The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.EC.488 Castle Creek Rd.022A-84 .J.'T.E. 4. (}c:.n+ure 1-0+ Sf't~+- .J. -r. 'C.. M. UfiYIM.I./ ~~x,,~;.~[~)< Phone: . '. 7~1~ REPRESENTATIVE: ~ Cu A-~ Phone: :i' PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT: ~ - TYPE OF APPLICATION: '_..~ ---- t-... J;:''J CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET n City of ASp'en CASE NO. 022.4-84 ~ \e. ~Q STAFF: 6 ~ 13'1 -; (FEE) I. GMP/SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step) 1. 2. Conceptual Submission Preliminary Plat Final Plat ($2,730.00) ($1,640.00) ($ 820.00) 3. II. SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step) , ! ,t.. ~ ~ III. IV. - ... 1. 2. Conceptual Submission Preliminary Plat Final Plat ($1,900.00) ($1,220.00) ($ 820.00) 3. EXCEPTION/EXEMPTION/REZONING (2 step) ($1,490.00)'/ \...~S'f\'~ .~ .~ SPECIAL REVIEW (1 step) ~,....-l'~"~ y....- ($ 680.00~ .......~""\f"O 1. Special Review 2. Use Determination 3. Conditional Use 4. Other: CC MEETING DATE: (lr\~ DATE REFERRED: ',/U./N dw P&Z MEETING DATE: ~'^'I"'\-\ 1 REFERRALS: ,~rity Attorney ~ity Engineer Housing Director vi Aspen Water Dept. ____City Electric Environmental Hlth. ~Aspen Consolo ____Mountain Bell ____Parks Dept. ____Holy Cross Electric S.D. ____School District ____Recky Mtn. Natural Gas ____State Hwy Dept. (Glenwood) ____State Hwy Dept. (Grd. .Jctn) ____Building Dept. ____Other: Fire Marshall / Fire Chief FINAL ROUTING: ~ty Attorney ____Other: ~y Engineer DATE ROUTED: hilding l?1'Z-ylqy 0&- Dept. ____0ther: \'..... FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: l.J)5ED WI11-lDl2frWN ~LIC/1-77oAJ \rJ rrH ~R-A-tJ;J . 8/2#8f . ~ Ii ;; ii AEAoR{jIJ&Uj~. . ii i' . iO ~~A~fJLO--MiV1 !a-6fUkt ~ (!I);.;n1LO,"/(,f! . it j I .{ .F?~!Qo. tdk- t&~;. iOAYl;"'l' 2-lfs:7TfCj,\. ~~..liIT::l:pp;4- ..._.~.. .-1~~ i:~ ~),$.T 1, 1:1114. '. . .__ .' Laced;",,!! (fJ;,;:~P~{~ :E.J<Aif;'if/1).-. .: ,; . OLf:85CD,-${LL~\j(oo..d . .. ........._ ..~ , . . -' . . . n .. n . .+1 .-. ... ...-.-.' -----.....----......- ...........-.. ... ....:............. ..... ....: r~tuJ( Silir: 310; 00 I St ~+- . 7f()1l1../Vl.~rf {(-I~-A I~ub ( (II ,.,' :: ... . . _. .. . ... u....u . r01!. Q)( &\::. i~:tttP....~~~.~::~.I fla:~:;~~-LU;;, -~-~.F0i~ ;;,~;,;;;i.d ;;:"I~~ li~l8g1~4.~tld~~i;:~ :. ~VV\.Ds,~Q~V\.~ \ VV\'.~ <':..xQ.S),rl S.Lz:&' i~~\~~~~4~~it~' ip~c..~~.,~W~ ~1t[;. .K' it I.! vYl~ P'1 ArU1\.Q..1 VV\G.-jI\.~CLQ.S:. H~-~-j(:(; 1~{h&th~~c-_.~.~dr(~"W'\ci l ~d t 9Jo y\J Ifb.r~~l 'I ........ . ...... .....J~..J.r"...u;:.;.:;:,J~.3,u..!T............ .... LO,-~,~Q! ,(k\iIQrKf#:t",~J/YU:U4.l1Qj70:f{'d' . ii, \ ~. ..........~,V'AU1J~M"S1 ~ly.~-Jk~ !M 1rio' I C D-IG n' . . 4-4-.> ,In ...... ,...... ........~. K '.' ... .' en una.V\(\ VLOtJQ..CU} 'l!Lnj~~U.Q. ....:C!d.L...~.. . ...................~. '. ...tt......,.....'i=:.......'.~".......'.'.,.. , n ..AI.. n . '~o. ...... ..' . .d. : I 'CYY ~ W:1.J ..,.' ni' , ..' '~:(LJ1.. ......... il~f:l ~dQ-t6H.PC .... ..' ..( V'\o.!i-iQ"(1(ftifo.f1I~J ': / tv -.p 10..1'.1 .l.cti:tJ'fj ~U11..I. '.:s.&' _t:.. .. , I .. ......' ,'", '-" -", .',- ",<QT,~",. i ~ . ",,',' , , :1 :[ -!l i il I! II -',.-, ----,.. ......,-'c-C-c.,..'"',-c.-.-..-.-"'.".. ~..,.-.'_."...'" -..__.._..__.....,._._...,._..,,_.c I .j , i ! J '-, ')- , h ~ :.f EXHIBIT ")\" A tract of land located in Section 12 and Section 12 and Section 13 of To~ship 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, pitkin County, Colorado, described as follows: Beginning at a point, a No.5 re-bar on the easterly side of the County Road right-or-way, W'hence the common corner of Sections 11, 12, 13, and 14 bears South 87.06' West 1016.20 feet; thence North lil.S6' East 257.1.2 feet; thence South 060421 East 308.07 feet; tht'nl..'t~ ''':pst 11.84 f€~et to the Easterly side of the County Road right-of-way, th,-nce along the fenceline North 31.21' i.est 73.89 feet, thence'a10ng the fel1~e!ine North 44.55' West 133.57 feet, thence along the fenceline North 52.10' West 184.3! feet to the point of beginning, containing 36,001 sqtJarE' feet more or less. County of Pi~kin, State of C61orado. ( i: ~ III ~ < ~! "I ( l~~, I'" it , / .'\ I ~ ~ - I ffi ~~H 1!~n~7 I t; ~~~t~ ~ dd% I ~ ! nH 11~ _"':':t. =r:~ -,,'- ,'-" , /' (~ -;, " \J,' 1I ' ~ ~ I ~I~ e"/ ,=-' ==" ~ ; t ~: ~ I " ! I f-' ::JI > 0.1 ~ ~I ii "", ~ 2 \;.~I ., ~? . . ~l ~~ , / / , /// // ~...... // "/:/ , /./ , 1/ :1 , i , 'I' < . , I , , " / // /-- / ' /"'-..... , - ' ;/'. \ /~/ ....." I' I;' // " / , ! , / i , --< I -- / / I " " J ( ,{)_/ . j"// , - I / , I . / / / / '~ '....c.. . ! ~ :it [:: Z ii '> ~ J ~ ! !) I I , 1 " , \ I I rr., r r: ~ ~ & :1 \~I 5 S Z ~ i: 'I ",e! ~ \>l. ~ \i ::. 'I : \~ \i" i:i \i" ~ .1 '., t t 1...' "'... t. ~ ~! ~ i ;. j r.~: L- t ~ l- i !J II ~ ~ , . ~- f 1 ~ ~ ~ ;i'.. . . . . ffi ~ i z 2 I ,. w . l>. 9 fa III .~ .~ ::l or L I' ~:~ ~;\ ...;.......;. ~, ~ t ~: ~I ~! ~I:' ] ~ t' t:'" .. II.. d: ''f ~ '1' "i ~ H"~~~' 'l; if {O, ... ,,:.. .:~: '\"- " ~.: ~ "'" :p e e I ~ ~ ~ ~ Ii i ~ ~ ~ " ; ., & ~ "" ~ ~ ~- ~ / / / /' // /" "" l./" " ./ / / (/ I \ \ , '- ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . f ~ -- /' /' " -" /' ./ ) __~/~//~~~/// ~ //// /11/ - ..;:;:-;;';:__:~~////-:/ II; / //~</ / ~/ /~-j/ // /// / /:~'/ ! /,/ r \ , __I " , ~ / ~-...,/ // -- /' // I /// F / <0 ~:::" , l~ S:.. ~ Ili ; / / / / / / / I /~-"~"" // "., I: /~I II I / I / I / / "'" I .- /' / I I , " I ~/ / ~ carryover from 1979. Fengel said he felt there is goOd poten~~a~ Ior r~aership to and from Highlands. Councilman BeQ~endt asked if there were negotiations tor ~he city to ru the ski service to Highlands. ~gel said Highlands felt they co'.