-3 feet above grade. The soil holds moisture against the bark of the tree and can cause it to break down. Microbial activity in the soil and solar gain can cause the soils to heat up and further damage the bark and the underlying vascular tissues that transport water and nutrient throughout the tree. Poor root development and or damage to the vascular system as described above has caused much of the lower foliage of this tree to turn a bronze color. This coloration is an indicator of drought stress, likely due to the tree's inability to effectively and efficiently transport water and nutrient through its vascular system. This spruce tree is unsustainable in the landscape without significant infrastructure changes and a better understanding of root development and impacts from the raised planter surrounding its trunk. Trees#8 and 9 are narrowleaf cottonwoods with diameters of 14.5 and 12 inches. The trees are growing in the right of way,just outside the southeast property corner. Both trees have grown beneath the canopy of tree#7 which has influenced their growth patterns. Tree #8 has an asymmetric crown and reduced vigor due to competition for light, water, and nutrients. The same issue exists with tree #9,though impacts are much more severe. Tree 9 has an underdeveloped canopy and significant lean to the west as a phototropic response to the overarching canopy from tree 7. Tree#11 is a 3.5-inch diameter blue spruce in fair condition located in the southeast corner of the property. This tree does not fall within the City of Aspen Tree Removal Code parameters due to its diameters being less than 4 inches. If removal of this tree is desired by the owner, no permit is required. The tree exhibits poor root development as evidenced by the large girdling root above soil line on the north side of the trunk. The trunk of this tree has been girdled approximately 2.5 feet above grade. It appears that some sort of string/twine material was wrapped around the trunk at some point. The vascular system has been damaged in this area of the trunk and can result in a decline in health if it continues to grow. If can also be a point of structural failure under wind and snow loading events. Tree#12 is a 6-inch diameter aspen in poor condition growing within the wood deck on the east side of the property. This tree is amongst 2 other large aspen trees and has developed an asymmetrical crown RECEIVED 5 /g o/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT and significant lean to the south due to this competition. The tree has poor trunk taper because of its rapid phototropic growth seeking light and resources outside of the overarching canopies of surrounding trees. Poor trunk taper predisposes trees to structural failure under wind and snow loading events. Tree#16 is an 8-inch diameter aspen tree growing in the backyard of the private property east of 63o W. Hopkins. As mentioned previously,the lower 6 feet of this tree's trunk was not inspected due to obstruction by the privacy fence. However,the upper portions of tree's canopy could be seen from the west side of the tree. Approximately 15 up the tree's trunk, a wound has been created from a branch tear out. This type of wound, coupled with aspen trees'inadequacy in effectively compartmentalizing wounds, will likely result in the tree succumbing to fungal pathogens such as Cytospora canker. No fungal cankers in the portions of the tree that were accessible were detected at the time of assessment. RECEIVED 6�/g0/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT PHOTOS M\ .,Ai . s r Aft it ;% .- • " (..... e•• qi !'• ems" y. ,G 1 .. . --'„`- - ' / A - '. V• - • ' k ':,'.,i7, `� 'Y �4 .,•-4 0111M04,•; , .art -. ,'ilo - ' ' '0,140.t • ., 111 ir.ii - . ,,i4 �1� Y+ �' , .• r �� , f Photo 1.Tree#6; t . : spruce in raised ' planter/wood miry . . 4 deck ,itodhiyakoil et. : T : - // . • \. R 51 /g 0/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT i11 E • i ', ••4 11111 y • t ! • ,44*11. �IL �vr A.-` \ ; —• .4'S`i'". ' 'V--'s — • - 1 . ,, : 4 1 ilA j Photo 2.Tree#2; f Vic• E aspen with fungal - %. , r' canker at old - - r . • stem removal ' A.-- .�— • ' — =� /1' '-.441 wound - 4- - ' t r .4, J Y t SA, . . t$l; :4. r / ' ''I 1F w L SP �_ _ ' r,:i •f . . . , t , , -f 'fir - • fit- y� n++fi.. • j,✓iL ; : t, 4fitiolk. 15. 4 �, I- • 1 • + I •• • , • __ 'AN RECEIVED M /g0/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT veS+ y r -, t - t y A. T ` , ,, 7. ,t .7 . fir • , II r; • ,—• a • l �r ,.A. I flr : , �.4 , `',I,4 Photo 3.Trees#8-9; Poor v?- �'. = � 4 canopy structure and f. ' . ♦#70ti,_ _ 'N —phototropic lean • , i f} • ' �{-'"'�,:j4 ,�•' ,' + '• +9 a •`R4ji 4 r i' ,'4 • _4 -• r.,,. ' 1: . ,..,. . r , '' / . 4 _- Gr w 4/aev C ti f • RE(tTIVED 91a/e O/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT - . ...4 . - .1.,,. ... k. • • .,. ...;-. .A.•,, ... ;., . 1 . k.,..... __ A b ,, „. .._ , k%* - la s 41IMI-6.,‘.44. i 1 ____. 11,. 1".• ‘ .ft ,117410#"-r- • •ap. --...:........• - 11 .... .1 , . Photos 4&5.Tree#11; ,V * 7: girdling root and stem , Nk girdling , ,. ,..... .. . - . . - - .• •4. _ .._ ----- . ,.. . . 4 ' -,,.., . • .,•,. . 4, , i•-•-4.••;•• •:".f:. t., •-..,:. . --1 , V" t ..= 11 . ; ‘%s'\Sil - \ i it ''''' ' I 1 ao, ,-,,A • c; 11 ,, /,41... ,i ,. e7 '' 40trk, %i', - - • ,%.• .1:` : ...:Ai'• ,' s.' -\') 1 . /'f ett ' i. fP "‘\ ' .`t\vx • 4' • - 4:1".- 1,• 1",.,:'t-- -• iii\ i ' ii :pi 1 - . .4! lv,. ,/, rg-''_7!!`•t,i''!,-,, 4ij zs: ' 'i ' 1 4''' P; ,-- 11,,Tiki A Y,4--.q :7 • 047 lita*.' '•%,:k i. /IP AP\ i.Z!: '11.111 ' 1 IINIP,:",, :: .1:,,- / \' lis k,V, ,,,./ !I 0‘ /1/1 .41. .":‘d, \,1 \,i) i)41\ ' ,"‘1\x .,„. .---. . . P 0- •1115"-4. 1 d A 4.,,,‘,p,.:4. . 4.--.. .'.4:!‘l's\I `• ."..,,- • e,' ,:to 6: A.e,. ' '1 4 :•*-•'44- . I* ____Jet ,, . ... -7ir --,,C,441 k . '• It ...(‘ '1 -7 • - k "*ak / ...- k' ,4 g ii -- _ • var.._ .......1 i 4 4 , \ -i6. A • --:`*:. 1 '&. i` , f a" • 'ill rit RECEIVEL/ icClig °/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT . ...-i fc...:•‘ . 11 . . / i ,..• 0.- _ •c .- 11 ) / • V ... ....._ •_ , - r .• ii • r • ., .60:. •-. . • .1 r 1.- A' fi- Photo 7.Tree#12; ,-Aillank, e' 1*----------------Ale—_ - aspen with poor trunk ..., • . , taper;overcrowded 1 IR, IMO IIIIIIIIIII I . . MI Oil 114. . ilit -- ._ , . , , `r , 14\ I til , ,, if __;3.,,,K.,.Ill ',_i,/ L.Lt/ h °/2 0 2 0 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT TREE INVENTORY TABLE Tree # Species D.B.H Condition Comments Maximum Mitigation Value 1* Blue spruce 4.5 Fair Sparse crown; $715.33 poor structure Aspen Canker @a old $11,445.30 MIL codom bass. 3 Blue spruce 7 Fair Asymmetric $1,73o.g2 crown ® base; unsustainable 4 Narrowleaf 4 d.= cottonwood _al JW 5 Blue spruce 5 Good $883.12 Blue spruce Raised planter; $ soil issues; unsustainable 7 Narrowleaf 27.5 Good $26,714.53 cottonwood 8 Narrowleaf „nor Canopy $7,427.08 cottonwood structure; overcrowded 9 Narrowleaf 12 Poor Poor structure; $5,086.80 cottonwood overcrowded e spruce 4 $565.20 11 Blue spruce 3.5 Fair Below code N/A size 12 Overcrowded; $ .70 lean;taper 13 Aspen 12 Good $5,086.80 14 Air I-4.58 15* Aspen 6 Good $1,271.70 16* mEl. 8 17* Aspen 6 Good $1,271.70 18* 8 — =Jr Ung0.80 19* Aspen 8 Good $2,260.80 * Indicates tree located on adjacent private property;tree size not verified during assessment 2/18/20. 12 /g 0/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONCLUSIONS Trees#2, 9, 6, io, and 12 are in poor condition due to overall health and/or structural defects that can't be corrected. These trees will be problematic in the landscape and not result in long term assets for the community forest and will potentially not require mitigation if approved for removal via the City of Aspen Tree Removal Code. Trees#1, 3, 8, 11-12, and 16 are in fair condition due to conditions described above. These conditions could possibly be corrected with proper care, changes in surrounding infrastructure, and ongoing monitoring if the owners choose to employ such measures. The current condition of these trees makes them candidates for a reduction in mitigation value placed upon them via the City of Aspen Forester. All other trees within the scope of this project scored an overall rating of`good'. RECOMMENDATIONS I recommend removing the trees in poor condition, consisting of tree#s 2, 6, 9, and so. These removals require permitting through the City of Aspen Tree Removal process. Root pruning should be done for tree #11 to eliminate the girdling root seen during this assessment. Staking/guying may also be necessary once this root has been pruned to guard against failure during wind and snow events. Staking/guying should only be left on this tree, if deemed necessary after root pruning,for a period of 2 year. If tree#3 is to remain in the landscape, I recommend making modifications to the wood deck or moving the tree to another location. In order to transplant this tree, additional soil analysis will need to be done to verify the potential for a successful move. All other trees within the project scope should receive regularly scheduled monitoring to control future potential insect and disease populations. They should also be monitored for appropriate soil moisture content at least 3 times per growing season. Supplemental irrigation and appropriate soil fertility programs will aid in maintaining high vigor and pest resistance. RECEIVED �3q� g0/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Appendix A IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY �,�� LOTS M AND N, BLOCK 25, ORIGINAL TOWNSITE OF ASPEN `100LF COURSE :•T'.. ��• 4 :`4 CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO `` ��' { `l i 0 TRANS > 1 / / I `j� , ^ � 330 30 \ \ <<A 1"� r�/�l%1)7I I\• ` ' $�J x'7w t-'6111 SV eyilj % %1 IC' I ( '''� . a g g �� 11� �� 1. :: / 300 60 Last �nCTRJ 3 _ t,�'I 'JI/(�- A l t. a.) cl \qv TEDE. o\a �_- \ \\l\ �?�/ (J 1{ I�i},� r\\ a �� py ir 4. _— PNONg \ px,� \ V ��/) J � C a� - , :iits W 270 / • 90 E �O' 1� ALA Bi,`�.�\� _ / ��/� � • � ��\��` P.K NAIL FOUND p,,, L 1 //// 6 � • �,� BEARS 345°59'S8"E 1.95' �. B....LBp�� a / (44" 1l, lA� ��"/ A��1 240 120o9'u^ a / - � N44� ��( �� h�� ASPHALT 6000' 79 �\ 210 150 v - PARKING ;PLOP. \ �\ ,0 VICINITY MAP ��g6g o SREBAR&CAP PROPERTY DESCRIPTION SC AI.R:I"-2000' S //l Dg.DJA'G gq\K L.S.#;7935 SHT LOTS M AND N,BLOCK 25,ORIGINAL TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,CITY OF ASPEN,COUNTY OF COLUMN ASPHALT PIIKIN,STATE OF COLORADO . GRAPHIC SCALE I ,.) / PARKING i� • 2 /T19 . II �4/ _ WATER 33 LOT L I•• 23 MANHOLE / JS.00` '5 20' eLEC. / • W / V T18 n IN FEET) METER Oq A Z 1 inch= 10 ft. 1 / F.F. 7933.37' X ill/ S �I�` 7935.21' o 111 o LOTS M&N,BLOCK 25 e P 6,000S.F E 3: 8 Ni TWO STORY WOOD 793q T17 NI)IES: I. FRAME HOUSE ASPHALT TI6 .41 / WITH BASEMENT I)THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS,RESTRICTIONS,COVENANTS,BUILDING ��[yyy 630 W.HOPKINS AVENUE SETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD,OR IN PLACE AND EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SHOWN IN 9 JV THE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY,ORDER NO. W/o RIDGE) GAS Q64002805,DATED EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 24,2019. 