~ot make it this yen Councilman Behrendt asked if 'L "-ity would discontinue the daytiJ ~vice to Highlands a during the ski season. Fengel ~u1d he ~ould like to keep the servi~ ~oing all the time to Highlands. Councilman Behrendt said he had ~alked to the ski corp and assured them the city was not running buses to Highlands during the ski season daytime. because they are not paying for the service. Councilman Behrendt pointed out this could become a source of irritation to the ski corp because they are putting out a lot of money for the city to run the bus syste~ to the Ski Corp areas. Fengel said they had not put a ski corp bus on the route to Highlands, nor had they used a small bus on the ski corp routes. Councilman Behrendt \ said that is not the issue; Councilman Behrendt said people will ride the city buses to ski at Highlands and Highlands.is not putting any money into the bus system like the Ski corp is. Jim Wentzel, Highlands, concurred there may be duplication during the ski season. Highlands is, running 7 buses and the skiers should ri,de the Highlands buses. Wentzel sail' he felt s.trongly about a city bus in the night time. councilman Van Ness pointed out there are skiers in town going to Aspen mountain that ride city buses, and the ski corp does not pay for the in-town buses. Mayor Edel suggested the city face this next fall and discuss this particular problem. Fengel agreed they would run the day and night service to Highlands and come back, in October. In the meantime he will discuss this with the ski corp. 1 All in favor, motion carried. ,~ ORDINANCE #11, SERIES OF 1980 - Celia Marolt Annexation Mayor Edel open~d the public hearing. !I ~ ,<to Ii . Ii ;~ :: ~~ I' ',I ' I ,'," ;i '. ~ l ~'. f ~~~......~ l Nrcw '. . ORDINANCE ill I (Series of 1980) I AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING A TRACT OF LAND KNOWN AS THE CELIA MAROLT PROPERTY j LOCATED IN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, WHICH ANNEXATION IS ACCOMPLISHED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLORADO MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION ACT OF 1965 was read by the ci~y clerk Joe Wells, planning office, told Council this parcel is 36,000 square feet and the origin al planning' office recommendation was to zone it R-l5A. There was some, cO,ncern that an I R-15A without a restriction against further subdivision would have theeffeet of elimin- f ating possible employee units on the site; R-l5A as a single lot, a duplex would be I permitted with the second unit d~~drestr~cted; however, on a 36,000 square foot parcel, the creation of a second lot would be less than 20,000 square feet necessary to create two units. Only two free market single family ,units would be permitted in the event a lot split had been accomplished. Wells pointed out the Opal Marolt property, which is being annexed, is recommended R-ISA mandatory PUD, and the mandatory PUD designation should apply to this site as well. Mandatory PUD triggers the slope reduction formula; this formula recognizes that steeply sloped 'sites are less developable and should have less density potential. The PUD designation reduces the allowable density to 20,000 s~uare feet which would allow a duplex situation. The planning office feels the PUD designat10n should be added. Councilman Isaac moved to read Ordinance #11, Series of 1980; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Behrendt said there is a claim that there might be a bandit. unit in the build- ing at this time and asked if staff had checked this 'out. Wells answered this has not been checked out because the tenants are not in town. Lennie Oates, representing the applicant, told Council this has never been used as a duplex; it is not set up like that. Wells told Council the PUD designation has been applied to the adjacent site for the same 1 reasons the planning office would like it applied to this site. Ms. Smith told council I the P & Z had recommended R-15A with r~striction against subdivision 0= the lot, so that ! the effect is basically the same. Oates said the applicant felt there were some advantage' of corning into the city at th,e R-lS designation. The~"r, zoning request, was R-1SA without I the PUD. P & Z recommended zoning as long as there was a contract arrangement so that there was not a lot split. Oates aaid he would like to have the right to come back and go through the subdivision process; however, he agreed not to avail0rdinan~e i3,whichisl ~utomatic .lot split. Wells said the planning office would prefer to leave this unannexed ~f the city does not get the benefit of the employee,unit. City Attorney Stock said he felt it was inappropriate to apply to one site in a zone some~ thing which is unique and different to it and not apply to all sites within the zone. TO I restrict R-ISA would be subject to challenge. Stock recommended R-lSA/PUD. Councilman. 1 Isaac said he felt the Council should go with planning office.and attorneys recommendat10nl I Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Ordinance ill, Series of 1980, as amended with PUD added I in Section 2; seconded by Councilman Van Ness: Roll call vote; Councilmembers Collins, nay; Parry, aye; Van Ness, aye; Isaac, aye; Behrendt, nay; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. . I I F" (.C i;za'" \'1 ',,.d)e5 ~ . ~ . 1 . l' ~ . I j I j , J I I " 1 ,'30 "" ''''Y :ccl: I ~ i ~ Ii ~ I, :." 'Of r'\ r-') MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Pat Webster, Project Engineer DATE: August 1, 1984 RE: J.T.E.M. VENTURE Lot Split and Exemption from Manatory P.U.D. - Case No. City 022A-84 --------------------------------------------------~---------~----- ------------------------------------------------------------------ As you requested, here are the slope reductions for the lot. These are based on our 50 scale to po maps which are accurate to eithin +1 foot. The applicants map is a blowup of this 50 scale topo and is correspondingly more inaccurate (i.e. +2 to 3 feet). 0 - 20% Slope = 19,362.50 sq. ft. 20% 30% Slope = 3,525.00 sq. ft. 30% 40% Slope = 2,875.00 sq. ft. over 40% Slope = 10,238.50 sq. ft. PH/co ,-, ~ I ! REQUEST FOR ZONING I! Ii !, i' i! WHEREAS, Celia L. Marolt, in the Petition to which this ii II request is attached, has requested the City Council of the City Ii II of Aspen to annex the land described in the Petition for Annexa- I I tion to the City of Aspen; and, I il WHEREAS, the land which is contiguous to that property described in the Petition is zoned AF-2. NOW, THEREFORE, Celia L. Marolt requests that the City Council of the City of Aspen direct the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen, at the earliest possible con- venience of the Planning and Zoning Commission, to commence pro- ceedings to rezone the sUbject property R-l5-A, the granting of such zoning classification being a condition of annexation. f ~;;.