1 Q 7962.T METER � '� 2)THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS NOVEMBER 04&14,2019. II w J II `K AG 'S.60, N ,' 7935 3)BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S75'59'11"E BETWEEN THE K¢¢g' c T15 SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT K,BLOCK 25,A#5 REBAR&RED PLASTIC CAP L.S.#9018 gf l }+/� WINDOW //� _ FOUND IN PLACE AND THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT M,BLOCK 25,A 45 REBAR&BED N O)6 WELL �/ ' PLASTIC CAP L.S.i19018 FOUND IN PLACE. ( 'Pig WELL c 4)UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S.SURVEY FEET. F.F. 4,01 • Ij!%/,tOltWI • 7927.61'Cy1 7935.FE. 1E'��-"0. ,/ 5)THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE CITY AND TOWNSITE PLAT OF ASPEN PLAT AND AN 1 6' IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PREPARED BY HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING RECORDED JANUARY 14, I 7961.3' LOT 0 2008 IN PLAT BOOK 86 AT PAGE 31 IN THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE AND :�— — / 9.6pIV/< CORNERS FOUND IN PLACE a / RA/J, CHIMNEY PCF.♦ 6)ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON A GPS OBSERVATION UTILIZING THE WESTERN COLORADO i(7g61.; / 3 THERTVRN GPS NETWORK Q9880R OF DATUM)M,B BLOCK 25 G AN ON-SITE ELEVATION OF 7933.88'ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT BLOCK 25 AS SHOWN.CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS l FOOT. LOT K A - 7)THERE WAS APPROXIMATELY 5"OF SNOW AND ICE ON THE GROUND AT THE TIME OF #5 REBAR&RED TI .S CHIMNEY /y SURVEY. PLASTIC CAP L5.#9018 / (7 Aro. / 7961.5' /q /U 8)OPACCORDING TO THE 8.CITY OF ASPEN REITY DEVELOPMENT WEBSITE THE SUBJECT 3270 d PROPERTY IS ZONED Rfi.FRONT SETBACKS ARE 10'FOR THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING AND IS'FOR - �' : _ ¢ AN ACCESSORY BUILDING,REAR SETBACKS ARE 10'FOR THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING AND 5'FOR • 7961.5 J250' b AN ACCESSORY BUILDING AND SIDE SETBACKS ARE 5'. LOT L T2 a, �' ASIS GE ggNO #5 REBAR&RED ^ •'±-! g S PLASTIC CAP L.S.#9018 -_ if � 8 �7\L-7933.88' g b o J - �;� / C.O.A.GPS ! -101. �� OODDgI MONUMENT#] 584.44'31'V L3 ' 4 i /� • 106.73' �� `�'k, 31 'Y7s°n911..W 0 �M' a • 3 Tu IMPROVEMENT SURVEY STATEMEML 7934 T4 I,IASON R.NEIL,HEREBY CERTIFY TO WINGSTONE TOY COMPANY,LLC.,A PENNSYLVANIA 000,' LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,THAT I AM A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR LICENSED •,. #5 REBAR&YELLOW UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO;THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT IS T9 PLASTIC CAP L.S.#19598 TRUE,CORRECT AND COMPLETE BASED ON MY KNOWLEDGE,INFORMATION AND BELIEF AS ;III. - `DIrCX 7933 ! BEARS S84.13'03"W 0.68' LAID OUT AND SHOWN HEREON;THAT IBIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT IS NOT A GUARANTY 8 OR WARRANTY,EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT WAS \ e� TT S MADE BY DIRECT FROM AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF THE REAL PROPERTY PERFORMED BY ME OR ! GRAVEL 77EgGRDAR `'- �� T10 m% UNDER MY SUPERVISION ON NOVEMBER 04&14,2019;THAT,IN THE PREPARATION OF 'rs.Sd, THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT,I RELIED UPON THE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY PARKMO "?•', LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY,ORDER NO.Q64002805,DATED EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 24,2019; II�� -7933� PROPERTY AND WAYMATTERS EVIDENCE REFERENCED IN SAHI TITLE ENCROACHMENTS CROOR OF BEINGEREAL THAT THE LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF ALL BUILDINGS,IMPROVEMENTS,EASEMENTS,IN / \ • SHOWN ARE ACCURATELY SHOWN,AND THAT THIS PLAT IS IN ACCORDANCE OF AN WOOD ` 79 7932 IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT AS SET FORTH IN C.R.S.§38-51-102)9).ERROR OF CLOSURE FOR BRIDGE Ho 33 THIS SURVEY IS LESS THAN 1:15,000. m -OE G.D.A.GPS GRAVEL MONUMENT#; NOp \ DATED:DECEMBER 02,..'�`YIIYSq -. p A�R-WADF "'',.....„........„„.,........,,...j '. BY 0 c, w \ \ `.SON IL,PI..`O.3797 `IRiA .aTI:;. ..LF OFo �`. I.PIS 'VEYIN c,INC.: 4� \ 1 \w w\ w\ w \w R. ,7. Drawn By: B y NO. Date Revision Project NO. JRN WINGSTONE TOY COMPANY,LLC. Checked By CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO 19080 P.O.Box 1746 4 Rifle, (970)CO)625-19581650 Dale: 'R'' Phone IMPROVEMENT&TOPO SURVEY Fax(970)579-7150 DEC.02,2019 LOTS M&N,BLOCK 25,CITY OF ASPEN NOTICE:ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW,YOU MIST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL.ACTION www.peaksurveyinginc.com BASER UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AMER YOU FIRST Computer File: 630 W.HOPKINS AVE. 1 OF 1 pFrEIVED TOIISHI,DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY E BECOW COMMENHEREONCED MORE 4 THAN s Since 2001 1� 080.DWGN .i' 0—D/30/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Appendix B (f) Any remedies provided for herein shall be cumulative and not exclusive and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law. (Code 1971, § 11-4.9; Ord. No. 35-1985, § 1; Ord. No. 12-1996, § 10) Sec. 13.16.100. Penalties and relief. (a) Any person, upon conviction of a violation of any provision of this Title, shall be subject to a fine, imprisonment or both a fine and imprisonment, as set forth in Section 1.04.080 of this Code, for each separate offense and may be enjoined from any further or continued violation hereof. A violation of Chapter 13.16 shall be punishable by a fine only. Each day any violation of this Title shall continue, shall constitute a separate offense hereunder. (b) In addition to the penalties and relief provided for in Subsection (a) above, any person found in violation of any provision of Sections 13.04.010 to 13.04.100 of this Title shall reimburse the City for any expenses incurred in preventing pollution of the municipal water supplies caused by said person, any expenses incurred in restoring municipal water supplies to the standards set forth in Section 13.04.020 or any expenses incurred in improving any intake, treatment facility or other part of the water works, which improvement is necessitated by the violation found hereunder. (Code 1971, § 11-5.1; Ord. No. 44-1981, § 1; Ord.No. 12-1983, § 8; Ord.No. 35-1985, § 1; Ord.No. 12-1996, § 9) Chapter 13.20 TREE REMOVAL PERMITS Sec. 13.20.010. Legislative intent and purposes. The City Council finds that trees provide important environmental, aesthetic and health benefits to the residents and guests of the City which extend beyond the boundaries of the property upon which trees may grow. The City Council further finds that trees enhance the real estate values of property upon which trees grow and neighboring properties. Large trees are a resource which cannot be fully replaced if injured, damaged or removed. Property development and construction activities can result in injury or loss of valuable trees in the City. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve to the fullest extent possible existing trees considered desirable by the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee as hereinafter set forth. (Ord. 34-1995, § 3) Sec. 13.20.020. Removal of trees; permit required; valuation. (a) Applicability of Section and definition. The terms and provisions of this Chapter shall apply to all private and public real property situated in or subsequently annexed to the corporate limits of the City. The term tree shall include, for purposes of this Chapter, all deciduous trees having a trunk diameter of six (6) inches or more, Querus gambelli (Gamble Oak), Acer glabrum (Rocky Mountain Maple),Amelanchier spp. (Serviceberry) and Prunus Virginiana (Chokecherry)with a trunk diameter of three (3) inches or more and coniferous trees having a trunk diameter of four (4) inches or more. Trunk diameters shall be measured in inches measured as close to four and one-half(4'/2) feet above ground as possible. (b) Removal or damage to trees prohibited without permit. (1) It shall be unlawful for any person, without first obtaining a permit as herein provided, to remove or cause to be removed any tree. (2) It shall be unlawful for any person, without first obtaining a permit for tree removal as herein provided, to dig, excavate, turn, compact or till the soil within the dripline of aIRE(! E IVE D 06/30/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Appendix B such a manner as to cause material damage to the root system of the tree. For purposes of this Subsection, the dripline of a tree is a cylinder extending from grade level down to a depth of ten (10) feet below grade, having a radius equal to the length of the longest branch of the tree,with the center of the cylinder located at the center of the trunk of the tree. (3) It shall be unlawful for any person in the construction of any structure or other improvement to park or place machinery, automobiles or structures; or to pile, store or place, soil, excavated material, fill or any other matter within the dripline of any tree. During construction the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee, may require the erection of suitable barriers around all trees, including trees not included in the definition set forth at Subsection (a) above, to be preserved. These protection areas will be established on site in order to protect existing natural resources when appropriate. Roots must be protected from exposure to the elements with burlap or other suitable materials and these materials must remain moist during the extent of the project. In addition, during construction, no attachments or wires other than protective guy wires shall be attached to any tree. (4) Where construction of structures or improvements on any property necessitates the removal or relocation of any trees, the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee, may, as a condition for the approval of the removal or relocation, require that the owner replace any removed or relocated trees with a tree or trees of comparable value on the affected property. When in the opinion of the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee,replacement of relocated trees cannot reasonably be accommodated on the affected property; the applicant shall pay a cash-in-lieu amount equal to the comparable value of the aggregate of all trees removed as determined pursuant