~ L Jnak...<2~ Cel~a L. Marolt ~ J]~'~~Wkt..~-"""""""",,,;"J.4..,,",,=~~~L: 0, J.",== c~."~;;","'"\f";,"'l-i'.~I,,";N(~"~iIl""""'M6;;,,,,;;;,,,,:;s ~ J n . ", --' ~/ MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Joe Wells, Planning Office RE: Castle Circle Annexation (Celia Marolt) DATE: April 22, 1980 You will recall at the first reading of the annexation rezoning request on the Celi,a Marolt property that our office expressed concern that if R-15A zoning is applied to the parcel, the 36,000 square foot parcel would be eligible for further subdivision,to create a second single family home- site. Creation of the second lot would eliminate the possibility of duplex construction on the existing lot whereby the second unit would be permitted as an employee unit. (The two lots would be of insufficient size to permit construction of duplexes of one free market unit and one restricted unit on each lot, so logically two free market single family units would be the end result of such an action.) The annexation in our mind would not bene- fit the City unless the result is one employee unit. You will recall that the attorney for the applicant argued that the same zoning should be applied to his client's land as is being contemplated for the Opal Marolt property adjacent, requesting in effect equal treatment for both parties. We agree with that argument; the zoning description presently considered for the Opal Marolt property, however, is R-15A PUD,', not simply R-15A. The R-15A PUD zoning has been recommended for the Opal Marolt property because of the extent of steep slopes on a portion of the site. For the same reason it is appropriate to apply the PUD designation to the Celia Marolt property. The Celia Marolt site is generally fairly level only for that portion of the parcel on which the existing structure and driveway are located. The balance of the site drops off sharply. Based on calculations at 1" = 100' scale, approximately 16,400 square feet of the 36,000 square feet site is between 0% arid 20% grade, 5,800 square feet is between 20% and 30%, and 2,800 square feet is between 30% and 40%. The balance of the site (approximately 11,000 square feet) is in excess of 40% grade. The PUD procedures which would be followed on both the Marolt parcels under the PUD designation would reduce the density potential on the sites. The effect of this reduction has already been taken into account in the Opal Marolt proposal. Because of the steepness of the Celia Marolt parcel, the amount of land eligible for density calculation purposes would be reduced from 36,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet. Only 15,000 square feet would be required to permit the construction of a duplex; 30,000 square feet would be required for the creation of the two sing',e-family lots. In both cases, con- siderable upzoning from present County zoning (two acre' minimum lot ,size) is contemplated and we would recommend that you adopt R-15A PUD zoning for the parcel. ':)~r,:,Ij'f,'::'o-':'3.'-:~~.'~I~~-"'!.~'~:c>,;^~'4'~%... ~ "S;[^:~~". ,- ""'_,"""",_''''i#-~>i<I'$li~'~",\vY>1"",t__.\P,I''N.,,\~~.,:,"\q(~;~:m;;;;Vi:;;';ltZmt.:::!!g~i\!&"~)~:,';J;i;i,;,:;'''' r--. ;; n MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Karen Smith, Planning Office RE: Castle Circle Annexation - Zoning (Celia Marolt) DATE: March 3, 1980 Application has been received for annexation ,and zoning of a parcel of land of 36,000 square feet, owned by Celia Marolt adjacent to the Opal Marolt property just off Castle Creek Road. The request was for an R-15A zone designation. The property is a triangle of land in the southern end of the Opal Marolt property and immediately across from the City's Water Plant site. The property is currently zoned AF-2 (two acre minimum lot size) as was the Opal Marolt property. Immediately southeast of the property, the zoning changes to the AF-1 (ten acre ,minimum lot size). The request for this zoning designation had been delayed pending the outcome of the annexation and rezoning request on Opal Marolt. As you know, the zoning recommended for that site was R-15A/P.U.D./S.P.A. As Council has adopted that zoning, the R-15A designation for Celia Marolt now appears to be very consistent with it. In addition, that designation is consistent with the 1973 Aspen Land Use Plan, which shows this property within a band of single family residential, buffered by open space. R-15A zoning on the Celia Marolt site at 36,000 square feet would permit: 2 single family units by lot split (exempt from GMP), or 1 duplex (2 units with a unit deed-restricted to employee price guidelines) On February 26th, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission approved a recommen- dation of R-15A zoning for the site, as it was consistent with surrounding zoning and considering the benefits to be derived of a duplex with one unit deed-restricted. (There is currently a single family house on that site.) However, the Planning & Zoning Commission consi,dered that the annexation and rezoning would not be consistent if the results were to be a lot split with two single family houses resulting where currently there is only one. Therefore, the Planning & Zoning Commission also conditioned their motion on a recommendation that the annexation be conditioned on a prohibition against a lot split. In previous similar annexations, the City Council has expressed concern over the difference between the floor area ratio requirement in the County and the lack thereof in the City. The Planning Staff believes if a lot split is prohibited and the only result is a duplex with one unit deed- restricted, then the floor area ratios considerations are a moot point. The Planning Office concurs with the P & Z's recommendation. t,*, ~,' .'l"" I":!F', _......~,' """"'-,. ".", '... ,~!'; '~'iir:~,r~"'" :4 -:-"""'''''"'''':i'''.R"-"?~~:::,~,,,,,,",,~, "'..,,. m~",,' ~i. \"o.'