to Section 13.20.020(e),below. (Ord 16-2016 §1) (5) It shall be unlawful for any person, without first obtaining a permit for tree removal as herein provided, to intentionally top, damage, girdle, limb up or poison any healthy tree. For purposes of this Section topping a tree is the removal of more than five percent (5%) of the height from the top of any deciduous tree or the removal of the terminal bud from a coniferous tree. The terminal bud of a coniferous tree is the highest bud on the tree. (6) It shall be unlawful for any person, without first obtaining a permit as herein provided, to relocate any tree. If a relocated tree dies within two (2)years of relocation and is not replaced with a tree of equal value, the death of the relocated tree shall be deemed an unpermitted tree removal. This Section shall not apply to the initial planting of trees obtained from nursery stock. (7) It shall be unlawful for any person to fail to provide the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee, with written notice, delivered at least four (4) working days in advance, of the time and date on which removal of any tree will occur. Written notice pursuant to this Section is required even if a permit for tree removal, as herein provided, has been obtained. (8) Each violation of the above Subsections (b)(1-7) shall be a separate offense. (c) Penalty. Any person convicted of violating any provision of Chapter 13.20 shall be subject to punishment as set forth in Section 1.04.080 of this Code. (d) Tree removal permits. (1) Any person wishing to obtain a permit or relocate a tree shall file an appropriate application with the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee. Such application RECEIVED 06/30/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Appendix B shall contain such information as the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee, shall require to allow adequate enforcement of this Section. (2) On request of the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee and when necessary to adequately apprise the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee, of the intended tree removal, said application shall include a site plan showing the following: (i) Location of proposed driveways and other planned areas or structures on said site; (ii) Location of all trees four(4)inches or over identified by trunk diameter and species; (iii) Designation of all diseased trees and any trees endangering any roadway pavement or structures and trees endangering utility service lines; (iv) Designation of any trees proposed to be removed, retained and relocated and areas which will remain undisturbed; (v) Any proposed grade changes which may adversely impact any trees on the site. (3) After filing said application, the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee, shall review the application (and site plan if required) and determine what effect the intended removal or relocation of trees will have on the natural and historic resources of the area. Based on a review of the following factors, the Manager of Parks and Recreation shall either grant or deny the requested permit: (i) Whether the trees intended for removal or relocation are necessary to minimize flood, snowslide or landslide hazards; (ii) Whether retention of the trees is necessary to prevent excess water runoff or otherwise protect the watershed; (iii) Whether the removal or relocation of the trees will cause wind erosion or otherwise adversely affect air quality; (iv) The condition of the trees with respect to disease, danger of falling and interference with utility lines; (v) The number and types of trees in the neighborhood, the contribution of the trees to the natural beauty of the area and the effect of removal or relocation on property values in the area; (vi) The necessity or lack thereof, to remove the trees to allow reasonable economic use and enjoyment of the property; (vii) The implementation of good forestry practices, including consideration of the number of healthy trees that the parcel of land in question can support; (viii) The adequacy of the methods proposed to be used to relocate any trees; and (ix) The impact of any tree on a historically designated property or adjacent right-of-way by considering the following matters: (A) In cases where a tree is jeopardizing the physical integrity of a historically designated structure through contact with the building, heaving due to roots or shading that results in decay, deterioration or structural defect, this shall be justification for the issuance of a tree removal permit exempt from mitigation pursuant toREil E IV'E D 06/30/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Appendix B 13.20.020(d). Examples of unacceptable impacts to a historically designated structure include: deterioration of exterior walls, foundations or other vertical supports; deterioration of flooring or floor supports or other horizontal members; deterioration of external chimneys; deterioration or crumbling of exterior plasters or mortars; ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs and foundations; the inability to retain paint on exterior surfaces; or excessive weathering of exterior surfaces. The applicant for a tree removal permit shall be required to submit proof of the damage that is occurring in the form of a written evaluation from a third party with expertise in structural engineering or a relevant building trade. The Manager of Parks and Recreation may suggest means to prevent the tree from causing further damage short of its removal if these actions would meaningfully reverse the problem. (B) In cases where, per the advice of the Historic Preservation Commission, a tree detracts from the integrity of a landscape which has been historically designated for its own merits, this shall be justification for the issuance of a tree removal permit exempt from mitigation pursuant to Section 13.20.020(d). (C) In cases where the visibility of the street facing facades of a historically designated structure are impacted by an evergreen tree which is not located in the City right-of-way, to the extent that the public enjoyment of the resource is seriously diminished per the advice of the Historic Preservation Commission, this shall be justification for the issuance of a tree removal permit exempt from mitigation pursuant to Section 13.20.020(d). The Manager of Parks and Recreation may consider whether the tree in question has a unique character to offset the negative impact to the structure. This character may include an unusual or unique species or specimen tree quality. The Manager of Parks and Recreation may suggest means to prevent the tree from obstructing the resource, short of its removal, if these actions would meaningfully reverse the problem. (D) In cases where, per the advice of the Historic Preservation Commission, a tree is inconsistent with established historic landscape patterns in the area or landscape practices associated with the period of significance of the property or district,the removal or relocation of the tree should be considered, subject to mitigation pursuant to Section 13.20.020(d). The Manager of Parks and Recreation may consider whether the tree in question has a unique character to offset the negative impact to the structure. This character may include an unusual or unique species or specimen tree quality. (E) In cases where, per the advice of the Historic Preservation Commission, the protection of a tree conflicts with the redevelopment of a historically designated property in a manner that is consistent with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines," the Manager of Parks and Recreation shall consult with the Historic Preservation Commission to consider the feasibility of all options including removal or relocation of the tree or redesign of the development. Unless the tree is an unusual or unique species or specimen tree quality, flexibility shall be allowed for its removal or relocation in favor of the best preservation option for the historic structure, subject to mitigation pursuant to Section 13.20.020(d). (4) Where construction of structures or improvements on any property necessitates the removal or relocation of any trees, the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee, may, as a condition for the approval of the removal or relocation, require that the owner replace any removed or relocated trees with a tree or trees of comparable value on the affected property. When in the opinion of the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee,replaci tqt E IVE D 06/30/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Appendix B relocated trees cannot reasonably be accommodated on the affected property; the applicant shall pay a cash-in-lieu amount equal to the comparable value of the aggregate of all trees removed. Comparable value for purposes of this Section shall mean a tree or trees of equal aggregate value and species to the replacement cost of the tree to be removed or relocated. (5) No trees shall be removed from City property except in accordance with Chapter 21.20 of this Code. (6) The removal of dead trees shall require prior notice to the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee and a permit from the City. (7) In case of an emergency caused by a tree being in a hazardous or dangerous condition posing an immediate threat to person or property, such tree may be removed without resort to the procedures herein described; provided, however,that evidence of such an emergency is provided to the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee,within twenty-four(24)hours. (8) After obtaining a permit as herein provided the responsible party must post the permit in such a manner that it is clearly visible from curbside of the property. (e) Valuation of trees. When, in accordance with this Section, the value of a tree must be determined, the Basic Value shall be $X per square inch of the cross sectional area of the tree at the point where the diameter of the tree is measured. In calculating the Basic Value, the following equation shall be used: Basic Value=$X x n x(D/2)2 Where: D=the diameter of the tree in inches,measured at 4.5 feet from the ground. X=the$(dollar)value assigned in the Tree Fees—Mitigation Fee in Section 2.12.080. (Ord.No. 34-1995, § 3; Ord.No. 19-2004 § 1; Ord.No. 16-2016 § 2) Sec. 13.20.030. Fees. The applicable administrative fees for tree removal permits and permits to landscape in the public right-of-way shall be as established in Section 2.12.080,Parks Department fees,where a removal permit is a request unrelated to construction activities and a removal permit—development is a request where construction of a structure or improvements on any property necessitates