!",,,,,,,,~,,,,,,~!w..;,,.; '."~ j;~:u~.!,\.;:rG::::,:,t':;Z;:-';:~-"~s~.,J:if.l';')),:J:::':;"'\"~I:~~"~~i,".~"i;~;,:"ii;';';";,,,,, I ,i " . ) \,,' ,......, ~ ) ,../ ' Recorded 3:09 PM May 23 19HO RecePtion~~;1~~ Loretta Banner Recorder -.389 rn,lt301 '0lIlil" e....IfOtCICO,L..,... l. co. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 leaves . ORDINANCE NO. /1 (Series' of 1980) AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING 'A TRACT OF LAND KNOWN AS TUE CELIA MAROLT PROP.ERTY LOCATED IN PITKIN CbUNTY, COLORADO, WHICH ANNEXATION IS ACCOMPLISHED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLORADO MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION ACT OF 1965 WHEREAS, there has been submitted a Petition for Annexation of a tract of land known as the Celia Marolt Property located in Pitkin County, Colorado, to ,the City of Aspen, which petition has been found to be in compliance with Section 3l-8-l07(1)(c), C.R.S. 1973, a part of the Colorado Annexation Act, and ,WHEREAS, the City Council has further considered the proposed annexation as described in the Petition for Annexation (herein- after "Petition") and accompanying plat, and has determined that: 1. The signatures on the Petition represent the owners of one ,hundred (100) percent of the land proposed for annexation. 2. Not less than one-sixth (1/6) of the perimeter of the area to be annexed is contiguous to the City of Aspen. 3. There exists a community of interest between the tract ,A to be annexed and the ,City of Aspen; the tract to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in the near fu- ture; and the tract to be annexed is integrated or capa- ble of being integrated with the City of Aspen. 4. The annexation will not affect the constitution of any existent school district. 5. The petition satisfies the statutory requirements of the Municipal Annexation Act, both as to substance and form; and ,. WHEREAS, the Colorado Annexation Act provides that where a Petition is signed by an owner of one hundred (100) percent of the I l~,...... ..' ,..'"" _, ..._~.., "~~"':"""""',,._. '~''''''-~''','':-' . -...~-,...,... -'.'~''''''''','''.',~".~. ..,.,......~~~-,.....- ~ , ."',.",,,,~..i".,,' '," (, ) ,- f(~ "l.. ' ..~ {' ~. ~~. >,/ ,"~, .J .389 r~f,:302, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS . ':'t 100 Leaves ,0ItliI '!I c." Mor <rt t. .. " ~. C\Io property proposed ::'0 be annexed, the 'City 'Counci~ may, by ordi-' nance, annex without notice Or hearing (other than that incident to ordinance adoption) and without election, and the City Council now wishes to so proceed; WHEREAS, the City Council has further considered the zoning as requested in the document attached to the Petition for Annexa- tion and the Planning and Zoning Co~nission has recommended the amendment of Section 24-2.2, 'of the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORApO: 'Section 1 That the following described tract, situate in Pitkin County, Co~orado, be and hereby is annexed to the City of Aspen, Colorado, pUrsuant to the provisions of the Col<:)rado Municipal Annexation Act: ,I ,,\.., A tract of land located in Section 12 and Section 13 of ' Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, ColoradO, described as follows: Beginning at a point, A No. 5 re-bar on the easterly side of the County Road right-of-way, whence the common corner of Sections 11, 12, 13, and 14 bears South 87006~ West 1016.20 feet; thence North 81056' East 257.42 feet; thence South 06042' East 308.07 feet; thence West 11.84 feet to the Easterly side of the County road right-of~way, thence along the fenceline North 31"21' West 73.89 feet, thence along the fenceline North 44055' West 133.57 feet, thence along the fenceline North 52030' West 184.31 feet to the point of beginning, containing 36,001 square feet more or less. Section 2 That Section 24-2.2 (Zoning District Map) is hereby amended , JPuO by including the following-described area in "the R-15-r zone district: A tract of land located in Section 12 and Section 13 of Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado, described ,as follows: Beg inning at a point, A No. 5 re-bar on the eas terly s ide of the County Road right-of-way, whence the co~non corner of 2 ~/r;::,"f . ",~.',.- '-' . ' " ", "'-;7~'!r-:---,~-T:,:, ';;(f~!r'~;~:iii:;'0~~~~7~-f~':1'~#l~~~;r~r~"~~~,R8~w::~:~:.' ~ ~~. ;,;;';~;~,":)5~t' :i::.~~t>' "--. ..,,~ v......;:,..... -~ ., - . , , 1 , ' . ] "-1 " "~l , 'I "'1 ! . --~~ JT , c) t""""\ , ~/. n ' -.:> _7 _389,I'AGl303 ", <'., RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 leaves Sections 11, 12, 13, and 14 bears South 87"06' West 1016.20 feet; thence North 81056' East 257.42 feet; thence South 06042' East 308.07 feet; thence West 11.84 feet to the Easterly side of the County road right-of-way, thence along the fenceline North 31021' West 73.89 feet, thence along the , fenceline North 44055' West 133.57 feet, thence along the ' fenceline North 52030' West 184.31 feet to the point of beginning, containing 36,001 square feet more or less. Section 3 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or por- tion of this ordinance is f~r any reason held invalid or unconsti- tutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and indepehdent provision and such. holding shall not' affect the validity of the remaining por- tions thereof. Section 4 A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the /~ day of ~,-i J , 1980, at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado,.15 days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published once 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 1C'~ay of ~- Michael'B Mayor Pro Tern ATTEST: Y~L,._J ,d'~ ~~"s/lK~~h City Clerk 3 . ., ,,' .,_.".-"'....,,.,,",',....,..,.,.,,~..,.'''',,..~,..,.,'''".' ..','.,,"';' <,,",,~..,.,.....-.:.v."'~' .,.".,..."._... '~"""<_''''~' ,:~':,'~,;'.:.~~.,~-,'.;'~;!>?':.\~~r, .'....';".~~,~.:::~', '.:.0 T~'I~T" c' .~. <,,~~;,~.p' /';' - . '''-rrr: - " .' ' ,..:..... ." -."".~,.~..;:;.-'4""i-,..~~,.."......,-...:.,....~.,......,_.;~...' .,:, ; .,\'""".;."*, .' . . .... , ",. .......'...,~."M..... ,......-,.. ....,.... . -"''',',," ,""..' , --- // ;:1 )/ // . r-, 1 ~ (/ .' c.> J.~.. ''-../ n ~.' _389 i'AC[304 c. t,"or:('oo:r.~ I... a~. u. . ~,. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS FINAL~ passed ATTEST: / ~",,',/~, '~~. IL Kathryn S. , ch City Clerk "'''''''--..- .-. ._. ._. - f ',..-...-.....--".. 1...."",-..,----........-, ._-'..,...., , I and approved on the c:?3 , 1980. He~~ Mayor , ..h..........._.._.............._._...... . . '. . . . . . . . . '. " :~-=""-:~~..=......................_........,...=,,,......-=-=-.==-.,,,,,...,...._""'",,.-,,....."'=.;,.,..-""..........."",,...."'"....".".......~._'_.'"'"..'"'.~....~.~,.,'.....-"-...4,........,.~..,..........~..".,.............."-'--._"U.'-'-'~.......-...__"..___....- _.......:..._~..".__.~..,-_.~~"..~"-,,;;.,,,...._.,'-'--,,_._."'--"- ..".....,~..,--'-_.,--'--'--;.~,...;;..:...,,,,.",-~, :,7B"-':// -.---..,.",!,:,:, ~'..<'",:":"."~' ... ..... .., ,.,.;. 4 """'~';"rwo__"'~'''!'''' '.. ~'. . ._~_~. '.> """:,.~..;.>~.,." ." " >;'r;,""~: ~ ., -~ .;>~-.;,' . , ~~. ;...- ~';- v" '<'~).'1~"'\'.:.~'~~' ~ -'~ ....-..,' "'-"':"" ,;:.....,...-.. 100 Leaves day of I 'I ,I d (.1 , , ~ "'..- ./' ''';// // ~ r") ;j MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office Pat Webster, City EngineeringlPuO FROM: DATE: July 21, 1984 RE: J.T.E.M. VENTURE Lot Split and Exemption from Mandatory P.U.D. - Case No. City 022A-84 ---------------------------------------------------------- Everything for a conceptual presentation appears to be in order, their calculations are accurate and there are no apparent engineering problems with regards to service and accesibility. However, the lot is shown as zoned R-15 P.U.D.; the annexation ordinance (ORD. #11, 1980) zoned it as R-15-A P.U.D. PW/co ---,.-,. t""'. n MEMORANDUM TO: Paul Taddune, City Attorney Jay Hammond, City Engineer Jim Markalunas, Aspen Water Department Heiko Kuhne, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District steve Crocket, Fire Chief Colette Penne, Planning Office J .T.E.M. Venture Lot Split and Exemption from Mandatory PUD - Case No. City 022A-84 June 26, 1984 FROM: RE: DATE: =========== ========= =======================::::=============== ===:::=:::::==:::::::::= Attached for your review is material submitted with respect to the J.T.E.M. Venture Lot Split and Exemption from Mandatory PUD application submitted by Jim Curtis on behalf of J.T.E.M. Venture. The property is located at the old Celia Marolt residence and consists of 36,001 s. f of land. Please review this material and return your referral comments to the Planning Office no later than July 24, 1984, in order for this Office to have adequate time to prepare for its presentation before P&Z on Aug~st 7, 1984. Thank you. IH/!> f(<o,JEer CA.... I~E' SC/'l.~,,1';; /:'Y "'Hi~ A .( ,oe_ CO/o-sot. I '\A-TlE.1'> $AJ-/'t-",../o..... h>IS1'/C.I'Ci4, ~THE l>/s~It,€l',J. )...1......,:: Ii-.- CAS"'L,~ eIL"'''''c ,R.Q1\1, A-"'~ I-vILL HO"'/I!~/I!"- r>~~~e-r- .L'ES I\' /'1/.... 1"1--': .s I,....."',./~- A, 1'HI: I-I....~ J-/E-t Ar.,a....",r-He PlZtJ"",,<r{ ~. ~ ct:Z. A C' $' f:;, Ii t?-. "crC' , 1""""'\ /"'"'I f .'1 ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT l~~~TIi1,,'.,n lllJUN 2" 1984JLW ASPEN / PITKIN CO, '-. PLANNtNG OFFiCE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: COLETTE PENNE-PLANNING OFFICE JII1 MARKALUNAS J.T.E.M. VENTURE ,~/1 JUNE 27, 1984 ------.) j /V" { I have reviewed the application referred to above and do not foresee a problem in respect to water availability. However, because of the location of Lot 2, it may be rather difficult to obtain water unless an easement is provided for this purpose to the 20" transmission main located along the northern boundary of Lot 1. Since service would have to be from the 20" transmission main, we will require special shut-off provisions in order to maintain operational integrity of the water main. We also concur with the recommendation for a fire hydrant tap to service both parcels. cc: J.T.E.M. Venture Mr. Jim Curtis - Real Estate Affiliates . n n ~~ @:~ ~!PJF~ 420 E. HOPKINS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Colette Penne, Planning Office steve Crockett, Chief J.T.E.M. Venture Lot Split July 22, 1984 Upon reviewing the J.T.E.M. Venture Lot Split application, I would like to request the following addition; 1) That the developer place a fire hydrant at the begining of the driveway on the left hand side of the driveway as you are turning off Castle Creek road into the driveway accessing both lots one and two. tJ' ,-., n J ~~~~PJF~ MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Office FROM: AVFD Plans-checking Committee RE: J .T.E.M. VENTURE LOT SPLIT DATE: JULY 22, 1984 420 E. HOPKINS STREET ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 Herewith, find our review of the named application before your office. Thank you. AVFD Plans checklist 1283 Cover "....., , s91~~@1ae,fPlF~ 420 E, HOPKINS STREET ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 The Aspen Volunteer Fire Department welcomes the opportunity to participate within the framework that is determining the future configuration of our town. Insofar as our concern is the protection of life and property, we have prepared the following guidelines to establish a sense of balance between our cap~bilities as a department and the locations we might be called upon to defend. To insure fairness and equality of application, the most recent edition of the Uniform Fire Code will serve as final authority in our eval uations. This review of plans is intended to impact final approval of a given project. There- fore we see most plans in a "conceptual" form. In many cases specific items of inter- est are simply not available for review as they don't exist in hardcopy. It is recommended that this checklist be reviewed at som~ subsequent time to insure that these items of concern ,have been addressed. We at the department will gladly perform this check at the direction of the Planning Office or in cooperation with the Building Department. Each item of the checklist is preceeded by three possible indicators: (OK)~ (10), which stands for Insufficient Data; and (NOT OK). General comments and clarifications will appear at the end of the prepared list. AVFD Plans checklist 1283 Page 1 rJ n ROADWAYS ~ (NOT OK) (ID) ~roadway to be considered as access for fire apparatus shall be an all weather driving surface of not less than 24 feet of unobstructed width capable of supporting the imposed loads of the apparatus. All turning radius shall be adequate and a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet, 6 inches shall be maintained. ~ (NOT OK) (ID) , , ~required width of access shall not be obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. Legal signs and/or other appropriate notice prohi~iting obstruction shall be required and maintained. ~ (NOT OK) (ID) " , ~cess roadway shall be extended to within 150 feet of 'all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of any building. Where this access cannot be reasonably provided, approved fire protection and suppression systems may be substituted, subject to review and approval by'the Fire Chief. ,~ (NOT OK) , (ID) , '-Cl?rb cuts shall be a minimum of'thirty feet for commercial or multi-family driveways. Curb cuts for public roadways shall be determined by the Town Engineer. A()'j(\l (NOT OK) (IO) , ~te circulation drives shall be a minimum of 22 feet wide excluding parking, except where water mains are laid when they shall be a minimum of 30 feet wide excluding parking. ~(NOT OK) (ID) ~riveway in a parking lot shall be a minimum of 22 feet wide excluding parking, except where water mains are laid when they shall be a minimum of ,30 feet wide excluding parking. ~(NOT OK) (10) ~s at 90 degree turns shall be a minimum of 25 feet at the inside curb and 50 feet at the ourside curb. ~NOT OK) (ID) , ~~~ds that exceed 150 feet in length shall be provided with turnaround provision. "K turns" shall be a minimum of 75 feet long and 15 fe,et wide. Cul-de-sacs shall provide a radius minimum of 50 feet. ~(NOT OK) (ID) (~ccess roadways may be used for pedestrian and/or bicycle traffic. Roadways so used will ensure ease of access to pedestrians by their design. It may be necessary to eliminate access to such roadways by unauthorized vehicles by posting of legal signs and/or a design device. In no case may such limiting design or device prohibit immediate access byemergancy'vehicles. (OK) (NOT OK) ~ ' ' Buildings 3 stories or higher must provide at least 2 clear means 'of access for a snorkle apparatus to a site no closer than 5 feet or no farther than 25 feet from the first floor of the building at the exterior wall. AVFD Plans checklist Page 2 ., . !""""\ ,.. ...; ,n HYDRANTS AND FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS ~(NOT OK) (10) '~emises where buildings or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed and are located more than 150 feet from access roadways shall be provided with an approved fire hydrant or other fire suppression system as reviewed and approved by the Fire Chief. ' ~ (NOT OK) (10) ~c10sest point of roadway access to a given building a maximum distance to the nearest hydrant shall be established. , In residential areas the maximum shall be 600 feet, in commercial areas 300 feet, in the core area the maximum shall be 2 city blocks as they exist or are to be built per the proposal being reviewed. ~ (NOT OK) (ID) , QH"'hydrants shall be located at least 50 feet from all structures in the vicinity 'whenever possible. ~(NOT OK) (10) ~drants shall be located on the high side of the fire access road. Hydrants shall be a minimum of 10 feet from the paved surface or "edge" of the access road. The center of the "steamer" connection shall be a minimum of 3 feet above the ,finish surface of the access road and shall be situated so that the "steamer" connection shall face the road. Clearance shall be maintained around the hydrant so as to allow the use of all outlets without kinking the hose and to allow the use of a 24 inch hydrant wrench on the stem nut without having to remove the wrench. (OK) (NOT OK) ,(10) t{ft, Fire hydrants located within parking lots must be accessible without obstruction but protected. This protection will be no closer than 5 feet from all sides of the hydrant and a minimum of 8 inches high. One access area centered on the '!steamer" connection shall be maintained at least 20 feet wide. (OK) (NOT OK) ~ ' The builder or ~oper is required to demonstrate that the proposed complex or individual buildings will fall within the storage and distribution water systems ability to deliver fire flow. Computations required shall be ISO "Procedures for Needed Fire Flow"; 1980 edition. No combustible construction shall start at a planned site until such computations demonstrate adequate protection. (OK) (NOT OK) ~ The Builder or ~per is required to check the Uniform Building and Fire Codes for requirements of automatic sprinkler system and audio/visual alarm systems. (OK) (NOT OK) ~ In buildings t~rovided with standpipe connections, the proposed locations of the siames and any associated audio/visual alarms shall be approved by the Fire Department. Clear access to all connections shall be provided for and maintained. (OK) (NOT OK)~ In a standPiPe'~ation, a charged outlet shall be available to within 150 feet of every dwelling unit in the building. AVFD Plans checklist Page 3 . . !""""'\. n GENERAL REVIEW CRITERIA (OK) (NOT OK) ~ ' Firefighter access into a building shall be provided for both by design and special provisions if necessary. (Fire key boxes in security situations for example. ) (OK) (NOT OK) ~ Posted street a~ses shall be visible from the nearest access roadway and/or at the driveway,curb cut of buildings set back out of sight. (OK) (NOT OK) (ID) Nft Bridges shall conform to all the same criteria as access roadways. (OK) (NOT OK) ~ Electrical cut-~hall be reasonably accessible, subject to approval of the Fire Chief. (OK) (NOT OK~ Unusual veget~nditions may exist in rural cases. Limitations may be imposed for wildfire control. AVFD Plans checklist Page 4 I"l n APPENDIX A ~ K",~'u(d.,d.t__.. ___._o'd",'k M.. '"' '-' _lh,,,....dn. R...c"ptionNu. IT'H==-";"==-:':;';'::':':";:=::,:,:-.::,: .,- .--- " I] 1:'-IIISDEED. M.d"thi. I 111 82. betW"I!" CELIA L~ MAROLT I ! uttht' "lUNG ST"~II' 2rd da)'..r August Q.lll1t)'Ur Pitkin '''l<I~H..h...r J. T. E. H. VENTURE. a Texas Joint Ventur~ wh_lt'caladd,,,,ui, P.O. Box 11558, Fort Worth, Texas 76109 ..rthe eo...nt)'ot Tarrant ItndStll.l"..r.(.J~~.ofth"'HC'oCld...~ I WITNESS!:."". That tbe..HI part)' of the first plitt, rur .,1<1 in con"id",,"tinn..r thl< It..m of ,TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration ~~~Aft~- I h. lh.. ..id part)' or Uw fint ,." In hand paid by th... aaid p..rty or th" Ilt.'l'OIW plltt. th., rt<<<ipt whe,.."t i. hereby "..ntuRd and acknowledpd. h"'ll'nMed, barlC"ltin,,". $tIlel and "uIIY,,)'...I. llond by thll5e prncmb dOl'I I:,.nt, barealn, I ....11. ."Unn)' IInd contirm, unto tlw ..id put)' lie th" ll.....ond flArt. hill h,'ir. AnU lIui&,n. for..,.r. an tlw {(JUowinl' :.I..."rilM:dlot c;rparnl ofland..ituIlL.., l)'inll'..nd b..inlt' in thll 1; Cuunt)'of Pitkin alll.lStlltll ofColllrll.uu. ~o.wi~: I: !; PLEASE SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND : INCORPORATED HEREIN BY tHIS REFERENCE. " " , " ;: .be._...-.t_....._..""'.. Il !i 1"1' . To(:I:.'TIIER with all and ",inllular ~ht' h"rlt'di~..nl<'n~>> 1l1l<1IIJlpurt<.nu'''..... ~l"'r"t,j "l"n"inlC,or in an)'wi.." IlPIWr- 1i b,ininlt". and th... rllvllni"n ..nd rft'''l'nillnll. r':I11ain<l.'r And r"",,,,,,<ll'rll, ro'n~.., ill~""" AlId j.r"rah tll",....f; ..nolall lh" '1 ! i Il..~.t... ,i.M, ti~I". illt"rll.~, d.il'llo ...,4 u....nand whlltll"'.......r..f ~h" ....id Im,ty..t ~h" ti,,,t pllrt,..ithuin I.w"'fl/uit)',llt, I 'j in ..nd toth.. .b...." b"'ltain.'<J prt'n,i"..... wi~h th" h...r<'ditll~"ll U1d "l'l",rhlll;wl"'''. . ! i, Tn IIAVt: ,\~UTO nOLU tll... ....id l.roi'l1"""~"\f&-"; . . "lid oI..,...riu...t.!. with th" .ppurhm.......... unt.. Ih.. .a.id ! ~ p.rt)' (Jt Ih..econd p.tt. IIi. ....i... . .~' . Am ht' .a.o.it.! p...ty o( th... tinl part, fllr Mmaelt, hi, heir.. II "."..II~o....ml..t.!mini.tI'.tllra.t.!YI'.l'O ..... . nrlCain,.nd..It""'''Lu..ndwi~htht...idJl''rl)'utlb.t...eundp..rt. ! hill h~irs .nt.!JlsaiIt"RS. ~h.t at the time of tht ..n."lIlinlC and oIl.li....r)' ur thell! p...Mtmb. ne i. well Him oftheprttmiatt. I; abov" (uRv"yed, a. ot <<UI>d. sun. p<IIrf"et. .bllulllto.' ..nu indt.r.....ibl" ".tat.. ",(Inherit",nc", inl.w. in f<<simpll., and h.. 1!It"U<>d .iKh~. t"1I P"'~' .nd law(ul ."thufi~y tu lCr..,,~. b.rltuin, ""II ..lid '<.Invt'Y the .am. irl ",a_r .nd t",rm as ! .torn.id. and that the ..m.. a,... (no! .nt.! el...ar from .11 tornl..r ..nd <.Ith...r ltrant.. b.rpin.. nl... liltna, ta.... I! aunllmenh .."d ellcumbr.nnoll of ....hllt"v...r kint.! u. n..tuft' 1I<><:......r., EXCEPT gencra1taxes for 1982, 11 due and payable in 1983, and SUBJECT TO reservations and excepts as contained I;in U.S. Patent recorded in Book 55 at Page 35 regarding the right of a proprietor 'I to extract ore; easements and rights of way as set forth on Map recorded in : Plat Book 9 at Page 70; terms, conditions, obligatIons and restrictiOns of l Ordinance No. 11 (Series of 1980) as set forth in instrument recorded 1a Book 389 ii at Page 301; easements and rights of way * (continued on reverse) ! .nd Ih.. .b......l.d b"KlOil",d p."mi....in th... qui.,t IInd 1I<'II'''IIM.. PUllK'llIioll...tth" IlIid plIrtyottb...aec:ond pa.lohl, I heir. and ....i..nl alt'.lnd 101I..nd tV<' .)' p"r:wn o. jlt'tlOIIM I.wfull)' dllimlnlCo. to ..lilim th" whOSt' Or an, p.r~ thernt, thll ..Id party o( Iht' (irllt p.rt .h,,1I ..nd will WARRANT AND "'OREVER O":"'END. n.e lin,ulH ."Imbirr ....U in"lu,I"lht'pl"..I,th"plutlItlhe.il'llt'ul..r,.ndth"u""o(any~nt.!er.hlllll>l'lll.plicabl"to.lI~nd...I''' IN WITSESS WHEREOf', the ".id pal'~)' of the tint 111I.t h..,. h"n'ul'lt... ""t hill hand and ."allhed.)'.nd year tint ab",v"wl'itt..n. ,~~~~,~~~/ ::::~:' _...._...._-~._--'---__,~__lSEALl STATE OF COLORADO C<1Ul'lt)'ot Pitkin I.. ill. t...;,,~:I'I~ indrum"nt wu .cknowledlted b"rore m..lhi. M d.,of IlttcJ1r.>f 1982,b)' CELIA L. ~.AROLT. Nyeonlml..,opellplfell IC),/fiJ. Address: 'C/O 11_.."" ' ,19 . Witl'lt'S. m)' haftd and otfieial",.I. ._(iJ.'Lk);",(~l./;;&L/:1v-~_ TRACY 11TlE.. LTD. i )"" /.}"'. x....., ...../1.. :eo1,E.Hyman,Sutte1CJa , _ _... . ____.__... ~'CcI~"!lYB1'1 - .,.~I""'''''l>Iiolll"".IIUW."."....LU._.COI02I._r....:tJ'-_'''1 N...n'ZA. 'lI.'WIC""nl.n:lJ. "'-'ii t I I I t :~. J , I i i I , M /~ -; (') Lot Split J.T.E.M. Venture Property June 15, 1984 Submitted to: Applicant: Project Manager: Aspen Planning Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 925-2020 J.T.E.M. Venture P. O. Box 11558 Fort Worth, Texas 76109 Mr. Jim Curtis Real Estate Affiliates 117 South Monarch Street Aspen, Colroado 81611 920-1395 n ,/ . . .1 r'1 (") 1 This application is for a lot split under the following provisions of the Code: 1. GMP exemption as provided for under Section 24-11.2(d). 2. Mandatory PUD exemption as provided for under Section 24-8.13. The property is owned by J.T.E.M. Venture, contains 36,001 sf., is zoned R-15 PUD, and has one existing house (the old Celia Marolt residence) . The Lot Split is illustrated by the attached drawings. 1 . Lot Spli t 2. Slope-Zoning Full size drawings have been submitted to the Planning Office separately. The allowed density for the property is 2.5 units based on the density reduction formula for slopes per the City Code as illustrated on the Slope-Zoning drawing. As shown on the Lot Split drawing, Lot 1 is approximately 21,000 sf. and contains an existing house. The existing house is approximately 2,200 sf. The existing garage of the house will be relocated to provide driveway access to Lot 2. Relocating the garage will elimin- ate a non-conforming item of Lot 1 as the garage as currently con- structed is within the 25 ft. front yard setback of R-15 zoning. As constructed, the garage is only 8 feet from the Castle Creek Road R.O.W. Lot 2 is approximately 15,000 sf. The building envelope is approxi- mately 4,800 sf. Access will be from the existing driveway of Lot 1. The portion of Lot 2 northeast of Lot 1 will be deed-restricted to open space as illustrated on the drawing. The proposed building envelope is characterized by a sloping upper bench (avg. 15% slope) which falls to a steeper embankment edge. The extension of the driveway and the majority of the building footprint will be located on the upper bench. The existing tree cover and scrub oak along Castle Creek Road will be maintained by the 25 ft. front yard setback from the Castle Creek Road R.O.W. The building envelope is basically similar in character and topography to the existing house site. u ~' r .~ ". ,......., I, i 2 Based on a conversation with Mr. Heiko Kuhn of the Aspen Sanitation District, Lot 2 will connect to the new sewer line installed to service the Country Day School and the Music Camp. The line is on the north side of Castle Creek Road adjacent to the property. Heiko stated Lot 2 will have to "force pump" sewage up to the line which is higher than the property, and that pumping is allowed by the ' District. Applicant shall comply with the standard connection policies of the District. The existing house on Lot 1 is serviced by an individual septic system. Based on a conversation with Mr. Jim Markalunas of the Aspen Water Department, Lot 2 will connect to a 20" main distribution line northwest of the property. The existing house is connected to the line and Jim recommended the existing Lot 1 line be reworked to allow Lot 1 and Lot 2 to use a single line to connect to the 20" main. Applicant shall comply with the standard connection policies of the Water Department and with Jim'S recommendation concerning the connection. Electric, telephone and gas will be provided by the respective utility company. GMP Exemption The proposed lot split complies with Section 24-1l.2(d) which pro- vides for the construction of one single-family residence on a lot subdivided after November 14, 1977, where the following conditions are met: 1. The tract of land which was subdivided had a preexisting dwelling unit; 2. No more than two (2) lots were created by the subdivision. Mandatory PUD Exemption The intent of mandatory PUD zoning is to plan for larger developments rather than individual homes as stated under Section 24-8.13 which provides that "in no event, however, a PUD designation notwithstanding, shall compliance with this article be required for the construction of a single-family residence on a separate lot." Notwithstanding, the proposed lot split complies with the planning criteria of the PUD zoning as outlined below: 8.13 (a) 8.13(a)(1) 8.13(a) (2) 8.13(a) (3) 8.13(a)(4) 8.13(a)(5) 8.13(a) (6) 8.13 (a) (7 ) 11 , r'} 3 The density of the proposed lot split is consistent with the density allowed for the PUD parcel after adjusting for slopes. Existing city utilities are available and have capa- city to service the new unit. The driveway is private and will be maintained by the lot owners. The driveway is so short that a fire truck may easily pull in and back out. A fire hydrant will be placed on the property if recommended by the Fire Marshall and Jim Markalunas. The proposed building envelope is characterized by a sloping upper bench (avg. 15% slope) which falls to a steeper embankment edge. The extension of the driveway and the majority of the building footprint will be located on the upper bench. The site is basically similar in character and topography to the existing house site. No ground instability, mud flow, rock falls or avalanche problems have ever occured to the existing house. The new house will have no major impact on area drain- age nor will it increase area water pollution. The new house will have no major impact on area air quality. The driveway will be an extension of the existing driveway with no new road cut to Castle Creek Road. The extension of the driveway will be virtually level with minimal cut and fill. The majority of the build- ing footprint will be located on the sloping upper bench of the building envelope. Any building along the embankment edge will either be dug into the slope or cantilevered over the slope. A grading plan for the property shall be prepared based upon the specific house design for the property and shall be submitted as part of the building permit. . t""') ^ ,( J 4 8.13(a) (8) Similar to the existing house, the new house will have limited visibility from Castle Creek Road for two reasons: 1. The existing ve~etation and tree cover along Castle Creek Road will be maintained by the 25 ft. front yard setback of the building envelope. Where the extension of the driveway is constructed, new planting will be added. 2. The center of the building envelope is approxi- mately 10-12 ft. below Castle Creek Road. Miscellaneous Items Proof of Ownership Adjacent Owners Appendix A, Property Deed Appendix B, List of Adjacent Owners .~ .---' .,;' .!""'\ f J t""1 APPENDIX B ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS Surrounding property owners names and addresses are from the pitkin County Assessor Office and are complete and correct to the knowledge of the applicant. 1. (Old Marolt Property) City of Aspen c/o Aspen Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 2. Castle Ridge Associates, Ltd. c/o Gene M. Zafft, Esq. Suite 1414 7777 Bonhomme St. Louis, Missouri 63105 ':"~.""r r - r! f""'l f ' \' -1 MEMORAlIIDUK TO: paJU Taddune, City Attorney ~~Hammond, City Engineer ~~ Markalunas, Aspen Water ,Department vffeiko Kuhne, Aspe,n Consolidated Sanitation ~ve Crocket, Fire Chief . District FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office J.T.E.M. Venture Lot Split and Exemption from Mandatory PUD - Case No. City 022A-84 June 26, 1984 RE: DATE: ======================================================================= . -- - - - -- - - '. '. Attached for your review is material submitted with respect to the J.T.E.M. Venture Lot Split and Exemption from Mandatory PUD application submitted by Jim Curtis on behalf of J .T.E.M. Venture. The property is. located at the old Celia Marolt residence. and consists of 36,001 s. f of land. Please review this material and return your referral comments to the Planning Office no later than July 24, 1984, in order for this Office to have adequate time to prepare for its presentation before P&Z on Aug~st 7, 1984. Thank you.