the removal or relocation of any trees. (Ord.No. 19-2004, § 1; Ord.No. 16-2016, § 3) Sec. 13.20.040. Appeals. Any person not satisfied with the action taken by the Manager of Parks and Recreation or his or her designee or any other City staff person with regard to an application pursuant to this Chapter shall have the right to take successive appeals, first to the City Manager and then to the City Council. An appeal to the City Manager shall be taken by filing with the City Clerk a signed statement that the applicant desires to appeal to the City Manager, along with a copy of the application and the written denial or the permit objected to. An appeal of a decision by the City Manager to the City Council shall be taken by filing with the City Clerk copies of the application, denial or permit and the written decision issued by the City Manager, along with a signed statement that the applicant desires to appeal to the City Council. Each appeal shall be filed within two (2) days, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, of the decision appealed from. An informal summary hearing shall precede a decision by either the City Manager or City Council, and advance notice of the hearing shall be provided to the applicannr E IVE D 06/30/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Appendix B City official whose decision is being appealed as soon as is practicable. The right to appeal an adverse decision by the City Manager to City Council shall be contingent upon City Council's regular meeting schedule. If the applicant's appeal cannot be heard by the City Council within ninety (90) days of the original decision then the City Manager's decision shall be final. (Ord.No. 19-2004, § 1) Chapter 13.24 WASTE REDUCTION 13.24.010 Definitions. For purposes of this Chapter,the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them: Disposable Paper Bag. The term Disposable Paper Bag means a bag made predominately of paper that is provide to a customer by a Grocer at the point of sale for the purpose of transporting goods. Disposable Plastic Bag. The term Disposable Plastic Bag means any bag that is less than two and one-quarter mil thick and is made predominately of plastic derived from petroleum or from bio-based sources,provided to a customer at the point of sale for the purpose of transporting goods. Disposable Carryout Bag does not mean: (a) Bags used by consumers inside stores to: (1) Package bulk items, such as fruit,vegetables,nuts, grains, candy or small hardware items; (2) Contain or wrap frozen foods,meat, or fish; (3) Contain or wrap flowers,potted plants, or other items where dampness may be a problem; and, (4) Contain unwrapped prepared foods or bakery goods; (5) A non-handled bag used to protect a purchased item from damaging or contaminating other purchased items when placed in a recyclable paper bag or reusable bag. (b) Bags provided by pharmacists to contain prescription drugs; (c) Newspaper bags, door-hanger bags, laundry-dry cleaning bags, or bags sold in packages containing multiple bags intended for use as garbage,pet waste,or yard waste bags; Grocer.The term Grocer means a retail establishment or business located within Aspen City limits in a permanent building, operating year round,that is a full-line, self-service market and which sells a line of staple foodstuffs,meats,produce,household supplies,or dairy products or other perishable items. Grocer does not mean: (a) Temporary vending establishment for fruits,vegetables,packaged meats and dairy. (b) Vendors at farmer's markets or other temporary events. (c) Location where foodstuffs is not the majority of sales for that business. (d) Location where the facility is less than 3500 sq. ft. Reusable Bag. The term Reusable Bag means a bag that is: (a) Designed and manufactured to withstand repeated uses over a period of time; and (b) Is made from a material that can be cleaned and disinfected regularly; and RECEIVED 06/30/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Appendix C IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY �,�� - LOTS M AND N, BLOCK 25, ORIGINAL TOWNSITE OF ASPEN `100LF COURSE , •,; 04., 4 4 A.,.....".---: 4 CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO - .`` \ --' ,IL' l,� •0 TRANB > 1 / / I� `j� �330 30 110-641 \ \ \ •_ << 1"�{ r�/�1%�1I\ `T ' $�J x7w SVey1 % J'j '' C, I ( '°''i .a g • a �� 11� �� 1. :N /, 300 60 .ast LnGT� 3� � � _ P ': ,, k.. I4, ..,„ � , a� \ TEDE. o\a �_- \ ------_---------1..,_. \l\ �?�/ (J 1{ I�i},� r\\ a �� P.K. ‘k) ---lY/-1' ;(rj," //e/I''''''''''''''-58.3"(14/).l5-1*s..t538‘34-t'02421-1111/4'7-'1 NAIL FOU1_793, BLS\ ."Fro... �•s � �,- OPE BEARSs4s°s9'ss"E z o wap '7345- ,d/'( �1 s r ,� �� I 240 120 -.NI / - �j)� %�� ( ��4 �� h�� - r k Mr � r %u,,�l> y i.�� ti ASPHALT 6000, 79 210 150 v - PARKING 30.00. \ �\ I 180 ,0 VICINITY MAP ��g6B 0 SRHBAR a�CAP PROPERTY DESCRIPTION SC AI 1"-2000 S // DY.DjA'G SACK L.S.N3]935 SHT/19 LOTS M AND N,BLOCK 25,ORIGINAL TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,CITY OF ASPEN,COUNTY OF UMI9 ASPHALT PITKIN,STATE OF COLORADOGRAPHIC SCALE '.) / PARKING i9 • �4/ _ WATER 33 LOT L I•• 23 MANHOLE 1 1SIN. - 20' ELEC. / W / V T18 n IN FEET) METER Oq& Z 1 inch= 10 ft. 1F.F. 7933.37' X/ sji 111Itit 7935.21' o/LOTS M&N,BLOCK 25 10 6,TORYt8T FRAME OUSE 793q TI7N()IES BASEMENT ASPHALT T16 q r / WITH BASEMENT I)THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS,RESTRICTIONS,COVENANTS,BUILDING ��[yyy 630 W.HOPKINS AVENUE SETBACKS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD,OR IN PLACE AND EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SHOWN IN n JV THE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY,ORDER NO. ,3 9) o RIDGE) GAS Q64002805,DATED EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 24,2019. K 7962.7' METER �Q '� 2)THE DATE OF THIS SURVEY WAS NOVEMBER 04&14,2019. g w J/. `K 14 'S.60, ' N 8 ,' 793s 3)BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S75509'11"E BETWEEN THE K 5,¢-- _c T15 SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT K,BLOCK 25,A 05 REBAR&RED PLASTIC CAP L.S.09018 gf., l }+�� WINDOW /� FOUND IN PLACE AND THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT M,BLOCK 25,AHS REBAR&RED N N 5 C SO; WELLlit PLASTIC CAP L.S.09018 FOUND IN PLACE. F.F. c�� '.��` I) 4 UNITS OF MEASURE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON IS U.S.SURVEY FEET. I , / •• 7927.61' F.F. prp 4 0�'y / 5)THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE CITY AND TOWNSITE PLAT OF ASPEN PLAT AND AN 20 rCHIMNEY ]935.16' V IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PREPARED BY HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING RECORDED JANUARY 14, �[ 7961.3' / 1��-A` � ai/ 2008 IN PLAT BOOK 86 AT PAGE 31 IN THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE AND ��•II.n LOT 0 CORNERS FOUND IN PLACE / RA/J, CHIMNEY P2NCF 6)ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON A GPS OBSERVATION UTILIZING THE WESTERN COLORADO 7961.3 / 6 ,,,,---3 THERTVIIN GPS NETWORK(1988 OR OF DATUM)M, 25 G AN ON-SITE ELEVATION OF 7933.88'ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT BLOCK 25 AS SHOWN.CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS l 3 FOOT. LOT K I - 7)THERE WAS APPROXIMATELY 5"OF SNOW AND ICE ON THE GROUND AT THE TIME OF 05 REBAR&RED TI .S CHIMNEY fy SURVEY. PLASTIC CAP L.S.09018 / / iii-7961.5' �q #3, } 8)ACCORDING TO THE CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEBSITE THE SUBJECT \ 32.70 d / Trees 1 1, 12, 1 J,•Clad PROPERTY IS ZONED RE.FRONT SETBACKS ARE 10'FOR THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING AND 15'FOR \ CHIMNEY 6, AN ACCESSORY BUILDING,REAR SETBACKS ARE 10'FOR THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING AND 5'FOR Atp. 7961.5' J250' b AN ACCESSORY BUILDING AND SIDE SETBACKS ARE 5'. \ LGTL / � 8 14 are marked w/tags on T2 a, +7 � •P ASIS OFgENG N5 REBAR&RED ^ � �/ tree trunks s \PLASTIC CAP L.S.#9018 8 0 •I/ .1�'�� /� �M EL=7933.88' dP , - �'� C.O.A.GPS ! - I� OGDDECI U MONUMENT N] 584°44'31"W 3 4 i /� /fi. 106.73' � ;,,, V7,..,,,,,, ,,,,,:, °l Ms ] I, • �� IMPROVEMENT SURVEY STATEMENT ]934 T4 T 1 1 I,IASON R.NEIL,HEREBY CERTIFY TO WINGSTONE TOY COMPANY,LLC.,A PENNSYLVANIA 000,' LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,THAT I AM A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR LICENSED ,. MS REBAR&YELLOW UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO;THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT IS T9 PLASTIC CAP L.S.019598 TRUE,CORRECT AND COMPLETE BASED ON MY KNOWLEDGE,INFORMATION AND BELIEF AS `3 `DjrCX I933 @Y BEARS S84°13'03"W 0.68' LAID OUT AND SHOWN HEREON;THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT IS NOT A GUARANTY 8 OR WARRANTY,EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT WAS �� TT S \ MADE BY DIRECT FROM AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF THE REAL PROPERTY PERFORMED BY ME OR �� ° \ GRAVEL 27EBORDER '- �� TI O m'�' UNDER MY VMEN SUPERVISION ON NOVEMBER 04&14,2019;THAT,IN THE PREPARATION OF 'rs.Sd, THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT,I RELIED UPON THE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY PARKINO "?•'x6 LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY,ORDER N0.Q64002805,DATED EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 24,2019; T T L O N D D I I L B L D I P E EA II�� -7933� PROPERTY WAYAND MATTERS EVIDENCE REFERENCED IN SAHI TITLE ENCROACHMENTS CROORENT OF THE REAL 3 IN / \ , SHOWN ARE ACCURATELY SHOWN,AND THAT THIS PLAT IS IN ACCORDANCE OF AN WOOD ` 79 7932 IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT AS SET FORTH IN C.R.S.§38-51-102(9).ERROR OF CLOSURE FOR BRIDGE B0� 33 THIS SURVEY IS LESS THAN 1:15,000. m RR C.O.A.GPS GRAVEL MONUMENTHS NOp \' DATED:DECEMBER 02,..'�3 $jNSq -. p A„'R-WN,„„ ,pO T \ P'. '",-....„.„......4,........,,...j '. BY r� w \ \ `.SON IL,PI..`0:3791 �`. 1`4S 'VEYIN c,INC.: 4� \ 1 \w .5 w\ •�'oN9l...i9�''O w\ w \w R. ,7. Drawn By: NO. Date Revision By Project NO. JRN WINGSTONE TOY COMPANY,LLC. Checked By: CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO 19080 P.O.Box 1746 14, Rifle, (970)CO)625-1954 81650 Dale: 'R'' Phone IMPROVEMENT&TOPO SURVEY Fax(970)579-7150 DEC.02,2019 LOTS M&N,BLOCK 25,CITY OF ASPEN NOTICE:ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW,YOU MIST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL.ACTION www.peaksurveyinginc.com BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST Computer File: 630 W.HOPKINS AVE. 1 OF 1 pFrEIVED anP1�THIS SHOW aOaeeN.Y BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TDISCOVER SUCH DEFECT IN NO EVENT MAY EN x xeNr�pA EOPN BASED UPON ANY as s� Since 2001 ' 080.DWGCE i' 4.}D/30/2020 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT