The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.11 Trainors Landing.A003-99(652: 4-003- 99 Nlp 41. l i f,~0 + b/9 Lov# 0 ,~~~) %O)4 ..p,9 - P 1 1,IA' 0 1 \\1 1. 41 ' Â·f Y l* k I . 1t . 'ke t y - L- IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY: + 0 BARBEE - RUGHEIMER PROPERTY ~~ A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NEI/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE Bth P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEET 2 OF 3 CORNER 1, MS #3956 FOUND 4' X 4" WOOD ~ - Ill.-*-- .*. --- I.----.-- - - --I-i POST W/ METAL CAP L / 7-7-Le MARKED 1/3956 L.S. #16413 1 FOUND BLM BRASS W.C. CAP, N 1/4, 1 / SEC 13 BEARS: K-- SET REBAR & CAP, 43956 , -k~---fuakeâ€ž 3 1 \ L.S, #28643, INTERSECTION ~~OEEMRA~I~L~E \ 1/16 LINE WITH ' ~ ~ S 00'00"44" w 660.00 CLAIM ~ - 940% L Olit - *. Fo 1 0% /1 / ~-INE 1-4 MS #3956 i 7 (.14 790.62' -i 4 9 if- 1 / 108.89-- ' j / ~C N 00Â°15'47" 2 -- --- -- --4- --- - - - - -- -~- - - ------- ------------ ' ..6--~. N 00Â°15'47" E l $3 Â·.. POINT OF BEGINNING- / ~ SW COR LOT 1 #2559' *---- ill-----Ill./.=-Il'......ill'.'.iWI'...S 2, -144 - N W COR LOT 1 4/ NE 1/16 SEC 13) (E 1/16 SEC 12/13) ~~ ... FOUND BLM BRASS / AET 2 5" ALUM. CAP 1498.69' r /& REBAFCE.S. #0643 \ SET 2.5â€ž ALUM. CAP & Vf CAP, CORNER #1 05 ' FOUND REBAR & -. 1 --Â»-- REBAR, L. S. #28643 * ~ MS #1759 # 0 CAP, L.S. #9013 UPGRADED TO A â‚¬- \ ~ CORNER 3, MS #7577 0/ Â·~ ~2'861TERLINE EXISTING - ' 2,5" ALUM, CAP & . f REBAR, L.S. #28643 -1 4 / I.il *04 44&~627,96, 52120, t . ~ - Â«- ~~HIKING TRAIL ~ 9 0 0 Crl / 4 - \ OUNTÂ¥ ASPEN.--~ %4 - - \ ND .BAE & \ DISCOVERY L #9 3 , \~NH i. 1 SHAFT Â·4â€ž- TAILINGS '-PILE - R ED ~ CAP, CORNER #5 7 . n CORNE 4, 3- ~ FOUND BLM BRASS 1th ~ M A MS #9606 AM , / BA L.S. 28 \ /- 0 i 91 --7 L 449 DISCOVERY 1/..1 . . 4 7677 i / '/ - SHAFT - 1 fil \A 1 1--- NO;ES.Â· ~ PILE SITE 1 - \ TAILINGS - 1, B> COUNTY PARC*L 1) THE MAJOR DISCOVERY SHAFTS/TAILINGS ARE SHOWN AS PART OF 17.695 acres - ~"~ -- 7.003 acres J - THIS PLAT ALONG WITH VARIOUS OTHER MINOR DISCOVERY , \ SHAFTS/BORINGS. SMALL EXPLORATORY HOLES/BORINGS POCKET ~ .0 I -11 1 THIS PROPERTY. 2) ~sEBUZE&'RIM'J-&2turwo~Rm~Boc~wsoi~ooEx~"o~nAow~ pR~JTRoAo CITY PARCEL , Al-/ -/ 2 t*--1-.-*----*-- / 10.693 acres CBK 17 0 PG 76) AND ;HE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXAMON PLAT (SK - ~ - 8 0 PG 81). -~* 3) THE BLOCKS IN THE ASPEN TOWNSI TE INFLUENCING THIS SURVEY ' 4 4 -. Â£0 100 00' WERE ESTABLISHED FROM THE FOUND MONUMENTAnON FOR THE DISCOVERY j. DISCOVERY LOT/BLOCK CORNERS, AS SHOWN, VARIOUS RECORDED PLATS, AS Â· SHAFT , FOUND REBAP Â· P IDENTIFIED AND THE 1959 G.E.BUCHANAN OFFICIAL MAP OF- THE & & CAP, L S #9ot.2 - CITY OF ASPEN. TAILINGS - f / ~- l > DISCOVERY , 4\ 4) BLOCK 11 EAMES ADDLTION WAS ESTABLISHED FROM THE FOUND - SHAFT 1 - / 4 RE L/mE MACK LODE MS /3956 AAS ESTABLISHED FROW THE ~ ~~ .F .'P /41 DISCOVERY SHAFT 1 ./.--- 20.04 30.00' -- - FOUND LODE CLAIM CORNERS, AS SHO*V, 17â‚¬ RECORDEl) PLA TOF ~ 0 ~ --~ - - --- ~ ~~ CORNERS MONUMENT?NG THE LOTS OF SAID BLOCK 11 ~ 4, *---4 Â«Spilf 1 1 - 1/T '' | I .4 0 -- - SAID LODE CLAIM AND THE RELD LOCATED DISCOVERY SHAFT. -11!jil f {' lip*ittf f * 1 i i f 9 / THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED-~~~~~~~~4;~ 5 ~ 00 IN SEellON 2 OF BK 230 1 , , ~,/ y ' F FOUND BLM BRASS --- PG 496 . - , 1 - ~ CAP,INTERSECTION 0 , .4 - LINE 4-5 US #9606 AM / REBAR & CAP, L.S. 7/ , - LINE, 2-3 MS #7577 --*. - i PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINE TABLE ~ #28643 SET (TYP.) Â¥ '94 2 il f -4 -7 LINE 1 DIRECTION I OSI Â»ACE 2 S . i }-. . -fl Bll S 14'50'49" W 20.50' 4 1 ... 8 ' P#Y#... / i BL2 N 75'09'11" W 31 25' 1060, f- - -- --4 f BL3 S 14'50'49" W 14.67' 1-FOUND REBAR & 6 -%--- FOUND REBAR & - - ' P 65.40' CAP, L.S. #25947 9- 00 0 -- ~ CAP, LS. #25947 FOUND REBAR & ~09*- - 4 i.01 1* CAP, L.S. #9018 3 â€ž E 1, rk 8 +01:,11.0 - 419 4 2 FOUND REBAR & - 7 \ W 14Â°50'49â€ž *, *4 I.,F 39 --- Â»mme"* , 9 ... CAP, L.S. #25947 0 - -5/ 9- / h 27 8 7,40'49" . 2,0.00' 78.001 , t ;31 \ - 11 L -%*--- , 115.00 i / 26 1 i , f .- h 1 1 - 25 ; THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED FOUND REBAR &1 rv , 1 / (P. ..%- In / /24 i~- IN BK 206 @PG 334 CAP, L.S. #2376 ~ 41 - *0 ~ ~FOUND FL~GGED SPIKE Â·- â‚¬ 16330, -\ \\--4 \ -1-- ~ / / / 2'i '22 / //'*~ S Orr~43 ".;, 164.99' 214Â·50Â·.9. --- & 6 'Aok - - f UPGRADED TO A REBAR - r- 4-Â£ 1 t GRAPHIC SCALE 96 21 .*64 I l & CAP. L,S. #78643 1 5, bY/ 22 ' 2 22Â°an#59~7 --- 1--j 1-~ , ~ 9 0. /0 0- h.illel.b L _1 316.35'- -- '0/ 1 03 %' 5 1% , -7 1 1 6 / 91APON MO~ITAIN ; f 2 0 n -14.-/\ 4 -L f f--- 1\. i i / / /5 k )- - , i / --) 0 ;VU.het,OaPWAN#NS ! 3 4 co C & FEET j ' 14 ' 1 FOUND REBAR &-1 i _ 1 l -- ~ 1 ' 1 1 inch = 60 ft BL3 t i , CAP, L. S. #2376 / /3 /41, - FOUND #5 REBAR Of . / ' * 1 1 14 7 1 1504 f 4 6---- -%- 4 1 -----1---4 1--- --- 1 30.091 - .4--- --1.- 11-~ 4 I - - tu '0 / - / / FOUND#5 REBAR 1 z T t' 1 1 FOUNIp REBAR &-1 1' 121 1 1 t i mi L X Ft CAP, iL. S. #2376 , - --~ 1. !1 / -----1 P h 0 / --- ~ t \-~ --I~, ~-- FOUND #5 REBAR~ 10,00' 50.00' th 1 1 -1 1 2/ 11 1 1 - M / , 8, 1 100 00 - 0 l A./ D / FOUND REBAR & 111 20.60 4 73.70' --- 7 12 - 69 \ 5 1/k/ ~44<4/2 - - CAP, L.S. #25947 --------1-__- I f 'LL -"l-1Â£-1 Of 18.74' \ 12---72 L- --- \ /23 ---QU ' -1 - - L!.430'49 FOUND 1954 BLM BRASS - --- SOUT[-1 ASPEN STR. 13 - i 11 7- CAP, E 1/4, SEC 13 , / \\--- 1 - N\ ---4 1 I ,1--alT- __. 1 -----4 0 1 - ---19900 i.- ~*/ ~~--- 0~ ~GEBAR,kf-- ,' ~~--- ~ - - _ 1308.54'_ _ _ _1Â®a.54'_ _ -4--4 --- ---- mi r / , ~ CAP, L.S. #1~29 9 la f .,1 9- 1, N 00'06'36" E BASIS OF BEARING # ' - - / 7 9 NE CORNER, SEC 13 %-- \ 1 1 \\ X<-1 1 FOUND REBAR ru--21-\_-Of-33--Â·4 6/ f UNDER ASPHALT Â£ 2 SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC -0- le. 00, 37.50' -4 ---\7 0/ / CIVIL CONSULTANTS 1 1 \-9 1 , 31 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 ' f At A CE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL \ leo' ~~- ----1 NE CORNERJ SEC ,~3--- .4*. CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 ~ 1 1 - D UPON ANY DEFECT IN 1}1JS SURVEY BE COMMENCED WORE THAN TEN (970) 704-0311 1 1 UNDER ASPHAL~ -\N.- / .2/ A. 1-,a 342.86' 6*.98 ,61'919 _ 3 .0 9.y .00 999 FINAL PLAT OF: BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND DEDICATION COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT MARY K. BARBEE, JOHN W. SHEET 1 OF 2 1 BARBEE. AND HALLIE B. RUGHEIMER, BEING THE OWNERS oF THE FOLLOWING ~ DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN 8 COUNTY, COLORADO, TO WIT: - 1 f --- INSTITUTE *IveR d ASPeN d 11 2- O l THAT PART OF LOT 1 OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST FOUND BLM BRASS U.~ ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST, OF THE CAP, CORNER #1 3# 1 0 ASPeN 0 f f.--7.-h--- --L/ O 4 0 SIXâ„¢ PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE DIAGRAM CERTIFIED BY THE MS #1759 ~~ -r H UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE. JANUARY 4, 1896 AS ; 4 gl ~*~*31 2 ~ J -1-- --1 \ 1 MALLAI ATTACHED TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE SURVEY OF SAID TOWNSHIP AND ' 1 8 â‚¬ Music RANGE APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE MARCH --*-- NW COR LOT 1 LITTLE CLAP % // ir-- 31, 1891, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: (E 1/16 SEC 12/13) ~ SUNPIVISION i |ST 1 ~~ UNE 2-3 MS' #75,97 / ~ ~ d' LAKE FESTIVAL A TeNT T FND 2.5" ALUM. CAP & r\\ \ 1 0 A 6. 1- ST BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT ONE. SAID CORNER ALSO ~EBAR, LS. #2864p . N - 1 ".1 S UG Lt IT RT 0 N 75~09'11Â» W BEING THE EAST ONE-SIXTEENTH CORNER SECTONS 12 AND 13, THENCE 1 1 i k er ppY S S 8945'56" E ALONG THE NORTHERLY UNE OF SAID LOT 1 342.86 FEET, ' 1,~ CA ~8 89~1&'86'* E > 342,86'4-"-~ '~ lilli ,---- 1 1 i ..1\ l l MR NCI 9 TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE FORMER RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE ! A f y $ 1 3 1 ' - -411â‚¬4- - e h COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD COMPANY; THENCE S 42'27'42* E ALONG // . 1.- -4 -it-NQBW -UNLiQUQN~114- 1- -l - - ~-NUU 642~' -Â«- R Z . ST ill 0 4 HALLAM BT. SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 482.57 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY ~ 111 J : 1 ' 0 / ~ / 7- FOUND REBAR & ~r- 1 h Â® B 1,1 7. r & UNE OF- SOUTH GARMISCH STREET; THENCE S 1450'49" W ALONG SAlD ~ 6 4 %â€¢4LL 0 â‚¬ M 0 LFOUND REBAR &~hl~ ?AP, L.S. 0918~ ~ - /1~45.~* - ---7.-7 H K A h ~ RE. Te Aself WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 242.01 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER 1 1~19 . / 1 %2 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SECnON 2 OF INSTRUMENT RECORDED 114 1 SECTION 9 3, FPUND A BOOK 230 AT PAGE 496 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ~ ~, ~ ' , 1 1 -'hz N H MA AV J 00/ S 3947'01" E 87.07 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY I DESCR/BED IN SAID iNSTRUMENT, THENCE S 1450'49" W 115.00 FEET TO 1 4 FOUND- #5-- 0 2 2 / 1 708/ k THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 3, BLOCK 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE REBAR 1' ~ ... - U 6 3 Co I a -1.-1 00 7- , b CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; THENCE S 75'09'11' E ALONG THE SOUTHERLy l , 'OUND REBAR 4-~ 0 9 9 CR AV ~ f / UNE OF SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF- LOT 7 \G ~ / '' *1/1*p, L.S. #901~* 1 1, -h- p : g D ANAV 4 U f O1~ SSA~*D'~*~ ~1, 2~J'ite:'fTA~NtiO~fg%'Qt?LJORNE Oks~E- 971; 4 -1. 06 Â·/1/ Jb . 0 2 DEA ST // 7 2BJ SAID BLOCK 11, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF 4 THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED N BOOK 206 AT PAGE 334 OF THE PITKIN .. 7/ 2 zor 7 , / / COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY UNE OF SAID PROPERTY 40 7 No t;3- , A , il- 0 - Do W DESCRIBED IN BOOK 206 A r PAGE 334 77â‚¬ FOLLOMNG THREE COURSESÂ· - 1 7 9,4 ITII 1, 1) N 75'09'11" W 31.25 FEET ASPEN 22 174.It 08.00 FEET ~ ~ ~ -" SCALE, 1. 0 1000 SKI AREA MOUNTAIN 3) S 0355'43- W 164.99 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT ~12: ~ FOUND 05 REBAR| 1 -l 1 1 V ' %4443 i ' ' 1; i 1- -1--27 ~ THENCE S 1430*49" W ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 li' i j to>'2? 2 0 \~ 30~ * a 1 FOUND RtBAR & r j ~ 210.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 11; THENCE . 2,~ CAP, L.S, #f549 / t / S 75'09'11Â» E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 - J / .3 4 2 1,~* VICINITY MAP CITY OP ASPEN FI-Er TO THE SOU73EAS~ CGRNER OF SAID BLOCK 11. SAID CORNER ALSO -~~~ R~ ~~ ~ BEING A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ASPEN STREET; 0, / THENCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 S 1450'49" W Lt)T 5 ~ ~ ' .* CAP. L.S #2376 7 - ,,rni. TITLE COMPANY CERTIFICATE ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SA/D ASPEN STREET 14,67 ' ' %~ l j j f --T--<- FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE , i LOT 12 1 ..1 j S 8931'40' W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 804.58 FEET CORNER 3, MS #7577 ~ - 1 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, SAID CORNER ALSO BONG THE REBAR, L S. #28643 ~ ~~ ~' ~ ~ ~- 2.5- ALUM CAP & , , 96 NORTHEAST ONE-S/XTEENTH CORNER OF SECTION 11 THENCE JOHN W. BARBEE AND HALLIE B. RUCHEIMER ARE THE OWNERS OF THE 0 top , 0 E ~ 846>â‚¬* l . 31 --,3 ~'~ 1 PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT MARY K. BARBEE, N 0015'4r E ALONG THE WESTERLY UNE OF SAID LOT 1 108.60 FEET 'f, ' 0 N TO A PONT ON UNE -4 OF ;HE UT;ZE MACK LOAD CL/M, UN/lED STA TES '- ~~~1* p HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY, IN FEE SIMPLE, FREE AND CLEAR OF ALL 4 -- Vj. S Â»/14 f 1 4/ 1 6/ MINERAL SURVEY NO. 3956 AS PATENTED TN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 212 Of THE , 750Â§41' W PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE N 1437'52Â» E ALONG 71-IE LINE 1-4 OF MONETARY LIENS AND ENCUMBRANCES. 2 9 19 2 , .r.- A'A - 11 SAID LOAD CLAIM 707.96 FEET TO CORNER #4 OF SAID LOAD CLA/M; THENCE , 86,62' N 7506'16" W ALONG 7},E L/NE 4-3 0- 54/0 LOAD CLA/U 185.69 FEET / ; 7---7 1//Ill.3/bilioiliwilt/-1. 1 01 \.rat 1 PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1, THENCE LEAVING THE LINE 4-3 OF CORNER 4, MS #3956 / LOT'-2 , ' Uâ‚¬k 5,/ i / SAID LOAD CLAIM N 0075'47* E ALONG THE WESTERLY UNE OF- SAID LOT 1 2.5" ALUM. CAP & 4 t. 1, L_ I ' | I & BY: 1 476.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL OF LAND ~ REBAR, L.S. #28643 r VINCE HIGENS. PRESIDENT 3-L CONTAINING 17.695 ACRES MORE OR LESS. ' 4 'f--'-h,MOLÂ£** 6 i DATE.* -M -4~ 1 . Col 1 h.-K. FREBAR & CAP, DO HEREBY SUBDIVIDE AND PLAT THE SAME INTO LOTS 1 evii '.: 2 - 1<< / L.& 1064 (TYP~ ,~r~ 4.-j ~' f ~ 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 AND 12, AND A CONSERVATION PARCEL, b- 46 ~ ~ CITY ENGINEER APPROVAL BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED HERON. . 4)/ ' 6 : 4 2) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, IN FEE, FOR - ' h ' O -TH#:Â«72*Â£ r.-Alv' , z THIS FINAL PLAT OF THE BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS APPROVED THE PUBLIC USE FOR ACCESS, ROADWAY, SIDEWALK AND UNDERGROUND OUNDARY L*-4.-~ 6 -44 UTILITY PURPOSES THE 2 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY STRIP DEPICTED AND 1 0 '' - BY THE CITY ENGINEER oF THE CITY oF ASPEN THIS DAY oF 06. ENMELLPE :' / 1 ~t FOUND #5 REBAR Â£ , , 1999. 7 - DESCRIBED HEREON ADJACENT TO EXISTING SOUTH GARMISCH STREET 0 1 , CITY ENGINEER , '/1 .7 2 1 RIGHT-OF-WAY. 1 4 ~' '''' 2-2 k 3) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT A PERPETUAL, PRIVATE, NON- ' /4, t .5. *25947 ~ 2 En DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL 1 0% i /' UN RteAR & f *IreN l Â£ E- EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER, ALONG, ACROSS AND ' ~ ' 1 THIS FINAL PLAT oF THE BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS APPROVED - 5*09'71 ' E /,,, j ~4 aL *21-J 120 / 2 BENEATH THE PRIVATE ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED HEREON FROM ITS POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH GARMISCH 6 Vy , , -- BY THE CITY oF ASPEN DEPARTMENT oF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THIS / 486.37' STREET, AND THENCE CONTINUING WESTERLY AND THEN NORTHERLY al 1 1, ,- Al Q 7.U DAY OF I '. 1 0/5 , 1999. WITHIN AND ACROSS LOT 12 TO ITS POINT OF TERMINUS ON THE ' 150 00' m' a NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SUBDIVISION, FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT ~ ~ '' ~ OF AND TO RUN WITH THE TITLE TO LOTS 5,6,7,8,9,10,11, AND 12 1 4 . I i / '' .:, I I f k DIRECTOR AND FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE BARBEE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ./ I . 1 ASSOCIATION, FOR PURPOSES OF ALL FORMS OF OPEN AND . I . 1 1. 1 , 7 1 . f , 1 6. UNOBSTRUCTED SURFACE ACCESS AND TRAVEL TO AND FROM SAID LOTS 14 k / ' ' ' / ~t CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL 1 0 5-12, INCLUSIVE, FOR ANY AND ALL USES THAT MAY NOW OR ' S 03Â°65'48" W / HEREAFTER BE LEGALLY PERMITTED ON SAID LOTS, OR ANY OF THEM, AND FOR ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES. UTILITY COMPANIES 2 CONSER VATION PARCEL , 1 1/7 0 iu - 1 ~T ~ 1 THIS FINAL PLAT oF THE BARBEE FAMIL r SUBDIVISION/PUD IS APPRO VED , 1999. SHALL ALSO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED EASEMENT ,=~1 - :' fou~~~g~7 8 590.610 34 ft I k FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES WHICH SERVE LOTS 5-12 OR ANY OF ~ BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN THIS DAY OF THEM. 7. f -k---tx 4) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT PERPETUAL, PRIVATE, NON-EXCLUSIVE FND REBAR & CAP,- t 4 . MAYOR '4 PERIMETER BOUNDARY LINE TABLE -- ,~ 14Â°50'48" 17 ~ ATTEST: EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF--WAY OVER, ALONG, ACROSS AND BENEATH ANY 1 /15 UNE *ATM l - - ' / JZY O.0 4 LINE 1 0/RECHON I DISTANCE L.S. #28643, INTERSECTION\~ W;51Â£1':filiEBACZWJL TANwPLitoMPARTEADL:NA#~SSE~;BED LINE 1-4 MS #3956 ~, ' ~t~ ../ BL2 S 1430'49" W 115.00' 1 1 Blt S 3947'01" E 87.07' A S 75'09'11" E 150.00' \ UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES, FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF AND TO BLJ 37. SO' BL4 S 1430'49* W 20.50' CITY CLERK , RUN WITH THE TITLE TO LOTS 5- 12,INCLUSIVE, AND FOR THE N 00Â°15'47" E|~ ~ 1/ r-CtNTEi(UNE EX~TZNG '~ ' , BU N 75'09'11" W 31.29 FURTHER USE AND BENEFIT OF UTILITY COMPANIES FOR UNDERGROUND 108.89' \~F *' /' 0 *HIKING TRAIU ... BL6 S 1430'49" W 78.00' UTILITY LINES WHICH SERVE LOTS 5-12 OR ANY OF THEM. - BL7 S 1430'49" W 14.67' SURVEYOR' S CERTIFICATE 7 1 5) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT PERPETUAL. NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT .1 1 . ..- ~j , C F . L .5 /25947 FOUND'REBAf? & U. 75.'05'11" I PREPARED THIS FINAL PLAT OF BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD, THAT 1, MARK BECKLER, A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER, ALONG, ACROSS AND BENEATH THE UTILITY ' Â· , ' v' R CAp, LS #25947 THE LOCATION ON THE OUTSIDE BOUNDARY, INTERNAL LOT LINES, PRIVATE 1':' EASEMENT DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED HEREN, LOCATED ON LOT 1, FOR ' THE USE AND BENEFIT OF ALL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR THE 9 89=51'40 17 804.58' RECORDED OR APPARENT EASEMENTS, UTILITY LINES IN EVIDENCE OR ..2 7 7 4* ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT, OTHER UTILITY EASEMENTS, OTHER OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT OF UNDERGROUND (NE 1 /16 SEC 13) REBAR & CAP,-/~ 1 KNOWN TO ME, IMPROVEMENTS, ENCROACHMENTS ON OR oFF THE PROPERTY, SW COR LOT 1 BL7 UTILITY LINES. FND 2.5" ALUM CAP L. S #28643 (TYP ) AND OTHER FEATURES, ARE ACCURATELY SHOWN HEREON, THAT THE OUTSIDE & REBAR, L.S. #28643 GRAPHIC SCALE BOUNDARY HAS BEEN MONUMENTED AS REQUIRED BY LAW, THAT THE PLATTED 6) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT A PERPETUAL, PRIVATE, NON- LOTS AND PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD CONFORM TO THOSE STAKED ON THE EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER, ALONG AND ACROSS THE 100 0 50 100 200 400 GROUND, AND THAT THE SAME ARE BASED ON FIELD SURVEYS. RECORDED CORNER 1, MS #3956 20 FOOT WIDE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED FOUND 4 X 4 WOOD EASEMENT, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND RESTRICTIONS ARE THOSE SET FORTH IN HEREON FROM ITS POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH GARMISCH STREET, CAP, E 1/4, SEC 13 ~~ SECTION 2 OF SCHEDULE B OF THE TITLE COMMITMENT ISSUED BY PITKIN POST W/ METAL CAP FOUND BLM BRASS AND THENCE CONTINUING WESTERLY 100 FEET WITHIN AND ACROSS LOTS ( IN FEET ) I MARKED 1/3956 L.S. #16413 COUNTY TITLE, INC. UNDER CASE NO. PCT-8990. 3 AND 4, 10 FOOT ON EITHER SIDE OF THEIR COMMON LOTLINE TO ITS 1 inch = 100 ft. POINT OF TERMINUS, FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF AND TO RUN WITH THE TITLE TO LOTS 3 AND 4, FOR PURPOSES OF ALL FORMS OF OPEN SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC AND UNOBSTRUCTED SURFACE ACCESS AND TRAVEL TO AND FROM SAID BY: LOTS 3 AND 4 AND FOR ANY AND ALL USES THAT MAY NOW OR PLAT SHEET INDEX HEREAFTER BE LEGALLY PERMITTED ON SAID LOTS. NOTES: MARK S. BECKLER, P.L.S. #28643 1) THE BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS SUBJECT TO THAT CERTAIN DATE: STATE OF STATE OF STATE OF- 2.) FINAL SURVEY PLAT - LOTS 1-12 DETAIL IN THE OFF#CE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF 1.) FINAL SURVEY PLAT - EXTERIOR BOUNDARY SUBDIVISION/PUD AGREEMENT RECORDED AT RECEPTION NO. MARY K. BARBEE COUNTY OF COUNTY OF COUNTY OF PITK1N COUNTY, COLORADO. 11-IE FOREGOING WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THE FOREGOING WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THE FOREGOING WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME HERON) ARE SUBJECT TO A DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT 2) THE CONSERVATION PARCEL AND A PORDON OF LOT 1 (AS SHOWN ACCEPTANCE FOR RECORDING THIS DAY OF- , 1999, THIS DAY OF , 1999, THIS DAY OF , 1999, RECORDED AT RECEP71014 NO. IN THE THIS FINAL PLAT OF BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS ACCEPTED FOR JOHN N. BARBEE BY JOHN W. BARBEE. BY MARY K. BARBEE. BY HALUE B. RUGHEINMER OFFICES OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN COUNTY, FILING IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN COUNTY, SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. CIVIL CONSULTANTS Â· PLAT BOOK AT PAGE COLORADO. HALLIE B. RUGHEIMER COLORADO, THIS DAY OF , 1999 IN MY COMMISSJON EXPIRES: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 32 ' /' DENOTESCIANSERFARMEASEMENTAREA .CORDING TO COLORADO LAW Volt MUST COMMENCE AN Y LEGAL D UPON ANY DEFECT IN~SSURVEY .THIN THREE YEARS ' CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACnON NOTARY PUBUC NOTARY PUBUC NOTARY PUBLIC (970) 704-0311 ANY DEFECT W THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. 97089 ul /99 789PLAT OWS CON!8Â¥39 30 IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY: 3 - 7 BARBEE - RUGHEIMER PROPERTY 1 A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOW-NS-HIP 10 SOUTH, -RANGE 85 WEST oF THE Bth P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 3 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ~ i ~ *~~ 1 U'* 1 ' 1 4 THAT PART OF LOT 1 OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST | ASPEN INSTITUTe ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST, OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE DIAGRAM CERTIFIED BY THE, ~ W.C. Nl/4 CORN~\ g ASPEN UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE, JANUARY 4, 1896 AS * sEC. 13 ' &1 Â£ MUSIC ATTACHED TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE SURVEY OF SAID TOWNSHIP AND T 7 FOUND 1954-1974 \~ \ rn 'CS-NVAL . RANGE APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE MA#CH 1 4 BLM BRASS CAP TeNT NW CORNER \ \ 31, 1891, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.Â· - ~ . ~ ~ ~~_ â€ž / 1 fLor 1, sEc. 13 j h er RT BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER oF SAID LOT ONE, SAID CORNER ALSO . L ~* Ne s 17.4 0 1 / POINT OF BEGINNING ~ ~ ~ Â© UPPYS $ UG Le BEING THE EAST ONE-SIXTEENTH CORNER SECTIONS 12 AND 13; THENCE r ,# 0'~ ~ ~~77-*Lb' ~ /797771- 1 6 k HALLAM sT S 89Â°45'56" E ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 342.86 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE FORMER RIGHT-OF-FAY OF THE = '2276,4 qrb~) 1 I SL & k h COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD COMPANY; THENCE S 42*27'42" E ALONG k h Â¥ IT SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 482.57 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY - N 8904Â£Q51 1 0 265Â¢.~~1.~19.1 2[1<44Â£j ff' ~7 NE CORNER ' 2 0 M m R r e W f . 1329.34' 342.86' ~ 4,,34â‚¬p#86.49' -1-0, j 'm41 ,'*OUND REBAR AE --10*',SEC. 13 H KI LINE OF SOUTH GARMISCH STREET; THENCE S 14*50'49" W ALONG SAID NW CORNER 1 th th 4 WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 242.01 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER SEC. 13 OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 2 OF INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN i Â£-~ ASPHALT :f g H M.hAV 30 ~ & 2 BOOK 230 AT PAGE 496 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE \ i .6 \Fli 11*44: 0 36 Z ' 2 & #4 S 39Â°47'01" E 87.07 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER oF THAT PROPERTY k ~ 41 i , 2 1 i 9 i -NAr 5= 1 I U CO ER AV 0 â‚¬ DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT; THENCE S 14Â°50'49" P 115.00 FEET TO , 0 - 'I rn- -a 65 ~ L ~DE~ ~~ AV THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 3, BLOCK 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE I U p.. 9 N I n 1\, \\ \ j 99 9/. /1,1 -> CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; THENCE S 75Â°09'11"E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY \ . 1 10- Ef 1 I i /1 # / 3 1 - 1 1 LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7 .' 1- - U OF SAID BLOCK 11: THENCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 46 1 4. 1 -0 'N F.,.r?*;V Â«51 !91 11 S 14*50'49" W 20.50 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 13 OF %1 /ro ST SAID BLOCK 11, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF Al- / ASPEN 4/ e 1.60 3 , Â¥bl 4-Aff iC MOUNTAIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PROPERTY - SKI AREA THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN BOOK 206 AT PAGE 334 OF THE PITKIN 4 4 1 01,-1 0 0 . L q SCALL1LL-1222 t DESCRIBED IN BOOK 206 AT PAGE 334 THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: N I 1 ; 1% 2 ld < 7 1) N 75*09'11" W 31.25 FEET ~ *~ i .a, CITY OF ASPEN 2) S 14'50'49" W 78.00 FEET 108.89' VICINITY MAP 3) S 03'55'43" W 164.99 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT ~ 1 4 20, SAID BLOCK 11; i 1 - _ -_ _ly *211'40" E * 3 4 804.58' THENCE S 14*50'49" W ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 1332.87' N 89.51'40" ~32.87' - 7 0 210.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 11; THENCE ' S NOTES: S 75Â°09'11" E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 SW CORNER L 5 r,7, / DATE OF SURVEY: DECEMBER. 1997 & SEPTEMBER, 1998. FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTER CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 11, SAID CORNER ALSO LOT 1, SEC. 13 0 BEING A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ASPEN STREET; 1 1 21 THENCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY JINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 S 14'50'49" F ~ Wi SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER, 1998. i le./ 2) DATE oF PREPARATION: DECEMBER, 1997 & JANUARY, ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WkY LINE OF SAID ASPEN STREET 14.67 N - FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1: THENCE 6 2 CO\ S 89Â°51'40" W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 804.58 FEET ' 0 0 ~9 33 BASIS OF' BEARING: N 00Â°06'36" E ALONG THE EASTERLY TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE ;4 LINE OF SECTION 13, BETWEEN THE NE CORNER SECTION 13, A NORTHEAST ONE-SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SECTION 13; THENCE \ SECTION 13, A FOUND 1954 BLM BRASS CAP. N 00Â°15'47" E ALONG THE FESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 108.89 FEET ~ ~ ~ FOUND REBAR (UNDER ASPHALT) AND THE El/4 CORNER OF N 2i NE COR im. BEATTY - TO A POINT ON LINE 1-4 OF THE LITTLE MACK LOAD CLAIM. UNITED STATES NON-CONFORMING CLAIM 4 4) BASIS OF SURVEY: THE 1890 FRANK D. HOWE PLAT OF THE MINERAL SURVEY NO. 3956 AS PATENTED IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 212 OF THE i E-â€ž. 1/16. SET 13 bi RESURVEYED ASPEN TOWNSITE, THE 1891 THOMAS FITHERS GLO PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE N 14Â°57'52" E ALONG THE LINE 1-4 OF 01 1 SAID LOAD CLAIM 707.96 FEET TO CORNER #4 OF SAID LOAD CLAIM; THENCE 1, PLAT OF Tl OS, R85 W oF THE Gth P.M., THE 1896 GLO DIAGRAM 21 I N 75Â°06'16" W ALONG THE LINE 4-3 OF SAID LOAD CLAIM 185.69 FEET r oF THE NE 1/43Â£1/4 oF SAID SECTION 13 ATTACHED TO THE TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT N THENCE LEAVING THE LINE 4-3 OF i,/ ~ -~1 __-~- ____ WITHERS SURVEY OF 1891, THE 1896 WILLITS MAP OF THE ASPEN 41!i i I u: TOWNSITE AND UNRECORDED EAMES ADDITION TO ASPEN. THE 1917 SAID LOAD CLAIM N 00Â°15'47" E ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT < - 4 N 89Â°29'24-- - 2672.90'- 4 ALONZO H. ADAMS GLO DEPENDENT RESURVEY PLAT OF A PORTION N 89Â°29'24" E 1336.45' 1336.451 _ _- 1 476.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL OF LAND -1327.80 - - g OF THE SUBDIVISIONAL LINES OF SAID TOWNSHIP, THE 1980 BLM CONTAINING 17.695 ACRES MORE OR LESS. l't RAY HARPIN DEPENDENT RESURVEY AND SURVEY PLAT OF SAID 1 \ \Wl/4 CORNER t( El/4 CORNER r t 1 .P TOWNS}liP, VARIOUS INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD AND MINERAL SEC 13 SEC. 13 I SURVEY, SUBDIVISION, CONDOMINIUM AND ANNEXATION PUTS AS FOUND 1954 BLM ARE RECORDED WITH THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S FOUND 1954 BLM r BRASS CAP BRASS CAP OFFICE AND THE SHOWN FOUND MONUMENTATION. \ THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY SOPRIS 2 ENGINEERING, LLC (SE) To DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OR EASEMENTS 5) \ RIGHTS-oF-WAY AND/OR TITLE OF RECORD, SE RELIED UPON THE OF RECORD. FOR ALL INFORMATION REGARDING EASEMENTS, ' CASE NO. PET-8990 DATED JULY 02, 1997. ALL TITLE TITLE COMMITMENT ISSUED BY PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., EXCEPTIONS LISTED THEREIN ARE DEPICTED HEREON. , ~ ~ IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY' CERTIFICATE ENGINEERING, LLC. FOR HALLIE BARBEE RUGHEIMER. 4\ \ I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY WAS PREPARED BY SOPRIS 1 t I FURTHER STATE THAT THE~ IMPROFEMENTS ON TILE' ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ON THIS DATE, OCTOBER 29, 1998, EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS, ARE \ ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES oF THE PARCEL , EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBED PREMISES BY f IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND \ THAT THERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF ANY EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENING ANY PART OF SAID PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. I 1 1 FURTHER STATE THAT THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, Â£1/4 CORNER RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS AND EASEMENTS oF RECORD oR IN PLACE. \ / SEC. 13 / FOUND 1978 BLM SW CORNER 1 ~/ BRASS CAP j ST CORNER BY: SEC. 13 SEC 18 MARK S. BECKLER, L. S. #28643 -1---1- CLOSING CORNER GRAPHIC SCALE SEC 13/24 400 COUNTY SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE c DEPOSITED THIS -- -- - DAY OF , 1998, AT M., IN ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 400 11 ' THE PITKIN COUNTY INDEX FOR INFORMATIONAL LAND SURVEY PLATS UNDER RECEPTION NUMBER BY: SCPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC PITKIN COUNTY SURVEYOR CIVIL CONSULTANTS DATE: NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL- a02 MAIN STREET, SUITE AB FILING INFORMATION: SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST, ' ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN â„¢IS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS OF THE 6TH P.M. AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION (970) 704-0311 CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN â„¢IS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE â„¢AN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICADON SHOWNI HEREON 97089 1 /11 /99 89SITE.DWC K -In 19 1Â¥NIS NO 98,90. ,Zoycze ./ - -. IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY: - '-1-1: BARBEE I.=.= RUGHEIMER PROPERTY , A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, \RANGE 85 WEST OF THE Bt-1-1 P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO . ~ SHEET 2 OF 3 CORNER 1, MS #3956 /4-Â§%). 1Â»--------- FOUND 4" X 4" WOOD | - POST W/ METAL CAP L 1 77-LE / 4 - - -- - - MARKED 1/3956 L.S. #16413 . #3956 - \ \%~h l, F0UND BLU BRASS 1 44 ~ ~~ ~* ~ SEC 13 BEARS r-SET REBAR & CAP, DISCOVERY SHAFT / i S 00-00"44" W 660.00 r \ W. C. CAP, N 1/4, 1 /1 \ L.S #28643, INTERSECTION LITTLE MACK LODE \ 1/16 UNE WITH CLAIM VACK LOrE ~LINE 1-4 MS #3956 ' < 1.1 79*-9 / i , ..2,0'P / ~ g:'' 108.89_ 1 . 1 1 n---- __ / ~ N 00~15'47" E \ N 00.15'47â€ž E 478.64% \ S POINT OF BEGINNING- ~ SW COR LOT 1 1-1 - - ~ NW COR LOT i #2539. NE 1/16 SEC 13) -4 ~ (E 1/16 SEC 12/13) FOUND BLM BRASS SET 2 5" ALUM. CAP \\ 65 FOUND REBAR & - REBAR L S. #28643 1498.59' ' SET 2.5* ALUM. CAP & - & REBAR, L.S. #28643 0 -- '~ -35~* r ~ ~=NER #1 < CAP, L.S. #9013 â‚¬ CORNER 3, MS #7577 /\ UPGRADED TO A % 74 \ L- CENTERLINE EXISTING 4 25" ALUM. CAP & -b - - HIKING TRAIL 707 96Â· REBAR, L.S. #28643 â‚¬J.>o. 60 --% 00 -40 9 00 0 / 4 / 9 11 1 i 3 \ --4 / 11 4 --0 - - tie' COUNTY CITY OF ASPEN# - / FOUND REBAR & DISCOVERY CAP. L.S. #9013 - SHAFT TAILINGS CORNER 4, MS #3956 - PILE UPGRADED TO A Â·<~ CAP. CORNER #5 - ---~ B?18 ~ FOUND BLM BRAN -7/ 2.5" ALUM. CAP & MS #9606 AM ~ ' REBAR, L.S. #28643 \ 1 2--- 8 - A/41.-l-1- 9 6, 4 i 0 -- - DISCOVERY \\-l 99 /4 76-7-fof)0- tk f Iff-= j 9 01 . SHAFT 1 - i 4 \ -1 9 1 1 TAILINGS A\\\ NOU.Â· PILE SITE - - COUNTY PARC#L 7.003 acres - 1) THE MAJOR DISCOVERY SHAFTS/TAILINGS ARE SHOWN AS PART OF 17.695 acres - ~ ~~ ~ THIS PLAT ALONG WITH VARIOUS OTHER MINOR DISCOVERY SHAFTS/BORINGS. SMALL EXPLORATORY HOLES/BOR#NGS POCKET ~ i I ./---.--I- THIS PROPERTY. - -- , ~ \ 2) THE FORMER RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE COLORADO MILLAND RAILROAD CITY PARCEL - ' / IS BASED ON THE KOCH LUMBER SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT I , 10.693 acres T<.1 4.8PG 76) AND THE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXATION PLAT (SK . 3) THE BLOCKS IN THE ASPEN TOWNSITE INFLUENCING THIS SURVEY DISCOVERY DISCOVERY ~/B lÂ» L~F~ AS 1%02 NVA~~ S MREO~D ~O AR ~.HEA S . SHAFT SHAFT yt FOUND REBAR & - IDENT/RED AND THE 1959 G.E.BUCHANAN OFF/C/AL MAP OF THE CAP, L.S. #9018 ED CITY OF ASPEN. DISCOVERY SHAFT 1. TAILINGS & 0 / N 1 -'-I 1 PILE > DISCOVERY t/5 - 4) BLOCK 11 EAMES ADD/TION WAS ESTABLISHED FROM 7HE FOUND ~ SHAFT / i CORNERS MONUMENUNG THE LOTS OF SAID BLOCK 1. r.. 61 - 5) THE UTTLE MACK LODE M. S. #3956 WAS ESTAX/SHED FROM THE 1 1 ~- - r~' / ' 1 V. 7 - 1/ - FIRST STREET FOUND LODE CLAIM CORNERS, AS SHOWN, THE RECORDED PLAT OF 1 1 - ' 30.bo' ~ SAID LODE CLAIM AND THE FIELD LOCATED DISCOVERY SHAFT. 1 1 // . -----, 65.40' / \ THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED Pi 2 CAP, L.S. #9184 1 / LFOUND BLM BRASS ------ --- FOUND REBAR &~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S,~~|ON 2 OF BK 230 1 1--- CAP, INTERSECTION -- Â£ LINE 4-5 MS #9606 AM ,- REBAR & CAP, L.S. 7, UNE- 2-3 MS #-1577 --. - --~ PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINE TABLE ~"--_.~~ #28643 SET (TYP.) ~ , ,~Â«>lf-/04 /~ ~ . 0 Â« p J LINE 1 DIRECTION I DISTANCE 9 ~' Bll S 14'50'49" W 20.50' - \ /? 1 / 7 - 1 il , Â· , 1 #1 , L 1 1 ~ <440' - BL2 N 75'09'11 " W 31 25' 7 BL3 S 14'50'49' W 14 67' ~OUND REBAR & 100.00 29 // r- 1 1 FOUND REBAR &7 / CAP. L.S. #25947 FOUND REBAR & .g \\ 2 1, .4 $ CAP, L.S. #9018 / 4-290,/ - 5 CAP, L.S. #25947 1 0 1 8 f - 4 wl 01Â·\ 5 14.60. 100 00' 1 I -Â«/4.-4 51 49" FOUND REBAR & 3 --_ , to 1 2 1 /-k. 4 14o60'49 N115.00 ~# 1--- j CAP, L.S. #25947 27 , ~ 14Â°60'Â·09 " * 242.01' 1 un j . 1 40 1 -- 1 00 - - - / 10 $ -- +1 1/ --. 0 .1 - ~04 / '1 1 - S h I / CT)1 \ - N \ .A / i ---*-% / - 1%0 , -7-- . 1 210 00' , 25 THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED FOUND REBAR &1 r , , 24 0 0 - 0 IN 8K 206 @ PG 334 CAP, L.S 023-75 ~ 4, - -,0 4 1 50 00' I -%. ' - 162.50' - X % - f F ! 22 S 03Â°55'43" 4, 2 62.1 j.---- 1 4-- - , GRAPHIC SCALE 14 50' 0 0 1 1 ? FOUND FLAGGED SP\KE.4 -- 1 1 \( U:rA%DEN.O#{ R~~BAR - 1. 1 , --- 1 j -l 3 , \ f i 1 - ! 1 i 2<g j 6 -- -i~- ~ 0 1 / 4 -r 1 f- U, ' - -* 316.33' k. 60 0 494 0 / 30 60 120 240 1-1 1\ 1 10 0 / i ./ i ' 18 , 0 1 44 / ' - 78.00' . FOUND REBAR &- - 0 , ~ -- f- 91APON /MOLNTAIN ( IN FEm ) ~VWE;El C.~PRANORS i f-- --- -1 F- ~ - ~~ 1 l_ -4 - r i 4 CAP, L.S. #25947 -%*-1 I -- / , 00 / _ N ' -,14 /1 ----- F -~ 1 - - ~* SOUT#l -250.494 a 41 --- FOUND #5 REBAR. L 1 inch = 60 ft. BL3 i / CAP, L.S. #2376 -I FOUND REBAR & , lijitilit FOUND REBAR & CAP L.S. #9184 . 1 4 --1 j \ 1 1 Â®AR'\11421-1}J~ ..43.09, 'l L 1 1 - i ~ * F~~ND #5 REBAR s TR h 1 1 z , 1 lit ---e --- --7 i lf) 1 1/ FOUNd '~REBAR /&//1 0--* A- f f \1 9 - f -- f 1 18 ---- / 4-ta ~-- -- ~Odf~r --_ 1,1 4 FS f------ T f CAP , L.S. #2376 1. 1 b 1 -31 1 --1 5 10 2 - 1 0 1 ... ' -* 1 4/ 21 1 100,06-,--L - , 341 2? 1 _ / MA . -Â·.1 lf) , a / L-- -t--- d -_--L_ ~lrION ,~ 26' 4 1 - 4 111 --1 1 1 CAP, L.S. #25947 01 - 06 - 1 1 73.70' IC'- - l 22* -- 1 col '0 --- AK. L -1 1 r - FOUND 1954 BLM BRASS - ~ 143049. W Â»Â«29=opÂ·J ;3 SOUT-M ASPEN STR. CAP, E 1 /4, SEC 13 0 --4/ 1 -1--- - 1 ' --- ~-% ----0 **11 4 4-Pif844- ---f L 1 1 --- 1 4-4- - - 1308.54'_ _ 1 --1 2121 - - --4 44 10.00. --* -9 l 1, T 1' L.- F -1-* j F N 00-06'36" E 0 2\Â«--0 j BASIS OF BEARING 1 4-- 1 *,1 2526&-LJ 7-7 / 4 4.j 0, 1 1 -1 /-30Â·00' 1 ,- NE CORNER, SEC 13 1 P.---------- - b ID- .1 1 FOUND REBAR . 1 4-: k\ UNDER ASPHALT i , \ -- ~ 751[W\.- , / 0 / L / 0 /4? r-\ SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC - *.00 37.50' - 1 9.-- Â«-4 1 Â£ / --27"=- / k 1 CIVIL CONSULTANTS -/ \\-4 0 / - *%- - 1 .- 2/ 1 L 1 -. X.-41 1 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 - 1-7 1~- --1.- NE CORNER.' SEC,"13 -- NOTICEÂ· ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU WUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL /A-U ~ / ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN TWS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS -1 AnER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION' --- \ UNDER ASPHALTi CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 - 1%260' 1 1 FOUND REBAR ~ BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE â„¢AN TEN / (970) 704-0311 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICAnON SHOWIN HEREON . 1 97089 1,/11 /99 89SITE.DWC 4 / / .89*08 7 50.02 - - -4% V-- NÂ«ir 1 IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY. BARBEE - RUGHEIMER PROPERTY 1 -- A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED ~N A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE]-/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, ~ANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEET 3 OF 3 \1 lit' 1 // , 1 / . 43 43<5 -i - / / 0--1 -*I-* -i..* -I.-- - --1-~ I '' A --e - <*.- .- -- -/ I iÂ·, i . -// It ----* -- i / I / : I / I - KX-- -- - -3 --3- 0,9 33 - -i . -- %.- -33-J ~~~_ / / " 1< 4 ,- / ./.I -- - - --- ! / , 1 1,1: - /~-/ 1 / / - / --- / Ott 0 -7 - -- / '41'J /i' i 1 // -/ - -3 â‚¬-h - C , / 11 - 0 /, I / - / / --- /5- -01 -- F --T ' Â£ It - , -/ / // // / / /,r / / ...DISCOVERY - 1 -- 020 1 / / / ' SHAFT (TYP.1.-4 - - Â· , 41/1 d . -/ - - - --0 - / ,- -- --- I 1/ - / / C - - - - - / , -- 01 01 - 1/ -1 0 1 i , , 1 / i.' / 1 / / / - 0 - / . EXISTING-OAK BRUSH , lit .- :.-- -- ----- -6 -- 3 0201 - - 1, 1 1 ./ .1 1 1 ---/ K .,- 0 - If -- -< / 6 t ir - e , 1 , 0 , 0 / // / 1 / .../ / ./.- / / / / 2 / W 7* - ~ -- A I / 1 1 .ir f 1 '1 -/ \ O V 0 1 -7 W \ 4 49 / / i / / , il , 20 4 7 ' Ill 4, e 9 + I 3-9-3 23, 1 %2 1 4 /1 lili 1,1/ 1 (1 1 1 - ...8 07 1.i Il,l 4' OV / 111'. i l t i Il 4.- 1 l 11 111 1 f 42 / , \ 1 011/ 2 CP / Iiil j ; t \ 1 1 1 1 21 1 lilli \ \ / 0=1 -\ LI \ , / 1 / 1, 1 i , -h , 2 1 1 /1 ./\ 3 ? /1 ' 4fdy . f - CP // Cr / NOTES: , Iii / 1 1$\ ll1 1 - 1 1.1 j -- -- 'iIi 1/,111 It'l ' - Lit <A + 1 j ' 1 1) THE MAJOR DISCOVERY SHAFTS/TAILINGS ARE SHOWN AS PART OF 1/ 1 , \ r,/ \ THE PLAT ALONG WITH VARIOUS OTHER MINOR DISCOVERY r? SHAFTS/BORINGS. SMALL EXPLORATORY HOLES/BORINGS POCKET , , THIS PROPERTY. 3 fl i /10, lili am I 1 . / / / I rQ 1 / \Â£251\ \\ % 1 11 1 i 2) THE FORMER RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE COLORADO MIDLAND RALROAD 2 ~~ ' /1 - 1 33/1 1 1 / 7 / IS BASED ON THE KOCH LUMBER SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT 1 ' <:23 1 1 1 .1 1 D.---- #3, -Ir... 1 1 11 -, /\ \ \\ \ 1 'j (BK 17@PG 76) AND THE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXATION PLAT (BK 1 1 / 8 0 PG 81) 11 , 1 , / r - il Al . \ 3) THE BLOCKS IN THE ASPEN TOWNSITE INFLUENONG THIS SURVEY ; 11 'P --4-3 ~6<~~le/ \ 0 3/ / 0 WERE ESTABUSHED FROM THE FOUND NIONUMENTATION FOR THE o j LOT/BLOCK CORNERS, AS SHOWN, VAR/OUS RECORDED PLATS, AS 1 Â¢ r i 1 t l ' 1 y. 1 91-, , 1 1 0. 1 , IDENTIFIED AND THE 1959 G.E.BUCHANAN OFFICIAL MAP Of THE iÂ· j / ,$4 ,/ il\1\ i j. , I CM il r /117 <r / 11 / 1 1 j \ 6.1 CITY OF ASPEN. . / 11 1 , / CD/ i O/ 4) BLOCK 11 EAMES ADDINON WAS ESTABLISHED FROM THE FOUND ~ ~ ~ ~ / 4 CORNERS MONUMENTING THE LOTS OF SAID BLOCK 11. $1 l., '~ ~ '~~~ PICKET L , '' i 5) THE LITTLE MACK LODE M.S. #3956 WAS ESTABLISHED FROM THE 1 FENCE N 'i Â· / fOUND LODE CLA/M CORNERS AS SHOÂ»N THE RECORDED PLAT OF ~ ~ 1/ / .' 0 1: I g , 1 1 SAID LODE CLAIM AND THE FIELD LOCATED DISCOVERY SHAFT. j f / / 6) BAS/S OF EZEVA DONÂ· AN ASSUMED ELEVA MON OF 1011.77 014 0 ,â‚¬~ clr\~~3 / , j ( r E=1 1/1 1 11/ / 1 11 1 1 . i f 1 1 / / THE EXISTING SEWER MANHOLE RIM AT THE INTERSECTION OF / Ia l \ .1 4 \ / / ~LEIAVNATENEUEQUAN~O~OUP~OJEART BENCHSMA~XET'TOSTI*JN.G. S. .7 - L.4 j ... 1 4-' 2 -- - -- - PITKIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE BENCHMARK (7906.81') = +6767.95' , , Lf / v 4 1 '3 19 x:. 59 /:fll 1 1\ EXISTING. -2/ 4 f //,.3 w f \ 1 sHED ~I' -2.. .4-' r\~ \/ 1- * \ 111 \ ur lit It / 1 , Il EXISTING -~7<---__ ' / A N \ / 7) PROJECT DATUM ELEVATION 1000.00' = CITY OF ASPEN 1998 1 ~ RETAINING WALL\ 1 ' r (/) m 9 e DREXEL-BARRELL GPS GRID CONTROL DATUM ELEVATION 7912.61' -1 :UOM .i 1 l 05 % 1 4 8) CONTOUR INTERVAL: TWO (2) FEET. 1 il ' \ -- ~/ / 1 'rt~ ----~ *z c, ~ i \.~ ' z i Fol F m //ff 4 , 1 1 x11 .040 I \ / 0 / / 11 i 2/111 1/ 6 1 f ..1/ \-%0 0 0\ / UTILITY LEGEND / //, / , ~ 5 7/.1~~ t~ 17L / , 41 - i \ 1%1 zo L \ , f //1 P \ 1 - EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC ./ , a. 9 451 1 - 4 / '6Â¥ J / l H . 1 'J,Ft:Lil~./ SOUTH _p.ARMISE-HeSâ‚¬Fe--~ W - '' ' W- C C- EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC W -- , (INT>.) f - r- - G ----- G -- EXISTING GAS O / F ; 1 -0 lul / '' -m~ 4 1 7 1 8.0 , 1 40 2% \ - SEW - SEW - EXISTING SEWER , 1 ar *F-34 V ~' l SEVY.~ SEW SEW ~ SEW SE* ' SEW ~ SEW SEW 1 A -1 1 1 2- .UE"-7\ f L--r~ 11 1/ / - w - EXISTING WATER ./ / 2/ /f . // 5 / 'L 2- .04, 4 1 l/A ' , ~ ~/ 1 -------- - /V / r/ . A A \9 : - -Arn - E/T -- -T-T EXISnNG TELEPHONE 2%12\3 Hl 1 w w .///7 // f f - -W 4- ,A EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT ge\.,4 0220\% \ S M. 4/B 1//1 / EXISTING WATER VALVE EXISTING S.M.H EXISTING UTILITY PEDESTAL :SS a < RIM = 1028.19 in /Â»49 / f 1 , INV IN = 1022.08 4 919 7 0 7 2 (D INV OUT = 1021.02 , U 8 -1 1 1 l < X ~| -A U l ' / --- E /3 - TE:, a f o c h 3- 11 0 - F 1 z z 16 & M -1 < i m < f rn ...........C 1 1 4 1 f (IN FEET ) , * 1 inch = 20 ft. . SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 NOTICE- ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL it - CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE IHAN TEN (970) 704-0311 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIACAnON SHOWN HEREON. 97089 11'11 ~99 89S'TE.DWC E D 31 1 . A ... I Sue Le T FINAL PLAT OF: BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST oF THE 6th P.M CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND DEDICATION COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT MARY K. BARBEE, JOHN W. SHEET 1 OF 2 RIVER $ BARBEE, AND HALLIE B. RUGHEIMER, BEING THE OWNERS OF THE FOLLOWING ASPEN $ DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN '4 \ / L--1-1-119\ :11 'i 1 1 1-T--.7--7--\ 7-~333Vj,GO--,4be ~~ ~ INSTITUTE = COUNTY, COLORADO. TO WIT: j 4 1 --1\ ) THAT PART Of- LOT 1 OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST FOUND BLM BRASS be.~ 0 0 /41 4 t + 4* ASPEN HALL... ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST. OF THE 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 0-Â»_- 4 u MUSIC CAP. CORNER #1 .~~ ~ FOUNb Bl.61 BRASS 1 , l i Im FESTIVAL y SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE DIAGRAM CERTIFIED BY THE MS #1759 ~ ~ CAP, INTERSEÂ¢nON, / ~ 1 1 ,- 1, 0 -reNT f\ -i:42/ ~HEDAis THER gNEUCEND lf**7011101?UIP AND ' I ' UNE 4-4 US #9506 k f -1 11//1 1/1 1 ..Le .T RANGE APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE MARCH ~ NW COR LOT 1 ~ UTTLf a..01,0 31, 1891, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: (E 1/16 SEC 12/13) SUNPIVISWAJ 1 1 1 r -~*~ tr-37---4 1 ~- li Â« f-1-1-,- Â·-4 4% 0/ / i 1 / f 1/ T 1 â€¢-7- 1//1/' $ f 1 ' 1 1 1 1 --.-1 1 , 1 1 h h BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER Of SAID LOT ONE, SAID CORNER ALSO REBAR, L.S. #28643 pill -r - 6 BONG THE EAST ONE-SDGEENTH CORNER SECTIONS 12 AND 13, THENCE FND 2.5" ALUM. CAP & 1 -7 - N-Z2.09'11* W N 75.0911- M UPPY 8 S 89'45'56" E ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 342.86 FEET. S 89Â°45'56" E 342.86' 4-\ 10100' 1 5 PR Nc s '49 -- -228.23' TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE FORMER RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE 74 - 21-72 0 6L EX , A 2--NOR ID UNC.Â£77QN>3 ~ 1 Â· ; HALLAM ST. COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD COMPANY; THENCE S 4277'42Â» E ALONG . 1 UNE OF SOUTH GARMISCH STREET; THENCE S 1450'49' W ALONG SAID REBAR UNDER ASPHA . 4 3 - 62 9*-- 4Â« 34 J L- -4 -1- 1 _ 2 I SECRON !1 3, FOUND H K; 0 4, C. f W H 'r.r ~ 1 -1- - KNG;*~ST ZORNER~~ -1- f h SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 482.57 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY / 1 Â·~ - e w IN TRE T :st:_tgau=% f:2~1CZ~T mI~sl~~F~2Ul~~ l 'AL *, ' - 1 1 -'14 F ND;ENat f ~34 . ~ 9 \ / 0001*R -*29.00 i , 42 BOOK 230 AT PAGE 496 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ' AV -1 I j i j HMA -2 S 39'47'01* E 87.07 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY ; /'FOUND #5 - -- * 009/009 //./.,--/ Toll & 0 3 / 1 1 REBAR / L. ; <41 -4 / I 'N ----1 - L co ER v e DESCR/BED IN SAID INSTRUMENT; THENCE S 14'50'Â« W 115.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 3, BLOCK 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE 4 7- --' Â¢ :,~ 0 1/ F / FOUND REBAR & --- (47- ~ _ CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; 7HENCE S 7509'11Â» E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY 1 1 - U 2 ./ / 1 4 \ - - I -U I 2 h j . LINE Of- SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7 # --~ OF SAID BLOCK 11: THENCE LEAVING â„¢E SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 1 / f 4 0Â« rkf#*pr Â£ //,/ E-- 1 1 CAP, L.S. #9018 , 2 0 1 oe* sT J <r 0 AN AV 0 11 S 1450'49- W 20.50 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 13 OF O R r# 1 . SAID BLOCK 11, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF 1 f 0/* 10 THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN BOOK 206 AT PAGE 334 OF THE PITKIN 1,0 4,120 r sÂ·r ~ ~ ~ LOT 7 35.~20 388.00' COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAD PROPERTY / 49â‚¬' / Ill \t \ \le DESCRIBED IN BOOK 206 AT PAGE 334 THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: / 04 1 ~ 7---- -L ~ \ 1) N 75'09'11Â» W 31.25 FEET r7 MOUNTAIN ASPEN L - 2) S 1430'49' W 78.00 FEET 3) S 0355'43" W 164.99 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT : , 1 *4 / Aj t~ FOUND #5 *BAR~ I *- 20, SA/D BLOCK 14Â· ' 2- SCALE, 1' Â· 1000 SKI AREA 1 0 .**orm . 11 THENCE S 1450'490' W ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 / i 3 9/ / Ay ~ , P : % LOP B & 0 / /FOUND REBAR' & EAS~- c- / CAP, L.S, #16129 / CITY OF: ASPEN 210.00 FEET TO 7HE SOU77Â¥*ESE-PLY CORNER OF SA/0 BLOCK 11.Â· 7HENCE . 9 4, 2 / --715~2, ~.~4- 4,~ ' ' S 75'09'11' E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 6 ' -, L \ , \ , VICINITY MAP FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTER CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 11, SAD CORNER ALSO 0 , 1 BEING A POtNT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ASPEN STREET, , 04 1-FOUND REBAR & W THENCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 S 14'50'49= W k / LOT G 4 0 4/4 CAP. L.S. #2376 141- ./\24 fl1 ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF- SAID ASPEN STREET 14.67 .... FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY UNE OF SAID LOT 1, THENCE tr,Zi %1277 9 6 r ' i < 12 1 21% 1 1 1 - LOT TITLE COMPANY CERTIFICATE S 89'51'40" W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 804.58 FEET 9 - , f .7-- -9 - 7 \ \%33 4/ 1 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE / PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT MARY K. BARBEE, REBAR, L.S. #28643 .:... i. - 4 $ M.O.W. f 42.4< 4 ~ '6 ~ I NORTHEAST ONE-St)(TEENTH CORNER OF SECUON 13; THENCE ' JOHN W. BARBEE AND HALLIE B. RUCHEIMER ARE THE OIFNERS OF THE , N 0075'47" E ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 108.60 FEET 4'-~ i '<C ADD)'TIA, 4 4 * ~ HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY, IN FEE SIMPLE, FREE AND CLEAR OF ALL F--11N LOG' 16" Â¥ , TO A PONT ON UNE 1-4 OF THE UTTLE MACK LOAD CLAIM, UNITED STATES 1 + 1 , 0 MONETARY LIENS AND ENCUMBRANCES. MINERAL SURVEY NO. 3956 AS PATENTED IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 212 OF THE N 75'09'71- W if LOT â€¢9 4\ 6 : 1\ 1 PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS, THENCE N 1437'57 E ALONG THE UNE 1-4 OF Be.62' h k - 2414.4/10 h SAID LOAD CLAIM 707.96 FEET TO CORNER MOF SAID LOAD CLAIM, THENCE ' | PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 185.69' N 75'06'16' W ALONG THE LINE 4-3 OF SAID LOAD CLAIM 185.69 FEET I TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT n THENCE LEAV#NG THE LINE 4-3 OF CORNER 4. MS #3956 / 4 LOT, 2- 6% --2 Z {1 1 -fly -Â» Â« 4- SAID LOAD CLAIM N 0015'47~ E ALONG THE WESTERLY UNE OF- SA/D LOT 1 2.5" ALUM. CAP & 4 L..1 1 Iii j BY: VINCE HICENS, PRESIDENT 1 476.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNIVG SAID PARCEL OF LAND ~ REBAR, L.S. #28643 /'//. -1 CONTAINING 17.695 ACRES MORE OR LESS. 1 IÂ»%2-24*04 , \1 4 N Â£ 1 FREBAR & CAP, S Appll . 1- 1 l \ DATE: 1) DO HEREBY SUBDIFIDE AND PLAT THE SAME INTO LOTS QU ,/194.-~-1.--1.- - .1 + 4 L.EL #29543 11''fP~ j 74 - ..211- -1 0 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 AND 12, AND A CONSERVATION PARCEL, 2, 7 2 -1 | 1 . - - 0 CITY ENGINEER APPROVAL BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED 4 , e : 0/ 1 0 0/- V e, 1 HERON. / il-- - JIMN Ef- . 45 -1 3~ ~ ' c~ - *-- - -~tr~ ~ . BY THE CITY ENGINEER OP THE CITY OF ASPEN THIS __ DAY OF \ THIS FINAL PLAT OF THE BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS APPROVED 19 SOUTHWESTERLY ~ 2) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, IN FEE, FOR THE PUBLIC USE FOR ACCESS, ROADWAY, SIDEWALK AND UNDERGROUND ,/ / , /. Z /// N =)%= '1~~ '34-'Â· 4 ~1ND I;; RES~R Â£- ,; 9 , 1999. //// f .../, \ 4 0/ - 4, UTILITY PURPOSES THE 2 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY STRIP DEPICTED AND *~ / DESCRIBED HEREON ADJACENT TO EXISTING SOUTH GARMISCH STREET j / I j i ,1 'i qi 1-iN k 1r RIGHT-OF-WAY. 1 Â»- Lot .,44 / , / .42Â£4* 1/ 1 1 :21 0 CITY ENGINEER '&'' , 2Â£1' ./ s ~ *144 ,/ Le FOUND REBAR & U--_. i 5 2 M Di 41 h :$t DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL 3) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT A PERPETUAL, PRIVATE, NON- , 31 - CAP, L.S, #25947 , 0 447ae ----- 14-.2 EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT AND RIGHT-oF-WAY OVER, ALONG, ACROSS AND 4 \-4. Ld L THIS FINAL PLAT OF THE BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS APPROVED BENEATH THE PRIVATE ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT DEPICTED AND 41 4 DESCRIBED HEREON FROM ITS POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH GARMISCH 927' 4 /-- - W -1 R BY THE CITY OF ASPEN DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THIS STREET, AND THENCE CONTINUING WESTERLY AND THEN NORTHERLY , 1999. kl v 7.U DAY OF WITHIN AND ACROSS LOT 12 TO ITS POINT OF TERMINUS ON THE , e Â£2 - . i }, NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SUBDIVISION, FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT CAP, L.5 #2376 -~ FOUND REBAR & --- - 4 1 0 OF AND TO RUN WITH THE TITLE TO LOTS 5,6,7,8,9,10,11, AND 12 1 fTYPO , 2 DIRECTOR AND FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE BARBEE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSOCIATION, FOR PURPOSES OF ALL FORMS OF OPEN AND ~~ t 1 C UNOBSTRUCTED SURFACE ACCESS AND TRAVEL TO AND FROM SAID LOTS , SÂ· 03Â°65'48" W \ CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL 5-12, INCLUSIVE, FOR ANY AND ALL USES THAT MAY NOW OR /*/ ' 164.98' ~ HEREAFTER BE LEGALLY PERMITTED ON SAID LOTS, OR ANY OF THEM, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN THIS DAY OF AND FOR ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES. UTILITY COMPANIES ~ ~ 3 \ %-12-7 e ' THIS FINAL PLAT OF THE BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS APPROVED SHALL ALSO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED EASEMENT ~ i 2 ' ' # &' :'.' 0/ CONSERVATION PARCEL /' ' 590,610 sq.ft. . 1999. 13.559 acres , FOUND REBAR & FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES WHICH SERVE LOTS 5-12 OR ANY OF THEM. CAP, L.S. /25947 . 4) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT PERPETUAL, PRIVATE, NON-EXCLUSIVE FND REBAR & CAP,--n h / ////9 S 14Â°50'48" F -... ATTEST: EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER, ALONG, ACROSS AND BENEATH ANY L.S. #28643, INTERSECTION\~ LINE \ DIRECT'ION \ D/STANCE 4 PERIMETER BOUNDARY LINE TABLE \ MAYOR 1/16 LINE WITH OTHER UTILITY EASEMENTS THAT MAY BE DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED UNE 1-4 MS #3956 ~ 1 -----4' ~ S 39'47'01Â» E 87.07' HEREON, IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN HEREON, FOR ALL FORMS OF BL2 S 1450'49" R 115.00' \ UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES, FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF AND TO . 814 S 1430'49" W 20.50' CITY CLERK BL3 S 75'09'11" E 150.00' N 00Â°15'47" E ~ \ ' r CENTERL/NE EXISTING '<Â·i -- BL5 N 75'09'11Â» W 31.25' ~ RUN WITH THE TITLE TO LOTS 5- 12, INCLUSIVE, AND FOR THE FURTHER USE AND BENEFIT oF UTILITY COMPANIES FOR UNDERGROUND 108.89' \~~~Â· ' r / H#GNG 78,4/4 7-&6 S 14'50'49" W 78.00* UTILITY LINES WHICH SERVE LOTS 5-12 OR ANY OF THEM. ' '' ' ~ ~* BL7 S 1450'49Â» W 1467' * SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE -1 | /'fiffif,j~ '115 3ll&3~1/,41: ~Â· ~ti ~5~~~~~i, '~VOLND 4&BAR & :45' 4.-0 0--1 f 6) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT * / CAP, L.Sv #25947 05 11 h 2- 1 1 FOUND REBAP & I PREPARED THIS FINAL PLAT OF BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD, THAT I, MARK BECKLER, A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER, ALONG, ACROSS AND BENEATH THE UTILITY ~ THE LOCATION ON THE OUTSIDE BOUNDARY, INTERNAL LOT LINES, PRIVATE / .,./ CAP, L.S. #25947 150.00' EAHSEEMUSEENT ANDDEPIBCETNEEDF#1%+9=[Rl&:fITYHE~~1 LIOBESATEODE Â°THELOT 1, FOR - - _ - _ - e , 1 S 89Â°51'40" W 804.58' RECORDED OR APPARENT EASEMENTS, UTILITY LINES IN EVIDENCE OR ~ ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT, OTHER UTILITY EASEMENTS, OTHER OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT OF UNDERGROUND (NE 1/16 SEC 13) SW COR LOT 1 BL7 KNOWN TO ME, IMPROVEMENTS, ENCROACHMENTS ON OR OFF THE PROPERTY, REBAR & CAP,-~ 1 UTILITY LINES. FND 2.5" ALUM. CAP L.S. #28643 (TYP.) AND OTHER FEATURES, ARE ACCURATELY SHOWN HEREON, THAT THE OUTSIDE & REBAR, L.S. #28643 GRAPHIC SCALE BOUNDARY HAS BEEN MONUMENTED AS REQUIRED BY LAW, THAT THE PLATTED 6) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT A PERPETUAL, PRIVATE, NON- 1 LOTS AND PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD CONFORM TO THOSE STAKED ON THE EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER, ALONG AND ACROSS THE - CORNER 1, MS #3956 EASEMENT, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND RESTRICTIONS ARE THOSE SET FORTH IN 1~ GROUND, AND THAT THE SAME ARE BASED ON FIELD SURVEYS. RECORDED 20 FOOT WIDE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED ~ 16 FOUND 4 * C wOOD FOUND BLM BRASS SECTION 2 OF SCHEDULE B OF THE TITLE COMMITMENT ISSUED BY PITKIN HEREON FROM ITS POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH GARMISCH STREET, Â£~*- I MARKED 1/3956 L.S. #16413 CAP. E 1/4. SEC 13 ~ COUNTY TITLE, INC. UNDER CASE NO. PCT-8990. POST W/ METAL CAP AND THENCE CONTINUING WESTERLY 100 FEET WITHIN AND ACROSS LOTS , C IN FEET ) 3 AND 4, 10 FOOT ON EITHER SIDE OF THEIR COMMON LOTLINE TO ITS 1 inch = 100 ft. POINT oF TERMINUS, FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT oF AND TO RUN WITH SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC THE TITLE TO LOTS 3 AND 4, FOR PURPOSES OF ALL FORMS OF OPEN AND UNOBSTRUCTED SURFACE ACCESS AND TRAVEL TO AND FROM SAID BY: LOTS 3 AND 4 AND FOR ANY AND ALL USES THAT MAY NOW OR NOTES: MARK S. BECKLER, P.L.S. #28643 PLAT SHEET INDEX HEREAFTER BE LEGALLY PERMITTED ON SAID LOTS. 1) THE BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS SUBJECT TO THAT CERTA#N DATE: 1.) ANAL SURVEY PLAT - EXTERIOR BOUNDARY SUBDMWON/PUD AGREEMENT RECORDED AT RECEPTION NO. STATE OF STATE OF STATE OF 2.) FINAL SURVEY PLAr - LOTS 1 - 12 DETAIL IN THE OFF}CE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF MARY K. BARBEE OOUNTY OF COUNTY OF- COUNTY OF PIâ„¢IN COUNTY. COLORADO. THE FOREGOING WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THE FOREGOING WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THE FOREGOING WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME HERON) ARE SUBJECT TO A DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT 2) THE CONSERVATION PARCEL AND A PORTION OF LOT 1 (AS SHOWN ACCEPTANCE FOR RECORDING THIS DAY OF , 1999, THIS DAY OF , 1999, THIS DAY OF , 1999, SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC RECORDED AT RECEPTION NO. IN THE THIS FINAL PLAT OF BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS ACCEPTED FOR JOHN N. BARBEE BY MARY K. BARBEE. OFFICES OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN COUNTY, FILING IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN COUNTY, BY JOHN W. BARBEE. BY HALLIE B. RUGHEINMER. ~TNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. CIVIL CONSULTANTS COLORADO. HALLIE B. RUGHEIMER PLAT BOOK AT PAGE COLORADO, THIS DAY OF . 1999 IN MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: UY COMMTSSION EXPIRES: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 3) DENOTES CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA. NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION NOTARY PUBLIC NOTARY PUBLIC NOTARY PUBLIC (970) 704-0311 BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED WORE â„¢AN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CER 11nCATION SHOWN HEREON. 97089 171/99 789p AY.D'. C J.LIS 6 2 le@M V ;M210 FINAL PLAT OF: - BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT j V I .M A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RA-NGE 85 WEST oF THE Bth P.M. k Â· 'L. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO t S 2/ Â· / SHEET 2 OF 2 .../ 1 S 14-50'49Â» W 245.911 1 -4 1 LOT BOUNDARY CURVE TABLE ~ %2 CURVE \ RADIUS \ LENGTH \ TANGENT 1 CHORD I BEARING I DELLA ' ~ 4/ .t 1-:44\0- \\2\\\\.,\0 ...\ \ \% .\ . .1 + -\ 1 Lcl 107.42* 74.26' 38.68' 72 79' N 0457'32' W 39'36'42 1 + .1 I LC!A 107.42' 7.92' 3.96' 7.92' N 22'39'10' W 0473'26" \ \ i\ \ ... N - \ LelB 107.42' 66.34' 34.27' 65.29' S 0230'49Â» E 3573'16" # I :Ab<kil.#4-4 04 1 \ LC2 91.42' 114.62' 66.22' 107.26' N 0733'11Â» E 7150'19* - -- - fÂ»Â»21Â«-Â«-2-22>-Â«22-6---20-0--20 --2 0--rin.-2-p----Tr-Â»-- Â»20--2-JEE<T-Â«--2--Â«-Â«7--Â«. \\ \40\. - \ \ 4..i 4 GRAPHIC SCALE 158.14 rkÂ«: 4--0.141.33Â«12999. 6-#4.:2- ~06Â«Â»0\ \. r 10 0 15 30 60 120 00 0, 6, f S 01'04'38" E 64.69 11,736 sq. ft. 1 inch = 30 ft. LOT 7 ( IN FEET ) 0.269 ocras ~,/ 4\ -\ ./ . . 2 - r i S 1450'49" W 165.00' \0.-. N\.\\414104- .020\.N..voo\\40\ ~ LOT BOUNDARY LINE TABLE r-~ 55,00 55.00' 55.00' 2 - :Vi\\\3\ 3\ *\ ... \.\ -\i /\ 69.67' % UNE 1 0/RECRON I DISTANCE S 7509'11' E le LOT 6 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 0 135 acres u v 01 - LL 1 12.10' 1 1 5,887 sq. ft. I <15 1 1 11,705 sq. ft. 11,440 sq. ft. 14440 sq. ft 1 - 2 2=-2~..30Â«tti~\3>~ifillit\020-01.2\4~ 0\ \2.-42-430%.442 - ----11>.2~i>J~>941 f d UTILITY EASEMENT LINE TABLE m N 0.269 acres 0.263 acres 0.263 acres ~ v--- , 4956Â»1399~-2-9... 1 50' BUILDING 50' BU/LDING \ 0.145 acres c \ 1 1 212 S 74~02'20" E 17.77' 0 6,318 sq ft. u 0, EL 1 S 1537'40* W 12.10' LOT 5 UNE 1 0/RECRON I DISTANCE 1 SEP/CK--7 SETBACK J 11 - 4 b// - /2 1 2 \~ u ./ h .\ 9 60' BUILDING ./:'-:~i.~.EkÂ»4 39\9 0 4 SETBACK 0 3 1450'49" W IM LE!~ 61.87' X I \\ N .. .~ \I \ . X \ .\\ \2\. ~ 1 -~ ' 7 4/% u I 43 ~,/~-Lot ..\. %4 ~ 4 4 /2. LAND USE SUMMARY LC2 N /430'49- 2 60.72' 4 ' ~ AREA (s. f.) ~=<~-~-~~~~~-~-~~ LOT 8 / _ LOB ZONING \ 4142% 000 sq./1, ~2*' $2..# 2-.4 2. .. .' 4 -~4 .. 4% 3,017 sq.ft. 1 102 000 R- 15 2342 ocres S ~1450'49" W I 0069 ocres / -b, 0 919Â»35*4 1 11>~01 40 - 6/ 2 2 0, , .22.Tr.&:2*...22#2 9 4 / R W 11,705 AH1 /PUD \ ) i 4\-\ J\\ ./ -1.. \ 4 'i:il -5337-~ N N 75.09.11 W / 3 11,440 AH1/PUD 1 2 . S 14 50'49' W 90 57' 4 11,440 AH1/PUD 5 6 318 AH1/PUD LOT 9 / 7 11,736 AH1 /PUD 41....4 4 PRIVATE ACCESS 6 5 7 AH1/PUD 7 , / 2 259 sq.ft 8 3017 AH1/PUO ~ 'tio-'.. .,Jet,EASEMENT FOR I L- 7..0 -'' NA LOTS 3 & 4 - 0 ~ 0 34.84 0.052 acres o)~ j f.0 /, 6,1 13.55' 4\Ret.. 9 2259 AH1/PUD 8 LOT 12 10 211 AH1/PUD / 9.4.,4 \\. 11 lo \ . . . . . \ . \I \\. \. / 0, 8 \ 4 ro - ' A (AN N 9,446 sq. ft. qf / i 2255 AH1/PUD 0 t.- N 14'50'49" E ~ 40 / \ 12 9 446 AH1/PUD - 1 ~ N 14'50'49" E 48 39' h 1 \ . to . G LOT 10 34.16 ~ Â· 1 207 TOTAL 4.125 ACRES 4 I r - 4 0.217 ocres a a \ e 2,21/ sq n 4 > 0.051 acres ~ CONSERVATON PARCEL 13.559 AC C. CONSERVATION . .00 0 0 01 ~ \X\\ .. 1.\ \. 1 1.\. \2\4\ i 1 .. ~\. .\ .1. <)1 0 0 i j ./- f. Â« ...\ 4 24Â· '-, 6 i - . BUILDING ENVEEPE -1 1 \ 1- A <4 - N 1450'49- E 68.77' ~ 1 DED/CATED SOUTH GARMISCH STREET R.O. W. 0.011 A 4 41 1 . -- r.9 47~ 2 ~ 707;4Â£ ALL AREAS 17.695 ACRES 1 e . (447264 2 LOT 11 4/ 1 747..,72 N ~ ... 2255 sq. 0 07 2 10' BU/LOING [72409. 0 4 0.052 acres (f ~04\ 55.00' 53.45' ~1 42.83' ~ * NOTES.Â· 0 ' SETBACK 7,*yl, 9:Â£ Â·Â·'2211 J5.59' 55.00' HOUSE -Â« 11 * 484 sq. ft. S 14Â°50'49" N 242.01' EnSTING i rj Â¢,f ~S 39'47'01" E R.O.W. / 2 38, 1) DATE OF SURVEYÂ· DECEMBER, 1997 & SEPTEMBER, 1998. 2.45' 2) DATE OF PREPARATIONÂ· DECEMBER, 1997 & JANUARY, SEPTEMBER - - - ~ 00N %M$ & OCTOBER, 1998. \ \I \ \\ I 4 : - \ . 1 U nurr- IV 11/% ---- ---- 3) BASIS OF BEARING: N 00'06'36" E ALONG THE EASTERLY rv-r / i g -- - 3 -~ ~9 Â»2514--1-- -~-----1-Â«~-1Â«37Â«-1~22-~Â«022--1Â«-:0 2rÂ«.7 Ln EASEMENT \ LA 21 / 60[Jill BARMISOM STREET 3 N FOUND REBAR (UNDER ASPHALT) AND THE El/4 CORNER OF \ _r--1 \-13. 1.9 4 . SECTION 13, A FOUND 1954 BUM BRASS CAP. UNE OF SECNON 13, BETWEEN THE NE CORNER SECTION 13. A OffroisT,ZESTEZ-toÂ»#2529,Â°44 l--1 AL.Z.[46 V / 1 . 1 4) BASS OF SURVEY: THE 1890 FRANK 0. HOWE PLAT OF THE ;-. -* . %- /4,~,4 1 5 RESURVEYED ASPEN TOWNWTE, THE 1891 THOMAS WITHERS GLO OF THE NE1 /*NE1 /4 OF SAID SECTION 13 ATTACHED TO THE \ PLAT OF TTOS, R85W OF THE 6th P.M., THE 1896 GLO DiAGRAM 2 - .%212>-.b:12<3 : 12 #k ~ ~ -~ ~ /3-,3' .s~-2~9-,p) 1 74 ' 1 TOÂ»,Van- AND UNRECORDED E*WES ADO/r/ON TO ASPEN, RE /917 Â«4 49-Â·trtÂ«X ~4~4Â»6-Il > 41.26' 9.9 , WjTHERS SURVEY OF 1891, THE 1896 WILLIE MAP OF THE ASPEN 73.74' t./ / / ALONZO H. ADAMS GLO DEPENDENT RESURVEY PLAT oF A PORTION S 14~50'49" W 115.00' --- - - --2 70 --- -- I | / . 4 Of THE SUBUVISIONAL LINES OF SAID TOWNSHIP, THE 1980 BLM 1 21 ~ RAY HARPIN DEPENDENT RESURVEY AND SURVEY PLAT OF SAID 3.<F i > 1 SUR,EY. SUBD/WS/ON, COVDOW/MUM AND ANNEXA 770/Â¢ PLA 73 AS r.\04.21 \1 -S-...\Nj\- ARE RECORDED WITH THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S / 701Â»VSH/P, VAR/aus #VS mUMENE Cy RECORD AND WWERAL 4\..\43.00.4~ :I: h...0.\V< ..42 0% *f' 10 - 2% 1 / ~ ITJ OFFICE AND THE SHOWN FOUND MONUMENTADON. 5) FOR SECTION 13 BREAKDOWN INFORMATION REFER TO THE p I n P 1 RECEPRON No. OF THE Pin<IN COUNTY RECORDS. l4 i IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT FOR THIS PROPERTY RECORDED AS 0 r o , r/ THE FORMER RIGHT-OF-WAY OF TVE COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD 44>031>1 2 -~ ~*-:# ;>~< 9 i rn J 5 BASED ON 17â‚¬ KOCH LUMBER SU80/WS/ON EXEMPTION PLA T 1 9 1 (BK 170PG 76) AND THE MOUNTA#N EDGE ANNEXAT]ON PLAT (BK 0 69 ~- Ill 10 0 --- - -- -4 -- -------. Z V / SOPGal). Ih 3'Iii ~ z i 7) THE BLOCKS IN THE ASPEN TOWNS#TE INFLUENCING TH#S SURVEY â„¢ LOT/BLOCK CORNERS, AS SHOWN, VARIOUS RECORDED PLATS, AS WERE ESTABLISHED FROM THE FOUND MONUMENTAMON FOR THE 0 ' i /OENVF/ED AND me /959 GEBUCHANAN O"7(/AL MAP of- 1HE 1 1 1 -1 CITY OF ASPEN. 1 4 1 L Â¢ r / , i I / #-:Ni.T/Li.2...%#2-6- . - - 1 1 -1 1 1 7 1 --- U 1 - --- 04.--1 82 BLOCK 11 EAMES ADD/170,/ WAS ESTABLISHED /7?ow DHE FOUND 1 \ *1 -~ . CORNERS MONUMENT1NG THE LOTS OF ~8 BLOCK 11. 1 97 RE L/UZE MACK LODE M.S. #3956 WAS ESTABLISHED FROM THE ' 1 ' ' 1 1 FOUND LODE CLA/,W CORNERS ASSHON,V, 7HE RECORDED PLAT GF \ SAID LODE CLAIM AND THE FIELD LOCATED DISCOVERY SHAFT. 78.00' 1 1 tl 1 -----4 10) DENOTES CONSERVAT;ON EASEMENT AREA. 1 , SEE PLAT NOTE 2 ON SHEET 1. _3_75~09'11"W-' ~~ 1 1 / 1 1 1 31.25' 20.50' 1 i 1 S 14'50'49' F , 1 1 1 SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC .3 , , CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW VOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 ACnON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY MTHIN THREE YEARS (970) 704-0311 AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED WORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM 1}lE DATE OF CERTIFICAMON SHOWN HEREON 97089 Â·,11 /99 8951-TEDWC 1 r 6~Z N . 1 1,60.92 N ILDTG EN'â‚¬271 6092 S ,00-902 11,60.5Â£ S At .11,60.9Z N 00'012 5 8~00_96.61~~-~ ~~ , i '73 FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF: > BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A PARCEL OF LAND S-ITUATED -IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO \\ 7 1. ::\ \ 1 %. \\. \ / li\\X\\ ./ N / -1> \ 9 \\\ \ /, 4 - --- . 1 / 1 - - \ / - '~ ~ N \ \ i GRAPHIC SCALE x ' ./ / / \ - 1\ \ \ / qb . 1 , /\\ 0/ 1 \ \/\ \ . .-I 1 f ~\ 1 inch = 10 . ft /\ \ 1 \ . , i . \\ \ . / - ' SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC ' , \\ // I i ./\ \ \ \ /// 2 / I \/ i \ CIVIL CONSU<TANTS . , h . t. / CO 1 / f / / / ~ ' LOT 5\ \ \ 502 MAIN STREET, 8UITE A3 \ I i / I % N \ 6,318 sq. ft. . , , 1 \ CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 . \ \ ., \ ~ (970) 704-0311\ % I \ a . . 1 0 1\\ - ,/\ N \ \ / 00 \ \ / ./ 1 // / \ 1 . / / / 1 N \ \ / .....\IN LOT 4 / i l 1 4 \ S \ , , 11,440 sq. ft. / \ 1 1 34 \ \ %. \\ / \ 1 ..\ 1 4 . \ \ / / / BUILIANG ENVELOPE ~ ~ \ , 1/1 - \ / \ I .\ 904 5 03' 16 ///< \ / I \ 1 ./ i .\ % 1 S. \ \ \ t~ I 1/ / :I \ \ / 10\,AG *,0, \ 1 -/ 0 \ /// 1/1 j / .1 1 \ 1 \ \ /-1 /1 \ ./ .00 ocr 45.00, \M 3, 01 \\ 5,887 sg. ft~ , 1 \20 \ Â· LOT 6\ ~ \ , / I . i . \ I / / , Izeg 1 4 \ 1 \ 4/ 9 \\\ \ 9.# ~04 OF \ \ \ / 0// / , f ./\ 1 ' / \ 1 i , ./ \\ \ 44 . /// \ . + 1- ~ BU/LD/NG ENVELOPE f 1 06 \ // . I \ t --- - \~ CONNECTtON (TYP ) - r/yer DEPARTMENT 1// I \ EDGE OF 9 - '4> 41/..... ./ 0/ L. / \ 1 . TRAFFIC SURFACE ~ \ /9//16 \ I. P.. 1 /0 LOT 12 - COMMON AREA Q . 9,446 sq. ft. / 1 004 / 1 00. w STANDARD '~ 1 36"UGMT 0 2 t \\ '0 \ 4 90 1 / . 29 O / \ I ~>4 - m i 5.+ - ,. / 1 // 1> \\ ED .. .. I \12\% 11 4\\ 00./. / \ /0 , \ LOT 7 1 f \\ 11,736 sq. ft. \ c Cob,0 . 2 4-\ 1/ / / 7 1 \ LOT 8 X CITY LIGHT Â· f 99 N STANDA/iD ~ ADDITIONAL GARMISCH LOT 10 3,017 sq. ft. 20 <po 8. ~ ~1 , STREET R.O.W. 2,211 sq. ft -\ \ I 1.4 LOT 9 - N \ 2,259 sq. ft. 1 \. \\ 1 I \ 1 -\ 1 ; 1\ 1 1 , . \ \ 1 1 Ill 33 1 ' 1%1 11.06w ~ 1 33 ' 1} ~ 1 1 1,4 I '11 1 It i /1 11!1/,1 0 ' N , 0 , 1 1.1 11''I''b Ii'111.11 1Â· 1 .0. BUILDING ENVELOPE 2\ lilitililit -41 0 1 i' 1 lb'!11 11~11 I m O. *: 1 , IIlt7 1 1,11 I ~[ 1 11~414~ij ; 06 I N N S lili 11 l - lili,1 i 1 ; 111 1 :1 1111:11 1 1 4,2.0 I 1 1 1 11 0 .1 9111 I. 1 t 4 11 1,1 Itt 11114 1 \ 7 / -111< 1% It 1 1 1 . 1 lillit . i 11 1.0 1 ' 1 / i 11 l 1 1 1 \ 0 Ill 11. 11 1 i 11 614 6 . lil \ 1. 11'mi,!111 1 :1:1116 \ , 11-ilip' r 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. 111 1 1 Id lilli kiltrizil'11'11 !80/40/N ~4 ~ ~1 1 1 1 1 1 10 / 1- . TPMNT *A 1 ,!11,411 11 1 0- . 1 1 111 ~'1)1 |BUNDYNG AR~ i : 0 A , 1 '1 , 1 1 111/.:. , \\/1 . , lilli. All 1111 1. / \ 1111{1 O 4 Â·~ 1, 1Â» 'e,5,440 406 ll'!1111 lilli:.ditillil: 11. il~ ,;|41. f OITPRIVT t lilli 11 11 4 / 1 1//60.-0 AREA #,\ 4,~11~11 It O- 9.33 6 \ \ \ 1 PO.0 1 , \ \ \ \ 19 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ' 111 1 1 ~ f 1 I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1.11 B -4- .1,-Ili'.1, , A \\* ui ' 1~Ill k~ . 11 1:ll lA Â·I i 9 ' 1 ~ 12 l:\141\ #1,1\141 rÂ«- / \ ..7 . 1 1 ! 1 1 133: Hil L'' Â· 11 .4 P jl~j 1'4' \ \ 77% 1 114. ~ 1 \ \ 1 1.1 i + t A,3 o t 1 1 i \ 1 1 ilp 1\ ~ 1 ' . '~1 ~ 1 1 0. \ \ \ \ Ag. 1 9 . 4. LOT 11 -3- ~Â·- 2,255 sq. ft. \.\ \ , , 5 2 ./ 4 N SNOW STORAGE NOTES: 4 \ 4) BASS OF ELEVATION: AN ELEVATON OF 7906.81' ON THE U.S.G. S. 4 5 Â· ~|| ~~ BENCHMARK LOCATED AT THE PiTK/N COUNTY COURTHOUSE. ... N I 4. 1 - \\ NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICAnON SHOWN[ HEREON. 97089 1 //1 1/99 89SITE.DWG 44: 'a . L .1 ..2,4 9 f 1 6 1 -. 1 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A PARCEL OF LAND S-ITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE Gth P.M COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 / 1 - 1 1 0 / 1 Plant Schedule / 1 I j GRAPHIC SCALE 7 / 1\\ 29 G /60 12,4 DO /571-1/0. eFFV.0 ~ 0' e '- 10 ' 0 7.T-,~r~~~ \ / 'A Lic-16---di 56-1 /Xep 11 65%-F ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 10 ft. 10 UL- 1 4 P T .IS ENGINEERING - LLC 10 000 4 CIVIL CONSULTANTS 1, iip 2 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 BONDALE, COLORADO 81623 /3 Ot, C., (970) 704-0311 . f 4 \ \1 i.,\41 9 11 1 \.\4 i./Â·.\U il ~.'13 \\0 /l \ \>\ 3&- 4 9/ 92 4 -% \. 72 i /41 LOT 7 9 f. \ 11,736 sq, ft, CITY LIGHT -44-24_C STANDARD \\44 \33 % 1 1 1 \ - 11 0 7 6 t.fl 9 91 l \\ 10% 1 - 1 \ 1 \1 g LANDSCAPE PLA THE- 69TBVE-Ae Â©FoUP, /Ato, 62,0 AA,Al A *T 4 1-1,0 \ '54,92.-"ob-JAAL-% 6 0 05 70) 94Â», 6.-717 Ir - NOT]CE ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU UUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL. ACnON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY AC11ON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED WORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. ..,1,1 97089 11/06/98 89SITE DWG Â· r- 240 .. 0.9 I . .0 A . . 0 ' .. , , r..~ -- -I./ 0 - t 4 - ,, 1 4 - " .. 0 0 0. . :i . t>* .,, .. ... ..4 -0 - I 0,,0 .. 0 - 0 - Art . 4 , 4 - . 0 .. k. " 0 0 8 01 fe . 0 . 1 ., , 4012~ V , 0 4 - -- 1 jil .. 1 .9 1 11 ''e 21=141,1 1 Ih = - . 0, A b,1 1.A' m * t I 'VI /0, . ,---'. 4. 'r . L.JI L *#v#*pp-v-10 1.14Â»4,266ISÂ»Â»4449 1 -i, - 44Â»4Â«~ 1 r-----0=------------7---C~ i 4%/ i 1 1 1 \ f\Vi 7NG \\4141Â«< 32; 11 1 \ Apizj--1.00 11 1 11 1 1 - 04â‚¬R#3 7 \\ 9 . L J ~ ~ ABMT OR ~NAY Â»C,176* '4 1 1 1 r-LAA#73 OF smET FOUND REBAR & /MA90,1]WENT AFTMECT r 1%0=-mMW- 34- 1 DEDS,lim r it Z=- ,#A- J= - t \ \ u PROF'OSEb LOT UNE AFTER 2' CAP, LS. #2376 -~ j~ 1 PROPOSED LOT LNE AFTER ~ i~ 1 PROPOSED STREET UGHT7 -4 7 2' RIGHT OF MAY / A-~61 1 - , 4 4 \ \3 , I ' '.,I'. ' ASPHALT Ne ~1- 5' LIMEAPE- ARS,-1 _1--1- 242.01' . L.'-0.2, 8184- P, Elg U- SEMNALK 1 i U.quAL L --4--------------------- -- --------- O STAÂ· 2+34.33 1-tl GU,7ER '-4 . 9. SOUTH GARMISCH ST El Gump Am AS eUmED , ST,lÂ· 2+N..13 EDGE OF EX. 6 L Allt:W AS~64Â£7- Rl NEW END CURB & GUTTER ~-- ASPHALT (TYP.) 70* , 2. 0- Cl - __t 0 159.54 0 06- - - T _slÂ£=1Â©v - - -4 - - C2 4 g< - 1 k -- -s,=Â£243, 1 1724 --- NEW EDGE OF PAVEMENT-~ 1124' OV./.C.2 0 _ - O- - -- &1 \\ k LEGEND 4 - - - - - - 1 1 , EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY UNE *../.- 1 1 1 EXISTING UTILITY POLE | &00 .9 1 m EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL 1 EXISTING ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER 30 -49% ~ W t><1 EXISTING WATER VALVE d, 1 1 1 "- 0 05 1 1 1 1 <D ~ ~ ~ PROPOSED STREET UGHT I 1040 Py! STA = 0+30.81 . Cl PVY EUV= 1021.35 50.00' VE C: 100.30 10.50 \ 318 la55 Sl,SyS,Y 00111~5~ L & R Mor 0524 C~*mvs SumEr . AIVD SiSE AW' AVOWDED BY SOPRfS ENG#NEERNG LLC. 1030 Â· . ) ' SCdÂ· 1- - 10' HORZ 1 = - 5' WENT. 4* 19 01 PW STA - 1+80.08 PVI ELO = 1010.06 Â· 80.00' PE L Â¥5 1020 - ~~ 22 : 2* 8 - 8 4 1 I %8 f7N/9/ED QNOE ~ ~ 1010 *SE EXISTING GRADE ELEWATION (TYPO DATUM ELEV ~~ FINISHED GRADE ELE-ON (np.) 1000.00 00 44 2 40 2*<% SN %8 2% 2Â§ 28 8.8 I. 0+00 1+00 2+00 NUM- MNSRON ENGWEERS SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. DATE BY .Aob Ma 97072A SG SURVEYORS 118 w. eth street, suite 200 GARMISCH ST Dr- by: FT 1/ Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P.U.D. 12-17-98 SCHAACJESER (970) 945-1004 (FAX 945-5948) PLAN & PROFILE ~, - Aspen, Colorado (970) 925-6727 JH GORDON MEYER ~~ /5 4 - Fhe BARBEE 47 ..E '201\ U6U1 PT = +00.05 '3AV 1NV -4,6- ./ 2./ 'ta,jÂ·' 11.111 //jilli\\.\ , 70 5 97~%%Â« \% -INSTALL YARD H~RANT 1 1 ~6- - INSTALL 4Â» BLOWOFF DEVICE t~ ~ 22.5'BEND Â· N 13709.37 / N 13687 E 10630.2, /1//f///11 Ill 11 1 1 -T E 10635.69 -INSTALL 10 tf OF 4* DIP - . (1) 45EEND ,~*/~ CL I 1 4< - (1) 11.25' BEN INSTALL DRYWELL- / N 13607.66 . E 10656.22 Â· ST 40 DUCTILE IR 1-l. - REMO BLE PLUG - - INSTALL DRYWal i 8 LF 0 , . STALL 20 LF OF 4" DIP X / SCA LE- 1 "= 20 ' i - / INST 4- 1 . 1 j N ul# \ . 0 4 Â· m INSTALL-DRYWELL El 1.*65 / ; / 9 rÂ» \ NSTALL 1 STICK OF SDR 21 IPE / 1 1 l Â»41 8 1: INSTALL #30Â»002Â·44 +49 ~~ 1 INSTALL 6'x " YDRANT :~4414 Â· ASSEMBL ~*Â©~ A-INSTALL DRYWEIa. 1 1 1 REI)UCER N 13607.66 D - 441. 001 E 10656.22 0 / , Â· .0> x>Â©.0.. I . 1 \\\\.0 / 1 0-1 1 / 1 / f f 4// / : 1 / / 1 1/ / ./0 L , 1 /\-INSTALL DRYWELL ON - i / 1 6" SLEEVE W 3Â»*6= TEE & 6Â» GA VALVE-~ 1 N 13576.13 ' 4 < E 10779.11 64 / L / 1 ill 1 1 i. 1 1 . </ ... =t:m: '.143 10. III , i Il - Â·ihri- - 11- - -9- , l~411 < 11~STALL STREET GHT hi I m. 0 , r Win,7 8 V-' - di.-... 1-- / + .- f 2 ,~ ~,~ ~,~ ;,~ â€ž*. ~,~ ;.,~~-1,~>,LJÂ·,'2:i;:~fA :fâ€ži'~~Â·~i:j;~,~*j~~~,~~fjO~*1t. iÂ¥;bl~**f;FE"7~|~~1~jo \ 2 te 1 .eu 'Al.,WI'*2*4.+41.7 \4 93- :z â‚¬ 1 1 \1 .... 1. 1 4/ 1 1-----Y--irr-..-01~ 3 \\\ 1-- e 0 . .. 1 1 . d -- -EA- ------- I /\ ~r--31-3.-6 ,/ 1 JL. - -36â€ž 1.'Ld,12.-*~.,- w'*41,:1 1* 4-, - ~:Â·t, E SEW -18 Sl ~7 -- SEW / ~-DOST GATE VALvE 9 1 (APPRO=ATE LOCATION) , E/T -- 1-I 0 \ W // i \ 1 /\ EmTING 901 2 < / INV IN S- 1004.15 EITHER SIDE OF NEW MANHOLE + 1 1 EWSâ„¢G S.H At Z RÂ»41 - 1011.77 NSTALL 10 LF OF 8"SDR 35 INV N E- 1003.90 . / / Z N 1-10:208 INV OUT - 1003.84 (MATCH EXIST SLOPE) 1%1 INV OUT - 1021.02 STA: 1+89.79- e i ~~t 1 OFF$ET: 12.50 R -3 Â¥1 1 exist ss pipe O PR SMH c,4 = 1001.89 C 1 \>-,LZE..2.-EL.Z..I -Eli- < LEGEND g EXISTING FENCING -X X- 2212 -OE 05- EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINE SS EXISTING SANITARY SEWER UNE 888 w w EXISTING WATER MAIN -9 - -3 31-o/6 Z+<I= UTE EXISTING UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE AND ELECTRIC UNE al,â€¢40/6 E)(15TING UTILITY POLE a.u, I @EZ Â® EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE 1010 _ _ 1010 /7 _ 0 EXISTING TELEPHONE MANHollI m EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL 1~-LF ~| - - - - EXISTING ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER O 0.600 % I EXISTING WATER VALVE 8" SDR 26 1000 | 1000 ~ PROPOSED STREET UGHT INSTALL INSULATION STA 1+30 TO STA 2+38 --- ---- PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY LINE 1 PROPOSED FLOWUNE AND FLOW DIRECTION PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER MAIN PROPOSED SAN[TARY SEWER FORCE MAIN 8W PROPOSED 8 INCH DUCnLE IRON PIPE WATER MAIN APPRO)]MATE DOSTING SCALE: iGROUND ELEVATION < 1"-20' HORIZONTAL . 6 w PROPOSED 6 INCH DUCALE IRON PIPE WATER MAIN 1"-5' VERTICAL . 79 ELEF M PROPOSED GATE VALVE J PROPOSED HYDRANT ASSEMBLY 9 1 N A - - - . 9 PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE - 1+00 2+00 3+00 PRELIMINARY ' ENGrEERS SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. BER REVISION CATE By .DAIA 97072A NUM- NOT 2 SURVEYORS 118 W. eth Street, Suite 200 MASTER UTILITY \, D- * JH FOR Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P.U.D. PLAN LOTS 5- 12 t ~.4 11-11-98 SCHMUESER (970) 945-1004 (FAX (970) 945-5948) CONSTRUCTION GORDON MEYER - Aspen, Colorado (970) 925-8727 JH 1 - sgmOsgm-inc.com of-4 Fle UnUTES .89 SDR 26 0 Vwgs\1997\97072A\UTILITIES.dwg Thu Dec 17 09: 41: 18 1998 SGM Inc. (JTN) h 0.145 acres | LOT 6 [~ LOT 7 /// 6 INSTALL DRYWELLn 0 LOT 5 j -----*-Â· / 2 6*Â£90*ELâ‚¬U / 2 --<ZIEEÂ«94 k.Â· . 1 1 ET,TV - l ~ INSTALL DRYWEU ........ 1 ... -Ithill.... /4 00 --7.k 0 WO . 1 NOTE: PRODUCTS SHOWN ARE AVARABLE THRU COPEWID 1 4 .. CONCRETE INC. RFLE COLO. 625-1112.(OR I .-. INSTALL DRYWELL-7 EQUAL APPROVED BY ENGINEER). Â· :14 &1,0 . ATV#Q # - - -I '* ~ ,r-x . \\ r :N ... / a toi-42 -6- 4 *00* 343.-d . . e L EK, iff t .: . :.Â·..' f.; *d r A .1 6 .h j I. 1 444~4Â«Â«Â»~j~~ 1 ~ N-5 5\\ //0 3\< 1 Oibit6842- 70. 6 - - efi--- COWPAC,ED 1 0 .. 6 BAC*77LL 1 1 1 1 I. 1 - . 1 ; 1\ \ 2% \ \91 - C- . -ALUMINUM , >j 11Â« 1 4-5 .22::- - , 4 LEGEND \ SlEPS \413<toot h \ \ 1 2 5' AD. Sm. CONE : 1 0 , r EXISTING FENCING ---- --Il-. EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY LINE A SED'laV 47 : - C DIAMETER SOUD STANDPIPE -OE OE- EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UNE â‚¬ NTH TRASH SCREEN AT TOP O ~INSTALL DRYWELL ss EXISTING SANITARY SEWER UNE t>titt~tktm~1~ - Ill â€¢ t,q -.%* Â·. PERFORATED BELOW X W W EXISTING WATER MAIN ,- AL 729? F48,?,C -Â« + ~4>42/4 1-j#U \. ./ 1 1= ji- UTE EXISTING UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE AND ELECTRIC UNE 2 At LO- 12 6 0. . -7 O 01 122#41 ' 3 C ect, 1 EXISTING UTILITY POLE 1 -: jz*ja~Â«Â©-'432&~oaK :.1 1 9 1 EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE thft. 29/7 0 1 Â¢ PERFORATED CONCRETE PIPE 9 553 s ft 2 - - = / Â® I EXISTING TELEPHONE MANHOLE 5240 cres - d r 0 k: I - 1 - /1 MWUU FENE~A 77(~ t.~ m EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL =EW = bff- i 92:g#* ctâ‚¬349@i2(0.-Â« 9994ff 1 1 ~ "94- rÂ° 60 0,1-10 0142, Of /V70 054â€¢El ALLUWUU 4. acres < EXISTING ELECTRIC Â»NSFORMER O l rC; D O C 1.6-' u V O i ' ,-4- 24' 302 0.10 0_itu q~yog.-~p +5 ~ EXISTING WATER VALVE \ LE-Â»11%21# --I-~ j cyovÂ· U-Po 0.(t' 4-0)70 (746Â·.0.(f~ ry,-) ripos-432 492 '. 1V - 37 1 76212...'ZTZEEEEIEEEIE ((@1/ 1 1 9 0 . 0.21 lor 6' f 4Â£rkÂ¢:Ft:A+21 -*AL-4 , -INSTALL DRYWELL * PROPOSED STREET LIGHT Â·f , DRyÂ»ELL 57.ZE AND PEM77?A 776* m BE- BASED CW 5772- SPEDne h PEI?COLATION TESTS AND HYDROLOGY. K I , A AP#Ri#4*324. td ( PROPOSED FLOWLINE AND FLOW DIRECTION . - PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER MAIN '* DRYWELL SCHEMATIC Â·4 1 - L ./ PROPOSED SAN EARY SEWER FORCE MAIN C i , SW PROPOSED 8 INCH DUCTILE IRON PIPE WATER MAIN 6 w PROPOSED 6 INCH DUCTILE IRON PIPE WATER MAIN ~1 . 1 ! Al 9 9 PROPOSED GATE VALVE 1 0- . / *1 O 2 / I. k/ f PROPOSED HYDRANT ASSEMBLY 7070 r ~ 2-11~til\ 1---K~ 47 1 7 / PROPOSED SANrTARY SEWER MANHOLE 2 / A 4*4129 '/ 9 / r 0 . 1, v / U L. ~ 0 v SCALE. 1 "= 10' 1% k ' kâ€¢ PRDWELOT UNE FTE) ~ 1 + 100.,Mi 0 2' mGHT OF WAY Ir-~3:X~ )1~~ DEDICATION . a 1 4 I p / , 8 N I 111 A'O\\\ 1 P.:1.242,..~~fa'Aitteis~ I , -~Ariob~.~~.~..:.'4Â£:~:&122Tma1i*Lk##444?3*LI / ' --11,;11 1- Â·eÂ·-:~98#47'Pkwh~ et'- 11.:3:.=--- T P , -8,17\ 'ISEÂ¥~11'LK %............ o B ST,4.Â·~2+~4,1~ r--'wi#/ ae cUL ~779 LPATCH ASPHALT TO NEW GUTTER PAN AS REQU#?ED ; f.t -SaÂ· 2+Jâ€¢413 ~ â€¢x\ C2-Li.:2-Â·.iumouu;i,<r.<dket:.A t ~~ :,. - 7 *%-,M:,: .. 1--,.iwk.: <,,. 4 1 '.' ....4 /'' --- ' Â»al 0 / 1 117 93- MCIEE 1. ROUTE ROOF AND SURFACE DRAINAGE FOR LOTS 8,9,10 AND 11 TO DRYWELLS ON LOTS 9 AND 10. 2. LOTS 5.6 AND 7 MAY REQUIRE ADDITIOBIAL SITE SPECIFIC DRAINAGE FACILITIES FOR SPECIFIC DESIGNS (BUT ARE ACCOUNTED FOR IN DETENTION VOLUME) -- NUM- REVISION PRELIMINARY ' ENGâ€¢EERS SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. DATE BY .Af Na 97072A NOT -66AA SURVEYORS 118 W. 6th Street, Suite 200 GRADING AND JH FOR Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P.U.D. 0-: 12-17-98 ivtâ€¢ (970) 945-1004 (FAX (970) 945-5948) 4% SCHMESER Aspen, Colorado (970) 925-6727 JH CONSTRUCTION GORDON MEYER sgmOsgm-inc.com Flk PR-GRADING DRAINAGE PLAN i ~ * Lk i. k â‚¬ Â·Â·<9 1> 1 s.298/132///261$-.# 31:li"liMe'limillill'lill 0: \dwgs\1997\97072A\PA-GRADING.dwg Thu Dec 17 09:54: 41 1998 SGM Inc. (JTN) PROF'irri 1/4' Pin,000 0â€¢â€¢-1 UE 5' 2' 12' 12' IN OPEN FIEID W STIET #CE OF Plf ./ .1 r - \PLANTING STRIP THRU LANE THRU LANE Atl 4 CC~E, 17,41,k Elf'04110N U) 1/2. 80.0/W F.SH .DE G -\ SIDEWALK â€¢ ~~ b*Le = aA- 70 caÂ¥. IMâ€¢ 11.2- m / 15*21 AÂ¥4Â£ 0â€¢laE ~PEACE 37~IT CUB -77# ~ 807: A-NUT 80X v/ARCH AUTERN AEâ€¢ 82 - ASPNE, M / m , Sla, _ 'J ,-L CUE Mump . MEI _-2% -21_ l-3" HBP _~ FULL DEPTH ASPHILT. np Ct- Box TOP. ~ ~*j- Â£717!*gov n~ Cul (SEE DESIGN '12:91 '=111121/*TY*~ - DEAD END WYE 31/711< PUVDIGOV 9-2224Â»92=4 #â‚¬'D PLUG. - ~-8" CLASS 6 MIR= Imm-* + r :izir- co.mo.,=, smÂ· S7*14RDS SEC 11(SE 1. UPPER CURB/GUTTER -~ '6(lift*///*11 AS 3.OFED , A.... FOR .9 / 0-1 moUM) BOX rPUCE 1/2 al FT. OF 1 / OF CONCETE 70 Iim ~ ./tO-~SSION OUTLET ON 1*DISTU~ED 8%RTH TWO LANE STREET 1 77â€¢EK co,po 7 -1 11:= NES 1 OR O,P. . mENCH TO BE -CED OR SHEITED , /*r OR 3/4' CUB STOP lAY COPPER AT UNFORM AEULE]9 DPE BUL AS ,ECES,M VOR 11 SAFErf OF -1,0001- 18" 6= TIE Â»OR-W * THE PROTECT7ON 2004[ 10 -6- aa A#98401 SIP SLOPE PASt GOOSBECK - WEE QU#90Â£390Â¥ 7>lor R. =-10 94/ v. / =mt oF OTHER U711â„¢s. SECTION GATE VAL 1/E NION PIPE mlER 16- 869-*---- r M L.= Deâ‚¬,ZE CONCRETE Of\/ /SEE 1.14 /be i 4 - [3/4. PUJ / / 442Â· \ A-4 balU~S OYMER 73#*I DUCTRE 0104 MOVIX 00UilÂ£ ~- FUR AU Sl]~CE L.#23 1-GEN Ill 11 AND FUR ITER hi f 112R 7 =2-2- 1 ST- BRONZE SE~CE SADDLE (NOT 90-41 / TYP. WATER SERVICE DETAIL T--A- - / Â»7 6----Gi , F \ALVE BOX COVER A-*ED 1%,ATER' b *~0 AS - 4 0 1 N SPECFR~KNS .- 1 kt , 3 60 f- 0B TEE E'2, 22AF oR * ' 25 4 N b 3 1=44'lint "0'10=5 BOTTOM OF VERUCAL 8041 4.- 1) PmEWENT RE,lACE)dDLT SlaLL MEET OGST,NG â„¢ICKNESS AND ImÂ® MTH TIE la~UM a#RIX ZIMB /'84 FOUO-G UNWUMS: ASPHALT SUIB),aNG - r -. AGGREGATE 8,SE COURSE M SQUi FEET) - 8. A-4. . 4 GAUGE m(CE]9 .RE Z) 8â€¢SE COURSE REPLACaeI SHALL WEET E~Ill# ALICPOESS Â»â€¢,H THE FOUO-G ST)â€¢ne ME=Sul - 180 . SWC Fillifful - 100 /1 STANDARD 24" CURB dc GUTTER AANNUMS: AGGREWE -SE COURSE - 12' A- p 12 OR 12 OR OF Â»1RE *fID W,1-f BOX. BEND DRU 1/2= HOLE AND OCTEND 12= SCALE: 11/7- 1 '-0' 3) 016 4= PlACE}ENT SHALL hEEET EmTÂ»48 T,Â«CIOESS NÂ® 101Â«) WTH 8= ODD OÂ® "meD Â¥MRE NTO LOOP AND RETURN IRE nE A//Nule 4' TOPSOL 110// PECE- 11-1/4 22-0 48 00 11-1/4 21-0 45 00 ,/Allslil'JE TO FOLLOW ALONG PiPE- 1 4) SELECT MATO~ AS FOLLOMS: 1;/maN SIZE N TOP 12' OF 80191 W...E BOX Me(DIUM SIZE N ROWILDER OF -CRFU r Â£00 1,8 180 4,0 US LOO 110 100 &SO .00 r.w ~ 1 5) COMPACION REQUIREMENTS PER CITY OF ASPEN r too us 415 &00 &00 1.25175 &00 UO &75 W/CENTERING -IG V- r SOWâ‚¬ PIUT 10. 1.75 US -0 1100 880 100 400 7.75 'Us lam /1 WATER MAIN 125 Â«75 f.â€ž 1100 170 iso 11.00 :aoo 1420 TRENCH CROSS SECTION 175 10 lam 1/00 1&00 US &00 1175 2130 ,&00 fr 130 7- 1180 24.75 20,0 48 uo 1&90 3,30 2.,5 SC*E: 3/49. 1'-0' j< --0"CK 430 &50 17.00 31.00 MOO 51-0 2&75 100 31.00 TR,CER WIRE -ROADBASE AFFFT--7 I--7GGI171 r--7= / NOya 1. . I n I n I r I--AspHILT 1 â€¢â€¢ 0 18-A,â€¢1 *94* 1 *â€¢ Iâ€¢â€¢h IV *In 0- 60-â€¢ Dlii CAD InD ALL h B..9 1 P,007# po~-Irup %0nd-*--" bot,â€¢- d~, 0,4 concrifx 10-L-\.~-* JOIfTS AND F7TnNGS ~ CONT~CTOR TO DEA.ECT JOâ€¢rs --____ SIDew D-4--('~~ AS REQUIRED TO DaNTA,118* 3 4. AR bende. mtings. and reetr*t â€¢yeteme oholl m-t AVAÂ¥A Standordo m. SEP*~770,4 W/ NO ADOmONAL -0( EGH POINTS OR LOW POINTS :ml ri-1- -1. Â»- SEE CONCRETE \ 04(FOV 20(K O997ED , Â£~Plt .. - STAnc Fles~ - BO /9 SERTE PMEESZA - 300 PS TYPICAL GATE VAL 1â‚¬ 1. 011 E a" "ENDS . 00 . 00 1-NIEW WATENUNE L-#VSUAT~N FOR Mâ€¢TENUNE A (SEE INSUL477014 SECTION BELOW) 11-1/4 --1/2 45 â€¢0 11-1/4 22-1/1 45 00 At TS ELEVATION r too 1.73 iso &80 50 180 100 400 715 600 NOTE= 1. ..L WILfs no,CENT 70 ATI= SNILL i WATERLINE/CULVERT CROSSING !0. 225 410 10, leo los 178 US lus 1175 1125 1 1,0 100 &00 11.00 7.75 1.75 180 &75 11.0 100 BE Fl-GE x al Frn),8 9*41 I A-GED IEXT 10 WIL,El Lâ€¢E *ALFS TO E 18, x 1,1 - AELLLER All KDOEDy W,L,ES 70 0Â£ USED NO SCALE ' 12' 125 8.50 1150 2125 175 710 1430 2.0 1&75 COWUCT I,m, CON*TE A-S SH,U E *10O1TED Ar CUIW'MUTTER *Â® *LEy M,Pa ImEUD W,L,ES 1,001 ~ I Au LIVIS AW Rl,0 70 . 00 0!10Â£n DEZ,1 MC I, 0-, - Cat mICZ, 01Â¥ ItÂ®(Cl I 400 7.75 1100 moo 2100 480 100 1710 3118 moo DE CON;~70~ -4 \ / 100&00 ,â€ž0 -00 -80 5.70 11.30 2.0 41. 3190 j '1 1/ ScW~I~~~~~f~TaVpv 10~ US 1180 2410 4426 ..0 7.28 1480 125 5225 41.00 ON TOP OF APE) .FaASS 6 PER ~TRENCH CROSS SECTION~ AS REet) CONNECT Q BOU MNG TO jj - 7', SET FlWSzvED GDWE CONCRETE THRUST RESTRAINT DETAILS 1.6â‚¬ 70 = CONE AT 129 N ASP#ALT - FLUSH r-/ 4 G*UGE TR,CER MAE SEPARAMON IN ROAD-SE - r BELON GRADE mOED 70 wtoâ‚¬ aar r -24' 0. M.H. RING AND COVER N. 7.S COP TOP OF BOX 8 OF =REED W.LVE 00,4 1*ND INSULARON SECTION a.~ T --7%#*wÂ£', aâ€¢,Â£3, 0â€žor,nre a. a.,c Â¥MIE *(TO LOOP AND REfURN Â¥MRE /- pfÂ»â€¢a NOZZLE TO FOLLOW ALONG PIPE. NO SCALE L \Rv '-faimm,C COME NNU AICE L ;El 1 #3 = 1 \~ - REWORCEIdeq PED, ASâ„¢ C-474 / O 12= CC AOE RANE .4- 3:~f-: 1101Â£1 PÂ®CE - ANJSTABLE COAT EXTERIOR 'TH #4 0 12' CC VER. 11.. mr 7 COAL TAR EPOXY 1 Zior 7, - 1. CONCRETE .~RT MUST. SHAPED EZEK 7 1 .//-0 2. -*fOLE STEPS S-L SE MA OR FORIED FOR SMOOTH mWSmON. AT BURY UE c=====a Lae. 007. 1 , BCUSTRES P.1-2-PE. OR APPRO,ED 8=-6 12~ O.C NO SD,GGER ~ fouÂ«. mJ- 1 ALL PRECAST SECTIONS TO CONFORM 2. PER PLANS \2. 1? ASNG Sim f RAW NON- r 4 ALL GROUT SHALL BE -ED Â»m{ r- 1/2I EXPANSION JOINT TO ASâ„¢ C-47& k @VE WMâ€¢â‚¬ CON SEAL OR TYPE I CE,ENr NON SHRÂ»Â«. WHERE REQUIRED r BROOW FINISH APPR(MD EQUAL i i-OUS 941 0-OR coATED / 1077/ coe ;50 2700*K - 0 - 6 â€¢wouy 96Â«Â£ SE Alâ„¢O? 00(TED ~ a mIH ROFLEX EPOXY OR APPROVW - MW GRWEL ,@11 1 I . . CUIL ..4-6169-11.3'U ... .-41.j .-I .ot,42.0.0Â». 4 AIMMW 70 0 ~Â«Pra',5.Â·r 1 --r 85-0497- -___ GROCK ALL~ 1. ALL STUBS TO BE EXTE~ED 1 ,* '.1 i -rj U ' 1-INUM OUT FROM M.H. BASE .44,0.2,>Xs\X i OUTH , 2'-0~ 2'-0" SECTIONS JOR{IS ,Â«SIDE 5. - a UE MUST BE AIR TESTED 81 1 7 COMPACTED CLASS 6 AGGREGATE 1 . IL. - 5.-- CONm,CTOR 0 5 PW. UNIESTAL/"92 SOIL 9. Â»KSTE-la UNE MUST SE ***DREU LEVELiNG COURSE CONCIETE . 71 ,- COIT *V,zonor Ilf,H ~ lar 10 R,SS 3% 001*EC77* L COMPW:TED SUeGRADE REtllON â€¢ - RO,Ux Â£,~y 09 1 la I,S,ENKTER LNE AIUST BE TV LINE 7237ED 10 A(SS )mUIL A~Em;OV. ~ZES:- "OCK BLOCKS . b -1 MI-PE" f.~~~~-,APPR(MD EDUE 1 1) EXPANSION JOINTS: 100' ON CENTER AND AT DRIVE*YS. 0 Cum OF ,)0-/ PRO,~. 1~03/4'COR-TEN LS~ CONCRETE -- MOUT MTH 4000 La NON-SHRNK MIX 00Â£~SE m#El TE ROOS W/EYE BOLTS REACION BLOCK 2) DUMMY JOINTS: 1= DEEP BY 1/C - 1/4= WIDTH AT INTERVALS EQUAL TO astâ€¢v -ma,Â£ AND\OR HE114-LUGS DE,Al % 1 70.- . uDEMALK MOTH. Â·.r<)'Ox. -p re â€¢ 0 ..A ' ~ 423-' 3) USE 1/C RADIUS ON ALL EDGES. OR FlANGED Joâ€¢47& TEI TO BE IN X RANGED GV TO BE F~ANGED X 641 \ NOTES: 1) AL JOINTS FNOW -,4 TO Ht'ORINT VOLL BE DeA-LUGS. TE-,100% AND THRUST t. . Â·Â·Â· b -f -IN .L I . u~. 4) USE 6= DEPTH OF CONCRETE ON ALL DRIVEÂ»~AYS. 2) HMÂ»WT. W,LI AND ATINGS TO SE 250 P.11 0,*7En . I 8.1.1. apÂ£ Ul Mt'#OLE OR 5) CURE FDR n HOURS USING CURING COMPOUND. PLASTIC CO,ERING OR 3) POL,ETH,EME Â¥-P 9941- CO~ER DIP. ASSDABLY FROM HYDR~NT 18. * SWALLER 4'-0. A~057UVE .SE TO -TEN .4.1 (Â»4 08* A.1 0." :' 77%21-, 6.#113*-22: ..37*AffÂ».1 2,/26/4,Â«4\11~t''Cr~ 0~~ ~~~*~2< : -73 5-CT 1 . t. J.IL i 1-, 21-TO 48" 5'-0~ 6) USE 3750 PSI CONCRETE WITH FIBERMESH ADDITIVE AT 1-1/2 LBS./C.Y. 4) ALL HYDRV~T LEAD PIPING TO BE C OiP. 54- 0.-0. 5) CENTERLÂ»E OF HYDI-T TO E 4*-0~ FROM *CK OF IM -(IMUM SLUMP 4: :01Â«<Â».Â»>. 4= CLASS 6 AGGREGATE 8) MEULLER FI H,O,-TS TO SE USED 450,09/Â»1/> #4 0 5~ CC EACH my- 80~ 1 LARGER SPECWL OR EDGE OF SHOUDER UMESS OTIE-SE NOTED CONCRETE SIDEWALK PRECAST CONCRETE MANHOLE 7) THRUST ~311WN, IN STRUCTURE BY &201. ENG. PRO#ADE SD,BLIZED SCALE: 1 Â»- 1.-O. #4) 1111;Z-~0~ ZIL ~ PaE7*7700 17*PGUO, 577?UCFUVE l VALLEY PAN DETAIL WITH PRE-CAST BASE FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY f'7 01. SCALE: 1 !46 1 0-0* N. TS c. a INSTALLATION DETAIL Ai 1-" - PRELIMINARY ENGINEERS , NUM- REVISION r NOT SG SURVEYORS SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. 0, DATE BY 408 No. 97072 t 118 W. eth Street, Suite 200 ROAD & UTILIY 20Â»n Ar FT f-, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P.U.D. Dot. 12 -17-98 6.1 . FOR (970) 945-1004 (FAX (970) 945-6948) DETAILS " 4 SCHMUESER ~ ~6====== Aspen. Colorado (970) 925-6727 Appr. by: JH CONSTRUCTION GORDON MEYER . . 6 sgm@sgm-inc.com , of 4 F; Flle: BAR-det FOR 12' DIL PPE OR - 4 1 FINAL PLAT OF: 4 - BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELO;PMENT 1=/.= ~ f Â·r. t. : 1 1. : A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEET 2 OF 2 :,1 1 3.21.9 4.0 '1,82 4%* S 1430'49~ W 245 91' ~ . / / -/% W -. . f \; -/ : 11/ / -- ---i I. ...L lilli -2 - 1- -- / I -- i* 22 -7- -- / / I /2 -1 --- / % -- . /, % , / f - ./ /1 //// 01 /'' -0- / / - -- - A .-- 0 / , - 7 -3 9 - 2 - 292.50' 4.,e 14- __ ~_ /// / -i--- , - 0 / I / 1 - . / 6 / I ... / I A. /// tq - / - --- / - 5 -- - / .-- /r - 11. : 1 / f. - -- 3 1 01'0~9 - 04- , / 2 - --55 0 269 acres -- - 11,736 sq. ft 2/ / 4 / 'r#/ / f (//, S,f-449 W - - t * Â«I. -Li--- -69Â·6f - -f- - L / , Irs / --- 3 1- 1 - .- -4 .-/ - .6 --- 165 00' - - - - --- - *4 E / I - / - - --- 1 r / 111 1 - . 55.061- - , 1 7 -85.00' - -- ,- 2 1,11 1 1 f 56 00' E . / '' -- ... -21,4 /1 1 . A / ---- 1 Iii'll 1 '.1 / g / c~ .1 + / C , -- / A- , 3 1Â« LOT 2 : - _ _ - _ 7 - -5.187 sq. n. i//1 /,1/// 4/ 1,1/ / ' V , v 11,705/'sq. n. / 11,440 sq. ft. ,>-- 11.440Â· sq.ft. / --t , LOT 3 ~ 14 -LOT 4-- - - --._-- "~ 0./35 acres 0 1 -9 i r 0.2 9 acres 0.263 ocfG~ -)1263 acres / 111 7/ f / / 1/ LOT 5 1 11 \ I , / 4/ C .9 ; . / I / 4 1 7' f ~7~TBACK /~~~ ~ Â« , 49 6,318 sq.ft 2 . , i ~ 50' gUILÂ»G / / 50' BULDING < 0.145 'acres '~~ ' 'it SEmACK LDING li! iii 5 1450'49" W 1 /4/ 61.87' 1 6 0 A --*/ - - 1 /1/:'41 \ I m rÂ·,1 /1. 1/ 1 + 04 7 LC2 4- 5 9 1 0/ , , /1 1 100&1 1 / ~/f /Â·/ 11/ / A /f.// -\ '\ \1./ 0 9 % ' N 14'50'49" E 60.72' LOT 8 4 3,017 sq, ft, 1 /, 4 102,000 sq.ft. ~ ~ ' / i , 4 342, ogres , i / 9 % 1 \: . ~ S\14*50'49" W\ \ 1 0 069 acres 6 4 ; '1 , j f!; 1 #1 1 , 11 20.00 1 . - \ 1 1 N 75'09'11" W A ji lj#\ 7/ 1 1 ~~r.-e f 1 7 i % ' 1 ic / '- 'eA It 11, , k --3.327'--\~~ 21 5 7430'49 - w 90.57' 1 / i 1,-$31 9 /1, CÂ·.,Â· i~'1, PRVA TE ACCE-591 4 LOT 9 - , ,/ / ~1111~ t'~ \ \ 1 , \ \ f \ 1/. 94~ \ 1 -~f,. -A EASEMENT FOR \ 4 .- --- -- ------ - t- 0052 acres 3* 0 > ; /,f / // '1 I ' ,/i I / t~ 4 ' ~.''g~LOTS 3 &4 ' 2.259 sq. A. ofj~ 6-1) - 1 / , 4.. ' r // i j j 'jit tt \ 1 \ \t I ~ i \, #~ ,~~ ~ 4 '~4 ~C.-*9 I w LOT 12 4 N 74'5049* E 4&39' 1 i,t r '' ' 4 N 13.55 . - 34.84' 1 0 & 1. I . '4e F 4 0 0 0,217 acres * N 14'50'49" E ~ 4 i q 0 1/ 2 1 r ~7 . > , 6 /41 1 - h 9,446 sq. ft, r- 93// .-- ., -..a,. ~ Ul I. . / V f ./ ~& 1 k ".~~~ 1 1 9 +7 h'EA 6,4 0 4/ 2 LOT 10 34.16' / 2.211 sq. ft. < A .4% /00 li,/ \ ~ 14,5.. 0.051 ocres r,V ..77:j T N 14'50'49Â» E 68.77' 4., // 7/ / , 1 i , / 1 / L/// / 1 k & LOT 11 6/ N " i f 4 , N I r. Â· 434Â£, 6 0 - r '4 Â·~ 4'*.1 \ 2.255 sq. ft. 0/ 4 F 0 10. BUILD/NG 1. 7 2 Â¢ 1;3 \ h O.052 acres V / // .4 / /// */ & I I I Â¢ l ~ SETBACK (TiRT14 1,4 41 1 , f 35.5 55.00' '55.00' 53.45' ~1 42 83' IS lilli !, lili. i / 1 1 ' ' / i / S 14Â°50'49" N 1 1 242.01' / \ 1 - ie>' 1 1 _1 - EXISTING , ~ ~S 3~*47'rÂ» E ~ '~~' ' r.~ , ~/4,,52%,i. 5 i i : 49 /2,,, /,~.c 1 1 / 0.011 acres 1 R.6.w. / 1 HOUSE Ell 484 sq.ft. 1/11 f 0 7-------"-----7 ~ ~ EASEMENT 0/ g ' ' 1 4 010/, UTILITY ~ ~ ~ ~ SOUTtl @ARMI6611 STREET , y .11 t N ' / , 1, 0 4 i, </ 111 / - 1 6 1 C i , 1. \ III 1ll . IIi ~~/ ~ t '~ < ~ ~ ~ 65.00' ~, ~ P------------/ f 1 Ijll 10' SÂ£7BACK (Â»P) / , /7 4126' 73.74' 1) 1 S 14Â°50'4&&*1 \\ \ 115.00' ~ (0 1 7 1 1 1 1 1* 33 1 11 1 - 1% i Ir - 1 M\ 1 '18 . 9 NOTES: 4 4) BASIS OF ELEÂ¥AnON: AN ELEVATION OF 7906.81' ON THE U. S.G.S. BENCHMARK LOCATED AT THE Pin(IN COUNTY COURTHOUSE. GRAPHIC SCALE 120 SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC 5Â·. ( IN FEET ) t inch = 30 1 CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 8040 GREENLINE NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL- AC TION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY NTHIN THREE YEARS CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT /1,1 NO EENT MAY ANYÂ· ACTION 43:'I BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN (970) 704-0311 Â· j YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. 97089 1/'11/99 899 'E DWG .ic... . - 33.58 04 G ENVELOPE N 75'09'1 84.97' 99.26' 3 .11,60.2 S <9693 3Â¥813S ON I . FINAL PLAT OF: BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AF J S 14Â°50497-1 1 1 , 1 1 . .1 1 , 3 . i:,1 1 / 1 1 1 1 1 1 r L I F-1 f 1 1 /4 i SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC ,~ CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL IASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 bU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION Â°ON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED WORE THAN TEN (970) 704-0311 ?OU THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. 97089 1./11 /99 89SI'rE.DWC . .4 Â£ A. 0 Al A D A ... 0 0 0 . AA. 0 . 0 .A . 0 . 0 . A . ...10 . . 1 N ..0 . 1, 4 0 .. .. . ; , . 0 ... 0 4 0 , .. . 8 0 1. I . ... . 0 . 10 I I ,, . e e D. I , I 4 ., . 4 I 0 1 - .. . 4 ... 0 . .'' .. ... 4 . . # 0 4 , . 0 . . . I . . - 1. . 4 . ./: D . . I. 4 . . 4 .. .4 0 . 4 - , 0 . . 4 % 0 I I. . I ,- 0 2.. I . & 0 I. . ..1 .. - . D /1.. , I. I . 0 0 . D . t. 1,0 0. . 0 . . 2 1 . 1 2% . . ... 4. 4-0 0 . . D . .1 , I . 0 .. .e , I . . 0 - 0 ..... ' 1 .... ': , D . - 0 I . . I. e â€¢.r -4 . . :. 4 . 00 0 . 0,0 , 0 - ., .... 0 D ~-I. I . .. 8 . I . 0 6. . A- . 0: . ... D- . 0 0- I. 0 / . : ,/. 4. . ... .. , . 0 . .. 0 , . 0 .I. 0 . - . D . 00 . 0 0.0 , 0 .. : . 4 0 .. . . . I I . 0 0 , .. . . .. . 1, 0. D . . .D . .. . D 0 - , I. 0. . D &. . ..D B , . 0 - A .0 .... .:.'/....... ..0 0 .. I . . . . . ..D % - ' : I. 0 . , .. D - . . : .0 0 . - Â¥ A . . ...: i k. . i . I 1 . . I . . 0 . D . 0 0. Â¥ A 0 :. .0 .D, .. .... 0 . 4 'D . D I. . D 0 . A 0 00. 0 00 ..: 0 I .D .I- I 0 0 1 00 0 D. 0. , 0 '. 0 - 0 , 0 1 - = IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY: BARBEE ....... RUGHEIMER PROPERTY A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE Bth P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO h l.,4.. SHEET 1 OF 3 '9 k.f' 1 '41Â·'74 11. 4144 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ' 1 1 - 1 1 \ 1 - U/It THAT PART OF LOT 1 OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE N0R1HEAST 1 ~ ASPEN .4~ 1 " 03%6 INSTITUTE RIVe/t I 7/ ONE-QUARTER oF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST, OF THE / & SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE DIAGRAM CERTIFIED BY THE ~ 19.0. Nt/4 CORNE~ ~ 0 ASPeN SEC. 13 UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE, JANUARY 4, 1896 AS '' f' 1 MUSIC ATTACHED TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE SURVEY OF SAID TOWNSHIP iND ~ FOUND 1954-1974 ~ t TENT RANGE APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL' S OFFICE MARCH \ 4\ BLM BRASS CAP rNFF CORNER 1 ' . I,/2-/ IT , I \ 31, 1891, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ~ --. j LOT 1, SEC. 13 W. 4 N \ POI~Ir. OF BEGINNING i lic ST UPPY 8 & S ue Le 4 BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER oF SAID LOT ONE, SAID CORNER ALSO ~ BEING THE EAST ONE-SIXTEENTH CORNER SECTIONS 12 AND 13; THENCE i S 89Â°45'56" E ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 342.86 FEET, kIE I PR NC S TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE FORMER RIGHT-OF- IAY ' THE k / / aL ex 0 % HALLAM ST i n NE CORNER % E ~ M IN TR T ~OAILDORAY#Hf-IOD~-NW~Yllt:tly~t~lzff~'P~ENE~TT~E:~[# 1:E~T~f2;11:Htt?J:t-Â» - ------ --- --- --- -- - -- - -_ - -- _ -N_*9Â°35.567-E e 2658088 3 1 277 1 Â· L.N U 'SEC. 13 . k Â¥./ 1329.34' ' 342.86' ~ ~riileadj*4Â·tdi grtâ€¢OUND REBAR K~ A e WESTEAL~ORU~~HTG-AOnff LITREE]~2.nECET ST~ 4~NORTWHAWLEOSTERI'~ ER sA.CORsER 1 / - - -Ucibl ~1 TTÂ·rÂ»_ '1~1-j~1 2.WNDER ASPHALT 02<0 / 0 1 - rn OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 2 OF INSTRUMENT REC I $ e. H * Av -142 BOOK 230 AT PAGE 496 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS: THENCE 1 4 Ld PHI rn 0 30 x i 2 & D co RRA 6 3 S 39Â°47'01" E 87.07 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THA T PR ~ ~~ Â» t.Â« 112 1 CO f: 0 0 â‚¬ 1 1 DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT; THENCE S 14Â°50'49" W 115.00 FE it , 044 u THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 3, BLOCK 11, EAMES ADDITION k /J- 9719411 1 1 \ 9 Ill e CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; THENCE S 75Â°09'11" E ALONG THE SOUTH 1 -+ 0 N& Ap..1 L.27%4 ' -1 1.- 0 f d i - 0 / LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF \ 0 -- Dj144Â¥44*i 1 -4 OF SAID BLOCK 11; THENCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID * '~ ~ ; 1-1 ~ i n, .1. \ it-':, '9' O 4 ~ ~Y==DE~NT:O~HKE2~S ZI 21 1 3 614 / ~ 7, .4. SAID BLOCK 11, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNE 0 MOUNTAIN SKI AREA I e ASPEN 9 ~IP COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PROP 2 &31 %1 1 61 / 1% ~ DESCRIBED IN BOOK 206 AT PAGE 334 THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSE 1) N 75'09'11" W 31.25 FEET ~ ~ ~ ~\ - i e &2 CITY OF: ASPEN 2) S 14~50'49" N 78.00 FEET 108.89' VICINITY MAP 3) S 03*55'43" W 164.99 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER 0 N.8Â£51'40" Â£ 4 f ~ 20, SAID BLOCK 11; 2 U, 804.58' ~--AL_ _ 528.29' _ _ 4 THENCE S 14'50'49" W ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 1332.-89 ~ IN N 89'51'40" E 1332.87'- 1 0 210.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 11; TH 9 is: S 75'09'11" E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 53 J LSW CORNER \ LOT 1, SEC. 13 0 DATE OF SURVEY: DECEMBER, 1997 & SEPTEMBER, 1998, FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTER CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 11, SAID CORNER . 1 BEING A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ASPEN STRE %' THENCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 S 14-50'49" 4* Â°1 2) 1 R f f. FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1: THENCE =0- 46 3) BASIS OF BEARING: N 00'06'36" E ALONG THE EASTERLY v DATE OF PREPARATION: DECEMBER, 1997 & JANUARY, , N I ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID ASPEN STREET 14.6 ro SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER, 1998. 10 S 89Â°51'40" W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 804.58 FEET 1 0 010 LINE OF SECTION 13, BETWEEN THE NE CORNER SECTION 13, A TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE k ' tri %~ FOUND REBAR (UNDER ASPHALT) AND THE El/4 CORNER OF - NORTHEAST ONE-SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SECTION 13; THENCE 0 22 SECTION 13, A FOUND 1954 BLM BRASS CAP. At - N 00Â°15'47" E ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 108.89 FEET NE COR Wm. BEATTY \ 3 TO A POINT ON LINE 1-4 OF THE LITTLE MACK LOAD CLAIM. UNITED STATES \ NON-CONFORMING CLAIM , 0 MINERAL SURVEY NO. 3956 AS PATENTED IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 212 OF THE I 0-7, 1/1 6, SEC 13 11 0 RESURVEYED ASPEN TOWNS,TE, THE 1891 THOMAS WITHERS GLO PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE N 14=57'52" E ALONG THE LINE 1-4 OF , j FLAT OF T/08 R850' OF THE Bth P.M., THE 1896 GLO DIAGRAM 1 SAID LOAD CLAIM 707.96 FEET TO CORNER #4 oF SAID LOAD CLAIM,Â· TILENCE ~ ~ -- 21 1 oF THE NE1/â€¢NEt/4 OF SAID SECTION 13 ATTACHED TO THE N 75Â°06'16" W ALONG THE LINE 4-3 oF SAID LOAD CLAIM 185.69 FEET WITHERS SURVEY OF 1891 THE 1896 WILLITS MAP OF THE ASPEN TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAI} LOT 1; THENCE LEAVING THE LINE 4-LOF -~ Â·1" , 4 . j TOWNSITE AND UNRECORDED EAMES ADDITION TO ASPEN, THE 1917 1 OF THE SUBDIVISIONAL LINES OF SAID TOWNSHIP, THE 1980 BLM SAID LOAD CLAIM N 00Â°15'47" E ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT *----- S -8rf-2'4#"_ g.-~320.001.-_ _~__ - ALONZO H. ADAMS CLO DEPENDENT RESURVEY PLAT OF A PORTION 'a 4) BASIS OF SURVEY: THE 1890 FRANK D. HOWE PLAT OF THE 1 476.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL OF LAND 1327.86' t N 89Â°29'24" E 2672.90' CONTAINING 17.695 ACRES MORE OR LESS. -. RAY HARPIN DEPENDENT RESURVEY AND SURVEY PLAT OF SAID j \Wl/4 CORNER LI El /4 CORNER , t TOWNSHIP, VARIOUS INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD AND MINERAL SEC. 13 f SEC. 13 1 SURVEY, SUBDIVISION, CONDOMINIUM AND ANNEXATION PLATS AS FOUND 1954 BLM ARE RECORDED lrITH THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER' S FOUND 1954 BLM BRASS CAP BRASS CAP OFFICE AND THE SHOWN FOUND MONUMENTATION. 1 ~ OF RECORD. FOR ALL INFORMATION REGARDING EASEMENTS, 1 1 5) THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY SOPRIS \ ENGINEERING, LLC (SE) TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OR EASEMENTS RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND/OR TITLE OF RECORD, SE RELIED UPON THE , t vii ' CASE NO. PCT-8990 DATED JULY 02, 1997. ALL TITLE , TITLE COMMITMENT ISSUED BY PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., r EXCEPTIONS LISTED THEREIN ARE DEPICTED HEREON. 4 1 t) ~ IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY CERTIFICATE . 1 4 I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY WAS PREPARED BY SOPRIS 1% ENGINEERING, LLC. FOR HALLIE BARBEE RUGHEIMER, 3 ~\ U FURTHER STATE THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 1 ON THIS DATE, OCTOBER 29, 1998, EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS, ARE v , ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PARCEL , EXCEPT AS SHOWN, 6 21 1 THAT THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBED PREMISES BY -IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND ' THAT THERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF ANY EASEMENT 1 1 CROSSING OR BURDENING ANY PART OF SAID PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. I ~|| FURTHER STATE THAT THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, 1 1 RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR IN PLACE. j SEC. 13 El/4 CORNER SW CORNER BRASS CAP Â£SN CORNER BY: SEC. 13 Ic~~ FOUND 1978 BLM ,SEC 18 k MARK S. BECKLER, L.S. #28643 -- - -Ill .- CLOSING CORNER GRAPHIC SCALE SEC 13/24 1600 COUNTY SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ( IN FEET ) DEPOSITED THIS DAY OF , 1998, AT M., IN 1 inch = 400 n THE PITKIN COUNTY INDEX FOR INFORMATIONAL LAND SURVEY PLATS UNDER RECEPTION NUMBER BY: SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC PITKIN COUNTY SURVEYOR CIVIL CONSULTANTS DATE: NOnCE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ' ~ 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 FILING INFORMATION: SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST, 1 ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 OF THE 6TH P.M. AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY AChON r' BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY 8E COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN (970) 704-0311 -1, - YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTInCATION SHOWN HEREON 97089 1/11/99 89SITE.DWC 1,1 3 VNOIN IVNISINO t '1 -4,225.1 J M. Â· 419r IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY: BARBEE ....... RUGHEIMER PROPERTY K .- A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO ~ 1 X SHEET 3 OF 3 .//1 / . 4, ./ f,/5/ 01-1 -0 0 - 1-_ O -23 -ZI p I - --0 - // /-/ ---ill .0 - -- 1 1 . 1 - 1 f . I 1 / I %- --- --- / --I *-- K '.M -/ - - --. --- 1 -/ - - - / 1- 1 - 17-7 0-Ii:' P,L= 0 1 *K .-/ --- ___ 13- --%5 1 ~-~Â·~~ 9 ----6 -- 5--o,ox --- - ~- - 1.- / --0- / 1 / --- -- -/ 1 1 //// *-~ % -* --- , - -<1 - - - - I. - \\ \ /1 -- 1--Â· / , I .1 .*i--- , / --- 03Â«2Â«19444Â¢-- / - -./ <*.H- 6 - - / /'' I ' -i- / --- .-Ill --- 0.--I ------ ---- ~ \' 1 1,1 , 1 1 , - I-- - -1 71 / ---- -- #- ' 774.-75 1 3- 1 1 - --- i , - --- 1- / / / , I / / , - --/ - -- M >- 1 -2:t:I - _ OZO L - ~.- - --- , -- .... /R.-/ , DISCOVERY - -) -- -- 2 ( -- 0 1, SHAFT (TYP--a- / / , / /1 . // / -- - il{G :!111 / .-I -- / // f .-- - . 1 - i - - EXISTING OAK BRUSH 1 / , C ,- - - --/ // 1 --/ /3-/ --- / * I;K / / , 1 ----* 1---1 -- .- -- - / t,I. - i , 1 . Il -- -- - O L , 4 34-- \ lillill 1; i il 1 1 21,2 0 AY- 1 \ f , 0Â« 0 0 #1 1 1 47 1.1 , \ 49 1 1\ i re i // / / 3 11 1 li -12 0 / , 1 1 3 l.* /' I 1,1 1 0 // i / , 00. 1 / , 4/1 11/ , 1 r . 1 1 4 U \ 1 1 . / , / ~ ~Gl '61~~ % , / / / M g \ , i re ZE // 1. 'li. 1 ' 1 / /1 1 1 1 i i c * 1 4%2 / , 7 \ 1 I l!:1111 1 , 1 1 / 04 1.- Y NOTES: 1 --1+ 1 ' 1 0 6 2 . -l- 1 15 1 f , 1) THE MAJOR DISCOVERY SHAFTS/TAILINGS ARE SHOWN AS PART OF 1 , 1 THIS PLAT ALONG MTH VARIOUS OTHER MINOR DISCOVERY 1/1 1 t 1 e hy'l , . 1 / SHAFTS/BORINGS. SMALL EXPLORATORY HOLES/BORINGS POCKET 1 / ///1 lili i '' THIS PROPERTY. i't1 l 53 ;Ii 1 , 1.~ // 1 \ 1 tex \Â· 1 1 11 2) THE FORMER RÂ©iT-OF-WAY OF THE COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD 1 1; li (\ j li , 1 /5 BASED 04 RE KOCH LUMBER SUBO/WS/ON EXEMPT/ON FLAT / ~ ~.' , ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ---- i 1 --/2/ .1 1 \1 /1 \ 1 + (BK 17@PG 76) AND THE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXATION PLAT (BK | -<so , .I 8 @ PG 81) 39 Dâ‚¬ BLOCKS W mE ASPE?V TOHNS/IE- /NfLUENCING MS SURVEY ~ ~ ' i; j - 1 \ 1 / --L- n i 1 \ 0 l?1 '931 -2 --' It 1 / i.'! , 1 Z&2cffiERft SHEO~,UNV~R~~SU~EEritoP PFLOAR7J,M~S / ~ 1 1 \1 \ lie \ . f * 2 IDENAAED AND THE 1959 G.E.BUCHANAN OFFICIAL MAP OF THE 19 1/' U / Iii \ e. 4..1 / 1 '\ 0 f CITY OF ASPEN. h., il , , 1, :1 ,/-1 \ f 4) BLOCK 11 EAMES ADDITION WAS ESTABLISHED FROM THE FOUND : 73, 1 d CORNERS MONUMENTING THE LOTS OF SAID BLOCK 11. / ~\\2 \ 1 / 00/ <1 4 5) THE UTTLE MACK LODE M.S. #3956 WAS ESTABLEMED FROM THE ~ / /~ ~ 1 FENCE '~ ~ ~\ \ 7 PICKET 1, Ir ~ FOUND LODE CLAIM CORNERS, AS SHOWN, THE RECORDED PLAT OF / / I Eiit SAO LODE CLAIM AND 7HE f7ELD LOCA /ED DISCOVERY SHAFT ~ / 4 /1 1 1 / ~ / 3/ ' 1 , 1 1 // 1 i 1 *;Om ~ 4/ 6) BASIS OF ELEVATION: AN ASSUMED ELEVATION OF 1011.77 ON / THE EXISTING SEWER MANHOLE RIM AT THE INTERSECDON OF / / M t# f 1 /1% f d Zg' 1 1 / , DEAN AVENUE AND SOUTH GARMISCH STREET, AS SHOWN. / 2 0 1 U)'rr' 1 \ / ELEVA nON EQUA TIONÂ· PROJECT BENCHWARK TO RE US.GS 0-#13 , P/lk/N COUNTY COURTHOUSE- BENCHMARK 67906.817 - +6707:95' / ~ ~i~ ~I-ly \1 1 EXISTING. 11 0 0 / / 7 1 ....- i , SHED r,-4-~ 1 - I A EX#STING -7~ ' / ~ 1, ' 1/ 7) PROJECT DATUM ELEVATION 1000.00' = CITY OF ASPEN 1998 ' ~ ' ~ ~ RETA{NING WALL~ -- i ' l I DREXEL-BARRELL GPS GRID CONTROL DATUM ELEVATION 7912.61' Oom ~ 1 8) CONTOUR INTERVAL. TWO (2) FEET. / rea! Bej: 510' 1 m~ ~ z V i 1 1 Â·Â·Â·A 0 - J E= 0/ N 1 1 / N.-1 1 '9 / 1-E :UTILITY LEGEND / 1 29 4 6 8.0. 0 0 to . 1 / i V./ 8J / Â·as - 1 - \ -E-E- EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC ~ , /4 , -cf~ /1 i / /4/ W --,/ A SPHAG-tÂ·Â·Â·~Â·~L W f- W --14..1.~ C [- EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC / / 47 1.0Â· 1 S (TYP.) EXISTING GAS O -O M 71z 3 z ' r EDGE-/ _SOUTH G,â‚¬MISCH--SOrR=--1--~U w ---r~ w 1 M P 0 1./ 8 1 .-11--L . 8 6 \ 1.- -SEW-SEW- EXISTING SEWER C,7 ; - 34 1 .O. 1 dr L / Sul/ SEW . 4% e --W-9*- EXISTING WATER 1 1. C=-1. SEW I SEW Si* SEW SEW SEW \ -T-T- EXISTING TELEPHONE i / /2 1 -â‚¬ ( ~ 42~:~ , /~ ~~~~~fj Â«i: ------- -- 40 -- E/T - \ -- -- . W-\ EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT il, /1 1 2262\9 1 , ' i i ly 292 8% 44 \A W - 11 f ' Arn* 60 EXISTING WATER VALVE / - EXISTING S.M H. RN = 1028.19 EXISTING unLITY PEDESTAL \ INV IN = 1022.08 f wv '1---31- 1 \ \~ ~ ~~~ 'Q~ <%83Â¥ m X n U ar\-C W INV OUT = 1021.02 LI , --. --- k -3 :66 Â» 12, 0 e A ILMI , 1 5 -1 - + I I i E.; 8 4 0 \ rn 1 c ba /6 29 C) %1 5 z -z ts ' r 1 -1 7 + 1 1 2 ! < 1 Ill 1 0 1 - 1 < GRAPHIC SCALE 1 -1 Â· , ' m 50 ly'' 20 ! 1 111 i -1 (IN FEET ) *.4.%. 1 inch = 20 ft. SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC CIVIL CONSULTANTS NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL. CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WTHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY AC11ON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTInCAnON SHOWN HEREON. (970) 704-0311 97089 1111 ~99 899-1-E.DWC '~- ~%72: r.: .4, \\\\ FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF: BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO , \ \ I \ 1 \ . . I i .\%\ \\\ \ \ 31 ' e ... __ \ / I , \: I % \ 1 \ \ N \ -1 \ \ I. I \\\ , I . , I \ f.\ \\ -0 \ \ \\ \ / --7 1 \ .... 1 \\ \\ g , f 1 * GRAPHIC SCALE ; 1 / / 1\ \ / 1 \ \ -6 10 05 10 20~ 40 ' . h \\ \I , \\ #0 . \ / / Â· i \'U \ \/ / \5\\\ I.\. / I I. N / / I (IN FEET ) ~ 1 \ l inch=10 ft. 1 :li \\ 1 4 -- . I I \ r h' 1 1 ./// 1 b \ \\\ . \ -~ , \ /\\ I ' , ./ 1 \ / \ \ . I \ SOPRIS ENGINEERING L LLC ' ' ' * * Â· \ CIVIL CONSUIJANTS 1 \ / a \ th li/ C 1- r- --- .: \ 1 LOT 5# j \ 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 1 i 0 \ /\I. \ \\ / / 9- / r / , \ \ .\ - i I / \\\\ 6,318 34. ft. ~ \ ~ . CARBONDALE, COLORAbo 81623 1 / /1 / . \ (970) 704-0311\ 1 / / / / I.\\\ 1 1, \ -tb \\\ \ \ 1 1 N \..liN, ./ \\\ \ .1. LOT 4 / 44 1 1 I \\ \ / 1 ~440 sq. ft. / \ 1/ j / 1 1 \\ \ i / / 1 \ I \ \ I. / ,- / 1 / BUILDING ENVELOPE / N . \ / INX \ . N I \ 4 \ . N . \ \ // i \ 1\ , I / 1 00. -, 1% ~ \ % ' 1 \\ /\ f \ 1 ' I / i./ / 1 I \ 0 0 \ $ 1 1 4 11 . I. I 9/1 \\ \ 00.0 \ \ i \\ \ IN\ \ / \~\tic " 1 \ / / 1 N \ I 1 \ / .AL / , - /1 4 \:\\ i \\ 00 Gort AD.00 \~r .V \\ pOr Y / \ / \ / \ 5,887 sq. ft. J< : LOT 61 \ 1 , \ \ 1 1 \ 119.19 1 6\ 1 . / 600 1 , \ 1 X \ \\ . 1 \\ \ i \ ' 1 \ $ h ./\\ I 4. , /90Â¢ \\\ \ \. // \ 1 1 11 - - %-- *AL // \ N X -\. 1/ Â»/ \ RETAINING ~ BUILD/NG ENELOPE \ \ \? ' \ FARE DEPARTMENT \4 62 00 \~ EDGE OF -- - r-# CONNECTION (TYP.) -- 34 _ _ 004 \ 49 i +AN 9 /1 il \ N LOT 12 - COMMON AREA TRAFRC SURFACE - crl ./.\ /' 9,446 sq. ft. / 0 \ 36"LIGHT Â· Â·1 00 ~ 00- \ 1 /Kit ..1/ STANDARD - t \\ i i <41 1. \ 1 * 1 1 -- - 1 00 00 \, 1 \ /1/\ \ h \ 1 ' CP Â«FOF \\ / \11 -i- 4 .1. 1 /f' 960,('f'*. .22#./. ./. i~oo 90 , '. . \ LOT 7 \ #. 1/ 11,736 sq. ft. ~ * CITY LIGHT LOT 10 LOT 8 \\ <TANDARD ADDITIONAL GARMISCH 3,017 sq. ft. 1 0099 2 ./ I STREET R.O.W. 2,211 sq. ft . / /4 1 - \ a\\ 4 LOT 9 1 Id. 2,259 sq. ft. 1 N ./ (4 \ \ \ \ 1 -- 1 % 1 \ 11\ 433:i 1 1 15%34 14.53 ~ 1% ~ 1 .6 , 1\ 14.0311'it ' ' ~ 1. 12 0i i i , 1 1 \\ 14.331 11 \ lilli Ill 1 1 1 1 1 1. 111 11 1Â» . \ .1 \\ 16 01 + 1111 V . <11 11 \4 0 \ 111'' ! 1 10 BU/LDING ENVELOPE j Il .4 !111111 ~illlili 1 1 0 0- 1 41)11 .1 1 , I'lf 1;111 1111; 116 1 1 It:,1- 11 01 N \ '1 1 111 1 11 1 1:111 + \ 0 , el 4/ -%41 i 1, 1 , 1 i Z 1 1 4 li ' 1 i 1 r 1 1 111,1 11 lili 11 11:1 11 \ 1 1 1 1 . \ lili; 11 *.1 . 1,8 \ 1 + i \ 1/ / 1 / 1 1 11 i 1 11 1 1 i ' 'i 1, / 1,1 \ 4 1 11 Al 111 11 1 1111 1 A ~ 1,18UMDING ARE)4 il p 1 t ' P 1 ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ t ~ ~ ~~~ I~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~- ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~'~ '~ ~ ~ 1~--1. ~ 11 1 ~< 9-33 1 / / ~ ' TOO;PRNT 1' '; , 93 \ .15'840 1.1 1111,11 1111111.11'iil 't- 1'~''ll'Ii, ull~ill remmt ! I ~ 1 1 4 oo~ 11~~Ij"' fÂ°'1*7[1 ~~ ~.1 ~ 4 41,1 i '1111:11(: 1%Â·002 ~~~ Be/LDâ€¢GAREA' , 1 Â·/ 3 A \ IIi Eli 0 % 1 I lillilill:lit, :1 111 1 1 %-4 1, 11.1 ili.litillillill 1.11 111'lit'111111:11.11 - ill'ill. . 1 : i I ! 11 i 11,1 3. 1 1 \\ 0.< 9 I 19 ; 1. 1 01 4/ / \ m t .11 1- 1 w 84 ~, 6 ~34 1 94 1 1 10,3, \\ lilli.1 16 1 11 1 14Â» 1 '11 1 1 16 - \ \ III OP 1\1 . ill X \ FE t. 71. I ' 1 0 \ \ 4 4> \ \ Â¥ LOT 11 -1- I . 0 2,255 sq. ft Â·Â· 0 0 \ 1 *4 N SNOW STORAGE NO TES.Â· 4) BASIS OF ELEVATION: AN ELEVATION OF 7906.81' ON THE U.S. G.S. <\ ,uv ~~ ~ '' ~ 1~ ~ BENCHMARK LOCArED AT IHE P/DON COUNTY COURrHOUSE ,\ NOTICE. ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL Â· ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY Â¥11'THIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED WORE THAN TEN 97089 1)1/99 89911.DWG YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWNI HEREON. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF: BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A PA-RCEL 0-F LA-ND SITU-ATED -I-N A PO-RT-ION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NEL/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE Gth P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEET 1 OF 1 Plant Schedule =\ / I \ I / \ I , / / GRAPHIC' SCALE 26, ,:5 0 4. B F-hoo P Wre. 0- F' f~Â«2'12 / ,2 - i o . 1 *2$2#64+L-Ult---il-40 927 Ae' 2.0 21 24' 4 -. '' 7 1 1 5 gh- 1.1 ( IN FEET ) e Cll <53-il v INS LÂ·1522Â·fQ- FL7 , 1 inch = 10 ft. \\ l 53 69Â» L.. // 9. i 4 , I 4 Â¤57 -r-te ,-1 T| t..>Wjl :3' 404/ SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC 1 22, 065) 43;; ~ 4. Avv 4. ,. 11 l LOT 5 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE AB ' - 1 1 33Â£3*/f . F AÂ» T-1VE~ ,1,1 1 x ~ CIVIL CONSULTANTS \ / i 1 1 ~ 6,318 sq. ft. CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 H.53 0&, elf= (970) 704-0311 1 , 1 . / I ' LOT 4/ Lf 1 , 11,440 sq. ft. / ' I BU/LDING ENVELOPE I '/ 1 K f '~ 0 ' 9401 16.03 \ 7 1 1 - 0 Â» 0 0 163 4/}a râ‚¬.V),LIEF BL, m f.f.7, 2 4, 1, / r h * .0 O. oo 1 -* i / 1 It. 12 \ 1 - / \ RETANING 1 - 7 , 0 0 \ CONCRETE tu Â¥ 10 3 / / / 00 5,887 34. ft. 'i, 4.Arlv.2 -,Â©p ~~ki I X 7 wrÂ©7 . /11.1 LOT G \ \ *.1/ \6)/ED'FLOV,1'EF- 1 , ' ~AK k / / //1 ..746 /./ / 000 13 \ / / 11\\\ 7 4,11\ 1 \\ I ~ BUILDING ENVELOPE 1,. 7 4,66 1120- 1 4 \ rFIRE DEPARTMENT \ 1) CONNECTION (TYP.) > ~ 02 + ) Â©till â‚¬ EDGE OF TRAFFIC SURFACE i' LD, LOT 12 - COMMON AREA . '6 \11000 9,446 sq. ft. . / \1 d .9 ~< 36 ~ LIGHT . 0 -1 A \ 3 T40/0,4 RD ~ $0 ti i tr- 4 .. 1 .0 / 4 . Â·Â·Â·k,rr.5.3 .:%2/MbL_._ f . O 7 2 ~0 . 0 - 1. 0 . 91 /6 4 - .*-i, 1/7 7 t. A ' â€¢ _ 4 Q \ LOT 7 - r -,-':- , 11,736 sq, ft 1 A 06 Fr-e-1 , - C/Tr Z./CHr Â· 1, , ~ LOT 10 < 2~A~Â» 29 /1.-4 LOT 8 9â‚¬ b 124% / STANDARD ADDITIONAL GARMISCH ,-35 -2 - , LV* 4 00 eg 1 1 - AA 1 4 ~ 4 2,259 q. ft. - STREET R.O.W. ,/2,211 sq. ft. - 4- 0 11 .' 4' RAD , i '' ,Â·~ 4 f ' 387 h +PS.A.,1 , 1 22 6 rMÂ«,15 - L A *' h.i â‚¬,fE. & u 1.1 6 41> L -9 -- + ' 1. / k H â€ž t ' ~ 4 /4 â„¢ tti ~ 1 14.43 l.- 9 -3 - ,/ f\\ h. 1 1 k 70 84%9Â» _ - .+ f + '4'-Prle #-4- 11 CH 1 2- 5, f':429!2- 1Qi 1 2 0 1 BUILD/NG ENVELOPE CA \ 4 1 11 3 0 . A-: 1 - . 11 ./ I 11 - 11 1 / N. 1. I ' il'll Ill 11 lilli 11 ) lili lilli! 11 11 i) 1 1 1 , -9 t --Affibi 44 r, 1 - 11 1 7 - 1 1 *jv~ ~ -8 h 91.1 15 11 , r li11 J 1 BURDi Ak U.1 1,2 . r .er h -11 1 1 41 42 11 1,11 0.2 111 e - 44.71- 010 11.011 1 11 1 1 1111 'FfeÂ« 1 q,061 1 \ 11 1 ,lilli 1111 1 11 1 1 h 'Ils' lili 1 11 1 'i , j 'i- 3%4 Â«Â« A. 4 -*._ 0 rh:}- /1 nryâ‚¬ 11 1 11 lilli lb/-'. 3 1 1 11 \ <1> / 4 0,1 1111 1 53 /4 #Ferâ‚¬ 75' NA'D 4 14Â·, 1 I,l lili lilli 1 111 1 1.27 L j LA0 A - . 3 -1.i illilli'11 11 1. ~19 n 4- 11. ( 6 1 LANDSCAPE PLAN 11 \/ 1 11 'le'll _4 60 9 99+ e>EF.vice?DefrÂ·In Y 1 11 '08 1111> 11 / 1 11 1 1. . 0, . >hy BALYJWF - lilli !11 ./ bikix / 9' ~ 1** 1-1 . \/ 0 %. 1 \.11.7 3. 0, 1 - ( A< 'N 4 b H+ , < 1-HE- 0-Em-VE-r-10 et=ES'JF, /6.14::.. T 11 1 A * *0$. --Â·- _TTLAvv' 4 4689 N# f .6 414-664_ A. 21 1- I LAN N 6/2.0 MAIX -Â· ALÂ» tu Â«T. -9 11,0 t V 52, AÂ«F e 6.1 f f K QGA .. Â·. aL #*_ f T -,A + 4 / ,*Al=-,57.,.,~ '42Â»~fa =0 << 1 SNOW STORAGE \14 r' i \4 4.7R<67 C + 6 1-4.9-9fa,AvioF#_678"1 \ 1 -<--1 1 ,7- rt/V v 1 1 11 1.n 59 70) 9602:p, 0-7 17 \ \ \ 1 NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU WIST COk,UENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS Sur<VEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. It\ AC EVENT WAY ANY AC-RON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED WORE THAN TEN YEARS FROW THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. 97089 11/06~98 89SI T DWG -â€¢ 31 194Â«Ik<44149944444 h --- 13IEL ------ /,2- -- 1'.ti 1 F---- 1--- 7 n 40 Ill \ EXISTING Ill \ SHED 11 1 \ 11 1 7 11 1 - 94Â« I-e 11 1 r-UA#73 af 37MEIT ' 1 1 FOUND REBAR & l /MA?OVEMOVT ASECT PROPOSED LOT LINE AFTER ; 1 CAP, LS. #2376 PROPOSED S77MET LIF97 -44\ . 'rhaav--*-~. U 2' RIGHT OF WAY /A.,6, 4 L--6 21.- i monw 4,4 d... 1 / 1 - 1- - - -- -El'---------------- ---- - --- ---i - 4 V \,/ 1 Â·1 -Jl 1 \ - r v t t.6 - -1 i r 4 .,i;Â·f â‚¬,~ Â·Â·i:~ 4~ Â·AlÂ·.; .'.\4*.42.': ' . ' ~t' ~ .., jriÂ·.I Â·F~.~â€¢ /<~ Â· i ' -I 400\ -Â·: ~ -~Â·: .~FÂ»7>NÂ·~sÂ· 602)"ME St/.4*41 VALM+:.t<bri,k,JÂ·~,i- 6/41Â¢44.~Â·06: .:lau . H.. I ASPI~LT HC Â· .. .:. ' . I I 1 ~- 5' Â£,IAL)SOVE- AREA.~ 242.01' - ~4*-MAUEy EMAd~_ END OF ZE~VALK ' O ST* 2+N.JJ ...4-14=4~-----..................1.--*.--------- 1 11 -- GUTE? 4 01 00 ~-- ASPHA~T (TYP.)-~ SOUTH GARMISCH ST ~4 r wm mu 6 l~ 847<H ASPHAL T 70 NEW STA: 2+34.33 EDGE OF EX END CURB & GUTTER 0 7 -S14'53'191Â¥_ k- , 9. % 159.54' 0 1 X< - 4 1 8 4 1% 6- - -Se:8Â£243,_ 117.24 --~ NEW EDGE OF PAVEMDIT- ~ \~ 0 24' OV./.C) 11 Â» 7 1- " O 0 -- -- - LEGEND $ I EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY LINE o 1 1 1 1 1 1 EXISTING UTILITY POLE | 01//0/1 < } m EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL ~ EXISTING ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER I D<1 EXISTING WATER VALVE irt Z 1 1 0 2 il 0- Il < 1 1 1 1 - 4 1 <D PROPOSED STREET UGHT I 1 1 1 1 FM STA = 0+30.81 CURVE liLliE 9 ELEV = 1021.35 CURVE MDRIS LENGYMPAI,GENT CHORD \ 08-8 1 Cy 7030 20.95 \ 15.21 1113 I Sar#*4Â¥ 2.20*~= 13 50.00' Â£ cs loa50 les \ &28 la.55 l S17*83'527 06~01~05 . I .. i NOTE: EXISTING CONDmONS SURVEY 5 AAÂ© 84% AMP A?OWDED BY SOPRIS ENGINEERING UC. 1030 . 9 9. 1= - 5' VERT. 19 0; PV! STA - 1 +80.08 S# PM ELEV - 1010.06 -1.2 mt 80.00' M. QQ . 1 - -<- 8 8 Â¥5 1020 2 2 - 19 84 am 1 8 0 - ANISHED MADE 0, W Â· Â· f .. : 07371>ve alÂ«,E iii 04 t EXISTING GRADE ELEVAnON (TYP.) DATU1C EXV ~-~- FINISHED GRADE ELEMTION (np.) 1000.00 I. 08 0 0 61$1 NE 29 00 55 29 /4 88 00 00 00 00 0+00 1+00 2+00 ENGNEERS SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. BER NINA- REVISION CITE BY Job No. 97072A 7 SURVEYORS 118 W. 6th Street, Suite 200 GARMISCH ST D-n * FT 1 0-: 12-17-98 Glenwood Springs. Colorado 81601 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P.U.D. PLAN & PROFILE i ~ br (970) 945-1004 (FAX 945-5948) JH SCMÂ«ESER J Aspen, Colorado (970) 925-6727 of 4 GORDON MEYER 1 a# MABLE 060 - PT = +00.05 BVCE: 1024.35 DI \Owgs\1997\97072A,BAABEE.:wg Thu Dec 17 10: 09: 36 1998 SGM Inc. (JTN) Â£ I 4 / -INSTALL YARD HY~RÂ»IT 9, INSTALL 40 ..../ 1 22.5~ BEND N 13709.37 / 0 N 13687 E 10630.2 1 E 10635.69 -INSTALL 10 tr OF 4" DIP ~- =0'V~ ~ ' INSTALL 4' 1 C~ BLOWOFF DEVICE \ 1 //flflf//9Â«f\3 1/J-J/ft<.r )~ ~ - -- A L-2/- \ (1) 45'BEND ~ (1) 11.25' BEN I~TALL DRY"WE1-1= 2 A, N -3607.66 ~ < 40 DUCTILE IR -ZÂ®Â£3/ E 10656.22 0 / il l<. REMO BLE PLUG \A 1 9. C . / LINSTALL DRYWELL r 5///11,/ c V INST 8 LF SCALE: 1"= 20' //4< f - - 6 NSTALL 20 1-F OF 4~21 / INSTAiL 4' ~ GATE /VALVE ~ * d . 1 *â€žIL-- INSTALL_DRn,ELI. N 13606.28 .. E 10~1.65 \*Resâ‚¬ .. 4Â«Â«AN / 1 pÂ« NSTALL 1 SICK OF ~Â»2Â»*. \ \ SDR 21 PE YDRANT . 362Â«fÂ«%<t / -4 / REDUCER . 1 1Â«1Â»\Â»= . OF 4 DIP 7 1 1- Oa#- r I. 1 \ INSTALL F INSTALL 6~ 81 . ASSEMBL 4*2442<2~ NSTALL DRYWEU- 1 - N 13607.66 10 E 10656.22 1~ O .f if. -n O 1 A/1.*iÂ·- # fi ' 4444- 1 / i 0 -'4560' 7--INSTALL DRYWELL \ 08 1 4 F*Ii ~*zi L- 1 1 6' SLEEVE W 3"*60 f f/:7--7, ; 1 C A E 10779.11 1-1,- 74 , \6/ & I 1 ' 941<44Â«44Â«::--- al:latii Â«~ 1Â» \ N 13576.13 , =-0- U i 2~ . 10 441 , e f - 10... -L.-1 1 + H./a/- 1--1--1 -4-6~_ ~ IUSTALL STREET N 1 . . -4 fo . - Â· 4 :*%9 4, 4,'4 ''â€¢Â·Â·-14%0' L 1 1 . \ U 2--I- .....I 1- -/7//9/ -//Idi *'gailm Ill=....ir - ... 4 -- -1 4 - /:.96 ..:'- :Â¥19: blk..'# 1.:14-62'A:4 2 ----- - ~--ca~ i / /\ 1 -h â€¢AVT. 1/\ , 1 _ _-_ -_ _1_ __ -n--1.~~~~LL ~ , 1 -6/T- - ."TN-*-Liz. - '' .....'-/ : -' Â·15.''tjtb- , fll, 1//1 D-/ 1 4..:4. z, 11 91 ve SEW 1." i \ ~-EOST GATE VALVE L./ 1 0 - 0 --E/7:- - - -- (APPROXIUATE LOCATION) 0 \ i / M FUM - 1011.77 NSTALL 10 LF OF 8"SDR 35 / / E)0~ Sll At ? - INV INS- 1004.13 EITHER SIDE OF NEW MANHOLE + 1 INV IN E - 1003.90 . / / =; 1:46. 1 INV OUT - 1003.64 (MATCH EXIST SLOPE) 111 MV OUT - lon.02 A\ OFFSET: 12.50 R -3 / exist ss pipe OPR SMH c/l = 1001.89 1 / / / " LEGEND l Z;N 0 -X X- ~~ EXISTING FENCING -OE 05- EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UNE E2R NAN Ss EXISTING SANITARY SEWER UNE w w EXISTING WATER MAIN @rd/8 UTE EXISTING UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE AND ELECTRIC UNE EXISTING UTILITY POLE 0-0 2 ZE Â® EXISTING SANrrARY SEWER MANHOLE 1010 ~__ 1010 EXISTING TELEPHONE MANHOLE m EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL - 1-1------- ~ EXIST1NG ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER m EXISTING WATER VALVE 0 0.600 % 8" SDR 26 . I 1000 |1000 PROPOSED STREET UGHT PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY UNE 1 INSTALL INSULATION STA 1+30 TO STA 2+38 C PROPOSED FLOWLINE AND FLOW DIRECTION 1( PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER MAIN SM PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN 8W PROPOSED 8 INCH DUCTtLE IRON PIPE WATER MAIN APPROXIMATE EXISTING SCALE: ~GROUND El.EVAMON 1*-20'HORIZONTAL SW PROPOSED 6 INCH DUCTILE IRON PIPE WATER MAIN 10=5' VERTICAL . TUAC ELEV *4 PROPOSED GATE VALVE PROPOSED HYDRANT ASSEMBLY 990.00 9 . - PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE - 1+00 2+00 3+00 r PRELIMINARY 1 p ENGINEERS DATE BY .AOD MOL 97072A SURVEYORS SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. REVISION NOT 118 W. Gth Street, Suite 200 FOR JGA A MASTER UTILITY : Imm 4 JH Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P.U.D. PLAN LOTS 5 -12 1,< j. * J~ r-- 11-11-98 SCHMUESER lvl (970) 945-1004 (FAX (970) 945-5948) CONSTRUCTION GORDON MEYER ~- Aspen, Colorado (970) 925-6727 ab: U 77U WS - Â· sgm@sgm-inc. com SDR 26 D: ".wgs\1997\97072A\UTILITIES.dwg Thu Dec 17 09: 4:; 18 1998 SGM Inc. (JTN) 0.145 acres | LOT 6 C~- ~ LOT 7 * l q S _ ~ INSTALL DRYWELLn +1 LOT 5 - - --- 1 pa- 1 : . I-- ..+ 2 ...........0- 20331 62 50' 2/a@ZW) ' 4 VCS,/ r CÂ» 1 . El; TV- 1 1 % 1--=-I-'.: --I- ... ~ ~ INSTALL DRYEL l / NOTE: PRODUCTS SHOWN ARE AVAILABLE THRU COPEIAND 555-5 / CONCRETE NC. RFLC COLO. 625-1112. (OR ... -1... EQUAL APPROVED BY ENGINEER). INSTALL DRNELL-~ =!bk:&//~~// d.~ -\4(-1~140'tfitjlto- \\\ COE-n OFFSET AdANHOLE FRAAE & GRATE . =640\13 0 COVER ~ ~ 5-1900--H OR APPROVED EQUAL ... le'l.-- 1 1 3...012<34'ifftic ch hu L )00.2 0. 46944.-* 4--- \\\\ I >-29 0 . - -.*.#.i ...-. &-~-- % - / 3302 . I. 4 har Â· *Â·* 42446-9 3\ 01\2Â« 14 Z 77- COMPACTED 0 56,6 - . IR ./ 1 BAO(77U \Â»04~\~\41\ \ .. . ~il./- -. I\-.- - ! 3%44\ 2%24 I -- . \\30Â« \ \0\~ . - *94449.312 f . -ALUMINUM 7 -\ l - \ 1 SiEPS ' \ \ \\ \\ Cb -* LEGEND ~ . ill - \436 \04 D<ISTING RIGHT OF WAY LINE r \\. f \ \-1 -*m / SE'7*W 67 -X X-4 EXISTING FENCING - 4141<91.404 -Alip r -x-- 6= CIAACE7ER SIM STANIARFE . -OE 05--2 EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UNE - _- _ -r- MTH TRASH SCREEN AT TOP PERFORATED BELOW I - 4-0 / ~-INSTALL DRYWELL SS EXISTING SANEARY SEWER UNE . -k K IN xlyÂ« ~ 7 W W EXISTING WATER MAIN " ,~- FILTER FABRIC 412<Z'--Uy 1 41Â»41141. N , ~ ,~ UTE EXISnNG UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE AND ELECTRIC UNE I - .Ce-W.,bre-Â¥*5314-,094Mtf- 1 - LO- 12 0. 1 0-.- 0 'ril EXISTING UTIUTY POLE , i 02@yÂ»~9~.rist?GE'93â‚¬3' 2<361Â· 03,2~2~7Â·99 Â® EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE h =' . / e EXISTING TELEPHONE MANHOLE PERFORATED CONCRETE PIPE 9,553 sq.ft. 1.2 1 -1 ' 3 epÂ·~~cks rpo , ,-offc*grou<. d 4' A#MUUM RElVEm,177ON . 14 EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL . m 1/4' - 1 Lhp' --w----7 0,Â·Â·16(po (boUnu ,-O-' vt r INTO GRAVEL AUUMUM O.215 acres 1 jitt~44-Full . EXIS-nNG ELECTRIC â„¢ANSFORM ~ boaL I Yo<yo cpoocTo CÂ»C 4, roocro rÂ· .oo c Â£\1\ I EXISTING WATER VALVE 41~4 - 2425(cod/?936-83Â» cF: -~lff LOÂ» 1 ~ ~-& 294/6ad&(Aoi/47, UCS<69 )-n~ - V\\64 r ((EL Â· . -22 4~ \I ** C-A /-INSTALL DRYWO.L * PROPOSED STREET LIGHT 9 6\ \00\ 1 -\7Â»%45*ligideFIEEEMBEFE##immwi#Saff#MOB DRYWELL SIZE AND PENETRATION TO BE BASED ON SITE SPEaFIC PERCOLATION TESTS AND HYDROLOGY. k: 1 . 1 1 14; \\.. DRyWELL SCHE*IRC ~i t~ 9.90 / PROPOSED UVAJNE AND FLOW DIRECnON - -- tatzÂ« , ss , PROPOSED SANCTARY SEWER MAIN N. 7.S / 1 1 PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN 1 aw PROPOSED 8 INCH DUCTILE IRON PIPE WATER MAIN , 1 ow PROPOSED 6 INCH DUCT1LE IRON PIPE WATER MAIN . 1 0 ~ 43 / 1 0 , M PROPOSED GATE VALVE O - PROPOSED HYDRANT ASSEMBLY 0 * b.* u ti 44~44>i-- litv / 9 h PROPOSED SANrTARY SEWER MANHOLE /-4 \ 70,0~- .~ -~ *~1~pyÂ«t~~ AP/ / \43/ / -0. unplk , t\.4914*23 /. 1 1 , 902<~PÂ«\Â«y. 712\ I holoÂ« 0 ' Â»71 ' v. w ./,7 110/ Cu SCALE: 1 "= 10' \ a 1 PROPOSED LOT UNE AFTER r 2' mGHT OF WAY . f.-33~ 1 r----,&2Â£2%2W- 7 , / DEDICATION . /el 4 ----- 1 . ..1 / 4./ 1. ---~ i N , , 1 4 4 . \1 -- w LIUND,1,0:7~:TiC 1 \ 2 '7---- 1 4 1\\ i --.. I ~'-Â·~- *4Â·. 7-Â¥..~-7,r-~~T 4- 'Â· -WB&~,~u#~ ,;4-3Â¥*;A-Â»'*-Nfi~*.li@~ '/ 0 /br,.):\~~:,11: <-4.,i..:...(:iwi ::-+m L~v*w~4YAN;*~#41Â¢4.,#Ey< Li/ -- P T , IM)\ crtsuEÂ»ALK _ , 0 ' Sl* ~ '+~.1, --h-------p---1--- 1 C 71/ LPA 70/,49Â¥MLT 70 ~EIF . ~.~ : ~u . ..,- ~. :~il; ~ ~ .~ :u..2~~~3~ ---_4*_, ao cLU wn= GUTTER PAN AS REQURED STA: 2*34)03 ~ *X -.-E--7/4 - ---- ---- 0 / Â· t'QIES; i 1. ROUTE ROOF AND SURFACE DRANAGE FOR LOTS 8,9,10 AND 11 TO DRYWELLS ON LOTS 9 AND 10. 2. LOTS 5,6 AND 7 MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC DRAINAGE FACILITIES FOR SPECIFIC DESIGNS (BUT ARE ACCOUNTED FOR IN DETENTION VOLUME) PRELIMINARY ~~7 ,0/'. ENGâ€¢EERS NTE BY 97072A NOT *b~ SUIVEYORS 8CHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. 1&- ~STNV 118 W. Sth Street, Suite 200 GRADING AND JH Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P.U.D. FOR A/l, (970) 845-1004 (FAX (970) 945-5948) DRAINAGE PLAN ~1 0~r. * 12-17-98 CONSTRUCTION GORDON MEYER - SC#NUESER Aspen, Colorado (970) 925-6727 JH 1 -* sgmesgm-inc. com /94 7,-a. 9~Â·â„¢Fry..me D: \dwgs\1997\97072A\PA-GRADING.dwg Thu Dec 17 09: 54Â· 41 1998 SGM Inc (JTN) gv' -- 1 '1 4. pâ€¢ope,ry . f J lou LAE- 5' r ~: 5, m . . . r ... Ma OF M 2' 12' 12' IN OPEN FED IN ST~Er TI 1 . 1 ; , AA'r THR// /AW- ~,/'1 LIE) 1/2* BELOWW S FÂ»al Gl~DE 1 - OrrOISION TYPE CUIB # BOX w/ARCH AlTIERN BASE 1. UPPEM SECTION, Pem,GOP HEAD PWQ EPUCE lA CU FT. oF GRAE moUÂ® BOX r-TE SEMVICE 1 TO SUUNG l OR CAP. - 1= 0* 3/4~ a- SIOP AEULE}Â¥ DNE 84LL Wy.VE CO-USION TYPE /CO#0Â¥72- oijaf GAIL ? AW?KED 1*ATER' *<EN .RE AmoED 70 101Â£6â‚¬ Bar THN C OF TOP OF BOX 1/2' HOLE Ate EXTEND 12~ Mar ED WILE 8* 2~ 1 WID LOOP AND RETURN -E UOW ALONG PIPE n â€¢la? ETE LOCK A .10â‚¬ 1 ' wt,â‚¬5 10 ~ 66*D - 1 0, 1 'r PE- -Ir - USE TAICEN IWI r-/ 4 GAUGE 77,1CS? MAE ~ TO Â¥*nI C OF TOP OF BOX \ 7*Eb47191OÂ£D 70 W,Â£,E Bar I DRILL 1/r HOLE AND EXTEND Ir OF Â»,RE NTO W~LVE 804 BEND VARE *ITO LOOP AND RETURN IRE TO FOLLOW ALONG PIPE 2--tr EE CONCRETE sACDON aLOCK rI' 944. Â· 6 ... RUBBER GASKEr & NOTES: 1) ALL JONTS FRO,1 1- TO HYD,-r SH,LL elE MEGA-LUGS. TE-MOOS. AlÂ«) THRUST 3) USE 1/4- RADIUS ON ALL EDGES. OR FlANGED JONTS. TEE TO BE IW X FlANGED GV TO BE FlANGED X IU -- 0 . . . . . . ..b . C 12. A. 4) USE 6= DEPâ„¢ OF CONCRETE ON ALL DRIVE*AYS. R) HyDRWT. %,M-PE AND FlrYNGS TO E 250 P.11 84112 . " ' ~IFT La .4.0Â£Â£ Â£*i 5) CURE FOR n HOURS USING CURING COMPOUND. PLASTIC COVERING OR 3) POLYEn<Ve,E IR,P S-L COVER EUP. ASSBEY FROM H,1-NT 8. 1-1. , .. 18~ * SI~LLER A,asn,ME 8151 70 -13 A-i M OAWI ARst OFÂ«-79 .., 1.4~J=brrolt< . 5'-0. 6) USE 3750 PS CONCRETE WITH FIBERMESH ADDITIVE AT 1 -1/2 LB&/C.Y. 4) ALL H~,1-r LDD PF,48 TO BE C OJ.P. eÂ°Y>.4646*201(. 4 - ' C VeL' -0 47- 9..1.2-4. - .IÂ·Â·a 4 . 0Â©'e'vi-L . 4 1'Â· Â»995.6- 92-4 9 54. 8.-0. MAXIMUM SLUMP 4: 5) CENTUUE OF Ht-NT TO 015 4'-00 FROW -CK OF 0,8 ~4 0 5' CC EACH ItY. 00= A lARGEÂ» SPECAIL OR EDGE OF SHOUDER U~ESS 011â‚¬RmSE NOTED, 4420/<0749 6.Li~/.~i/4*62 PRECAST CONCRETE MANHOLE AND -TERPROOF SS,L AROUâ‚¬ PE~ET-ONS THROUGH STRUC1URE 4' CLASS 6 AGGREGATE CONCRETE SIDEWALK 6) AEULLER F11 #000*WTS 70 BE USED 7) 710,UST REST,W,r N SlRUCTURE BY hECIL ENG. PROVIDE SNIUZED SCALE: 1 ~- 1 '-0. V VALLEY PAN DETAI L WITH PRE-CAST BASE FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY SCALE: 114.= 1,-O. INSTALLATION DETAIL N.TS. tÂ· 1'1 11, â€¢1 PREUM#VARY - ENGINEERS SURVEYORS SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. B REVISION DATE BY Job Ma 97072 NUM- 118 W. 6th Street, Suite 200 ROAD & UTILIY Dawn * FT 4 / NOT FOR D-: 12-17-98 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P.U.D. DETAILS (970) 945-1004 (FAX (970) 945-6948) ' C' CONSTRUCTION GORDON MEYER --4 â€¢ sgm@sgm-inc.com \ RE BAR-det SCHMUESER .1 . 1.r- Aspen, Colorado (970) 925-6727 JH 1~4 t ; ..c--.21~7-p Â· Â· Â·44. u * . 0 ..... 0 ./- I .. .,4 4 I ' 4 .- , . I . . I lili I - , x.l â€¢ . . , 40 . I ~y. ~r ' " , . I . I. 1 . I . 0 .. . 40: . I .. .... I I . '. ... I 4 - .... J - . 1.. ./It 4 - I. 4 .b 6 -0, ( . ... 0 .* I . ..... -. . â€¢ A. . .* i./ I 3 7. 144% . 1 0 44 9 - P . I J 9. lilli. ....6 .. â€¢11. I . , 1 - . 1 , -2 â€¢ -i, 0 46 .... 4 + 1 1 D 4 2 . .31 0 .0 2 4 * 44 .. .. . i .. . . .... . I 3 3 . /2 I I . .4- ., f, 1 , 0 0 r . - ./'. t : I A . , , I ... ... I . .1. A. . . I .. . I . th t .. * A D.-D ,/ . 1 % .. , . 0 .2 3 - 33 â€¢1 AS / , , 2.- '3 ' 2 ' . 9. $ 0 0 - 9 , I . , , , 0 : 2. ../ . 0 ... . 1 ... ,/ 1/ ' I .Â¢. , , ~2 2-, 0 0 -2 2 . . 0 '' A ./ , -0 . , ' '' .' 1 , . 1 4 9 lileeellilill-'-Cri-'Ailib~? , , ..1 .... .. . 13 0 D / . " 0 -3 /'/. r .- 0 .. 1, ..... , 1. , 42' .1 *- .. V.. . . 1/0 I Â· ' , lA ,., ... ' 3, I â€¢ . I .0 0, , '' , . 1 , il .* , " ... . ... 2. .. .4 . e , * h li .... .,." . 0 .. . A . 0 I. 0,0 92. %, 11 * I'Â· ' h . Â¢ 3, r. 1 - D . 0 3 I. 1 I. /-/ 0 .. rÂ·, i . -- 0 Ii, ... . â€¢/2 .0 ..1. I. . * .3 2 -. . . Â· . . .0 . 1 .. . 3.. . 1 . h .1, 3 Â· ..I-- 3 3 e. - 0 .1. 0 ./1 . I .. I 0. . .0 I . 2. . . I & . / r :. 2-1 . ,-0 - '13, .' 0 :'I.. . .8 - 1 - '.2 3 - - D -al -- - 0 2, I .. .. ,... **L , ti 92 . - I .1/ . 2'.- ., J. M 3-â€¢ i , 1, I~Â· 1 . .. '1.- A Â·h / . D . , 3,2. rÂ·. O I ./ . 0 0 ' e, . : -1 -; . . 2, . ... ,. - 12' .' 2 /- D.2 .1 . A I Â· . â€¢ '.7 . . .. .. 7 0 1Â· .. . ' 3-1 i AH'Â·. . O 2/ â€¢ .0 , 1. . .2 , 0 . 2- . -3 rÂ·, ; . , â€¢. -- r I ". I . , 22' : . D - â€¢ 0 . 2. . A , FINAL PLAT OF: - - , BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE Gth P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEET 2 OF 2 / S 1430'49" W 245.91' / -- / -- -1- - , , - ---- 0/ --- ---- - i- -/ / i, - - -1 -71 --- 4 --- - I - - 4 - I - I - / , - Â·EE-f_ U - 292.50, 488.14/1 / 40 - -- .-I -- 470* / / , K / / --- -- i 1/ , /-- -------- - -- 6 - / / 1 1 W- 1 V . 1 -- - -1 -- - -- / - . 11,736 sqfÂ« - / --4,269 acres 1 ' 1 1 1 / 5.1419Â» 165.00' <- 1 /- / 40 ' f69Â·Ef - 122- 1- ---v A- - .* 1 - / W 1 \\111 1 4,06 T 55. OQL - - 1 k r 1, / n -_ 55.00' - ~. - 2 - - --4 -2-2 2- 2 - le .3- / 06 ,- 04 1 . I. - 62- Â·~r. --* / I - 40 2 -- ,--LOT_Â§ B / U f / 1 Loil. , / LOT 3 ,~ 4 LOT 4 - - : 22 -9,887 sq. ft. 1 -f - th , 1 11,70 11.440 sq. ft. - N.440-14.11. - 0.135 acres - 101 6 1/ 1 0.2#9 acres 0.263 ocr~ Â»Eb ares - ., 1 / - 1 \1 1 ---- -5 7 p / ---1 - ~ / e ' 1 -01 LOT 5 1 6.318 sq. ft 9 , 1 i 50' BUILDING 50' BUILDING r- 0.145 acres 11 / S 1450'49"' W / - / V--~OBACK ~ < ~TBACK/1 /1 ~ SEBA-CK~ ~_ ~ # , \1 / ~' ICTB 61.87' / ~ th 1 1 1 ,(2 1 / 7 1 -1 1 / 1,;i' 1 1 1 2 \ 1 A / LOÂ¥ 1 /// // 61\C 9/ 3 342 0Â¢res , -Â·- -- --Â·----1 r--- 102.000 er N 14'50'49' E 60.72 / LOT 8 4 fsq.ft. 1 3.01 7 sq. ft. 1 3 \ /9 + 5 1 1 1 1 1 ~ S\1450'49" *\ \ 1 0069 acres 6/ 4 fli I 111: \\1 1 | 20 00' 4 2 6 i / / 11 i \ i 7-10 \ --- v N 7509'11" W R 33.27' ~ N S 14'50'49" W go. 57' .2 ' g ill / 1 . \ i . 1 de i LOT 9 ''u FE ' A ., - - Â£;fdZ,~~2= 2,259 sq. ft. 4, 1/ / \/4\/ 1 .1 Â£0733&4 1 0.052 acres 05/ 0 1 el 4 Q 1 ; / i Z 13.55' 34.84' / ,- 1 1 40 :11 14 C C| N 1430'49" E r . / 4 1,0- : 1 11/ & 1/ f Lb 1 â‚¬ i Â£ B LOT 12 , N 5430'49- E 48.39'-~ , / 0 1 * 19 9,446 sg ft lu ./ i \ 244 LOT 10 , 0.217 acres 1 i.eli i / i/ 11 314 * 400 4 â‚¬ 0 - 1 1 34.!6' 10 .~/1 0.051 acres ' ~ F LA 2,211 sq. ft. 1 - - - ~ N 1450'49" E 68.777' ' f / le 11 1 1 - 1,/ 22- 9 , . 1 1 1 '43/ 1 . 1 1 \ 1 1 111 1 11 4 1 1 1 : @4 1 1/ 1-7 1 1 1 1 1 j , 1 i , C -3 . 1 ' 1 /4 . 1 80/LOING ENEL OPE - ~ _ ~~ ~ 2.255 sq. 0. 1 1.4 7 .//: 1 1 4 0 Z 09 6 , A LOT 11 % \ 10' BUILDING 6 4 0.052 acres , 1, , - 0 . SETBACKRTWin 2 iÂ· -~ L 9/0//, 1 \ 24 55.00' f f 55.00' 53.45' ~ 4283 /19 - / '11. 1 1 j EXISTING 484 sq. ft. , 1 S 14'50'49" W f 1 242.01' 0 / - - - l - 2.38 / 4 9/ \S 39'47'fl Â» E R.O.W. / Do / . 4/ HOUSE Â£44 lf. /4 Â·k / 2.49 1 Uk/TY- 37 6/4 - - - - -- - _ __ 0_011_2Â£res - 4 ~ / / 19' EASEMENT \LA 6/ /1 1 BOUT-Fl BAR'JvllÂ·SOM STREET 4~/, 7__ r---3*7 14/+ -~47 i I re 4Â·i j ~-5 ~~474# f / 4 9 3 1 , \ / 1.0 % I / i i , ./. . A . 1 ~ 65.000 .7 ! 1 .%74' . 1 / 41.26. \1* 73.74' 1 rlf# 1 f*~ 13' SE?BACK mp) S 14'50'4911 1 15.00' :F.z-R / i< I 'mi. 1 i / 1 52 1 $ ' NOTES: 4) BASIS OF ELEVATION: AN ELEVATION OF 7906 81' ON THE U. S.G. S. BENCHWARK LOCATED AT THE PITKIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE. GRAPHIC SCALE 7 15 30 80 120 SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 30 ft CIVIL CONSULTANTS NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL AC 1101 BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WTHIN THREE YEARS CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 8040 GREENLINE 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 AFER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT, IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THI5 SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS TROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. (970) 704-0311 . 97089 1/11/99 8@SITE.DWG / *g Â£ t, sa GL k, PEAN AVENLE N 75'09'11" W 3do-13AN] SNIO Vill MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum. C ity MartageQ~L~ John Worcester, City Attorney 1 FROM: Julie Ann Woods. Community Development Director DATE: April 12,1999 RE: 2nd Reading of Ordinance 11, Series of 1999 Barbee Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Exemption for Affordable Housing, Method of providing affordable housing, Vested Rights, Park Development Fee Waiver SUMMARY: The applicant. Mary Barbee. John Barbee. Hallie Rugheimer. and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc.. obtained conceptual PUD approval in January of 1998 pursuant to Ordinance 44. Series of 1997. The development proposed is to subdivide the property (approximately 17.695 acres) into twelve (12) development lots and a conservation parcel. This proposal would allow for the existing residence to remain on proposed Lot 1 (with approximately 2.3 acres). and be rezoned to R-15. Moderate Density Residential (with a PUD overlay). This lot will be conveyed to the existing property owner, Mary Barbee. A site specific building envelope has been designated on this lot to accommodate any future redevelopment of the existing residence. The balance of the lot will be subject to the same restrictions that will encumber the Conservation parcel. Lots 2 through 12 would be rezoned to AH l /PUD for 10 new residential units falling within the 70-30 "mix" allowed in the Affordable Housing Zone District (AH1-PUD) and an access easement. The Barbee property includes a substantial portion of Shadow Mountain. which is proposed as a Conservation parcel (approximately 13.559 acres) to be deeded in fee to the City of Aspen. The site is located at the base of West Aspen or "Shadow' Mountain just south of Koch-Lumber Park (see attached Exhibit ''D"). The following chart summarizes the proposed mix of units/bedrooms/prices: 1 Lot/Unit Type Proposed Price Lot Size FAR Proposed No. of Bedrooms 1 / Free-Market F.M. 102,000 s.f. 4,500 s.f. Existing 2 / Free-Market F.M. 11,705 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 3 / Free-Market F.M. 11,440 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 4 / Free-Market F.M. 11,440 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 5/RO $130,000/Lot 6,318 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 6/RO $130.000/Lot 5,887 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 7/RO $130,000/Lot 11,736 s.f. 2.575 s.f. 3 8 / Category 4 $219.500* 3,017 s.f. 1.400 s.f. 9 / Category 4 $219.500* 2,259 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 10 / Category 4 $219.500* 2,211 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 11 / Category 4 $219.500* 2,255 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 12/Access Easement N/A 9,446 s.f. N/A N/A 13/Conservation N/A 13.559 acres N/A N/A *This amount is the current 1998 capped price of a three-bedroom Category 4 unit. Under the proposed 1999 Housing Guidelines, the amount would increase to S222,500. The actual price ofthe units will be determined at the time of building permit issuance. The Conceptual approval addressed only the PUD review criteria. This Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) application (A) also includes land use requests for B)Subdivision, C)Rezoning. D)Growth Management Exemption for Affordable Housing, E)approval ofthe method of providing affordable housing, F)Vested Rights. and G)Park Development Fee Waiver. (Please refer to Exhibit A which addresses the above lettered requests as required by the Land Use Code). The Special Review for parking was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission also recommended approval of the final PUD. rezoning, and subdivision at their hearing on March 16. 1999. The growth management exemption requested by the applicant was recommended for approval by the Growth Management Commission at a hearing on March 16, 1999. The applicant has addressed the concerns raised during the conceptual review. Accommodations for architectural and landscape consistency, shared access ways. utility easements. site lighting. legal instruments for the conveyance o f the conservation parcel. draft plats. engineering schematics, and a draft Subdivision Improvements Agreement have all been included in the application. The majority of staff's comments are included in Exhibit "A" of this memorandum. Major points of discussion have been summarized below. ISSUES FROM FIRST READING: At first reading held on March 22, City Council requested some additional information be included in the staff memo. This included: more information on the conservation 2 01 cors /1 C,-1 Crl â‚¬9 â‚¬9 09 parcel, the Parks Dept.' s plans for this parcel (including trail connections), and its benefits to the city; the amount of the Park Dedication Fee being requested to be waived; copies of the P&Z resolution and GMC resolution; and more detail in the table which will address price commitments and proposed unit mix. Staff has also modified the ordinance to clear up issues with the applicant. Staff recommends City Council adopt Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999 upon second reading. APPLICANT: Mary Barbee, John Barbee. Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., all represented by Sunny Vann and Associates. LOCATION: Approximately the corner of Juan and S. Garmisch Streets. Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11. and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen, plus additional metes and bounds within the City of Aspen and Pitkin County as shown on the Site Improvements Survey (see attached vicinity map. Exhibit 'D'). ZONING (AND SUBSEQUENT ANNEXATION): The portions of the subject property currently within the City of Aspen (approximately 10.693 acres) are zoned R-15/PUD/L and Conservation. Portions of the property in the County (approximately 7.003 acres) are zoned AFR-10 and R-15/PUD. The applicant is seeking annexation into the City for the County portion of the property following land use approval. The applicant requested that the development proposal. if approved, be contingent upon annexation as they were not necessarily inclined to annex to the city unless the project could receive the necessary approvals. The rezoning on the entire parcel would not be in effect until the annexation is accomplished. The applicant is also seeking rezoning to AH1/PUD, R-15/PUD and Conservation as delineated in the PUD portion o f the application. The annexation will be accomplished prior to the recordation of a final plat and SIA. LOT SIZE: 17.695 acres, or approximately 770,794 square feet. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): Most of the subject property- consists of slopes of greater than 30%. Subtracting areas of slopes and the proposed access easements, the following lot areas apply for FAR and Density: FAR shall be based on 761.130 s.f. of Lot Area. Density shall be based on 109.144 s.f. of Lot Area. These are preliminary figures to be confirmed by the City Zoning Officer during building permit review. ALLOWABLE FAR AND DENSITY (UNDER AH-1/PUD ZONING): 3 FAR - 145,565 square feet by right, can be increased by Special Review. Density- for single family and duplex units: 36 units (109,144 + 3,000). PROPOSED FAR AND DENSITY: FAR: 31,325 square feet. Density: 10 new units plus one existing unit = 11 units. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence, assorted outbuildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: Same. but with ten (10) additional residences and two carport structures. The majority of the property is proposed to be deeded as a conservation parcel. PREVIOUS ACTION: The City Council considered and recommended approval of the conceptual PUD with the conditions incorporated into Ordinance 44, Series of 1997 (see attached Exhibit E). At their meeting on March 16. 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission passed by a 4 to 0 vote Resolution 99- which recommends City Council approve the application. (This resolution is attached as Exhibit 'IED. At their meeting on March 16.1999, the Growth Management Commission passed by a 7 to 0 vote Resolution 99- which recommends City Council approve the exemption from Growth Management and the method o f providing affordable housing. (This resolution is attached as Exhibit "F"). REVIEW PROCEDURE: Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Exemptions, Approval ofthe method ofproviding affordable housing, Park Fee Waivers, and Vested Rights. Cky Council shall approve approve with conditions. or deny this land use request at a public hearing after considering recommendations from the Community Development Director. the Planning and Zoning Commission. the Growth Management Commission, and the City's Housing Designee (APCHA). The property is currently in two jurisdictions. The applicant has requested annexation into the City and this action will take place after final land use approval from City Council. The actions taken by the City Council are subject to annexation of the property and become void if the land is not annexed into the City. Likewise. the zoning will not become effective until annexation has occurred. 4 STAFF COMiMENTS: The applicant has made great strides to accommodate the concerns of the staff. the Planning Commission. and the City Council in this application. The application is complete and includes all additional information requested during the initial review. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." A vicinity map has been included as Exhibit "D." The following concerns were issues to be further addressed as part of the final review: 8040 Greenline Review: The conceptual review requested an application for 8040 Greenline Review if the completed survey information determined the proposed development was in the overlay area. After reviewing the completed survey. no proposed development is in the 8040 jurisdiction and no review is required. Affordable Housing Method and Mix: This development is slightly different from typical private sector affordable housing projects in that the 70% affordable portion of the project is proposed to be conveyed to a non-profit affordable housing de~-elopment group. The Housing Authority Board reviewed this project during Conceptual Review and recommended City Council approve the proposal. The City Council approved the Conceptual PUD with two specific conditions regarding the provision of Affordable Housing on the property. Those were: 1.One of the R.O. lots would be provided to a member ofthe Barbeefamily, should that family member qualify for an R.O. unit. If no member of the Barbeefamily qualifies. the Barbee family would be paid 8130,000 for that lot. and the lot would be retained by AP EHI. 1.The remaining two R.O. lots, and the land for the Category units, would be retained by APEHI. The Housing O#ice will work with the non-profit to determine the jinal price of the R.O. lots and Category units, based on the final costs of the development and the appropriateness at that time of additional subsidy, subject to review by Council. Staff has suggested conditions o f this final approval which reflect the intentions o f these two conditions. but which better correspond to the language provided in the proposed Subdivision Agreement (please refer to condition no. 26). Currently, there are 163 allotments available for new affordable housing units. The applicant is requesting seven (7) units be allocated. There are also currently thirty-four (34) AH-Associated Free-market units available. The applicant is requesting three (3) be allocated to this project. The Growth Management Commission recommended that these allocations be exempted from Growth Management competition and scoring. subject to conditions. Under the AH1/PUD, only 30% of the project's bedrooms may be located within the free-market units. In addition. Category and Resident Occupied units must comprise at 5 least seventy percent (70%) o f the unit mix. Of the 70%, forty percent (40%) o f the units must be deed restricted to category units and RO units may comprise up to 30% of the unit mix. Below is a summary o f the proposed mix of units: Units % Bedrooms 96 Total Free-Market Units: 3 30% 9 30% Total RO Units: 3 30% 9 30% Total Category Units: 4 40% 12 40% Total: 10 100% 30 100% Total Free-Market Bedrooms = 30% Total RO/Category units = 70% Total Category units = 40% Total RO units = 30% The proposed AH1/PUD requirements for bedroom and unit mix have been met. Shared Access Ways: The Planning and Zoning Commission raised a concern about the multiple curb cuts on S. Garmisch Street and the affect of garage doors on the facades o f both the free-market homes and the RO homes. The applicant has responded by providing a shared access drive between Lots 3 and 4. This was acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk: During the conceptual review, planning staff expressed a desire for the edge of this project to be designed in a less urban manner. The Commission agreed and the applicant was required to investigate the design of the curb. gutter, and sidewalk with representatives o f the Streets. Parks, Engineering. and Planning Departments. The applicant did discuss this treatment with Engineering and Streets. who requested a more urban approach to the curb, gutter and sidewalk design. The City Planning Department preferred that this standard be met with a less urban treatment and suggested to the Commission that a drainage swale be created in the median, planted with tall native grasses and street trees, with a detached sidewalk. However, after discussions with the City Engineer. it was determined that. due to the soil characteristics in this area. the best solution is to place curb and gutter along the edge of the street to convey water away from the site. The Commission agreed that this was a preferable solution. Preservation of Existing Large Shed located nearest to Dean Street: During the conceptual review, staff urged the developer to find a mechanism to preserve some aspect of the large existing shed on the property. It is important to point out that this shed is not protected by the Citys Historic Preservation regulations and the developer is under no obligation to preserve the structure. However, regardless of the sheds technical value as a historic structure, the City Planning Department believes these old 6 sheds are important reminders of the City's history - as a type of visual reference to the Aspen society and culture as it has changed through time. Staff still believes this structure. or some part thereof. could and should be incorporated into the development plans. such as the street-side view of the carport structure. The structure could also be preserved on one of the proposed lots. or moved to another location in town and re-used. The structure is located approximately where the proposed shared driveway between Lots 3 and 4 is located. Concurring with staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that this be included as a condition of approval. Variances: First, the applicant is requesting approval of smaller lots (Lots 8.9.10. and 11) and zero lot line setbacks to allow for the creation of duplexes on individual lots. rather than with shared ownership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. The second variation is for the front yard setback of Lot #1. The R-15 zoning requires this distance be 25 feet. However. the existing house is much closer to the street and the back of the proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the R-15 zoning is the most appropriate for this property; 2) the 10 foot setback will be consistent with the remainder o f the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and. 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steep area o f the lot from development - a preferred development approach. Both of these variances are included in the PUD standards incorporated into the ordinance. Vested Property Rights: In order to preserve the land use approvals which would be obtained as a result of City Council approvals, the applicant is requesting vested property rights status (three years)for this project. Staff supports this request and has incorporated it into the ordinance. Park Development Fee Waivers and Conservation Easement: The applicant proposes to meet the park development impact fee requirements of Section 26.44.030 of the Land Use Code by way of a conveyance of the 13.559 acre Conservation parcel to the City of Aspen for open space purposes. Such conveyances are permitted pursuant to Section 26.44.080. subject to City Council's approval. Should the City Council prefer the payment of the Parks Dedication Fee, an amount of $36,340 would be required to be paid by the applicant at time of building permit issuance. As per Council's direction. the Parks Dept. has further evaluated the conservation parcel for its value as open space. Please refer to Exhibit "G" which addresses this issue. The Parks Dept. has indicated that the Conservation parcel will address several 7 goals of their program: it would formalize the trail easement between the City and the Aspen Mountain Trail; it would preserve the high quality transitional habitat for wildlife; and it would serve as visual relief (open space) from the more urbanized part of town. It should be noted that the Subdivision/PUD Agreement proposes that the parcel be deeded to the City of Aspen in fee simple ownership, but that a Conservation Easement be placed on the parcel, to the benefit of the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The Barbee family proposes this approach to ensure that the conservation parcel remains as open space in perpetuity. The Subdivision/PUD Agreement addresses the terms of the conservation easement. Because the agreement does not specifically address the ability of the City to have access through this site. staff is recommending that the agreement be modified accordingly to ensure that access be allowed (both trails and temporary construction access as necessary). This language has been added to Condition No. 3. RECOMMENDATION: Staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Growth Management Commission recommend City Council adopt Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999. with the following conditions: 1. The Land Use action is subject to annexation of the property into the City of Aspen. Failure to complete annexation within 180 days of this approval shall render this land use action void. unless the timeframe is extended by City Council. 2. Following annexation, but within 180 days after final land use approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building Permit. the applicant shall record a Final PUD/Subdivision development plan. This plan shall include all necessary plat requirements of the City Engineer including site plans. grading plans. utility plans. any physical improvements required to mitigate for additional air quality impacts as determined by the City Environmental Health Department, all utility easements. architectural plans and elevations, and a landscape plan. 3. Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building Permit, the applicant shall record a PUD/Subdivision Improvements Agreement binding the property. the Barbee Subdivision. to this development approval. The Agreement shall describe all subdivision and PUD improvements, requirements. restrictions, and maintenance, and shall provide financial assurance to the City for said improvements and the success of the site landscaping for a period of two (2) years after installation. The agreement shall be reviewed concurrently with the final plat and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation. The PUD/SIA will be modified to ensure that trail access and temporary construction access will be allowed as necessary. 4. That the following description of each lot's development provisions be included in the final ordinance: 8 Requirements Common to Entire Development Lot Dimensions: As represented on Final Plat. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 Feet. Maximum height: 25 Feet Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the setbacks. Minimum percent open space: No requirement. Lot 1 (existing Free-Market) Zone District: R-15/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North and East sides 10 feet each. Lot 2 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH 1 /PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 60 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 3 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 4 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 5 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. 9 Lot 6 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1 /PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 7 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1 /PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot 8 (categorv unit) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1.400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 35 feet from southern-most lot line. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 9 feet. Lot 9 (categorv unit) Zone District: AH!/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 27 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 7 feet; 0 feet. Lot 10 (categorv unit) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 14 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 7 feet. Lot 11 (categorv unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 6 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 14 feet; west 0 feet. 10 Lot 12 (shared access parcel) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowed Uses: 10 carport parking spaces, trash, snow storage, uses accessory to use of residential lots. Residential use shall require a substantial PUD amendment. Allowable Floor Area: 10 covered carports in two structures as represented on final plat. Setbacks: As represented on final plat. Trash access area: Minimum 10 feet wide, unobstructed. Conservation Parcel Zone District: Conservation Allowed Development and Uses: Uses allowed in the Conservation Zone District and allowed pursuant to the Deed of Conservation Easement. Uses and development necessary for community health and safety reasons may occur on this parcel. 5. The City shall accept title to the "conservation parcel" only after the City Attorney has reviewed all aspects ofthe Warranty Deed, the Deed of Conservation Easement. and is satisfied that no inordinate liability issues exist with respect to prior mining activities on the parcel. To satisfy this concern, the City may require areas of mining activity to be mitigated, or otherwise properly treated. or a legal instrument indemnifying the City prior to conveyance. In the event that title cannot be conveyed to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, then a trail easement will be conveyed and allowed in the Conservation Area. 6. Replacement after demolition of the existing single-family residence on Lot #1 shall require a GMQS Exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.050, as amended. 7. The Home Owners' Association. or similar entity responsible for Lot #12, the common access way, shall install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at such time determined necessary for public safety by the City Engineer. 8. Access to Lots 3 and 4 shall be via the shared access easement as described on the final plat. The City Engineer shall issue only one curb cut permit between these two lots. 9. All Lots are subject to the City's Residential Design Standards, as amended. Lot #1 shall be subject to the provisions of the Landscape Guidelines, as proposed in Exhibit B of the draft SIA upon redevelopment of the Lot. All other aspects of the City's Residential Design Standard, as amended, will apply. 10. For purposes of calculating the fee-in-lieu of school land dedication, the building permit application for each lot shall include an appraisal of the lot's fair market value. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the lot owner. 11. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for an individual lot, the School Land Dedication Fee shall be paid in full pursuant to the regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 12. Prior to recordation of the final plat, an air quality mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Department for approval. Physical improvements to the site required for mitigation shall be delineated on the final plat. 11 13. A Building Permit application for any and all lots shall include a fugitive dust mitigation plan for review and approval by the City Environmental Health Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for each lot, the applicant shall gain the necessarv permits from the appropriate department for any fireplaces or wood burning devices. 15. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No Sunday construction activity will be permitted. Exceeding the City Noise Ordinance may result in a stop work order. 16. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. All exterior lighting, including street lights. shall be downcast, sharp cut-off, and not used to accentuate landscape or architectural features of the development. No exterior up-lighting is permitted. No exterior floodlights are permitted. 17. The Community Development Dept. shall assign street addresses as follows: Lots 2-4 shall receive numbers with a Garmisch Street address; Lots 5-11 shall receive numbers with a Dean Street address. 18. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately Lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature. preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site. or the facades could be incorporated into the S. Garmisch Street side of the carport structure. I f preserved for storage use. its FAR shall be exempt. 19. Prior to the issuance o f a Certificate of Occupancy for the duplex units, six (6) street trees shall be planted along the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W or Midland Trail in locations approved by the City Forester considering the storage of plowed snow. These trees shall be three- inches or greater in caliper if deciduous or at least six feet in height if coniferous. 20. Prior to applying for a Building Permit. the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension and a collection system agreement from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. For the duplex units, a shared service agreement may be required. There exists a possibility that gravity service from Lots 5-7 will require a pump system: if so, its design must be approved by ACSD and the City Engineer. 21. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for any lot, adequate silt fencing shall be erected to ensure that no sediment-loaded drainage will be leaving the property during construction. This fencing shall remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the respective lot. 22. Prior to applying for a Building Permit for any lot, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. This agreement can be recorded with the plat and SIA documents. 23. Building Permit applications for any and alllots shall include payment of a $50.00 per project fee in lieu of digital submission requirements. 24. Any work within public rights-of-way shall gain approval from the appropriate City Department. This includes. but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 12 25. The applicant shall record the Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 26. That the final "mix" of categories shall be as follows, and conditioned as follows: a) The project shall consist of ten (10) new residential units. Three (3) shall be free-market units of no more than three (3) bedrooms each. Three (3) shall be RO Lots, each for the purpose of a single-family residence of no less than three (3) bedrooms. Four (4) shall be Category 4 three-bedroom units constructed and conveyed pursuant to APCHA Guidelines. The mix is summarized in the table below. b) At or near completion of the Category duplex units, the applicant shall provide the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority the opportunity to "buy-down" the Category designations of the Category Units and the RO Lots or Units to a lower Category prior to conveyance. c) Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy (CO) on the Free-Market units, the four Category units must have received their CO. Summary Table Units _1% Bedrooms b 1 1 Ao / Total Free-Market Units: 30% 9 DU /0 Total RO Units: 3 30% 9 30% Total Category Units: 4 40% 12 40% Total: 10 100% 30 100% Total Free-Market Bedrooms = 30% Total RO/Category units = 709/0 Total Category units = 40% Total RO units = 30% 27. That the language of these conditions as finally approved by the appropriate authority be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit set of plans and all other sets made for the purpose of construction. 28. That the applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of all P&Z, GMC, and City Council resolutions and ordinances applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter as part of the building permit application indicating that conditions of approval are known and understood. 29. That a Parking Management Plan be submitted for staff s review and approval prior to the Building permit application which will address the phasing, staging, and construction parking on the site. 30. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Growth Management Commission, and the City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval. unless otherwise amended by an entity having the authority to do so. 13 RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance 11, Series of 1999." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Comments from Referral Agencies Exhibit C -- Application Exhibit D -- Vicinity Map Exhibit E -- P&Z Resolution Exhibit F -- GMC Resolution Exhibit G -- Parks Dept. Memo 14 EXHIBIT A Staff Comments: A) Barbee Planned Unit Development A development application for a PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements: A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community' Plan. Staff Finding: Community Vision: The proposed development increases resident housing opportunities. encourages a balanced permanent community. may provide residents with a transportation alternative if they choose to walk to town. work. etc.. and is a relatively sustainable development pattern. Community Vitality: The proposed development is 70% affordable. addressing the community's desire to provide affordable housing opportunities within a reasonable walking distance to employment and recreation resources. The proposed development is an in-fill site within. or approximately within. the original townsite. Increased residential density. especially for local working residents. within the functional town promotes a sense of community that cannot be achieved by placing that critical mass in a remote location, regardless of where the metro area or extended metro boundaries exist. Open Space and Environment: Providing housing opportunities within walking distance to employment. entertainment. recreation, and other residences reduces the need to use a vehicle for every trip. Also. compact development within the townsite reduces the need to extend services and develop land on the outskirts of town, and preserves those natural open space areas for their wildlife and aesthetic functions. The proposal is preserving areas that are clearly not appropriate for development. The proposal also preserves the bench area above the proposed RO lots. just above the Little Cloud Subdivision. It is important to underscore this preservation because this area could be expensive "view lots" with dramatic affects upon the visual openness of the mountain. Staff believes this approach to development is the most desired for this parcel and is appreciative of the site planning and presen-ation. 1993 AACP: This project addresses elements of the existing AACP. Specifically. it 'creates a housing environment dispersed, appropriately scaled, and affordable.' And. it 'preserves and enhances the natural beauty of the area.' 1999 AACP: This document has not been adopted. However, the draft document provides substantial support for affordable housing to be located in town where it protects Staff Comments 1 surrounding open spaces outside of town and where the residents can become integral members of the social fabric. The plan also supports the preservation of natural open space areas such as the proposed conservation parcel for Shadow Mountain. Interim Housing Guidelines: The development proposed is consistent with the Interim (Citizen) Housing Guidelines adopted by the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions. The development is within the Metro Area. is within walking distance of the community core. preserves a significant amount of natural lands. represents quality design visually appropriate for the neighborhood. integrates different social levels within one project. is an optimum development level for this site. and does not promote urban sprawl. In addition. this project is proposed with no public subsidy and is not expected to have a significant negative fiscal impact upon I}le City or its taxpayers. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: Surrounding development zo the northeast consists o f multi- family housing. a park. older lodge conversions. and future potential mini-base development for Lift 1 or Town Lift: There is virtually no development. or potenrial for development, to the Southeast o f the site which is compatible with the open space easement proposed. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The surrounding areas development or redevelopment potential will not be affected by this development. Redevelopment of the largely vacant areas to the east have sufficient access from surrounding streets and a platted alleyway. D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. Staff Finding: Although exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures. the application must receive development allorments for 10 residential units. The Growth >[anagement Commission will consider this case and make a recommendation to City Council. The GMC public hearing is aiso scheduled for March 16, 1999, at 5:30 PM. 2. Density: A. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Furthermore, densities may be reduced if: 1. There is not sufficient water pressure and other utilities to serve the proposed development; 2. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development; 3. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of slope. ground instability. and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls and avalanche dangers; 4. The effects of the proposed development are detrimentai to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage. soil erosion and consequent water pollution; Staff Comments 2 5. The proposec development will have deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city: or 6. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance ro critical natural features of the site, Staff Finding: The density proposed on this site is far below that allowed by the gross lot size. There are sufficient utilities and ser.-ices to accommodate this development. The access to the RO and Category lots has been designed in cooperation with the Fire Marshall and is adequate for fire protection senice. The portion of the property where development is proposed is suitable for development. The applicant has not provided an Air Quality 1Mitigation Plan in the final application. The Environmental Health Department has suggested several recommendations. and the applicant is reviewing final details of tile recommended mitigation measures. The location of the proposed development does not appear to be in conflict with the natural terrain and features of the site. B. Reduction in density for slope consideration. 1, In order to reduce :vildfire. mudslide. and avalanche hazards: enhance soil stability: and guarantee adequate fire protection access. the density of a PLD shall also be reduced in areas with slopes in excess of twenty (20) percent in the following manor: a. For lands betu'een zero (0) and twenty (20) percent slope. the maximum density allowed shall be that permitted in the underlying zone district. b. For lands benveen twenty-one (21) and thirty (30) percent slope. the maximum density allowed shall be reduced to fifty (50) percent ofthat permitted in the underlying zone district. c. For lands between thirty-one (31) and forty (40) percent slope. the density shall be reduced to twenty-five (25) percent of that allowed in the underlying zone district. d. For iands in excess of forty (40) percent slope, no density~ credit shall be allowed. 2. Maximum densitv for the entire parcel on which the development is proposed shall be calculated by each slope classification, and then b> dividing the square footage necessary in the underlying zone district per dwelling unit. 3. For parcels resting in more than one (1) zone district. the density reduction calculation shall be performed separately on the lands within each zone district. 4. Density shall be further reduced as specified in Chapter 26.04. Definition of Lot Area. Staff Finding: The application specifies the percentages of the property falling within the described slope classifications. A substantial portion of the property is steep and does not contribute to development potential. As a general guideline. the flat portion of the property is the only portion which has development potential both in physical location and zoning (density and floor area). However. even considering the steep topography. the site has far more development potential than is being proposed. In this case. the community gains the assurance o f an appropriate level of development notwithstanding the high level of potential development. 3. Land Uses. The land uses permitted shall be those of the underlying zone district. Detached residential units may be authorized to be clustered in a zero lot line or row house configuration, but multi-family dwelling units shall only be allowed when permitted in the underlying zone district. Staff Comments 3 Staff Finding: The application includes a request to rezone the property to AH1/PUD. The present zoning, both City and County. allows for residential development in varying densities. The applicant is proposing the duplexes in a clustered. zero lot line configuration. 4. Dimensional Requirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district. provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings: b. Maximum height (including viewpianes): c. Minimum front yard: d. Minimum rear yard: e. Minimum side yard: Minimum lot width; Minimum lot area; Trash access area; Internal floor area ratio: and j. Minimum percent open space. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying zone diStriet. provided that the total area of all lots. when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone district. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final plat development plan. Staff Finding: This PUD will establish the dimensional requirements for Lots 1-12. Two variations to the underlying zone district are proposed. The first is to the minimum lot size for Lots 9. 10. and 11. The minimum lot size for a fatheing parcel this large is 3.000 s.f. The minimum lot area per unit in a duplex configuration, however. is 1,500 s.f. This essentially allows for a duplex on a 3.000 s.f. lot but does not allow for the duplexes to sit on their own fee simple property. Upon completion. the developer usually condominiumizes the shared property to separate ownership to allow each unit to sit on its own land as a limited common element. The smaller lot and a zero lot line setback allows for the creation of duplexes on individual lots rather than with shared ownership. This also saves the applicant from having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. The second variation is for the front yard setback of Lot #1. The R-15 zoning requires this distance be 25 feet. However, the existing house is much closer to the street and the back of the proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the R-15 zoning is the most appropriate for the location of the property; 2) the 10 foot setback wiil be consistent with the remainder of the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and, 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steep area of tile lot from development - a preferred development approach. Staff Comments 4 7. 7 0* r.; Staff supports the proposed dimensional requirements as outlined in the main body of this memorandum. 5. Off-street parking. The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used byÂ·those using the proposed development. b. The parking need of any nonresidential units. c. The varying time periods of use. whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. d. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities. including those for pedestrian access and or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. e. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number o f off-street parking spaces is reduced. the City shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change Staff Finding: The proposed underlying zone district(AH1 1. mandates that parking requirements be established through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposal includes at least 2 parking spaces per dweiling unit. which is the minimum for development city-wide. The RO and Free Market lots shall provide two spaces pursuant to the City s parking standards at the time of actual development. The Category units are provided with two spaces per unit with an additional two spaces for gUeSIS. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the proposed parking through Special Review. 6. Open Space. The Open Space requirement shall be that of the underlying zone district. However, a variation in minimum open space may be permitted if such variation would not be detrimental to the character of the proposed PUD, and if the proposed development shall include open space for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD through a common park or recreation area. An area may be approved asa common park or recreation area if it: a. Is to be used and is suitable for scenic. landscaping. or recreation purposes; and b. Is land which is accessible and available to all dwelling units or lots for whom the common area is intended. A proportionate. undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas shall be deeded in perpetuity to each lot or du elling unit owner within the planned unit development (PUD). together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Any plan for open space shall also be accompanied by a legal instrument which ensures the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas. and communall> owned facilities. Staff Finding: The Conservation parcel will be deeded to the City with the surface easement granted to the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The legal instruments to protecting the area have been provided to and reviewed by the Parks Department who intends to maintain a trail easement. No common area for recreation is required and none is proposed. Thus. no legal apparatus for its maintenance has been provided. The maintenance. repair, and Staff Comrnents 5 snowplowing of Lot #12 (access parcel) has been defined in the proposed SIA. The responsibility of this willlie with a condominium association, including Lots 5-12. 7. Landscape Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces. It shall provide an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species that are regarded as suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding: The Final Development Plan includes a Landscape Plan for the Category parcels and the access parcel. This plan provides a reasonable amount and variety of plantings appropriate for the neighborhood and the 'climate. Landscape guidelines for the remaining parcels have been supplied to ensure some consistency between parcels without significantly restricting personal choice. These guidelines are appropriate and adequately address the concerns about visual consistency between parcels. Adequate areas for snow storage have been delineated. The access drive has been slightly shortened and the snow storage is not expected to encroach on the Midland Trail - a concern raised during conceptual review. 8. Architectural Site Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency with the proposed development, architectural character, building design, and the preservation of the visual character of the City. It is not the purpose of this review that control of architectural character be so rigidly enforced that individual initiative is stified in the design of a particular building, or substantial additional expense is required. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, upon appropriate use of materials, and upon the principles of harmony and proportion of the buildings with each other and surrounding land uses. Building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion. Staff Finding: Building envelopes have been placed appropriately considering the natural terrain and surrounding land uses. Architectural plans and elevations for the Category units have been included in this application. The proportions, massing, and materials are appropriate. During the conceptual review. staff expressed a desire that the free-market and RO buildings be of similar architectural character to the Category structures because o f their proximity. This was not an attempt to control style but rather to minimize contrast. The applicant has proposed architectural guidelines to ensure some compatibility with the Category units without being so strict as to limit creativity and personal expression. These are well prepared and more sensitive about materials. colors, and style than the City's more objective standards. The lots not proposed for current construction are subject to the City'S Residential Design Standards. Staff recommends that in the case of Staff Comments 6 an appeal o f the standards, that these architectural guidelines for the PUD should also be considered. During the conceptual review. members of the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed a desire for combined vehicular entrances to reduce the street presence of driveways and garage doors. Suggestion for combining lot access way were discussed and the applicant agreed to study those possibilities. The applicant has proposed combining driveways between Lots 3 and 4. Staff is recommending that the shared driveway access easement be placed between Lots 2 and 3. and that Lot 4 use the common driveway with access behind the carports. 9. Lighting. All lighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Staff Finding: Lighting shall be downcast. No lighting of landscape elements or architectural features should be allowed. This will be included as a recommended condition in the final Ordinance. 10. Clustering. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. Staff Finding: The development has been clustered. The entire site is 17 acres with approximately 13.6 acres set aside for conservation. This leaves less than 4 acres available for development, which is less than 24% of the site. Therefore, all development would be clustered onto less than one quarter ( 1/4) of tile entire property. 11. Public facilities. The proposed development shall be designed so that adequate public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development at the time development is constructed, and that there will be no net public cost for the provision of these public facilities. Further, buildings shall not be arranged such that any structure is inaccessible to emergency vehicles. Staff Finding: The proposed access way and fire suppression has been designed to accommodate the Fire Marshalls requirements as explained evident in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C (in Exhibit The City Engineer has requested a ten (10) foot strip of land be dedicated to the City R.O.W. in front of Lot #1 upon that lots redevelopment. This area is required to accommodate the full requirements for the R.O.W. There exist sufficient utilities in the immediate area to accommodate this development. The applicant is obligated to provide for utility upgrades and extensions. An easement to access the existing manhole near the front steps of the existing house has been proposed on the final plat. This easement addresses the request of the ACSD. The Sanitation District will require a line extension, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes. There may exist an elevation problem for gravity lines from the RO Lots to the trunk line on S. Garmisch Street. The Staff Comments 7 applicant should consult with the ACSD to determine if a pump system or alternative fall line can be designed to accommodate sanitation service. Staff recommends this issue be finalized prior to acceptance of an application for a building permit. The Engineering and Streets Departments are asking for the development of curb and gutter with this project. The Planning Department concurs with this recommendation. 12. Traffic and pedestrian circulation. a. Every dwelling unit. or other land use permitted in the planned unit development (PUD) shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road. a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed :o permit smooth traffic dow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall not be connected ro streets outside the development so aS to encourage their use by through traffic. c. The proposed development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding collector and arterial roads shall be improved so thar they will not be adverseiy affected. d. Every residential building shall not be farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadwa> or drive providing access to a public street. e. All nonresidential land use within the planned unit development (PUD) shall have direct access to a collector or arterial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on an> street. f, Streets in the planned unit development (PLD) may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent city regulations and ordinances. Staff Finding: The proposed development meets these standards. Each lot created has adequate access to public rights-of-way. The land owners sharing Lot 12 will be responsible for maintaining safe access. Staff Comments: B) Barbee Subdivision A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding: The proposed development meets these standards. Please refer to staff' s findings for these criteria under the PUD review, pages 1 and 2 of this section. Staff Comments 8 d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision is in compliance with applicable requirements of the land use code considering the variations recommended for approval and the conditions proposed by staff. 2. Suitability of land for subdivision. a. Land suitabilitv. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of tlooding. drainage. rock or soil creep. mudflow. rockslide, avalanche or snowslide. steep topography, or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health. safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies. duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: The city staff has reviewed this project and found that with the clustering proposal. the land proposed to be developed is suitable. and the layout of the subdivision is spatially efficient. 3. Improvements. The improvements outlined in Section 26.88.040(C)(3) must be provided. Staff Finding: The City Engineer has reviewed the engineering documents provided in the application and provided referral comments. The applicant shall provide lot pins for each lot and provide range points and monuments within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. as determined necessary by the City Engineer. All street improvements and repairing shall be accomplished pursuant to the final plat documents. A new street name is not necessary as the parcels can be numbered with a Dean Street address. Traffic control signs are not expected to be necessarv. however. the homeowners' association should be required to install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at any time the City Engineer feels the sign is necessary for safety~ reasons. The installation of six street trees are required. The installation o f the appropriate site utilities and drainage has been included in the provided engineering drawings for the final plat. 4. Design Standards. The design standards of section 26.88.040(C)(4) shall be complied with. a. Streets and Related Improvements. Staff Finding: The City Engineer has requested a10 foot wide Strip of land in front of Proposed Lot #1 be dedicated to the City right-of-way upon the redevelopment of that parce[. This is to correct for a deficient width of the R.O.W. and to allow for safe travel and maintenance of the roadway. The setback and building envelope for that parcel shall be adjusted to correspond with the new property line after the dedication. Dedication of this strip shall be noted on the final plat. The status ofthe northeasterly corner shall be verified on the final plat. The proposed access way meets these standards and is adequate for fire access. Final paving of the new access way and the final overlay on S. Garmisch Street shall not be completed until one year after all subsurface improvements are completed unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Street names. The three new parcels along S. Garmisch Street shall be numbered with S. Garmisch Street addresses. The seven new parcels accessed from the new drive shall be numbered with Dean Street addresses, unless an alternative street name is proposed and accepted Staff Comments 9 by City Council. The homeowners' association shall be responsible for traffic control signs if a safety issue arises in the future. as determined by the C ity Engineer. The City Engineer has requested the provision of two street lights along the property. This is different from the one street light requested at the access way entrance by the City Engineer during the conceptual review and as proposed by the applicant. The City Planning Department believes the one street light proposed by the applicant is sufficient for safety and meets the standard as provided above. This opinion is based on the exact letter of the law, the opinion of the City Engineer during conceptual review. the relatively low traffic levels on this portion of S. Garmisch Street. and the desire to not over-urbanize the edge of town with excessive outdoor lighting. Too much lighting detracts from safety by causing glare, The proposed curb, sidewalk. and planting buffer is adequate and meets city standards. Trees. One street tree per lot facing S. Garmisch Street would result in six trees. Tile applicant shall install six street trees along the planting buffer of the street R.O.W. or in another suitable location at the discretion of the City Forester. These trees shall be planted in a location where they will not be crushed with plowed snow. These trees shall be three inches or greater in caliper ifdeciduous, or at east six feet in height if coniferous. b. Easements. Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe a general easement for access and maintenance of utilities within the proposed access w-ay (Lot 12) and specific easements for individual utility agencies as required for above or below ground equipment. pedestals. and service personnel within Lot 12 and within Lots 5-11, as needed. Utility easements for Lots 1-4 shall be shown and described on the final plat to the extent utilities are being currently provided. Otherwise. utility easements on Lot 1-4 shall be provided at the time of actual development. Shared access easements and the proposed conservation easement shall also be placed on the plat. c. Lots and blocks. Staff Findine: The proposed Lots meet the design standards for Lots and Blocks, d. Survey 1Monuments. Staff Findine: The lots shall be pinned and monumented to the satisfaction ofthe City Engineer. If required by the City Engineer, a range point shall be installed within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. and the proposed access way. e. Utilities (Water, sewer, fire, and other). Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe plans and specifications for the provision of utilities. Approval from the respective utility provider is required for the final plat. The applicant should be aware that there may exist lack o f elevation for gravity flow sanitary sewer from proposed Lots 5-7 and a pump system may be required. Staff Comments 10 f. Storm Drainage. Staff Finding: The City Engineer concurs with the grading and drainage plans submitted for this review. These plans shall be incorporated into the final plat. The applicant shall provide drainage control for construction to limit sediment loaded drainage from exiting the property. g. Flood hazard areas. The following standards shall apply to special flood hazard areas as defined in Section 26.68.040 of the Municipal Code. Staff Finding: The subject lands are not within the flood hazard area. h. The design and location of any proposed structure, building envelope, road, driveway. trail, or other similar development is compatible with significant natural or scenic features of the site. - Staff Finding: The proposed development is preserving a substantial portion of the natural and scenic features ofthe site. i. Variations of design standards. Variations from the provisions of this section, -Design Standards," may be granted by special review as provided for in Chapter 26.64. Staff Finding: The applicant is not seeking any variations form the Subdivision standards. 5. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26,48. Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.100, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: As a new subdivision that would be comprised of new- dwelling units, the applicant is seeking GMQS exemptions pursuant to the referenced section. No replacement dwelling units are proposed. 6. School land dedication standards. Staff Finding: This is not an appropriate location for land dedication. Upon application for development each Lot owner shall be responsible for the payment of the School Land Dedication Fee (payment-in- lieu). This fee shall be based upon the fair market value of the respective Lot at the time o f development, the land dedication standards applicable for the proposed development, and the calculation formula as specified in the code. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the. sole cost of the lot owner. STAFF COMMENTS: C) Barbee Rezoning Section 26.92.020, Standards Applicable to Rezoning In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council shall consider: Staff Comments 11 A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: The development proposed is proceeding through a Planned Unit Development review to ensure , consistency with all applicable City requirements. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: The rezoning allows for increased density for projects representing 70% affordable housing. This incentive zone is consistent with the AACP and the development being proposed is in substantial compliance with this community document. Please refer to the AACP compliance criteria of PUD more fully responded to on pages 1 and 2 of this section. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The rezoning, as well as the level and type of development being proposed is consistent with and appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The rezoning and the level of development being proposed does not represent an adverse effect on road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities. and whether and the extent tO which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilitieS. including, but not limited to. transportation facilities. sewage facilities, water supply, parks. drainage. schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The rezoning and the level of development being considered is within the communitys infrastructure capabilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Findiniz: The rezoning will not have significant adverse impacts upon the natural environment. In fact. a large portion o f the property is being preserved against development to the benefit of the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City o f Aspen. Staff Finding: A mix of free-market and affordable housing is appropriate for this neighborhood and the level of density being proposed is appropriate for the edge of the City's urbanized area. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment allows for development of the parcel with 70% of the units being deed restricted to affordable housing and a substantial portion of the property being zoned Staff Comments 12 conservation. The removal of the Lodge (L) overlay on Lot# 1 is appropriate given the purely residential use on either side of the lot. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent o f this title. Staff Finding: The proposed rezoning is not in conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the intent ofthe municipal dode. ST.AFF COMMENTS: D) GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND E) METHOD OF PROVIDING THE HOUSING The exemption by City Council may only be granted subsequent to review and consideration by the GMC. There are. however. no specific review standards for this review other than the more general criteria listed below. To the extent possible. staff has incorporated general observations of the project in relation to the Community Plan and the Interim Housing Guidelines under the criteria of the PUD and Subdivision reviews located elsewhere in this Exhibit A. Approval of the method by ivhich the applicant proposes to provide affordable housing shall be at the option of the City Council. upon the recommendation of the Growth Management Commission. In evaluating the applicant's proposal the advice of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be sought in considering thefollowing factors: 1. Whether the city has an adopted plan to develop affordable housing with monies received from payment of affordable housing dedication fees. 2. Whether the city has an adopted plan identifying the applicant's site as being appropriate for affordable housing. Staff Finding: The City, through the Housing Authority, has developed an affordable housing plan for both public and private monies. The site is not identified in the Community Plan as a potential affordable housing site. The Plan. however, only identified individual parcels and did not provide direction in evaluating all sites in general. However, the City and County Planning Commissions have adopted Resolution No. 98-11, "The Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan" as an update of the Housing Element of the 1993 AACP. Based on it's location, size, and proximity to general services, staff believes this site is an appropriate site for affordable housing. Staff believes the Interim Housing Guidelines further this opinion. 3. Whether the applicant's site is well suited for the development of afordable housing, taking into account the availability of services, proximity to employment opportunities and whether the Staff Comments 13 site is afected by environmental constraints to development or historic preservation concerns. Staff Finding: The site is an excellent site for affordable housing. Its proximity to physical and social infrastructure. transit. employment and recreation opportunities. and location within an established neighborhood make this a well-suited. appropriate site. Furthermore. the preservation of the majority of the property as a conservation easement protecting Shadow Mountain furthers man)- community goals. not only those related to affordable housing. 4. Whether the method proposed will result in employee housing being produced prior to or at the same time the impacts of the development will be experienced by the community. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision Improvement Agreement prohibits the conveyance of the Free- Market lots until such time as the Category units are built and occupied and the RO Lots have been conveyed. 5. Whether the development itself requires the provision of affordable housing on-site to meet its service needs. Staff Finding: This development is proposed within the 70/30 incentive zone district AH1/PUD. The community must rely on the private sector to aid in the development of affordable housing if the community's AH goals are to be accomplished. This is a recognized incentive zone to encourage the private sector's involvement in the provision of affordable housing. In fact, the "Purpose" ofthe zone district is explained in the Land Use Code as: "to provide for the use of land for the production of Category 1,2,3, and 4 ajfordable housing and resident occupied lots and units. The zone district also permits a limited component offree market lots/units to 0Jf-set the cost of developing afordable housing. It is contemplated that land may also be subdivided in connection with a development plan." The applicant is proposing the category units as Category 4. One condition o f approval would allow the Housing Authority to "buy down" these categon- units to a lower category prior to their conveyance to qualified residents. The number o f employees living in the development will far out-number employees generated by the use, and the development will certainly have a more positive impact on the social health o f the community than will discouraging local working people from becoming vested members o f Aspen. As an additional benefit, the Free Market lots have been proposed with FAR caps limiting their size to a relatively modest 4,500 square feet. While these will be large homes, they pale in comparison to the excessively large homes that are believed to generate substantial numbers of employees. Staff Comments 14 STAFF COMMENTS: F) VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS In order to preserve the land use approvals which may be obtained as a result of the City council's approval of this application, the applicant must request approval of Vested property Rights per Section 26.52.080 of the Land Use Regulations. There are no review criteria that must be met in considering the vesting request. . Staff Finding: Staff is recommending the City' Council approve the requested Vested Rights for this project. STAFF COMMENTS: G) PARK FEE WAIVER REQUEST The applicant proposes to meet the park development impact fee requirements of Section 26.44.030 of the Land use code by way of a conveyance of the conservation parcel to the City of Aspen for open space purposes. Such conveyances are permitted pursuant to Section 26.44.080. subject to city council's approval. This proposal is addressed in the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Staff Findins The applicant is responsible for paying a Parks Dedication Fee in the amount of approximately $36.340 (based on 30 bedrooms). Attached to the memo is an analysis from the Parks Dept. which indicates their desire to receive the 13- acre Conservation parcel rather than the Parks Dedication Fee. Staff is recommending the City Council approve the Park Fee Waiver request for this project. Staff Comments 15 PARCEL ID:~2735-131-00100 DATE RCVD: |1/12/99 # COPIES:1 CASE NO|A003-99 CASE NAME:~Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD PLNR:|Chris Bendon PROJ ADDR:|Lot l and 2, Lotsl-9 of Block Five CASE TYPiPUD -*7, )2 Ck...~ STEPS:~ OWN/APP:'Erbee Family/Hallie' ADR~1400 Story Mill Rd. ~ C/S/Z:~Bozeman, MT 5971 ~ PHN:~<406) 587-1429 REP~Sunny Vann ADR:~230 East Hopkins C/S/Z:~Aspen, CO 81611 PHN~925-6958 FEES DUE:~2110 (d) + 320 fe) + 160 C FEES RCVD]2750 i STAT: [---m REFERRALS~ REFi BY| DUE:| 1 MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED 1 1 DATE OF FINAL ACTION:| - CITY COUNCIL: REMARKS~ PZ: BOA: CLOSED:~ BY: ~ DRAC: PLAT SUBMITD: | PLAT {BK,PG):~ ADMIN: MEMORANDUM TO: Plans were routed to those departments checked-off below: *........... City Engineer Zoning Officer 4 ........... Housing Director ........... Parks Department ........... Aspen Fire Marshal ........... City Water ........... Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District ........... Building Department ........... Environmental Health Electric Department O........... Holy Cross Electric City Attorney Streets Department O........... Historic Preservation Officer Pitkin County Planning FROM: Chris Bendon, Planner Community Development Department 130 So. Galena St.; Aspen, CO 81611 Phone-920.5090 Fax-920.5439 RE: Barbee Subdivision and Final PUD DATE: January 21, 1999 REFERRAL SCHEDULE DRC MEETING DATE:(note time: 1:30-3:00) January 27, 1999 OTHER REFERRALS DUE TO PLANNER: February 3, 1999 ENGINEERING REFERRAL DUE TO PLANNER: February 5, 1999 Thank you, Chris. *****4 DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of the Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption from expiration, extension or reinstatement is granted or a revocation is issued by the City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. John Barbee, 1400 Story Mill Rd., Bozeman, MT 59915 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number Lots 8, 9, 10, 11 Barbee Subdivision, Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property Insubstantial Plat Amendment Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Administrative Decision, 12/2/99 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) December 10,1999 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) December 11,2002 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this 10th day of December, 1999, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director G.Planning.Aspen.forms.DevOrder PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Lots 8, 9, 10, 11 of the City and Townsite of Aspen, by Administrative Decision of the Community Development Director. For further information contact Julie Ann Woods, at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 920-5090. s/Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk, City of Aspen Publish in The Aspen Times on December 10, 1999. VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants July 26, 1999 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Julie Ann Woods Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, Annexation Ordinance Dear Julie Ann: As we discussed, I would appreciate it if you would arrange to table the second reading of City Council Ordinance No. 12-99 which is presently scheduled for consideration at a public hearing on July 26, 1999. While the Barbee family is continuing to negotiate with APEHI for the development of the affordable housing component of the Barbee Subdivision/PUD, an agreement has yet to be reached. I would suggest that we open the public hearing on July 26 and continue it to the second Council meeting in August, which I believe is scheduled for August 23. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours very truly, VA~ ASSOCIAT#S, LLC Sun ann, AICP SV: CC: Arthur C. Daily, Esq. c:\bus\city.ltriltr34097.jw3 230 East Hopkins Ave ' Aspen, Colorado 81611 Â· 970/925-6958 Â· Fax 970/920-9310 Sunny Vann, 04:46 ... 5/12/99 , Barbee Ordinance X-Sender: svann@rof.net Date: Wed, 12Â·May 1999 16:46:38 -0700 To: juliew@ci.aspen.co.us From: Sunny Vann <svann@rof.net> Subject: Barbee Ordinance Julie Ann: The revised ordinance looks OK to me. I would appreciate it if you would leave a hard copy for me in the Planning Office pickup box. Thanks! Sunny Printed for Julie Ann Woods <juliew@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants RECEIVED April 14, 1999 APR 1 4 1999 IIAND DELIVERED ASPEN / PITKIN Ms. Julie Ann Woods COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, Annexation Ordinance Dear Julie Ann: As we discussed, I would appreciate it if you would arrange to table the second reading of City Council Ordinance No. 12-99 which is presently scheduled for consideration at a public hearing on April 26, 1999. Tabling is necessary to allow sufficient time for the Barbee family to negotiate an agreement with APEHI for the development of the affordable housing component of the Barbee Subdivision/PUD. I would suggest that we open the public hearing on April 26 and continue it to the second Council meeting in May, which I believe is scheduled for May 24. Should additional time be required, we can table again in May. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours very truly, VANF ASSOCIAIF, LLC ~unny~,nn, AICP sv:CY I CC: Arthur C. Daily, Esq. c:\bus\city.LtrUtr34097.Jwl 230 East Hopkins Ave. Â· Aspen, Colorado 81611 Â· 970/925-6958 Â· Fax 970/920-9310 4. -4 CASE STATUS SHEET Case # R 20 4 - 99 Case Assigned To: (*c,) AÂ«-,2,_, - Representative' s Name: 6/hn \W Phone: 0114.(6445 Fax: 0 -9 510 Activity: Date Assigned: I ki /99 Date Applicant Contacted: I , 19.CPI, Date of Site Visit: 7, 1, 11 Date of Determination of completeness 4,21,1 1 Date ofDRC Meeting: 0-3 P&Z Date(s): *A ig (416,4 HPC Date(s): Council Date(s): /94,1/1 7(Lrb#AMI K '3*i Date Action/Activity C 001 1Â»4- 04 4 96 1.t <pec, W.Mt 1 -1(0 aÂ».UÂ·91 &12 3 4 4*Â·Mt Sa-1 j IA 40 Ct /j #14 CDÂ»-r,-4- 2---4- + /1,1,*f 'A 6-, 21 6- 40 2 --e re-*3 Re,0 , :-J C e. . 4.1 r e -k. 1 *s#+1 -f LUuÂ£-A p~h.-~,-*- r~r.c,,...3 -~re.. f#4 ne:vJ...t. MEMORANDUM Vild TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manage~~~ John Worcester, City Attorney -1 4: FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director LA- DATE: April 12,1999 RE: 2nd Reading of Ordinance 11, Series of 1999 Barbee Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Exemption for Affordable Housing, Method of providing affordable housing, Vested Rights, Park Development Fee Waiver SUMMARY: The applicant, Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., obtained conceptual PUD approval in January of 1998 pursuant to Ordinance 44, Series of 1997. The development proposed is to subdivide the property (approximately 17.695 acres) into twelve (12) development lots and a conservation parcel. This proposal would allow for the existing residence to remain on proposed Lot 1 (with approximately 2.3 acres), and be rezoned to R-15, Moderate Density Residential (with a PUD overlay). This lot will be conveyed to the existing property owner, Mary Barbee. A site specific building envelope has been designated on this lot to accommodate any future redevelopment of the existing residence. The balance of the lot will be subject to the same restrictions that will encumber the Conservation parcel. Lots 2 through 12 would be rezoned to AH l/PUD for 10 new residential units falling within the 70-30 "mix" allowed in the Affordable Housing Zone District (AH1-PUD) and an access easement. The Barbee property includes a substantial portion of Shadow Mountain, which is proposed as a Conservation parcel (approximately 13.559 acres) to be deeded in fee to the City of Aspen. The site is located at the base of West Aspen or "Shadow" Mountain just south of Koch-Lumber Park (see attached Exhibit "D"). The following chart summarizes the proposed mix of units/bedrooms/prices: 1 Lot/Unit Type Proposed Price Lot Size FAR Proposed No. of Bedrooms 1 / Free-Market F.M. 102,000 s.f. 4,500 s.f. Existing 2 / Free-Market F.M. 11,705 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 3 3 / Free-Market F.M. 11,440 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 3 4 / Free-Market F.M. 11,440 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 3 5/RO $130,000/Lot 6,318 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 3 6/RO $130,000/Lot 5,887 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 3 7/RO $130,000/Lot 11,736 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 3 8 / Category 4 $219,500* 3,017 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 3 9 / Category 4 $219,500* 2,259 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 3 10 / Category 4 $219,500* 2,211 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 3 11 / Category 4 $219,500* 2,255 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 3 12/Access Easement N/A 9,446 s.f. N/A N/A 13/Conservation N/A 13.559 acres N/A N/A *This amount is the current 1998 capped price ofa three-bedroom Category 4 unit. Under the proposed 1999 Housing Guidelines, the amount would increase to $222,500. The actual price of the units will be determined at the time of building permit issuance. The Conceptual approval addressed only the PUD review criteria. This Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) application (A) also includes land use requests for B)Subdivision, C)Rezoning, D)Growth Management Exemption for Affordable Housing, E)approval ofthe method of providing affordable housing, F)Vested Rights, and G)Park Development Fee Waiver. (Please refer to Exhibit A which addresses the above lettered requests as required by the Land Use Code). The Special Review for parking was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission also recommended approval ofthe final PUD, rezoning, and subdivision at their hearing on March 16, 1999. The growth management exemption requested by the applicant was recommended for approval by the Growth Management Commission at a hearing on March 16, 1999. The applicant has addressed the concerns raised during the conceptual review. Accommodations for architectural and landscape consistency, shared access ways, utility easements, site lighting, legal instruments for the conveyance of the conservation parcel, draft plats, engineering schematics, and a draft Subdivision Improvements Agreement have all been included in the application. The majority of staffs comments are included in Exhibit "A" of this memorandum. Major points of discussion have been summarized below. ISSUES FROM FIRST READING: At first reading held on March 22, City Council requested some additional information be included in the staffmemo. This included: more information on the conservation 2 parcel, the Parks Dept.'s plans for this parcel (including trail connections), and its benefits to the city; the amount of the Park Dedication Fee being requested to be waived; copies of the P&Z resolution and GMC resolution; and more detail in the table which will address price commitments and proposed unit mix. Staff has also modified the ordinance to clear up issues with the applicant. Staff recommends City Council adopt Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999 upon second reading. APPLICANT: Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., all represented by Sunny Vann and Associates. LOCATION: Approximately the corner of Juan and S. Garmisch Streets. Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen, plus additional metes and bounds within the City of Aspen and Pitkin County as shown on the Site Improvements Survey (see attached vicinity map, Exhibit "D"). ZONING (AND SUBSEQUENT ANNEXATION): The portions of the subject property currently within the City of Aspen (approximately 10.693 acres) are zoned R-15/PUD/L and Conservation. Portions of the property in the County (approximately 7.003 acres) are zoned AFR-10 and R-15/PUD. The applicant is seeking annexation into the City for the County portion of the property following land use approval. The applicant requested that the development proposal, if approved, be contingent upon annexation as they were not necessarily inclined to annex to the city unless the project could receive the necessary approvals. The rezoning on the entire parcel would not be in effect until the annexation is accomplished. The applicant is also seeking rezoning to AH1/PUD, R-15/PUD and Conservation as delineated in the PUD portion o f the application. The annexation will be accomplished prior to the recordation of a final plat and SIA. LOT SIZE: 17.695 acres, or approximately 770,794 square feet. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): Most of the subject property consists of slopes of greater than 30%. Subtracting areas of slopes and the proposed access easements, the following lot areas apply for FAR and Density: FAR shall be based on 761,130 s. f. of Lot Area. Density shall be based on 109,144 s. f. of Lot Area. These are preliminary figures to be confirmed by the City Zoning Officer during building permit review. ALLOWABLE FAR AND DENSITY (UNDER AH-1/PUD ZONING): 3 FAR - 145,565 square feet by right, can be increased by Special Review. Density - for single family and duplex units: 36 units (109,144 + 3,000). PROPOSED FAR AND DENSITY: FAR: 31,325 square feet. Density: 10 new units plus one existing unit = 11 units. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence, assorted outbuildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: Same, but with ten (10) additional residences and two carport structures. The majority of the property is proposed to be deeded as a conservation parcel. PREVIOUS ACTION: The City Council considered and recommended approval of the conceptual PUD with the conditions incorporated into Ordinance 44, Series of 1997 (see attached Exhibit E). At their meeting on March 16, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission passed by a 4 to 0 vote Resolution 99- which recommends City Council approve the application. (This resolution is attached as Exhibit "E"). At their meeting on March 16, 1999, the Growth Management Commission passed by a 7 to 0 vote Resolution 99- which recommends City Council approve the exemption from Growth Management and the method of providing affordable housing. (This resolution is attached as Exhibit "F"). REVIEW PROCEDURE: Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Exemptions, Approval of the method of providing affordable housing, Park Fee Waivers, and Vested Rights. City Council shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny this land use request at a public hearing after considering recommendations from the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Growth Management Commission, and the City's Housing Designee (APCHA). The property is currently in two jurisdictions. The applicant has requested annexation into the City and this action will take place after final land use approval from City Council. The actions taken by the City Council are subject to annexation of the property and become void if the land is not annexed into the City. Likewise, the zoning will not become effective until annexation has occurred. 4 STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has made great strides to accommodate the concerns of the staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council in this application. The application is complete and includes all additional information requested during the initial review. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." A vicinity map has been included as Exhibit "D." The following concerns were issues to be further addressed as part of the final review: 8040 Greentine Review: The conceptual review requested an application for 8040 Greenline Review if the completed survey information determined the proposed development was in the overlay area. After reviewing the completed survey, no proposed development is in the 8040 jurisdiction and no review is required. Affordable Housing Method and Mix: This development is slightly different from typical private sector affordable housing proj ects in that the 70% affordable portion o f the project is proposed to be conveyed to a non-profit affordable housing development group. The Housing Authority Board reviewed this project during Conceptual Review and recommended City Council approve the proposal. The City Council approved the Conceptual PUD with two specific conditions regarding the provision of Affordable Housing on the property. Those were: 1.One ofthe R.O. lots would be provided to a member of the Barbee family, should that family member qualifyfor an R.O. unit. Uno member ofthe Barbeefamily qualifies, the Barbee family would be paid $ 130,000 for that lot, and the lot would be retained by APEHI. 1.The remaining two R.O, lots, and the land for the Category units, would be retained by APEHI. The Housing Office will work with the non-profit to determine the final price of the R.O. lots and Category units, based on the final costs of the development and the appropriateness at that time of additional subsidy, subject to review by Council. Staff has suggested conditions of this final approval which reflect the intentions of these two conditions, but which better correspond to the language provided in the proposed Subdivision Agreement (please refer to condition no. 26). Currently, there are 163 allotments available for new affordable housing units. The applicant is requesting seven (7) units be allocated. There are also currently thirty-four (34) AH-Associated Free-market units available. The applicant is requesting three (3) be allocated to this project. The Growth Management Commission recommended that these allocations be exempted from Growth Management competition and scoring, subject to conditions. Under the AH1/PUD, only 30% of the project's bedrooms may be located within the free-market units. In addition, Category and Resident Occupied units must comprise at 5 least seventy percent (70%) of the unit mix. Of the 70%, forty percent (40%) ofthe units must be deed restricted to category units and RO units may comprise up to 30% of the unit mix. Below is a summary of the proposed mix of units: Units _% Bedrooms % Total Free-Market Units: 3 30% 9 30% Total RO Units: 3 30% 9 30% Total Category Units: 4 40% 12 40% Total: 10 100% 30 100% Total Free-Market Bedrooms = 30% Total RO/Category units = 70% Total Category units = 40% Total RO units = 30% The proposed AH1/PUD requirements for bedroom and unit mix have been met. Shared Access Ways: The Planning and Zoning Commission raised a concern about the multiple curb cuts on S. Garmisch Street and the affect of garage doors on the facades of both the free-market homes and the RO homes. The applicant has responded by providing a shared access drive between Lots 3 and 4. This was acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk: During the conceptual review, planning staff expressed a desire for the edge of this project to be designed in a less urban manner. The Commission agreed and the applicant was required to investigate the design o f the curb, gutter, and sidewalk with representatives of the Streets, Parks, Engineering, and Planning Departments. The applicant did discuss this treatment with Engineering and Streets, who requested a more urban approach to the curb, gutter and sidewalk design. The City Planning Department preferred that this standard be met with a less urban treatment and suggested to the Commission that a drainage swale be created in the median, planted with tall native grasses and street trees, with a detached sidewalk. However, after discussions with the City Engineer, it was determined that, due to the soil characteristics in this area, the best solution is to place curb and gutter along the edge of the street to convey water away from the site. The Commission agreed that this was a preferable solution. Preservation of Existing Large Shed located nearest to Dean Street: During the conceptual review, staff urged the developer to find a mechanism to preserve some aspect of the large existing shed on the property. It is important to point out that this shed is not protected by the City's Historic Preservation regulations and the developer is under no obligation to preserve the structure. However, regardless of the shed's technical value as a historic structure, the City Planning Department believes these old 6 sheds are important reminders of the City' s history - as a type of visual reference to the Aspen society and culture as it has changed through time. Staff still believes this structure, or some part thereof, could and should be incorporated into the development plans, such as the street-side view of the carport structure. The structure could also be preserved on one of the proposed lots, or moved to another location in town and re-used. The structure is located approximately where the proposed shared driveway between Lots 3 and 4 is located. Concurring with staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that this be included as a condition of approval. Variances: First, the applicant is requesting approval of smaller lots (Lots 8,9,10, and 11) and zero lot line setbacks to allow for the creation of duplexes on individual lots, rather than with shared ownership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. The second variation is for the front yard setback of Lot #1. The R-15 zoning requires this distance be 25 feet. However, the existing house is much closer to the street and the back of the proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the R-15 zoning is the most appropriate for this property; 2) the 10 foot setback will be consistent with the remainder of the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and, 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steep area of the lot from development - a preferred development approach. Both of these variances are included in the PUD standards incorporated into the ordinance. Vested Properly Rights: In order to preserve the land use approvals which would be obtained as a result of City Council approvals, the applicant is requesting vested property rights status (three years)for this project. Staff supports this request and has incorporated it into the ordinance. Park Development Fee Waivers and Conservation Easement: The applicant proposes to meet the park development impact fee requirements of Section 26.44.030 of the Land Use Code by way of a conveyance of the 13.559 acre Conservation parcel to the City of Aspen for open space purposes. Such conveyances are permitted pursuant to Section 26.44.080, subject to City Council's approval. Should the City Council prefer the payment of the Parks Dedication Fee, an amount of $36,340 would be required to be paid by the applicant at time of building permit issuance. As per Council's direction, the Parks Dept. has further evaluated the conservation parcel for its value as open space. Please refer to Exhibit "G" which addresses this issue. The Parks Dept. has indicated that the Conservation parcel will address several 7 goals of their program: it would formalize the trail easement between the City and the Aspen Mountain Trail; it would preserve the high quality transitional habitat for wildlife; and it would serve as visual relief (open space) from the more urbanized part of town. It should be noted that the Subdivision/PUD Agreement proposes that the parcel be deeded to the City of Aspen in fee simple ownership, but that a Conservation Easement be placed on the parcel, to the benefit of the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The Barbee family proposes this approach to ensure that the conservation parcel remains as open space in perpetuity. The Subdivision/PUD Agreement addresses the terms of the conservation easement. Because the agreement does not specifically address the ability of the City to have access through this site, staff is recommending that the agreement be modified accordingly to ensure that access be allowed (both trails and temporary construction access as necessary). This language has been added to Condition No. 3. RECOMMENDATION: Staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Growth Management Commission recommend City Council adopt Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999, with the following conditions: 1. The Land Use action is subject to annexation ofthe property into the City of Aspen. Failure to complete annexation within 180 days of this approval shall render this land use action void, unless the timeframe is extended by City Council. 2. Following annexation, but within 180 days after final land use approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant shall record a Final PUD/Subdivision development plan. This plan shall include all necessary plat requirements of the City Engineer including site plans, grading plans, utility plans, any physical improvements required to mitigate for additional air quality impacts as determined by the City Environmental Health Department, all utility easements, architectural plans and elevations, and a landscape plan. 3. Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building Permit, the applicant shall record a PUD/Subdivision Improvements Agreement binding the property, the Barbee Subdivision, to this development approval. The Agreement shall describe all subdivision and PUD improvements, requirements, restrictions, and maintenance, and shall provide financial assurance to the City for said improvements and the success of the site landscaping for a period of two (2) years after installation. The agreement shall be reviewed concurrently with the final plat and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation. The PUD/SIA will be modified to ensure that trail access and temporary construction access will be allowed as necessary. 4. That the following description of each lot's development provisions be included in the final ordinance: 8 Requirements Common to Entire Development Lot Dimensions: As represented on Final Plat. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 Feet Maximum height: 25 Feet. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the setbacks. Minimum percent open space: No requirement. Lot 1 (existing Free-Market) Zone District: R-15/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North and East sides 10 feet each. Lot 2 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 60 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 3 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 4 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 5 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. 9 Lot 6 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 7 (resident occupied) Zone District: AHI/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot 8 (category unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 35 feet from southern-most lot line. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 9 feet. Lot 9 (category unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 27 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 7 feet; 0 feet. Lot 10 (cateizory unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 14 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 7 feet. Lot 11 (category unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 6 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 14 feet; west 0 feet. 10 Lot 12 (shared access parcel) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowed Uses: 10 carport parking spaces, trash, snow storage, uses accessory to use of residential lots. Residential use shall require a substantial PUD amendment. Allowable Floor Area: 10 covered carports in two structures as represented on final plat. Setbacks: As represented on final plat. Trash access area: Minimum 10 feet wide, unobstructed. Conservation Parcel Zone District: Conservation Allowed Development and Uses: Uses allowed in the Conservation Zone District and allowed pursuant to the Deed of Conservation Easement. Uses and development necessary for community health and safety reasons may occur on this parcel. 5. The City shall accept title to the "conservation parcel" only after the City Attorney has reviewed all aspects ofthe Warranty Deed, the Deed of Conservation Easement, and is satisfied that no inordinate liability issues exist with respect to prior mining activities on the parcel. To satisfy this concern, the City may require areas of mining activity to be mitigated, or otherwise properly treated, or a legal instrument indemnifying the City prior to conveyance. In the event that title cannot be conveyed to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, then a trail easement will be conveyed and allowed in the Conservation Area. 6. Replacement after demolition of the existing single-family residence on Lot #1 shall require a GMQS Exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.050, as amended. 7. The Home Owners' Association, or similar entity responsible for Lot #12, the common access way, shall install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at such time determined necessary for public safety by the City Engineer. 8. Access to Lots 3 and 4 shall be via the shared access easement as described on the final plat. The City Engineer shall issue only one curb cut permit between these two lots. 9. All Lots are subject to the City's Residential Design Standards, as amended. Lot #1 shall be subject to the provisions of the Landscape Guidelines, as proposed in Exhibit B of the draft SIA upon redevelopment of the Lot. All other aspects of the City's Residential Design Standard, as amended, will apply. 10. For purposes of calculating the fee-in-lieu of school land dedication, the building permit application for each lot shall include an appraisal of the lot's fair market value. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the lot owner. 11. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for an individual lot, the School Land Dedication Fee shall be paid in full pursuant to the regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 12. Prior to recordation of the final plat, an air quality mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Department for approval. Physical improvements to the site required for mitigation shall be delineated on the final plat. 11 13. A Building Permit application for any and all lots shall include a fugitive dust mitigation plan for review and approval by the City Environmental Health Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for each lot, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the appropriate department for any fireplaces or wood burning devices. 15. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No Sunday construction activity will be permitted. Exceeding the City Noise Ordinance may result iii a stop work order. 16. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. All exterior lighting, including street lights, shall be downeast, sharp cut-off, and not used to accentuate landscape or architectural features of the development. No exterior up-lighting is permitted. No exterior floodlights are permitted. 17. The Community Development Dept. shall assign street addresses as follows: Lots 2-4 shall receive numbers with a Garmisch Street address; Lots 5-11 shall receive numbers with a Dean Street address. 18. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately Lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the S. Garmisch Street side of the carport structure. If preserved for storage use, its FAR shall be exempt. 19. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the duplex units, six (6) street trees shall be planted along the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W or Midland Trail in locations approved by the City Forester considering the storage of plowed snow. These trees shall be three- inches or greater in caliper ifdeciduous or at least six feet in height if coniferous. 20. Prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension and a collection system agreement from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. For the duplex units, a shared service agreement may be required. There exists a possibility that gravity service from Lots 5-7 will require a pump system; if so, its design must be approved by ACSD and the City Engineer. 21. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for any lot, adequate silt fencing shall be erected to ensure that no sediment-loaded drainage will be leaving the property during construction. This fencing shall remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the respective lot. 22. Prior to applying for a Building Permit for any lot, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. This agreement can be recorded with the plat and SIA documents. 23. Building Permit applications for any and alllots shall include payment of a $50.00 per project fee in lieu of digital submission requirements. 24. Any work within public rights-of-way shall gain approval from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 12 25. The applicant shall record the Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 26. That the final "mix" of categories shall be as follows, and conditioned as follows: a) The project shall consist often (10) new residential units. Three (3) shall be free-market units of no more than three (3) bedrooms each. Three (3) shall be RO Lots, each for the purpose of a single-family residence of no less than three (3) bedrooms. Four (4) shall be Category 4 three-bedroom units constructed and conveyed pursuant to APCHA Guidelines. The mix is summarized in the table below. b) At or near completion ofthe Category duplex units, the applicant shall provide the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority the opportunity to "buy-down" the Category designations of the Category Units and the RO Lots or Units to a lower Category prior to conveyance. c) Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy (CO) on the Free-Market units, the four Category units must have received their CO. Summary Table Units 3% Bedrooms 21 Total Free-Market Units: 3 30% 9 30% Total RO Units: 3 30% 9 30% Total Category Units: 4 40% 12 40% Total: 10 100% 30 100% Total Free-Market Bedrooms = 30% Total RO/Category units = 70% Total Category units = 40% Total RO units = 30% 27. That the language of these conditions as finally approved by the appropriate authority be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit set of plans and all other sets made for the purpose of construction. 28. That the applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of all P&Z, GMC, and City Council resolutions and ordinances applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter as part of the building permit application indicating that conditions of approval are known and understood. 29. That a Parking Management Plan be submitted for staff's review and approval prior to the Building permit application which will address the phasing, staging, and construction parking on the site. 30. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Growth Management Commission, and the City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by an entity having the authority to do so. 13 RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance 11, Series of 1999." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Comments from Referral Agencies Exhibit C -- Application Exhibit D -- Vicinity Map Exhibit E -- P&Z Resolution Exhibit F -- GMC Resolution Exhibit G -- Parks Dept. Memo 14 EXHIBIT A Staff Comments: A) Barbee Planned Unit Development A development application for a PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements: A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: Community Vision: The proposed development increases resident housing opportunities, encourages a balanced permanent community, may provide residents with a transportation alternative if they choose to walk to town. work. etc.. and is a relatively sustainable development pattern. Community Vitality: The proposed development is 70% affordable, addressing the community's desire to provide affordable housing opportunities within a reasonable walking distance to employment and recreation resources. The proposed development is an in-fill site within, or approximately within, the original townsite. Increased residential density, especially for local working residents. within the functional town promotes a sense of community that cannot be achieved by placing that critical mass in a remote location, regardless o f where the metro area or extended metro boundaries exist. Open Space and Environment: Providing housing opportunities within walking distance to employment, entertainment. recreation, and other residences reduces the need to use a vehicle for every trip. Also, compact development within the townsite reduces the need to extend services and develop land on the outskirts of town, and preserves those natural open space areas for their wildlife and aesthetic functions. The proposal is preserving areas that are clearly not appropriate for development. The proposal also preserves the bench area above the proposed RO lots, just above the Little Cloud Subdivision. It is important to underscore this preservation because this area could be expensive "view lots" with dramatic affects upon the visual openness of the mountain. Staff believes this approach to development is the most desired for this parcel and is appreciative of the site planning and preservation. 1993 AACP: This project addresses elements of the existing AACP. Specifically, it 'creates a housing environment dispersed, appropriately scaled, and affordable.' And, it 'preserves and enhances the natural beauty Of the area.' 1999 AACP: This document has not been adopted. However, the draft document provides substantial support for affordable housing to be located in town where it protects Staff Comments 1 surrounding open spaces outside of town and where the residents can become integral members ofthe social fabric. The plan also supports the preservation of natural open space areas such as the proposed conservation parcel for Shadow Mountain. Interim Housing Guidelines: The development proposed is consistent with the Interim (Citizen) Housing Guidelines adopted by the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions. The development is within the Metro Area. is within walking distance of the community core. preserves a significant amount of natural lands. represents quality design visually appropriate for the neighborhood, integrates different social levels within one project. is an optimum development level for this site, and does not promote urban sprawl. In addition. this project is proposed with no public subsidy and is not expected to have a significant negative fiscal impact upon the City or its taxpayers. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: Surrounding development to the northeast consists of multi-family housing, a park. older lodge conversions, and future potential mini-base development for Lift 1 or 'Town Lift.' There is virtually no development, or potential for development, to the Southeast of the site which is compatible with the open space easement proposed. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The surrounding area' s development or redevelopment potential wilI not be affected by this development. Redevelopment of the largely vacant areas to the east have sufficient access from surrounding streets and a platted alleyway. D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. Staff Finding: Although exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures. the application must receive development allotments for 10 residential units. The Growth Management Commission will consider this case and make a recommendation to City Council. The GMC public hearing is also scheduled for March 16, 1999, at 5:30 PM. 2. Density: A. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Furthermore, densities may be reduced if: 1. There is not sufficient water pressure and other utilities to serve the proposed development; 2. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development; 3. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of slope. ground instability, and the possibility of mud flow. rockfalls and avalanche dangers; 4. The effects ofthe proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution; Staff Comments 2 5. The proposec development will have deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city: or 6. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding: The density proposed on this site is far below that allowed by the gross lot size. There are sufficient utilities and services to accommodate this development. The access to the RO and Category lots has been designed in cooperation with the Fire Marshall and is adequate for fire protection service. The portion of the property where development is proposed is suitable for development. The applicant has not provided an Air Quality Mitigation Plan in the final application. The Environmental Health Department has suggested several recommendations, and the applicant is reviewing final details of the recommended mitigation measures. The location of the proposed development does not appear to be in conflict with the natural terrain and features o f the site. B. Reduction in density for slope consideration. 1. In order to reduce wildfire. mudslide, and avalanche hazards: enhance soil stability; and guarantee adequate fire protection access, the density of a PUD shall also be reduced in areas with slopes in excess of twenty (20) percent in the following manor: a. For lands between zero (0) and twenty (20) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be that permitted in the underlying zone district. b. For lands between twenty-one (21) and thirty (30) percent slope. the maximum density allowed shall be reduced to fifty (50) percent of that permitted in the underlying zone district. c. For lands between thirty-one (31) and forty (40) percent slope, the density shall be reduced to twenty-five (25) percent of that allowed in the underlying zone district. d. For lands in excess of forty (40) percent slope, no density credit shall be allowed. 2. Maximum density for the entire parcel on which the development is proposed shall be calculated by each slope classification, and then by dividing the square footage necessary in the underlying zone district per dwelling unit. 3. For parcels resting in more than one (1) zone district, the density' reduction calculation shall be performed separately on the lands within each zone district. 4. Density shall be further reduced as specified in Chapter 26.04, Definition of Lot Area. Staff Finding: The application specifies the percentages of the property falling within the described slope classifications. A substantial portion of the property is steep and does not contribute to development potential. As a general guideline. the flat portion of the property is the only portion which has development potential both in physical location and zoning (density and floor area). However, even considering the steep topography, the site has far more development potential than is being proposed. In this case. the community gains the assurance of an appropriate level of development notwithstanding the high level of potential development. 3. Land Uses. The land uses permitted shall be those of the underlying zone district. Detached residential units may be authorized to be clustered in a zero lot line or row house configuration, but multi-family dwelling units shall only be allowed when permitted in the underlying zone district. Staff Comments 3 Staff Finding: The application includes a request to rezone the property to AH1/PUD. The present zoning, both City and County, allows for residential development in varying densities. The applicant is proposing the duplexes in a clustered, zero lot line configuration. 4. Dimensional Requirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings: b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard: d. Minimum rear yard: e. Minimum side yard; Minimum lot width; Minimum lot area; Trash access area; Internal floor area ratio: and j. Minimum percent open space. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying zone district, provided that the total area ofalllots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone district. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final plat development plan. Staff Finding: This PUD will establish the dimensional requirements for Lots 1-12. Two variations to the underlying zone district are proposed. The first is to the minimum lot size for Lots 9, 10, and 11. The minimum lot size for a fathering parcel this large is 3,000 s.f. The minimum lot area per unit in a duplex configuration, however. is 1,500 s.f. This essentially allows for a duplex on a 3,000 s.f. lot but does not allow for the duplexes to sit on their own fee simple property. Upon completion, the developer usually condominiumizes the shared property to separate ownership to allow each unit to sit on its own land as a limited common element. The smaller lot and a zero lot line setback allows for the creation of duplexes on individual lots rather than with shared ownership. This also saves the applicant from having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. The second variation is for the front yard setback of Lot #1. The R-15 zoning requires this distance be 25 feet. However, the existing house is much closer to the street and the back of the proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the R-15 zoning is the most appropriate for the location of the property; 2) the 10 foot setback will be consistent with the remainder of the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and, 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steep area of the lot from development - a preferred development approach. Staff Comments 4 7. 7 qq m Staff supports the proposed dimensional requirements as outlined in the main body o f this memorandum. 5. Off-street parking. The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used byÂ·those using the proposed development. b. The parking need of any nonresidential units. c. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. d. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities. including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. e. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced. the City shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change Staff Finding: The proposed underlying zone district(AH1). mandates that parking requirements be established through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposal includes at least 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit, which is the minimum for development city-wide. The RO and Free Market lots shall provide two spaces pursuant to the City's parking standards at the time of actual development. The Category units are provided with two spaces per unit with an additional two spaces for gueSIS. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the proposed parking through Special Review. 6. Open Space. The Open Space requirement shall be that of the underlying zone district. However, a variation in minimum open space may be permitted if such variation would not be detrimental to the character of the proposed PUD, and if the proposed development shall include open space for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD through a common park or recreation area. An area may be approved as a common park or recreation area if it: a. Is to be used and is suitable for scenic, landscaping, or recreation purposes; and b. Is land which is accessible and available to all dwelling units or lots for whom the common area is intended. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas shall be deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the planned unit development (PUD), together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Any plan for open space shall also be accompanied by a legal instrument which ensures the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and communally owned facilities. Staff Finding: The Conservation parcel will be deeded to the City with the surface easement granted to the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The legal instruments to protecting the area have been provided to and reviewed by the Parks Department who intends to maintain a trail easement. No common area for recreation is required and none is proposed. Thus, no legal apparatus for its maintenance has been provided. The maintenance, repair, and Staff Comments 5 snowplowing of Lot #12 (access parcel) has been defined in the proposed SIA. The responsibility of this willlie with a condominium association, including Lots 5-12. 7. Landscape Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces. It shall provide an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species that are regarded as suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding: The Final Development Plan includes a Landscape Plan for the Category parcels and the access parcel. This plan provides a reasonable amount and variety of plantings appropriate for the neighborhood and the Â·climate. Landscape guidelines for the remaining parcels have been supplied to ensure some consistency between parcels without significantly restricting personal choice. These guidelines are appropriate and adequately address the concerns about visual consistency between parcels. Adequate areas for snow storage have been delineated. The access drive has been slightly shortened and the snow storage is not expected to encroach on the Midland Trail - a concern raised during conceptual review. 8. Architectural Site Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency with the proposed development, architectural character, building design, and the preservation of the visual character of the City. It is not the purpose of this review that control of architectural character be so rigidly enforced that individual initiative is stilled in the design of a particular building, or substantial additional expense is required. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, upon appropriate use of materials, and upon the principles of harmony and proportion of the buildings with each other and surrounding land uses. Building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion. Staff Finding: Building envelopes have been placed appropriately considering the natural terrain and surrounding land uses. Architectural plans and elevations for the Category units have been included in this application. The proportions, massing, and materials are appropriate. During the conceptual review, staff expressed a desire that the free-market and RO buildings be of similar architectural character to the Category structures because o f their proximity. This was not an attempt to control style but rather to minimize contrast. The applicant has proposed architectural guidelines to ensure some compatibility with the Category units without being so strict as to limit creativity and personal expression. These are well prepared and more sensitive about materials, colors, and style than the City's more objective standards. The lots not proposed for current construction are subject to the City's Residential Design Standards. Staff recommends that in the case of Staff Comments 6 an appeal of the standards, that these architectural guidelines for the PUD should also be considered. During the conceptual review. members of the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed a desire for combined vehicular entrances to reduce the street presence of driveways and garage doors. Suggestion for combining lot access way were discussed and the applicant agreed to study those possibilities. The applicant has proposed combining driveways between Lots 3 and 4. Staff is recommending that the shared driveway access easement be placed between Lots 2 and 3. and that Lot 4 use the common driveway with access behind the carports. 9. Lighting. Alllighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Staff Finding: Lighting shall be downcast. No lighting of landscape elements or architectural features should be allowed. This will be included as a recommended condition in the final Ordinance. 10. Clustering. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. Staff Finding: The development has been clustered. The entire site is 17 acres with approximately 13.6 acres set aside for conservation. This leaves less than 4 acres available for development. which is less than 24% of the site. Therefore, all development would be clustered onto less than one quarter (1/4) of the entire property. 11. Public facilities. The proposed development shall be designed so that adequate public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development at the time development is constructed, and that there will be no net public cost for the provision of these public facilities. Further, buildings shall not be arranged such that any structure is inaccessible to emergency vehicles. Staff Finding: The proposed access way and fire suppression has been designed to accommodate the Fire Marshall's requirements as explained evident in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C (in Exhibit The City Engineer has requested a ten (10) foot strip of land be dedicated to the City R.O.W. in front of Lot #1 upon that lot's redevelopment. This area is required to accommodate the full requirements for the R.O.W. There exist sufficient utilities in the immediate area to accommodate this development. The applicant is obligated to provide for utility upgrades and extensions. An easement to access the existing manhole near the front steps of the existing house has been proposed on the final plat. This easement addresses the request of the ACSD. The Sanitation District will require a line extension, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes. There may exist an elevation problem for gravity lines from the RO Lots to the trunk line on S. Garmisch Street. The Staff Comments 7 applicant should consult with the ACSD to determine if a pump system or alternative fall line can be designed to accommodate sanitation service. Staff recommends this issue be finalized prior to acceptance of an application for a building permit. The Engineering and Streets Departments are asking for the development of curb and gutter with this project. The Planning Department concurs with this recommendation. 12. Traffic and pedestrian circulation. a. Every dwelling unit. or other land use permitted in the planned unit development (PUD) shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road. a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. c. The proposed development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding collector and arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. Every residential building shall not be farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadway or drive providing access to a public street. e. All nonresidential land use within the planned unit development (PUD) shall have direct access to a collector or arterial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. f. Streets in the planned unit development (PUD) may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent city regulations and ordinances. Staff Finding: The proposed development meets these standards. Each lot created has adequate access to public rights-o f-way. The land owners sharing Lot 12 will be responsible for maintaining safe access. Staff Comments: B) Barbee Subdivision A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding: The proposed development meets these standards. Please refer to staff s findings for these criteria under the PUD review, pages 1 and 2 of this section. Staff Comments 8 d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision is in compliance with applicable requirements of the land use code considering the variations recommended for approval and the conditions proposed by staff. 2. Suitability of land for subdivision. a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding. drainage. rock or soil creep, mudflow. rockslide, avalanche or snowslide. steep topography. or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health. safety, or welfare of the residents , in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies. duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: The city staff has reviewed this project and found that with the clustering proposal. the land proposed to be developed is suitable. and the layout of the subdivision is spatially efficient. 3. Improvements. The improvements outlined in Section 26.88.040(C)(3) must be provided. Staff Finding: The City Engineer has reviewed the engineering documents provided in the application and provided referral comments. The applicant shall provide lot pins for each lot and provide range points and monuments within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. as determined necessary by the City Engineer. All street improvements and repairing shall be accomplished pursuant to the final plat documents. A new- street name is not necessary as the parcels can be numbered with a Dean Street address. Traffic control signs are not expected to be necessary, however, the homeowners' association should be required to install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at any time the City Engineer feels the sign is necessary for safety reasons. The installation of six street trees are required. The installation of the appropriate site utilities and drainage has been included in the provided engineering drawings for the final plat. 4. Design Standards. The design standards of section 26.88.040(C)(4) shall be complied with. a. Streets and Related Improvements. Staff Finding: The City Engineer has requested a10 foot wide strip of land in front of Proposed Lot #1 be dedicated to the City right-of-way upon the redevelopment of that parcel. This is to correct for a deficient width of the R.O.W. and to allow for safe travel and maintenance of the roadway. The setback and building envelope for that parcel shall be adjusted to correspond with the new- property line after the dedication. Dedication of this strip shall be noted on the final plat. The status ofthe northeasterly corner shall be verified on the final plat. The proposed access way meets these standards and is adequate for fire access. Final paving of the new access way and the final overlay on S. Garmisch Street shall not be completed until one year after all subsurface improvements are completed unless othenvise approved by the City Engineer. Street names. The three new parcels along S. Garmisch Street shall be numbered with S. Garmisch Street addresses. The seven new parcels accessed from the new drive shall be numbered with Dean Street addresses, unless an alternative street name is proposed and accepted Staff Comments 9 by City Council. The homeowners' association shall be responsible for traffic control signs if a safety issue arises in the future, as determined by the C ity Engineer. The City Engineer has requested the provision of two street lights along the property. This is different from the one street light requested at the access way entrance by the City Engineer during the conceptual review and as proposed by the applicant. The City Planning Department believes the one street light proposed by the applicant is sufficient for safety and meets the standard as provided above. This opinion is based on the exact letter of the law. the opinion of the City' Engineer during conceptual review, the relatively low traffic levels on this portion of S. Garmisch Street, and the desire to not over-urbanize the edge of town with excessive outdoor lighting. Too much lighting detracts from safety by causing glare, The proposed curb, sidewalk, and planting buffer is adequate and meets city standards. Trees. One street tree per lot facing S. Garmisch Street would result in six trees. The applicant shall install six street trees along the planting buffer of the street R.O.W. or in another suitable location at the discretion ofthe City Forester. These trees shall be planted in a location where they will not be crushed with plowed snow. These trees shall be three inches or greater in caliper if deciduous, or at east six feet in height if coniferous. b. Easements. Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe a general easement for access and maintenance of utilities within the proposed access way (Lot 12) and specific easements for individual utility agencies as required for above or below ground equipment, pedestals, and service personnel within Lot 12 and within Lots 5-11, as needed. Utility easements for Lots 1-4 shall be shown and described on the final plat to the extent utilities are being currently provided. Otherwise, utility easements on Lot 1-4 shall be provided at the time of actual development. Shared access easements and the proposed conservation easement shall also be placed on the plat. e. Lots and blocks. Staff Finding: The proposed Lots meet the design standards for Lots and Blocks. d. Survey Monuments. Staff Finding: The lots shall be pinned and monumented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. If required by the City Engineer, a range point shall be installed within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. and the proposed access way. e. Utilities (Water, sewer, fire, and other). Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe plans and specifications for the provision of utilities. Approval from the respective utility provider is required for the final plat. The applicant should be aware that there may exist lack of elevation for gravity flow sanitary sewer from proposed Lots 5-7 and a pump system may be required. Staff Comments 10 f. Storm Drainage. Staff Finding: The City Engineer concurs with the grading and drainage plans submitted for this review. These plans shall be incorporated into the final plat. The applicant shall provide drainage control for construction to limit sediment loaded drainage from exiting the property. g. Flood hazard areas. The following standards shall apply to special flood hazard areas as defined in Section 26.68.040 of the Municipal Code. Staff Finding: The subject lands are not within the flood hazard area. h. The design and location of any proposed structure, building envelope, road, driveway, trail, or other similar development is compatible with significant natural or scenic features of the site. Staff Finding: The proposed development is preserving a substantial portion of the natural and scenic features ofthe site. i. Variations of design standards. Variations from the provisions of this section, -Design Standards," may be granted by special review as provided for in Chapter 26.64. Staff Finding: The applicant is not seeking any variations form the Subdivision standards. 5. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.48, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.100, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: As a new subdivision that would be comprised of new dwelling units, the applicant is seeking GMQS exemptions pursuant to the referenced section. No replacement dwelling units are proposed. 6. School land dedication standards. Staff Findino This is not an appropriate location for land dedication. Upon application for development each Lot owner shall be responsible for the payment of the School Land Dedication Fee (payment-in- lieu). This fee shall be based upon the fair market value of the respective Lot at the time of development, the land dedication standards applicable for the proposed development, and the calculation formula as specified in the code. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the. sole cost of the lot owner. STAFF COMMENTS: C) Barbee Rezoning Section 26.92.020, Standards Applicable to Rezoning In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council shall consider: Staff Comments 11 A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: The development proposed is proceeding through a Planned Unit Development review to ensure , consistency with all applicable City requirements. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: The rezoning allows for increased density for projects representing 70% affordable housing. This incentive zone is consistent with the AACP and the development being proposed is in substantial compliance with this community document. Please refer to the AACP compliance criteria of PUD more fully responded to on pages 1 and 2 of this section. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The rezoning, as well as the level and type of development being proposed is consistent with and appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The rezoning and the level o f development being proposed does not represent an adverse effect on road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to. transportation facilities. sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The rezoning and the level of development being considered is within the community's infrastructure capabilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: The rezoning will not have significant adverse impacts upon the natural environment. In fact. a large portion of the property is being preserved against development to the benefit of the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: A mix of free-market and affordable housing is appropriate for this neighborhood and the level of density being proposed is appropriate for the edge of the City's urbanized area. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment allows for development of the parcel with 70% of the units being deed restricted to affordable housing and a substantial portion of the property being zoned Staff Comments 12 conservation. The removal of the Lodge (L) overlay on Lot #1 is appropriate given the purely residential use on either side of the lot. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the pubiic interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed rezoning is not in conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the intent ofthe municipal dode. STAFF COMMENTS: D) GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND E) METHOD OF PROVIDING THE HOUSING The exemption by City Council may only be granted subsequent to review and consideration by the GMC. There are. however, no specific review standards for this review other than the more general criteria listed below. To the extent possible. staff has incorporated general observations of the project in relation to the Community Plan and the Interim Housing Guidelines under the criteria of the PUD and Subdivision reviews located elsewhere in this Exhibit A. Approval of the method by which the applicant proposes to provide affordable housing shall be at the option of the City Council, upon the recommendation of the Growth Management Commission. In evaluating the applicant's proposal. the advice of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be sought in considering thefollowing factors: 1. Whether the city has an adopted plan to develop affordable housing with monies received from payment of affordable housing dedication fees. 2. Whether the city has an adopted planidentifying the applicant's site as being appropriate for affordable housing. Staff Finding: The City, through the Housing Authority, has developed an affordable housing plan for both public and private monies. The site is not identified in the Community Plan as a potential affordable housing site. The Plan, however, only identified individual parcels and did not provide direction in evaluating all sites in general. However, the City and County Planning Commissions have adopted Resolution No. 98-11, "The Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan" as an update of the Housing Element of the 1993 AACP. Based on it's location, size, and proximity to general services, staffbelieves this site is an appropriate site for affordable housing. Staff believes the Interim Housing Guidelines further this opinion. 3. Whether the applicant's site is well suited for the development of affordable housing, taking into account the availability of services, proximity to employment opportunities and whether the Staff Comments 13 site is alfected by environmental constraints to development or historic preservation concerns. Staff Finding: The site is an excellent site for affordable housing. Its proximity to physical and social infrastructure, transit, employment and recreation opportunities. and location within an established neighborhood make this a well-suited. appropriate site. Furthermore. the preservation of the majority of the property as a conservation easement protecting Shadow Mountain furthers man)- community goals, not only those related to affordable housing. 4. Whether the method proposed will result in employee housing being produced prior to or at the same time the impacts Of the development -will be experienced by the community. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision Improvement Agreement prohibits the conveyance of the Free- Market lots until such time as the Category units are built and occupied and the RO Lots have been conveyed. 5. Whether the development itself requires the provision of affordable housing on-site to meet its service needs. Staff Finding: This development is proposed within the 70/30 incentive zone district AH1/PUD. The community must rely on the private sector to aid in the development of affordable housing if the community's AH goals are to be accomplished. This is a recognized incentive zone to encourage the private sector' s involvement in the provision of affordable housing. In fact, the "Purpose" of the zone district is explained in the Land Use Code as: "to provide for the use Of land for the production of Category 1, 2, 3, and 4 affordable housing and resident occupied lots and units. The zone district also permits a limited component offree market lots/units to off-set the cost of de-veloping affordable housing. It is contemplated that land may also be subdivided in connection with a development plan." The applicant is proposing the category units as Category 4. One condition of approval would allow the Housing Authority to "buy down" these category- units to a lower category prior to their conveyance to qualified residents. The number of employees living in the development will fur out-number employees generated by the use, and the development will certainly have a more positive impact on the social health of the community than will discouraging local working people from becoming vested members of Aspen. As an additional benefit, the Free Market lots have been proposed with FAR caps limiting their size to a relatively modest 4,500 square feet. While these will be large homes, they pale in comparison to the excessively large homes that are believed to generate substantial numbers o f employees. Staff Comments 14 STAFF COMMENTS: F) VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS In order to preserve the land use approvals which may be obtained as a result of the City council's approval of this application. the applicant must request approval of Vested property Rights per Section 26.52.080 of the Land Use Regulations. There are no review criteria that must be met in considering the vesting request. . Staff Finding: Staff is recommending the City Council approve the requested Vested Rights for this project. STAFF COMMENTS: G) PARK FEE WAIVER REQUEST The applicant proposes to meet the park development impact fee requirements of Section 26.44.030 of the Land use code by way of a conveyance of the conservation parcel to the City of Aspen for open space purposes. Such conveyances are permitted pursuant to Section 26.44.080. subject to city council's approval. This proposal is addressed in the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Staff Finding: The applicant is responsible for paying a Parks Dedication Fee in the amount of approximately $36,340 (based ort 30 bedrooms). Attached to the memo is an analysis from the Parks Dept. which indicates their desire to receive the 13+ acre Conservation parcel rather than the Parks Dedication Fee. Staff is recommending the City Council approve the Park Fee Waiver request for this project. 1 Staff Comments 15 EXH- i#'T 13 g EFGAW#H- 06+1,*râ€¢Ts MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Project Planner Thru: Nick Adeh. City Engineer )1~~ From: Ross C. Soderstrom, Profect ERimeer ,Â¢~~ 0 Date: March 9, 1999 Re: Barbee (Family) Subdivision and Final PUD Physical Address: 601 South Garmisch Street. City of Aspen, CO Legal Description: A 17.67 Ac. tract of land being a part of Lot 1, NE 1/4, NE 1/4, Section 13, TlOS, R85W, of the 6th P.M., lying partially in both the City of Aspen and Pitkin County, CO. After reviewing the above referenced application and making a site visit, I am reporting the comments of the Engineering Department: Summary: The applicants have satisfactorily addressed the majority of the principal requirements and elements for the proposed subdivision. Further refinement will be required to - fill out the conceptual plans to construction plans. Changes in Conditions & Subsequent Reviews: If the proposed use, density, or timing of construction of the project change. or the site, parking or utility plans for this project change subsequent to this review, a complete set of the revised plans shall be provided to the Engineering Dept. for review and re-evaluation. The discussion and recommendations given in this memorandum apply to the application and plans (dated November 22, 1997) provided for this review and such comments and recommendations may change in response to changes in the use, density, or timing o f the construction o f the project, or changes in the site, parking or utility designs. 1. Improvement Survey & Rights-Of-Way: After minor corrections, the several survey sheets included in the application should be included in the Final Subdivision / PUD plat for the development. 2. Utility Services & Easements: The applicant should verify conformance with the specific requirements for each utility provider. Construction plans must be approved by each respective utility provider prior to building permit application. The design engineer should re-evaluate the extension of sanitary sewer service lines to Lots 5,6 and 7. Water and electric utility meters and service connection points must be accessible to service personnel in the completed project and not obstructed by garbage or recycling containers, parked vehicles, other structures, landscape features, or vegetation. Any new surface utilities requiring a DRCM6a99.DOC 1 OF 4 Memo - Barbee (Family) ivision and Final PUD pedestal or other above ground equipment must be installed on an easement provided by the property owner and not located within the public right-of-way. As stated in the application, the 20 ft wide water main easement into the development will run through the driveway (Lot 12). Any required easements for utilities shall be shown on the final subdivision plat submitted for approval and shall also be shown on the plan sets submitted for building permits. 3. Final Plat. Agreements and Building Permits The applicant will prepare the final subdivision/PUD plat, all agreements and fulfill the conditions o f approval which precede any construction activities prior to submitting any applications for building permits. Utility providers will have signature blocks on the final plat for confirmation of compliance with their standards for their respective utility systems. A space 10 feet wide across the frontage of Lot 1 should be reserved for future right-of-way dedication and identified as such on the subdivision plat. 4. Streets and Pedestrian Area: The intersection of S. Garmisch St. and Juan St. most likely will require re-construction to improve the width, alignment and grading of the roadway and to improve the storm drainage. We expect improvements to the adjacent streets will become necessary, in part, as a result of this development. These improvements should include pavement improvements, re-aligning, grading and reconstruction of the corner of S. Garmisch St. and Juan St., street lighting. drainage, and landscaping. The street-scape improvements would include curb, gutter and sidewalk, planted median, and street lighting. 5. Driveway Access: Given the irregular intersection geometry of S. Garmisch St. and Juan St., the driveway to Lot 2 should be located at the northerly side of this lot to provide better sigh.t distance between the driveway and the intersection. 6. Redevelopment of Lot 1: If, or when the existing house on Lot 1 is removed, the owner will dedicate ten (10) ft width of right-o f-way to the City dependent upon the existing width of the right-of-way and the needs of the City for such widening. Correspondingly, the front setback line and building envelope for this lot should be set based upon the revised front lot line after such adjustment, if a front lot line adjustment is completed. 7. Site Drainage and Erosion Control: The new development shall not release more than historic storm run-off flows (in non-concentrated fashion) from the site and any increase in historic storm run-off flows must be first routed and detained on the site. A drainage plan and report by a currently licensed Colorado civil engineer shall be included in the site development plans submitted for the individual free-market and deed restricted lots as each is developed. The report should provide general construction techniques and details (minimum standards) for erosion control and sediment transport control to be employed by the developer(s) when the several residences are constructed. If the lots are developed individually, the property lines shall be fenced with construction and sediment fencing prior to construction and shall be securely DRCM6a99.DOC 2 OF 4 Memo - Barbee (Family) ouudivision and Final PUD maintained until the later o f either establishment of the permanent ground cover or issuance of a C.O. for the project. 8. Mine Closures and Mine Tailing Clean-up: The property owners should provide full disclosure of the conditions (size, depth. stability) of the shafts and mine openings to the City. The several mine shaft openings and discovery shafts should be evaluated by a qualified, independent party to determine i f any reclamation activities need to be performed to secure the mine workings and secure the sites as possible hazards to the future property owners and the general public. The Colorado Geological Survey may perform the evaluations without charge for the owners. If any remediation or closure work is recommended by the CGi the owners should arrange to complete the work prior to development of any housing units and prior to conveyance o f the open space parcel to the City. The Colorado Division of Minerals & Geology, (Dept. ofNatural Resources) can provide recommended design details and procedures for the closure of mines. 9. Survey Monument Records: The applicant's surveyor shall record the monument records prescribed by State law. These records shall be filed before the recordation of the subdivision/PUD plat and the proposed annexation o f the parcel presently located in the county. 10. West Aspen Mountain Trail: The location o f the existing hiking trail shall be included on the Improvement Survey and on the final subdivision plat. If a new alignment is developed or approved for the trail, this should be shown on the subdivision plat. 11. Water Wells and Water Rights: If there are any water wells on the subject property, they will be properly abandoned and capped according to the City Water Department standards prior to development of any housing units and prior to conveyance o f the open space parcel to the City. The owners will fulfill the requirements of the City Water Department for new service and conveyance of water rights. 12. Underground Improvements: The owners will fully disclose the location and condition of any underground improvements, facilities or services such as underground storage tanks (USTs), wells, vaults, cellars, pipelines, etc. which may be located on the property. 13. Street Lighting: The applicants should provide a street light along the S. Garmisch Street frontage o f the property as per the site plan. 14. Rock Removal: The stone rip-rap along the westerly side of S. Garmisch St. may need to be removed to permit the construction o f the sidewalk and provide an easement for the existing sanitary sewer main and manhole. This is contingent upon verification o f the right-of- way width and geometry. DRCM6a99.DOC 3 OF 4 Memo - Barbee (Family) SL - - vision and Final PUD 15. ADU Parking: If any ADUs are developed in the free-market homes, on-site ADU parking will be provided for the unit(s) on the respective lot. 16. Standard Conditions of Construction: The standard conditions regarding construction practices (e.g. dust, debris and drainage control on and ar,und the site, traffic , control, temporary facilities and parking, etc.) will be required o f the developer at the time of construction. As-built records in GIS compatible format will need to be submitted to the City GIS Dept. to update the city records for the several stages of development. This condition also applies to the individual development o f the free-market lots. DRCM6a99.DOC 4 OF 4 FEB 17 '99 12: 57PM ASFEN HOUSING OF-C P.1 MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendcn, Community Development Dept, FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office DATE: February 17, 1999 RE: Barbee Subdivision and Final PUD Parcel iD No. 2735-131-00-100 REQUEST: The applicant received conceptual approval to annex the County pot-4on of the property into the City and to subdivide the property int 12 Icts for development purposes and a conservation parcel. Lot 1 contains an existing single-family residence. Lots 2,3 and 4 are to constitute the project's free-market component. The affordable housing portion is to include three Resident Occupied single-family Icts and two Category 4 duplexes. The duplexes are to contain three bedrocms and approximately 1,400 square feet of floor area, plus a 500 square foot basement. The RO residences will be restricted to a minimum cf three bedrooms, maximum size of 2,200 gross square feet, a maximum 500 square foot garage and an 800 square foot basement. RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Board recommends approval of this project, but would also like the opportunity to re-evaluate the designation of the duplex unRs to a lower category. A condition of approval is recommended that would allow the review of the pro formas to evaluate whether any or all of the units can be categoMzed to a lower category. \r=forrallbarb=c.mh MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Community Development Department From: Lee Cassin, City Environmental Health Director Date: February 2, 1999 Re: Barbee Subdivision and Final PUD Parcel ID #2735-131-00-100 The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and has the following comments. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Section 11-1.7 "It shall be unlawful for the owner or occupant of any building used for residence or business purposes within the city to construct or reconstruct an on-site sewage disposal device." The plans to provide wastewater disposal for this project through the central collection lines of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) meet the requirements of this department. ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR 1WATER NEEDS: Section 23-55 "All buildings, structures, facilities, parks, or the like within the city limits which use water shall be connected to the municipal water utility system." The provision of potable water from the City of Aspen system is consistent with Environmental Health policies ensuring the supply of safe water. The City of Aspen water supply meets all standards of the Colorado Department of Health for drinking water quality. WATER QUALITY IMPACTS: Section 11-1.3 "For the purpose of maintaining and protecting its municipal water supply from injury and pollution, the city shall exercise regulatory and supervisory jurisdiction within the incorporated limits of the City of Aspen and over all streams and sources contributing to municipal water supplies for a distance of five (5) miles above the points from which municipal water supplies are diverted." The applicant has addressed this issue with the provision of drywells on site to detain runoff from impervious areas. This drainage plan to mitigate the water quality impacts from drive and parking areas will be evaluated by the City Engineer. AIR QUALITY: Sections 11-2.1 "It is the purpose of [the air quality section of the Municipal Code] to achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity possible by requiring the use of all available practical methods and techniques to control, prevent and reduce air pollution throughout the city..." The Land Use Regulations seek to "lessen congestion" and "avoid transportation demands that cannot be met" as well as to "provide clean air by protecting the natural air sheds and reducing pollutants" The code requires that the proposed development not have a deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city. The primary negative effect on air quality of a residential development is the traffic generated, and the resulting PMto emissions. To meet the code requirements, the development will need to determine which mitigation measures will be the easiest for the applicant to implement. PM-10 (83% of which comes from traffic driving on paved roads) is a significant health concern in Aspen. The traffic generated will also produce carbon %.; ...)11...:f>lpt, 3,?Ii<%%~p.4.4*fi#f~:~f, 4. i .r*2.:1$1*-,--154 ~- to.>,tf,~~iâ„¢Â·,1'fâ‚¬(?rl..''.-'. V 14 1 . ~Â·TD monoxide and other emissions that are health concerns. The municipal code requires developments to achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity by using all available practical methods to reduce pollution. The applicant needs to implement measures that will minimize traffic increases of the development, or offset the emissions from the project with PM10 reduction measures elsewhere. The application does not address this, but confines its comments to stating that traffic will increase and the neighboring streets can handle the added traffic. In our previous comments on this application we recommended that a condition of approval be that before final submission the applicant provide information to the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department which documents that proposed mitigation measures are sufficient to offset any increases in PMio caused by the project. The standard Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Report, Fifth Edition ITE trip generation rate is 9.55 trips/ day for a single family home or duplex unit. This number of trips is not expected to be made just by the residents. The figure includes trips by visitors, mail trucks, service workers, etc. However, the Pitkin County Road Maintenance Standards allow a trip - reduction for residential units located within one half mile of a transit stop oi 1.0 trips per dav. While in many cases, this is not realistic, given the location of this project within walking distance of downtown for errands that do not involve carrying heavy items, and within walking distance of bus routes, this reduction is more reasonable. This project consists of 11 homes, one of which is already existing, so the net number of trips to be offset is 80 trips/day, which produces 11 pounds of PMio emissions per day. (This is after taking the reduction for proximity to transit.) There are several measures the applicant can explore to reduce, and then offset the trips. These include, just to list a few of the steps other applicants have taken or proposed, and that might work for this project, â€¢ Having reduced homeowners assessments (or sale prices) for owners having one or no cars â€¢ Providing covered, secure bike storage facilities (minimal trip reduction) â€¢ Providing free bikes for use of owners to reduce car use for short trips (small trip reduction) â€¢ Having a gate with small fee so that persons leaving the parking area in a car pay a small fee each time, to encourage residents to make some short trips on foot or bike (Many other measures have been implemented as well, from providing Dial-a-Ride service to adding bus service to providing a connecting bike trail easement to plowing a bike path, to paving an existing unpaved area, etc. These measures would probably not be appropriate for this project.) These or any other programs that the applicant feels might benefit the project and will also reduce trips could be used. A combination of measures willlikely be needed. A condition of approval should be that the applicant provide a PM10 mitigation plan for approval from the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department, which documents that measures are sufficient to offset increases in PI\to caused by the project. This pIan should be approved prior to Z= final approval or issuance of building permits. Without such a plan, the project would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. This was aIso a condition of approval of Ordinance No. 44, Series of 1998 and has not yet been complied with. FIREPLACE/WOODSTOVE PERMITS The applicant must file a fireplace/woodstove registration form with the Building Department before the building permit will be issued. In the City of Aspen, buildings may have two gas log fireplaces or two certified woodstoves (or 1 of each) and unlimited numbers of decorative gas fireplace appliances Rei building. New homes may NOT have wood burning fireplaces, nor may any heating device use coal as fuel. FUGITIVE DUST A fugitive dust control plan is required which includes, but is not limited to fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove mud that has been carried out, speed limits, or other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line or causing a nuisance. Dust control will be crucial due to the closeness of existing homes to the site. CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: NOISE ABATEMENT: Section 16-1 "The city council finds and declares that noise is a significant source of environmental pollution that represents a present and increasing threat to the public peace and to the health, safetv and welfare of the residents of the City of Aspen and it its visitors. .....Accordingly, it is the policy of council to provide standards for permissible noise levels in various areas and manners and at various times and to prohibit noise in excess of those levels." During construction, noise can not exceed maximum permissible sound level standards, and construction cannot be done except between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. It is very likely that noise generated during the construction phase of this project will have some negative impact on the neighborhood. The applicant should be aware of this and take measures to minimize the predicted high noise levels. A suggestion that has been very effective for others is notifying neighbors of the construction schedule. ' i, Â·Â· : i'Â£E,sk 1''r . , P~' . . A 4' 7627â€¢kill>, A.~.-4.0,07. 543~ Memo RECEIVED FCO Le r To: Chris Bendon, Planner ' Asp= 1999 .N / PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT From: Aspen Fire Protection District Subject: Barbee Subdivision and Final PUD Date: February 1, 1999 Chris, This project shall meet all of the codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District. This includes and is not limited to those outlined in Section IV page 20. Ifyou have any questions or concerns please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you, 0 $ di / Ed Van Walraven, Fire Marshal Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District S y Kelly * Cha irnian John Keleher 1 T Paul S mith * Treas Fran.R Lousllill Michael Kelly * Secv Bruce Matherly, Mgr 0 February 1, 1999 Chris Bendon Community Development 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Re Barbee Subdivision Final PUD Dear Chris* The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District currently has sufficient line and treatment capacity to serve this project. Service is contingent upon compliance with the Districts rules. regulations, and specifications which are on file at the District office. Once detailed plans are available. tap permits can be completed which will estimate the fees for the project. We would request that the total connection fees be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. The applicant will be required to complete a line extension request and collection system agreement for the short line extension that will be needed. Both items will need to be approved by our Board ofDirectors. Shared service line agreements will also be needed for the affordable housing component if it is served by shared service lines. There are some downstream line constraints that will be eliminated through a system of proportionate additional charges. It is not clear from the plans how sewer service will be provided for lots 5,6, and 7. The short line extension that is shown may need to be extended to allow lots 5,6, and 7 to be served. District line specifications prohibit taps to manholes. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, 4*-7*41 uu,C 0 Bruce Matherly District Manager 565 N. Mill St.,Aspen, CO 81611 / (970)925-3601 / FAX (970) 925-2537 MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, City Planner FROM: Suzanne Wolff. County Planner_..<VJ RE: Barbee Family Final Subdivision/PUD DATE: February 2,1999 I have reviewed the application and offer the following comments: The County Planning staff supports annexation of the remainder of the Barbee parcel into the City and the rezoning and development ofthe majority of the parcel as a mixed affordable housing/free market project. The site is consistent with the philosopies and criteria of the "Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan that was jointly adopted by the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions in June of 1998. Specifically, the development is within the Aspen metro area, is adjacent to available public mass transit, does not promote sprawl, and is served by existing urban services. The Aspen Skiing Company has proposed in their recently approved Aspen Mountain Master Plan to open existing terrain on lower Shadow Mountain/West Aspen Mountain, when conditions permit. Egress from this terrain is represented to be "near Little Cloud Park", but staff would note that this terrain may be adjacent to the 13.6 acre conservation parcel to be established as part of this development. The applicant may wish to contact ASC to determine the boundaries of the ski terrain. NX 91CV111 eÂ·>f-*.Â»f -Â»r-EFf/Â¢%:2~11 Â·f . / .--/r# 4/. u,Z>,23Â¢, . / %<3.t ':-'FLMPXX '' -#*- -*- ---'--'Irrul__77 z-- :*423=A .79*~ AN -JE#VA" - Unt f,4Â« 0 4-4 - 1 .Â£ -- -- \ . N+X - ft-NT.-//,1//1/11 : 4-. /- - , 4.-4 . :p- 4/-F/,<~ Fibak#&*12- -_ â„¢_ *ch . 0-T----4, --- 37 - SITE .... - 1... - 1.2--=nv Rctâ‚¬.7 =ECK -/ -- <>-h . IN- - 1.7 Â«2 - Â»>J - 6- -- Juan St. AM Acts. 3 - 7 ) L Fl-F,i,FRL)/ET1-4Â©Iâ‚¬927 i B- b\ -~ - .3th -<Â» -'44'~ ~ - ..\, 7 f \-- 40 =23, -- .6-=.19.*f'I<.*9'Jill#-- / G.Â» -: 1 2. .--4.-- /014.Cip, /'.A,Ii//.-1.-2.~41-,~',' r~<~il~-~77 : i - <JO (~:Â·Lh/2*.2*#//.-7-9* Ad<00 i - 2-14.4 .3- --H.<~#ftZ/~6~â‚¬ 7 f . ' ' ...0 7 .41 7.-121 Litt~ - fi, ~ - LI~ ./ C- --J N . 1 r 1 - Pal K -- 1 i .ib .-4 3 fr* -2 ~ I -Al '... - . # 'r ,, , 1 I / \ 1 '' 11/ I 1 , 'f C ..d~k>. 4j 6*Hiet-r- 4 Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Jeff Woods, Parks Director FROM: Rebecca Schickling, Assistant Parks Director DATE: April 7, 1999 RE: Barbee Conservation Easement At the last Council meeting on March 22, Council requested that staff review the value of the open space parcel being donated in exchange for a waiver of park dedicatio.n fees. The estimated value of the park dedication fees for this project is approximately $36,000. The appraised value of this property, if the City were purchasing the property, is likely to be considerably higher. In 1977, the City acquired the Little Cloud Mining Claim for $95,000, the acreage of which was only 2.2 acres. The County recently acquired a conservation easement on a similar parcel of steeply sloping land as part of the Moore P.U.D. development. The County parcel, approximately 89 acres, was purchased for $400,000 and has no public access. One of the primary benefits of the Barbee parcel is the formalizing of the trail easement (no trail easement exists) and the ability to connect to the Aspen Mountain Trail. The Aspen Mountain Trail has been a high priority for a number of years and has been recognized in numerous community master plans, including the Pitkin County Trails Master Plan, the Aspen Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan and the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. Another benefit of this open space parcel, is the transitional habitat that it provides for wildlife. The area to be preserved is a combination of Gambel Oak, Aspen, and Spruce/Fir Forest. These connected transitional zones are decreasing in and near town as development pressures are extending higher on slopes. These ecotypes support a greater diversity of wildlife and the overlap of these zones are ecologically important. Staff believes that for these reasons, the City is fortunate to be able to acquire such a valuable parcel of land in exchange for a waiver of park dedication fees. The final consideration is in regards to the Conservation Easement. The City would acquire fee simple title to the property, however, a conservation easement would encumber the deed. The Aspen Valley Land Trust would be the benefactor of the conservation easement. Staff has discussed the conservation easement with the Executive Director of the Aspen Valley Land Trust, Reid Haughey, to ensure the City will have the ability to relocate a trail if necessary, on the parcel to meet the needs of the City. If Council would prefer we could re-examine the language of the conservation easement to ensure there will be no legal obstacles in the future to such a trail relocation. B c,-6--L VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultarits June 18, 1999 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Julie Ann Woods Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, Annexation Ordinance Dear Julie Ann: As we discussed, I would appreciate it if you would arrange to table the second reading of City Council Ordinance No. 12-99 which is presently scheduled for consideration at a public hearing on June 28, 1999. While the Barbee family is continuing to negotiate with APEHI for the development of the affordable housing component of the Barbee Subdivision/PUD, an agreement has yet to be reached. I would suggest that we open the public hearing on June 28 and continue it to the second Council meeting in July, which I believe is scheduled for July 26. Should additional time be required, we can table again in July. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours very truly, V~N ASSOCIA~-5A~LC / Â¥ Sun# ~inn, AICP , 1, cc:V Arthur C. Daily, Esq. c:\bus\city.ltr\ltr34097.jw2 230 East Hopkins Ave. Â· Aspen. Colorado 81611 ' 970/925-6958 ' Fax 970/920-9310 845+ 1% C. f2â‚¬,JL*3 1MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Directoq~~~ DATE: March 22,1999 7 RE: 1st Reading -- Barbee Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Exemption for Affordable Housing, Method of providing affordable housing, Vested Rights, Park Development Fee Waiver SUMMARY: The applicant, Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc.. obtained conceptual PUD approval in January of 1998 pursuant to Ordinance 44, Series of 1997. The development proposed is for 10 new residential units falling within the 70-30 "mix" allowed in the Affordable Housing Zone District. The site is located at the base of West Aspen or "Shadow" Mountain just south of Koch-Lumber Park (see attached Exhibit "D"). The property includes a substantial portion of Shadow Mountain, which is proposed as a conservation parcel to be deeded in fee to the City of Aspen. The following chart summarizes the proposed mix of units: Lot/Unit Type Lot Size FAR Proposed 1 / Free-Market 102,000 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 2 / Free-Market 11,705 s.f. 3 bj 4,500 s.f. 3 / Free-Market 11,440 s.f.'364 4,500 s.f. 4 / Free-Market 11,440 s.f. 3 6-t 4,500 s.f. 5/RO 6,318 s. f. .M-1 2,575 s.f. 6/RO 5,887 s.f. 3}p'.1 2,575 s.f. 7/RO 11,736 s.f.34 2,575 s.f. 8 / Category 4 3,017 s.f. 313) 1,400 s.f. 9/ Category q 2,259 s.f. *) <jvÂ»61,400 s.f. 10 / Category 4 2,211 s.f. V ) 1,400 s.Â£ 11 / Category'? 2,255 s.f.34~ 1,400 s.f. The Conceptual approval addressed only the PUD review criteria. This Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) application also includes land use requests for Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Exemption for Affordable Housing, approval of the method of providing affordable housing, Vested Rights, and Park Development Fee Waiver. 1 The Special Review for parking was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The land use request for growth management exemptions was considered by the Growth Management Commission at a hearing on March 16,1999, whereby they recommended approval. City Council's review will consider the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Housing Authority, and the Growth Management Commission for each ofthe requested land use actions. The applicant has addressed most of the concerns raised during the conceptual review. Accommodations for architectural and landscape consistency, shared access ways, utility easements, site lighting, legal instruments for the conveyance of the conservation parcel, draft plats, engineering schematics, and a draft Subdivision Improvements Agreement have all been included in the application. The majority of staff's comments are included in Exhibit "A" of this memorandum. Major points of discussion have been summarized below. Staff recommends City Council adopt Ordinance No. ~ ~ , Series of 1999 upon first reading and schedule the public hearing for April 12, 1999. APPLICANT: Mary Barbee. John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer. and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., all represented by Sunny Vann and Associates. LOCATION: Approximately the corner of Juan and S. Garmisch Streets. Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11. and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen. plus additional metes and bounds within City of Aspen and Pitkin County as shown on the Site Improvements Survey (see attached vicinity map, Exhibit "D"). ZONING: The portions of the subject property currently within the City of Aspen are zoned R- 15/PUD/L and Conservation. Portions of the property in the County are zoned AFR-10 and R-15/PUD. The applicant is seeking annexation into the City for the County portion of the property following land use approval. The applicant is also seeking rezoning to AH1/PUD, R-15/PUD and Conservation as delineated in the PUD portion of the application. The annexation will be accomplished prior to the recordation of a final plat and SIA. LOT SIZE: 17.695 acres, or approximately 770,794 square feet. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): Most of the subject property consists of slopes of greater than 30%. Subtracting areas of slopes and the proposed access easements, the following lot areas apply for FAR and Density: FAR shall be based on 761,130 s.f. of Lot Area. 2 Density shall be based on - 109,144 s. f. of Lot Area. These are preliminary figures to be confirmed by the City Zoning Officer during building permit review. ALLOWABLE FAR AND DENSITY (UNDER AH-1/PUD ZONING): FAR- 145,565 square feet by right, can be increased by Special Review. Density - for single family and duplex units: 36 units (109,144 + 3,000). PROPOSED FAR AND DENSITY: FAR - 31,325 square feet. Density - 10 new units plus one existing unit = 11 units. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence, assorted outbuildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: Same, but with ten (10) additional residences and two carport structures. The majority of the property is proposed to be deeded as a conservation parcel. PREVIOUS ACTION: The City Council considered and recommended approval of the conceptual PUD with the conditions incorporated into Ordinance 44, Series of 1997 (see attached Exhibit E). At their meeting on March 16, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission passed by a 4 to 0 vote Resolution 99- which recommends City Council approve the application. (This resolution will be distributed at the City Council meeting). At their meeting on March 16, 1999, the Growth Management Commission passed by a 7 to 0 vote Resolution 99- which recommends City Council approve the exemption from Growth Management and the method o f providing affordable housing. (This resolution will also be distributed at the City Council meeting). REVIEW PROCEDURE: Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Exemptions, Approval of the method of providing affordable housing, Park Fee Waivers, and Vested Rights. Cky Council shall approve, approve with conditions. or deny this land use request at a public hearing after considering recommendations from the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission. the Growth Management Commission, and the City's Housing Designee (APCHA). The property is currently in two jurisdictions. The applicant has requested annexation into the City and this action will take place concurrent with or after final land use approval from City Council. The actions taken by the City Council are subject to annexation of the property and become void if the land is not annexed into the City. 3 STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has made great strides to accommodate the concerns of the staff. the Planning Commission, and the City Council in this application. The application is complete and includes all additional information requested during the initial review. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." A vicinity map has been included as Exhibit "D." The following concerns were issues to be further addressed as part of the final review: 8040 Greenline Review: The conceptual review requested an application for 8040 Greenline Review if the completed survey information determined the proposed development was in the overlay area. After reviewing the completed survey. no proposed development is in the 8040 jurisdiction and no review is required. Affordable Housing Method: This development is slightly different from typical private sector affordable housing projects in that the 70% affordable portion of the project is proposed to be conveyed to a non-profit affordable housing development group. The Housing Authority Board reviewed his project during Conceptual Review and recommended City Council approve the proposal. The City Council approved the Conceptual PUD with two specific conditions regarding the provision of Affordable Housing on the property. Those were: 1.One of the RO. lots would be provided to a member of the Barbee family, should that family member qualify for an R. O. unit. If no member ofthe Barbee family qualifies. the Barbee family would be paid S130,000 for that lot, and the lot would be retained by APEHI. 1.The remaining two RO. lots, and the land for the Category units, would be retained by APEHI. The Housing Ofice will work with the non-profit to determine the final price of the R.O. lots and Category units, based on the final costs of the development and the appropriateness at that time of additional subsidy, subject to review by Council. Staff has suggested conditions of this final approval which reflect the intentions of these two conditions, but which better correspond to the language provided in the proposed Subdivision Agreement. -1< [9 3 Currently, there are 163 allotments available for new affordable housing units. The applicant is requesting seven (7) units be allocated. There are also currently thirty-four (34) AH-Associated Free-market units available. The applicant is requesting three (3 ) 9 L.. be allocated to this project. The Growth Management Commission recommended that these allocations be exempted from Growth Management competition and scoring, subject to conditions. 4 Shared Access Ways: The Planning and Zoning Commission raised a concern about the multiple curb cuts on S. Garmisch Street and the affect of garage doors on the facades of both the free-market homes and the RO homes. The applicant has responded by providing a shared access drive between Lots 3 and 4. This was acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk: During the conceptual review. planning staff expressed a desire for the edge of this project to be designed in a less urban manner. The Commission agreed and the applicant was required to investigate the design of the curb, gutter, and sidewalk with representatives o f the Streets, Parks, Engineering, and Planning Departments. The applicant did discuss this treatment with Engineering and Streets. who requested a more urban approach to the curb, gutter and sidewalk design. The City Planning Department preferred that this standard be met with a less urban treatment and suggested to the Commission that a drainage swale be created in the median, planted with tall native grasses and street trees. with a detached sidewalk. However, after discussions with the City Engineer, staff backed off from this suggestion as it was explained that due to the soil characteristics in this area the best solution is to place curb and gutter along the edge of the street to convey water away from the site. The Commission was also comfortable with this recommendation. Preservation of Existing Large Shed located nearest to Dean Street: During the conceptual review, staff urged the developer to find a mechanism to preserve some aspect o f the large existing shed on the property. It is important to point out that this shed is not protected by the City's Historic Preservation regulations and the developer is under no obligation to preserve the structure. However, regardless of the shed's technical value as a historic structure, the City Planning Department believes these old sheds are important reminders of the City' s history - as a type of visual reference to the Aspen society and culture as it has changed through time. Staff still believes this structure. or some part thereof, could and should be incorporated into the development plans. such as the street-side view of the carport structure. The structure could also be preserved on one of the proposed lots. or moved to another location in town and re-used. The structure is located approximately where the proposed shared driveway between Lots 3 and 4 is located. Concurring with staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that this be included as a condition of approval. Variances: First, the applicant is requesting approval of smaller lots and zero lot line setbacks to allow for the creation of duplexes on individual lots, rather than with shared ownership. This also saves the applicant from having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. 5 The second variation is for the front yard setback of Lot #1. The R-15 zoning requires this distance be 25 feet. However, the existing house is much closer to the street and the back ofthe proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the R-15 zoning is the most appropriate for the location of the property; 2) the 10 foot setback will be consistent with the remainder of the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and, 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steep area of the lot from development - a preferred development approach. Both of these variances are included in the PUD standards incorporated into the Ordinance. Vested Property Rights: In order to preserve the land use approvals which would be obtained as a result of City Council approvals, the applicant is requesting vested property rights status for this project. Staff supports this request and has incorporated it into the ordinance. Park Development Fee Waivers: The applicant proposes to meet the park development impact fee requirements of Section 26.44.030 of the Land Use Code by way o f a conveyance of the Conservation parcel to the City of Aspen for open space purposes. Such conveyances are permitted pursuant to Section 26.44.080. subject to City Council's approval. This proposal is addressed in the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Staff supports this request. Summary: The applicant has accommodated the concerns expressed by the staff. the Commission, and the City Council in this application. RECOMMENDATION: Staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Growth Management Commission recommend City Council adopt this Ordinance upon first reading, with the following conditions: 1. The Land Use action is subject to annexation of the property into the City of Aspen. Failure to complete annexation within 180 days of this approval shall render this land use action void, unless the timeframe is extended by City Council. 2. Following annexation, but within 180 days after final land use approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant shall record a Final PUD/Subdivision development plan. This plan shall include all necessary plat requirements of the City Engineer including site plans, grading plans, utility plans, any physical improvements required to mitigate for additional air quality impacts as determined by the City Environmental Health Department, all utility easements, architectural plans and elevations, and a landscape plan. 3. Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building Permit, the applicant shall record a PUD/Subdivision Improvements Agreement binding the 6 property, the Barbee Subdivision, to this development approval. The Agreement shall describe all subdivision and PUD improvements, requirements, and restrictions, and maintenance, and shall provide financial assurance to the City for said improvements and the success of the site landscaping for a period of two (2) years after installation. The agreement shall be reviewed concurrently with the final plat and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation. 4. That the following description of each Lot's development provisions be included in the final Ordinance: Requirements Common to Entire Development Lot Dimensions: As represented on Final Plat. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 Feet. Maximum height .# , Â¥ 25 Feet. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade. approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the setbacks. Minimum percent open space: No requirement #.Dux~ 9--t;/.* Lot 1 (existing Free-Market) Zone District: R-15/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North and East sides 10 feet each. Lot 2 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 60 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 3 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 4 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH 1 /PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. 7 01,9,râ€¢.'1;,11:641/9,rÂ¥'â€¢:.,1, Lot 5 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot 6 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 7 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH liPUD Allowable Floor Area: 2.575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot 8 (categorv unit) pr Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 35 feet from southern-most lot line. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 9 feet. Lot 9 (categorv unit) 3\ Zone District: AH 1 /PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 27 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 7 feet; 0 feet. Lot 10 (category unit) ~ Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 14 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 7 feet. Lot 11 (category unit) A Zone District: AH L'PUD 8 Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 6 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 14 feet; west 0 feet. Lot 12 (shared access parcel) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowed Uses: 10 carport parking spaces. trash, snow storage. uses accessory to use of residential lots. Residential use shall require a substantial PUD amendment. Allowable Floor Area: 10 covered carports in two structures as represented on final plat. Setbacks: As represented on final plat. Trash access area: Minimum 10 feet wide, unobstructed. Conservation Parcel Zone District: Conservation Allowed Development and Uses: Uses allowed in the Conservation Zone District and allowed pursuant to the Deed of Conservation Easementr 86+eme,Miefi. Uses and development necessary for community health and safety reasons may occur on this parcel. 0~ t-wh 5. The City shall accept title to the_lconservation parcel" only after the City Attorney has reviewed all aspects ofthe0-2,h-&&1;Deed,Â·the Deed of Conservation Easement. and is satisfied that no inordinate l._jility issues exist with respect to prior mining activities on the parcel. To satisfy this concern, the City may require areas of mining activity to be mitigated. or othenvise properly treated, or a legal instrument indemnifying the City prior to conveyance. In the event that title cannot be conveyed to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, then a trail easement will be conveyed and allowed in the Conservation Area. 6. Replacement after demolition of the existing single-family residence on Lot #1 shall require a GMQS Exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.050, as amended. 7. The Home Owners' Association, or similar entity responsible for Lot #12, the common access way, shall install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at such time determined necessary for public safety by the City Engineer. 8. Access to Lots 3 and 4 shall be via the shared access easement as described on the final plat. The City Engineer shall issue only one curb cut permit between these two lots. 9. All Lots are subject to the City's Residential Design Standards, as amended. 4,@U-46-duWL ~--4,Â¢--ineittde#4n-the*rch+tee<UfalÂ·GUelin*&r*px@pesed##-6*blb#%(oflhe-di~-Si*. Lot #1 shall be subject to the provisions ofthe Landscape Guidelines, as proposed in Exhibit B of the draft SIA upon redevelopment ofthe Lot. All other aspects ofthe. City's Residential Design Standard, as amended, will apply. 10. For purposes of calculating the fee-in-lieu of school land dedication, the building permit application for each lot shall include an appraisal of the lot's fair market value. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the lot owner. 9 Im; 11. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for an individual lot, the School Land Dedication Fee shall be paid in full pursuant to the regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 12. Prior to recordation of the final plat, an air quality mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Department for approval. Physical improvements to the site required for mitigation shall be delineated on the final plat. 13. A Building Permit application for any and aillots shall include a fugitive dust mitigation plan for review and approval by the City Environmental Health Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for each lot, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the appropriate department for any fireplaces or wood burning devices. 15. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No Sunday construction activity will be permitted. Exceeding the City Noise Ordinance may result in a stop work order. 16. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. All exterior lighting, including street lights, shall be downcast, sharp cut-off, and not used to accentuate landscape or architectural features of the development. No exterior up-lighting is permitted. No exterior floodlights are permitted. 17. The Community Development Dept. shall assign street addresses as follows: Lots 2-4 shall receive numbers with a Garmisch Street address; Lots 5-11 shall receive numbers with a Dean Street address. 18. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately Lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature. preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the S. Garmisch Street side of the carport structure. I f preserved for storage use, its FAR shall be exempt. 19. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the duplex units, six (6) street trees shall be planted along the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W or Midland Trail in locations approved by the City Forester considering the storage of plowed snow. These trees shall be three- inches or greater in caliper if deciduous or at least six feet in height if coniferous. 20. Prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension and a collection system agreement from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. For the duplex units, a shared service agreement may be required. There exists a possibility that gravity service from Lots 5-7 will require a pump system; if so, its design must be approved by ACSD and the City Engineer. 21. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for any lot, adequate silt fencing shall be erected to ensure that no sediment-loaded drainage will be leaving the property during construction. This fencing shall remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the respective lot. 22. Prior to applying for a Building Permit for any lot, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. This agreement can be recorded with the plat and SIA documents. 10 23. Building Permit applications for any and alllots shall include payment of a $50.00 per project fee in lieu of digital submission requirements. 24. Any work within public rights-of-way shall gain approval from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 25. The applicant shall record the Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 26. That the final "mix" of categories shall be as follows, and conditioned as follows: a) The project shall consist of ten (10) new residential units. Three (3) shall be free-market units of no more than three (3) bedrooms each. Three (3) shall be RO Lots, each for the purpose of a single-family residence of no less than three (3) bedrooms. Four (4) shall be Category 4 three bedroom units constructed and conveyed pursuant to APCHA Guidelines. b) At or near completion of the Category duplex units, the applicant shall provide the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority the opportunity to "buy- down" the Category designations of the Category Units and the RO Lots or Units to a lower Category prior to conveyance. 27. That the language of these conditions as finally approved by the appropriate authority be printed on the cover sheet ofthe building permit set of plans and all other sets made for the purpose of construction. 28. That the applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of all P&Z, GMC, and City Council resolutions and ordinances applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter as part of the building permit application indicating that conditions of approval are known and understood. 29. That a Parking Management Plan be submitted for staffs review and approval prior to the Building permit application which will address the phasing, staging, and construction parking on the site. 30. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Growth Management Commission. and the City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by an entity having the authority to do so. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance ~ ~ , Series of 1999, upon first reading." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Comments from Referral Agencies Exhibit C -- Application Exhibit D -- Vicinity Map 8 1 6, 5}aff Jift F~*â‚¬-4~ a. gvrnrnoxg 4 -44 70 4/30 4 6.<cll- 8-6"h- %;+ a- 0- /u /7102, 041~ -- 11 0.2 EXHIBIT ~ Staff Comments: Barbee Planned Unit Development A development application for a PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements: A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: Community Fin'on: The proposed development increases resident housing opportunities, encourages a balanced permanent community, may provide residents with a transportation alternative if they choose to walk to town, work, etc., and is a relatively sustainable development pattern. Community Vitality: The proposed development is 70% affordable, addressing the community's desire to provide affordable housing opportunities within a reasonable walking distance to employment and recreation resources. The proposed development is an in-fill site within, or approximately within, the original townsite. Increased residential density, especially for local working residents, within the functional town promotes a sense of community that cannot be achieved by placing that critical mass in a remote location, regardless of where the metro area or extended metro boundaries exist. Open Space and Environment: Providing housing opportunities within walking distance to employment, entertainment, recreation, and other residences reduces the need to use a vehicle for every trip. Also, compact development within the townsite reduces the need to extend services and develop land on the outskirts of town, and preserves those natural open space areas for their wildlife and aesthetic functions. The proposal is preserving areas that are clearly not appropriate for development. The proposal also preserves the bench area above the proposed RO lots, just above the Little Cloud Subdivision. It is important to underscore this preservation because this area could be expensive "view lots" with dramatic affects upon the visual openness of the mountain. Staff believes this approach to development is the most desired for this parcel and is appreciative o f the site planning and preservation. 1993 AACP: This project addresses elements ofthe existing AACP. Specifically, it 'creates a housing environment dispersed, appropriately scaled, and affordable.' And, it 'preserves and enhances the natural beauty of the area.' 1999 AACP: This document has not been adopted. However, the draft document provides substantial support for affordable housing to be located in town where it protects Staff Comments 1 surrounding open spaces outside of town and where the residents can become integral members ofthe social fabric. The plan also supports the preservation of natural open space areas such as the proposed conservation parcel for Shadow Mountain. Interim Housing Guidelines: The development proposed is consistent with the Interim (Citizen) Housing Guidelines adopted by the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions. The development is within the Metro Area, is within walking distance of the community core, preserves a significant amount of natural lands, represents quality design visually appropriate for the neighborhood, integrates different social levels within one project, is an optimum development level for this site, and does not promote urban sprawl. In addition, this project is proposed with no public subsidy and is not expected to have a significant negative fiscal impact upon the City or its taxpayers. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: Surrounding development to the northeast consists of multi-family housing. a park, older lodge conversions, and future potential mini-base development for Lift 1 or 'Town Lift.' There is virtually no development, or potential for development, to the Southeast of the site which is compatible with the open space easement proposed. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The surrounding area's development or redevelopment potential will not be affected by this development. Redevelopment of the largely vacant areas to the east have sufficient access from surrounding streets and a platted alleyway. D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. Staff Finding: Although exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures, the application must receive development allotments for 10 residential units. The Growth Management Commission will consider this case and make a recommendation to City Council. The GMC public hearing is also scheduled for March 16, 1999, at 5:30 PM. 2. Density: A. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Furthermore, densities may be reduced ift 1. There is not sufficient water pressure and other utilities to serve the proposed development; 2. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development; 3. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of slope, ground instability, and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls and avalanche dangers; 4. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution; Staff Comments 2 5. The proposed development will have deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city; or 6. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding: The density proposed on this site is far below that allowed by the gross lot size. There are sufficient utilities and services to accommodate this development. The access to the RO and Category lots has been designed in cooperation with the Fire Marshall and is adequate for fire protection service. The portion of the property where development is proposed is suitable for development. The applicant has not provided an Air Quality Mitigation Plan in the final application. The Environmental Health Department has suggested several recommendations, and the applicant is reviewing final details of the recommended mitigation measures. The location o f the proposed development does not appear to be in conflict with the natural terrain and features o f the site. B. Reduction in density for slope consideration. 1. In order to reduce wildfire. mudslide, and avalanche hazards; enhance soil stability; and guarantee adequate fire protection access. the density of a PUD shall also be reduced in areas with slopes in excess oftwenty (20) percent in the following manor: a. For lands between zero (0) and twenty (20) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be that permitted in the underlying zone district. b. For lands between twenty-one (21) and thirty (30) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be reduced to fifty (50) percent of that permitted in the underlying zone district. c. For lands between thirty-one (31) and forty (40) percent slope. the density shall be reduced to twenty-five (25) percent ofthat allowed in the underlying zone district. d. For lands in excess of forty (40) percent slope, no density credit shall be allowed. 2. Maximum density for the entire parcel on which the development is proposed shall be calculated by each slope classification, and then by dividing the square footage necessary in the underlying zone district per dwelling unit. 3. For parcels resting in more than one (1) zone district. the density reduction calculation shall be performed separately on the lands within each zone district. 4. Density shall be further reduced as specified in Chapter 26.04. Definition o f Lot Area. Staff Finding: The application specifies the percentages o f the property falling within the described slope classifications. A substantial portion of the property is steep and does not contribute to development potential. As a general guideline, the flat portion of the property is the only portion which has development potential both in physical location and zoning (derisity and floor area). However, even considering the steep topography. the site has far more development potential than is being proposed. In this case, the community gains the assurance o f an appropriate level of development notwithstanding the high level of potential development. 3. Land Uses. The land uses permitted shall be those of the underlying zone district. Detached residential units may be authorized to be clustered in a zero lot line or row house configuration, but multi-family dwelling units shall only be allowed when permitted in the underlying zone district. Staff Comments 3 Staff Finding: The application includes a request to rezone the property to AH1/PUD. The present zoning, both City and County, allows for residential development in varying densities. The applicant is proposing the duplexes in a clustered, zero lot line configuration. 4. Dimensional Requirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings: b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; i. Internal fioor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying zone district, provided that the total area of all lots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone district. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final plat development plan. Staff Finding: This PUD will establish the dimensional requirements for Lots 1-12. Two variations to the underlying zone district are proposed. The first is to the minimum lot size for Lots 9, 10, and 11. The minimum lot size for a fathering parcel this large is 3,000 s.f. The minimum lot area per unit in a duplex configuration. however. is 1.500 s.f. This essentially allows for a duplex on a 3,000 s.f. lot but does not allow for the duplexes to sit on their own fee simple property. Upon completion, the developer usually condominiumizes the shared property to separate ownership to allow each unit to sit on its own land as a limited common element. The smaller lot and a zero lot line setback allows for the creation of duplexes on individual lots rather than with shared ownership. This also saves the applicant from having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. The second variation is for the front yard setback of Lot #1. The R-15 zoning requires this distance be 25 feet. However, the existing house is much closer to the street and the back of the proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the R-15 zoning is the most appropriate for the location of the property; 2) the 10 foot setback will be consistent with the remainder of the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and, 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steep area of the lot from development - a preferred development approach. Staff Comments 4 Staff supports the proposed dimensional requirements as outlined in the main body of this memorandum. 5. Off-street parking. The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. b. The parking need of any nonresidential units. c. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. d. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. e. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the City shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change Staff Finding: The proposed underlying zone district(AH1), mandates that parking requirements be established through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposal includes at least 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit. which is the minimum for development city-wide. The RO and Free Market lots shall provide two spaces pursuant to the City's parking standards at the time of actual development. The Category units are provided with two spaces per unit with an additional two spaces for guests. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the proposed parking through Special Review. 6. Open Space. The Open Space requirement shall be that of the underlying zone district. However, a variation in minimum open space may be permitted if such variation would not be detrimental to the character of the proposed PUD, and if the proposed development shall include open space for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD through a common park or recreation area. An area may be approved as a common park or recreation area if it: a. Is to be used and is suitable for scenic, landscaping, or recreation purposes; and b. ls land which is accessible and available to all dwelling units or lots for whom the common area is intended. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas shall be deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the planned unit development (PUD), together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Any plan for open space shall also be accompanied by a legal instrument which ensures the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and communally owned facilities. Staff Finding: The Conservation parcel will be deeded to the City with the surface easement granted to the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The legal instruments to protecting the area have been provided to and reviewed by the Parks Department who intends to maintain a trail easennent. No common area for recreation is required and none is proposed. Thus, no legal apparatus for its maintenance has been provided. The maintenance, repair, and Staff Comments 5 snowplowing of Lot #12 (access parcel) has been defined in the proposed SIA. The responsibility of this willlie with a condominium association, including Lots 5-12. 7. Landscape Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces. It shall provide an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species that are regarded as suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding: The Final Development Plan includes a Landscape Plan for the Category parcels and the access parcel. This plan provides a reasonable amount and variety of plantings appropriate for the neighborhood and the climate. Landscape guidelines for the remaining parcels have been supplied to ensure some consistency between parcels without significantly restricting personal choice. These guidelines are appropriate and adequately address the concerns about visual consistency between parcels. Adequate areas for snow storage have been delineated. The access drive has been slightly shortened and the snow storage is not expected to encroach on the Midland Trail - a concern raised during conceptual review. 8. Architectural Site Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency with the proposed development, architectural character, building design, and the preservation of the visual character of the City. It is not the purpose of this review that control of architectural character be so rigidly enforced that individual initiative is stifted in the design of a particular building, or substantial additional expense is required. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, upon appropriate use of materials, and upon the principles of harmony and proportion of the buildings with each other and surrounding land uses. Building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion. Staff Finding: Building envelopes have been placed appropriately considering the natural terrain and surrounding land uses. Architectural plans and elevations for the Category units have been included in this application. The proportions, massing, and materials are appropriate. During the conceptual review, staff expressed a desire that the free-market and RO buildings be o f similar architectural character to the Category structures because of their proximity. This was not an attempt to control style but rather to minimize contrast. The applicant has proposed architectural guidelines to ensure some compatibility with the Category units without being so strict as to limit creativity and personal expression. These are well prepared and more sensitive about materials, colors, and style than the City's more objective standards. The lots not proposed for current construction are subject to the City's Residential Design Standards. Staff recommends that in the case of Staff Comments 6 an appeal of the standards, that these architectural guidelines for the PUD should also be considered. During the conceptual review, members of the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed a desire for combined vehicular entrances to reduce the street presence of driveways and garage doors. Suggestion for combining lot access way were discussed and the applicant agreed to study those possibilities. The applicant has proposed combining driveways between Lots 3 and 4. Staff is recommending that the shared driveway access easement be placed between Lots 2 and 3, and that Lot 4 use the common driveway with access behind the carports. 9. Lighting. All lighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Staff Finding: Lighting shall be downcast. No lighting of landscape elements or architectural features should be allowed. This will be included as a recommended condition in the final Ordinance. 10. Clustering. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. Staff Finding: The development has been clustered. The entire site is 17 acres with approximately 13.6 acres set aside for conservation. This leaves less than 4 acres available for development, which is less than 24% of the site. Therefore. all development would be clustered onto less than one quarter (1/4) of the entire property. 11. Public facilities. The proposed development shall be designed so that adequate public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development at the time development is constructed, and that there will be no net public cost for the provision of these public facilities. Further, buildings shall not be arranged such that any structure is inaccessible to emergency vehicles. Staff Finding: The proposed access way and fire suppression has been designed to accommodate the Fire Marshall' s requirements as explained evident in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C (in Exhibit 4,r, The City Engineer has requested a ten (10) foot strip of land be dedicated to the City R.O.W. in front of Lot #1 upon that lot's redevelopment. This area is required to accommodate the full requirements for the R.O.W. There exist sufficient utilities in the immediate area to accommodate this development. The applicant is obligated to provide for utility upgrades and extensions. An easement to access the existing manhole near the front steps of the existing house has been proposed on the final plat. This easement addresses the request of the ACSD. The Sanitation District will require a line extension, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes. There may exist an elevation problem for gravity lines from the RO Lots to the trunk line on S. Garmisch Street. The Staff Comments 7 applicant should consult with the ACSD to determine if a pump system or alternative fall line call be designed to accommodate sanitation service. Staff recommends this issue be finalized prior to acceptance of an application for a building permit. The Engineering and Streets Departments are asking for the development of curb and gutter with this project. The Planning Department concurs with this recommendation. 12. Traffic and pedestrian circulation. a. Every dwelling unit, or other land use permitted in the planned unit development (PUD) shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. c. The proposed development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding collector and arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. Every residential building shall not be farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadway or drive providing access to a public street. e. All nonresidential land use within the planned unit development (PUD) shall have direct access to a collector or arterial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. f. Streets in the planned unit development (PUD) may be dedicated to pubiic use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent city regulations and ordinances. Staff Finding: The proposed development meets these standards. Each lot created has adequate access to public rights-of-way. The land owners sharing Lot 12.will be responsible for maintaining safe access. Staff Comments: Barbee Subdivision A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding: The proposed development meets these standards. Please refer to staff s findings for these criteria under the PUD review, pages 1 and 2 of this section. Staff Comments 8 d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision is in compliance with applicable requirements of the land use code considering the variations recommended for approval and the conditions proposed by staff. 2. Suitability of land for subdivision. a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudfiow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography, or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: The city staff has reviewed this project and found that with the clustering proposal, the land proposed to be developed is suitable, and the layout of the subdivision is spatially efficient. 3. Improvements. The improvements outlined in Section 26.88.040(C)(3) must be provided. Staff Findine: The City Engineer has reviewed the engineering documents provided in the application and provided referral comments. The applicant shall provide lot pins for each lot and provide range points and monuments within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. as determined necessary by the City Engineer. All street improvements and repairing shall be accomplished pursuant to the final plat documents. A new street name is not necessary as the parcels can be numbered with a Dean Street address. Traffic control signs are not expected to be necessary, however, the homeowners' association should be required to install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at any time the City Engineer feels the sign is necessary for safety reasons. The installation of six street trees are required. The installation of the appropriate site utilities and drainage has been included in the provided engineering drawings for the final plat. 4. Design Standards. The design standards of section 26.88.040(C)(4) shall be complied with. a. Streets and Related Improvements. Staff Finding: The City Engineer has requested a10 foot wide strip of land in front of Proposed Lot #1 be dedicated to the City right-of-way upon the redevelopment of that parcel. This is to correct for a deficient width of the R.O.W. and to allow for safe travel and maintenance of the roadway. The setback and building envelope for that parcel shall be adjusted to correspond with the new property line after the dedication. Dedication of this strip shall be noted on the final plat. The status of the northeasterly corner shall be verified on the final plat. The proposed access way meets these standards and is adequate for fire access. Final paving of the new access way and the final overlay on S. Garmisch Street shall not be completed until one year after all subsurface improvements are completed unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Street names. The three new parcels along S. Garmisch Street shall be numbered with S. Garmisch Street addresses. The seven new parcels accessed from the new drive shall be numbered with Dean Street addresses, unless an alternative street name is proposed and accepted Staff Comments 9 by City Council. The homeowners' association shall be responsible for traffic control signs ifa safety issue arises in the future, as determined by the City Engineer. The City Engineer has requested the provision of two street lights along the property. This is different from the one street light requested at the access way entrance by the City Engineer during the conceptual review and as proposed by the applicant. The City Planning Department believes the one street light proposed by the applicant is sufficient for safety and meets the standard as provided above. This opinion is based on the exact letter of the law, the opinion of the City Engineer during conceptual review, the relatively low traffic levels on this portion of S. Garmisch Street, and the desire to not over-urbanize the edge of town with excessive outdoor lighting. Too much lighting detracts from safety by causing glare. The proposed curb, sidewalk, and planting buffer is adequate and meets city standards. Trees. One street tree per lot facing S. Garmisch Street would result in six trees. The applicant shall install six street trees along the planting buffer of the street R.O.W. or in another suitable location at the discretion of the City Forester. These trees shall be planted in a location where they will not be crushed with plowed snow. These trees shall be three inches or greater in caliper if deciduous, or at east six feet in height if coniferous. b. Easements. Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe a general easement for access and maintenance of utilities within the proposed access way (Lot 12) and specific easements for individual utility agencies as required for above or below ground equipment. pedestals. and service personnel within Lot 12 and within Lots 5-11, as needed. Utility easements for Lots 1-4 shall be shown and described on the final plat to the extent utilities are being currently provided. Otherwise, utility easements on Lot 1-4 shall be provided at the time of actual development. Shared access easements shall also be placed on the plat. c. Lots and blocks. Staff Findine: The proposed Lots meet the design standards for Lots and Blocks. d. Survey Monuments. Staff Finding: The lots shall be pinned and monumented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. If required by the City Engineer, a range point shall be installed within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. and the proposed access way. e. Utilities (Water, sewer, fire, and other). Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe plans and specifications for the provision of utilities. Approval from the respective utility provider is required for the final plat. The applicant should be aware that there may exist lack of elevation for gravity flow sanitary sewer from proposed Lots 5-7 and a pump system may be required. f. Storm Drainage. Staff Finding: Staff Comments 10 The City Engineer concurs with the grading and drainage plans submitted for this review. These plans shall be incorporated into the final plat. The applicant shall provide drainage control for construction to limit sediment loaded drainage from exiting the property. g. Flood hazard areas. The following standards shall apply to special flood hazard areas as defined in Section 26.68.040 of the Municipal Code. Staff Finding: The subject lands are not within the flood hazard area. h. The design and location of any proposed structure, building envelope, road, driveway, trail, or other similar development is compatible with significant natural or scenic features of the site. Staff Finding: The proposed development is preserving a substantial portion of the natural and scenic features ofthe site. i. Variations of design standards. Variations from the provisions ofthis section, "Design Standards," may be granted by special review as provided for in Chapter 26.64. Staff Finding: The applicant is not seeking any variations form the Subdivision standards. 5. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.48, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.100, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: As a new subdivision that would be comprised of new dwelling units, the applicant is seeking GMQS exemptions pursuant to the referenced section. No replacement dwelling units are proposed. 6. School land dedication standards. Staff Finding: This is not an appropriate location for land dedication. Upon application for development each Lot owner shall be responsible for the payment of the School Land Dedication Fee (payment-in- lieu). This fee shall be based upon the fair market value of the respective Lot at the time of development, the land dedication standards applicable for the proposed development, and the calculation formula as specified in the code. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the lot owner. STAFF COMMENTS: Barbee Rezoning Section 26.92.020, Standards Applicable to Rezoning In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: Staff Comments 11 The development proposed is proceeding through a Planned Unit Development review to ensure consistency with all applicable City requirements. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: The rezoning allows for increased density for projects representing 70% affordable housing. This incentive zone is consistent with the AACP and the development being proposed is in substantial compliance with this community document. Please refer to the AACP compliance criteria of PUD more fully responded to on pages 1 and 2 of this section. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The rezoning, as well as the level and type of development being proposed is consistent with and appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood. D. The effect ofthe proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The rezoning and the level of development being proposed does not represent an adverse effect on road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The rezoning and the level of development being considered is within the communit>fs infrastructure capabilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: The rezoning will not have significant adverse impacts upon the natural environment. In fact, a large portion of the properly is being preserved against development to the benefit of the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: A mix of free-market and affordable housing is appropriate for this neighborhood and the level of density being proposed is appropriate for the edge of the City's urbanized area. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment allows for development of the parcel with 70% of the units being deed restricted to affordable housing and a substantial portion of the property being zoned conservation. The removal of the Lodge (L) overlay on Lot #1 is appropriate given the purely residential use on either side of the lot. Staff Comments 12 I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest. and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed rezoning is not in conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the intent of the municipal code. STAFF COMMENTS: VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS In order to preserve the land use approvals which may be obtained as a result of the City council's approval of this application, the applicant must request approval of Vested property Rights per Section 26.52.080 of the Land Use Regulations. There are no review criteria that must be met in considering the vesting request. . Staff Finding: Staff is recommending the City Council approve the requested Vested Rights for this project. STAFF COMMENTS: PARK FEE WAIVER REQUEST The applicant proposes to meet the park development impact fee requirements of Section 26.44.030 of the Land use code by way of a conveyance of the conservation parcel to the City of Aspen for open space purposes. Such conveyances are permitted pursuant to Section 26.44.080, subject to city council's approval. This proposal is addressed in the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Staff Finding: Staff is recommending the City Council approve the requested Park Fee Waiver request for this project. STAFF COMMENTS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING (AND METHOD OF PROVIDING THE HOUSING) The exemption by City Council may only be granted subsequent to review and consideration by the GMC. There are, however, no specific review standards for this review other than the more general criteria listed below. To the extent possible, staff has incorporated general observations of the project in relation to the Community Plan and the Interim Housing Guidelines under the criteria of the PUD and Subdivision reviews located elsewhere in this Exhibit A. Approval of the method by which the applicant proposes to provide affordable housing shall be at the option of the City Council, upon the recommendation of the Growth Management Commission. In evaluating the Staff Comments 13 applicant's proposal, the advice of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be sought in considering thefollowing factors: 1. Whether the city has an adopted plan to develop a#ordable housing with monies received from payment of affordable housing dedication fees. 2. W-hether the city has an adopted plan identifying the applicant's site as being appropriate for affordable housing. Staff Finding: The City, through the Housing Authority, has developed an affordable housing plan for both public and private monies. The site is not identified in the Community Plan as a potential affordable housing site. The Plan, however, only identified individual parcels and did not provide direction in evaluating all sites in general. However, the City and County Planning Commissions have adopted Resolution No. 98-11, "The Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan" as an update of the Housing Element of the 1993 AACP. Based on it's location. size. and proximity to general services, staff believes this site is an appropriate site for affordable housing. Staff believes the Interim Housing Guidelines further this opinion. 3. Whether the applicant's site is well suited for the development of affordable housing, taking into account the availability of services, proximity to employment opportunities and whether the site is affected by environmental constraints to development or historic preservation concerns. Staff Finding: The site is an excellent site for affordable housing. Its proximity to physical and social infrastructure, transit. employment and recreation opportunities, and location within an established neighborhood make this a well-suited, appropriate site. Furthermore, the preservation of the majority of the property as a conservation easement protecting Shadow Mountain furthers many community goals, not only those related to affordable housing. 4. Whether the method proposed will result in employee housing being produced prior to or at the same time the impacts of the development will be experienced by the community. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision Improvement Agreement prohibits the conveyance of the Free- Market lots until such time as the Category units are built and occupied and the RO Lots have been conveyed. 5. Whether the development itself requires the provision of affordable housing on-site to meet its service needs. Staff Comments 14 Staff Finding: This development is proposed within the 70/30 incentive zone district AH1/PUD. The community must rely on the private sector to aid in the development of affordable housing if the community's AH goals are to be accomplished. This is a recognized incentive zone to encourage the private sector's involvement in the provision of affordable housing. In fact, the "Purpose" of the zone district is explained in the Land Use Code as: "to provide for the use of land for the production of Category 1, 2, 3, and 4 affordable housing and resident occupied lots and units. The zone district also permits a limited component offree market lots/units to o#-set the cost of developing affordable housing. It is contemplated that land may also be subdivided in connection with a development plan." The applicant is proposing the category units as Category 4. One condition of approval would allow the Housing Authority to "buy down" these category units to a lower category prior to their conveyance to qualified residents. The number of employees living in the development will far out-number employees generated by the use, and the development will certainly have a more positive impact on the social health of the community than will discouraging local working people from becoming vested members o f Aspen. As an additional benefit, the Free Market lots have been proposed with FAR caps limiting their size to a relatively modest 4,500 square feet. While these will be large homes, they pale in comparison to the excessively large homes that are believed to generate substantial numbers of employees. Staff Comments 15 Ek x61+ A VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants September 16, 1999 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Julie Ann Woods Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Co 81611 Re: Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD Plat Recordation Dear Chris: The Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD was approved by the City Council on April 12, 1999. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999, annexation of the property must be completed within 180 days of final subdivision/PUD approval (i.e., October 9, 1999). The annexation of the property was also approved by the Council at first reading on April 12 (Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1999). Second reading of the ordi- nance is presently scheduled for September 27. Assuming that the Council approves the ordinance at that time, the deadline for annexation will have been met. Ordinance No. 11 also requires that the project's final subdivision plat and PUD development plan be recorded within 180 days of Council's April 12 approval. The project's subdivision/PUD agreement and conservation easement must be recorded concurrently with the final plat. As we discussed, the Barbee family is presently negotiating the sale of two of the free market lots and the project's affordable housing component to a developer who would construct both the free market and affordable housing units. While the family is close to finalizing the sales contract, it may not be possibie to complete the process prior to October 9, the deadline for recordation of the final plat and related docu- ments. As the family would prefer to complete the sales contract prior to recor- dation, we respectfully request a 45 day extension of the 180 day deadline. The requested extension may be approved by the City Council pursuant to Section 26.480.070.E. of the Land Use Code upon a showing of good cause. The Barbee family members are not developers, hence the need to sell portions of the property to an appropriate entity. The family has diligently pursued such a sale since the receipt of their final approvals and is presently involved in contractual negotiations with two prospective buyers. Given these circumstances, we believe an extension of the recordation deadline is appropriate. 230 East Hopkins Ave. Â· Aspen, Colorado 81611 Â· 970/925-6958 Â· Fax 970/920-9310 1 Ms. Julie Ann Woods September 16, 1999 Page 2 I would appreciate it if you would schedule this matter for consideration by the City Council at their September 27 meeting. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, VA~I ASSOCIATES, LLC - punny;*ln, AICP CC: Hallie Rugheimer Arthur C. Daly, Esq. c:\bus\city.ltr\ltr34097.cb 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director 02It)- i i '' FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner*,6/ RE: Barbee Family Extension of Recordation for Final PUD/Subdivision Development Plan and Improvement Agreement, Resolution No. 110, Series of 1999 DATE: November 22, 1999 SUMMARY: The Barbee family was granted PUD/Subdivision approval by City Council Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999. This Ordinance required the applicant to file a final PUD/subdivision development plan and improvement agreement within 180 days of the approval granted April 12,1999; therefore, the recordation deadline was October 9,1999. On September 27, 1999, City Council approved a 45 day recordation deadline extension to November 24,1999 by approving Resolution No. 89, Series of 1999. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.070.E., the City Council may extend or waive the recordation deadline for a showing of good cause. The Barbee family is presently completing the sale of two of the free market lots and the project's affordable housing component to a developer who would construct both the free market and affordable housing units, and in the process of meeting the conditions of approval required by Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1999. Staff is also working with the Barbee representatives on modifications to the Subdivision Improvement Agreement to address trail related issues. Therefore, the family requests an additional 60 day recordation deadline extension to January 23,2000. Staff finds that the request to complete the sales contract and fulfill the conditions of approval prior to the recordation of the final development plan and improvement agreement is good cause for extending the recordation an additional 60 days beyond the November 24,1999, deadline. Staff recommends City Council approve Resolution No. 110, Series of 1999, extending the deadline for filing the Final Plat and PUD to January 23,2000. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. 110, Series of 2000, extending the filing deadline for the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD Final Plat to January 23,2000." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: C:\HOME\ACTIVE CASES\PLAT EXTENSION - BARBEE\MEMOEXT OF PLAT REC BARBEE FAMILY2.DOC RECEIVED PUBLIC NOTICE MAR 3 0 1999 RE: BARBEE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, FINAL PLANNED UNIT AortiN i M , KIN DEVELOPMENT, SUBDIVISION, REZONING, AND SPECIAL REVIE-W'11 MuTV or\/Fa (15)4'r-k!- NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, April 12. 1999 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council. Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena, Aspen. Colorado to consider an application submitted by Mary Barbee, John Barbee, and Hallie Rugheimer, 1400 Story Mill Road. Bozeman. Montana 59715, requesting approval for a final Planned Unit Development. subdivision and rezoning to the Affordable Housing Zone District (AH-1). The property is located at 601 South Garmisch Street, and is described as a 17.67 acre tract o f land being a part of Lot 1, NE1/4, NE1/4, Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M. For further information, contact Julie Ann Woods at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO, (970) 920-5100, juliew@ci.aspen.co.us. s/John Bennett, Mayor Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on March 27, 1999. City of Aspen Account Chris Bendon, 01:46 PM 3/10/99 , Re: Barbee Subd /PUD memo X-Sender: chrisb@comdev Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:46:55 -0700 To: juliew@ci.aspen.co.us From: Chris Bendon <chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Barbee Subd /PUD memo >Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:50:14 -0700 (MST) >X-Sender: leec@comdev >To: Ross Soderstrom <ross@ci.aspen.co.us> >From: Lee Cassin <leec@ci.aspen.co.us> >Subject: Re: Barbee Subd /PUD memo >Cc: mitchh@ci.aspen.co.us, chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us >ross, >you should take out the sentence that reads, "The Environmental Health Dept. >will request verification of the proper disposal of mine tailings, if any >are present on the site." >I confirmed with Tom, because I thought we had stopped writing such comments >a long time ago. His reply: "lee, we should not require any such language >unless it is in the superfund >site. We should have dropped that language years ago. We were challenged >that we were requiring information that we could not legally ask for and >then Com Dev was turning them into conditions of approval. thanks tsd" >thanks, lee >At 05:22 PM 3/9/99 -0700, you wrote: >>Attached is the draft memo for the Barbee Subd. If you have any comments, >>pls forward them immediately, like Wed. 3/10/99 by 9:00 am. >> >>Attachment Converted: C:\HOME\ATTACH\DRCM6A99.doc >>Ross S. >> >> >> >Lee E. Cassin, Director >City of Aspen Environmental Health Department >(970)920-5075 >fax (970)920-5074 >http://www.aspen.com/airquality > Cheers, Chris Bendon Printed for Julie Ann Woods <juliew@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 r. ..:44, Fie Q-luu IX I 990 2 2Fxl~(tte, _ t,4 cpÂ©. /LA 2, (6 r - 1 -- 12*-- _ 1 SU- 4- Al,v,ek. _-*__ s,=Al _4Gh Lece*U ot ~46__~r i Obb' 8[44 blt[Â»1 --+ lot a H. aâ‚¬iD: :tÂ»-ug. -1 664- o- 61- vz. >i10 1% 4--1,%4 #Ao[64 W, R*-ire, Â· CÂ»- LUE__ akÂ»Ll 6.4 eab 640 64,Â¥ .--164&z_4. 06Â» 4 Wia Â·21 : _ 4_ C _Â»4 brkx bl- lux ACHiel-r 4 Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Jeff Woods, Parks Director FROM: Rebecca Schickling, Assistant Parks Director DATE: April 7, 1999 RE: Barbee Conservation Easement At the last Council meeting on March 22, Council requested that staff review the value of the open space parcel being donated in exchange for a waiver of park dedication fees. The estimated value of the park dedication fees for this project is approximately $36,000. The appraised value of this property, if the City were purchasing the property, is likely to be considerably higher. In 1977, the City acquired the Little Cloud Mining Claim for $95,000, the acreage of which was only 2.2 acres. The County recently acquired a conservation easement on a similar parcel of steeply sloping land as part of the Moore P.U.D. development. The County parcel, approximately 89 acres, was purchased for $400,000 and has no public access. One of the primary benefits of the Barbee parcel is the formalizing of the trail easement (no trail easement exists) and the ability to connect to the Aspen Mountain Trail. The Aspen Mountain Trail has been a high priority for a number of years and has been recognized in numerous community master plans, including the Pitkin County Trails Master Plan, the Aspen Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan and the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. Another benefit of this open space parcel, is the transitional habitat that it provides for wildlife. The area to be preserved is a combination of Gambel Oak, Aspen, and Spruce/Fir Forest. These connected transitional zones are decreasing in and near town as development pressures are extending higher on slopes. These ecotypes support a greater diversity of wildlife and the overlap of these zones are ecologically important. Staff believes that for these reasons, the City is fortunate to be able to acquire such a valuable parcel of land in exchange for a waiver of park dedication fees. The final consideration is in regards to the Conservation Easement. The City would acquire fee simple title to the property, however, a conservation easement would encumber the deed. The Aspen Valley Land Trust would be the benefactor of the conservation easement. Staff has discussed the conservation easement with the Executive Director of the Aspen Valley Land Trust, Reid Haughey, to ensure the City will have the ability to relocate a trail if necessary, on the parcel to meet the needs of the City. If Council would prefer we could re-examine the language of the conservation easement to ensure there will be no legal obstacles in the future to such a trail relocation. BARBEE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, SUBDIVISION, REZONING, AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR PARKING - PUBLIC HEARING Planned Unit Development A development application for a PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements: A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. 2. Density: A. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Furthermore, densities may be reduced if: 1. There is not sufficient water pressure and other utilities to serve the proposed development; 2. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development; 3. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of slope, ground instability, and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls and avalanche dangers; 4. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution; 5. The proposed development will have deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city; or 6. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Comments 1 B. Reduction in density for slope consideration. 1. In order to reduce wildfire, mudslide, and avalanche hazards; enhance soil stability; and guarantee adequate fire protection access, the density of a PUD shall also be reduced in areas with slopes in excess of twenty (20) percent in the following manor: a. For lands between zero (0) and twenty (20) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be that permitted in the underlying zone district. b. For lands between twenty-one (21) and thirty (30) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be reduced to fifty (50) percent of that permitted in the underlying zone district. c. For lands between thirty-one (31) and forty (40) percent slope, the density shall be reduced to twenty-five (25) percent of that allowed in the underlying zone district. d. For lands in excess of forty (40) percent slope, no density credit shall be allowed. 2. Maximum density for the entire parcel on which the development is proposed shall be calculated by each slope classification, and then by dividing the square footage necessary in the underlying zone district per dwelling unit. 3. For parcels resting in more than one (1) zone district, the density reduction calculation shall be performed separately on the lands within each zone district. 4. Density shall be further reduced as specified in Chapter 26.04, Definition of Lot Area. 3. Land Uses. The land uses permitted shall be those of the underlying zone district. Detached residential units may be authorized to be clustered in a zero lot line or row house configuration, but multi-family dwelling units shall only be allowed when permitted in the underlying zone district. 4. Dimensional Requirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; i. Internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying zone district, provided that the total area of alllots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone district. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final plat development plan. Staff Comments 2 5. Off-street parking. The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. b. The parking need of any nonresidential units. c. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. d. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. e. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the City shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change 6. Open Space. The Open Space requirement shall be that of the underlying zone district. However, a variation in minimum open space may be permitted if such variation would not be detrimental to the character of the proposed PUD, and if the proposed development shall include open space for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD through a common park or recreation area. An area may be approved as a common park or recreation area if it: a. Is to be used and is suitable for scenic, landscaping, or recreation purposes; and b. Is land which is accessible and available to all dwelling units or lots for whom the common area is intended. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas shall be deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the planned unit development (PUD), together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Any plan for open space shall also be accompanied by a legal instrument which ensures the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and communally owned facilities. 7. Landscape Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces. It shall provide an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species that are regarded as suitable for the Aspen area climate. 8. Architectural Site Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency with the proposed development, architectural character, building design, and the preservation of the visual character of the City. It is not the purpose of this review that control of architectural character be so rigidly enforced that individual initiative is stined in the design of a particular Staff Comments 3 building, or substantial additional expense is required. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, upon appropriate use of materials, and upon the principles of harmony and proportion of the buildings with each other and surrounding land uses. Building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion. 9. Lighting. All lighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. 10. Clustering. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. 11. Public facilities. The proposed development shall be designed so that adequate public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development at the time development is constructed, and that there will be no net public cost for the provision of these public facilities. Further, buildings shall not be arranged such that any structure is inaccessible to emergency vehicles. 12. Traffic and pedestrian circulation. a. Every dwelling unit, or other land use permitted in the planned unit development (PUD) shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. c. The proposed development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding collector and arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. Every residential building shall not be farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadway or drive providing access to a public street. e. All nonresidential land use within the planned unit development (PUD) shall have direct access to a collector or arterial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. f. Streets in the planned unit development (PUD) may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent city regulations and ordinances. Staff Comments 4 Subdivision A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. 2. Suitability of land for subdivision. a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography, or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. 3. Improvements. a. Required improvements. The following shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. 1. Permanent survey monuments, range points, and lot pins. 2. Paved streets, not exceeding the requirements for paving and improvements of a collector street. 3. Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. 4. Paved alleys. 5. Traffic-control signs, signals, or devices. 6. Street lights. 7. Street name signs. 8. Street trees or landscaping. 9. Water lines and fire hydrants. 10. Sanitary sewer lines. 11. Storm drainage improvements and storm sewers. 12. Bridges and culverts. 13. Electrical lines. 14. Telephone lines. Staff Comments 5 15. Natural gas lines. 16. Cable television lines. b. Approved plans. Construction shall not commence until on any of the improvements required by this Section 26.88.040(C)(3)(a) until a plan, profile, and specifications have been received and approved by the City Engineer and, when appropriate, the relevant utility company. c. Oversize Utilities. In the event oversized utilities are required as a part of the improvements, arrangements for reimbursement shall be made whereby the subdivider shall be allowed to recover the cost of the utilities that have been provided beyond the needs of the subdivision. 4. Design Standards. The following design standards shall be required for all subdivisions. a. Street and related improvements. the following standards shall apply to streets regardless of type or size, unless the street has been improved with paving, curb, gutter, and sidewalk. 1. Conform to plan for street extension. Streets shall conform to approved plans for street extensions and shall bear a logical relationship to the topography and to the location of existing or planned streets on adjacent properties. 2. Right-of-way dedication. Right-of-way shall be dedicated for the entire width for alllocal, collector, and arterial streets. 3. Right-of-way width. Streets and alley right-of-way widths, curves and grades shall meet the following standards: Street Min. Curve ROW Max % Class. Radius Width Grade Local 100 60 10 Collector 250 80 6 Arterial 625 100 5 Alley 50 20 5 4. Half-street dedications. Half-street dedications shall be prohibited unless they are for the purpose of increasing the width of an inadequate existing right-of-way. 5. Street ends at subdivision. When a street is dedicated which ends on the subdivision, the last foot of the street on the terminal end or outside perimeter of the subdivision shall be dedicated to the City of Aspen in fee simple and shall be designated by using outlot(s). The City shall use the dedicated land for public road and access purposes. 6. Cul-de-sacs. Cul-de-sacs shall not exceed four hundred (400) feet in length and shall have a turnaround diameter of one-hundred (100) feet. A cul-de-sac of less than two hundred (200) feet in length in a single- family detached residential area does not require a turnaround if the City Engineer determines a "T," "Y" or other design is adequate turnaround for the vehicles expected to use the cul-de-sac. 7. Dead-end streets. Dead-end streets, except for cul-de-sacs, shall be prohibited unless they are designed to connect with future streets on adjacent lands that have not been platted. In cases where these type Staff Comments 6 dead-end streets are allowed, a temporary turnaround of one hundred (100) feet shall be constructed. 8. Centerline offset. Streets shall have a centerline offset of at least one hundred and twenty-five (125) feet. 9. Reverse curves. Reverse curves on arterial and collector streets shall be joined by a tangent of at least one hundred (100) feet in length. 10. Changes in street grade. All changes in street grades shall be connected by vertical curves of a minimum length in feet equivalent to the following appropriate "K" value multiplied by the algebraic difference in the street grades. Street Classification: Local Collector Arterial "K" Value for: Crest vertical curve 28 16 55 Sag vertical curve 35 24 55 11. Alleys. Alleys shall be provided in subdivisions where commercial and industrial development is expected, except when other provision are made and approved for service access. 12. Intersections. Intersections shall approximate right angles and have a minimum tangent of fifty (50) feet on each leg. The subdivision design shall minimize the number of local streets that intersect arterial streets. 13. Intersection grade. Intersection grades shall not exceed four (4) percent for a minimum distance of one hundred (100) feet on each leg. Flatter grades are desirable. 14. Curb return radii. Curb return radii for local street intersections shall be fifteen (15) feet. Curb return radii and corner setbacks for all other types of intersections shall be based upon the expected types of vehicle usage, traffic volumes, and traffic patterns using accepted engineering standards. In case of streets which intersect at acute angles, appropriate increases in curb return radii shall be made for the necessary turning movements. 15. Turn by-passes and turn lanes. Right-turn by-passes or left-turn lanes shall be required at the intersection of arterial streets or the intersection of an arterial street and a collector street if traffic conditions indicate they are needed. Sufficient right-of-way shall be dedicated to accommodate such lanes when they are required. 16. Street names and numbers. When streets are in alignment with existing streets, any new street shall be named according to the street with which they correspond. Street which do not fit into an established street- naming pattern shall be named in a manner which will not duplicate or be confused with existing street names within the City or its environs. Street numbers shall be assigned by the City Building Inspector in accordance with the City numbering system. 17. Installation of curb, gutter sidewalks, or driveways. No finish paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, or driveways shall be constructed until one year after the installation of all subsurface utilities and improvements. 18. Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be eight (8) feet wide in the Commercial Core (CC), Commercial (Cl), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), and Commercial Lodge (CL) Zone Districts and five (5) feet wide in all other zone districts where sidewalks are required. Consideration shall be given to existing and proposed landscaping when establishing sidewalk locations. Staff Comments 7 19. City specifications for streets. All streets and related improvements shall be constructed in accordance with City specifications which are on ' file in the office of the City Engineer. 20. Range point monuments. Prior to paving any street, permanent range point monuments meeting the standards of Section 26.88.040(C)(4)(d) shall be installed to approximately finish grade. Permanent range point boxes shall be installed during or a soon as practicable after paving. 21. Street name signs. Street name signs shall conform to the type currently in use by the City. 22. Traffic Control signs. Any required traffic-control signs, signals, or devices shall conform to the "Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices." 23. Street lights. Street lights shall be placed at a maximum spacing of three hundred (300) feet. Ornamental street light are desirable. 24. Street tree. One street tree of three-inch caliper for deciduous trees measured at the top of the ball or root system, or a minimum of six-foot height for conifers, shall be provided in a subdivision in residential zone districts for each lot of seventy (70) foot frontage or less, and at least two (2) such trees shall be provided for every lot in excess of seventy (70) feet frontage. Corner lots shall require at least one tree for each street. Trees shall be placed so as not to block sight distances at driveways or corners. The City Parks and Recreation Department shall furnish a list of acceptable trees. Trees, foliage, and landscaping shall be provided in subdivisions in all other zone districts in the City in accordance with the adopted street landscaping plan. b. Easements. 1. Utility easements. Utility easements often ten (10) feet in width on each side of all rear lot lines and five (5) feet in width on each side of lot lines shall be provided where necessary. Where the rear or side lot lines abut property outside of the subdivision on which there are no rear or side lot line easements at least five (5) feet in width, the easements on the rear and side lot lines in the subdivision shall be between twenty (20) feet and ten (10) feet in width, respectively. 2. "T" intersections and cul-de-sacs. Easements twenty (20) feet in width shall be provided in "T" intersections and cul-de-sacs for the continuation of utilities or drainage improvements, if necessary. 3. Potable water and sewer easements. Water and sewer easements shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet in width. 4. Planned utility or drainage system. Whenever a subdivision embraces any part of a planned utility or drainage system designated on an adopted plan, an easement shall be provided to accommodate the plan within the subdivision. 5. Irrigation ditch, channel natural creek. Where an irrigation ditch or channel, natural creek or stream traverses a subdivision, an easement sufficient for drainage and to allow for maintenance of the ditch shall be provided. Staff Comments 8 6. Fire lanes and emergency access easements. Fire lanes and emergency access easements twenty (20) feet in width shall be provided where required by the City Fire Marshal. 7. Planned street or transit alignment. Whenever a subdivision embraces any part of an existing or planned street or transit alignment designated on an adopted plan, an easement shall be provided to accommodate the plan with the subdivision. 8. Planned trail system. Whenever a subdivision embraces any part of a bikeway, bridle path, cross country ski trail or hiking trail designated on the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan Map, an easement shall be provided to accommodate the plan within the subdivision. c. Lots and blocks. d. Survey Monuments. 1. Location. The external boundaries of all subdivisions, blocks and lots shall be monumented on the ground by reasonably permanent monuments solidly embedded in the ground. These monuments shall be set not more than fourteen hundred (1400) feet apart along any straight boundary line, at all angle points, and at the beginning, end, and points of change of direction or change of radius of any curved boundaries. 2. C.R.S. 1972 38-51-101. All monuments shall be set in accordance with the provisions of C.R.S. 1973 38-51-101, as amended from time to time, unless otherwise provided for in this title. 3. Range points and boxes. Range points and boxes meeting City specifications shall be set on the centerline of the street right-of-way unless designated otherwise. c. Utilities. 1. Potable waterline and appurtenances. All potable waterlines, fire hydrants and appurtenances shall meet the City' s standards on file in the City Engineer' s office. 2. Size of waterlines. All potable water lines shall be at least eight (8) inches in size unless the length of the line is less than two hundred (200) feet. Where the potable waterline is less than two hundred (200) feet in length, its minimum size shall be six (6) inches in width. 3. Fire hydrants. Fire hydrants shall be spaced no farther apart than five hundred (500) feet in detached residential and duplex subdivisions. Fire hydrants shall be no farther apart than three hundred fifty(350) feet apart in multi-family residential, business, commercial, service, and industrial subdivisions. Staff Comments 9 4. Sanitary sewer. Sanitary sewer facilities shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. 5. Underground utilities. All utilities shall be placed underground, except transformers, switching boxes, terminal boxes, meter cabinets, pedestals, and ventilation ducts. 6. Other utilities. Other utilities not specifically mentioned shall be provided in accordance with the standards and regulations of the applicable utility department or company. 7. Utilities stubbed out. All utilities shall be stubbed out at the property lines of lots. f. Storm Drainage g. Flood hazard areas. h. The design and location of any proposed structure, building envelope, road, driveway, trail, or other similar development is compatible with significant natural or scenic features of the site. i. Variations of design standards. Variations from the provisions of this section, "Design Standards," may be granted by special review as provided for in Chapter 26.64. 5. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.48, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.100, Growth Management Quota System. 6. School land dedication standards. c. Dedication Schedule. 1. Land Dedication. School land dedications shall be assessed according to the following schedule: Unit Type Land Dedication Standard Dormitory .0000 acres (0 sq., ft.) Studio/One bedroom .0012 acres (52 sq. ft.) Two bedroom .0095 acres (416 sq. ft.) Three bedroom .0162 acres (707 sq. ft.) Four bedroom .0248 acres (1081 sq. ft.) Five bedroom .0284 acres (1236 sq. ft.) 2. Cash-in-lieu payment. An applicant may make a cash payment in-lieu of dedicating land to the City, or make a cash payment in combination with a land dedication, to comply with the standards of this section. Because the cost of subdivided land in the City of Aspen, the School District and Staff Comments 10 i Aspen have decided to require payment of a cash-in-lieu amount which is less than the full market value of the land area. The formula to determine the amount of cash-in-lieu payment for each residential dwelling unit is as follows: Market value of land x applicable land dedication standard x 0.33 = cash payment. Payment of cash-in-lieu of a land dedication shall be made to the City prior to and on a proportional basis to the issuance of any building permits for the residential dwellings. REZONING: Section 26.92.020, Standards Applicable to Rezoning In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Comments 11 H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the . surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS No development subject to special review shall be permitted unless the Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all standards set forth below. B. Off-street parking requirements. Whenever off-street parking requirements of a proposed development are subject to establishment ancFor mitigation via a payment in lieu by special review, the development application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met: 1. In all zone districts where the off-street parking requirements of a proposed development are subject to establishment and/or mitigation by special review, the applicant shall demonstrate that the parking needs of the residents, customers, guests, and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, the projected traffic generation of the project, the projected impacts onto the on-street parking of the neighborhood, its proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area, and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests, and employees. Staff Comments 12 f 1 ./ k MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission . FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Directol~~~ ~ Mitch Haas, Interim Deputy Directorll_11< V DATE: March 16,1999 RE: Barbee Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, and Special Review for Parking -- Public Hearing SUMMARY: The applicant, Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., obtained conceptual PUD approval in January of 1998 pursuant to Ordinance 44, Series of 1997. The development proposed is for 10 new Fesidential uqits falling within the 70-30 "mix" allowed in the Affordable Housing Zon, District. The site is located at the base of West Aspen or "Shadow" Mountain just south of Koch-Lumber Park (see attached Exhibit "D"). The property includes a substantial portion of Shadow Mountain which is proposed as a conservation parcel to be deeded in fee to the City of Aspen. The following chart summarizes the proposed mix of units: Lot/Unit Type Lot Size FAR Proposed 1 / Free-Market 102,000 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 2 / Free-Market 11,705 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 3 / Free-Market 11,440 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 4 / Free-Market 11,440 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 5/RO 6,318 s.Â£ 2,575 s.f. 6/RO 5,887 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 7/RO 11,736 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 8 / Category 3,017 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 9 / Category 2,259 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 10 / Category 2,211 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 11 / Category 2,255 s.f. 1,400 s.f. The Conceptual approval addressed only the PUD review criteria. This Final PUD application also includes land use requests for Subdivision, Rezoning, and Special Review for Parkind. The land use request for growth management exemptions will be considered for recommendation by the Growth Management Commission (also scheduled for March 16, at 5:30 PM as a separate public hearing) and finally decided, upon by City Council. City Council's review will consider the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Housing Authority, and the Growth Management Commission. 1 , The applicant has addressed most of the concerns raised during the conceptual review. Accommodations for architectural and landscape consistency, shared access ways, utility easements, site lighting, legal instruments for the conveyance of the conservation parcel, draft plats, engineering schematics, and a draft Subdivision Improvements Agreement have all been included in the application. The majority of staffs comments are included in Exhibit "A" of this memorandum. Major points of discussion have been summarized below. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward a recommendation of approval for this Final PUD/Subdivision and Rezoning to the City Council, with conditions, and approve the Special Review for Parking. APPLICANT: Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., all represented by Sunny Vann and Associates. LOCATION: Approximately the corner of Juan and S. Garmisch Streets. Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen, plus additional metes and bounds within City of Aspen and Pitkin County as shown on the Site Improvements Survey (see attached vicinity map, Exhibit "D"). ZONING: The portions of the subject property currently within the City of Aspen are zoned IW j 5/PUD/L and Conservation. Portions of the property in the County are zoned AFR-10 ~ and It,15/PUD. #The applicant is seeking annexation into the City for the County portion of the property and a rezoning to A+Il/PUD. This will be accomplished prior to the recordation of a final plat and SIA. LOT SIZE: 17.695 *res, or approximately 770,794 square feet. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): Most of the subject property consists of slopes of greater than 30%. Subtracting areas of slopes and the proposed access easements, the following lot areas apply for FAR and Density: FAR shall be based on 761,130 s.f. of Lot Area. Density shall be based on - 109,144 s.f. of Lot Area. These are preliminary figures to be confirmed by the City Zoning Officer during building permit review. ALLOWABLE FAR AND DENSITY (UNDER AH-1/PUD ZONING): FAR - 145,565 square feet by right, can be increased by Special Review. 2 t. Density - for single family and duplex units: 36 units (109,144 + 3,000). PROPOSED FAR AND DENSITY: JfAR = 31,325 square feet. Density - 10 new units plus one existing unit = 11 units. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family re/dence, assorted outbuildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: Same, but with ten (10) additional residences and two carport structures. The majority of the property is proposed to be deeded as a co~Â£rvation parcel. PREVIOUS ACTION: The Commission considered and recommended approval ofthe conceptual PUD with the conditions incorporated into Ordinance 44, Series of 1997, included in the application packet. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the application at a hearing and recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial to City Council. Special Review. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application at a hearing. The Growth Management Commission will formulate a recommendation on the requested exemptions during a separate public hearing. BACKGROUND: The property is currently in two jurisdictions. The applicant has requested annexation into the City and this action will take place concurrent with or after final land use approval from City Council. The actions taken by the Commission are subject to annexation of the property and become void if the land is not annexed into the City. STAFF COMMENTS: The City Planning Department is concerned about community character, sense of place, and sense of pride residents have in the City, and the ways in which development affects these perceptions through visual appearance. The following concerns remain as issues to be resolved on this project. Shared Access Ways: The Planning and Zoning Commission raised a concern about the multiple curb cuts on Garmisch Street and the affect of garage doors on the facades of 3 both the free-market homes and on the RO homes. The applicant has responded by providing a shared access drive between Lots 3 and 4. Staff believes that this is a step in the right direction, but we recommend that the shared driveway access easement be placed between Lots,2 and 3, and that Lot 4 be accessed through the shared driveway (Lot 12), behind the carport structure. Staff believes that this will have the effect of minimizing the extent of garages on the front facades. As the RO units come in for building permit, staff will evaluate each design for compliance with the Residential Design Standards, including how the garages are handled. Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk: During the conceptual review, planning staff expressed a desire for the edge of this project to be designed in a less urban manner. The Commission agreed and the applicant was required to investigate the design of the curb, gutter, and sidewalk with representatives of the Streets, Parks, Engineering, and Planning Departments. The applicant did discuss this treatment with Engineering and Streets, who requested a more urban approach to the curb, gutter and sidewalk design. 074 shM A -b The City Planning Department prefers this standard be met with a less urbarÂ¥~eatment UD and suggests the CommissiQn and Council consider requiring adrainage swale in the A.V- 609 median, planted with tall natiVe g*~es and street trees,~yllhli-detached sidewalk. This type of treatment is more appropriate forÂ®~ transitional edge of the city and will lessen Â») the visual contrast prescribed by the subdi~ip.eICi~ndards. Planning staffbelieves this R ~Â«tj type of treatment is more visually appropriate, canltcom*ish the same purposes as a 044*4 more urban treatment, and elevatestiimmunity character, senge ofiplace, and 3 W1. 2 1 -tk neighborhood pride in this areE The applicant will be required to elier intoan 4/ 60 Â«6/ tk agreement for future improvements. J 444 Preservation of Existing Large Shed located nearest to Dean Street: During the conceptual review, staff urged the developer to find a mechanism to preserve some / r aspect of the large existing shed on the property. It is important to point out that this -244.-7,- shed is not protected by the City's Historic Preservation regulations and the developer Â«5 is under no obligation to preserve the structure. However, regardless of the shed's technical value as a historic structure, the City Planning Department believes these old sheds are important reminders of the City's history - as a type of visual reference to the Aspen society and culture as it has changed through time. Sl#f still believes this structure, or some part thereof, could and should be incorporated ' ..1,1 - 44,Â» ..4. into the development plans, such as the stree-side view of the carport structure. The structure could also be preserved on one of the proposed lots, or moved to aAother location in town and re-used. The structure is located approximately where the proposed shared driveway between Lots 3 and 4 is located. yariances: First, the applicant is requesting approval of smaller lots and zero lot line setbacks to allow for the creation of duplexes on individual lots, rather than with shared ownership. This also saves the applicant from having to amend the plat in the future to 4 condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. The second variation is for the front yard setback of Lot #1. The R-15 zoning requires ,this distance be 25 feet. However, the existing house is much closer to the street and the back of the proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the , R- 15 zoning is the most appropriate for the location of the property; 2) the 10 foot, setback will be consistent with the remainder of the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and, 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steelarea of the lot from development - a preferred development approach. Summary: With the exception of the issues addressed above, the applicant has accommodated the concerns expressed by the Planning staff and the Commission in this application. The application is complete and includes all additional information requested during the initial review including suggestion made by staff and the Commission. The conceptual review approval included a request for an application for 8040 , Greenline Review if the completed survey information determined that the proposed development was in the overlay area. After reviewing the completed survey, na, proposed development is in the 8040 jurisdiction and therefore, no review is required. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." A vicinity map has been included as Exhibit "D." RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council for this development application, with the following conditions: 1. The Land Use action is subject to annexation ofthe property into the City of Aspen. Failure to complete annexation within 180 days of this approval shall render this land use action void, unless the timeframe is extended by City Council. 2. Following annexation, but within 180 days after final land use approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant shall record a Final PUD/Subdivision development'plan. This plan shall include all necessary plat requirements of the City Engineer including site plans, grading plans, utility plans, any physical improvements required to mitigate for additional air quality impacts as determined by the City Environmental Health Department, all utility easements, architectural plans and elevations, and a landscape plan. 3. Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building Permit, the applicant shall record a PUD/Subdivision Improvements Agreement binding the property, 5 the Barbee Subdivision, to this development approval. The Agreement shall describe all subdivision and PUD improvements, requirements, and restrictions, and maintenance, and shall provide financial assurance to the City for said improvements and the success of the site landscaping for a period of two (2) years after installation. The agreement shall be reviewed concurrently with the final plat and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation. 4. That the following description of each Lot's development provisions be included in the final Ordinance: Requirements Common to Entire Development Lot Dimensions: As represented on Final Plat. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 Feet Maximum height (including viewplanes): 25 Feet Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the setbacks. Minimum percent open space: No requirement (building envelopes). Lot 1 (existing Free-Market) Zone District: R-15/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North and East sides 10 feet each. Lot 2 (Free-Market) Zone District: AHI/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 60 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 3 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 4 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. 6 Lot 5 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot 6 (resident occupied) Zone District: AHI/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 7 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning Maximum Gross Floor Area: 'Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot 8 (category unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 35 feet from southern-most lot line. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 9 feet. Lot 9 (category unit) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 27 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 7 feet; 0 feet. Lot 10 (category unit) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 14 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 7 feet. Lot 11 (category unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. 7 Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 6 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 14 feet; west 0 feet. Lot 12 (shared access parcel) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowed Uses: 10 carport parking spaces, trash, snow storage, uses accessory to use of residential lots. Residential use shall require a substantial PUD amendment. Allowable Floor Area: 10 covered carports in two structures as represented on final plat. Setbacks: As represented on final plat. Trash access area: Minimum 10 feet wide, unobstructed. Conservation Parcel Zone District: Conservation Allowed Development and Uses: Uses allowed in the Conservation Zone District and allowed pursuant to the Deed of Conservation Easement, as amended. Uses and development necessary for community health and safety reasons may occur on this parcel. 5. The City shall adEEpt title to the "conservation parcel" only after the City Attorney has reviewed all aspects ofthe Bargain Sale Deed, the Deed of Conservation Easement, and is satisfied that no inordinate liability issues exist with respect to prior mining activities on the parcel. To satisfy this concern, the City may require areas of mining activity to be mitigated,0 or otherwise properly treated, or a legal instrument indemnifying the City prior to conveyance. The title shall be clear that a trail easement will be conveyed and allowed in this Conservation Area. 6. Replacement after demolition of the existing single-family residence on Lot# 1 shall requirea GMQS Exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.050, as amended. 7. The Home Owners' Association, or similar entity responsible for Lot #12, the common access way, shall install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at such time determined necessary for public safety by the City Engineer. 2. 9 3 8. Access to Lots 4 and 4 shall be via the shared access easement as described on the final plat. 4Â°â‚¬4- jo Lt-9 The City Engineer shall issue only one curb cut permit between these two Lots. -i-A 9. All Lots are subject to the City's Residential Design Standards, as amended. Lots 1-4 shall 44-3. be included in the Architectural Guidelines, as proposed in Exhibit C of the draft SIA. Lot # 1 - 4496 f; shall be subject to the provisions of the Landscape Guidelines, as proposed in Exhibit B of r 10+--9 the draft SIA upon redevelopment of the Lot. All other aspects of the Residential Design Standard, as amended, applicable to all Lots ofthis Subdivision may be appealed to the 14>4 Design Review Appeal Committee pursuant to section 26.58, as amended. If an appeal is 22 sought, the Architectural Guidelines applicable to this Subdivision and the proposed development's conformance to said guidelines shall be considered. 10. For purposes of calculating the fee-in-lieu of school land dedication, the building permit application for each lot shall include an appraisal ofthe lot's fair market value. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third 8 party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the lot owner. 11. Prior to issuance ofa Building Permit for an individual lot, the School Land Dedication Fei shall be paid in full pursuant to the following-calculation-formula< ,Â»*44 A , Â«L S (Fair Market Value persquarET66[-bt the Lot) x (.33) x (applicable dedication-standard forimit) *-C 17 -16 The_applicable dedication_standard varies-depending upon unit size pursuant to Section , 6 26.88.040, as.amended. 12. Prior to recordation of the final plat, an air quality mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Department for approval. Physical improvements to the site required for mitigationshall be delineated on the final plat. 13. A Building Permit application for any and alllots shall include a fugitive dust mitigation plan for review and approval by the City Environmental Health Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for each and every lot, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the Environmental Health Department for any fireplaces or wood burning devices. ~ CoAstruction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 10 p.14. Exceeding the City Noise Ordinance may result in a stop work order. 0Â° 2 - -- 16. The ai*ficant shall provide a street lig101ear thetehibular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. All exterior lighting, including street lights, shall be downcast, sharp cut-off, and not used to accentual landscape or architectural features of the development. No exterior up-lighting is permitted. No exterior floodlights are permitted. 17. The Community Development Dept. shall assign street addresses as follows: Lots 2-4 shall receive numbers with a Garmisch Street address. Lots 5-11 shall receive numbers with a Dean Street address. 18. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately Lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the Garmisch Street side of the carport structure. If preserved for storage use, its FAR shall be exempt. 19. The applicaut shall redesign-The edge of they.--Girinisch Street R:O.W to provijh. drainage_~ sw*~<With qative gr*es and a pedestriap/bath cons~ructed with crusher filpes over a~ cgmpacted ~ad base material. pe jpign presenteÂ¢ in the final apHlicatidn may be Wonstructed 4ly'#the City Engineer determines thekedeâ‚¬~n un-wotkabi~e. 20. Six (6) street trees shall be provided along the Garmisch Street R.O.W or Midland Trail in rÂ·yÂ» -A locations approved by the City Forester considering the storage of plowed snow. These trees Ji. C.+r-~04 shall be three-inches or greater in caliper i f deciduous or atkast six feet in height if coniferous. 21. Prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension and a collection system agreement from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. For the duplex units, a shared service agreement may be required. There exists a possibility that gravity service from Lots 5-7 will require a pump system; if so, its design must be approved by ACSD and the City Engineer. 0,7+Q 9 22. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for any Lot, adequate silt fencing shall be erected to ensure that no sediment-loaded drainage will be leaving the property during construction. This fencing shall remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the respective Lot. 23. Prior to applying for a Building Permit for any Lot, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula, This agreement can be recorded with the plat and SIA documents. 24. Building Permit applications for any and alllots shall include payment of a $50.00 poe*rfJ/A L'*- â€¢ in lieu of digital submission requirements. 25. Any work within public rights-of-way shall gain approval from the appropriate City -4,6.4- Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 26. The applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 27. That the plat be modified to included a shared access/driveway easement between Lots 2 and 3; and a shared access easement to serve Lot 4 via the common driveway serving the remaining lots, and entering Lot 4 behind the carports. 28. That the City Council determine the final "mix" of categories to be assigned to Lots 8,9,10, andll. 29. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. 30. That the language of these conditions as finally approved by the approporiate authority be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit set of plans and all other sets made for the purpose of construction. 31. That the applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of all P&Z, GMC, and City Council resolutions and ordinances applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter as part of the building permit application indicating that conditions of approval are known and understood. 31. f 0-41 f c A- fl-JI-2,-k c-j" 4,Â£--c johe-,lj 0- ~Â·,v-u,,4,~â€ž-~L.4 0-00~'0~'~ RECOMMENDED MOTION: O 0~.4.-- 'VbL "I move to approve the Special Review for Parking for the Barbee Affordable housing - 1 development and recommend City Council approve the Barbee Final PUD/Subdivision 4-C) A-44 and Rezoning, with the conditions outlined in the Staff memo dated March 16,1999." Ao,0.2 Flay,-4 1-174 ATTACHMENTS: P-D=04 Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments rk' A- 72-0 Exhibit B -- Comments from Referral Agencies 'Â« Exhibit C -- Application Exhibit D -- Vicinity Map / 3,3-4-8: r,r C>eue.A (04 U 10 Â¥ l EXHIBIT ~ Staff Comments: Barbee Planned Unit Development A development t#Elicationfor a PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements: A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community I A Plan. Staff Finding: Community Vision: The proposed development increases resident housing opportunities, encourages a balanced permanent community, may provide residents with a transportation alternative if they choose to walk to town, work, etc., and is a relatively sustainable development pattern. Community Vitality: The proposed development is 70% affordable, addressing the community' s desire to provide affordable housing opportunities within a reasonable walking distance to employment and recreation resources. The proposed development is an in-fill site within, or approximately within, the original townsite. Increased residential density, especially for local working residents, within the functional town promotes a sense of community that cannot be achieved by placing that critical mass in a remote location, regardless of where the metro area or extended metro boundaries exist. Open Space and Environment: Providing housing opportunities within walking distance to employment, entertainment, recreation, and other residences reduces the need to use a vehicle for every trip. Also, compact development within the townsite reduces the need to extend services and develop land on the outskirts of town, and preserves those natural open space areas for their wildlife and aesthetic functions. The proposal is preserving areas that are clearly not appropriate for development. The proposal also preserves the bench area above the proposed RO lots, just above the Little Cloud Subdivision. It is important to underscore this preservation because this area could be expensive "view lots" with dramatic affects upon the visual openness of the mountain. Staff believes this approach to development is the most desired for this parcel and is appreciative of the site planning and preservation. 1993 AACP: This project addresses elements of the existing AACP. Specifically, it 'creates a housing environment dispersed, appropriately scaled, and affordable.' And, it 'preserves and enhances the natural beauty Of the area.' 1999 AACP: This document has not been adopted. However, the draft document provides substantial support for affordable housing to be located in town where it protects Staff Comments 1 surrounding open spaces outside of town and where the residents can become integral members of the social fabric. The plan also supports the preservation of natural open space areas such as the proposed conservation parcel for Shadow Mountain. Interim Housing Guidelines: The development proposed is consistent with the Interim (Citizen) Housing Guidelines adopted by the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions. The development is within the Metro Area, is within walking distance of the community core, preserves a significant amount of natural lands, represents quality design visually appropriate for the neighborhood, integrates different social levels within one project, is an optimum development level for this site, and does not promote urban sprawl. In addition, this project is proposed with no public subsidy and is not expected to have a significant negative fiscal impact upon the City or its taxpayers. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: Surrounding development to the northeast consists of multi-family housing, a park, older lodge conversions, and future potential mini-base development for Lift 1 or 'Town Lift.' There is virtually no development, or potential for development, to the Southeast of the site which is compatible with the open space easement proposed. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The surrounding area's development or redevelopment potential will not be affected by this development. Redevelopment of the largely vacant areas to the east have sufficient access from surrounding streets and a platted alleyway. D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to whic4 GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. Staff Finding: Although exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures, the application must receive development allotments for 10 residential units.â€¢The Growth Management Commission will consider this case and make a recommendation to City Council. The GMC public hearing is also scheduled for March 16, 1999, at 5:30 PM. 2. Density: A. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Furthermore, densities may be reduced if: 1. There is not sufficient water pressure and other utilities to serve the proposed development; 2. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development; 3. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of slope, ground instability, and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls and avalanche dangers; 4. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution; Staff Comments 2 5. The proposed development will have deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city; or 6. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features ofthe site. Staff Finding: - The density proposed on this site is far below that allowed by the gross lot size. There are sufficient utilities and services to accommodate this development. The access to the RO and Category lots has been designed in cooperation with the Fire Marshall and is adequate for fire protection service. The portion o f the property where development is proposed is suitable for development. The applicant has not provided an Air Quality Mitigation Plan in the final application. The Environmental Health Department has suggested several recommendations, and the applicant is reviewing final details of the recommended mitigation measures. The location of the proposed development does not appear to be in conflict with the natural terrain and features of the site. B. Reduction in density for slope consideration. 1. In order to reduce wildfire, mudslide, and avalanche hazards; enhance soil stability; and guarantee adequate fire protection access, the density of a PUD shall also be reduced in areas with slopes in excess oftwenty (20) percent in the following manor: a. For lands between zero (0) and twenty (20) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be that permitted in the underlying zone district. b. For lands between twenty-one (21) and thirty (30) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be reduced to fifty (50) percent of that permitted in the underlying zone district. c. For lands between thirty-one (31) and forty (40) percent slope, the density shall be reduced to twenty-five (25) percent of that allowed in the underlying zone district. d. For lands in excess of forty (40) percent slope, no density credit shall be allowed. 2. Maximum density for the entire parcel on which the development is proposed shall be calculated by each slope classification, and then by dividing the square footage necessary in the underlying zone district per dwelling unit. 3. For parcels resting in more than one (1) zone district, the density reduction calculation shall be performed separately on the lands within each zone district. 4. Density shall be further reduced as specified in Chapter 26.04, Definition of Lot Area. Staff Finding: The application specifies the percentages of the property falling within the described slope classifications. A substantial portion of the property is steep and does not contribute to development potential. As a general guideline, the flat portion of the , property is the only portion which has development potential both in physical location, and zoning (density and floor area). However, even considering the steep topography, the site has far more development potential than is being proposed. In this case, the community gains the assurance of an appropriate level of development notwithstanding the high level of potential development. 3. Land Uses. The land uses permitted shall be those of the underlying zone district. Detached residential units may be authorized to be clustered in a, . zero lot line or row house configuration, but multi-family dwelling units shall only be allowed when permitted in the underlying zone district. Staff Comments 3 Staff Finding: The application includes a request to rezone the property to AH1/PUD. The present zoning, both City and County, allows for residential development in varying densities. The applicant is proposing the duplexes in a clustered, zero lot line configuration. 4. Dimensional Requirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; i. Internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying zone district, provided that the total area of alllots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone district. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final plat development plan. Staff Finding: This PUD will establish the dimensional requirements for Lots 1-12. Two variations to the underlying zone district are proposed. The first is to the minimum lot size for Lots 9* p 10, and 11. The minimum lot size for a fathering parcel this large is 3,000 s.f.'The minimum lot area per unit in a duplex configuration, however, is 1,500 s.f. This essentially allows for a duplex on a 3,000 s.f. lot but does not allow for the duplexes to sit on their own fee simple property. Upon completion, the developer usually condominiumizes the shared property to separate ownership to allow each unit to sit on its own land as a limited common element. : The smaller lot and a zero lot line setback allows for the creation of duplexes on , individual lots rather than with shared ownership. This also saves the applicant from having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. The second variation is for the *ont yard setback of Lot # 1. The R-15 zoning requires v this distance be 25 feet. However, the existing house is much closer to the street and the back of the proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the R-15 zoning is the most appropriate for the location of the property; 2) the 10 foot setback will be consistent with the remainder of the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and, 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steep area of the lot from development - a preferred development approach. Staff Comments 4 Staff supports the proposed dimensional requirements as outlined in the main body of this memorandum. 5. Off-street parking: The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. b. The parking need of any nonresidential units. c. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. d. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. e. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the City shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change Staff Finding: The proposed underlying zone district(AH1), mandates that parking requirements be established through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposal includes at least 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit, which is the minimum for development city-wide. The RO and Free Market lots shall provide two spaces pursuant to the City's parking standards at the time of actual development. The Category units are provided with two spaces per unit with an additional two spaces for guests. The Special Review standards are provided later in this section. Staff is recommending Special ,Review approval for the parking propoial. 6. Open Space. The 6pen Space requirement shall be that of the underlyilig-folie district. However, a variation in minimum open space may be permitted if such variation would not be detrimental to the character of the proposed PUD, and if the proposed development shall include open space for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD through a common park or recreation area. An area may be approved as a common park or recreation area if it: a. Is to be used and is suitable for scenic, landscaping, or recreation purposes; and b. Is land which is accessible and available to all dwelling units or lots for whom the common area is intended. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas shall be deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the planned unit development (PUD), together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Any plan for open space shall also be accompanied by a legal instrument which ensures the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and communally owned facilities. Staff Finding: The Conservation parcel will be deeded to the City with the surface easement granted to A the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The legal instruments to protecting the area have been provided to and reviewed by the Parks Department who intends to maintain a trail easement. No common area for recreation is required and none is proposed. Thus, no legal apparatus for its maintenance has been provided. The maintenance, repair, and Staff Comments 5 snowplowing of Lot #17~282Â§.s *parcel) has been defined in the proposed SIA. The responsibility ofthis wiT} lid with a co-ndomihium association, including Lots 5-12. 7. Landscape Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces. It shall provide an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species that are regarded as suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding: The Final DeveloFEBnt Plan includes a Landscape Plan for the Category parcels and the access parcel. This plan provides a reasonable amount and variety of plantings appropriate for the neighborhood and the climate. ,Landscape guidelines for the remaining parcels have been supplied to ensure some consistency between parcels without significantly restricting personal choice. These guidelines are appropriate and adequately address the concerns about visual consistency between parcels. *Adequate areas fof~51 storage have been delineated. The access drive has been slightly 0 shortened and the snow storage is not expected to encroach on the Midland Trail - a concern raised during conceptual review. 8. Architectural Site Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final * development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency with the proposed development, architectural character, building design, and the preservation of the visual character of the City. It is not the purpose of this review that control of architectural character be so rigidly enforced that individual initiative is stified in the design of a particular building, or substantial additional expense is required. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, upon appropriate use of materials, and upon the principles of harmony and proportion of the buildings with each other and surrounding land uses. Building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion. Staff Finding: Building envelopes have been placed appropriately considering the natural terrain and surrounding land uses. Architectural plans and elevations for the Category units have been included in this application. The proportions, massing, and materials are appropriate. During the conceptual review, staff expressed a desire that the free-market and RO buildings be of similar architectural character to the Category structures because of their proximity. This was not an attempt to control style but rather to minimize contrast. The applicant has proposed architectural guidelines to ensure some compatibility with the Category units without being so strict as to limit creativity and personal expression. These are well prepared and more sensitive about materials, colors, and style than the City's more objective standards. The lots not proposed for current construction are, subject to the City's Residential Design Standards. Staff recommends that in the case of Staff Comments 6 an appeal of the standards, that these architectural guidelines for the PUD should also be considered. During the conceptual review, members of the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed a desire for combined vehicular entrances to reduce the street presence of driveways and garage doors. Suggestion for combining lot access way were discussed and the applicant agreed to study those possibilities. The applicant has proposed tombining driveways bet*een Lots 3 and 4. Staff is recommending that the shared driveway access easement be placed between Lots 2 and 3, and that Lot 4 use the common driveway with access behind the carports. 9. Lighting. All lighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Staff Finding: Lighting shall be downcast. No lighting of landscape elements or architectural features should be allowed. This will be included as a recommended condition in the final Ordinance. 10. Clustering. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. Staff Finding: The development has been clustered. The entire site is 17 acres with approximately 13.6 acres set aside for conservation. This leaves less than 4 acres available for development, which is less than 24% of the sife. Therefore, all development would be clustered onto less than one quarter (1/4) of the entire property. 11. Public facilities. The proposed development shall be designed so that adequate public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development at the time development is constructed, and that there will be no net public cost for the provision of these public facilities. Further, buildings shall not be arranged such that any structure is inaccessible to emergency vehicles. Staff Finding: The proposed access way and fire suppression has been designed to accommodate the Fire Marshall' s requirements ds explained evident in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C (in Exhibit The City Engineer has requested a ten (10) foot strip of land be dedicated to the City .R.O.w. in front of Lot #1 upon that lot's redevelopment. This area is required to â‚¬Eommodate the full requirements for the R.O.W. There exist sufficient utilities in the immediate area to accommodate this development. The applicant is obligated to provide for utility upgrades and extensions. An easement to access the existing manhole near the front steps of the existing house has been proposed on the final plat. This easement addresses the request of the ACSD. The Sanitation District will require a line extension, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes. There may exist an elevation problem for gravity lines from the RO Lots to the trunk line on S. Garmisch Street. The Staff Comments 7 applicant should consult with the ACSD to determine if a pump system or alternative fall line can be designed to accommodate sanitation service. Staff recommends this issue be finalized prior to acceptance of an application for a building permit. The Engineering and Streets Departments are asking for the development of curb and < gutter with this project. The Planning Department is-hoping thesame-eperatienal_goals Ct- for drainage, snowplowing,etcngn_be achieved with a less urban_treatmentsuchas a A drainage swale and Idetached sidewalk. Planhing staff prefers this type o f treatment based ofriG locÂ®f?nugf the- site-on-the edgeof-ffiE-City-12iKe transition from an urban to Aore tural-character. 12. Traffic and pedestrian circulation. a. Every dwelling unit, or other land use permitted in the planned unit development (PUD) shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. c. The proposed development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding collector and arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. Every residential building shall not be farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadway or drive providing access to a public street. e. All nonresidential land use within the planned unit development (PUD) shall have direct access to a collector or arterial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. f. Streets in the planned unit development (PUD) may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent city regulations and ordinances. Staff Finding: The proposed development meets these standards..Each lot created has adequate access -to public rights-of-way. The land owners sharing Lot 12 will be responsible for maintaining safe access. Staff Comments: Barbee Subdivision A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Comments 8 Staff Finding: The proposed development meets these standards. Please refer to staff' s findings for these criteria under the PUD review, pages 1 and 2 of this section. d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision is in compliance with applicable requirements ofthe land use code .considering the variation# recommended for approval and the conditions proposed by staff. 2. Suitability of land for subdivision. a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography, or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare ofthe residents in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding: ***pu -iye ~r.4..... The city staff hasreviewed this project and found that with the clustering proposal,1Ae land proposed to be developed is suitable, and the layout of the subdivision is spatially efficient. 3. Improvements. The improvements outlined in Section 26.88.040(C)(3) must be provided. Staff Finding: The City Engineer has reviewed the engineering documents provided in the application and provided referral comments. The applicant shall provide lot pins for each lot and provide range points and monuments within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. as determined necessary by the City Engineer. All street improvements and repairing shall be accomplished pursuant to the final plat documents. A new street name is not necessary as the parcels can be numbered with a Dean Street address. Traffic control signs are not expected to be necessary, however, the homeowners' association should be required to install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at any time the City Engineer feels the sign is necessary for safety reasons. The installation of six street trees are required. Tile installation ofthe appropriate site utilities and drainage has been included in the provided engineering drawings for the final plat. 4. Design Standards. The design standards of section 26.88.040(C)(4) shall be complied with. a. Streets and Related Improvements. Staff Finding: The City Engiri:PRM984uested a 10 foot wide strip of land in front of Proposed Lot #1 be' dedicated to the City right-of-way upon the redevelopment ofthat parcel. This is to correct for a deficient width of the R.O.W. and to allow for safe travel and maintenance ofthe roadway. The setback and building envelope for that parcel shall be adjusted to correspond with the new property line after the dedication. Dedication of this strip shall be noted on the final plat. The status of the northeasterly corner shall be verified on the final plat. The proposed access way meets these standards and is adequate for fire access. Final paving of the new access way and the final overlay on S. Garmisch Street shall not be completed until one year after all subsurface improvements are completed unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Staff Comments 9 Street names. The three new parcels along S. Garmisch Street shall be numbered with S. Garmisch Street addresses. The seven new parcels accessed from the new drive shall be numbered with Dean Street addresses, unless an alternative street name is proposed and accepted by City Council. The homeowners' association shall be responsible for traffic control signs if a safety issue arises in the future, as determined by the City Engineer. The City Engineer has requested the provision of two street lights along the property. This is different from the one street light requested at the access way entrance by the City Engineer during the conceptual review and as proposed by the applicant. The City Planning Department believes the one street light proposed by the applicant is sufficient for safety and meets the * standard as provided above. This opinion is based on the exact letter ofthe law, the opinion of the City Engineer during conceptual review, the relatively low traffic levels on this portion of S. Garmisch Street, and the desire to not over-urbanize the edge of town with excessive outdoor lighting. Too much lighting detracts from safety by causing glare. The proposed curb, sidewalk, and planting buffer is adequate and meets city standards. 6--0, However, tlfis type of urban treatment may contrast the less urban context of the neighborhood and the base of Shadow MountainrlliECity Planning Office prefers thE-stanÂ®rd be met with a 2%Â» less urbap treatqlent *d suggests the Cgmmission and Cquncil consider requiritg a drainage swale, prantejl with t#11 nat}ye grasses a,Ad street trees, wi~ a detaphed sidewalk.XEhis type~of treatmeJUs more apATpriate for the tÂ¢ansitional edge o~itylnd willlessen the visual ~ contrast prescribed by the subdivision(endards. Trees. One street tree per lot facing S. Garmisch Street would result in six trees. The applicant shall install six street trees along the planting buffer of the street R.O.W. or in another suitable location at the discretion ofthe City Forester. These trees shall be planted in a location where they will not be crushed with plowed snow. These trees shall be three inches or greater in caliper if deciduous, or at east six feet in height if coniferous. b. Easements. Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe a generRT'ENEZMZt foraccessanZmaintenance of utilities within the proposed access way (Lot 12) and specific easements for individual utility agencies as required for above or below ground equipment, pedestals, and service personnel within Lot 12 and within Lots 5-11, as needed. Utility easements for Lots 1-4 shall be shown and described on the final plat to the extent utilities are being currently provided. Otherwise, utility easements on Lot 1 -4 shall be provided at the time of actual development. Shared access easements shall also be placed on the plat. c. Lots and blocks. Staff Finding: The proposed Lots meet the design standards for Lots and Blocks. d. Survey Monuments. Staff Finding: The lots shall be pinned and monumented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. If required by the City Engineer, a range point shall be installed within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. and the proposed access way. Staff Comments 10 e. Utilities (Water, sewer, fire, and other). Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe plans and specifications for the provision of utilities. Approval from the respective utility provider is required for the final plat. The applicant should be aware that there may exist lack of elevation for gravity flow sanitary sewer from proposed Lots 5-7 and a pump system may be required. f. Storm Drainage. Staff Finding: The City Engineer concurs with the grading and drainage plans submitted for this review. These ; plans shall be incorporated into the final plat. The applicant shall provide drainage control for construction to limit sediment loaded drainage from exiting the property. g. Flood hazard areas. The following standards shall apply to special flood hazard areas as defined in Section 26.68.040 ofthe Municipal Code. Â·Staff Finding: ~he subject lands are not within the flood hazard area. h. The design and location of any proposed structure, building envelope, road, driveway, trail, or other similar development is compatible with significant natural or scenic features of the site. Staff Finding: The proposed development is preserving a substantial portion of the natural and scenic features of the site. i. Variations of design standards. Variations from the provisions ofthis section, "Design Standards," may be granted by special review as provided for in Chapter 26.64. Staff Finding: .9 I . The applicant 15 nof seeklng Any variations form the Subdivision standards. Staff is recommending r,rgibg the sidewalk;\curb and-gutteutandards, but feels that the signingofan improvements agreertent is k.commitment to meetifig thes'bstftndardi/' 5. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.48, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.100, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding: As a new subdivision that would be comprised of new dwelling units, the applicant is seeking GMQS exemptions pursuant to the referenced section. No replacement dwelling units are proposed. 6. School land dedication standards. Staff Finding: This is not an appropriate location for land dedication. Upon application for development each Lot owner shall be responsible for the payment of the School Land Dedication Fee (payment-in- lieu). This fee s~111 be based upon the fair market value of the respective Lot at the time of development, the land dedication standards applicable for the proposed development, and the calculation formula as specified in the code. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the lot owner. Staff Comments 11 1 / .-7 STAFF COMMENTS: Barbee Rezoning Section 26.92.020, Standards Applicable to Rezoning In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: The development proposed is proceeding through a Planned Unit Development review to ensure - consistency with all applicable City requirements. , B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: The rezoning allows for increased density for projects representing 70% affordable housing. This incentive zone is consistent with the AACP and the development being proposed is in substantial compliance with this community document. Please refer to the AACP compliance criteria of PUD more fully responded to on pages 1 and 2 of this section. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The rezoning, as well as the level and type of development being proposed islonsistent with and. appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The rezoning an~"~~'v,e=Ycifdeveic;pment being proposed does not represent an adverse effect , on road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The rezoning and the level of development being considered is within the community's infrastructure capabilities, * / F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: The rezoning will not have significant adverse impacts upon the natural environment. In fact, a large portion of the property is being preserved against development to the benefit of the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Comments 12 --3 r 1 , Staff Finding: A mix of free-market and affordable housing is appropriate for this neighborhood and the level of density being proposed is appropriate for the edge of the City's urbanized area. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment allows for development of the parcel with 70% ofthe units being deed, restricted to affordable housing and a substantial portion ofthe property being zoned conservation. The removal of the Lodge (L) overlay on Lot #1 is appropriate given the purely residential use on either side of the lot. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed rezoning is not in conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the intent of the municipal code. STAFF COMMENTS: OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS No development subject to special review shall be permitted unless the Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all standards set forth below. B. Off-street parking requirements. Whenever off-street parking requirements of a proposed development are subject to establishment and/or m itigation via a payment in lieu by special review, the development application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met: 1. In all zone districts where the off-street parking requirements of a proposed development are subject to establishment and/or mitigation by special review, the applicant shall demonstrate that the parking needs of the residents, customers, guests, and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses ofthe parcel, the projected traffic generation of the project, the projected impacts onto the on-street parking of the neighborhood, its proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area, and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests, and enlployees. Staff Finding: The City-wide parking standards require one space per bedroom or two per unit, whichever is fewer. For this project, two spaces per each unit is the requirement, The applicant has proposed two spaces per each Category unit with an additional two spaces being provided for all guests. The applicant has further proposed each of the free-market and RO Lots be required to provide two off-street spaces. This Parking Special Review provision allows a developer to request fewer , spaces than the City Code requires but does not allow the Commission to require more than the, City Code. In the case where the developer is proposing a number of parking spaces in conformance with the City Code the review is a mere formality. Staff is recommending the Commission approve the Special Review for Parking for this project. , Staff Comments 13 74 0 aPPR-4 MEMORANDUM TO: Joint Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Directi Mitch Haas, Interim Deputy Director,1 &-p 95* DATE: March 16, 1999 RE: Barbee Affordable Housing Growth Management Exemption -- Public Hearing SUMMARY: The applicant, Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., obtained concepÂ®al PUD approval in January of 1998 pursuant to Ordinance 44, Series of 1997, for 10 new residential units to be constructed within the "70/30 mix" o f the AH1/PUD Zone District. The applicant is f~questing these units be exempted from the competition and scoring procedures oftile Growth_ Management (,EÂ®i-sysremras-well as approvaofiRe method in which the affordable unitsare-Reing prop02[--Both of these requests may be granted by City Council after the Growth Management Commission makes a recommendation at a public hearing. The proposed development is located along the west side of S. Garmisch Street, between Juan Street and Durant Avenue. There is an existing house, proposed to remain, and various out-buildings. Specifically, the request is for 7 affordable housing units and 3 free-market, ALI- Associated units for a total of 10 units. The applicant has indicated that three (3) RO lots will be conveyed as vacant parcels for no more than $130,000 and that four (4) Category 4 three-bedroom units (in duplex configuration) be constructed with the proceeds from the sale of both the vacant RO lots and the Category units themselves. This would be the proposed method of providing affordable units. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority reviewed this proposed method and is recommending approval with one caveat: that the developer of the Category units review the final development costs with the Housing Authority and give the Housing Authority the opportunity to "buy-down" the units to a lower Category prior to sale. Community Development staff recommends that the Housing Authority' s review of the final development costs be limited in scope such that only the potential for "buying down" the units to lower categories be considered. The review criteria and staff responses are attached as Exhibit A. Referral comments are attached as Exhibit B, the submitted application is attached as Exhibit C, and a vicinity map is provided as Exhibit D. Staff recommends that the Growth Management Commission advise City Council to approve this request, with conditions. 1 irK APPLICANT: Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., all represented by Sunny Vann and Associates. LOCATION: Approximately the corner of Juan and S. Garmisch Streets. Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen, plus additional metes and bounds within the City of Aspen and Pitkin County as shown on the Site Improvements Survey (see Exhibit "D" attached). ZONING: The portions o f the subject property currently within the City of Aspen are zoned R- 15/PUD/L and Conservation. Portions of the property in the County are zoned AFR-10 and R-15/PUD. The applicant is seeking annexation into the City for the County portion o f the property and a subsequent rezoning to AH1 /PUD. LOT SIZE: 17.695 acres, or approximately 770,794 square feet. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): Most of the subject property consists of slopes of greater than 30%. Subtracting areas of slopes and the proposed access easements, the following lot areas apply for FAR and Density: FAR shall be based on 761,130 s.f. of Lot Area. Density shall be based on 1 09,144 s.f. of Lot Area. These are preliminary figures to be confirmed by the City Zoning Officer during building permit review. ALLOWABLE FAR AND DENSITY: FAR - 145,565 square feet by right, can be increased by Special Review. Density- for single family and duplex units: 36 units (109,144 + 3,000). PROPOSED FAR AND DENSITY: FAR - 31,325 square feet Density - 10 new units plus one existing unit = 11 units. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence, assorted outbuildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: Same, but with ten (10) additional residences and two carport structures. The majority of the property is proposed to be deeded as a conservation parcel. 2 PREVIOUS ACTIONS: The City Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council considered and approved the conceptual PUD with the conditions incorporated into Ordinance 44, Series of 1997, included in the application packet. The final PUD is now being considered by the City P&Z. PROCEDURE: AFFORDABLE HOUSING Affordable housing proj ects are eligible for an exemption from the scoring and competition components of Growth Management by City Council. The application must first be reviewed and considered by the Growth Management Commission at a public hearing. Affordable housing projects are deducted from the annual allotment pool. Please refer to Exhibit "A" for the applicable criteria. GROWTH IssuES: ALLOTMENTS AVAILABLE The application was received in the 1998-99 Growth Management year. New affordable housing units are deducted from the annual pool of development allotments. There are 43 allotments available each year plus additional allotments carried over from previous years. Approximately 120 allotments in this category have been carried forward and added to the current 43, equaling approximately 163 available allotments for the 1998-99 GMQS year. This figure does not include AH projects currently in the planning process that have not been finally awarded allocations. Also to be subtracted from this number are a few caretaker units approved in the County. The applicant is requesting seven (7) units from this 163 unit pool. AH-Associated Free Market units are also deducted from an annual pool. There are eight (8) allotments available each year plus those units not used in previous years. Approximately 26 units have been carried over from previous years plus the eight (8) available this year. The applicant is requesting three (3) AH-Associated allotments of the 34 currently available. STAFF COMMENTS: Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." The application materials have been included as Exhibit "C." RECOMMENDATION: City Staff has reviewed this application according to the applicable criteria and recommends that the Growth Management Commission forward a recommendation of approval to City Council for this project, with the following conditions: 1. The project shall consist often (10) new residential units and one (1) existing residential unit. Of the new units, three (3) shall be free-market units of no more than three (3) bedrooms each; three (3) shall be RO Lots, each for the purpose of a single-family residence of no less than three (3) bedrooms; and, four (4) shall be 3 Category 4 three-bedroom units constructed and conveyed pursuant to APCHA Guidelines. 2. At or near completion of construction ofthe Category duplex units, the applicant shall provide the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority the opportunity to "buy- down" the Category designations of the Category Units and the RO Lots/Units to a lower Category prior to conveyance. 3. The applicant is fully subject to all reviews and approvals by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission and the Aspen City Council as required in the Municipal Code. In no way shall this recommendation imply approval of or reliance for any other required approval. 4. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Growth Management Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions o f this recommendation, unless otherwise amended by an entity with the authority to do so. RECOMMENDED MOTION: " I move to recommend the Aspen City Council exempt from the growth management competition and scoring procedures seven (7) affordable housing units and three (3) AH-Associated Free Market units, via the proposed method, for the Barbee Affordable Housing project, with the conditions listed in the City Community Development Department memo dated March 16, 1999." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Review Criteria Exhibit B - Agency referral comments Exhibit C - Application Exhibit D - Vicinity Map 4 EXHIBIT ~ Staff Comments: Barbee Affordable Housing The exemption by City Council may only be granted subsequent to review and consideration by the GMC. There are, however, no specific review standards for this review other than the more general criteria listed below. To the extent possible, staff has incorporated general observations of the project in relation to the Community Plan, the Interim Housing Guidelines, and pertinent criteria of PUD and Subdivision reviews. Approval of the method by which the applicant proposes to provide affordable housing shall be at the option of the City Council, upon the recommendation of the Growth Management Commission. In evaluating the applicant's proposal, the advice of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be sought in considering the folio-wing factors: 1. Whether the city has an adopted plan to develop affordable housing with monies received from payment of affordable housing dedicationfees. 2. Whether the city has an adopted plan identifying the applicant's site as being appropriate for affordable housing. Staff Finding: The City, through the Housing Authority, has developed an affordable housing plan for both public and private monies. The site is not identified in the Community Plan as a potential affordable housing site. The Plan, however, only identified individual parcels and did not provide direction in evaluating all sites in general. However, the City and county Planning commissions have adopted Resolution No. 98-11, "The Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan" as an update of the Housing Element of the 1993 AACP. Based on it's location, size, and proximity to general services, staff believes this site is an appropriate site for affordable housing. Staff believes the Interim Housing Guidelines further this opinion. 3. Whether the applicant's site is well suited for the development of affordable housing, taking into account the availability of services, proximity to employment opportunities and whether the site is affected by environmental constraints to development or historic preservation concerns. Staff Finding: The site is an excellent site for affordable housing. Its proximity to physical and social infrastructure, transit, employment and recreation opportunities, and location within an established neighborhood make this a well-suited, appropriate site. Furthermore, the preservation ofthe majority of the property as a conservation easement protecting Shadow Mountain furthers many community goals, not only those related to affordable housing. staff comments page 1 -, 1 4. Whether the method proposed will result in employee housing being produced prior to or at the same time the impacts of the development will be experienced by the community. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision Improvement Agreement prohibits the conveyance of the Free-Market lots until such time as the Category units are built and occupied and the RO Lots have been conveyed. 5. Whether the development itself requires the provision of affordable housing on-site to meet its service needs. Staff Finding: This development is proposed within the 70/30 incentive zone district AH 1/PUD. The community must rely on the private sector to aid in the development of affordable housing if the community's AH goals are to be accomplished. This is a recognized incentive zone to encourage the private sector's involvement in the provision of affordable housing. In fact, the "Purpose" of the zone district is explained in the Land Use Code as: "to provide for the use of land for the production of Category 1,2,3, and 4 affordable housing and resident occupied lots and units. The zone district also permits a limited component ofjree market lots/units to off-set the cost of developing affordable housing. It is contemplated that land may also be subdivided in connection with a development plan." The number of employees living in the development will far out-number employees generated by the use, and the development will certainly have a more positive impact on the social health of the community than will discouraging local working people from becoming vested members of Aspen. As an additional benefit, the Free Market lots have been proposed with FAR caps limiting their size to a relatively modest 4,500 square feet. While these will be large homes, they pale in comparison to the excessively large homes that are believed to generate substantial numbers of employees. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan [requirement of PUD and Subdivision]. Staff Finding: Community Vision: The proposed development increases resident housing opportunities, encourages a balanced permanent community, may provide residents with a transportation alternative if they choose to walk to town, work, etc., and is a relatively sustainable development pattern. Community Vitality: The proposed development is 70% affordable, addressing the community's desire to provide affordable housing opportunities within a reasonable walking distance to employment and recreation resources. The proposed development is an in-fill site within, or approximately within, the original townsite. Increased residential density, especially for local working residents, within the functional town promotes a staff comments page 2 ' I i sense of community that cannot be achieved by placing that critical mass in a remote location, regardless of where the metro area or extended metro boundaries exist. Open Space and Environment: Providing housing opportunities within walking distance to employment, entertainment, recreation, and other residences reduces the need to use a vehicle for every trip. Also, compact development within the townsite reduces the need to extend services and develop land on the outskirts of town, and preserves those natural open space areas for their wildlife and aesthetic functions. The proposal is preserving areas that are clearly not appropriate for development. The proposal also preserves the bench area above the proposed RO lots, just above the Little Cloud Subdivision. It is important to underscore this preservation because this area could be expensive "view lots" with dramatic affects upon the visual openness of the mountain. Staff believes this approach to development is the most desired for this parcel and is appreciative of the site planning and preservation. 1993 AACP: This project addresses elements of the existing AACP. Specifically, it 'creates a housing environment dispersed, appropriately scaled, and affordable.' And, it 'preserves and enhances the natural beauty of the area.' 1999 AACP: This document has not been adopted. However, the draft document provides substantial support for affordable housing to be located in town where it protects surrounding open spaces outside of town and where the residents can become integral members of the social fabric. The plan also supports the preservation of natural open space areas such as the proposed conservation parcel for Shadow Mountain. Interim Housing Guidelines: The development proposed is consistent with the Interim (Citizen) Housing Guidelines adopted by the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions. The development is within the Metro Area, is within walking distance of the community core, preserves a significant amount of natural lands, represents quality design visually appropriate for the neighborhood, integrates different social levels within one proj ect, is an optimum development level for this site, and does not promote urban sprawl. In addition, this project is proposed with no public subsidy and is not expected to have a significant negative fiscal impact upon the City or its taxpayers. This proposal places the development of affordable housing where it is needed and where it is appropriate - in town. It represents the philosophy behind the "Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan" criteria. It does not represent sprawl and it does not destroy valuable open space. In fact, the area proposed for development can be easily served with existing utility and infrastructure capabilities and the side of Shadow Mountain has its development rights extinguished including the bench above the Little Cloud Subdivision which could support "view lots" with a high level of visual impact upon the City. staff comments page 3 8 t'Utlvt:L AIAR 8 1999 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: BARBEE AFFORDABLE HOUSING GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOT* / Fi [KIN nn/ci nour-â€¢1- SYSTEM EXEMPTION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 16, 1999 at a meeting to begin at 5:30 p.m. before Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galenda, Aspen, Colorado to consider an application submitted by Mary Barbee, John Barbee and Hallie Rugheimer, 1400 Story Mill Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, requesting an exemption from the "scoring" and "competition" procedures of the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) for a project to contain three free-market and seven affordable residential dwellings. The property is located at 601 South Garmisch Street, and is described as a 17.67 acre tract of land being a part of Lot 1, NE1/4, NE1/4, Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M. For further information, contact Chris Bendon at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 920-5072, chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Bob Blaich. Chair Aspen/Pitkin County Growth Management Commission Published in the Aspen Times on February 27, 1999. City of Aspen Account Saturday-Sunday, Febniary 27-28, 1999 â€¢ The Aspen Times 17-C m-: - PUBIIC NOTICE itt ...41 . E LAUDERMAN LISA M T BUS OPERATOR 1 3.023 03 s/Bob Blaich, Chair Instruction to Bidders and any spectfic criteria at which time evidence and testimony were pre- MACAYEAL JAMES I T BUS OPERATOM 1 1.383.06 MACK DEBORAH 'YNN T BUS OPERATOR 1 2.984.19 Aspen/Patkin Co,inty listed m the bid docutneuts may be considered bented with respect to,]ns application. MADYES PETEA ROY T OPERATIONS CLEIX 8 691.05 Growth Management Commission m Judging which Btd is in the best interests of 5. The Board deterinmed that the proposed MCDAMEL DAINE D T IUS OPERATOR 1 01ENWOOD 316.60 Published in The Aspen Times on February 27 the City. No bid may be withdrawn within a peri activity meets the applicable criteria estab- MCDON",1 L L JOHN M T BUS OFf RATOR 1 2.044.33 1999. (35430) od of sixty (60) calendar days after the date lished in the Lan(l Use Code, provided the con- MILL.1 JOEL I T BUS OPERATOR 1 .404.55 fixed jor opening bids. No bids will be consid dit]ons listed in thus resolution are adhered to. 6Ek.*VAA JOSE MANUEL T BUS OPERATOR 1 6 027 b2 -7Ird** PUBLIC NOTICE ~ ered which are received after the time menÂ· NOW, THEREFORE, 13E IT RESOLVED by the MILLER RUCHAM L T BUS OPERATOR 1 2.170.24 NOVIWIC SEAD , BUS OPERATOM 1 3.43 1 92 ~ RE: BARBEE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, FINAL tioned, and any bids so received after the sched Board 01 County Commissioners of Pitkin 0Â·HARA GREOONY L T BUS OPERATOR 1 1.198.40 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, SUBDIVISION, uled closing time will be returned to the bidder County, Colorado, that it does hereby grant 0* DONALD E T BUS OPERATOR 1 6.820.59 REZONING, AND SPECIAL REVIEW u,]opened. Subdivision/PU[) Final Plat approval to the PENN-GToN .JOHN M 1 BUS OPERATOR 1 10.563 OB NOTICE IS HEREBY (i]VEN that a public hearing For further information call (970) 920-5080 North Forty PUD project, subject to the follow- MNEDO MARIO T IUS OPERATOR 1 9,811.88 will be held on Tuesday, March 16,1999 at a Published in The Aspen Times February 27, ing conditions which shall run with the land and WAYNE E T BUS OPERATOM I 1 724.39 1,0*ENTS JAIUDS T //3 OPERATOR 1 13.366.97 meeting to begin at 4.30 p.m. before the Aspen 1999. (35412) be binding on all successors in interest: 1,06* 1 ANGELNE T BUS OPERATOR 1 1.997.59 Planning and Zoning Commission, Council 1. The Applicant or development entity or sue- ROSS JANET L T mUS OPERATOR 1 743.49 Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena, Aspen, PIJBLIC NOTICE cessors and assigns shall adhere to material rep- 'ALIS JAMES A T BUS OPERATOR 1 5 369.36 Colorado to consider an application submitted The Joint Commission on Accreditation of resentations made in tile applications and in the SANDERSON .JOHN T T BUS OFEUTOR 1 76.82 by Mary Barbee, John Barbee, and Hallie Healthcare Organizations will conduct an public meetings. STEWANT ROMÂ¥ N T %6 0/RATOM 1 3.293 05 Rugheimer, 1400 Story Mill Road, Bozeman, accreditation survey of Midvalley Ambulatory 2. All conditions and requirements 01 BOCC TENNAN(JOUR RAY O T 505 OPiMATOR 1 2.167.83 Montana 59715, requesting approval jor a final Surgery Center on March 15 -16, 1999 Resolution No. 96-286 (Conceptual THOAâ€¢PSON ROCKY R T IUS OPERATOR 1 1 91* 80 Planned Unit Development, subdivision, rezon The purpose of the survey will be to evaluate Subdivision/PUD) and Resolution No. 98-99 TOMASETTI DAAD J T BUG OPERATOR 1 1.230.31 VALLE JOU O T *UN OPEMATOR 1 1.426.14 ing to the Affordable Housing Zone District the organization's compliance with nationally (Detailed Subdivision/PUD) shall be adhered to WADE DAWD G T BUS OPERATOR 1 (11 ENWOOD 1.690.30 (AHI), and special review for parking for a pro- established Joint Commission standards. The unless specifically modified by the terms of WATEMS WILUAM T T IUS OPERATOR 1 ..698 35 ject to contain three free-market and seven survey results wj]! be used to determine these conditions. WEAVER MARY E T BUS OPERATOR 1 1.404 65 affordable residential dwellings. The property is whether, and the conditions under wl~ich 3. Prior to recordation of the Final Plat the Â¥~UAMSON SUE T IUS OPEUTOR 1 14.610.11 located at 601 South Garmisch Street, and is = accreditation should be awarded the organiza- County Attorney's Oflice shall review and TA OKMATIONs Tot,1 4.1 10....53 described as a 17.67 acre tract of land being a tion. approve the Final Plat documents, the 4 Tu kil- 16 406.222.08 part of Lot 1, NE 1/4, NE !/4, Section 13, Township Johit Commission standards deal with orgam- Subdivision Improvernents Agreement, the VITS 'AID 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th PM. For fur- zational quality of care issues and the safety of Avigation Easement, and the Protective 1 917.175.23 ther information, contact Chris Bendon at the the environment in which care is provided. Covenants lor form and content The final piat INSURANCE IEMENT-NEDICAL DENTAL. VISION & LIFE 970,679.87 Aspen/Pitkin Community Development . Anyone believing that he or she has pertinent may not be recorded until the County Attorney's ~Ul- M~~ FUU YEAR OR PRO RATA SHARE, *b, 1.-48 Department, 130 S. (ialena St., Aspen, CO, (970) and valid information about such matters may Office has approve,1 each of these documents. ACAmeÂ£MCAM 268.200.51 920-5072, chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us. request a public information interview with the 4. Prior to recordation of the Final Plat the Ill PASSES 45 635.00 EDUCAnoN UNCLUDED IN *ALAMIES FAJOJ 16.000.01 s/Bob Blatch, Chair Joint Commission's field representatives at the Applicant shail present a final plat and GIS disk w PA$*3. I,TA ONLY (INCLUDED IN SAL-AmES PAID) 26,726.00 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission time W the survey Information presented at the meeting aM requirements of the Code for review ~ Published m The Aspen Times on February 27, , interview will be carefully evaltiated for rele- and approval of the County Engineer, the County EXCLUDING AFTA & 11 I,5 9/CLUDED W SALARIES /Ail 128.446.83 1999.(35429) -1 vance to the accreditation process. Requests for Attorney, and Community Development I- Tit/1 .1 1-fkâ€¢ 3.417.038.93 PUBLIC NOTICE a public Information interview must Le made in 1)irector INVITATION TO BED writing and should be sent to the Joint 5. Prior to recordation of the Final Plat the Sealed bids will be received by the City 0, Commission no later than jive working days County Engineer shall review and approve a )ne -1,1.HTS PMOVIDED, 11 0 WCK. VACATION AND COMP TIME ARE 'CWOED " 1% GROSS SALARY ~PORTED Aspen, Colorado at the Oftice of the City Clerk, before the survey begins. The request must also drainage and erosion control plan submitted by 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, until Indicate the nature of the information to be pro- the Applicant. Copies of the proposed Resolution are avail- - ANONÂ·-UatiNT EXCLUDING RFTA ' 1:30 P M., Thursday March 11, 1999, at which vided at the interview. Such requests should be able lor public inspection during regular busi- addressed to: MU.AgE"ENT l*34.776.20 time the bids will be publicly opened and read ness hours in the Office of the Clerk and Division of Accreditation Operations - 7,942,126,71 aloud in the City Council Chambers, for the toi- Recorder, 530 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 1- C-.'...'..'- 5.571.902.91 Accreditation Service Specialist lowing City of Aspen project: 816 11. Phone (970) 9205180 Joint Commission of Accreditation " 1999 Utility Projects" Jeanette Jones, of Healthcare Organizations 411.12 fOUVAUNT FOR ID-(FTEl Complete Bid Packages are available on or alter Deputy County Clerk One Renaissance Boulevard prncl cotâ€¢ir, 231.0 1:00 PM., Friday, February 26, 1999, from the Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181 Published in The Aspen Tunes on February 27, ROA-4 FOAK TUNSIT AGENCY INTAI 160 0 City of Aspen, Colorado, for $35.00 per set Jn 381.0 terms of company check, certified check, or The Joint Commission will acknowledge such 1999. (35425) Published in The Aspen Times on February 27 cashier's cher.k only (refundable H the complete requests m writing or by telephone and will NOTICE OF PUBL.!C TRUSTEES SALE 1999. (35407) set or sets an returned unmarked and in accept- Inform the organjzation of the request for any No. 99-2 PUBLIC NOTICE sell and convey the same in manner and form an able condition to the Engineering Department), interview. The organization will, in turn, notify TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This Notice is iCE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Board 01 aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear at the Engineering Department, 130 South the interviewee of the date, time and place d given with regard to the following described y Commissioners, at its regular meeting from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, (latena Street, Aspen, Colorado. All refunds must the meeting. Deed of Trust: bruary 0,1999. and after a duly-noticed hens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances andi be requested following the bid opening and This notice is posted in accordance with the Original Grantor Helena Wood hearing published in the Weekend Edition restrictions ol whatever kind or nature soever, prior to March 25, 1999. No partial return or Joint Commission's requirements and may not Original Beneficiary: Long Beach Mortgage be removed be[ore the survey is completed. Coinpany â€¢ Aspen Times on January 23, 1999, adopt- except those matters as set forth on Exhibit 'An rejund will be allowed. attached hereto and incorporated herein by rel- Each bid must be accompanied by Bid Security Date Posted. 2-15-99 Current Owner of Eviclence of Debt: Federal lollowing Ordinance #99-8: ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY erence. to include a bid bond or certified check made Published in The Aspen Times February 27, Home Loan Bank ol San Francisco 'OMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY. The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOR- payable to the City ol Aspen in the amount of 1999. (35416) Date of Deed of Trust August 18,1995 RADO ACCEiliNG THE CONVEYANCE OF EVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in One percent (1%) 01 the Bid. The Bld Security PUBLIC NOTICE Recording Date of Deed of Trust: September 5, LAL PROPEIGY FROM ASPEN SCHOOL the quiet and peaceable possession of the accompanying the three lowest responsive and COUNTY COURT, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO 1995 liSTRICT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY grantee, his heirs and assigns, against all and responsible bids may be held until the Contract Case No. 99C19 Div. County of Recording: Pitkin COMMISSIONERS OF every person or persons lawfully claiming the is awarded. The Bid Security accompanying the ORDER FOR PUBLICATION AND CHANGE OF Reference Numbers of Recording: Reception No. PITKiN COUNTY, whole or any part thereof. The singular number other proposals shall be returned promptly NAME 385066, Book 792, Page 585 COLORADO shall include the plural, the plural the singular, after the bid prices have been compared and IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR THE You are hereby notified that the owner 01 the Ordinance No. 99-8 and the use of gender shall be applicable to all evaluated . CHANGE OF NAME OF: Evidence 01 Debt, the original pringpal Amount of which was $157,500.00 with a present out- Reettals genders. A pre-bid conference will be held at Sister USA HAISFIELD, Petitioner. Areâ€¢nted this day 01 Cities Meeting room, Aspen City Hall, at 300 ORDER FOR PUBLICATION standing principal balance due and ewing of m. r.,..., 64.1- ..na infl ron,irtâ€¢red the 1155.926.31 and whichis secured by the Deed 01 , 4 'AAâ€ž'. h:.: Ii].41 written election 15**46 A A - 4 L l,/\(NA,b--kle*~M*fx/V . ' ~Al tup Yetmpwrki.0&,f~ l Werzomnis ACAL 41/2*USU EL=fegu (2Â«>tr=9.*112) 0Â»l. *4-L *64404 V// Eye- 4 0Â»*Â» *01+WebÂ» Mt}ta 1 +GAD Ci*ki _ toUE -Â¥4.\ fR*D \*14Â£ '.ltjAW1 ..Anew* d,Joilites'.- 0*RA A"k 9652Â«7 41406+43 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD FINAL PUD/SUBDIVISION 7 APPLICATION <W ~MM RAoP-44* &4 % 4 *M AN APPLICATION FOR FINAL PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD Submitted by: Mary K. Barbee John W. Barbee Hallie B. Rugheimer % Hallie B. Rugheimer 1400 Story Mill Road Bozeman, MT 59715 (406) 587-1429 and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing, Inc. 93 Reid Haughey policywest, inc. 1228 Kings Row Avenue Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 963-4269 Prepared by: VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 925-6958 PROJECT CONSULTANTS PLANNER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT Sunny Vann, AICP Thomas G. Stevens Vann Associates, LLC The Stevens Group, Inc. 230 East Hopkins Avenue 580 Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 Carbondale, CO 81623 (303) 925-6958 (970) 963-6717 ARCHITECT Wayne Stryker, AIA Stryker-Brown Architects, PC 300 South Spring Street Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-2254 ENGINEER Jay Hammond, P.E. Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. P.O. Box 2155 Aspen, CO 81612 (970) 925-6727 SURVEYOR Mark S. Beckler, L.S. #28643 Sopris Engineering, Inc. 502 Main Street, Suite A3 Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 704-0311 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 11. BACKGROUND 2 111. PROJECT SITE 4 IV. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 9 V. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS 30 A. Final PUD Development Plan 30 B. Subdivision 38 C. Rezoning 46 D. Special Review 49 E. Growth Management Exemptions 50 F. Vested Property Rights 52 APPENDIX A. Exhibit 1, Pre-Application Conference Summary Exhibit 2, City Council Resolution No. 69, Series of 1997 Exhibit 3, City Council Resolution No 78, Series of 1997 Exhibit 4, Title Insurance Commitment ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Exhibit 5, Permission to Represent Exhibit 6, List of Adjacent Property Owners Exhibit 7, Application Fee Agreement B. Exhibit 1, Ordinance No. 44, Series of 1997 C. Exhibit 1, Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD Agreement Exhibit 2, Deed of Conservation Easement Exhibit 3, Bargain and Sale Deed Exhibit 4, Fire Protection District Access Driveway Approval D. Exhibit 1, 8040 Greenline Map Exhibit 2, Aspen Survey Engineers Property Investigation Map Exhibit 3, Schmueser Gordon Meyer Engineering Report Exhibit 4, Schmueser Gordon Meyer Drainage Analysis iii 1. INTRODUCTION The following application requests final planned unit development (PUD), subdivision and special review approval for the development of a mixed free market/affordable housing project on the Barbee property, which is located near the base of West Aspen Mountain (a/k/a, Shadow Mountain) at the south end of Garmisch Street. A rezoning to AH1/PUD, Affordable Housing/Planned Unit Development, R-15, Moderate-Density Residential and C, Conservation; two growth management quota system (GMQS) exemptions; and vested property rights status for the project's various land use approvals is also requested (see Pre-Application Conference Summary, Exhibit 1, Appendix A). As a portion of the property is presently located within unincorporated Pitkin County, annexation is required. An annexation petition was submitted to the City Clerk on August 18, 1997. The petition was considered by the City Council on September 8, 1997, and found to comply with the petition requirements of the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, as amended (see Resolution No. 69, Exhibit 2, Appendix A). A second hearing was held on October 14, 1997, at which time the Council determined that the proposed annexation also complied with applicable statutory requirements (see Resolution No. 78, Exhibit 3, Appendix A). The actual annexation, however, must be approved by City Council ordinance, and will occur concurrently with the project's final PUD development plan approval. The application is submitted pursuant to Sections 26.84.030, 26.88.040, 26.92.030, 26.64.040, 26.102.040 and 26.52.080 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations by Mary K. Barbee, John W. Barbee and Hallie Barbee Rugheimer, the owners of the property (see Title Insurance Commitment, Exhibit 4, Appendix A), and Aspen- 1 Pitkin Employee Housing, Inc., a Colorado nonprofitcorporation (collectively "Appli- cant"). Permission for Vann Associates, LLC, Planning Consultants, to represent the Applicant is attached as Exhibit 5, Appendix A. A list of owners located within three hundred feet of the property and an application fee agreement are attached as Exhibits 6 and 7, Appendix A, respectively. The application is divided into five sections. Section I provides a brief introduction to the application, while Section II provides background information with regard to the Applicant's development objectives and the project's approval history. Section III describes the project site, while Section IV of the application outlines the Applicant's development proposal. Section V addresses the proposal's compliance with the applicable review criteria of the Land Use Regulations. For the reviewer's convenience, all pertinent supporting documents relating to the project (e.g., proof of ownership, etc.) are provided in the various appendices to the application. While the Applicant has attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Regulations, and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application, questions may arise which require further information and/or clarification. The Applicant will provide such additional information as may be required in the course of the application's review. 11. BAC KGROUND As discussed in the Applicant's conceptual PUD application, the ownership of the Barbee property has remained in the family since its acquisition by Mary Tharp Davis Barbee in the 1940's. Mrs. Barbee's children, John W. Barbee, Hallie Barbee Rugheimer and David E. Barbee, were raised on the property, and all three 2 graduated from Aspen High School. The properly is presently owned by John, Hallie and Mary K. Barbee, the former wife of David Barbee. Each family member owns an undivided one-third interest in the property. Rather than simply sell the entire parcel, the family wishes to equitably divide a portion of the property among themselves, to develop part of the properly for affordable housing purposes, and to conserve the remainder as permanent open space. The proposed development approach will permit the two family members who wish to live on the property to retain ownership of a portion of the family's land, while allowing the remainder of the property to be put to beneficial public use. To accomplish these objectives, the Barbee family has entered into a partnership with Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing, Inc. (APEHI) to subdivide and develop the property pursuant to the City's affordable housing zone district regulations. As the family members have neither the financial ability nor expertise to undertake a project of this magnitude, a partner is necessary to develop the project's required affordable housing component. The proposed development received conceptual PUD development plan approval from the City Council on January 12, 1998. The conditions of conceptual approval are contained in Ordinance No. 44, Series of 1997, which is attached as Exhibit 1, Appendix B. While the conceptual application addressed all of the project's review and approval requirements, formal action with respect to the *pliâ‚¬~~ request for subdivision, rezoning and special review approval will occur concurrently wi~ the City's review of the final PUD development plan application. Please note, however, that the relevant portions of the conceptual PUD application pertaining to these additional approval requirements~hilve also been included in this application. r-30Â· Â¥ 3 111. PROJECT SITE The project site consists of a single metes and bounds parcel which contains approximately eighteen acres of land area. As the following Improvement Location Survey illustrates, approximately eleven acres are located within the City of Aspen. The City portion of the property abuts South Garmisch Street, the Juan Street affordable housing project, the Mine Dump Apartments, and the Shadow Mountain Condominiums. The remainder of the property, or approximately seven acres, is presently located within unincorporated Pitkin County. The County portion of the property abuts Garmisch Street, the former Colorado Midland Railroad right-of-way, and the City's Koch Lumber Park. Man-made improvements to the property are limited to an approximately 2,100 square foot single-family residence and a few small outbuildings. The property's topography consists primarily of the steeply sloping West Aspen Mountain hillside. A relatively small area of flat terrain, however, is located north of the existing residence and adjacent to South Garmisch Street. A second area of relatively flat terrain occupies a small bench on the lower hillside overlooking Koch Lumber Park and Garmisch Street below. The City's so-called "8040 Greenline", which coincides with the 8040 foot elevation, traverses the portion of the property located within the city limits. Several scattered mine tailings can be found on the upper portion of the property. Natural vegetation within the property's boundaries consists of mountain shrubs (gambel oak, chokecherry, sen'iceberry, etc.), numerous small aspen trees, and several large cottonwoods and evergreens. The mountain shrubs and evergreens are located on the hillside while the aspen and cottonwood trees are located in the 4 = =---- IMPROVEWEATT I,OCATION SURVEY: BARBEE - RUGHEIMER PROPERTY A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO .SHEmll-QE--3 PROPERTY D,SCR,PTION , ' ..491-=fÂ».. \ Â¢-- MT PART 0, LOT , OF TH, NORTHEAST ON,-QUJ~TER OF 17/, NORTNEAST | ~ I ~ ~=~( ,-,a 11 ~ < ..c. N,/4 coRNXi , & .1 1- 7 -1-- 6 ONE-QUARTER 0, SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP to SOUTH. FUNGE 85 VEST, oF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. ACCORDING TO THE DIAGRAM CERTIFIED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE, JANUARY 4,1896 AS - SEC, 13 â‚¬ BLM BRASS CAP AITACHED TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE SURVEY OF SAID TOWNSHIP AND Â¥ FOUND 1054-1974 \~ i ,~ - , l. ,-~ NÂ¥ CORNER -Â»<7J-- Dll RANGE APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE MARCH .1 LOT t. SEC. 13 St. 1891. DESC1UB1ID AS FOLLOWS: '1-% //,0~71~071 BICINNING 0,3( -4-2='5-1'43 4'-2Â©e.2â‚¬ c bid BEGINNING AT TH! NORTHIEST CORNER oF SAID LOT ONE, SAID CORNER ALSO &12 1---CÂ» 4%0-2/ DEING THE EAST ONE-SIXTEENTH CORNER SIMONS 1 Z AND 13: THENCE 1 S 89'45'5C E ALONG THE NORTHERLY UNE OF SAID LOT 1 342.86 FEET, TO A POINT ON TH! SOUTHERLY UNE OF THE /ORMER RIGHT- 0,-WAY oF THE COLOIUDO J,IDUND RAILROAD COMPANY; THENCE S 42~27'42- f ALONG N <,45'50- 1 -9~4, â€ž, ~; _ -679#itj Ljrv#%%DQ~9,,0"0 f , #iddg*lztti+044As9 SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE 482.67 FEET To THI WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY 1329. UNE 0/ SOUTH CARMISCH STREET. THINCE S 1 4â€¢50'49~ W ALONG SAID NI CORNER IESTERLY RIGHT-OF-VAT UNE 24101 FEET TO THE NORTHIESTERLY CORNER SEC. 13 IKY lZDPRn 4.4,6-4.dâ‚¬NDER ASPULT T.T.'TILERit/%31/9/itititriggr~ 1 / Prik : O, THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SECTION Z O, INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN 5 BOOK 230 AT PACE 496 OF THZ PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE S 3747'Of' 1 87.07 nET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT: THENCE S 14Â·50'49' 111 5.00 FEET TO li i -L 1 1 1 THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 3. BLOCK 1 1. EAMES ADDITION To THE UNE OF SAID BLOCK 11 160.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7 CITY 0, ASPEN, COLORADO: THENCE S 75Â·0,'11* 1 ALONG TRE SOUTHERLY $ 1 1 1" -0 1) al F 1 4 11 44.4 OF SALD BLOCK 11; THENCE LEAVING THI SOUTHERLY UNE OF SAID BLOCK fI S Iâ€¢-60'40' 1 10.SO nir 70 !Ir NORTHIEST CORNER OF LOr la OF 1-|- e l~ 4 /1 k F /2 A-â‚¬14 WO*TADI SAID BLOCK 11. SAID POINT ALSO BEING TEE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF * A lualjt-I..._22 Ht ARCA 2 1 + M THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN BOOK :06 AT PAGE 334 oF THE PITKIN N COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY LImIt OF SAID PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN BOOK 205 AT PAGE 334 THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: N 75'OS' 1 r Â¥ 31.IS FEET CITY OP ASPEN 1) S 1*60'49- Â¥ 78.00 FEET VICINITY MAP 3) S 03*55'43- 1 184.99 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT N 89~51'4< E 93 804.5,Â· --4 528.29Â· . 20. SAID BLOCK 11: - 1332.87 ~ ~ ~LOT 1. SEC. 13 THENCE S 14â€¢60'49~ W ALONG THI WESTERLY LINE 0, SAID BLOCK 11 N 8991 40* 1 1332.87' c 0 NOTES+ 210.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWISTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 1 1, THENCE SW CORNER 1) DATE OF SURVEn DECEMBER. 1~7 a SEPTEMBER. 1 998. S 76-09'1 r R ALONG THE SOUTHERLY UNI 0, SAID BLOCK It 160.00 4 FEET M THE SOUTHEASTER CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 1 1. SAID CORNER ALSO . U BEING A POINT ON THE ISTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF ASPEN STREET. : 2) DATE OF PREPARATION: DECEMBER. 1897 k JANUARY. ~ SEPT,AIBER AND OCTUBIA 1900. THINCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY UNE OF SAID BLOCK 11 8 14-5049 W ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID ASPEN STREET 14.67 160 3) BASIS OF BEARING: N 0701'34~ E ALONG TRE EASTERLY FEET TO A POINT ON THZ SOUTHERLY UNE OF SAID LOT 1: THENCE UNE OF SECTION 13. BETâ€¢!EN TNE NE CORNER SECTION 13. A WUftulfmciu#7~ N~Il:;.Wton,; Sos;jwTHE k 4; ~'4 NORTHEAST ONE-SIXTIENTH CORNER 0, SECTION 13, THENCE 21 'OUND REBAR (UNDER ASPHALT) AND THE RI/4 CORNER OF - - SECTION 13. A FOUND 1,54 81. BRASS CAP. N 00-15'47~ R ALONG THE WESTERLY UNE OF SAID LOT 1 108.89 FEET r- NE CDR In= BEATTY 4) BASIS OF SURVEY: THE 1890 FRANK D. HOVE PLAT OF THE TO A POINT ON UNE 1-4 01 THE UTTLE MACK LOAD CLAIM. UNITED STATES \ NON-CONFORMING CLAIM MINERAL SURVIY NO. 3968 AS PATENTED IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE *12 OF THE ~ C-Â¥ 1/16. SEC N RESURVIYED ASPEN TOWNSITE, THE 1891 THOIUS Â¥!THERS CLO PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS. THENCE N 14â€¢57'52* E ALONG THE UNE 1-4 oF PLAT OF TloS. R85W OF THE Ith P.M.. THE 1856 CIO DIAGRAM SAID LOAD CLAâ„¢ 707.06 FEET TO CORNER 04 OF SAID LOAD CLAIM; THENCE oF THE N:1/4!411/4 OF SAID SECTION IS ATTACHED TO THE N 75-00' Ir V ALONG THE UNI 4-3 OF SAID LOAD CLWM 185.69 FEET ,!THERS SURVEY OF 18,1. THE 1896 FIUITS MAP 0, THE ASPEN TOWNSITE AND UNRECORDED EAMES ADDITION TO ASPEN. TRE 19,7 1336.4â‚¬ TO THE VISTERLY UNE OF SAID LOT i THENCE LEAVING THE LINE 4-3 OF SAID LOAD CLAIM M 04 147" E ALONG THE VISTERLY UNE OF SAID LOT S 89-59'4Â£ 1 1320.00' f N 89â€¢29'*4-1- _ 1- ~___ _122Â§Â·45. -- - ~167i.W - -7 1 476.64 FIET TO THE TRUE POINT OP BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL OF LAND 1327-ji N-6Â¥WW 1 ALONZO H. ADAMS GLO DEPENDENT RISURVIY PLAT OF A PORTION RAY HARPIN DEPINDENT RESURVIT AND SURVEY PLAT OF SAID TOINSHIP. VARIOUS INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD AND MINERAL CONTAINING 17.896 ACRES MORE OR LESS. OF THE SUBDIVISIONAL UNES OF SAID NINSHIP. THE 1980 BUr SURVEY. SUBDIVISION. CONDOMIMIUM AND ANNEXATION PUTS AS \Ne-/3 FOUND 1954 BLM FOUND 1954 BLM ARE RECORDED Â¥ITH THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S BRASS CAP BRASS CAP OFFICE AND THE SHOWN FOUND MONUMENTATION. 6) THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY SOPRIS ENGINEERING. LLC (SE) TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD. FOR ALL INFORMATION REGARDING EASEMENTS. RIGHTS-0,-WAY AND/OR TrTLE 0/ RECORD, SE REUED UPON THE TITLE COMMITMENT ISSUED BY PITIâ„¢ COUNTY TrrLE. INC. CASE NO. PCT-8990 DATED JULY 01, 1997. ALL TITLE EXCEPTIONS USTED THEREIN ARE DEPICTED HEREON. i THAT THERE IS NO AteABIEr ZWDINCE OR SION OF ANY EASEMENT IMPROVEMENT LOCAPON SURVEY CERTVICATI I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY VAS PREPARED BY SOPRIS ENGINEERING. UC. FOR HALLIE BARBEE RUGHEIMER. 1 FURTHER STATE THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ON THIS DATE. OCTOBER 29. 1~8. EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS, ARE ENTIREM WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PARCIL . EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT THERE ARE NO ENCROACEMENTS UPON THE DESCRUBED PREMISES BY IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES. EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND CROSSING OR BURDENING ANY PART OF SAID PARCEL EXCEPT AS NOTED. r FURTHER STATE THAT THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS. COVENANTS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR IN PLACE. 370773 / FOUND 1978 BLM SW CORNER ~ BRASS CAP SÂ¥ CORNER BY: SIC. fl SEC ?- MARK S. BECKLER. LS. 028643 0 CLOSING CORNER GRAPHIC SCALE SEC 13/24 DEPOSITED THIS _ DAY OF 1998, A.T __-_M.. 17/ THE PITKIN COUNTY INDEX FOR INFORMATIONAL LAND SURVEY PLATE UNDER 1 -h - 400 A RECEPTION NUMBER BY: SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC PITKIN COUNTY SURVEYOR nATEÂ· CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 FIUNG INFORMATION: SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH. RANGE 05 WEST. CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 OF THE GTH P.M. -- --I. =-Ul - I. -~-al.* ~*-6--=,m: :0":U ~=W- (970) 704-0311 ... ,1 ...0. - U Tl _/i _1// --UL-.11. Tm_/ I ~__- _.JIll -1 -TE FE / Tl 2116 12 4*St i .Â£* 9*80 N 10'ALE I .09.â€¢2.00 N 1- Eli. 1r --T_l L.1...11.7~ ' IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY: BARBEE - RUGHEIMER PROPERTY A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6lh P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO .SHEET 2 OF 3 FOUhÂ«) C X C WOOD , r ... al -ASS CORâ€¢ER 1 IS #950 L11-1-1 POST Â¥4/ WITAL CAP â€¢ C CAP. I 1/4 MARKED 1/3958 LS 0164,3 41 ~ SET REBAR * cul DISCOVERY 9,AFT its 4 Adth ,i.t -tfiL SIC 13 10*$ 1 S ocrooÂ·.IÂ· I ./0 Do \ LS #20643. INTERSECMON UTTLE MACK LOOâ‚¬ #5956 \ LODE Â»Â»44- \ CLAnd 'X 1527 6/Y , e we ' // /1 ' -----1 .1 ~ N 00â€¢15'47- I / N 00-15'47' E 478 64 - S POMT OF 'U,a-G-'-X- Â»4.. --- Nâ€¢ COR ~01 1 ~SW COR LOT 1 ~ ([ 1/16 SEC 12/n) ./f rollt> 004 BRASS NE 1/16 SEC 13) SE 1 2 5- ALL- CAP I 1 CAP. COR'll 01 1498.69 SIT 225' ALUW CAP . ~~~ ~ FOUND REBAR A - - -3* Illâ€¢â€¢. L S #*41 \ IS , 71â€¢ a REBAR. L.S 028843 0 CAP, LS 19013 h\\ / -*- ~ UPGRADED TO A , ~6 CORNER 3. WS /7577 4 2 s- AL# CAP & 7- CDITERLINE EXISTNG ROAR. LS. 028643 \-9 (2) ~ - -i)G MAL ... . 1 \ C O 1 1 -1 -- I b - 1- 2 / ----0#4*St-- 01% .W I T -- kiu: - .1 ,; #6 3 =U. 1 -~-- , DISCOVERY CAP. LE /'01 3 SHAFT TAIUNGS CORB 4. MS #3936 1 UPGRADED TO A WASS 11- ' 2.5- ALUW CAP & REBAR, LS /28643 DISCOVERY , N- -1 - 1 SHAFT L \ 4-9~ -4-77L0LE ~,~ i - 1 1 p.ols PLE SITE COUNTY PARCEL S 14*50 49- / 7 003 ocr- 1) DE WAX, 01%04RY 9WTS/TALNGS INE 9,0-4 AS PART (y 17.695 acres . 1 TH,S PLAF ALONG *aol/S Onâ‚¬N -OR CISCOâ‚¬RÂ¥ gw-7%,la-Gs- sâ€¢uu DRatâ€¢noâ€¢y war&190-â€¢GS pocary \ /tor 4 r, w iNS p,Crf],ry 2) 11Â« Fr-,11 moa-or--r OF Â»â‚¬ COIMIH I,(EAND *ALROW CITY PARCEL M BASED ON Thi KOO, l.*EN SUMOnÂ¢SKON EXD,P,KI PLAT (DK 17 O PC 75) Â»0 ThE MOLITAN EDGE A,Â·,EXATION MAT (D< ..PG .4 1 - 3) DE RoorS I Iâ‚¬ ASPâ‚¬,4 TD-grE Wli,ENCÂ»'G nIS SL~#â‚¬y DISCOVERY 94/1 FolÂ»O REBAR a IGE {37*aUSâ€¢41) FROH nE FOIC UOUAENTAIKÂ»4 FOR 11â‚¬ 7 4 -- LOr/BCOOr CONNS AS 900-< ,$-OUS ~ECO.W P~ m AS ly> - CENâ„¢*D K 1)â‚¬ 1*59 C E 1* AH CynaAL -P OF TEE TAUNGS b Orr Cy ASPEN P.LE ?* 4 --<-46;sti l----- -- - -- 1 4) ROCK Â¥, fAIUS ADDAO, -S ES,Aaeâ‚¬D fÂ»OW Â»/ FULâ€¢O COAMERS I,CM,IMING 74 LOFS W $.le IDLOC* 11 / sy 0.- unl.Â£ 1,â€¢or Lar Es ,â€¢50 -s w...Â£â€¢e .,mi, w ' ' ~?0 1- --- 1 -- Acer -e 2:1.at~'iN-pz~Utr'- -- 44 pi-84 / - 1 RAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED n Ial i* 4 Ill N SECIION 2 OF SK 230 \ PC 496 \ 59 4 1 - 00 - I , --4 1 1 1 - saip: /WE i ~ R 1509 H~ / 11 1* 4 FOUND REBAR al If--41413 7% 14, L ) 1 s qÂ« f $ 14Â·544- â€¢ ' ... CAP, L 5 19018/ *,/4 FOUND REBAR 1 Y~--:7 CAP. l= 125;r**&07:,-~4 40.i-t- - -2 --'-r"~:" -1- tur << , 1 ---li------- 1 h r'OUND REBAR a 1- 1 41 14 /=205/Paly CAP, LS 12378~ 4 - - 5 FOUND FLA 1 I j 4,Â«00, 1 . f CAP, LS ~2~T PROPERTY FOUND RQAR *7 1. ----7 1 - -2 --// ---- V / - -00 5 -7 1 2 - -UPgR A REBAR --1 L 1 . 1 , S 03*66'43' N ~ 6 4#F . .0=2,1 -134 -1 1 1 . --, 1 -- 8643 Â· 14~50'49 GRAPHIC SCALE 4 --7\ - rc-.-- i ,; O l---- ---2- C m irri) CAP. l.1 0184 ~ * ~ ~ --- ; t.. ~P. L S. 05947 i il ' Ul 1 -- FOLâ€¢40 RE-R * d 1 loch - 80 1 Â£/ - -. FOUND /5 REBAR 309 -- 4/- hi - FOL/4 REBAR, A -- % 1-4 k J 1~ r 1 isj '00-ke- -- 1 CAP,/LS .2,1.,1 - 18 f- - Extit--rt-_Pl f-j lf-f-R_---------~i 11 ~--22 -ff--4 m# LEEIS-4 ;" i ft fleri*Ll .----1--i- - 1 9 - iljl .. t- 1 M , b NI - 60*.OL.Â£/;;~., 91 --- -t - 1 _ 1~4ts 4,4 I*i -4 p \ 1 r - I 3 W N - 1 1 , 1 7- FOLM) 1/. 1. -ASS CAP. E ,/4 SEC t3 -/0.- Â«11177 ASFEN sTR - - - 0 6-4. 12/ / _--19.$91----11-j 4+ - - '10.1, - 2im22 -laa - - --04 / k / FOUND RE&1-~* -__ 1 ~ ---0.1 1 w u *En Li 7Â¢29 1 t-_ 4 1 -*i- -- 1 L -- b -44 1 % --- -- 37.80' .9 , I. lÂ»O~ ASPMAL T - -,4 -~--- -u -- -\ t.3 1 - SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC - L.Â·v' / -- CIVIL CONSULTANTS ---- -- *- 2 -j j j 502 MAIN 5rREET, SUITE A3 - - '11'~' ~ i--N-.---- \J CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 :=17%:f:::..=mt:=6/:.n- (970) 704-03! 1 . -*'' ' --1 1 M - + 6~4 - CAÂ»r.<ANÂ» De- â€¢â€¢~-L -' , ~ 1 f ..... ./1 - lili M . -Ii I --- ~-- - - -I.Pli----*I.-9.I.-.-- _ _._lilli 11 11.11 I.JI 11/,1111111-1- 1-- Jaill;11!Li]/1 Jil@11 .1 1.1;1 ~~~ A .0.,,9.8, S .*.5.-00 S IMPROVEMENT LOCATION SURVEY: BARBEE - RUGHEIMER PROPERTY A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NEt/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEEU=.-3 :m# f 0.//Â·/ f '/// i///f f. '13 5 0 i >~ 5-5- -- 0- - - - --- .._. -_1 __ g -- - / 1l/li / -- I ' 11, 1111111 } - - ' .tj .. % / / - Illi 'At. -- ---- ,/-0--3---1 -1------ / -1 -25 -2 â‚¬L Z- /11!i / - / - , - - -- -1- - - / % - , - - -il - \ 1 11 - . // , X --- -1 4 0 f/// / - 1111'li 'ili//,/ / 1/ / - 1 1,1 /;ill//./ /1 1, , . 0,0.- / --r .7.) 11 1,11/ irlt / / + I . 1- 1 I < / 'trJ1521'.~ - - r ... A f.9 i f ,-3 FIÂ·' - 111 11\ 'il'jillili /1 lilli,tlift f,/1,/,11 1 - M - t 1,/ f . -- / Ill H # 1111&.1/;' , - !l! , I . 4 9 , '>'53 15 -1 - / It' /, tlit'3#1!lf:/1 1 1'li j /j / 1/1 - , - - - 2 0%91 ,Â·â€¢er k.,k _ h . 1 - //- J / -4 -/ 0 -_ / . / 111111//111/1 l.-/ / , 1 2 1 111 J'(//111 1 / k.0 0 ,#Q11 'i / 1 1/ 1/ j 1. f lill i1 1,121/ /// ' i i / 23 111111/ 1-43 4 =b ey- / 1 - f o / 0.' - 1-val ' ' ~if , 'fi- 1 \* i ' i x 1, , O . 1~ 1/,i 1 1 '11111'bilf/7/ 1 6 1 (*2 CLf(I <, ,~I-- j ~ ~ 01// 4 0 / \ 0 1 1â‚¬1 1 1 1 6, / /1 2 4 + 1 f 1 1 11 111 ' 11 11 1,1 1 1 : J ) Fjo- I h\ 9\\\ \ . - 1 , / . 1 4-0 1 1.1\ f /11< 1; \1 1 1 / ,-1- \ 1 1 111\ , t . , - lilli pâ€¢o,n lilli" 8 nâ‚¬ MAJOR c,sco,or SHAFTs/TAUâ€¢cs Al 9.0- As //IT W # , 1 1 61 / 11'j/1111/ DIS PUT ALONG Nâ„¢ VAROIS ONE, -10* ENSCOey f 1 11 1 / PILL 05<0Â¢470*r NKU*'Daqia ADOCE' 0 - It I t j, 2) DE FOMMEW *led-OF--Y of nâ‚¬ COLORADO VIOUIÂ® RALMOID ~ 1 / 1 / 0 =1%=P ;lj111 111)1 1 1/ / / 11 1 1 I \ \1 i 8 * Pc 811 / DE ASPEN 10-81/ Wllâ‚¬/514/ MS SUhâ‚¬Y ///2////1////1///f/ // / /// 1 !1 6 1 111 11 ; 1 \ qlf- ESTARJSâ‚¬ID HO,1 17â‚¬ FOLÂ»O â€¢ICÂ»A,/BTATION FOR râ‚¬ 0 LOTÂ»LOCâ€¢ CODERi AS SHO- b-auS MICO~ED AA 71 AS lili \ \ 4 7 vel,WED IND nÂ« 195* CE BUCHANAN UnCIAL -/ OF ThE /1 1,1 1 0 /1 / 1 / CITY Ky ASPE,4 0) SLOCK I CIALS AD[Â»1~0N *S ESTASLGED RCM NE FIRN) , / P / Call/2/5 AiOM~,EllliG nâ‚¬ LO!5 9 500 aLOCI 11 41 1,1 A> 7,â‚¬ Ulnt MAC,r LCOE Ki 03~56 -5 ESTIOUS/0 FICâ€¢ Iâ‚¬ ~ 0 1 FOL/O LOOE a,- CODâ‚¬,1 AS 9,0- DE *COROED MAY OF s 5.â€¢El LIE- CLAII *W 14- ~10 Â£00â€¢ ln) MCDâ€¢EN, 9-7 0 *) BASS ,* 11/VATO' AN ASS,IED {11-./* O. "" 17 0/ /11/ 1 1 , 1 1 / \\ / 1-l - , / 1 2 1 / DEAN A,EME AlÂ® Soury GAR-SCH S?REIT. AS 940- EL.EVATOI EQUAX,t PROCT aENO-AM TO -*u Anc~ CoutrY COUR,Houg ae,0--r (790,8,1 - +I,045' Â»-1 :471/ 1 42(-2: 1 4 / 1 11 1 1 I OpSTÂ»IG Â·,-r~A-_54/ I, 74/ , 1 1 1 7, A-Er, al,Ul, EU',14=ne=00' - an m 40*7Â¥,990 /1 / / '' / / pti,~Aâ€ž4 *ALL~<- . 1 l.37 / . 1 ,Â§ 1 1-54 , 2 -il' ' # 0 \ , + LÂ« 2.\\ r 0 , o \ 0\ O 1.-___ 11 i \ _UnUTY LEGEND , /4111 4 ) ill - - \ :\ I EXMTÂ»,4 09â‚¬mICAD EL[cmc 1 1 j : i /* t *' Ati q 4 0 f 4 1 '. f L rEDGEJ ' / h -30~~-_GARMIihM--E-1--7-- . ->-r_ 1-Mir#L- . --{~- DOSTâ€ž6 l~Â©EÂ»ORCUÂ«) [LECT,C 1 / rx --W 1-----f-0-IturL---67Â»--- 6 " ' 42 , ' * ,1*,7 1 - /21 1 4 0-0-=- SEW SEW -- ./ =h--- HVL- V -29 22 1 / - 2 g. SEW -- - 005'.G ..TE' W -_1_ DITâ€¢â€¢G 'rolhoâ‚¬ 1 / J .4 / %11 1 DOSTDIC F- HYDRANT 211'11 I I / / , bji i OCSTDIC WATIA Â¥N.le EXISTING 5.,4 ...f, / / ,6 ,- 1 1 - - 1020.19 Lilli - 111 DOUNG VIUTY ADESTAL 2-' / Â£ 1 \ 1 pt \\1 V.9 i Iwl . 1022.08 r / NI oUT- 1021.02 1 X. -1 ,/ 1 % TE,46 41 8 N 1 1 -* i\-3 1% 1 % Z 1 1 5 & r'11 GRAPHIC SCALE m..MM.-1.-4. 1 SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 (970) 704-0311 .... 17,- ... 0. - Â·r - Â·T-ltÂ·.- lITII-L--1.1--111_!_IT/._ _ T _- ~Ih- -T--- 8 x,Mi., 7 7 general vicinity of the existing residence and outbuildings. With the exception of various field grasses and a few scattered bushes, the flat portion of the properly located adjacent to Garmisch Street is devoid of vegetation. As presently configured, the Barbee property contains five separate zone districts. The portion of the property located within the City and below the 8040 footelevation ispredominantly zonedlklifUP)(Lj, Moderate-Density Residential, Planned Unit Development, Lodge Overlay. A small area of this portion of the property located in the vicinity of the existing residence is zoned lim!- Lodge/Tourist Residential. The remainder of the City portion of the property (i.e., the area located above the 8040 foot elevation) is zoned (,Consexxation. The portion of the property located within the County and below the 8040 foot elevation is zoned_!1-15PYR,Moderate Density Residential, Planned Unit Development. The remainder of the County portion of the property is zonedAER-10, Agricultur- al/Forestry/Residential. Existing utilities in the immediate site area include water, sewer, electric, telephone, natural gas and cable TV. A six inch water main and an eight inch sanitary sewer are located in South Garmisch Street. Electric service has been relocated underground, and is available from either a transformer located east of the existing residence on Juan Street or from lines located near the northeast corner of the property on Garmisch Street. Gas, telephone and cable TV service are also located within the Juan and Garmisch Street right-of-ways. The telephone and cable TV lines were buried in conjunction with the relocation of the area's electric service. The nearest fire hydrant (#700) is conveniently located across from the property at the southeast corner of South Garmisch Street and East Durant Avenue. 8 IV. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Applicant proposes to annex the County portion of the property into the - City, and to subdivide the property into twelve development lots and a conservation parcel. At the Community Development Department's request, Lot 1 will be r--v V- 4 rezoned to It=15~~6derate-Density Residential. Lots 2 through 12 will be rezoned to AHUPUD and developed pursuant to the City's affordable housing/planned unit development regulations. As the following final plat of the Barbee Family Subdivision/Planned Unit Development illustrates, Lot 1 will contain approximately 2.3 acres and the property's existing single-family residence. The lot will be conveyed to Mary Barbee, the present owner of the residence, upon completion of the land use approval process. Please note that a site specific building envelope has been designated on Lot 1 to accommodate any future redevelopment of the existing residence. The balance of the lot will be subject to the same restrictions that will encumber the conservation parcel. Lots 2,3 and 4 constitute the free market residential component of the project's AH1/PUD zone district. Lot 2 will contain 11,705 square feet of lot area while Lots 3 and 4 will each contain 11,440 square feet. These three lots will be conveyed to Mary Barbee, John Barbee and Hallie Rugheimer, respectively, upon recordation of the project's final plat. The single-familyresidences to be constructed_ on Lots 2,3 and 4 will each be limited to three bedrooms and a maximum floor area of forty-five hundred square feet. All development will be confined to the building .-I envelope which has been designated on each lot. The bedroom and floor area limitations are memorialized in Article II, paragraphs 1.(c) and (d) of the proposed Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD Agreement which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1, Appendix C. The Agreement, which is required pursuant to Sections 26.84.040 and 9 .. BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ' A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE1/4NEt/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6lh P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO INOÂ¥ ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT MARY K. BARBEE, JOHN Â¥ 21~11-922 BARBEE. AND H.111.11 B. RUCHEIMER, BEING THE OWNERS OF THE POLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN TH! CITY 0, ASPEN. PITKIN , i p=,Â·Â·hâ„¢ 1 4 COUNrY. COLORADO. TO WIT: . ------r 1 1 E- r k-)- f c THAT PART U LOT T CF 1,â‚¬ NORT)<AST CAIE-OUARTEÂ» 0/ 1,â‚¬ NORDÂ·EAST FOLÂ»K) /11 .ASS 3- ONE-QUARTEâ€¢ oF SECT-1 11 10Â¥0Â¢9- 10 901/11< RANGE 85 Â¥EW. cy ?HE CAP. toRNER F jIC 9*TH PR-RrAL hEME,Aft ACCOM-G 10) DE DIAGRAM CO! 1*ID Ir nâ‚¬ ws /750 -t . UlllED 51*lr5 52*â‚¬,OR Geâ‚¬ULS Ofnet -4*Ry 4 1896 AS RANGE APFROâ‚¬ID Dr DE Ul,?ED STATES A,I,rrOR GENENALS Of}KI WARCH =ic g 1~ ~ 12/13) 31. 1891 OESCRGED AS FOLLO/t 4 75Â·OPS, 1 -.Wat'-13Gmt + 4- 11(S--A-EL / 1,0 25 Ad.Uld CAP * arGI-NG AT 11â‚¬ Noll,AEST CORâ€¢â‚¬R Of SAO LOT OPâ‚¬ SAC CORNEN ALSO REBAR, LS 128643 4 2941- SONG DE f-AST 0,â‚¬-SUFEIN,H CO-ER SICâ„¢JNS U AND 11 TNENCE S 8745'56- B 342.86 S 00Â·â€¢536~ E ALONG ?NE NORFHERLY LEâ‚¬ OF SAC Lor 1 34186 FIET. till' # 1 94.I0*1-=AN,61- m A Pora ON 1}E SOUÂ»47?ir ~E OF Â»â‚¬ FORMER RIGHT-OF--y OF 1,â‚¬ / 1 p F.REBAR a u .* 4-79. f / 4-1:5:0*lz58-A32%* 140 %.7-â‚¬,-0.r..I .OP FEIT 70 JMÂ· #2572= rAN,-0-0.F --W COLORADO â€¢1Â«/10 RAAROAD CO-ANÂ¥: 1Â¥â‚¬NCE 5 42-2TC- E ALONG 3Â«Â«4201Â«/ L,â‚¬ Or Soun, GA-SO, Sâ„¢fIT. DENCE S 14304,- , ALONG SAÂ© 7-n OF THAT MlopERTY DESCRED 11 SECION 2 C* 16â„¢1.4,ENT RECORDED W BOX* 2,0 Ar PA(/ 4/6 0/ 1// PIN// COLEâ€¢TY MECCIOS, T~/ha 5 394701- i 07.07 mi TO DE NORneST CO-[I of TNAT -SPErr 1 / /// - 7\ Orr / Aspt-,1 COLORADÂ» Â»ENCE S 750*~i- E ALONG ME Soumel r U t 5 LIâ‚¬ 01 SID ILOCK 11 15)00 FEIT TD 1,â‚¬ SOUDEAST COM,IR OF LOT 7 k 0, SIÂ© ROCK H. DENCE LEA-G 11â‚¬ SOUnâ‚¬lty Lli Of SAO SLOCK M S 14-90'49- 1 2050 FET 10 11, NO,lk,IEST Co-N OF LOT ,3 Of- 1 -flah 1 .4 i 1 /, 4 .. SAE} atoCX n. SA, POIT ALSO BENG 11â‚¬ NORDâ‚¬AS?EAY COVER CP try 7 74*T Pe<rENTÂ¥ DESCRIED N ICâ‚¬* 706 AY PAGE 334 U- THE PITKIN Flk / / / R A.PeN COLÂ»,TY RECC,D% 1,0,CE ALONG TIC DaÂ»CARY LK , SAK) PIOPERTY DESC~ED I IX* 201 AT PAGE 134 TE FOLIC)-/ l/Er c{X~SES 11 N 751Â»11 1. . p 23 FUT ICIÂ»rt.,4 Z) S 1.10'4*. â€¢ 7&00 FEIT Ir\ / illg 164~ 1 4 Â»f// 14 1 3) S 03Â·55'43- W i,4.99 FUT 70 1,Â·â‚¬ SOUTHIES?Ulty CORâ€¢ER oF LOT -=11; AffLA- 444*Ful-Tl ~ 99- lit AMEA 21000 Fur 10) Iâ‚¬ SCUIN~ESFIny CO-EN U SAO ILOOf 11. Â»40*CE VICINITY MAP L Li. '3 CITY ofâ€¢ A.Pe N FEET m DE SOUDEAS~ CO-, Or SIÂ© It-00< 11, SAD Co/Â»EN ALSO 8[Â»,C A #0~ 04 Iâ‚¬ NOMMe Aga-OF--r Uâ‚¬ Of ASPEN STREET ' DEMI LIA-G Â»/ SOUâ€¢G,1 LAE OF SAD .0, " 5 14-504. W AL// nr NES-Y /0#T--C,--7 LUE OF SAE) ASPEN STREET 14.67 3.2 .UZZILY comâ‚¬M A WIS #7577 PITKIN COUNTY TlnE. INC. HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT MARY K. BARBEE, S 8931/t, ALONG Â»E SOUNRY U/OF SAC LOT , 80/5/ FEET 25 AllÂ»,1 CAP I TO nâ‚¬ SCM.In-ST CO-â‚¬P P SAO LOT 1, SAK) 02*B ALSO REMG INE REBAR. L S #:28843 NORM AST Ce<-9*TEDÂ¢11 9*00 1 SErâ„¢* 0 Â»ENCE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY. IM FEE SIMPLL /REE AND CLEAR OF ALL -1 MN F. BARBIE AND HALUE B. RUCM:IMER ARE THE OWNERS OF TBE 10 A POWT ON uâ‚¬ 1-4 OF DE Unt.E WA<* LO~ a,A*k -TED STATES MONETARY DENS AND ENCUMBRANCES. wâ‚¬MAL 9.Â»râ‚¬r Na 3938 AS PAINTED N )00* 95 AT PASE 212 OF nE P,â„¢,4 0Â©-Tr â€¢fIGeÂ©1 11â‚¬,â€¢,CE N !437'U E ALONG BE L.â€¢E 1-4 OF 188.50* t Sla LOAD CL- 707 - FEIT TO CO*.O B Ct St LOAD aAID< DÂ·ENCI - 0 11111.-- A,~L. #1- .C- ...1 1 4 Br: . PITIGN COUNTY nTU. INC. : I 75,0'4- ~ -05 Â», Lm, â€¢-5, SO Â£010 a- Ae,re,Er, 1 - l TO TIE VES111~Â·r L~â‚¬ CF SAÂ® LOT & Â»ea LEA-G BE LNE 4-3 oF CE;ne 4. d *2 / . , -r 91 2%1111 -rf [.41141 -, ; N 1 /W LOAD Clal N 0013'â€¢r â‚¬ ALONG rE ~STDMLY i.,â‚¬ OF SIO LOT REBAR, L.1 128643 ./ / / 2 5* ALLI CAP * VINCE WGINS, PRESIDENT 1 476.64 FIET TO 11â‚¬ mlE PONT Of aECI-4 14} PARCU OF LUO ' I. 2 '/7 714%Gj CONTA-4 17 695 ACRES WORE M LESS O DO 0,11:Br SUID,FLD, AND PUT 15, SAM, INTO LOTS ~ / ,~5j~t-'f~â‚¬:21,~ ~~5,1, ' --i -f~~3 1 1 5 1.1,3,4,5.6,7.8,0,10, f f AND /2. AND A CONS,RN TION PARCEL. BARBEE FAMILY SUBD,VISION/PUD. AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED 1 THIS I,NAL PUT 0, THE BARBEE /AM[LY SUBDIVISION/FUD IS APPROVED HERON. .1tttI Br TH! CITY ENGINEER 0, THE CITY 0, ASPEN THIS - DAY OF 1, DO Nt,REBY D,DIC,7, AND GRANT 70 1'82 CITY 0, ASPEN. LAr m.,00 THE PUBLIC USE FOR ACCESS. ROADIAY, SIDEâ€¢ALK AND UNDERGROUND UTILITY PURPOSES THE Z FOOT IUCHT-OF-Â¥AY STRIP DIFICTED AND th 4 0 r./9. DESCRIBED HERRON ADJACENT TO IXISTING SOUTE GARMISCH STREET Ill:ill'llj 4ts' .f-2 ~0 CITY ENGINEER RIGHT-07-WAY. 1 Of *~Aybij~ . .217 %4 RICLUSIVE *ASIMINT AND RIGHT-OF-VAY OVER. ALONG. ACROSS AND BENZAN THE PROATE ACCESS AND UTILJTÂ·Y EASEMENT DEPICTED AND i BY THE CITY OF ASPEN DEPARâ„¢INT 0, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TnIS DEPARâ„¢ENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL DISCRIBED HIRION FROM ~TS POINT OF INTERSECTION â€¢ITE! GARMISCH ~ ~ W DAY OF . /999. TH{S FINAL PUT OF THE BARBEE FAMILÂ¥ SUBDrrISION/PUD fs APPROVED I UtiN'.:;t *m~N~Ir J:~TiNWIA:Immt.lt':1;ZESM::T~RE~LY N. NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SUBDinSION, FOR THE USE AND DENE,ry DIRECTOR \ oF AND TO RUN WITH THE TrTLE TO LOTS 6.8.7,8,9.10.11, AND It i AND FOR THZ USE AND BENEFIT 0, THI BARBIE AFFORDABLE HOUSING t AssocLATION. FOR PURPOSES OF ALL FORMS OF OPEN AND Â¤IL_CQUHCUateRQMAL UNOBSTRUCTID SURFACE ACCESS AND TRAVEL TO AND FROM SAID LOTS THIS FINAL PLAT OF THE BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD IS APPROVED 5-12, INCLUSIVE. FOR ANY AND ALL USES THAT MAY NOW OR , < HEREAFTER BE UCAUY PERMITTED ON SAID LOTS, OR ANY Or THEM, BY THE CMY COUNCIL OF THE C!17 0, ASPEN THIS DAY 0, AND FOR AU UNDERGROUND UTILITY UNIS UTILITY COMPANIES ~ i r SHALL ALSO HAVE THE BENEFIT O/ TRE ABOVE-DESCRIBED EASEMENT . 1,99. + FOR UNDERGROUND UTIUTY UNES WHICH SERVE LOTS 5- 12 OR ANY 0, NAME r,rew. / 4) DO HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT PERPITUAL PRIVATE. NON-EXCLUSIVE WAR * CAP.- . LASIMENTS AND RIGHT-0,-â€¢AY OVIR. ALONG. ACROSS AND BENEATH ANY t>o'~1â„¢ ArrtsÂ¥. -* Â·014/9524% 50.-4. 32'. HERZON, IN TNE LOCATIONS SHOWN HEREON. FOR ALL /ORMS 0/ 3'.So.- 1 CITY CLERK N 00â€¢15'47= 1 ,////Â»252Â¢fy~ 3~ZEARMH~~ir~Z~n~Ill~alUSPilP~~~EZ~MD~S/(muB~D,0 LDE 1-4 WS #3956 ~ RUN WITH THE TITLE TO LOTS 6-12. INCLUSIVE. AND FOR THE 5 11 i tivi 1% i FURTHER USE AND BENEFIT 0, UTIUrr COMPANIES FOR UNDERGROUND 108.89' UT11117 UNES WHICS SERVE LOTS 6-12 OR ANY OF THEM. 1.or t Algagoohill/lut:Vig/ZI i. MARK BECCER. A REGISTERED UND SURVEYOR. HEREBY CERTIFY THAT 5) DO HERIBY DEDICATE AND GRANT PERPETUAL NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOUND REBAR A 1 PREPARED THIS FINAL FLAT OF BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD, THAT ' , MS 75*of,r E larib,1*L&13Â«31%49Â»34372'fÂ·-4 i AND RICHT- 07-WAY ovER. ALONG. ACROSS AND BENEATH THE UTILITY CAP L S 025947 ~ m LOCINON ON 158 OUYSIDE BOUNDARY. IATEK'UL LOT LINES. PRIVATE ACCESS AND UnUTY EASEMENT. OTHER UTILITY EASIMENTS. OTHER EASEMENT DEPICTID AND DESCRIBED HEREON. LOCATED ON LOT 1.Felt THE USE AND BENIFIT OF ALL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR TBE , S 89Â·61'40* Â¥ 80458' RECORDED OR APPARENT EASEMENTS. UTILITY UNES IN EVIDENCE OR SW COR LOT 1 REBAR & CAP,-~ BL' KNOWN To ME, IMPROVEMENTS. ENCROACHMENTS ON OR oFF THE PROPERTY. OPERATION.MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND REPIACEMENT 0, UNDERGROUND UnUTY UNES. 00 2 r AUU' CAP LS 028643 (11,) AND OrnR nATUUS. 4111 ACCURATELY SHOWN HERION, THAT THE OUTS,DE 1 - 'Al SEC '3) a ABAR. LS 026643 GRAPHIC SCALE BOUNDARY HAS BEEN MONUMENTED AS REQUIRED BY LAN. THAr rHE PLATTED 0) DO MEREBY DEDICATE IND GRANT A PERPETUAL. PRIVATE. NON LOTS AND PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD CONFORM TO THOSE STAKED ON THE .- + GROUND, AND TRAT THE SANE ARE BASED ON FIELD SURVEYS. RECORDED traUSIVE EASEMENT AND RIGHT-0/-WAY OVER, ALONG AND ACROSS THE EASEMENT. RIGHT-OF-VAY AND RESTRICTIONS ARE THOSE SET FORTH IN 10 FOOT WIDE PRIVATI ACCESS EASEMENT DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED lf,MON nOM M PCNNT 0/ iNTERSEC!,ON IfTN G.i~UnSCE STA~r, ~4- pow ./ a Op Nule BLM NIASS SECTION 2 0, SCE*DUU B or THI TITLE COMMITMENT ISSUED BY PITKIN MARKED 1/3038 LS #16413 ( IN PrIT ) COUNTY TITU, Me. UNDER CASE NO. PCT-8990. AND THEMEE CONTINUING VISTERLY 100 FEET WITHIN AND ACROSS LOTS CAP, E 1/4. SEC 13 ~ 3 AND 4. 10 FOOT ON EITHER SLDE OF THEIR COMMON LOTUNE TO ITS ' inch - 100 3. SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC POINT 0, TERMINUS. FOR TRI USE AND BENIFIW OF AND TO RUN 1111 THE TTLE TO LOTS 3 AND 4. FOR PURPOSES 0/ ALL FORMS 0, OPEN RY AND UNOBSTRUCTED SURFACE ACCESS AND TRAVEL TO AND FROM SAID LOTS 3 AND 4 AND FOR ANY AND ALL USES TRAT MAY NOW OR 4.â‚¬'ES MARK S. BECKLER. P.LS. 028643 HEREAFTER BE LICAUY PIRMMTED ON SAID LOTS. PLAT SHEET INDEX i) DE *ARSEE FAILY StIDIASION/PU) IS SLS,ECT 10 WAT CERTAIN DATE: 1.) F*NAL SURCy PIAT - Ex,EmOR SOUGARY Suet#WSICN/*UO AGREE,EP,T RECORDED AT MECEPT,0,1 Na \ S., OF STATE OF STATE OF 2,0 Alll SU~â€¢â€¢EY PLAr - lorS &11 DEr- 1,4 11 OrncE Of DE CUNK NÂ® RECOREER OF MARY I. BARBIE COL-Tr W 00.Tr OF COUNTY OF Plrill COUNTY. COLMADO 2,1 THE CONS[*-1,04 PARCIL A,0 A PORYÂ»N OF LOT i (AS 910- '. W ZIE,Ol,4 -S AC,0,0â€¢LEDGED SE,TIC i nâ‚¬ falm<Â»10 -S ADOOUDGED lin,{ IdE -K FO~Â©004, -S AaCH,aUDGED MIC,f WE HERCN) AMâ‚¬ SLS.ECT % A DEEI) ar CONSENMATICÂ¥ EASS.IENT HS _ N. oF INS _ 0â€¢Y OF- WS - DAY , SOPRIS ENGINEERING - UC RECORDED AT RECIP,loN Na â€¢ ThE TmS FINAL PUT 0, BA.RBIE FAMILY SUBDIV]SION/PUD IS ACCEPTED FOR JOHN V. BARBIR 8Â¥ Al I IAINL Dy WARY / ..11 .y R.U. a *lgilie OFF-KES OF INE ClE- NO *CO*DER OF Mr,4 COLITY, FILING IN THE OFFICE OF TER CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITAN COUNTY. - COURAPa COLORADO, THIS - DAY OF , 199S IN mIESS MY HAIÂ«} AlÂ«) -IC- SEAL WiCS â€¢V *t NÂ® 0-OAL IAL *INESS MÂ¥ 164% Â·440 (rnatl SEAL CIVIL CONSULTANTS PLAT BOOK AT PAGE EALLI! 1. RUCIEIMER ~ MAINSTREET, SUITE A3 Â·t' M~ mm'21 co~]â„¢4 naN c.st.*r ..a CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 MTKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER NondÂ¥ â€¢t~C NOTARY Puk,C NOT-Y Pueut (970) 704-0311 ././illi//Ill'll'llill/'llillillill"lill'll'll'llill'/mill'll~--/--27!19",--71iilh FINAL PLAT OF: BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT 1JEVEL0PMENT A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NEt/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEET_.2-QE--2 S ,â€¢3049. w 24591Â· LOT BOUNDARY CURVE TABLI 5 --;~~~~.~~.~~~ci~~i...~F#A~J S Â·50'49* E 3323'W 1 AL- - --- 91,42 .ir 10, U N 0753'11- I , /4 GRAPHIC SCALE 042Â«Â·4494~49<:afbi /4 - - .n / 1 -h - m n - --- ai#- 500382 ( m n.) 2 1 11 1 1 U' '210 1 s 14Â·50'.r . 76100' 69 or ~32 _64-L,ove#Al<LiarLILL 5100' 3100' 8100' k Â»Â»:43 -f~2#*APAR~ 1 Â£or. 42 h 2 4'U Z: 449Â«~01Â» , 1.705 4 Q. 8;8 :1 11.4400 .11 LOT Z LOT 3 LOT 4 0269 *-Â·' . f-- -1 UTILITY EASEMENT UNE TABLE LEâ‚¬ 1 Ftenow k DIST/<â‚¬ 1 m.â€¢ 11 // 50' BUONG - Immy- 4 aw"â€žâ€¢ / SE TBAc'c 1 \643 0, .0.ve k / 5 141040- W sr- 0 - 0101 4 .2 - 0// ,/* UI =/"-' . m 1 Lon IMA (.0 Z-16 . 31// . S|.â€¢50'.'â€¢ , 4 *>/44*62> N Â«0 :7 N 14Â·50'49 EM 72 LOT 8 10,7 â€¢9 4 1 102(Joe a 069 ocr// 2 ..705 1 moo' 0 4 J ..40 4 11.4.0 34*torÂ«Â»Â»*. --~- N 75'01'11Â· W i. ,â€¢,4,4 s 1.90,9- . lair 1~' NIAO \ NASÂ»Â»NtÂ»Zx<Â»994.Xm<**Â«24; -3737-\. 4 2- 2916)(2* *'Im ACCESy g LO 1017 LOIS JIÂ¢ 0 3133' - 34Â·1' :0 :All == 1, 4 LOT 12 izu P#4'9*vi)*F#$7:i iTt - 44.0 **le El N â€žSON. r B k ~ LOT 10 LOT Ion* Â« 125 ACNES 34,0 / : 4 :g; :11 A cON./44*noN PAACEL 11SS* AC C COW~N- .* i N 1430'4Â£ Â£ 18 77' 01<AIED Sol/1. GA-SO, Sl~IT R all[ 0011 A m V r i TOTAL ILL *)5 17 -5 <Ifi *2 1 <I#<;7, - 1 sr,Aar mâ€¢) DAIL/stâ€¢â€¢Er :Emet*,-7â€¢ Dmia lâ€¢,2 3 % 4 t ME f / 1 N \.444.-34\464 8 10' BU[eVE 31. 1 =~1 3%=~.. ..r 1 f S 14*60'Â« V ,/, 242.01' 18/ U Â£14% OF ..PAR'll DE..", 1-7 * .â€¢lull/, Svilly-Or - ~\Â«\ if AN. a OCIOBEN teea aon .... lix Â»\\ -2 h. L râ€¢,sara Â»41.-4/ / Sourn e,awnsort STREET ~ 4 LE / sle", 11 0,1â€¢ED, M I 0,-O sccie,l ia A FollÂ® ~BAR (UPÂ®EN ASPI,Ill) AlÂ«) 11â‚¬ El/4 colle oF 1-% i# *1494\22\401 SECnON 11 A FOXIC 1054 -W -ASS CAP 94Â»44Â«Â«14 Lrl,-if /. - I ' lid 0 849; oF DAE,1 11â‚¬ 18*0 F~- 0 HOC â€¢LAY OF DE AES:,AEDED 'SFâ‚¬M 10-9< nE ,-1 nÂ«]*AS Inâ‚¬RS =0 MAT 9 nCi â€¢85/ M ME la P W. nâ‚¬ 119* 010 01/MA'~ 1 1 oF NE #â‚¬1/4,21/4 0/ SAO SECTION 13 ArTIOED To nE ~ 00' f:pÂ·=~r='%:g= 2~y'U~â€¢MM'~ I â€¢nERS SUM.â‚¬r OF 1 Mt. Â»E , 096 -LUT5 -P Cr Thâ‚¬ ASPOI J| 40, 9 73 1. l / 1/13 ji OF NE SRE,%190NAL LMS OF SAID 10-90. Â»â‚¬ 1810 8LM SURâ‚¬Y. SLIOn,90,4 CO,DOâ€¢lll/ AND A,#IXABON PLArS AS O.--Zi-azz=ZEE~22=20-2--1-- 1 r 3 1 : & i m 1 21493* 144 ' 1 12<34-4 1:2.2.St:~.-1.11 ARE RECO~ED -H DE PINCI CO*JITÂ¥ a.11% A,O MCOIUMY 5) FO? SEcl,ON 13 IMEAADWII lia-Al,04 REyER 10 11â‚¬ C,Flef /O nâ‚¬ SMO- FOXIO W)HINTANON -1 *Ic/gr 5-/Â¥ MAI F-OR NS FR~ENTÂ¥ immED AS 1% -- ir nE mâ„¢IN Col/ITY RECOMol itiffitttlew#I-: 81 5 ' ji ' v IS BA520 04 TE KOCH Ulall SUIOMS,ON E)â‚¬-TION RAT (1* 17 0 PC 76) A~C DE WOUNTA# EDGE ANNEXAâ„¢]I PLAT M 1 1 - -R---71 7,9 7,â‚¬ aoots i, 1â€ž- Asâ€¢Ew 10-9,1r #,1,E,o,9 FWS Surâ€¢rr a I K .0 1 iR , NIERE EST,-19â‚¬I) MI ME RJU,O MOA,O,TAMON Fâ„¢ THE 4 1 1 t#,==lz,%:.11t:=2:~ %44352*RS*92- â€¢ 8) ILOCK 1, EAWES ADOTION -5 ESTAIL/9â‚¬D FROM 1,â‚¬ Folle L--- lill 1 ,> 1,â‚¬ Unu moÂ¢ LODE list Bes, ats =TABUSIED F,Cal nE 44~ E cowns alo,<IN- ME Lols, -0 â€¢toor il 9 I il I -il FOUIC LOCE CLA# CORIâ‚¬ft AS 5190- Â»â‚¬ RECORDED PLAT Of SAJO LOCE CLAN Aâ€¢O 11â‚¬ FILD LOCATED 05Â©00Â¥ 9.-7 **4.- 2 06444 ~ 1 11 - F ' 1 SEr .Ar Nor 2 . s.rÂ·r i. 78.00. 94% Iii '1 -LE.....4-J * ~ .,M---1 Io, r~~7".a ofwis co~sEÂ».1. EASEMENT A'2* 11 F-- --- 1 3 1 15' Mao' 1 1 1 1 lili 1 1 1 1 / 1 s N/50'49' , 1 11 SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE AB CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 (970) 704-0311 ... 1 , ..... ~T 1.-ILE- Â·-Â·r..1- Â· Â·Â·.1-Il 1.1 J 1- 1 ~ 1 . ~UT...11.-- 26.88.050 of the Regulations, will govern the development of the property and help to ensure compliance with the various conditions of final PUD approval. As no development of Lots 2,3 and 4 is proposed at this time, compliance with the City's Residential Design Standards will be determined at such time as building permits are req4*ied. Please note, however, that an access easement has been provided adjacent to the common boundary between Lots 3 and 4 to permit the ab 1 construction of a shared driveway. Shared access to these two lots will reduce the (2 ~V' Ae, number of required curb cuts on South Garmisch Street and facilitate the placement 41) 0.9& ('CiÂ»WM and orientation of the future residences' garages. A private easement for the CÂ«Dâ‚¬t:, ujul, common driveway which will serve Lots 3 and 4 is granted in paragraph 6) of the final plat's Certificate of Ownership and Dedication. The construction, use and maintenance of the common driveway is addressed in Article II, paragraph 2.(b) of - the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Lots 5 through 12 will be given to Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing, Inc., who will develop the AHI/PUD zone district's affordable housing component. The proposed affordable housing component consists of three resident occupied (RO) single-family lots and two so-called "category" duplexes. As presently envisioned, APEHI will convey Lots 5, 6 and 7 to qualified residents who will construct their own deed restricted residences. Pursuant to condition number 8. of Ordinance No. 44, APEHI will receive the proceeds from the sale of two of the RO lots. The remaining RO lot will be conveyed to John Barbee, provided that he complies with the Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority's (APCHA) affordable housing guidelines in effect at the time of the conveyance. In the alternative, the lot will be sold by APEHI to a qualified resident and the proceeds distributed to John Barbee and Hallie Rugheimer as provided for in condition number 7. of Ordinance No. 44. The 12 above requirements are memorialized in Article II, paragraphs 1.0) and (m) of the.- Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Each RO residence will be restricted to a minimum of three bedrooms and APCHA's maximum size limitation of twenty-two_MB#red.gross square feet. A 64Â»LE' maximum five hundred square foot garage and eight hundred square foot basement will also be allowed. The minimum bedroom requirement and size limitations for the RO lots are addressed in Article II, paragraph (f), (g) and (h) of the Subdivi- sion/PUD Agreement. The single-family residences to be constructed on the RO lots will also be subject to architectural guidelines to ensure compatibility with the duplex units to be constructed by APEHI on Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11. This provision is addressed in Article II, paragraph 1.(n) of the Agreement. The proposed guidelines are attached to the Subdivision/PUD Agreement as Exhibit C. The two duplexes will be constructed by APEHI and sold to qualified residents pursuant to APCHA's affordable housing guidelines in effect at the time of sale. Each duplex unit will be located on its own lot (i.e., Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11) in a zero lot line configuration to permit ownership of both a unit and its underlying ground. Each unit will contain three bedrooms and approximately fourteen hundred square feet of floor area. Individual basements will be provided if financially feasible. While the duplex units were originally proposed as Category 4 units, AEPHI will work with APCHA to determine the final sales price of both the 1-7 category units and the RO lots as provided for in condition number 8. of Ordinance No. 44. The remainder of the property, or approximately 13.6 acres, will be designated as a conservation parcel. Those portions of the proposed conservation parcel 13 presently zoned R-15(PUD)(L), R-15(PUD) and AFR-10 will be rezoned to C, Conservation, upon completion of the annexation process, and encumbered with a conservation easement to be conveyed to Park Trust, Ltd. (d/b/a, Aspen Valley Land Trust), a local nonprofit land trust. The Applicant proposes to convey fee title to the conservation parcel to the City concurrent with the recordation of the project's final plat. The area to be encumbered by the proposed easement is depicted thereon. The Deed of Conservation Easement is referenced in plat note number 2) and attached hereto as Exhibit 2, Appendix C. A Bargain and Sale Deed for the conservation parcel is attached as Exhibit 3, Appendix C. While the proposed conservation easement is intended to preclude develop- ment of the remainder of the property, and to otherwise preserve the conservation parcel in its present state, the Applicant is amenable to the publick use_ of the relatively_fl91-upper bench area_located above Lotal_6 and. 7 for passive park purposes. Public use of the existing trail which traverses the southwestern portion of the conservation parcel will also be preserved. The public's right to use the conservation parcel for limited park purposes and to utilize the trail which traverses the parcel is provided for in Article II, paragraphs 3.(i) and (ii) of the Deed of Conservation Easement. As the Final Development Plan on the following page illustrates, the three RO lots have been located at the base of the West Aspen Mountain hillside to reduce the visual impact of the residences to be constructed thereon. The lots contain approximately 6,320 square feet, 5,890 square feet and 11,740 square feet, respectively. A building envelope has been designated on each lot. The four duplex units have been located adjacent to the former Colorado Midland Railroad right-of- way, thereby creating a more defined edge to the Koch Lumber Park. 14 P iNAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF. BARBEE r'AMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT uEVELOPMENT A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6lh P,M, 1 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO \ .... ,1 \\\\. / J - .1 \ ,/r/\ - \\\ \ 4 k \ \ , . I \\ 1 \ GRAPHIC SCALE . / 1 \ , \ \ \ : 1 1 - 1. \ \ 1/ . 1 \\\ / 1 - N / I C . F.T) 1 / 4 . \ 1 -b -10 # 1 l , \ I\\ I . \ / \ 1 ' ' '* . SOP~IS ENG}NEEWNG - LLC- ' \ 1 : 'ti C CIVIL CONkul<TANTS \ ~ il â€¢ 1 : .~ \ 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE AB ~ -7 X 1/ / I \ CARBONDALE COLORAbO 81623 1-. i /1 / , , , \ \ ; (970) 704-0311\ / h ,/ t/ \ / 1 LOT 4 / %\\ . I \ 11,440 ,q ft . . I ./ 1 1 / / \ e . / . i . 1 2 / ' / BLAQAG ENEZOP ,/ . , \ - \\\I \ \ 0 -- / / 9 / // 1/ /1 \ ./. \ I i \ y d>'. ,/' ~N // 1/ V . \ %.\ \% \ // \ I I. / 19 \ r ' 1% ' 1 \%\\ \\\ \ 1 / / 6 /0 // / / 9 V \ . \ 4 1, \ ..\ \\I \,\ \ \. :.I : \ \ \ / t, \ /2 \ \ 1 9 Lor~\ '. 4 1 \\ 4 ,/ 6.887 4. ft~ x \ I ./04 \ \ \\ '\\ \ 4\\\ .\ I \ \. I , ./ 4/1 // /0/ 1\\\ \\\. i \\\ \.\ I. , 1.00 / / . 1 / /71 X t\/ / / it 1 \ /\ \. \ i \ \ 4 C \ \ 40 LJ I lilli , ~ 8,Â«DE 0/6{26:rE ~ \ ....F.Ji i. \ \ / /\ / ED. OF ~ - - V C.4.*ft.OV <r,M) - f - _ .~ \ \ 1 7 \ h \ ....\ i / / 7*4~77C 24Â¥*I - 1 9,446 09. ft J..UNÂ¢T /' 2 \>\ dil / 1 %. . # 1 LOT 12 - COMMON AREA% / ~ '< - \ ~ ~ ~4 Â»f~ ~\ f \ 4\ 0 \\ .. \\ /\1 \ /4,<\ : .\ 1 / \ / / \~ 1 1 *\1 ,>1~24\\\\ ...~ \ ;\... 1 V / , / /1 /2.i >31\/ .- , , 4 \ 1 \ 5 ,\ S.-/ . e :- 0 t.,3< . .i .. 4 . 'I # ~ LOT 7 / / \ A \ 1 . it 730 4. n. \ 1/1/ I X LOT 8 orr LKSM T ADDITIONAL CARMISCH / 1 Â·Â· \ 9 P'- , \ Ak , LOT,0 , 3,0,7 ag. ft. e X \ 4.440 P STREET R.O.W. 2,21 f iq. ft , r 1 \ 7 14 \7\ 1 \ 1 2,259 84. ft 4 LOT 9 \ N --\. X / 1 1 11/1 \ il /1, . \.\ \\ Mii,35}'r lit~ 2' 4'11,111;11 fl\\1144ii 1 1. 11 lilli lilI I !; 111 1 1 1~ 1 /11 11, a.taâ€¢.5 BfOP' . \ \/< ' I %\ / . 111 1151 ; 1 It li ./. j ..<r ... \ l \ 3 / \ 1 55, \ \. ~ r ~~~vi '11'~11 RI'~ 1'~''~'3;'#I[,~~4- r, , . . r&+ARIMMiT 44 i \ \ 1 / \\ 4. 1 1 14 / N \ 1 1 ~ 11 ; N~ 111 ,~i Ur; \411\ ~t ~11~ ' ~~' ~1>r \ 2 pe 1 Â¥114 1 - \ 1 3 f 11 1.11 17 \ f \ 1 \ \\ \\ X ,; 1. LOT 1 1 7 2,253 iq. .ft \ 1 1 0 ' G o. sm-Gr NOIEN \ 4 ~0 ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ 41 842: , 21Â£,/110% A, arÂ¥/ral , 7901 81 Â· O, 1,â‚¬ US GS 800*,Amr lo~TED AT 7}â‚¬ /â„¢1, CÂ©UNTY COUâ€¢moust / #U â€¢CCON. -m~~0 L- *-1 -~=-/.I \\ 9 .......i -coâ€¢,â€¢ ..... ... M......... .- ./.LP- -' ./. - '- .../-/I' l- The category units to be constructed by APEHI have been configured as duplexes to provide the greatest possible daylight exposure for each unit. Each unit's entry faces south to enhance solar gain. As the floor plans and elevations on the following pages illustrate, significant windows face the street, and porches wrap the street sides of the buildings as required pursuant to the City's Residential Design 696. Standards. Subtle variations in exterior walls, porches and gable roofs evoke a miner's cabin character which is consistent with Aspen's early architectural history. Exterior building materials will consist of wood or simulated wood walls and trim, exposed heavy timber structural elements, painted aluminum window frames, and metal roofs. Vehicular access to the three RO lots and the four duplex units will be provided directly from South Garmisch Street via a private driveway to be constructed within Lot 12. As Article II, paragraph 1.(j) of the Subdivision/PUD Agreement indicates, Lot 12 will be owned in common by the owners of the duplex units. A private access and utility easement across Lot 12 has been dedicated on the project's final plat for the use and benefit of Lots 5 through 11 (see the final plat's _ Certificate of Ownership and Dedication, paragraph 3). The cost of maintaining the common driveway will be shared by both the RO lots and the duplex unit owners. CON*â‚¬1 A cost sharing provision is provided in Article II, paragraph 2.(a) of the Subdivi- 4*7 l sion/PUD Agreement. With respect to parking, ten covered spaces will be provided within Lot 12 for the use and benefit of the four duplex units. AEPHI's obligation to provide these spaces is addressed in Article II, paragraph 1.(j) of the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. The parking area has been located to provide a buffer between the project's affordable housing units and the adjacent free market lot. Two off-street spaces 16 - 8 Q (3 Â® 12: IN 14'-4'I - 14 94" d-; 1 -1 if _i -4 10 rl -1PFâ‚¬3â‚¬12 -31~ 1 = : 0 0 60202 - Â® #v#71* 347816 [1.-1:-"~rf~~ LAA ~119_cÂ·.:* =q :-i- ir- 1 - % 1=j - 0*ZEK .O -or ' 1 i 22225Â· +1â‚¬EeD ~ de 9) i i 0 -ln =1~ Ff=b~ 1--10-Ir p/A/N# ~2~1' .t--2*141- - <. 1 i f.._7 il' r. Â® 11.--11Â«J / /073 - 016 .{th . 1.1 Ack,241"gr.2" 0 9602200 3 31- 99 ..J U 1 4.,;482* - . - - - I_ 1 -jat-F (34==1@) 1-1--rri -1 4 _L 0 -1 - 1== 20Â¢\ 1 0 - L _1 11 0 -- ..1 00 0 --r-- 11 hMW#,vA 3 01 i' le ird# MErE,2.5 1 - ~Il//AL~ - -5 40 ' . Â®1 . - U F , $.'VINC) t (21 - 0 0 lu C - -4 (2) 1 1 - - r-~-iII e) 1 -4 0-1 08\243'EE fAM )'-7 69(/BDI VISION 77 piCA L /0 AIN kE VE L AFFOAPA-14 LE. fto'/4/19 4 14"1 0009 1 I 1 0 0 (3 E 0 1 9 - I -4-- 1 1 --I- - 9 ~Â®23~.yaDA#/ 1=1 1 1 Ln'1-1- -lk t==i- 9. 1 - 4 0 ---- _- _ 14 0110 /9/2/200 1 @11 - -- ---- --1. 7 ~1-, PN B 1 - 8.00 F 7-KÂ»/2 4[2 1 - -- r ~~~ d L [11-24 4 - 1 *or -22 1 1 U - 1 1 =1/82â‚¬a," 1- C y - 1 01*F /7,6 Â®11 --31 ~1.-7-1 1-*-.4. 7 1 Â« -6- 1 154/2 BEE -FAAIILY t>(AD) Vit/ON -172<A L UPPER t-EVEL AFFORPA/3 LE Â¤OUL,/Ncl '\Â·1111 ,/8, s \'- O" 1 1 6600 1 e (9 Â® 0 Â®63)(3) Â® 1 1 441 11 . 0 1. )*-..Al#WLS,- 417-7 ~711 1,)WIL'tiehi# /97\ /541 -ii -6-- A IT \44 MEV 1 FIE] 4KtriT-4|U I rril,41' IL' I'!'1*A -,1,-1.- 1 0@ -LTIi'Ei~ @ @ LIE:;1 _4 ILL 111'zgy?". _ __ -Ti i 1 1 1 \* 2, f - 1 iteÂ« b. -- -- O*u*V ~ 23 ~| r 1 - 1 1 4 A --- Â®<5 - kit...3 7 -- 1 4,@1635 7,2>09 1 - - LL-1 | 41.1 Â® Iii!Â·'2'IN 1 /72 ~>MA/NA. - - 771 -I , Jk . I .- ... 44*& . ----", - .- - - 4-ia /4, 1 77PICAL NORTH BLEVATION 77P. WEST El-EV ATIO N 1 \ re" = /1-01' 0 8 BARBEE- FA M fLy 46/8 D/l//6/oN Aff2/21*BtÂ£ Ho vel N 4 f. SS, 17 - 1 <24> 1. 1 -/1_ rl 11 KEZN ~ 02) IIJ- 1 /7/11 \ r. e \ . - -- -- -I. gOof IN# C- /33 1 . - lit-1 /6/ 1 Â» 24 1 1 X- 9 Lr-6--r -E~Zarny= 2, Roof cov EK. 41 1 111 ' -1-,11 1-111 -- , -Â£ L ' / /~\ ~. *ILLi '18'- IJ Ve," - -0 V.v/ til -8 -re/V frÂ«fi-f. - ---- ~- C 91, tx V ROOF GOVEFL 49-91 /73 h bc\ -â‚¬>Ct-L L/pr'F jâ‚¬ t. 497/ 297 22-1 1 09 [M-- i - -1 WOOD 40/6/FLE e 0- 1 Â© ___~<E El i I *' i [.Md] '71*11 -k! 1 _ IL m e --- 4,!P/N4 TE#ch,. 111 r 1 / ---\ --1-,/ MAI N L. 7 10 --#--1 -. 1 - 1 0 D -O i 6-kr,-A M MT@M 6 - f . ial_ac, Me.rEFÂ·~~--0~)Â·- --4 778 Â»ST LELE 1/477* 77PMA L C)OU-TN ELE VATIO N '' | GA* M,-râ€¢p-4 78" = iL 01, 1 1 per unit will be available in addition to two guest parking spaces. As Article II, paragraph 1.(f) ofthe Subdivision/PUD Agreement indicates, each RO lot owner will be required to provide two off-street parking spaces for their residence. Guest parking for the RO lots will be provided on each residence's driveway apron.- cul-- 4-4~fl Y oltacw-ets The proposed access driveway design has been reviewed by the Aspen Fire Protection District who has determined that adequate space will be available to accommodate emergency vehicle access (see Exhibit 4, Appendix C). Based on the District's recommendation, the_duplex-and RO units will be sprinklered; and a fire hydrant will be installed within Lot 12 to further enhance fire protection. The obligation of the RO lot owners and AEPHI to provide sprinklers in the residences to be constructed on Lots 5 through 11 is addressed in Article II, paragraph 3.(c) of the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. The duplex lots, the common access driveway, and the off-street parking area (i.e., Lots 8 through 12) will be landscaped by APEHI as depicted on the Landscape 1 Plan on the following page. Lots 2 through 7 will be landscaped by the individual lot owners. To ensure consistency in the project's landscaping, the owners of Lots 2 through 7 will be required to comply with a common set of landscape guidelines which are designed to complement the proposed landscape plan for Lots 8 through 12. The landscape plan and guidelines are required pursuant to condition number 1.e) of Ordinance No. 44 and are addressed in Article II, paragraph 4. of the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. The proposed landscape guidelines are attached to the Agreement as Exhibit B. A five foot concrete sidewalk and curb and gutter will be installed along the _ property's Garmisch Street frontage. The sidewalk will be set back from the edge 1 20 1 - FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF: -1 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 1 A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. 1 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO SHEELL.QE--1 1 4 / 1 ~ i Plant Schedule ~ ~~400 hU/Z *Pdwoz /'~~10/r ~ GRAPHIC SCALE ~ ~~~ I m nry) 1.1 elerivt,pet,Ve/~F-r ,#~ 9 6-4 I J.1 - 10 LIL-Â»& ... , 1 tich - 10 / '' i '' ~ LOT 5 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 : 14 11-ew Ti-051 9 611 , ~ SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC l i TX 1,74Â·r. HARv /WA , /'0' CIVIL CONSULTANTS | . I 6,318 â€¢q. ft CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 i * H Â»* 4. F i 6.770- .' (970) 704-0311 1/ I. i / \\1 / 1 1! LOT 4 11,440 Iq. ft 1 + , 9.4 t.0//1 1 / .3.fl'.Be.S.f \\1 /11 4,0 , 40\\\\ 1 1 4 1 1 1\ d . l 4 1 , % 4- 1-b. . 1 \ \\ 1 \\ I 2~ 1 , 2/ \ ' ./.4 ,/ 1 \ ,/ L~ LOT 6 \ 1 - i l 5,887 4. ft Â»1-we /5,0 4 11 / , / 6 \ W. W.HÂ»P-vâ€¢/4. / 1 I \ 1 il 1 // \ /10, \ 2 SCIONT EN,ELOT , 1 - 1 l * /\ <1 1 1\ Â£ 1 - ik~ ED< . - 4,1 3 1,WAC S~FACE . LOT 12 - COMMON AREA 9,446.4. A -'I Â· ...11..,1 1, r 4 /\ 1 %: '. /' 1 .. \ .// ./46 . I . uâ€¢-A eâ€¢/O 791]L .9 ~2 / ~ , LOT 7 -| 4 Â»F.W . 1 ~- \ 41 rADDITIONAL CARMISCH . LOT 10 LOT 8 '3//ID-l/\ '~ 4 .' At*- 3---i3lv 11,736 4. ft I h./re.r= ~ .. 71%71\ - â€¢ 5 I ' Â·Â· 3,0, ,g. fl, 1>162 .2>. C \ ..0 > / STREET R. O.W. . 2,Ull â€¢q. ft 77(*L/'117* . \ /3 1-Ped -LA=ec, 1, 2,259 : * A'*2\ **rl.,Ce - - -~- .. A l l . â‚¬WÂ· 41 / \2[111 Â· Ly, ... 9- 4, rrâ€¢,0-5 -- 1* .1- suit,05 0/9104= 1- I . 1 1 1 trn~l)114\ 1 1 1 4 ill '. 2%54 911*45 +I,/,f4' . /: /14 1 -30+24JJ li frFFEFir./.Ar~TrMitili~~~~~~~' \3 0 ' .11 ' 7 LI \ ' V. lili '*111111111111111'y' *f'Fl \ l h.5\ 2122-11112 1 4. eeM.v,cG,rrÂ«, y \ yl \ \.% \+1'D \\\498 10~ --* -0-te. wr.ve..1- arcurÂ·,i,46 hi ~ \~'V;; AX\~'6~ ~ 4.0 -- 5 -p.w Â· - L.ww .ego,Uix - \ :36,0 Wr,#W .'T 4 1-1.0 $ Aeped h ' =- ===iY 1 -- C 0.9-0,4,Â»L.. ..O 1 - 05 70) 94,Â» 1 67/7 31 *sm.. .... I ./.0. r ,1 1 -- LI r . 1 1_ - rrn, of the street pavement to permit the installation of street trees and to accommodate snow storage. The proposed improvements, which are depicted on the plan and profile on the following page, were designed by Jay Hammond, P.E., of Schmueser 04}ordon Meyer, Inc., Consulting Engineers, in cooperation with the City's Streets and V r Engineering Departments as required pursuant to condition number 4. of Ordinance - No. 44. The Streets Department expressed a preference for a vertical curb and gutter to facilitate storm water drainage and snow removal. A streetlight will also be installed adjacent to the common driveway which will serve Lots 5 through 11 as required pursuant to condition number 2. of Ordinance No. 44. While the installation of sidewalk, curb and gutter as proposed will result in a uniform Garmisch Street cross section, the required sidewalk encroaches upon the project site. The Applicant proposes to resolve this issue via thededicaugn_ofo â€¢-r-- ----- ~ --- - - foot_strip of land adjacent to the exiting Garmisch Street right-of-way for access, - roadway, sidewalk and underground utility purposes. The additional right-of-way is depicted on the final plat and dedicated to the City in paragraph 2) of the plat's Certificate of Ownership and Dedication. The proposed development complies with all of the dimensional requirements of the AIil/PUD and R-15 zone districts with the exception of minimum lot size and front yard setback. As Table 1 on page 24 indicates, the proposed size of three of the four duplex Lots (i.e., Lots 9, 10 and 11) is less than the minimum required. Please note, however, that the lots in question are substandard due solely to L-/1- r.1 , AEPHI's desire to permit the future residents to own both their unit and its \~Cl f 104~0~ underlying ground. This approa@ yill enhance the buyers' access to financing and 1 1 ~l,|~) their sense of property ownershipi~Were the duplexes to be constructed on only tu--1 lots, the resulting lot areas would significantly exceed the minimum required. - - F 22 *Ahly D r 1 \ 144%444*444444*441 / U r - 0022----/1*/core~ rt Â£ ir- r-- 2Â¢77 1 1 ; EXISTING ~~ F f *;Mt OF WAY ~ SHED ~ || 1 442 4: -11 1 iii , \ PROPOSED LOT 10/ M LILA OF. Ll 0237Â§ 1 \ \ u PROF~SEb LOT L,â‚¬ AnE, 2' ~ FOU.Â«) /='a . LJ 05'GHT 01 -r DED,047*W X & 1- -<*--*- M, ~ I Y+Z- 2-17 1 4 // ; PROPOSED SÂ¥â€¢EET UC,frl iril - Â· Â·- Â·Â·Â· Â· 3"- .'Â·~ ,~,D- it'~ f4,7.. 01'74.Dull.6 ,;4,7.tÂ· 4-~0, i;i; ;NLir., *i :&~':14k,4 +~M +~ b 4%,t9A,au,Â·, ~~U -r i,Fry-7-3-11-- 46 . .ik~-r Inil/*Ell(/fa,.Â·1't'â€žf'*1>42Â·i.ri;J:,dÂ·'MhtiN'a*Lf41:404~%,tÂ·1'%&1 A 4â‚¬â‚¬v . ,-J- . 4, 1-L /- 5* 1,*OS04PE AMIA -1 '10. 4 6 1 Slk /00 - SOUTH GARMISCH ST ~ L===% ==D \-0 EDGE ofÂ· EX. ecom'amm ~--= AFI1ALT (~.) .. 2 Â¥ 159.34'- --- ---- --L -2(2 R .-/ - )1 -- 1 - - -li 1 ,/EmEOFFM~EÂ¤NTJ 1 0 24' A.Le) 0; ------- 1 ------- DOSTID MOMT OF WAY LNE a : 6 B 11 1 1 1 1 In.. EXESTIHG UTUrr POLE | 1 rdiell 1 DOST,He ElE,INC T-,SFORMEN 1 0(mNG TCEP,Â«1Â« PIDESTAL ~ A ousn~c v.=.g .1 1 1- C 1 0 1 0 0 11 1 2.- It 1 1 <D 1 1 1 1 4 1 # WO 1 11 /040 Pw STA - 0,Ja81 amE Plif 1 N ElEV - 1021.35 1 Â· mao' K ,/lz//HEME"J'Vi-U I *58 NOIE: WS)- COIÂ®mONS S,JINEY NE) -SE W- PRO~*D W SOPRIS D,GN,Eâ„¢NG UC 1 la" i i sc/LE> 1- . 10Â· #**z. . f. 5Â·,Em. S - m - ,+06100 M Euv - 10,&08 a8 1020 1% 99 11 I --4.- 8 mR f F.sle -OE 1070 LuBâ€ž.w .%- iii -42 r DEnNO glyâ‚¬ rlaM,ION (ne ) r MWD -DE aNMWI# Â¢ 41 Â¢ Â¢ Â¢ 0+00 1+00 *400 ./ ./ 97072A TlS W. 0111 81-t. Sulti 200 GARMISCH ST FT 1 I 4; =--- *=~~~~~~~-BARBEE PAWLY SUBDIWSION /P. U,D, 12-17-98 - NkÂ· PLAN & PROFILE ~ E~ JH /02 4 Â¢*)*â€¢XÂ»1,2,- i. Alpe# Colorado (070) 025-0727 '3AV IN M.*1997\9707283*EEE 0,9 'flu ul t 7 10 09 35 1998 91 [r< [/rIC 1 Lot l's proposed front yard setback is also less than the minimum required. As Table l indicates, a minimum setback of twenty-five feet is required while a ten foot setback is proposed. The proposed setback, however, is consistent with the front yard setbacks of adjacent Lots 2,3 and 4, and is necessary to accommodate the existing residence on Lot 1 and any future redevelopment thereof. As the Improvement Location Survey illustrates, Lot l's proposed building envelope is significantly constrained by the adjacent West Aspen Mountain hillside. A variation dupla< Ulg, in the minimum lot size for Lots 9, '10, 11.Antlkand in the front yard setback for -- Lot 1, is requested as discussed in Section V.A. of this application. Il F i-_Ipor> . - Table 1 DEVELOPMENT DATA Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD 1. Existing Zoning City of Aspen Above 8040 Greenline C, Conservation Below 8040 Greenline R-15(PUD)(L), Moderate-Density Residential, Planned Unit Development, Lodge Overlay and L/TR, Lodge/Tourist Residential Pitkin County Above 8040 Elevation AFR-10, Agricultural/Forestry/ Residential Below 8040 Elevation R-15(PUD), Moderate-Density Residential Existing Site Area 2. Acres 17.69 City of Aspen 10.69 Pitkin County 7.00 Square Feet 770,576 City of Aspen 465,656 Pitkin County 304,920 1 24 1 3. Existing Lot Area (Sq. Ft.) For Density Purposesi ~ 109 14â‚¬___~_ For Floor Area Purposesz ~~761,130 ~ 4. Minimum Required Lot Size (Sq. Ft.) R-15 Zone District 15,000 AHUPUD Zone District3 3,000 5. Proposed Lot Size (Sq. Ft.)4 Conservation Parcel 590,610 Lot 1 102,000 Lot 2 11,705 Lot 3 11,440 1 Lot 4 11,440 Lot 5 6,318 Lot 6 5,887 1 Lot 7 11,736 Lot 8 3,017 Lot 9 2,259 Lot 10 2,211 Lot 11 2,255 Lot 12 9,446 6. Minimum Required Lot Area (Sq. Ft.) 30,000 31 , 006 R-15 Zone District 1 Existing Single-Family Dwelling Unit @ 15,000 15,000 Sq. Ft./Unit AH1/PUD Zone District 11000 6 New Single-Family Dwelling Units @ T,500 ' 9,000 lÂ¥)00 Sq. Ft./Unit 4 New Duplex Dwelling Units @ 1,500 6,000 Sq. Ft./Unit 7. Minimum Required Setbacks R-15 Zone District (Feet) Front Yard 25 Side Yards 10 Rear Yards 10 25 AH1/PUD Zone District Subject to PUD Review 8. Proposed Setbacks (Feety 1 Lot 1 Front Yard - \kvUu_ - - 10 North Side Yard 10 East Side Yard 10 Rear Yard Varies 1 Lots 2 Front Yard 10 Side Yards 10 Rear Yard 60 Lots 3 and 4 Front Yards 10 Side Yards 10 Rear Yards 50 Lot 5 Front Yard 10 South Side Yard 15 North Side Yard 10 Rear Yard 15 Lot 6 Front Yard 10 Side Yards 10 Rear Yard 20 Lot 7 Front Yard 10 South Side Yard 10 North Side Yard 14 Rear Yard 24 Lot 8 Front Yard 35 East Side Yard o West Side Yard 9 Rear Yard 10 26 1 Lot 9 Front Yard 27 East Side Yard 7 West Side Yard 0 Rear Yard 10 Lot 10 Front Yard 14 East Side Yard 0 West Side Yard 7 Rear Yard 10 Lot 11 Front Yard 6 East Side Yard 14 West Side Yard 0 Rear Yard 10 9. Maximum Height R-15 Zone District (Feet) 25 AH1/PUD Zone District Subject to PUD Review 10. Proposed Height (Feet) 25 11. Maximum Allowable Floor Area (Sq. Ft.)7 145,565 12. Proposed Floor Area (Sq. Ft.) 31,325-- Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 @ 4,500 Sq. Ft./ 18,000 Dwelling Unit Lots 5, 6 and 7 @ 2,575 Sq. Ft./ 7,725 Dwelling Unit7 Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 @ 1,400 Sq. Ft./ 5,600 Dwelling Units 13. Minimum Required Open Space Subject to PUD Review 14. Proposed Open Space 725,395 Lots l through 129 Square Feet 134,785 Percent 75 27 Conservation Parcel Square Feet 590,610 Percent 100 15. Minimum Required Parkinglo Subject to Special Review 16. Proposed Parking 24 Free Market Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4@2 Spaces/ 8 Dwelling Unitll RO Lots 5, 6 and 7@2 Spaces/ 6 Dwelling Unitll Duplex Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 @ 2 Spaces/ 8 Dwelling Unit Duplex Lots Guest Parking 2 1 The property's gross land area has been adjusted to reflect the presence of slopes greater than 20 percent and the proposed access easement which will encumber Lot 12. Slope density reduction calculations based on Barbee Property Investigation map prepared by Aspen Survey Engineers. 2 The application of slope reduction for floor area calculation purposes results in a floor area reduction in excess of 25 percent. Consequently, the Barbee property's gross land area less the proposed access easement which will encumber Lot 12 constitutes available lot area for floor area purposes. 3 For subdivided lots from a parcel of 27,000 square feet of larger. Excludes proposed two foot right-of-way dedication. 5 All setbacks measured from the designated building envelopes or the closest projection of the proposed structures perpendicular to the adjacent lot line. 6 Based on gross site area less the proposed access easement which will encumber Lot 12, a floor area ratio of 0.3:1, a 25 percent maximum reduction in allowable floor area due to steep slopes, and the 85 percent floor area limitation of the AH1/PUD zone district. 7 Based on the assumption that all of an RO residence's 2,200 square foot gross size limitation and 75 percent of its 500 square foot garage limitation would count as floor area. 28 8 Each duplex unit will also include a five hundred square foot basement depending upon financial feasibility. 9 Excludes designated building envelopes, building footprints, and the common access driveway and off-street parking area on Lot 12. 1 Pursuant to Section 26.28.110.E.1. of the Regulations, the maximum number free market units. Parking for affordable housing units shall not exceed one of parking spaces required shall not exceed two spaces per dwelling unit for space per bedroom or two spaces per dwelling unit, whichever is less. Two off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit are required for the free 11 market and RO lots in the project's Subdivision/PUD Agreement. As Table 1 indicates, the minimum required lot area for the project's eleven dwelling units is substantially less than the property's total lot area. For density purposes, the lot area of the fathering parcel after adjustment for slope reduction is approximately 109,144 square feet. Based on the applicable minimum lot area per dwelling unit requirements of the AH1/PUD zone district, only thirty thousand square feet of lot area is required to accommodate the proposed density. Similarly, the project's proposed floor area is significantly less than the property's maximum allowable floor area. A maximum floor area of approximately 145,565 square feet is allowed while only 31,325 square feet is proposed. All other dimensional requirements for Lots 2 through 12 are established in connection with PUD development plan review. While there is no minimum open space requirement in the C, Conservation, R-15 and AI-Il/PUD zone districts, it should be noted that approximately 94 percent of the properly will remain undeveloped. The entire conservation parcel, and approximately 134,785 square feet, or 75 percent, of Lots 1 through 12, will be retained as permanent open space. 29 1 1 V. REVI EW REQUIREMENTS The proposed development is subject to final PUD development plan, subdivision and special review. A rezoning and two growth management exemptions are also required. While the conceptual PUD application identified the possibility that the project might require 8040 greenline review, it has since been determined that all of the proposed building envelopes are located more than one hundred and fifty feet below the property's 8040 elevation (see Exhibit 1, Appendix D). As a result 8040 ~Zedline review is no longer required. Vested properly rights status is requested for all approvals granted pursuant to this application. Each of the applicable review requirements is discussed below. A. Final PUD Development Plan Development within the AHI/PUD, Affordable Housing/Planned Unit Development, zone district is subject to review and approval pursuant to the PUD provisions of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. Pursuant to Section 26.84.030.B.1. of the Regulations, the proposed development must comply with the following general requirements. 1. "The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan." While the 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) contains no site specific recommendations with respect to the Barbee property, the Applicant's proposed development is consistent with several of the Plan's goals and policies. For example, the intent of the AACP's Housing Action Plan is to J'create -il:94#,ig_- environment which is dispersed, appropriately_scaled to the neighborhoods and aj~rdable".Related policies encourage small to mid-size affordable housing projects 30 and infill development within the existing urban area. The proposed development is a relatively small, infill project which is appropriately scaled with respect to its immediate site area. The project site is ideally located and well suited for moderate density single-family/duplex development. The Barbee property is conveniently located with respect to alternative transportation modes (e.g., RFIA's bus routes and the public trail system) and the project's density is below the maximum allowed. Basmuch as seventy percent of the proposed development will ultimately consist of deed restricted affordable housing units, the Applicant's project represents a balanced approach to community development which is consistent with the AACP's objective of increasing the availability of affordable housing opportuni- ties in the Aspen metro area. In addition, the proposed development will result in the preservation of a substantial portion of the property as permanent open space for the benefit of both the project's residents and the public at large. The intent of the AACP's Open Space/Recreation and Environment Action Plan is to "preserve and enhance_thenatural beate_of the area"._ Related policies seek to preserve key open space parcels and to encourage projects which integrate the development of affordable housing and the maintenance of open space, both of which are reflected in the Applicant's proposed development. 2. "The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area." The proposed development is consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. With the exception of the Applicant's properly and Block 6 of the Eames Addition, which is located immediately east of the property, the immediate site area is fully developed. Existing development consists primarily of multi-family residential structures, and includes the adjacent Juan Street 1 31 I affordable housing project, the Mine Dump Apartments, and the neighboring Shadow Mountain, Lift One, Aspen Townhouse Central, and Timber Ridge Condominium complexes. The City's Koch Lumber Park is located immediately north of the project site. A small single-family residence is located on Block 6 of the Eames Addition at the northeast corner of Juan Street and South Garmisch Street. 3. "The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area." The project site and Block 6 of the Eames Addition represent the last significant development opportunities in the immediate site area. As the area is essentially fully developed, the proposed development should have little, if any, effect on the development potential of Block 6 or the surrounding area. 4. "Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant." A GMQS allocation is not required to develop the project. The existing residence predates the adoption of the City's growth management quota system. The proposed free market, single-family residences are exempt from the quota system subject to compliance with the requirements of the AH1/PUD zone district. The project's affordable housing units are also exempt from growth management subject to compliance with the applicable requirements of APCHA's affordable housing guidelines. Both exemptions, however, must be approved by the City Council. In addition to the above requirements, the PUD regulations impose various review standards with respect to density, land use, dimensional requirements, parking, open space, landscaping, architecture, lighting, public facilities, and traffic 32 and pedestrian circulation. The various standards, and the proposed development's compliance therewith, are discussed below. a) Density. Pursuant to Section 26.84.030.B.2.a. of the Regula- tions, a project's maximum density cannot exceed that which is permitted in the underlying zone district. In addition, Section 26.84.030.B.2.b. requires that the density of a PUD be reduced in areas with slopes in excess of twenty percent. The required slope analysis for the Barbee property was depicted on the Property Investigation map prepared by Aspen Survey Engineers in connection with the Applicant's conceptual PUD application (see Exhibit 2, Appendix D). The density reduction calculations which result from the original slope analysis are summarized in Table 2, below. Table 2 SLOPE DENSITY REDUCTION CALCULATIONS Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD Slopel Area2 Reduction Net Area 1 0-20 87,510 None 87,510 20 - 30 45,240 50 Percent 22,620 30 - 40 33,850 75 Percent 8,460 40> 602,870 100 Percent -- 2 Total 769,470 118,590 1 All slopes measured in percent. All areas rounded to the nearest ten square feet. 2 3 Based on Barbee Property Investigation map prepared by Aspen Survey Engineers dated October 1, 1997. 33 Pursuant to the definition of lot area, land within an existing or proposed dedicated right-of-way or surface easement must also be subtracted in determining available lot area for density purposes. As discussed previously, Lot 12 is to be encumbered with an access easement for the use and benefit of Lots 5 through 11. The resulting lot area, therefore, based on the original slope reduction calculations is as follows. Net Area After Slope Reduction - Proposed Easement = Lot Area 118,590 Sq. Ft. - 9,446 Sq. Ft. = 109,144 Sq. Ft. As the approximately 109,144 square feet of lot area which is available for density purposes exceeds the minimum required lot area of thirty thousand square feet (see Table 1, page 24), sufficient land area is available after adjustment for slopes greater than twenty percent and the subtraction of the access easement to accommodate the project's proposed density. Please note that the Improvement Location Survey prepared by Sopris Engineering for the final PUD application indicates that the Barbee property contains slightly more land area than originally estimated (17.69 acres vs. 17.67 acres). This increase in the property's land area, however, is insufficient to significantly alter the outcome of the original density reduction and access easement calculations. b) Land Uses. Pursuant to Section 26.84.030.B.3., land uses in a PUD are limited to those which are permitted in the underlying zone district. The single-family and duplex residential land uses which are proposed for the Barbee properly are permitted by right in the AH1/PUD zone district. 34 1 c) Dimensional Requirements. Section 26.84.030.B.4. of the Regulations permits variations in all of the dimensional requirements of a PUD's underlying zone district except allowable floor area. While virtually all of the dimensional requirements of the AH1 zone district are established in connection with PUD review, a variation is requested with respect to the proposed size of Lots 9, 10 and 11. As discussed previously, each duplex unit has been located on its own lot so as to permit ownership of both a unit and its underlying ground. The resulting zero lot line configuration reduces the lot area of the lots in question below the AH1 zone district's minimum three thousand square foot lot size requirement. A 7~f variation, therefore, is required. A variation is also requested from the R-15 zone district's front yard requirement for Lot 1. As discussed previously, the applicable setback requirement is twenty-five feet. A ten foot setback, however, is proposed to accommodate the existing residence located on Lot 1 and its potential redevelopment. The building envelope on Lot 1 is significantly constrained due to the proximity of the adjacent ~~--' hillside. The proposed setback is consistent with the front yard setbacks on adjacent Lots 2,3 and 4, and will have no adverse impact on surrounding development. d) Off-Street Parking. While Section 26.84.030.B.5. permits the number of required off-street parking spaces in a PUD to be varied, no such variation is required to accommodate the proposed development. As Table 1 indicates, a total of twenty-two parking spaces will be provided to accommodate the project's ten new dwelling units. As discussed previously, ten covered parking spaces will be provided for the use and benefit of the four duplex units (i.e., two off-street spaces per dwelling unit plus two guest parking spaces). The project's Subdivi- sion/PUD Agreement also requires the provision of two off-street parking spaces per 1 35 1 dwelling unit for the single-family residences to be constructed on both the free market and RO lots. e) Open Space. Pursuant to Section 26.84.030.B.6., a PUD's 1 minimum open space requirement may also be varied. As the open space requirement of the AH1 zone district is established in connection with PUD review, no variation is required. As discussed previously, approximately 94 percent of the property will be preserved as open space. This percentage substantially exceeds the open space requirements of all of the City's various zone districts. f) Landscape Plan. Pursuant to Section 26.84.030.B.7., a detailed 1 landscape plan has been prepared for the proposed duplexes to be constructed by APEHI on Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11, and for the common parking area which is located on Lot 12. Landscape guidelines for the single-family residences to be developed on free market Lots 2,3 and 4, and RO Lots 5,6 and 7, have also been prepared and are attached to the Subdivision/PUD Agreement as Exhibit B. Compliance with the landscape plan and guidelines is required in Article II, paragraph 4. of the Agreement. g) Architectural Site Plan. Section 26.84.030.B.8. requires the approval of the project's architecture in connection with final PUD development plan review. Architectural floor plans and elevations for the two duplexes to be constructed by APEHI included in this application. The plans and elevations will be finalized in the event required following their review by the Community Develop- ment Department for compliance with the City's Residential Design Standards. Final plans and elevations for the duplex units will be recorded with the Applicant's final plat and PUD development plan. dot" ok 1 36 , A 1 #909%*7. 4 6 h) Ughting. Pursuant to Section 26.84.030.B.9., all exterior lighting within the proposed development will be designed to minimize adverse impacts on neighboring development and the adjacent public street system. As presently envisioned, the project's exterior lighting will be limited to such fixtures as are reasonably required to provide safe pedestrian and vehicular access to the affordable housing units to be constructed on Lots 5 through 11. A streetlight will be provided within the Garmisch Street right-of-way as required pursuant to condition number 2. of Ordinance No. 44. Clustering. The proposed development's affordable housing component has been clustered to the extent feasible to preserve site features, to reduce the impact of development on neighboring properties, and to rejuvenate the residential character of the area. The proposed free market single-family residences have been located adjacent to Garmisch Street consistent with the City's Residential Design Standards. The resulting site development plan is compatible with neighboring development, and preserves the majority of the site as open space for the benefit of the project's residents and the public at large. j) Public Facilities. As the attached engineering report prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer for the Applicant's conceptual PUD application indicates (see Exhibit 3, Appendix D), existing utilities in the immediate site area are adequate to serve the proposed development as required pursuant to Section 26.84.030.B.11. All costs associated with the installation of required public facilities and utilities will be borne by the Applicant. Emergency vehicle access to the proposed development will be provided via the adjacent public street system and the private access driveway which will serve Lots 5 through 11. The access driveway has been designed to accommodate emergency vehicles and has been reviewed and 37 approved by the Fire Protection District. The specific public facilities and utilities to be installed by the Applicant are discussed in detail Section V.B. of this application. 1 4-k) Traffic and Pedestrian Circulation. All of the proposed dwelling units will have access to a public street as required pursuant to Section 26.84.030.B.12. of the Regulations. Access to the single-family residences on Lots 1 through 4 will be provided from South Garmisch Street via individual driveways. The residential units to be constructed on Lots 5 through 11 will be accessed via a private common driveway from Garmisch Street. As Schmueser Gordon Meyer's engineering report indicates, no adverse impact on traffic circulation in the immediate site area is anticipated. As discussed previously, the Applicant will install sidewalk, curb and gutter along the property's Garmisch Street frontage. B. Subdivision Pursuant to Section 26.04.100 of the Regulations, land which is divided into two or more lots for purposes of transfer of ownership and/or development is by definition a subdivision which is subject to the City's review and approval. As the Applicant proposes to subdivide the property for development purposes, subdivision review pursuant to Section 26.88.040 is required. The various review criteria, and the proposed development's compliance therewith, are summarized as follows. Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan." 1. IrThe proposed development shall be consistent with the Compliance with this criteria is also required in connection with PUD review. Please refer to Section V.A.1., page 30, of this application for a discussion of this review criteria. 38 2. "The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area." Compliance with this criteria is also required in connection with PUD review. Please refer to Section V.A.2., page 31, of this application for a discussion of this review criteria. 3. -The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area." Compliance with this criteria is also required in connection with PUD review. Please refer to Section V.A.3., page 32, of this application for a discussion of this review criteria. applicable requirements of this chapter." 4. "The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all The proposed subdivision has been designed to comply with the applicable requirements of the AHEPUD and R-15 zone districts and all relevant provisions of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. With the exception of the size of Lots 9, 10 and 11, and Lot l's front yard setback, no variations in the district's dimension- al requirements are necessary to implement the project. 5. "The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision." I To the best of the Applicant's knowledge, no natural hazards adversely affect the area of the property proposed for development. Consequently, no adverse affect upon the health, safety or welfare of the project's residents is anticipated. 39 6. -The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs." No governmentalinefficiencies, duplication of facilities, or unnecessary // D public costs will occur as a result of the provision of public services to the proposed development. All required utilities are currently available in the immediate site area. All costs associated with the installation of the public improvements to serve the - project which have been identified in this application will be borne by the Applicant as may be required. In addition to compliance with the preceding review criteria, the subdivision regulations also require that various improvements be provided in connection with the proposed development. The required improvements are summarized as follows. a) Water. Water service will be provided from the existing six inch main located in South Garmisch Street. As a condition of service, the Water Department may require the replacement of a portion of the line with a new eight inch main to be installed between the Durant Avenue and Garmisch Street intersection and the entrance to Lot 12. The decision regarding the necessity of - -7 replacement will be made at the time of construction. A new water main will also - be extended into Lot 12 to provide service to the seven dwelling units to be located on Lots 5 through 11 and a new fire hydrant to be installed within Lot 12. The - proposed water line extension and hydrant are depicted on the Master Utility Plan on the following page. The single-family residences to be constructed on Lots 2,3 and 4 will be served by individual service lines connected to the existing six inch main in Garmisch 40 1 - -- /2511- 1 8 101:TALL YARD I*ANT ~ OISTALL 4' /1 ILOROFF DEâ€¢CE \ 7 11101' \ ' Ck DISTALL 10 ~ OF 4-* (L-/ 1 \3~2/ k L-7 1 Mr< 4- 0 \1 PLUG 1 - / L,,STALL ORY"Ell I JU SCALE: 1*= 20' 4-- 1 oF 41- 7 6 .1. 20 LF OF 7 - - ' / 1./ .an,-Mu. f N 1 ... El 1.85 \1 -111.--I / 1 1 , INSTALL 1 R%**40*449 \\ i F Â»Â¢~ALL 6'x ~ 8 ASS~Met. E:Â«*Â»i~ -0/ 1 REDUCER N 13607.00 1. / 1 1 -= A-*ISTAU. ORYÂ¥~- Ncre:Zzillk:ksh -- L E 10658.22 / 1Â»1 \ \1: 1 , ii < 8" SLEE. 5-1.-1 ; R ~11 - e- j, 1 \ 1 1 4 1 1 Hl~7[13 VAL 0 ; . 1 ) 1 1 C p k 14- -11 - -7. I _F....TICJf ~TALL SMEET +Nk Cri~2'Sh=,Â» ~ ~ ~ ~~17 ~7*f3773dK*:~7:#M~- 11\ 1 / L...."=.1.92~4â€¢ ....: 4UU' '614*74 1,?b. 1.,i....... 7-/i-/./.1/ 1 7 I 1 -,_--1-_I-.-17Â«7 r ' J$/1. 1 -41 =- ..Le.~w, ..11272-.12=Zkj=t*.2 1.12 2,-ER&-2 x<~'~-'; ~ '~' 11'r , * * c. ~ 0.-9.--- 1 1 .\ 1 \1 , . ./ b -...... au'60~4 + M I. \ (MATCH COST SLOPE) 1 , // / 3176- =196.*20'PR s-, el - 1001.ag 1 / , 5 / 1 1 2~ 00 - 0051.0 W~Al SE'â€¢EN U.E W 0//SING //91% I- -UIE- OX=I/( TEUPHOÂ»E .O [lirrmc Ul' 1 i DOSTÂ»,O UTUrr P{XE 0 -.0 -T..0 -at 1010 1010 r---------- ----- fl------------ 1 EXST,40 TO-O'10,2 -'IOLE _____ . i OnSâ„¢G 01011< â„¢NUORMER DISTNG WATER -vE * a600% r=20 - 1 1 0 1000 1000 PROPOSED 5â„¢EIT UG,fr 14STALL NSUATION STA 1+30 TO STA 2+38 ------- -OPOSED .11 0, WAY U. - PROPOSED 'uÂ»u,/ */ A.04, O/'K") -POSED WÂ«T-f SEWI ki- ru PROPOSED SIMTMIY Sal) MRCE -4 1 AEVID)*A~E D9311N9 SCALE: - I- PROPO~ 0 1401 DUCTU KN - I#lER -1 ~MOLIÂ® ELEVATION -OPOSED 0 *01 DUCTLE -1 PPE -TEN W- ruM =% A PIOPOSED GATE -VE 990.00 4- i 1 0 LE 1+00 ' 2+00 3400 1 PRELA-ARY 2 - ~ 8(-EBER GORDON MerrER Na 97072A NOT 10 W. eth 8#-l Sati 200 FOR -SGM, t*701 946-la ,AX te= D45-5,4â€ž BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P. U.D. MASTER UTILITY :, "- * â€ž_r_,8 2 ~ 0-wood NÂ¥â€¢.ge. Colorado 81601 PLAN LOTS 5-12 \ - AIp,Q Colorido (97OI 026-6727 4,1 I L" 1 CONSTRUCTION 65.v. _. -r,/IV'n- h. corn *h, UILUES 0 '-sug"\,70721\Ultl IHES.0,9 rru OK :.7 09 At 18 1990 91 Ine lar,0 Street. As indicated in Schmueser Gordon Meyer's engineering report, water of adequate quantity and pressure is available to serve the proposed development without additional upgrades to the City's treatment facility. b) Sewer. Sewer service will be provided from the existing eight inch sanitary sewer located in Garmisch Street. The three residential units to be constructed on Lots 2,3 and 4 will each connect directly to the existing sewer. The ED 1% residences to be constructed on Lots 5 through 11 will be served by a new eight inch l,v sewer to be connected to the existing sanitary sewer in Garmisch Street. The 46942 proposed sewer extension is also depicted on the Master Utility Plan. A tap fee ~491,3 surcharge will be assessed by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) to address root intrusion problems in the existing Garmisch Street sewer and a downstream constraint in the sanitary sewer located in the alley of Block 61. As indicated in Schmueser Gordon Meyer's engineering report, sufficient treatment capacity is available form ACSD to serve the project. c) Electric, Telephone, Natural Gas and Cable TV. Electric, telephone, natural gas and cable TV service is presently available in the immediate site area, and will be extended to serve the proposed development as depicted on the Master Utility Plan. All required extensions of these utilities will be located underground, and will conform to the applicable extension policies of the individual utility companies. d) Easements. Easements to accommodate utility extensions will be provided in compliance with the applicable provisions of Section 26.88.040.C.4.b. of the Regulations as may be required by the individual utility companies. Please note that a specific utility easement has been dedicated on the final plat to 42 accommodate the existing sewer manhole located on Lot 1 as required pursuant to condition number 5. of Ordinance No. 44 (see Certificate of Ownership and Dedication, paragraph number 5). e) Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter. As discussed previously, the Applicant will install sidewalk, curb and gutter along the property's Garmisch Street frontage. The design of these improvement was coordinated with the City's M<V/LAH' 1, PAWLÂ« 4 Engineering and Stteets Departments as required pursuant to condition number 4. of Ordinance No. 44. Â«1~YAE V,Â£42* 9Aole f) Fire Protection. Fire protection for the proposed development will be provided by the Aspen Volunteer Fire Department. The project site is located approximately six blocks from the fire station, resulting in a response time of approximately five minutes. As noted previously, an existing fire hydrant is conveniently located across from the property at the southeast corner of South Garmisch Street Durant Avenue. A new fire hydrant will be installed within Parcel 12 to serve Lots 5 through 11. As discussed previously, both the single-family dwelling units to be constructed on RO Lots 5, 6 and 7, and the duplex units to be constructed on Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11, will be sprinklered. g) Drainage. The proposed development's storm water drainage system has been designed to maintain historic flow rates with respect to surface water runoff and groundwater recharge. As the Grading and Drainage Plan on the following page illustrates, on-site drywells will be utilized to intercept and detain runoff from building roofs and impervious areas, and to control the rate of groundwater recharge, on Lots 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. Schmueser Gordon Meyer's drainage calculations and recommendations for these lots are contained in Exhibit 43 0.145 acres LOT 5 ICL- 1 LOT 7 0,STALL OR'MELÂ·l LOT 5 --=C--2 , ====-- 7 1 k 4 -- i 4 0/4 ./#./56-1*-. -===4--0----A r. L____ i ~ INSTul DR~â‚¬17 1 /54/ , NOTE: PmoucTS SHO/Â¢ ~ ANA~ 1-U COPGNÂ® ccl,o,yr /,c. *u: coÂ£a eS-, 1,2 mr INSTAU- DRY*11-\ w Â· ~ mu*L -*OÂ¢CD ef ellâ€¢EDG. ../ 01 9 7 =7 r SIF-1000-N OR *mO~ED =Al \\ \\ OFFSET -IKOLE FWIC I G~CE 1 54: 0 7 / rk (7 969Nk \ - 1 4--=r , 2- --0-- -- -\ \ 4~41Â§4 .---ALUUMI# Â· \*P UaMZ- STEPS \ ..1/9-1 "1Â£7 '. W . i./- r t...e yan st'*-i 1 -OF-- 0&1 Dr,râ€¢,9 0,10â€¢*,O 0-rcr-C t.Â»C b .Â·<, 11~Â»~ 8*sE= 47 m. / f- NSTAL OR,1â‚¬11 ~ - 1 -1 - CKMT'Ic FUIC-0 SS EXT,Tâ€¢Â«0 5'Im"â€¢Â·r Sr'IR l- 7 FT-*.i k-#"AE- 1 w 1 Â·- -1- -UTE- 009,(1,00*04Â«) = MID CECT=C IX 4% DO*TN; Umm POLE 't' 4 LO- 12 t /33 fÂ¥25Â» 0Â¥4-k :345~ O .pocrorPJBCM Â·Â·4>DU>g,<\c,-eurS "-ae ft3Â©lf '32-yth Â· LCEE41*9~\ ~ ~55.; sq. ft. Â§ ~Â»06,<34 , Â® c..r.o m-wo. 4' MI~,11*A, P~Em,mal , 00,172 mip,HolÂ« Fooâ„¢ M-10 CRAâ‚¬1 AUUWL- \ 0.215 acres Â· ~ ~ ~~~~â„¢1~-- -Â£=0 zi#16Â£ 02 - EUST.O -rEN Wilt r 2 Pj***964 BIRIBL S& AW BIE=lWAial 70 K BASED,Â»Â¥ 31,E SPEC,;C Â· ~ Ul,STALL ORYÂ¥â‚¬11 * i / 1 --PROPOSED -011 DRYWELL SCHEMAUC f / ru -0,0=D â€¢â€¢gram SE.* FOâ€¢CE ... 1 'RoposED w..." SE.,7 -I PID<ill 0 Iâ€¢CH DUCTU -1 PPI IATIN -01 ---I. - PNOICes= 1 -CH DUNU RON -t I.TE, 14-( . / M i o- r ..12 ~a~,~. PROPOSED SNICTAN SE-~ WANNOLE PROPOSED GATE "â€¢LÂ¥E 4-411 + /42 --- f , /0 ~ SCALE 1-= 10' / PL,xiaa'a#.*rk f- f Im/ WAY 1 1-1-1 ~ Pl-OSED LOT LINE AnEN 0 , DEDICATION 47 -J #:<- **(:~Nit;~,L _ _ 19 i91 4 1 ---- 1 / ,--r--CP - -Allk '1 00 al 1, LPâ€¢10, A.,-r m le, 1 -- GUTTEÂ» PAN AS REÂ©l.O \ 1 . '1- 1 . )11\ (2 . 4 . i,i- ;)1 1'Â·;;63#;i,Â·.Â·r<M 1, 1, . Â·iÂ· 4.1 2Â£ .,, 1 Â·.Â· . 1 \ 1 lilli ' 1 1 1~ 1 -- \\01 -Lâ‚¬HT_ 1, 7 t 1. MOUTE WOOF AlÂ® SURF~CE D-Â»aGE FOR LOTS 8,0,10 AND 11 TO ORmil.LS ON LOTS 0 NE) 10. 2. LOTS U AlÂ® 7 -CY Re@URE **XTIONIL SITE SPE]Cn 0*4-OE FICLrna FOR SPECIFT 0â‚¬3196 (0UT -5 00004~<TED FOR *4 DETE}mON VOLLAB PREELAIIVARy r-- m- 80*â€¢UESER GORDON -YER NC ... 97072A NOT 118 W. eth Sty-t, Sulte 200 GRADING AND JH SG 0-wood 8,1*,al. Coerâ€¢- 0001 CONST~~CTION A.o=eN ... -~ 4970) 948-1004 /AX (970) 948-0048) BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION /P.U.D. DRAINAGE PLAN \ D- 12-17-98 AIp-Z Colorldo (070) 0254727 JH /9,///"n- ke,-n 1 '. .1.-a.0.Â¥S ---10' 7 \*laU997\17072â€¢\--qUO!,G M .hy Nâ‚¬ 17 09 5. 41 1998 %11 1.c un,0 4, Appendix D. Stormwater drainage plans for the single-family residential units to be constructed on Lots 2 through 7 will be submitted for review and approval by the City's Engineering Department prior to issuance of building permits for the residences. Compliance with this requirement is required in Article II, paragraph 5. of the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. h) Roads. As the Schmueser Gordon Meyer's engineering report -1 indicates, the capacity of the surrounding street system is sufficient to accommodate the increase in traffic levels which will result from the development of the project. Sidewalk, curb and gutter will be installed along the project's Garmisch street frontage. The proposed improvements are depicted on the Garmisch Street Plan and Profile. As discussed previously, the Applicant will dedicate two feet of the property - to the City to accommodate the additional right-of-way requirements. The installation of sidewalk, curb and gutter will significantly improve pedestrian circulation and storm water drainage in the immediate site area. i) Final Plat Section 26.88.040.D.2. of the Regulations requires the preparation and submission of a final plat prior to Cily Council review of a subdivision application. The required final plat accompanies this application. D School Land Dedication/Park Development Impact Fee. The Subdivision/PUD Agreement which will govern the project requires the owners of Lots 2,3,4,5,6 and 7 to make a cash payment-in-lieu of school land dedication as A provided for in Section 26.88.040.C.6.c.(2) of the Regulations prior to the issuance e of building permits for their respective residences. A similar payment will be made by APEHI for the duplexes to be constructed on Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11. These requirements are memorialized in Article II, paragraph 8. Of the Agreement. 45 The Applicant proposes to meet the park development impact fee requirements of Section 26.44.030 of the Regulations via the conveyance of the ~ conservation parcel to the City for open space purposes. Such conveyances are t.~~t,,Â¢ permitted pursuant to Section 26.44.080 subject to the City's approval. This proposal is addressed in Article II, paragraph 9. of the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. k) Subdivision Agreement. Pursuant to Section 26.88.050, the Applicant and the City must enter into a subdivision agreement which binds the Applicant to any conditions of subdivision approval and financially guarantees the installation of required public facilities and landscape improvements. The required subdivision agreement has been combined with the PUD agreement which is required pursuant to Section 26.84.040, and is attached hereto as Exhibit 1, Appendix C. Cost estimates for the project's infrastructure and landscaping have been prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer and The Stevens Group, and are attached to the proposed Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD Agreement as Exhibits D and E, respectively. Please note that the Subdivision/PUD Agreement incorporates all of the various requirements imposed by condition number 6. of Ordinance No. 44. C. Rezoning The Applicant proposes to rezone the portion of the property to be occupied by Lots 2 through 12 to AH1/PUD, Affordable Housing, Planned Unit Development, and the conservation parcel to C, Conservation. As noted previously, the Community Development Department has requested that Lot 1 be rezoned to R-15, Moderate-Density Residential. The rezoning to A.Hl/PUD is required to permit the development of the proposed mixed free market/affordable housing project. Although not specifically required, the rezoning of the conservation parcel 46 Wi to C, Conservation, will help ensure its preservation as permanent open space for both the project's residents and the public at large. Pursuant to Section 26.92.030 of the Regulations, private applications for an amendment to the City's official zone district map must be submitted on or prior to February 15 or August 15 of each year. The applicable review criteria for such applications, and the proposed rezoning's compliance therewith, are discussed below. 1. "Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter." To the best of our knowledge, the proposed rezoning complies with all applicable requirements of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. 2. "Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Compliance with this criteria is also required in connection with PUD and subdivision review. Please refer to Section V.A.1., page 30, of this application for a discussion of this review criteria. 3. "Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics." Compliance with this criteria is also required in connection with PUD/ subdivision review and is discussed in Section V.A.2., page 31, of this application. 4. "The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety." Please refer to Section V.B.h), page 45, of this application. 47 5. "Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities." Existing utilities and public facilities are adequate to serve the , proposed development. All costs for the extension of utilities (i.e., water and sewer extensions) and the installation of additional public facilities (i.e., the Garmisch Street sidewalk, curb and gutter) will be borne by the Applicant. 6. "Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment." The proposed development will have no significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. 7. "Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and 1, compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen". While compatibility with the City's "community character" is obviously a subjective criteria, the proposed rezoning is clearly consistent with surrounding 14 zoning and existing land uses. 8. "Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment." The proposed rezoning to AH1/PUD is required to permit develop- ment of the project pursuant to the parameters of the Affordable Housing zone district. As the AH1 zone district was expressly created to encourage private sector development of such projects, it was clearly the City's intent to rezone property where appropriate to facilitate development. It should also be noted that the City 48 has previously rezoned an adjacent parcel to AH1/PUD to accommodate the so- called Juan Street affordable housing project. The rezoning of Lot 1 to R-15 was requested by the Community Development Department. While not absolutely required, the proposed rezoning of the conservation parcel to C, Conservation will help memorialize its preservation as permanent open space. 9. "Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter." 1Basmuch as the proposed rezonings are necessary to permit the development of a mixed free market/affordable housing project, the public interest -0 would appear to be appropriately served. As discussed previously, the proposed development is consistent with the intent and purpose of the City's planned unit development and subdivision regulations, and otherwise complies with the applicable provisions of the R-15, AHI/PUD and C, Conservation, zone districts. D. Special Review Pursuant to Section 26.28.110.E.1., the off-street parking requirements of the AHI/PUD zone district are established by special review. The maximum number of spaces required for an AH project's free market component, however, shall not exceed two spaces per dwelling unit. Similarly, the required parking for the project's affordable housing units shall not exceed one space per bedroom or two spaces per dwelling unit, whichever is less. As the proposed development will contain two off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit for both the project's free market residences and deed restricted affordable housing units, the proposed parking complies with the AH1/PUD zone district's maximum parking requirement. Two additional guest parking spaces will be provided for the category duplex units. Given 49 the fact that the maximum number of required spaces has been provided, the project's proposed off-street parking can be assumed to comply with applicable special review standards. E. Growth Management Exemptions Pursuant to Section 26.100.050.C.3.d. of the Regulations, the development of free market residential units within the AH1/PUD zone district is exempt from the City's growth management quota system subject to the approval of the City Council. The only apparent criteria for eligibility would appear to be compliance with the district's affordable housing requirements. The applicable zone district requirements can be summarized as follows. 1. Residential units deed restricted to APCHA's affordable housing guidelines must comprise a minimum of 70 percent of the unit mix of a development within the AHEPUD zone district. Free market units are limited to a maximum of 30 percent of the development's unit mix. 2. A minimum of 40 percent of the development's affordable housing units must be deed restricted to Category 1, 2, 3 or 4, as defined by APCHA. A maximum of 30 percent of the development's affordable housing units may be deed restricted to APCHA's resident occupancy guidelines. 3. A maximum of 30 percent of the development's bedrooms may be located within free market units. A minimum of 70 percent of the development's bedrooms must be located within the affordable housing units. As Table 3 indicates, the proposed development complies with all of the requirements of the AH1/PUD zone district. Seven of the project's ten units, or 50 70 percent, will be deed restricted to APCHA's affordable housing guidelines. In addition, twenty-one of the project's thirty bedrooms, or 70 percent, will be located within deed restricted units. Finally, four of the seven affordable housing units, or 57 percent, will be deed restricted to APCHA's category guidelines. Table 3 PROPOSED DWELLING UNIT/BEDROOM MIX Barbee Family Sub division/PUD 1. Proposed Dwelling Units 10 Affordable Housing Units 7 Category 3 4 Resident Occupied Percent Total 70 Free Market Units 3 Percent Total 30 2. Proposed Bedrooms 30 Affordable Housing Bedrooms 21 Category 9 12 Resident Occupiedl Percent Total 70 Free Market Bedroomsz 9 Percent Total 30 1 The Subdivision/PUD Agreement requires a minimum of three bedrooms per dwelling unit for the single-family residences to be constructed on the RO lots. 2 The Subdivision/PUD Agreement limits the free market residences to be constructed on Lots 2,3 and 4 to a maximum of three bedrooms per lot. 51 The City Council must also exempt the proposed development's affordable housing component from the growth management quota system. Pursuant to Section 26.100.050.C.3.b. of the Regulations, the only criteria for a GMQS exemption would appear to be compliance with the applicable requirements of APCHA's affordable housing guidelines. As discussed previously, the proposed duplex units will contain approximately fourteen hundred square feet of floor area. This figure exceeds APCHA's minimum net livable area requirement for Category 4 affordable housing units. Similarly, the single-family residences to be constructed on the project's three RO lots will be limited to a maximum gross size of 2,200 square feet, as provided for in APCHA's resident occupied guidelines. Both the category units and the RO lots will be conveyed to qualified residents pursuant to applicable guidelines in effect at the time of conveyance. F. Vested Property Rights In order to preserve the land use approvals which may be obtained as a result of this application, the Applicant hereby requests vested property rights status pursuant to the provisions of Section 26.52.080 of the Land Use Regulations. It is our understanding that final approval of the proposed development must be granted by ordinance of the City Council to establish such status. It is also our understanding that no specific submission requirements, or review criteria other than a public hearing, are required to confer such status. 52 APPENDIX A EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Chris Bendon, 920.5072 DATE: 7.10.98 PROJECT: Barbee Property Affordable Housing Final. REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann OWNER: Barbee Family TYPE OF APPLICATION: 2 Step -- Final PUD, Rezoning, Subdivision, Growth Management, Special Review for parking, 8040 Greenline, Residential Design waivers, and fee waivers DESCRIPTION: Development of 10 additional residential units within AH1 program Land Use Code Section(s) 26.08 City Council Waiver of Land Use Fees 26.28.110 Affordable Housing Zone District - AH1 -PUD 26.28.050 R-15 Zone District 26.28.220 Conservation Zone District 26.44 Park Development Impact Fee - Waiver Request 26.52 Common Development Review Procedure 26.58 Residential Design Standards 26.64 Special Review - Parking Standards 26.68.030 8040 Greenline Review 26.84 Planned Unit Development - PUD Final 26.88 Subdivision 26.92 Amendments to the Official Zone District Map (rezoning) 26.100 Residential Growth Management Review by: Staff for Completeness, Development Review Committee (DRC), Planning and Zoning Commission, Growth Management Commission, City Council. Public Hearing: Yes. Growth Management Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council. (Planner will provide applicant with more detailed schedule after application is submitted) Applicant must post property and mail notice at least 10 days prior to hearing, or at least 15 days prior to the public hearing if any federal agency, state, county. municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application . Applicant will need to provide proof Of posting and mailing with a a#idavit at the public hearing(s). Referral Agencies: Engineering, Environmental Health. Parks, Zoning, Fire Marshall, Water, ACSD, Building Department, Pitkin County Community Development Planning Fees: Planning Deposit Major ($2,160) Referral Agency Fees: Engineering, Major ($270); Housing, Major ($165); Environmental Health, Minor ($155) Total Deposit: $2,750 (additional hours are billed at a rate of $180/hour) To apply, submit the following information: 1. Proof of ownership . 2. Signed fee agreement ' 3. Applicant's name. address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number ofthe representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 4. Street address and legal description ofthe parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mongages, judgments, liens. easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 5. Total deposit for review of the application 6. 35 _ Copies ofthe complete application packet and maps. HPC = 12; PZ = 10; GMC = PZ+7; CC = 7; Referral Agencies = 1/ea.; Planning Staff = 2 7. An 8 1/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. 8. Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, including all easements and vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. 9. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. 10. Annexation approval. (Annexation must occur prior to, or concurrent with, final approval from City Council) 11. For Residential Proposals (Ord. 30): a) Neighborhood block plan at 1"=50' (available from City Engineering Department) Graphically show the front portions of all existing buildings on both sides ofthe block and their setback from the street in feet. Identify parking and front engy for each building and locate any accessory dwelling units along the alley. Indicate whether any portions of the houses immediately adjacent to the subject parcel are one story (only one living level). b) Site plan at 1" = 10'. Show ground floors of all buildings on the subject parcel, as proposed, and footprints of adjacent buildings for a distance of 100' from the side property lines. Show topography of the subject site with 2' contours. c) All building elevations at 1/8" = 1'-0. d) Floor plans, roof plan, and elevations as needed to verify that the project meets or does not meet the "Primary Mass" standard. e) Photographic panorama. Show elevations of all buildings on both sides of the block, including present condition of the subject property. Label photos and mount on a presentation board. 12. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearings. 13. Copies of prior approvals (copy of Ord. 44-1997) Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. FNT EXHIBIT 4 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: 12/30/98 at 08:30 A.M. Case No. PCT-8990 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ TBD Premium$ Proposed Insured: Rate: PROFORMA (b) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ Premium$ Proposed Insured: Rate: 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: MARY K. BARBEE and JOHN W. BARBEE and HALLIE B. RUGHEIMER 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO and is described as follows: See Attached Exhibit "A" PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Schedule A-PG.1 601 E. HOPKINS This Commitment is invalid ASPEN, CO. 81611 unless the Insuring 970-925-1766 Provisions and Schedules 970-925-6527 FAX A and B are attached. AUTHORIZED AGENT EXHIBIT A , That part of Lot 1 and the Northeast one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., according to the Diagram certified by the United States Surveyor General's Office, January 4, 1896 as attached to General Land Office Survey of said Township and Range approved by the United States Surveyor General's Office March 31, 1891, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Lot one, said corner also being the East one-sixteenth corner of Sections 12 and 13; thence S 89Â°45'56" E along the Northerly line of said Lot 1 342.86 feet, to a point on the Southerly line of the former right-of-way of the Colorado Midland Railroad Company; thence S 42Â°27'42" E along said right-of-way line 482.57 feet to the Westerly right-of-way line of South Garmisch Street; thence S 14Â°50'49" W along said Westerly right-of-way line 242.01 feet to the Northwesterly corner of that property described in Section 2 of instrument recorded in Book 230 at Page 496 of the Pitkin County Records; thence S 39Â°47'01" E 87.07 feet to the Northeast corner of that property described in said instrument; thence S 14Â°50'49" W 115.00 feet to the Southwesterly corner of Lot 3, Block 11, Eames Addition to the City of Aspen, Colorado; thence S 75Â°09'11" E along the Southerly line of said Block 11 150.00 feet to the Southeast corner of Lot 7 of said Block 11; thence leaving the Southerly line of said Block 11 S 14Â°50'49" W 20.50 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 13 of said Block 11, said point also being the Northeasterly corner of that property described in Book 206 at Page 334 of the Pitkin County Records; thence along the boundary line of said property described in Book 206 at Page 334 the following three courses: 1). N 75Â°09'11" W 31.25 feet 2). S 14Â°50'49" W 78.00 feet 3). S 03Â°55'43" W 164.99 feet to the Southwesterly corner of Lot 20, said Block 11; thence S 14Â°50'49" W along the Westerly line of said Block 11 210.00 feet to the Southwesterly corner of said Block 11; thence S 75Â°09'11" E along the Southerly line of said Block 11 150.00 feet to the Southeasterly corner of said Block 11, said corner also being a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of Aspen Street; thence leaving the Southerly line of said Block 11 S 14Â°50'49" W along the Westerly right-of-way line of said Aspen Street 14.67 feet to a point on the Southerly line of said Lot 1; thence S 89Â°51'40" W along the Southerly line of said Lot 1 804.58 feet to the Southwest corner of said Lot 1, said corner also being the Northeast one-sixteenth corner of said Section 13; thence N 00Â°15'47" E along the Westerly line of said Lot 1 108.89 feet to a point on Line 1-4 of the Little Mack Lode Claim, United States Mineral Survey No. 3956 as Patented in Book 175 at Page 212 of the Pitkin County Records; thence N 14Â°57'52" E along Line 1-4 of said Lode Claim 707.96 feet to corner #4 of said Lode Claim; thence N 75Â°06'16" W along the Line 4-3 of said Lode Claim 185.69 feet to the Westerly Line of said Lot 1; thence leaving the line 4-3 of said Lode Claim N 00Â°15'47" E along the Westerly Line of said Lot 1 476.64 feet to the true point of beginning. Being the same property as described in Judgement recorded June 27, , 1975 in Book 300 at Page 255 of the Pitkin County Records. FNT SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to-wit: 1. Good and sufficient Improvement Survey of the subject property must be delivered to and approved by the Company prior to the issuance of the Title Insurance. THIS COMMITMENT IS FURNISHED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, IT IS NOT A CONTRACT TO ISSUE TITLE INSURANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH. IN THE EVENT A PROPOSED INSURED IS NAMED THE COMPANY HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS AS DEEMED NECESSARY. THE RECIPIENT OF THIS INFORMATIONAL REPORT HEREBY AGREES THAT THE COMPANY HAS ISSUED THIS REPORT BY THEIR REQUEST AND ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS ACCURATE AND CORRECT, THE COMPANY SHALL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD THAT PROVE TO BE INCORRECT AND THE COMPANY IS NOT OBLIGATED TO ISSUE ANY POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE. FNT SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract or remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted as reserved in United States Patent recorded August 26, 1949 in Book 175 at Page 298. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT-8990 A and B are attached. FNT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DISCLOSURES The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1. (2) Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS EXCEPTION WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED HEREUNDER) Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89-2; NOTE: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospective insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family residence (including a condominim or townhouse unit) (i) of 3 that title entity' s general requirements for the deletion of an exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics or materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialments Liens executed by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon request, Pre-printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the Owner's policy when issued. Please contact the Company for further information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or materialmens lien coverage. NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners or loan closing under circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage" . Pursuant to Senate Bill 91-14 (CRS 10-11- 122); (a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing District; (b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction _ may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent; (C) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: A tax Certificate will be ordered from the County Treasurer by the Company and the costs thereof charged to the proposed insured unless written instruction to the contrary are received by the company prior to the issuance of the Title Policy anticipated by this Commitment. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT-8990 A and B are attached. EXHIBIT 5 October 6, 1997 HAND DELIVERED Mr. Mitch Haas Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Permission to Represent Dear Mr. Haas: Please consider this letter authorization for Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, Planning Consultants, to represent us in the processing of our application for PUD/sub- division approval for the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD. Mr. Vann is hereby autho- rized to act on our behalf with respect to all matters reasonably pertaining to the afore- mentioned application. Should you have any questions, or if we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, 1-0- tjÂ« L r Jbhn W. Barbee 43202 Walz Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 928-0173 SV:CWV c:\bus\city.ltr\ltr34097.mhl 300' ]tadius List 25-Sep-97 Parcel Number Schedule Number Owner Name Name 2 / Address 1 Address 2 City State Zip Code 2735-131-15-021 R000716 ADAMS HOWARDS PO BOX 11774 ASPEN CO 81612- | 2735-131-04-004 R000014 AL! 1 HOLDING COMPANY/INVERNESS LOIXE I A COLORADOCORPORATION 435 W MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-24-004 R004650 ANDERSON BRIAN W 213 RAYNOR ST ISELIN NI 08830- 2735-131-00-021 R007881 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY EAMES ADDITION P.O. BOX 1248 ASPEN, CO 81612- - 2735-131-37-701 R014699 BAILEY I.n.IANN E & BAILEY BRIAN L AS /Tl-ENANTS 117 JIJANST ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-00-100 R000082 BAR BEE 101 !N W 1 /3 INT RUGI IEIMER HALLIE B 1 /3 INT PO BOX 788 ASPEN CO 81612- - - Ill-/I .-- 2735-131-37-705 R014705 BENSON DEE CI IRISTENSEN CINDY AS JTTENAN PO BOX 11814 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-10-002 R000023 REINIORST JERRY BERIIORS-[CAROLE 71611.INDENMERE DR BLOOMFIELD 1111.15 MI 48301- 2735-131-15-014 R001296 BERZINS INA 6030 E IST AVE DENVER CO 80220- 2735-131-24-007 R004813 MEL ALEXANDER L B[EL LEE M 3811.OVE[.L AVE Mill.VAI.].EY CA 94941- - 2735-131-07-006 R000309 BLACKWELL CLARENCE A BLACKWELL ANNE [ I PO BOX 3244 ANNAPOI.IS MD 2140 2735-131-10-001 R000016 BROWN EDWARD L PO BOX 2604 NAPERVILLE It. 61)56 2735-131-07-011 R001482 B R U M D E R I N 111.1 P G & A SM U TI [ A N TI I O N Y QUARLES & BRADY C/O 411 E WISCONSIN AVE S!-E 2500 Mn.WA{ IKEE Wl 53202- 2735-131-15-003 R000207 CABELL JOE 1765 ALA MOANA BLVD MONOLUI.U 111 96815- 2735-131-15-011 R000977 CAIN DOUGLAS M CAIN CONSTANCE MOFFIT rRUSTE 1960 i IUDSON ST DENVER CO 80220- 2735-131-37-706 R014706 CALDWELL KARI A CALDWELLGRANTL 107 JUAN ST ASPEN CO 81611-188 2735-131-10-004 R 0()O211 CALKINS GEORGE W 5100 E QUINCY AVE E N G.1.Ii\VC)Ol) CO 80110- 2735-131-33-006 R 008609 CARRUTHERSMARILYN 101 E COOPER S[t #.301 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-10-005 RO[)0240 CASSIDAY BARBARA 8522 N 82ND ST SCO'l-IS[)ALE AZ 85258- 2735-131-10-006 R000280 Cll[J FAMILY'IRIST'2/PINT 1.11 CllYI-KANG & NANCY-1/31NT 38 CORMORANT CIR NEWPORT BRACII CA 92660- 2735-131-03-851 R014737 CITY OF ASPEN 130 SGALENA ASPEN CO 81611- -- 2735-131-33-001 R0()86(}7 COI.EMANISAIAE 1 PO BOX 11239 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-10-007 R000342 CRISTOI. STANI.EY J 2918 3RI) ST BOUI.DER CO 8030-1- 2735-131-37-702 R014702 CUMNOCK CliERYL L & CUMNOCK ROBERT E ASIT l'ENAN 1 15 JUAN STREET ASPEN CO 81611-188 2735-131-15-004 R000208 CUNNINGI IAM P PO BOX 11717 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-15-005 R000350 CZAJKOWSKI MEI IAEL CZAJKOWSK] SANDRA J 90 1.A SAL.LE ST APT 16G NEW YORK NY 10027- 2735-131-24-006 R004801 DINGWALL WILL[AM A AGREEMENT OF 1RUST DINGWALL WILL.IAM A 1RUSIEE 1539 I.OCI IRIDGE RD 01.OOMFIE[.1)1111.!S MI 48302-'}73 2735-131-10-008 R000508 DOPKIN IIARIAN PO BOX 4696 ASPEN CO 816 2735-131-24-014 R005006 ELLIS JAMES BYRON 171/2 FI-EETST MARINA I)EL REY CA 9029.- 2735-131-15-020 R000427 Ell. IS PAUI,DAVID 1'0 BOX 3633 ASI'EN CO 81612- 2735-131-15-006 R000370 FARR BRUCE K PARR GAIL 1 1 PO BOX 5142 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-37-704 R014704 FLETCI IER KAREN K & FLETCHER JAY R AS J-1 TENANTS PO BOX 3476 AS['EN CO 81612- 2735-131-10-011 R000639 FRIEDMAN RICI IARD L C/O CARPENTER & CO 20 UNIVERSITY RD CAMBRIDGE MA 0213r 2735-131-24-008 R004852 (11[.BERT DONAI.DC & NANCY T GILBERT PARLIE INC - C/O 417 MADISON AVE NEW YORK NY 100 2735-131-15-019 R001494 GILLESPIE JOIIN E 9112 W IIE[;N[iR YIJKON OK , 2735-131-07-010 R001017 GINSB[JRG ANNE 17309 Wl 1101'13 1 IAVEN Dll BOCA RATON FL 2735-131-24-003 R004625 GLASER STEFANIE SOKOL 420 E. 72ND ST/#11) NEW YORK NY I i- -I-~i~ - ---1- -- 2735-131-10-027 R001448 GLAUDINGER LAWRENCE D GLAUBINGER LUCIENNE. 437 GOLDEN ISLE DIt 1!Al.JANI)Al.6 Fl 2735-131-10-017 R000790 GLICKMAN EDWIN C 2322 LAZY O RD SNOWMASS c 2735-131-33-009 R008604 GO LDSM m 1 DOUG L AS DAVID 101 E COOPER ST APT 102 ASI'EN 2735-131-10-022 R001057 GRAHAM MANREEN 3575 MAIJTZ-YEAGER R[) MARK)N ~ EXHIBIT 6 1 It - Parcel Number Schedule Number Owner Name Name 2 / Address 1 Address 2 City Stale Zip Code 2735-131-24-021 R005192 GRANT BROTHERS LLP 60% GRANT WALLACE H & DOUGLAS 20 PO BOX 978 LONGMONT CO 80502- 2735-131-10-028 R001452 GRE[NER JERRY M GREINER TERESA U 1401 ROSELAWN WEST ROSEVILLE M4 55113- 2715-131-24-002 R004609 HANG TEN ADVENTURES GARY NICHOLS C/O PO BOX 8116 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-10-019 R000910 IiAR-IMAN a-IRISTINA MUND 1/2 COIHEN FAIIHHARTMANUNI)1/2 2865 NE 241-1 1 CT Fr LAUDERDALE FL 33305- 2735-131-07-001 R000537 HEIM WIILIAM D 301 SEVERN AVE ANNAPOUS MD 21403- | 2735-131-15-008 R000617 HHMANN GEORGE R PO BOX 1312 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-33-002 R008611 HOUGH HAZEL C ONE BEACH DRIVE APT #1002 ST. PETERSBURG FL 33701- 2735-131-37-707 R014707 JUAN STREET HOUSING COMMON AREA ASPEN/Prn<IN COUNTY HOUSING A 530 E MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-24-010 R004879 KABERT INDUSTRIES INC PO BOX 277 VILLA PARK IL 60181- 2735-131-24-012 R004897 KABERT INDUSTRIES INC AN ILLINOIS CORP 321 W S[CHARLES RD VILLA PARK IL 60181- 2735-131-24-001 R0()4540 KANN TOMAS M 809 S ASPEN ST #8 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-07-002 R001045 KIRSCI INFER CAROLE J 300 PUPPY SMITH #205-278 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-24-022 R008111 KLIKA YVONNE S 32415 BURLWOOD DR SOLON C*1 44139- 2735-131-10-015 R000760 KNOWLTON VERA JEAN 2552 E ALAMEDA STE 31 DENVER CO 80209- 2735-131-24-013 R004904 L& RCOMPANY HAROLD C LYMAN PRESIDENT 20430 I.AKEVIEW AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331- 2735-131-10-016 R000789 LACY ROANE M JR PO BOX 20788 WACO TX 767()2- 2735-131-15-022 R015382 LARKIN 1-HOMAS J LARKIN MARYANN K 1 Sl IELDRAKE LN PALM BEACH GARDENS FL 33418-682 2735-131-10-018 R000804 LE CHARD ALLAN P LE CHARD SIDNEY ANN 1002 BUCKINGHAM RD GROSSE POINTE PARK MI 48230- 2735-131-10-025 R001237 LIFTONE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 131 E DURANT AVE ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-24-011 R004896 LOCKWOOD CONSULTANTS INC 3200 SW FREEWAY STE 3300 HOUSTON 13< 77027- 2735-131-33-005 R008606 MAC AI.PINE KENDRA M PO BOX 11433 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-37-703 R014703 MC CAR'rNEY CHARLES H & DAI IL-MC CARTNEY BRENDA AS JT PO BOX 12106 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-10-010 R000586 MC CONNELL THOMAS W MC CONNELL KAY L 3814 OAKHILLS BLOOMFIELD HILLS MI 48301- 2735-131-24-015 R005033 MENDEL M MARK MENDEL GRACE A - JT TENANTS 809 S ASPEN ST #16 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-10-030 R001487 MILTON ZALE TRUST AGREEMENT JACOBSON LIVING TRUST 2()19 KENMORE CHICAGO IL 60614- 2735-131-10-009 R000557 MULKEY DAVIDA DR TRUSTEE 2839 QUEENS COURTYARD DR LAS VEGAS NV 89109-152 2735-131-15-009 R000648 NITSCHKE DR RUPERT NITSCI IKE ELIZABETIi M 6701 N RIIODE ISLAND ST OKLAHOMACKY OK 73111- 2735-131-15-010 R000664 NOBLE GUY T 2571 NE OCEAN BLVD #405 STUART FL 34996- 2735-131-10-020 R001008 O'CONNOR ROBERT W O'CONNOR CATHERINE L 17896 SABLE RIDGE DR SOUTH BEND IN 46635- 2735-131-33-008 R008608 OTT JOHN 814 SECOND AVE CROYDEN PA 19021- 2735-131-24-020 R005190 PODSAID PATRICK 2701 S DAYSI-IORE DR STE 315 MIAMI FL 33133- 2735-131-10-023 R001093 REED LYNN W 6434 RIO GRANDE NW ALBUQUERQUE NM 87107- 2735-124-20-852 R014045 REEDER OPEN SPACE rn'KIN COUNTY 506 E MAIN ST ASrEN CO 81611- 2735-131-10-024 R001107 ROARING FORK PROPERTIES 5055 26TH AVE ROCKFORD IL 61109- 2735-131-10-021 R001033 ROBLES ENRIQUE ALVAREZ ALVAREZ CRETINA SIERRA GORDA #340 LOMAS CHAPULTEPEC 1100 M 2735-131-07-003 R001016 ROSE JON E ROSE RITA L 303 MAGNOLIA LAKE DR I.ONGWOOD FL 32779- 2735-131-15-012 R001264 ROSS ROBERT M 17030 NANES DR STE 214 HOUSTON 1X 77090- 2735-131-15-016 R001307 RUDEI*IAN ERIC P RUDERMAN MIMI E 1790 FOREST ST PKWY DENVER CO 80218- 2735-131-24-016 R005054 RYAN ELIZABETH H 1/2 INT COPE G RICHARD & NANCY M 1/2 IN 419 WINNEBAGO DR JANESVILLE WI 53545- 2735-131-23-001 R004639 SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP EAMES ADDITION BLK 11 LOT 13-20 1925 CENTURY PARK E STE 1900 LOS ANGELES CA 90067- 2735-131-14-003 R000051 SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP EAMES ADDITION BLK 11 LOTS 7-12 1925 CENTURY PARK E STE 1900 LOS ANGELES CA 90067- 2735-131-13-001 R009032 SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 1925 CENTURY PARK E STE 1900 LOS ANGELES CA 90067- 2735-131-33-004 R008605 SCHUBERT JANICE M 710 HEARTHSTONE DR BASALT CO 81621- 2735-131-24-019 R005169 SERRAO PETER R FAMILY PARTNERSHIP 3825 OCEAN DR CORPUS CHRISTI TX 78411-121 2735-131-07-005 R001192 SEVERY CHARLES L & GALE L 73.39% JOHNSTON MARGARET S 9.87% 30 DEXTER ST DENVER CO 80220- 2 Parce ber Tule er wne me: ress ddr 'p c 2735-131-24-009 R005078 SHADOW MOUNTAIN CONDOMINIUM COA IS REID & WALDRON- C/O 720 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-07-008 R06i216 SI IENK JAMES R TRUSTEE OF SHENK TRUST 0304 HWY 133 CARBONDAL.E CO 81623- Z735-131-07-007 R001215 SIIENK ROBERT D 0304 HWY 133 CARBONDAI.E CO 81623- - --- - - i.----- - Z735-131-24-017 R005073 SM-15 SEELBACE I WILLIA - C/O 45()0() S WOODI,AND CHAGRIN FALLS OH 44022- 2735-131-10-003 R0()0030 S(-)1.OMON RONALD IE 1711 SW 301'H It FT LAUDERDALE FL 33315- 3735-131-10-014 R000734 Sl-EINER DONALD R 5536 SILVER RII)GE DR STONE MOUNTAIN GA 30087- 2735-131-10-()26 R001273 STEPHENS JOHN M 4433 ALLA RD #2 MARINA DEL REY CA 90292- 2735-131-07-()04 R001308 TAYLOR i IARVIEY C W 301 N 9430 HWY E HARTIAND WI 53029- 3735-131-24-005 R004783 TUCKER RC DR CGI.(.)ROW - ATIN: 642(}SFAUDER CIR Eli)INA MN 55436- 2735-131-10-031 R000080 TYDEN FAMILY FARMS PARTNERSHIP 60% INTGROOS NICHOLAS D 40% INT 210 N INDUSTRIAL PARK RD HASTINGS MI 49058- 2735-131-33-011 R00861(} TYI.ER BERIT G 4900 N OCEAN BLVD APT 1216 FFLAUDERDALE FL 33308- 2735-131-07-009 R001349 WII[.FELDER FAMILY I NVES IMEN 15 RLLP 633 N 4Ti-I ST ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-10-013 R000693 VANDERWALL DEAN ROBERT 531 EAST POST LONE PINE CA 93545- 2735-131-15-017 R001364 VICKERY MARIE B 41 COUNTRY CLUB VILLAGE PUEBLO CO 81008- 2735-131-15-013 R001274 WAI.DRON GAILYN L WAI.DRON GAILYN PO BOX 10244 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-10-029 R()01479 WARSTLER ROBERT T 4920 liOLLY TREE DR DAI .AS 1X 75287- 2735-131-15-007 R000400 WEISE RICHARD il 1303 E ALGONQUIN RD SCI-IAUMBURG 1 60196- 2735-131-15-002 R0()0130 WII.LIAMS LOYD 70 MIDDLE RD PALM BEACH FL 33480- 2735-131-15-018 R001467 WOLF HEINZ AND ELIANE IRUSTEES OF WOLF FAMILY TRUS 1221 MYRTLE AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92103- !735-131-10-012 R000651 WUGALTER JOEL 245 E 54'TH ST APT 23F NEW YORK NY 10022-472 !735-131-33-003 R008603 ZAUNER HEINZ JURGEN PO BOX 11947 ASPEN ('O 81612- 3 1 0 â€¢ UL L . r= 1.Jur-,C 1 1 IC, - 5-, 1 111 . -44=lt. EXHIBIT 7 ASPEN/PrrKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for hyment of City of Aspen Development Appliation, Fees ilene Print Clearly) CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and 8'ntaE MKI-4 11:f ' (hereinder APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:,/~ 1. APPLICANT has submined to CITY an application for ,/~5*~dÂ· ,/-200 rÂ»Ae:rhle-/ rble (hereinatter. THE PROJECT). ~ 2. APPLICANT understands and agrces that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 43 (Sefics of 1996) establishes a fee snucrure for land use applications and the payment of al! processing fees is a condition precedent to a determinarion of applicalion completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project it iS not possible aI this time to ascertain the fuil extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY Airther agree that it is in the intcrest of the parties to allow APPLICANT to make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional Costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by reraining great cash liquidiry and will make addirional payments upon nonfication by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred CITY agrees ir will be benemed through the gmater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANTS application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree thatitis impracticable fbr CITY Sti to Complete processing or present stdYicient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Cbuncil to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required indings for project approval. unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees thal in consider=ion of the City' s waiver of ics right tc collect full fees prior to a determination of anplicarion completeness. APPLICANT Rhall pay an inital deposir in the amount of $0/dawhich is for hours of Planning staff ime. and if actual recorded costs exced & initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay addirional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CrrY for the processlng of the applicanon mentioned above. inciuding post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. : APPLICANT further agrees thst failure to pay such accrued costs shall bc grounds for suspension of processing. CrrY OF ASPEN APPLICANT signa=: 16*5,244,u~ ~*ie Ann Woods Date: , \1 Printed Name: 2%PA. Con=uniry Development Maihng Address: 3*02 46*77*AMIL *97. Acing Director r)512,0**4 . blr en/, 4 Ciry of Aspen 04624*7 - /419 TnTA P tai APPENDIX B APPENDIX C EXHIBIT 1 SUBDIVISION/PUD AGREEMENT FOR BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD THIS SUBDIVISION/PUD AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 1999, by and between THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and MARY K. BARBEE, JOHN W. BARBEE and HALLIE B. RUGHEIMER (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Barbee Partners"), WIT NE SSE TH: WHEREAS, Barbee Partners have submitted to the City for approval, execution and recordation a Final Plat of a tract of land situated within the City of Aspen, Colorado and more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference (hereinafter referred to as the "Final Plat"), said property being hereinafter designated as the "Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD"; and WHEREAS, City has fully considered the Final Plat, the proposed development and improvement of the lands therein, and the effects of the proposed development and improvement of said lands on adjoining or neighboring properties and property owners; and WHEREAS, City has imposed certain conditions and requirements in connection with its approval, execution and recordation of the Final Plat, such matters being necessary to protect, promote and enhance the public welfare; and WHEREAS, following recording of the Final Plat, Barbee Partners intend to convey certain of the Lots within the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD to Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing, Inc. or another qualified affordable housing builder (the "AH Developer"), which Lots will be developed and/or conveyed by the AH Developer for affordable housing purposes; and WHEREAS, Barbee Partners are willing to acknowledge, accept, abide by and faithfully perform the conditions and requirements imposed by the City of Aspen in approving the Final Plat; and WHEREAS, under the authority of Sections 26 84 040 (C and D) and 26 88 050 (C and D) of the Aspen Municipal Code, City is entitled to certain financial guarantees to ensure that (i) the required public facilities are installed and (ii) the required landscaping is implemented and maintained, and Barbee Partners are prepared to provide such guarantees as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the approval, execution and acceptance of the Final Plat for 1 recordation by City, and for other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE I ANNEXATION, ZONING AND REGULATORY APPROVALS 1. Pursuant to Ordinance No. (Series of 1998) adopted on , 1999, the Aspen City Council annexed a portion of the lands within the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD to the City and zoned Lot 1 R-15 moderate density residential, Lots 2-12 AH1/PUD, and the Conservation Parcel C, Conservation, as said Lots and Conservation Parcel are depicted on the Final Plat to be recorded contemporaneously with this Subdivision/PUD Agreement 2. Pursuant to Ordinance No. (Series of 1998) adopted on , 1999, the Aspen City Council granted final subdivision/PUD approval for the creation of four free market single-family residential lots (Lots 1-4); three Resident Occupied Lots ("RO Lots") (Lots 5-7); four category lots (Lots 8-11), each of which will contain one affordable housing condominium unit, Lot 12, which will contain the parking facility for Lots 8-11; and a Conservation Parcel. The property is subject to all of the conditions and restrictions set forth in said Ordinance. 3. The Aspen City Council exempted Lots 2,3 and 4 from growth management in consideration of the Barbee Partners' dedication of (i) Lots 5-7 for development and occupancy as RO Lots, and (ii) Lots 8-12 for development and occupancy as Category Lots, pursuant to the City's AHI/PUD, Affordable Housing zone district regulations.. ARTICLE II DEVELOPMENT AND USE REOUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS 1 Development Limitations on Certain Lots. (a) Lot 1 contains an existing single-family residence. Development on Lot 1 is limited to a single-family residence and such accessory uses and structures as may be permitted from time to time in the R-15 zone district or any successor to such zone district. The existing residence may be replaced, provided--ad a the replacement residence is located in the designated building envelope.'Xny 6,8*e#,t,W expansion of the existing residence must also be located in the designated building 95 0,54* envelope. (b) On each of Lots 2, 3 and 4, development is limited to one ( 1 ) single- family residence and such accessory uses and structures as may be permitted from time to time in the AHI/PUD zone district or any successor to such zone district. 2 (c) On each of Lots 2, 3 and 4, the maximum allowable residential floor area (including accessory structures) shall be 4,500 square feet, calculated in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time a building permit is applied for on a particular Lot. The same floor area limitation shall apply to a replacqment_residence on Lot 1, and to any expansion of the existing residence on L~.By its execution hereof-City agrees that said 4,500 square foormaximGWi--1 rp Iallowable floor area shall be vested in perpetuity, and shall not be diminished~ , \ future changes in zoning or other land use laws. 4-- --g (d) The single-family residences on Lots 2,3 and 4 shall be limited to a maximum of three (3) bedrooms each. This bedroom limitation does not apply to Lot 1. A minimum of two (2) off-street parking spaces are required for each residence on Lots 2,3 and 4, and for any replacement residence on Lot 1. Ce) With the exception of existing uses on Lot 1, no development shall occur outside the building envelopes on Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 except the following: (i) Landscaping consistent with the Landscape Guidelines attached hereto as Exhibit B and made a part hereof by this reference. (ii) Underground utilities and irrigation systems. . Individual driveways to residences on Lots. (iv) Fencing. (v) Vegetation removal for fire protection purposes. (f) On each of RO Lots 5, 6 and 7, development is limited to one ( 1) single-family residence deed restricted to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority' s Affordable Housing Guidelines for RO Lots in effect at the time a building permit is applied for on a particular RO Lot. A minimum of two (2) off- street parking spaces are required for each residence. (g) On each of RO Lots 5, 6 and 7, the maximum allowable residential floor area shall be 2,200 square feet (exclusive of a maximum 500 square foot garage and a maximum 800 square foot basement), calculated in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time a building permit is applied for on a particular RO Lot. (h) The single-family residences on RO Lots 5, 6 and 7 must each contain a minimum of three (3) bedrooms. (i) On each of Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11. development is limited to one-half of a residential duplex, to be built in a zero lot line configuration. The maximum allowable residential floor area for each duplex unit shall be 1,400 square feet, 3 -- calculated in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time the AH Developer applies for a building permit for the dupiexes, and each duplex unit shall be limited to a maximum of three (3) bedrooms. Both duplexes are to be constructed by the AH Developer in substantial compliance with the schematic architectural plans that are attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. Lots 8-12 shall be condominiumized by the AH Developer to permit conveyance of the four (4) duplex units to individual owners, a Condominium Declaration shall be recorded in connection therewith, and the duplex units shall be deed restricted by the AH Developer to the Housing Authority's Category 4 guidelines in effect at the time the building permit is issued for the duplexes or to such other guidelines as may be mutually acceptable to the AH Developer, the Housing Authority, and City. (j) On Lot 12, development is limited to covered parking for the affordable housing units on Lots 8-11. A minimum of ten (10) covered spaces are to be provided within Lot 12. Use of the spaces shall be allocated as set forth in the Condominium Declaration for Lots 8-11. Lot 12 shall be a common element which is owned by the Condominium Association that will be formed to govern and administer the four (4) duplex units, (k) The maximum height of structures on Lots 2-12, and of any __-122-. replacement structure on Lot 1, shall be 25 feet measured pursuant to the City's height regulations in effect at the time a building permit is applied for on a particular Lot. I (1) Upon recording of the Final Plat, Barbee Partners will convey Lots 1 and 2 to Mary Barbee and will convey Lots 3-12 and the Conservation Parcel to John Barbee and Hallie Rugheimer ("Barbee/Rugheimer"), Following the negotiation and execution by Barbee/Rugheimer and the AH Developer of a mutually acceptable agreement setting forth the terms and conditions on which the AH Developer will (i) finance and develop the four (4) duplex units on Lots 8-11 and the parking facility on Lot 12, and (ii) market and sell the RO Lots that are conveyed to the AH Developer, Barbee/Rugheimer will convey Lots 8-12 and two ofRO Lots 5-7 (to be selected by Barbee/Rugheimer) to the AH Developer subject to the terms and conditions of that agreement. (m) With respect to the third RO Lot, John Barbee and/or his wife Nancy Barbee and their children (collectively "John Barbee") shall have a period of one (1) year following the recordation of the Final Plat in which to qualify for ownership thereof in accordance with the current Affordable Housing Guidelines ' If John Barbee qualifies within said time period, Barbee/Rugheimer shall convey the third RO Lot to John Barbee for such consideration as they shall mutually agree. If John Barbee does not qualify within said time period. Barbee/Rugheimer shall convey the third RO Lot to the AH Developer in consideration for a simultaneous cash payment from the AH Developer to Barbee/Rugheimer in the amount of $130,000.00 4 5 7 (n) Residential structures on RO Lots 5-7 shall adhere to the Architectural Guidelines attached hereto as Exhibit C and made a part hereof by this reference. (0) On Lots 2,3 and 4, no building permits shall be issued until (i) Certificates of Occupancy have been issued for the four (4) duplex units being built by the AH Developer on Lots 8-11, and (ii) the RO Lots owned by the AH Developer have been conveyed to qualified buyers subject to the condition that residences be built on such Lots within 12 months following the date of the conveyance. 2, Common Driveway, Private Access Easement, and Individual Drivewavs (a) A perpetual, non-exclusive easement and right-of-way has been dedicated on the Final Plat across Lot 12 for purposes of access from South Garmisch Street to Lots 5-12 and for underground utility lines The AH Developer shall be responsible for constructing the common driveway, as hereinafter provided. Themaintenance, repair, snowplowing and further improvement of said common driveway shall be the responsibility of the duplex condominium association and each of RO Lots 5, 6 and 7 shall reimburse the Association for 20 percent of such costs within 30 days following receipt of a bill therefor from the Association. These cost allocations can be amended at any time by the written agreement of the condominium association and at least two (2) of the RO Lots. (b) A perpetual, non-exclusive private access easement 20 feet in width has been dedicated on the Final Plat along a portion of the common boundary between Lots 3 and 4 for purposes of access to Lots 3 and 4 from South Garmisch Street. The first Lot owner that wishes to improve the private access easement, and to install any necessary common utilities therein (adequately sized to serve both Lots), shall have the right to do so on behalf of both owners, and upon completion shall deliver a copy of the invoice for the work to the owner of the other Lot. Said other owner shall be obligated to reimburse the Lot owner that constructed the driveway and utilities within the private access easement for 50 percent of the invoiced cost thereof no later than 10 days after a building permit is issued for the construction of a residence on said other Lot owner's Lot. , Following construction of said shared driveway, the costs and expenses of maintaining, repairing, improving and snowplowing the shared driveway and any common utilities installed in the easement shall be shared, allocated and paid fifty percent (50%) by Lot 3 and fifty percent (50%) by Lot 4, provided that the owner that builds a residence last shall not be responsible for paying any share of such maintenance or snowplowing costs until from and after the issuance of a building permit for the construction of a residence on said owner's Lot. Subject to that proviso, if one Lot owner pays all of a maintenance or snowplowing bill, the other Lot owner shall be obligated to reimburse the paying Lot owner for fifty percent 5 (50%) of said bill no later than 10 days after receiving a copy of the bill from the paying Lot owner. In the event of a delinquency in reimbursing for half of the cost of constructing the shared driveway or for half of any maintenance or snowplowing bill as required above, the delinquent sum shall bear interest at 18 percent per annum from the due date to the date of payment in full. The Lot owner who has paid the invoice or bill shall have the right to file a civil action against the delinquent owner in the Pitkin County courts for purposes of collecting the delinquent amount, plus accrued interest. The prevailing party in any such action shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in connection with such action. (c) Except as provided in subparagraph (b) above for the shared driveway that serves Lots 3 and 4, the owner of each of Lots 2-7 shall be responsible for constructing the driveway within the owner's Lot that serves the residence thereon. 3. Utilities. (a) Water, sewer, gas, electric, telephone and cable TV service will be available from existing (or replacement) lines in Garmisch Street, and from extensions thereof into Lot 12 by the AH Developer as hereinafter provided. (b) All individual utility service lines from these main lines to the residences shall be installed by the owners of Lots 2-7 at their expense, shall be buried underground, and shall be located within the individual driveways where feasible. Areas disturbed by the installation or maintenance of individual utility lines shall be restored and revegetated by and at the expense of the Lot owner causing the disturbance as promptly as possible following the disturbance. (c) The residences on RO Lots 5, 6 and 7 and the units on Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 shall contain interior sprinkler systems. (d) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers shall be installed within the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD and not in any public right-of-way. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. Easements must be provided for pedestals. Utility locations and easements are depicted on the Final Plat and/or the Utility Plan attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. Revisions to such utility locations and easements must be delineated on an amended Final Plat or Utility Plan prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a Lot affected thereby 4 Landscaping 6 (a) Lots 8-12 shall comply with the Landscape Plan attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. The AH Developer shall be responsible for implementing said Landscape Plan, as hereinafter provided. The duplex condominium association shall be responsible for maintaining such landscaping. (b) At the time a residence is constructed on any of Lots 2-7, and at the time of construction of a replacement residence on Lot 1, the Lot owner shall comply with and implement the attached Landscape Guidelines. Thereafter, the Lot owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of such landscaping. 5. Drainage (a) At the time a building permit is applied for on Lots 2,3 or 4, or for a replacement residence on Lot 1, the Lot owner shall submit to the City Engineering Department a detailed storm water drainage plan for the Lot. (b) Lots 5-12 shall comply with the Drainage Plan attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. When the AH Developer develops Lots 8-12, it shall be responsible for implementing said Drainage Plan, At the time a residence is constructed on RO Lots 5,6 or 7, the individual Lot owner shall be responsible for implementing said Drainage Plan. 6. Air Oualitv. (a) All development within the Barbee Family Subdivision /PUD must comply with the Environmental Health Department's woodburning stove/fireplace regulations in effect at the time of issuance of a building permit. (b) Before any building permits are issued for development on Lots 8- 12, the AH Developer must submit a fugitive dust control plan to the Environmental Health Department for its review and approval. 7. Improvement Districts. The owners from time to time of each of the Lots shall be required to join any future improvement districts that may be formed that encompass said Lots. 8. School Land Dedication Fees. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a residence on each of Lots 2-7, the Lot owner shall pay to the City a cash payment in lieu of school land dedication, calculated in accordance with the formula set forth in 04*4- Section 26.88.040.C.6.c(2) of the Aspen Municipal Code. The AH Developer shall make a similar cash payment to the City before a building permit is issued for the construction of the four (4) duplex units on Lots 8-11. 9. Park Dedication Fee The park dedication fees associated with the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD have been fully satisfied by the conveyance by Barbee/Rugheimer to the City of the Conservation Parcel shown on the Final Plat, subject to a Conservation Easement for the benefit of Park Trust, Ltd 7 1 10. Work in Public Right-of-Wav. A Lot owner must first receive the approval of the appropriate City Department before any work is performed in a public I right-of-way. This requirement includes, without limitation, approval for a mail box and right-of-way landscaping from the City Streets Department. 11 Damage to Public Right-of-Wav. A Lot owner shall repair any public right-of-way damaged during construction on the owner's Lot before a certificate of occupancy is issued therefor. 1 ARTICLE III A. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS 1. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any residence or duplex unit in Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer, as specified below, shall accomplish the following subdivision improvements, all as depicted on the Final PUD Development Plan is attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. (a) Barbee Partners and the AH Developer shall together investigate the extent to which the 6-inch water main in South Garmisch Street between the South Garmisch Street/Durant Avenue intersection and the entrance to the common driveway in Lot 12 has already been replaced with an 8-inch water main, and shall replace any remaining 6-inch main with an 8-inch ductile iron water main. The cost of said investigation and of any necessary new 8-inch main shall be paid fifty percent (50%) by Barbee Partners and fifty percent (50%) by the AH Developer. (b) The AH Developer shall extend a new water main from South Garmisch Street into Lot 12 for a distance of approximately 150 feet, and shall also install a new fire hydrant within Lot 12, to provide service to the seven dwelling units to be located on Lots 5-11, all as depicted on the Utility Plan attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. (c) The AH Developer shall construct a new 8-inch sewer extension from the existing 8-inch sewer line in South Garmisch Street into Lot 12, and shall also extend electric primary, telephone and cable TV lines from the existing lines in South Garmisch Street into Lot 12. to provide service to the seven dwelling units to be located on Lots 5-11. (d) Barbee Partners and the AH Developer shall together construct a>>h sidewalk, curb and gutter, and a 5-foot wide landscaped strip, along the frontage 8&4 of Lots 2, 3, 4, 12 and 11 on South Garmisch Street. The cost thereof shall be 1 paid based on street frontage as described in attached Exhibit D, as referenced below. ti 8 (e) The AH Developer shall construct the common driveway within and across Lot 12 from South Garmisch Street to the northerly edge of the subdivision, and shall also install a new street light at the South Garmisch Street/common driveway intersection. 2. A construction schedule for the above-described improvements shall be submitted to the City Engineering Department at the same time that the financial guarantees described in Section B below are provided 3. The current estimated cost of the subdivision improvements described in Paragraph 1 above, as more specifically set forth in a letter from Jay W. Hammond of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. to Sunny Vann dated November 18, 1998, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit D and made a part hereof by this reference, and as approved by the City Engineer, is $163,657.00. Barbee Partners' aggregate share of that cost is $22,352.00, and the AH Developer's share of that cost is $141,305.00. If John Barbee qualifies for ownership of an RO Lot, he shall reimburse the AH Developer for one-seventh of the AH Developer's out-of-pocket cost of constructing the subdivision improvements described in Paragraph 1 above no later than 30 days following the completion thereof and the AH Developer's delivery to John Barbee of a written invoice summarizing such costs. 4. The AH Developer shall complete the landscaping of Lots 8-12 in accordance with the Landscape Plan attached to the Final Plat no later than six (6) months following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the duplex units. Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer, as the case may be, shall have the right to plant additional native vegetation within Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, as they may consider appropriate from time to time, without further approvals being required. 5. The current estimated cost of implementing the Landscape Plan for Lots 8- 12 and of maintaining said landscaping for a period of two (2) years after installation, as more specifically set forth in a letter from Thomas G. Stevens of The Stevens Group, Inc. to Sunny Vann dated December 7, 1998, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit E and made a part hereof by this reference, and as approved by the City Engineer, is $26,960.00. One hundred twenty-five percent (125%) of that cost amounts to $33,700.00. B. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES In order to ensure construction and installation of the subdivision and landscaping improvements described in Section A above, and to guarantee 100 percent of the current estimated cost ofthe subdivision improvements and 125 percent of the current estimated cost of the landscaping improvements (including 2 years of maintenance thereof), Barbee Partners shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit from a financially responsible lender in the amount of $22,352.00, and the AH Developer shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit from a financially responsible lender in the amount 9 of $175,005.00. Said guarantees shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of the first residential structure in Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and the City Manager, and shall each give the City the unconditional right, upon default by Barbee Partners or the AH Developer, as the case may be, to withdraw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully complete and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any outstanding bills for work done thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty amount to be applied first to additional administrative or legal costs associated with any such default and the repair of any deterioration in improvements already constructed before the unused remainder, if any, of such guaranty is released to Barbee Partners or the AH Developer, as the case may be. Provided, however, that Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer shall be given fourteen (14) days written notice of default prior to the City's ability to make a call under a letter of credit and further provided that delays or other problems resulting from acts of God or other events beyond the control of Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer shall not constitute a default hereunder so long as a good faith effort is being made to remedy the problem and the problem is in fact resolved within a reasonable period of time following its occurrence. As portions of the improvements required are completed, the City Engineer shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he shall authorize the release of the agreed estimated cost for that portion of the improvements; provided, however, that ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost shall be withheld until all proposed improvements are completed and approved by the City Engineer, and with respect to landscaping improvements, an additional twenty-five percent (25%) of the estimated cost thereof shall be retained until the landscaping improvements have been maintained in a satisfactory condition for two (2) years. It is the express understanding of the parties that the procedure set forth in Section C below pertaining to the procedure for default and amendment of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall not be required with respect to the enforcement and implementation of these financial assurances and guarantees to be provided by Barbee Partners and the AH Developer as set forth above. C. NON-COMPLIANCE AND REOUEST FOR AMENDMENTS OR EXTENSIONS BY BARBEE PARTNERS OR THE AH DEVELOPER In the event that the City Council determines that Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer are not acting in substantial compliance with the terms of this ' Subdivision/PUD Agreement, the City Council shall notify the offending owner in writing specifying the alleged non-compliance and asking that said owner remedy the alleged non-compliance within such reasonable time as the City Council may determine, but not less than 30 days. If the City Council determines that said owner has not complied within such time, the City Council may issue and serve upon the owner a written order specifying the alleged non-compliance and requiring the owner to remedy the same within thirty (30) days. Within twenty (20) days of the receipt of such order, the owner may file with the City Council either a notice advising the City Council that it is in 10 compliance or a written petition requesting a hearing to determine any one or both of the following matters: (a) Whether the alleged non-compliance exists or did exist, or (b) Whether a variance, extension of time or amendment to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement should be granted with respect to any such non- compliance which is determined to exist. Upon the receipt of such petition, the City Council shall promptly schedule a hearing to consider the matters set forth in the order of non-compliance and in the petition. The hearing shall be convened and conducted pursuant to the procedures normally established by the City Council for other hearings. If the City Council determines by a preponderance of the evidence that a non-compliance exists which has not been remedied, it may issue such orders as may be appropriate; provided, however, no order terminating any approval previously granted by the City Council shall be issued without a finding of the City Council that substantial evidence warrants such action and affording the owner a reasonable time to remedy such non-compliance. A final determination of non-compliance which has not been remedied or for which no variance has been granted may, at the option of the City Council, and upon written notice to the owner, terminate any of such approvals which are reasonably related to the requirement(s) with which owner has failed to comply. Alternatively, the City Council may grant such variances, extensions of time or amendments to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement as it may deem appropriate under the circumstances. In addition to the foregoing, Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer or their respective successors or assigns may, on their own initiative, petition the City Council for a variance, an amendment to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement or an extension of one or more of the time periods required for performance hereunder. The City Council may grant such variances, amendments to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement, or extensions of time as it may deem appropriate under the circumstances. The parties expressly acknowledge and agree that the City Council shall not unreasonably refuse to extend the time periods for performance if the owner demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that the reasons for the delay(s) which necessitate said extension(s) are beyond the control of the owner, despite good faith efforts on its part to perform in a timely manner. 11 D. GENERAL PROVISIONS ' 6. The provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of Barbee Partners and the AlI Developer and City and their respective successors and assigns. 7. This Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall be subject to and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. 8. If any of the provisions of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement or any paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or section or the application thereof in any circumstance is invalidated, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement, and the application of any such provision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or section in any other circumstance shall not be affected thereby. 9. This Subdivision/PUD Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties hereto with respect to the transactions contemplated hereunder, and except as otherwise specifically provided herein, may be altered or amended from time to time only by written instruments executed by all parties hereto that are affected by the proposed amendment.. 10. Numerical and title headings contained in this Subdivision/PUD Agreement are for convenience only, and shall not be deemed determinative of the substance contained herein. As used herein, where the context requires, the use of the singular shall include the plural and the use of any gender shall include all genders. 11. Upon execution of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement by all parties hereto, City agrees to approve and execute the Final Plat for Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, and to accept the same for recordation in the office of the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County, Colorado, upon payment of the recordation fee by the owners. 12. Notices to be given to the parties to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall be considered to be given if hand delivered or if deposited in the United States Mail to the parties by registered or certified mail at the addresses indicated below, or such other addresses as may be substituted upon written notice by the parties or their successors or assigns: City of Aspen City Manager 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Barbee Partners c/o Hallie B. Rugheimer 1400 Story Hill Road Bozeman, MT 59715 12 With a copy to: Arthur C. Daily, Esq. Holland & Hart LLP 600 East Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 13. The terms, conditions, provisions and obligations herein contained shall be deemed covenants that run with and burden the real property more particularly described herein and any and all owners thereof, their successors, grantees or assigns, and further shall inure to the benefit of and be specifically enforceable by or against the parties hereto, their successors, grantees or assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year first above written. CITY: City of Aspen. Colorado, a municipal corporation By: Mayor Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney BARBEE PARTNERS: Mary K. Barbee John W Barbee Hallie B. Rugheimer 13 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999, by John Bennett as Mayor and Kathryn S. Koch as City Clerk of the City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corporation. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999, by Mary K. Barbee. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public STATEOF ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999, by John W Barbee. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires Notary Public 14 1 STATE OF ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999, by Hallie B. Rugheimer.. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public ASPEN:0024631.05 1 15 ' EXHIBIT A That part of Lot 1 of the Norcheast one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the Eth P.M., according to the Diagram certified by the United States Survevor General's Office, January 4, 1896 as attached to General Land Office Survey of said Township and Range approved by the United States Surveyor General's utrice March 31, 1891, described as zeziows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Loc 1; thence East 337.73 feec, more or less, to the Soucherly line cf the former right of way of the Colorade Midland Railway Company; thence along said right of way line, Souch 42Â°23' East 477.44 Z___, -==r 9 . more or less, to the Wescerly right of way line cf Garmisch Streec; thence along said Wescerly richt of way line, Souch 14Â°50'49" Wesz - 243.07 feec, more or less, to the Northwescerlv corner cf cronerzv - I - - described in Section 2 cf inscrument -#*#- roon-r--an -9 - -4 - -6 Book 230 ac Page 436 of the Pitkin Countv records; Chance South 40Â°21'11" Ease 86.00 feec; thence South 14Â°50'49" West 115.00 feez; crence Souch 75Â°09'11" Ease 150.00 feet thence South 14Â°50'49" West 470.00 feec; . thence South 75Â°09'11" Ease 150.00 reet, more cr less, zo the Westerly right of way of Asven Street; thence along the Westerly right of way line of Aspen Street South 14Â°50'49" Wesz 25.00 feec, more or less, to the Souch line of sai Lot 1; thence along the Souch line of said Lot 1, West 786.93 -, 7== - 1 I _' more or less, to che Souchwesc corner o= saic Lcu 1; . thence along the West line or sala Lot 1, North 171.67 feec, more cr 1 less, to line 4-1 of the Litzle Mack Lode Claim, Uniced States . - ..i - -U- Ill -... 1.- VT, i#-2 , Survey No. 3956 as Patented in Book 175 at Paae 212 of the Pickin County recorcs; thence Norch 14Â°57' Ease 650.39 feec, more or less, te Corner No. 4 or said lode claim; Chance North 75Â°03' West _,0.12 feec, more cr less, cc che Wes= _ine of said Lcc 1; chence alcnc che Wesz line CE saic Lac 1, Norsh . , I . J - -- X- ..... ... , . L ... .- -- -/ -- 1-72 0,1 ===r less, to the paine of beginninc. EXCEPTING cherefrcm the =crticn thereof described in Beck 236 a= Page 334 and any porricn wirnin cne preperzy descri in Beck 201 az Face 307 cf the 34 +174 â€ž ~Al ,"-17 Yar-,-vr-ric 44.-.- -1 -- 71 1- EXHIBIT B /1 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES jt Prepared December 7, 1998 Â»4Â»Â»-/ LdÂ« C The following landscape guidelines shall apply to lots 2,3,4,5,6, and 7 of the Barbee Family Subdivision. The site currently consists of native grasses, aspen, spruce, serviceberry and sage. As such, these plant materials should be used to the greatest , extent possible. General Intent It is the intent of this document to provide a guideline for landscaping that will emphasize the use of native material found on the Barbee Family Subdivision site and to discourage the use ofnon native material. This will provide for a continuity among properties whether they are deed restricted or free market. As such, this document applies to both free market lots as well as deed restricted lots and is intended to provide for a level of quality and not to limit creativity. Plant Material The following plant material is encouraged for use within the landscape plans for the homes within the Barbee Family Subdivision. Trees Aspen Spruce Crab Apple Canada Red Cherry f Additional native trees Shrubs Serviceberry Scrub oak 4- Potentilla Common Lilac Additional native shrubs Grasses Bluegrass Sod Fescue lawn mix Native grass mix for re vegetation r Irrigation Alllandscape areas shall receive irrigation, Those areas within lawn shall receive permanent underground, automatic systems. Those areas within native grass areas should receive a temporary system consisting of surface piping, spray heads for grass areas and drip emitters for trees and shrubs and automated, clocked valves. The temporary system should be left in place for a minimum of two years. After this two year period, the system can be dismantled, or at the owners discretion be left in place for use during drought periods. Topsoil, Surface Preparation All topsoil encountered during excavation ofthe home and improvements shall be stockpiled at an appropriate location on the lot for re use, Topsoil should be screened before re use. A minimum of four inches oftopsoil should be placed on the surface and shall be hand racked to remove any material, such as rocks, greater than four inches in diameter in size. Grading Positive drainage should be provided around all structures. This should be graded at a minimum of 3%. All drainage created by site improvements shall be contained on site by the use of drywells. Surface drainage currently experienced on site that is not disturbed is acceptable as it is considered historic. No drainage shall be allowed off site that is not considered historic. In areas of steep grade, no un retained grade shall exceed 2.1 slope. Those grades of 2:1 slope shall receive an erosion control net and must be seeded within the first growing season. Once the seed has established itself, the netting must be removed. All areas that cannot meet 2: 1 slope must be mechanically retained. Landscape Lighting Landscape lighting should be minimal. When used, only downcast fixtures should be used. Lighting should only be used to provide safety when required and not to call attention to landscape features. Timing ofLandscape Improvements All construction disturbance must be repaired within the first growing season after completion of construction ofthe home. Minimum Improvements While it is recognized that landscaping may take place over several years, at a minimum, all site grading and drainage, topsoil, irrigation and sod/seeding must be completed within the first growing season after construction ofthe home. EXHIBIT C Barbee Affordable Housing Dec. 3, 1998 BARBEE LOTS 5.6. & 7 ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINEi A. Intent Architectural expression is encouraged in conjunction with adherence to simple and basic criteria for sound architectural practice and design. Through choice of naturally occurring materials and colors, and by understanding the scale relationships between the building sites and the site as a whole, sensitive and harmonious architecture can be developed. Issues to be considered in the architectural design include form and massing, materials, roofs, chimneys, windows, walls, foundations, lighting, decks and patios ' and the following criteria are required to the extent that they do not conflict with any City of Aspen ordinances. B. Review Any new structure must be approved by the project's Architectural Design Review i Committee prior to that structure's submission for application for a Building Permit. This committee is to be comprised of three members in any combination of existing homeowners or APEHI directors. Application for design approval by the committee of any new structure must be submitted to APEHI 31 days in advance of the intended application for Building Permit. C. Form and Massing ' 1. Simple shapes are best, however, 'A' frame, domes or freeform structures are not permitted. (2- \\ 2. Shapes that are referential to the adjacent duplexes on Lots 1-4 are most desirable. D. Materials Materials chosen for the architecture should strive to make the building appear most compatible and integrated with the site and the duplexes. Color and texture should be carefully considered. Material choices should be kept to a minimum and emphasize a 'less-is-more' approach, Bright or reflective surfaces are discouraged. E. Roofs i 1. Svmmetrical gable roots are preferred. 2. Fiat roofs that are small in size may be used. 3. Gable or shed type dormers are preferred. 1 4. Any solar collectors should lie flat onto pitched roofs. 5. Skylights are not recommended. 6. Rooftop vents, equipment, antennae, etc. shall be confined within the roof or chimnev volumes to the extent possible. 7. In general roof omaments like scroll work or decorative elements are discouraged. page two; F. Windows Reflective or mirrored window materials are unacceptable. G. Walls Stone, wood and natural cement stucco sidings are encouraged, however the use of stone and stucco as a single material is discouraged. H. Foundations Foundations should follow the contour of the site and exposed concrete foundation walls should be covered with an appropriate architectural finish material. I. Color Palette 1. Exterior wall colors should harmonize with the site and surrounding buildings. Accent colors on wall surfaces are acceptable if they are confined to entries and interior or recessed type spaces. 2. The predominant tone should tend toward warm, earthy hues of browns, dark greens, and grays. J. Lighting The objective is to provide night lighting discreetly, illuminating only what is needed for safety and convenience. Shielded type lights are preferred. K. Decks Decks should be extensions of the architecture while responding to the land form. Care should be taken to minimize any exposed undersides of decks. L. Landscaping 1. The exterior areas should be left in a natural a condition and as much of the existing scrub oak should be preserved as possible. 2. Issues to be considered in the landscape design include fencing, paving, irrigation, signage, grading, retention, erosion control, planting and revegetation. 414 00,41 L.)lk 9 7/4 ~ Â© i - .- d * 4 *411 November 18, 1998 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 2 approval conditions required by the City of Aspen Water Department for the Barbee Family Subdivision / PUD project was that the existing, older cast iron water main be replaced from the intersection of South Garmisch Street and Durant Avenue to the vicinity of the Affordable Housing lot entry (about 90 feet). More recent conversations with the City staff indicate that the water line south of Durant may already have been replaced to approximately mid-block (south of the AH entry) with a ductile line but there appears to be some uncertainty regarding exactly how much of the line has been replaced. As I understand the City's requirements right now, the Barbee project is to excavate or "pothole" the water main in the vicinity of the AH entry to verify whether the line is older cast iron or newer ductile iron. If it is the older material, the replacement would be required down to Durant Avenue (or to where existing ductile iron is encountered). Cost Allocation On pages 2 and 3 of the calculation sheets, I have endeavored to allocate the public improvement costs among Lots 2,3 and 4 of the freemarket parcels and the affordable housing parcel. On page 2 you will see a percentage allocation of the frontage distances with and without the AH entry construction. As an example, the affordable housing parcel would not be responsible for the frontage cost of the landscaping component where their entry is located (schedule "B"). They would, however, be responsible for prep work and asphalt repair in the entry area in a manner comparable to the other frontages (schedule "A"). I have put the streetlight at the AH entry and the entry itself entirely under the AH parcel. For the water line, there isn't as much of a frontage component yet it does improve public infrastructure to the benefit of all the Barbee lots. I have allocated the Garmisch water line replacement (which may or may not be needed) 50% to the AH parcel and 50% to all three freemarket lots. Utility-related improvements specific to the development of the AH parcel are allocated to that portion of the project. South Garmisch Improvements: Lot 2 . . . . . $ 6,632.00 Lot 3 . . , ~ ~ ~ $ 7,860.00 Lot 4 . . . . . . $ 7,860.00 AH parcel . $ 24,485.00 Total, South Garmisch ROW: . . $ 46,837.00 AH Parcel Infrastructure: . . . $116,820.00 Total public infrastructure cost: . . $163,657.00 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC ENGINEERS SURVEYORS (970) 925-6727 G SCHMUESER P.O. Box 2155 , FAX (970) 925-4157 GORDON MEYER - Aspen, CO 81612 November 18, 1998 EXHIBIT D Mr. Sunny Vann VANN ASSOCIATES LLC 230 East Hopkins Ave. Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Barbee Familv Property Subdivision Improvements Agreement, Infrastructure Cost Estimates Dear Sunny: This letter and attachments comprise a cost estimate and cost allocation schedule for public improvements at the Barbee property freemarket and affordable housing project on South Garmisch Street in Aspen, Colorado. The Barbee parcel is the subject of a pending Subdivision / PUD application with the City of Aspen and this information will be incorporated into the Subdivision Improvements Agreement for the property. Introduction The Barbee property comprises Lots 1 through 9 of Block 5 of the Eames Addition to the Original Aspen Townsite, Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11 of the Eames Addition as well as a metes and bounds description totalling approximately 17.67 acres. Of the total 17.67 acres, 10.83 acres is located in the City of Aspen and 6.84 acres remains in Pitkin County. The property currently includes an existing residence addressed at 601 South Garmisch Street as well as a couple of small sheds and outbuildings. The owner of the parcel has submitted an application to the City of Aspen for Subdivision and Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval to create a mixed freemarket and affordable housing project. The conceptual development program includes four freemarket lots including one for the existing home as well as the creation of three lots for single family resident- occupied (R.O.) affordable housing units and four lots for two duplex category 4 affordable housing units. Infrastructure Requirements Attached are calculation sheets regarding the public infrastructure requirements of the Barbee proposal. Included are improvements within the public right-of-way of South Garmisch Street including sidewalk, curb and gutter, landscaping, the affordable housing site entry, a possible water line replacement, pavement repair and a streetlight. In addition to the public right-of-way improvements, common improvements of a public nature will be required to construct the homes within the affordable housing site. I have provided figures for the possible replacement of an existing 6 inch diameter cast iron water main with an 8 inch diameter ductile iron water line in South Garmisch Street. One of the 118 West 6th, Suite 200 â€¢ Glenwood Springs, Colorado â€¢ (970) 945-1004 November 18, 1998 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 3 I hope these figures are helpful and sufficient for submission to the City in preparing the SIA for the Barbee Family Subdivision / PUD. Feel free to contact me if I may provide additional information or detail. Very truly yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. RE lo. 0/~ Ljay W. Hammond, P,E. Principal, Aspen Office JH4h 97072S1 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC toR 16â€¢<66-16,L / pu.D 5.,A. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 118 W. 6th St. Suite 200 P.O. Box 2155 SHEET NO 1 oF 1 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Aspen, CO 81612 (970) 945.1004 (970) 925-6727 CALCULATED BY --~ DATr 1/1-98 FAX (970) 945-5948 FAX (970) 925-4157 CHECKED BY DATF SCAIF Subdivis,mÂ« IlÂ·~frovt.M â‚¬01 16 Avrâ‚¬-2-exlf <Fu\olic- fvnfro#dne.tis Cobt ELÂ£,v.aÂ·li I l. 6â€¢.04.6 6)â€¢ry'~tilk 6:dgualk mla LIS XS # @406-/5/ ~â‚¬75-23 - 1 Z. 5.01-1~ Gar,~1'ik 04 6 Â£ 9 45- LE @ t# 27-*â‚¬04 Lâ‚¬4 Li,ulo- ~ 3, E.ir~ Frioltwoll< 74 R.0'W ZIS Sf=.2 4 6-, 50 4 4 flo 4. ~~-ISP Afollr 240 L, C. X 1 ' x 6 " =- 1 2 0 6-3 1 = 4.5- 6,1 = 1 t g , o e 4 700 - 1 5. 6. (barmbcl Prip i Exe-Wal\0-0 LS * 5,000 - 1 (Â°. L.vwl 4 64~6 5 ' bl-r ? p L S * 2, 900 - 1 -7, b Er.-4* 1 :1 kt i 64 Q Â·40, 4-bo 4 6 1Â£gao S. S. G,uvw :be.4 93, L. SIt ble 10 Lir â‚¬ *50(LF:= 4%1 00 11 E- IR @ DO row\AI L.5. 42,000 64- 3 44 4 + 1,000 43,000 | HE>e /DOL,â‚¬ x 15'X.4" =soo c,4 9& r i 9 6, 1. = 3% 6 49 (ce JA -~czoo 4 ( -5, ZOO 1 5, \AAJer 'MA, A. ellÂ·jrt,a,50 0-FL i *Â¥ 8 AÂ¥1 Stâ‚¬- G 'l D\ P \45- L.frâ‚¬ 45-/LE- 44(0,52-5 | -rie- IN g (2*ruise h L, 5 f 7,000 9 " (3\1* 1 (R,*\ t 0 00 At 1 ; 000 1 tri-1 156**1011 \ e* $ 415-00 4 "D\F (15- Li~(B LIZ~Lf= 6 5,-250 44 64- i 0 50 0 4 000 1 -Ele-to- of LL#Arawl \Â« 8-3iooo 4~-Seâ€žAG L ea, 62 756 4 L5-0 0 1 REP Wet>air 4 4,00 -' 4 25,1-7-5- Joe -Ka/bee SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. SHEET NO Z of 3 118 W. 6th St. Suite 200 P.O. Box 2155 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Aspen, CO 81612 (970) 945-1004 (970) 925Â·6727 CALCULATED BY <~ DATF Il Â· 17Â· 98 FAX (970) 945-5948 FAX (970) 925-4157 CHECKED BY DATF Sr.Al F 10. St.der MoLIA Â·,440 At\ 5:'le- -SrE- 14 @ GArrnise-14 L, 6, 6 7,500 ' 4 *Lok# Z ea (S 5, 500 1211,000 â‚¬' 74 6 14 0 L.E. 6 Â¥45- (p,100 * 19, soo i l . Elt)#rks 'fih Mif ~ 125- L,E (R ~SD/L 15 $ 1(â€¢,L5-0 77/548, 23 (22 4 / 01 doe $ 10,000 6 1 , z 51D * 4 7,Soo az. Pke..,Â£ / Ca 10(Q- 429 L. E ~4 4/ L â‚¬ 6 46 %751 SubtoÂ·t-al 18 /-5U, -5 & 0 â‚¬~:Keer,Al (G.1,01"v#Lf (12 zoh 4 2-71 27* 1~8 1-A L- 6 (63,700 651- SHARING I 6(624Â· A Sibrd. S 1-0+ FR-4-Ales .3 lo Lot Z 4 1 " 11Â· UD Let 3 55' 21 (5 LeE q 55' 21 25- AIA -121 91 89' wic e.4,41-Y 3,1 14(0' Zle InA cED arbe-O SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. SHEET NO ..~ of -3 118 W. 6th St Suite 200 P.O. Box 2155 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Aspen, CO 81612 (970) 945-1004 (970) 925-6727 CALCULATED BY tÂ·~3 DATF 11-19 -98 FAX (970) 945Â·5948 FAX (970) 925-4157 CHECKED BY DATF SCAI F (.zo'% Elr C c-k. 01Udoold) =El-pro- t.4 ftÂ£*4 iptued. 1_8 + L Lot 1 Let 4 A +4 I,197- \515-~ 1575- iÂ°15 3 2 1,001 13,11Â» 1317 ll.3 3 3. 1 41% 4. 1 Ecl 13% z3% 42 1 0Â£ 5. 1 6 -10 Il>Zo 1 310 2340 J G. 9-7-0 1-50 7 SO 930 j 7. 7%00 W 9 (50 - 50) 26 60 269(.0 2-660 19%0 t _ 9. 4# 30, 210 J Z 10. AA 23,1-60 -~ Ii. A)+ 57,00 6 11 1 2- *4 5,%56 ~ lbTAL.5 4 6, &31 42 11$(po * 7 IS(06 *141,-30 9 AM NABrE 64 Pulail L Roub 11-fr, : 6 14,455- 10>>Imul /-0 EXHIBIT E THE STEVENS GROUP INCORPORATED December 7, 1998 Mr. Sunny Vann 230 East Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Barbee Landscape Cost Estimate Dear Sunny, Pursuant to your request I have prepared the following estimate of landscape costs for the Barbee Family Subdivision as they pertain to the deed restricted duplex units. As such, it does not provide a cost for landscaping either the deed restricted lots or the free market lots. This cost estimate is based on the Landscape Plan dated December 7, 1998 prepared by my office. Plant Material Quantity Unit cost Cost Spruce - 6 ft. to 10 ft. height 26 $400 $10,400 Aspen - 2" to 2 14" caliper 37 $150 $5,550 Shrubs - 5 gallon 45 $30 $1,350 Lawn Mix 10,000 s.f $.09 $900 Native Mix 1,500 s.f. $.09 $135 Topsoil & Finish Grade 11,500 s.f $.30 $3,450 Irrigation 11.500 s.f. $.45 $5,175 TOTAL $26,960 These costs have been generated using the 1998 Williams Ranch contract unit costs increased slightly for 2 years of inflation anticipating a construction schedule of fall 2000. If you have any questions or require any additional information please contact me. Sincerely, lE-fti Â·< 2 4-- Thomas G. Stevens 580 MAIN STREET SUITE 220 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 (p) 970.963.6717 (D 970.963.6707 EXHIBIT 2 DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT (the "Conservation Easement") is made and entered into this day of , 1999, by and between MARY K. BARBEE, JOHN W. BARBEE and HALLIE B. RUGHEIMER (collectively "Grantor"), and PARK TRUST, LTD., a Colorado not-for-profit corporation d/b/a ASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUST ("Grantee"). RECITALS WHEREAS, Grantor is the record owner of the Conservation Parcel and of Lot 1 as depicted and described on the Final Plat of Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD recorded , 1999 in Plat Book at Page in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the Conservation Parcel, together with that portion of Lot 1 lying southerly and westerly of the platted building envelope on Lot 1, are hereinafter referred to as the "Conservation Easement Area", and WHEREAS, the Conservation Easement Area remains in a substantially undisturbed and natural state, and has significant wildlife habitat, ecological, open space, scenic and aesthetic features and values; and WHEREAS, preservation of these natural features and values will yield substantial public benefit; and WHEREAS, Grantor desires and intends to preserve and maintain the wildlife habitat, open space character and scenic qualities and values within and upon the Conservation Easement Area by encumbering the same with a conservation easement for the use and benefit of Grantee, pursuant to the provisions of Section 38-30.5-101, el seq., Colorado Revised Statutes; and WHEREAS, Grantee is a charitable organization, exempt from tax under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and created at least 2 years prior to the grant of this Conservation Easement, and is a "qualified conservation organization" as defined by the Internal Revenue Code; and WHEREAS, Grantee has the resources to carry out its responsibilities hereunder and, by acceptance of this Conservation Easement, Grantee acknowledges its commitment to honor the intentions of Grantor as expressed herein to preserve and protect in perpetuity the conservation values of the Conservation Easement Area for the benefit of this and future generations CONVEYANCE NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the facts recited above and of the mutual covenants contained herein, and for other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby confessed and acknowledged, Grantor hereby grants and conveys to Grantee, without warranties of title, a perpetual conservation easement in gross, pursuant to Section 38-30.5-101, ct seq., Colorado Revised Statutes, over, across and upon the Conservation Easement Area, subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, and subject to all easements and other matters shown on the Final Plat of Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD recorded , 1999 in Plat Book at Page Grantee hereby acknowledges, accepts without reservation and agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Conservation Easement. 1. Purpose. It is the essential purpose of this Conservation Easement to preserve and protect, in perpetuity, the natural, ecological, wildlife habitat, scenic, open space, and aesthetic features and values of the Conservation Easement Area. In furtherance of the foregoing objective, this Conservation Easement identifies certain uses of the Conservation Easement Area which are consistent or inconsistent with such objective and which are therefore allowed or prohibited. 2 Grantee's Affirmative Rights To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, the following affirmative rights are hereby granted to Grantee: a) To identify, preserve and protect in perpetuity the natural, ecological, wildlife habitat, open space and scenic features and values of the Conservation Easement Area. b) To enter upon the Conservation Easement Area to exercise the rights herein granted and to enforce the terms hereof Grantee shall conduct its activities in such manner as not to unreasonably interfere with or create a nuisance for the uses being made from time to time of the Conservation Easement Area, consistent with this Conservation Easement, or of the remainder of Lot 1, or of Lots 2- 12 of the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, at the time of such entry. c) To enjoin any activity on, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area which is prohibited herein or which is otherwise inconsistent with this Conservation Easement. The foregoing rights shall be exercised by Grantee in its discretion, consistent with Grantee's underlying mission and the general purposes set forth herein 3. Consistent Uses The following uses and practices, though not an exhaustive recital of consistent uses and practices, are consistent with this Conservation Easement, and shall be permitted on the Conservation Easement Area, and Grantor 2 reserves the right (but never the obligation) in itself and in its successors and assigns in the ownership of Lots 1-12 (or any of them), Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, to engage in, perform (or to contract with others to perform) and enjoy such uses and practices on the Conservation Easement Area, to wit: (i) Hiking, picnicking, horseback riding, cross-country skiing, and other open space and recreational uses by the owners from time to time of Lots 1-12 (or any of them), Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, and their respective families, guests and invitees, and by the general public to the extent expressly authorized and permitted from time to time by the owner of the Conservation Parcel, provided that the general public shall not be entitled to enter upon or use any portion of Lot 1. In the event any public uses are so authorized, the owner of the Conservation Parcel shall obtain and maintain adequate liability insurance which names Grantor as an additional insured. (ii) Grantee and/or the owner of the Conservation Parcel may, in its discretion, use, maintain and improve the existing public trail that traverses the southwesterly corner of the Conservation Parcel, provided that such trail shall be restricted to non-motorized uses and adequate liability insurance is obtained and maintained by said Grantee and/or Conservation Parcel owner, which insurance names Grantor as an additional insured. Grantee and/or the owner of the Conservation Parcel may also relocate said trail or segments thereof, provided the prior written approval of the Grantee is obtained as to the location and design of the relocated trail, which consent shall not be 11nreasonably withheld. (iii) The installation and maintenance of a plague in memory of Mary Tharp Davis Barbee, at Grantor's sole cost, in a location to be determined by Grantor Grantor shall design the plague and present the design to Grantee for review and comment before ordering the same. (iv) Such cutting and removal of dead, dying or diseased timber or other vegetation as may be reasonably necessary for fire protection or disease prevention purposes. (v) The taking of such reasonable steps as are necessary to control erosion on the Conservation Easement Area. 4. Prohibited Uses Except as permitted under Paragraph 3 of this Conservation Easement, the following uses and practices, though not an exhaustive recital of inconsistent uses and practices, are inconsistent with the purposes of this 3 Conservation Easement, and shall be prohibited on the Conservation Easement Area, to Wit: (i) The material change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of the natural, ecological, wildlife habitat, open space or scenic features or values of the Conservation Easement Area. (ii) The construction or placement of any structures or roads on the Conservation Easement Area, excepting such picnicking tables and similar facilities as Grantee and/or the owner of the Conservation Parcel may consider appropriate. (iii) The installation or operation of lights or lighting features of any kind. (iv) The use or operation of motor vehicles of any kind. (v) Camping, fires, firearms, noisy or otherwise offensive behavior, and commercial uses or activities of any kind. (Vi) The removal, destruction or cutting of native vegetation or timber. (Vii) The introduction of non-native plant species to the Conservation Easement Area which may compete with and result in the decline or elimination of native species. (viii) The exploration for or extraction of minerals, oil, gas, or other hydrocarbons, soils, sands, gravel, or other materials on or below the surface of the Conservation Easement Area. (ix) The dumping or other disposal or storage of refuse, garbage, or other unsightly or offensive material. (x) Any other activity which endangers, disturbs or adversely impacts the natural, scenic and aesthetic qualities of the Conservation Easement Area, except as permitted in this Conservation Easement. 5. Residual Estate. As expressly provided in Section 38-30.5-105 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, all interests and rights of ownership not transferred and conveyed to Grantee by this Conservation Easement shall remain in Grantor. Grantor shall have the right at any time to convey said residual estate to the City of Aspen, Colorado, following which conveyance Grantor shall have no further rights, obligations or liabilities with respect to the Conservation Easement Area, excepting those rights described in Paragraphs 3, 6, 7 and 11 hereof 6. Grantee Approval of Additional or Different Uses. In the event Grantor (or its successors in the ownership of Lots 1-12 or any of them, and/or the Conservation 4 Parcel, respectively) wishes to engage in a use or practice on the Conservation Easement Area which is not listed above as a "Consistent Use" or as a "Prohibited Use", Grantor shall send Grantee written notice describing the proposed use or practice. Grantee shall have thirty (30) days from the posting of such notice to review the proposed activity and to notify Grantor in writing of its support or objection thereto. Such objection, if any, shall be based upon Grantee's considered opinion that the proposed activity is inconsistent with this Conservation Easement. If at all possible, said notice shall inform Grantor of the manner in which the proposed activity can be modified to be consistent with this Conservation Easement. Should Grantee fail to provide a written response to Grantor's notice within 30 days of the posting of said notice, the proposed activity shall automatically be deemed consistent with the terms of this Conservation Easement, and Grantee shall have no further right to object to the activity identified by such notice. In the event Grantor and Grantee disagree as to whether a particular use or practice is a "Consistent Use" or a "Prohibited Use", as defined herein, or if Grantor disagrees with a determination by Grantee that a proposed use is inconsistent with this Conservation Easement, either Grantor or Grantee may submit the dispute (i) to arbitration pursuant to the rules and procedures of the American Arbitration Association, or (ii) to such other form of mediation or conflict resolution as may be mutually acceptable to Grantor and Grantee. In such event, the parties agree that the decision of the arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding upon the parties, and that the prevailing party shall bear the cost of the arbitration. However, each party shall pay its own attorney's fees, if any, regardless of outcome. 7 Enforcement of Rights. a) In the event of a violation of any term, condition, covenant, or restriction contained in this Conservation Easement by either I 1 Grantor or Grantee, after thirty (30) days notice of violation the aggrieved party may enjoin by temporary or permanent injunction such violation or institute a suit for damages for breach of covenant, or may take such other action as it deems necessary to insure compliance with the terms, conditions, covenants, and purposes of this Conservation Easement; provided, however, that any failure to so act by the Grantor or the Grantee shall not be deemed to be a waiver or a forfeiture of the right to enforce any term, condition, covenant, or purpose of this Conservation Easement in the future. b) In the event of litigation between the parties hereto involving the interpretation or enforcement of the terms of this Conservation Easement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred in connection therewith. c) Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement shall be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury 5 to or change in the Conservation Easement Area resulting from causes beyond the control of Grantor, including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from any prudent or good faith action taken by Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate injury to the Conservation Easement Area resulting from such causes. d) Upon a transfer by Grantor to a third party or parties of Lots 1-12, or any of them, Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, Grantor's rights under this Conservation Easement shall automatically pass to said successor owner(s). 8. Taxes and Assessments; Notice of Lot Transfers. Grantor agrees to pay any and all real property taxes and assessments levied by competent authority on the Conservation Easement Area, including any tax or assessment on the easement herein granted. Grantor also agrees to pay for the preparation and recording of this Conservation Easement, and for any administrative fee that may be charged by Grantee at the time of acceptance of this Conservation Easement. Grantor agrees that upon each transfer of fee title to a Lot in the Subdivision, written notice of such transfer shall be given to Grantee, including the name and address of the transferee. 9. Assignment Grantee may, without Grantor's consent, assign this Conservation Easement to any charitable organization exempt under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, which organization was created at least 2 years prior to receipt by it of the Conservation Easement, provided that (a) in the judgment of Grantee, the assignee organization has the ability, experience, interest and resources to carry out the conservation objectives expressed in this Conservation Easement, and (b) the assignee organization agrees in writing to abide by and to carry out the intentions of Grantor and Grantee as expressed in this Conservation Easement. In the unlikely event that the Grantee corporation should be voluntarily or involuntarily dissolved without having assigned this Conservation Easement as above allowed, all of Grantee's right, title and interest in and to this Conservation Easement shall be deemed automatically transferred and assigned to the City of Aspen, State of Colorado. The City, in turn, shall be obligated to assign the Conservation Easement to a charitable organization which meets the requirements set forth above in this Paragraph 10, no later than 6 months following the date of dissolution of Grantee. 10. Amendment. Grantor and Grantee recognize that circumstances may arise under which an amendment to or modification of this Conservation Easement would be appropriate, Accordingly, Grantor and Grantee may jointly amend this Conservation Easement without prior notice to any party, provided that no amendment shall be allowed that will affect the qualification of this Conservation Easement under Section 38-30.5-101, el seq.,Colorado Revised Statutes, and any amendment shall be consistent with the purpose of this Conservation Easement, and shall not affect its perpetual , duration. Any such amendment shall require the written consent of Grantee, and of the 6 owner of Lot 1, and of the then owners of at least 5 of Lots 2-11, and of the fee owner of the Conservation Parcel. Any such amendment shall be recorded in the official records of Pitkin County, Colorado. 11. Binding Effect; Violation of Rules. This Conservation Easement shall run with the title to the Conservation Easement Area, and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties hereto and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns, specifically including without limitation the owner or owners from time to time of each of Lots 1-12, Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, and of the Conservation Parcel. If any term or provision of this Conservation Easement would otherwise violate the rule against perpetuities or the rule restricting unreasonable restraints on alienation, such term or provision shall automatically expire and be of no further force or effect 20 years following the death of the last to die of Mary K. Barbee, John W. Barbee and Hallie B. Rugheimer, and their now living children. 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor and Grantee have executed this Conservation Easement as of the day and year first above written. GRANTOR Mary K. Barbee John W. Barbee Hallie B. Rugheimer GRANTEE PARK TRUST, LTD., d/b/a ASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUST By Its: 7 STATE OF ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing Deed of Conservation Easement was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999, by Mary K. Barbee. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: (SEAL) Notary Public STATE OF ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing Deed of Conservation Easement was acknowledged before me this day df , 1999, by John W. Barbee. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires (SEAL) Notary Public STATE OF ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing Deed of Conservation Easement was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999, by Hallie B. Rugheimer. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires (SEAL) Notary Public 8 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing Deed of Conservation Easement was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999, by as of Park Trust, Ltd. d/b/a Aspen Valley Land Trust, a Colorado I not-for-profit corporation Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: (SEAL) Notary Public ASPEN:0024661.04 9 EXHIBIT 3 BARGAIN AND SALE DEED KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, Thatt, the undersigned, John W. Barbee and Hallie B. Rugheimer whose address is c/o Hallie B. Rugheimer, 1400 Story Mill Road, Bozeman, MT 59715 &â‚¬Â·ownÂ·truf ord-State-uf ("Grantors") , for the consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration doHars- in hand paid, hereby sellis) and convey(s) to The City of Aspen, Colorado whobe legal address is 130 South Galena, Aspen, CO 81611 , County of Pitkin , and State of Colorado , the following real property situate in the County of Pitkin , and State of Colorado, to wit: The Conservation Parcel, as depicted and described on the Final Plat of Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD recorded in Plat Book at Page in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado (the "Final Plat"). This conveyance is subject to all matters set forth on said Final Plat, and that certain Deed of Conservation Easement recorded at Reception No. in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado, and to all other matters of record or otherwise in existence affecting the title to the Conserva- tion Parcel. abe.I,nown-by-suceland-numben-as asgesse,2&-sohedUU-011Â·ea:dijumizc with all its appurtenances. Signed and delivered this day of , 19 99 John W. Barbee Hallie B. Rugheimer STATE OF COLORADO, ISS. County of The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 19 99 .by John W. Barbee My commission expires '19 . Witness my hand and official seal. Notary Pubt,c 11Â£. *al i-,1 -.du See arrached Arirlirinnal Arknnwlprigpment Paop Nime Dij Addres,of Penon Crn,ing Newly Created Le,al Descnpuon (4 ]8Â·35-106.5, C R.S.) No. 901. Rev. 4-94. BARGAIN AND SALE DEED (StII,ry hm) Copyrilht Wil ~ Bradford Publishing 1743 Wuce St., Derner. CO*)202 - 003) 292-2300 - 4-97 ADDITIONAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT PAGE STATE OF ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999 by Hallie B. Rugheimer. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public 1 Â· I C.- 1 03 planting 9 9 1 iÂ·. Are truck ; tt{UÂ¥ t 13 trash turn space tdIC 2 ' ac . . C~If22 ~ LA )1 Istid:rd 1 <7 covered patking covered parking r 4 ' L- ) 1 -ir 6-'-1-37 Common Area N Common area = 9317 u 1 ---I - . Area d parking & driveways = 8397 st R.O. Lot 1 -bjjj f (10 - 1140 sprni"l Bolting Enyelope. 1 164 11 edge 01 1 I snow stor/ <9~\~ traffic surlaci ~ ' 1 dry well 36Â·!Ight 1\ ' 4 4---Hillside- toe _f standardl ,~ b of slope \\ di r , L M 'm *L, 1 4 1 1.18 ' 16'-OÂ· Al , Ide 1 Lot Al= 2327 + A2 *003Â©' 3 c 1 Lot A2= ._li:~ 12 2195 sf /%\ 6 7, ' Bultdin 1 are--- - - _ edge 01 i 4/ lootpn, 2 = 1859 9/F limn beling for \\\ i vehicular use \\\ , R.O. Lot 2 . r=171 \ ~9 E~Â©:~764 1 - 4 / * \ m: :7 LA= STR Y KER/BROWN 17 I ARCHITECTS,PC ~\ 4/jit,/4 3 4 1, 82 111 ~ 0/ Nou r u SPRING STRI.Er \N. 63/ \ ---- -=3093+ I.PHI . 1. (i R . 1] O .141' (970 I 925 2 254 1... 925 123. ~ 1~ 11 Lol 82, ' Building area , 1004*Int == 1659 st 1 BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION f AFFORDABLE HOUSING \~~~ ;~ ~ - Garmisch Sueet at Durant Street. Aspen. Colorado i==JJ Affordable Housing by the Barbee Family & Aspen/ Pitkin Employee Housing Inc. . CIE R.O. Lot 3 1 (to be 11,0 spfinklefed) 1 81,itaing Envelope = 1764 sf Site Plan NI â‚¬ S,low SCALE r = 20'- 0* \~drywell C Idc \ JuLY 31,1997 1 1 Garmisch St EXHIBIT 4 APPENDIX D CAr]IL)1 1 1 FINAL PLAT OF: , BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT r i A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE 1/4NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. 2 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO E .SHEEL2_QE_2 // s .30'49- â€¢ 2*91 - - //* __1 %-- EL g..I. -/ 4 /1 ~'Â«Â©ff, 4 49Â»6Â»UÂ«- -~130 4 K// b 5 50-5 SE z E j jEE- FCAESS,#30 + -- r ---- .1 .,2 - 22 5 5 25 --3 3543 1 0 2 3 & airil -4 43 . -2 41-3 24.1 2 F 4,~f'>41.J~f /t tÂ»1,1,Â°tâ‚¬ UIÂ«444Â«.4-4- - 2 1 5 51 *0 3 2- 2 1 1Â« -6. Â« . ~ =- --- 60~~1~~,~0322 2 ~ I ,22-22.52-z-- -fltij%fl/Â£5 6/ ..-.*.12.--51# U \ \\\\\11 11111 t; 1111 *Il' ltt{(////./l/''titill'.40*2%13- -- -- -- --- --4-5 5 1 -2-2 9 1 -4 F S 2355- =- - - 7 --- A -- - , / M k d -3 -13- '.09,1 - -2. --- - 4 h hunndoll'll/d!"il ff/to,MOM,> /.Â«E.- - .. -- //1 1 - - -- -0 -0- -/33Â» c o --3 1-522--= =1 1, 15 2?i- C- /--I--- - 111111jt / / / / T'â€¢44 ,/, 0// 't./3,/.39 5-3 5522424-7-/2.-02.-/2- =7-=L- *LI -ENiopt El 5- g , ;,-- 1 I 9 1 1 1 'REAk,/' t / 38,&2%-1- . /1 1 /1 K- - -- 2_P 0'~ * tiA"s -4-- j~ 1< ; % 1 ' 1 1 441-41' if /./'/ t,, ':4,;i <KAJ .1 : 1 ill' i;'111)1;11,\\1\'filtl'!(ill /1/,/1/1/1/1/1-7.11,4 , SE,Wor/. Â·/ st-m,or / ' ; 1 N. b/-,-3. 47 61-8/ 1 S ,â€¢WÂ·â€¢r I lilli li 1 1 1,1 111/\2 )44 4 1 tl / 1: - ~ ,~f ~ < ~< el ic, 4/4 i ,/ /; 1 ; ' tell.1 1,111'11'111'11/11, C ill 1. N 1,50'49- f 6,~Zy LOT 8 - L 1017 -4 ~on "/ 1,<t 4/~ ~14 ~t~91 ff' o / 4 "4 C ~'VAL /- J/4'Jil/:7111 4*3Â£ â€¢~ 0069 ocr- 2/ 9 1- li 1 / r-- -lilli 1 f / 1111111 /: 0/ 1 't I 111111111\\ \\\1 / -VI-/.!1; 1111 C z.* 0-4. .as, / \ 1 1 r # 1144; 4<2454, C 4 24 4,1 '~, t 2'5*i"i4~ jlll/1*~111 0,K 4/ /~/i r, / * 42 qp Â£0,5 3 . 4 0 3 2 Vilf- ~*ss LOT 9 855- ~ 3434 ' ' 1\\11\\\ ,\\111,1 lilli. 1 ,1.1 1 1 - aN; 22 I 14â€¢50'49* E / '. 1 1 */1 /3i~ill:jilli * ' y,44--3/ Ildi 1 4/7 Yfrhi ~ loT 12 1 N â€ž50Â·40Â· Â£ 4439Â· | 1 M LOT ,O - -- 71?// #f / // I. Ir 1 a Â£15, ay- 9 R / / 1 1 1,1 4,1 ,; 6'145 3 ~44> ~;, '90 9, Â·> t â€ž , 1Â»'t' "4<*%:t 5 ic e 1 i // *% 1 M L N 1450'49* E 6&77 ./Â· lk2 , 1 Â¢~74 , ' i, 1 21 1 *1 111% lilli 11 i 2255 41 :// 1 1 ~ ~ ~~ LOT â€ž j l- 1 1,1, ' 8 --121.292ELF *'<421 / T ac:52 xy.. j f 65%77710 Mt//' - 1 11 1 ~ SETBACK (DP.) 4 / , 1 4.49 i / S +50'49* \ 242.Of ' ' '~1 ja/11 p MOO 0. 5145' * 42 83' ~ f _ - . , i., / ,fj, 1 i 11 =iG n, \F 9.4 / AS 3#-47~F ~ E , J 54/ . 1 692;AL~~7 ~ ( F - Ii- -r/- 0 1 400,13â€ž71 5 7- --.- U.fflEe~Liâ‚¬Ji ERIEr 14> 1,1./ , ch#--0 *n-4-1/64< / ' I ' 1 1,9 s./,4Â·50'â€¢bi~lk 115.00' j~ , / l ~ | Z 1 1 1% iN 9 1 -1 11 1 1 - NotiE , 4) BAGS OF ELEVA ION: AN aranch, 07 7906 81' ON IME U Ll i SENOIUU.RK LOCATED AT nâ‚¬ Piâ„¢,4 COUNTÂ¥ COURTHOUSE. dÂ· GRAPHIC SCALE SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC 4 01 n/T ) 1 1-h - 30 rt CIVIL CONSULTANTS (970) 704-03 1 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 8040 GREENLINE U -W Kic:t-Z-'-Z'.*" -- - .POâ€ž "'ID -'ID.G l~InIll.-111_ L. J Â·IT111. -r -11=E-H-In, r.-J-- UL-.1111.-1 -'1. --Â· _ - 1 - 1 1 '.--7-â€¢- ~ '-~Â·11Â·r.--Il J . 1 1.0'I S - 4 4 1 BARBEE PROPERTY INVESTIGATION #4# / SLOPE SUMMARIES \\\ CITY PAKEL COUNTY PARCEL \\\ BLOCK 54 0 - 20. 331014 74Â·FT. â€¢/- \\\ 24,105 SO.FT â€¢/- 9 650 30 - ** O. ER - .7,303 . FT ./- 205,547 lo.FT ./- ror~ 471,742 :0.Fa â€¢/- W,714 se.FI. â€¢P f / LOT Z ~l l L f TTLE\ ~D 0 5; ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS. INC. SUBD.\ // 4 2,0 2. -LE- STNEET 0 4 0 / / , 0. = 250' 4. LOT 1 04 APEN. COLO. 01611 O ,<401/,FAX 1,701 123-3,18 1-b ... 29// A. 20. 1 I , 4 REÂ¥,SED to-1-4, / 11'EST COOPER AVE 11 ..1.1 - \0 .0 \Y ..WÂ·91. ... Ki.Â«'. i ... =-p . 79...2---- A 1 *-i 9Â» ...90. 4 SCALE 1 11,01 - 50 FEET Â· tÂ·J \63 .11*, . Â·' 0 ~3~3~~': Â·~*~-OK MOUNTAIN EDGE , \Â·Â·Â·\ .. 4 Â·42 \ i ANNEXATION Yelifire . T-- CO~roll INTERVAL 11 2 KIT /1 ...-.- t'hz 13 1 W=0=Â¥.=14..2 4' L J ''- 4 hi- i \11 1%42 :c../.. . 49/\ X ., i / // 1 6----4.-itÂ· , 1 I 74> VA - -- 4 1 \COUNTK PARCEL \ _- ~A<Â·- L ~ " 11, . Â·. - '0Â» ~ / 64 B N 47 - 19.9,\ , - 0 -Ri h 11 1/ 1 -20-p i - 4 ST ~D 1 4/447 : #WA ~ .' ..'i' /\~.Ki4 i./J<:4 . -- b') ~ - ~~~33 Â«f, /.7 400* 1 /p. . -r I 11 111 4. / , 1 ~ /1111 11111 ill'~1 \.4 -4 -a. I lili 1. 1 .... .7 . \ - 1.1. /; I 1 4. + -- - - - AL~ , . \ .1 Â« ./0 Â£17=EE ffE' 1. 1 , , '11\ - 1 1 1,111 1 \ CERTIF CAT. tON -Il-*.K //-20Â«/ *-Ior ''/ 0 '/0,/ ' /#?/ ~d//*4 ''A'# /4,1/# 1 41tl Â£4Â»+-=:~ . V- B . 6 -1-' -1. C..1.10.- -=r .11 ...1 - ~='lit--549- + -2 9 'I 11 9 2 ;o \\ -1. .. 1-101 - 1.1 ...Eigalit./. : 1 41111\ \1 0117~ 1 \\\ 1, 1 4 . - . W P ' I\.1 1 \ Vil \ 1 , - 44~ Â»\ ---t- 4,)Mrp. .~ ~*bE :#f 34Ht?~ *1,3 :*\ : i . - ~ fif~ ~ ~ ~ # pt . - ./# I- 00\*-Â·as*... v'&=71 1 . IKdo ?I.. '02*HÂ·. t r ' Â«21 + I X.â€ž4 - NYJ,/ASAAE.. k 1 - bateÂ·Â·.1 6 - J n r\L - , / A #Ut<*444&45*PV % - 9- --2. 4 - 4 , -*.- , 4444257&2~ 50~>xks'#Jrnx: - . 922 *. C* l" '~4\Â· va k i 2&0~ 6.'-\ \89*72.â‚¬46 0 1 1 /7.4.8 -. . --1 1 1 1,1 /2 7 --1---- \ F R , t.%*E' 1 I \ ~7 4% 1 ' e. -: -\ 1\ ..3Â»*t.Â»--fÂ«Â«t Mi**43<ik.Â·4+5-14 /AR,\ 1 & - glr*2.-2-- 1.. . \..... - \ I.2 ./. Ah \5 ' 9 U .-.--*.. I=-I: i\A... . of - .4.7 1 \ ' 44*:i 91- 142.41*f~49,~f-~'' ,,t ;1Â«-4\4)\\1~4\~9%\5\11 , ,- - - 4~~1 -a*--4-4 1 3 .11 ' 04\ \ ;\1{',< 1 ~Ii': it ---15:r - /7 t.- 4 > . ' .--- 4 - 2,>,)4\,N:..Â« ...4.., ... i<Y<,p\.~<NÂ·r#44.- 22- - 1\1\ \11 Â»j. / â€ž - 4 =rD' -- - \, 1 -- .1 !1 \ . /---9=ZE--- 9 a . Â¢\1 \~ A ./ \ k .. - 7 ~ \ 343 fry?\ -\ j. 1 \ 1 41 1 : 1 1 Â· P|i'llic|lb 0/ 1 -94 '5\ f 1 +44 4\Wh .1 13.,2 . 0 -- I . 9\:* : . 10,12 \ h\. 4 1 : t, V VA %1 \, -\\~., 11\' ./- 0,2- I . . I . I :\ \\I \ 4,\'\ \.\A'A -- \ 1 V.. 1 1 . \X.V. \44/.44.fid#4.19*-6 - \:. ,. - V 4 2..- 0 1 \\ , 40 22 -I. 14\1 \.. i 0, \ k. K . I . 6 , n - 4 Za r\ .- A 4 ' 1 /1,\ \ 1 - .< 9 \ A Â· Utillt -42 -/-Â·1-&f 44 ~.6. 4.,~ -:2-- / Â·ix \ lili 1.1 , 7- 41.\ 1 -3â‚¬ 2.-49.- 5/ 1 2,r : 9 .1 h. . L-7 \ I 11, \1\ i \ 1 \% 41\1 1 M ~ .1 1 fi 2 4.-Â£12- . 11\\4 -N \1-41.~F'ft-\Tr \\1' \ ~%- \I-3 \\<\11 1 -\Th- 7<A- 4 . 1 11 \< I \\11 i.t.,\1\%41\\%$11\+111< 1\\ ~\\\\~ 1~ ~ 1117\ :\1 . 34 F... . 30444>34%?lod, Â£ 1111.11111,1 ..4/. i ' 1 t#IE zihinik...'cm,iÂ· i Ill' '~/BLFL.414Â· '. \4h \' i.Â·, &Â·14.d: 40*<8<p#%.234,if#512-3 .Â·9 -e<f- - I\\\ - - /5)3 #3/ ~V; i i L i #4:Â·> 3-~*~I.Â·fi,413* 1.,11 4,~f~{*9%'ill~~ 4i~F 11mlk -*Â·;.ANÂ¥ \E i:Â·Â·1'.\1\\,\ i 1 ..3 1 It EXHIBIT 2 ENGINEERS SURVEYORS EXHIBIT 3 GM (970) 925-6727 SCHMUESER P.O. Box 2155 FAX (970) 925-4157 GORDON MEYER - Aspen, CO 81612 October 8,1997 Mr. Sunny Vann VANN ASSOCIATES 230 East Hopkins Ave. Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Barbee Propertv Subdivision and PUD Application Engineering Report Dear Sunny: This letter comprises an engineering report for the Subdivision / PUD application for the Barbee property freemarket and affordable housing project on South Garmisch Street in Aspen, Colorado. I have spoken with representatives of the primary utilities regarding the project and have undertaken site visits to observe site conditions and various utility locations. My comments endeavor to provide appropriate responses to the engineering-related requirements of City of Aspen Municipal Code Sections 26.52, COMMON DEVELOPMENTREV/EWPROCEDURES, 26.84, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), and 26.88, SUBDIVISION. Introduction The Barbee property comprises Lots 1 through 9 of Block 5 of the Eames Addition to the Original I Aspen Townsite, Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11 of the Eames Addition as well as a metes and bounds description totalling approximately 17.67 acres. Of the total 17.67 acres, 10.83 acres is located in the City of Aspen and 6.84 acres remains in Pitkin County. The property currently includes an existing residence addressed at 601 South Garmisch Street as well as a couple of small sheds and outbuildings. The owner of the parcel is submitting an application to the City of Aspen for Subdivision and Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval to create a mixed freemarket and affordable housing project. The conceptual development program includes four freemarket lots including one for the existing home as well as the creation of three lots for single family resident- occupied (R.O.) affordable housing units and four lots for two duplex category 4 affordable housing units. Please refer to the complete land use application for more definitive program information. This application will provide information relevant to the Conceptual Subdivision and PUD criteria of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. With regard to the requirements of the Aspen Code, I offer the following comments: Water Supply The Barbee site is located adjacent to an existing 6 inch diameter cast iron water line in South Garmisch Street. During the construction of the Juan Street Affordable Housing project in 1994 a concern was raised about the condition of this cast iron line. The line was excavated and a 118 West 6th, Suite 200 â€¢ Glenwood Springs. Colorado â€¢ (970) 945-1001 October 8, 1997 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 2 segment removed to 'tee-in" a fire hydrant connection for the Juan Street project. Based on an inspection of the segment removed in 1994, we found the line to be in reasonably good condition for its age. Based on my recent conversations with Aspen Water Department Director Phil Overeynder, however, the City remains concerned about the need to replace the 6 inch cast iron line in the Juan Street / South Garmisch loop as further development occurs in the area. To begin the replacement process, the Water Department will require that a segment of the existing 6 inch diameter line from the intersection of Durant and Garmisch to the entry of the affordable housing portion of the Barbee project (about 130 feet) be replaced with an 8 inch ductile iron line to provide service to the site. In addition, we anticipate placing a main extension of about 150 feet into the affordable housing site to accommodate service to the seven units as well as installing a fire hydrant within the affordable housing complex. Phil indicates that adequate water supply and pressure is available to serve the proposed project without additional upgrades to the City's treatment and distribution systems. As an existing site within the downtown Aspen area, service would be subject to normal tap fees and connection requirements. Fire Protection Fire protection is currently provided by an existing fire hydrant on the southeast corner of the intersection of Garmisch and Durant (#700). Hydrant 700 is located approximately 70 feet from the northeast corner of the Barbee site on a straight line basis. Fire protection provided by the existing hydrant should be adequate although the site plan anticipates sprinklering of the three R.O. and four duplex units within the Affordable Housing site as well as the installation of an additional fire hydrant at the end of a water main extension within the site. Existing hydrant #700 will be unaffected by the construction. Sanitarv Sewer I spoke with Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) Superintendent Tom Bracewell regarding service to the Barbee project. An existing 8 inch diameter sanitary collection main is located in South Garmisch Street paralleling the east boundary of the site. The existing collection main has significant root intrusion problems and some work is needed to provide adequate service to the property. Tom also notes problems with the existing downstream sewer main in the alley of Block 61. Tom indicates that a tap fee surcharge of several hundred dollars per EQR for necessary maintenance and system repairs will be required for connections to the existing main at this site. We also anticipate a short main extension of about 150 feet of 8 inch diameter PVC sewer line into the affordable housing site to provide service to the seven units. Treatment capacity is available from the ACSD to serve the additional demand associated with the proposed project subject to compliance with ACSD Rules, Regulations and Specifications. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC October 8,1997 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 3 Electric Existing electric service to the Barbee parcel is from a recently undergrounded line along the south edge of the Juan Street right-of-way. I spoke with system engineer Jeff Franke of Holy Cross Electric regarding the proposed freemarket lots and affordable housing project on the Barbee parcel. Jeff indicates that primary electric power has been undergrounded in the Juan Street area and that underground service is currently available from the existing transformer located east of the existing residence on Juan Street and from lines near the northeast corner of the property on Garmisch. Service into the affordable housing portion of the site will require installation of an additional transformer in that area. Miscellaneous Utilities Gas, telephone and cable television lines are also currently buried in the Juan and Garmisch Street rights-of-way. Gas Company records indicate an existing service to the existing residence and phone and cable TV primary lines were undergrounded in conjunction with the undergrounding of the electric lines in the area. Service is available to the site from all secondary utilities. Roads and Public Transportation The Barbee property is located on a relatively small extension of South Garmisch Street that is subject to light existing traffic volumes. Existing traffic counts are not available for the Juan Street / South Garmisch loop and the street was not included in the existing conditions figures presented in the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Element prepared \n 1987. South Garmisch Street in the vicinity of the site had an estimated traffic count of under 1,000 vehicles per day during peak ski season in 1987 and little has changed in this area since that time. Durant Avenue showed 800 vehicles per day in the same time period between Garmisch and Aspen Streets. The Juan Street / South Garmisch loop probably sees less than a hundred cars a day even at peak times due to the minimal number of existing residences served by the street. Pavement width is between 18 and 20 feet along the property frontage and is in fair condition. Parking is not permitted along the street at this time. To anticipate some basis for traffic generation from the additional residential development on the Barbee parcel, I would reference Section IV, "Road Design Standards" of the Pitkin County Road Management and Maintenance Plan, as adopted in 1995, which recommends a vehicle trip generation figure of 9.55 per unit per day for detached single family residential units and 5.86 vehicles per unit per day for the duplex townhome units. This would result in an additional traffic generation figure of 81 vehicles per day (vpd) impacting the adjacent streets as a result of this project. While traffic counts on Garmisch south of Durant are not available, the adjacent street is currently well under capacity and will see no adverse effect from an additional 81 vpd. No improvements to the adjacent street are required as a direct result of the traffic volumes associated with the Barbee property Subdivision and PUD application. It is the applicants intention, however, to install sidewalk and new pavement where excavation for utility connections RCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC October 8, 1997 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 4 will be required as well as curb and gutter in the event it is required by the City. The existing street has no curb, gutter or sidewalk anywhere between Durant Avenue and South Aspen Street. Access into the site will be from Garmisch Street into a single access for the seven affordable housing units with parking for 16 vehicles, over 2 spaces per proposed unit. The access intersects South Garmisch Street at a perpendicular angle and, given the very low traffic volumes on the street and lack of on-street parking, offers a safe entry with the opportunity for appropriate sight distances. Durant Avenue, approximately 100 feet from the affordable housing site and within 300 feet of the freemarket lots, serves as a major transit corridor offering convenient access to transit service including most major routes within Aspen as well as most down-valley destinations. The site is also located 4 blocks, or about 1,300 feet along adjacent streets, from the primary transit center for downtown Aspen, Rubey Park. Transit service to all points served by the Roaring Fork Transit Agency (RFTA) is available from Rubey Park. Storm Drainaae I have reviewed the proposed site plan for the Barbee project affordable housing in relation to the existing development and drainage conditions on the site and would offer several recommendations regarding drainage design in conformance with the Aspen Municipal Code. The existing site comprises a significant percentage of pervious surface with minimal existing pavement or drainage facilities. Site design should incorporate drainage to on-site detention facilities to control site runoff to historic levels following development. Based on our experience with the nearby Juan Street affordable housing site, I am anticipating that on-site drainage requirements to maintain historic conditions under City of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.88.040, C.4.f. Storm drainage, can be accomplished utilizing on-site drywells and/or surface detention swales located along the north perimeter of the site. On-site drywells should be feasible in the pervious soils and will prevent any net impacts due to runoff or soil erosion. Some drainage may enter the site from existing upslope areas to the south and southwest. Due to the highly pervious nature of the area soils, such surface flows will be minimal and should not result in significant impacts to the structures. Site design should, however, include grading to prevent minor off-site drainage entering the property from effecting on-site improvements. I hope these comments are helpful in your preparation of the Barbee property Subdivision and PUD application. Feel free to contact me if I may provide additional information or detail. RCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC October 8, 1997 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 5 Very truly yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. LAY W. Hammond, P.E. Principal, Aspen Office Jkvlh 97072ER SCHMHESER GORDON MEYER, INC ENGINEERS SURVEYORS EXHIBIT 4 p.0. Box 2155 (970) 925-6727 SCHMUESER FAX (970) 925-4157 GORDON MEYER - Aspen, CO 81612 December 8, 1998 Mr. Sunny Vann VANN ASSOCIATES LLC 230 East Hopkins Ave. Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Barbee Propertv Subdivision and PUD Application, Drainaqe Calculations and Recommendations Dear Sunny: Attached for your information and submission to the City of Aspen is a copy of my drainage calculations for the Barbee Property Subdivision and PUD application. These calculations form the basis of our proposed grading and drainage plan for the affordable housing (AH) portion of the Barbee Family Subdivision / PUD. It is anticipated that the freemarket lots would provide site- specific drainage calculations and design at such time as designs for those lots are prepared. Since the affordable housing site is down-gradient of the freemarket lots, drainage in the AH area will not impact the freemarket parcels. Introduction The Barbee property comprises Lots 1 through 9 of Block 5 of the Eames Addition to the Original Aspen Townsite, Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11 of the Eames Addition as well as a metes and bounds description totalling approximately 17.67 acres. Of the total 17.67 acres, 10.83 acres is located in the City of Aspen and 6.84 acres remains in Pitkin County. The property currently includes an existing residence, addressed as 601 South Garmisch Street, as well as a couple of small sheds and outbuildings. The bulk of the property comprises native grasses with a few trees and hillsides that are mostly scrub oak. The owner of the parcel has submitted an application to the City of Aspen for Subdivision and Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval to create a mixed freemarket and affordable housing project. The conceptual development program includes four freemarket lots, including one for the existing home, as well as the creation of three lots for single family resident-occupied (R.O.) affordable housing units and four lots for two duplex category 4 affordable housing units. Please refer to the complete land use application for more definitive program information. This drainage report and the attached calculations address the affordable housing portion, lots 5 through 12, of the proposed Subdivision for which a site plan with proposed building footprints 118 West 6th, Suite 200 â€¢ Glenwood Springs, Colorado â€¢ (970) 945-1004 December 8, 1998 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 2 has been defined. It is anticipated that additional drainage calculations and design would be prepared for each of the freemarket lots at such time as house designs are prepared for those lots. Drainage Design For purposes of the drainage calculations, I have used a Rational Method calculation for this "urban" site (considering the proposed density within the AH component more than surrounding conditions) in conformance with the recommendations of the City's current Interim Standards for Drainage Design and Erosion and Sedimentation Control for Parcels Smaller than One Acre dated April 30, 1998 and issued by the City Engineering Department. The interim standard references the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual published by the Denver Regional Council of Governments in 1969 and updated to as recently as 1978. The USDC manual is a design guideline that is broad in scope for a wide range of drainage conditions and basin types and sizes. I should note that I am assuming that the City of Aspen has effectively waived any specific requirement for compliance with the 1973 Urban Runoff Management Plan pursuant to existing Municipal Code Section 26.88.040 C., 4. Design Standards, t. Storm Drainage. The affordable housing site on the Barbee Family parcel is located on South Garmisch Street and comprises 0.995 acres. The undeveloped AH site is generally grass meadow area with a small amount of the scrub oak hillside to the west. A site inspection of the property shows no evidence of existing drainage improvements such as inlets or drywells. Upslope drainage does impact the site although the rocky nature of the soils on the lower slopes of Shadow Mountain seems to limit runoff onto the lower benches (as proved to be the case at the Juan Street housing project). Overflow from the site generally sheet flows to the north and is detained to some extent by the old Midland Railroad grade. Our calculations, using established Intensity-Duration-Frequency curves for Aspen from the URMP and assuming a 90-minute sustained rainfall as recommended in the interim standard, indicate that 1,582 cubic feet of on-site detention volume is required to maintain estimated pre- development off-site flow volumes for the property subsequent to the construction of the proposed residences and hardscape. (1 should note that we had some internal discussion regarding the interpretation of the 90-minute storm intensity from the TIF curve to 60 minutes. Our conclusion was to use an extension of the curve tangential to the 100-year curve at 60 minutes. This approach renders an intensity figure at 90 minutes that appears most consistent with the shape of the curve.) This volume would indicate the use of five drywell structures which may be located along the access drive and under the landscaped areas north of the duplex homes. The drywells are to accept roof, deck, drive and any exterior area drains from the site. To meet design requirements, five drywells 5 feet in inside diameter and four sections, or approximately 16 feet, deep will RCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC December 8, 1998 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 3 provide 1,568 cubic feet of capacity or 99% of the calculated requirement for the increased runoff volume associated with the 100-year, 90-minute event after development. In terms of final grading design, additional detention could be accommodated with landscape depressions in the vicinity of the drywell grates and, in fact, depression design may allow some reduction in the total volume of the drywells themselves. We feel that these volumes address the required design criteria and would significantly improve conditions compared to the existing site (for which there appeared to be no on-site storage structures). Each drywell should consist of an upper, solid wall concrete manhole section and three lower, perforated wall drywell sections backfilled with at least 12 inches (horizontally) of 11/2 - 2 inch washed rock. The manway would have any necessary riser rings and a grated inle#access cover to accommodate surface drainage from the site. These structures would provide sufficient volume to detain the increased flow volume due to the development of the property relative to pre-development conditions. Typically, grading should be positive away from the structures and any potential low spots in the landscape areas around the buildings should have small domed area drains or trench drains routed to the drywells. I would also recommend against routing footer drains into the same drywells as the storm and roof drain collection lines. I would be concerned about surface runoff backflowing into perforated footer drain lines and putting water around the foundation walls. The footer drains, if required based on soil conditions, should have their own small diameter drywells (small precast drywells in the range of 24 inches in diameter are available) to prevent introduction of storm water around the building foundations. During the construction phase, silt fencing and temporary sedimentation swales should be used to prevent sediment from travelling off-site. The site should be revegetated as soon as practical after construction. Certification I certify that the above proposed drainage design and submitted construction plans for the Barbee Family Subdivision / PUD affordable housing project will maintain the historic rate and volume of storm runoff for the 100-year, 90-minute storm from the undeveloped site pursuant to the requirements of the City of Aspen's Interim Standards for Drainage Design and Erosion and Sedimentation Control for Parcels Smaller than One Acre dated April 30, 1998 and issued by the City Engineering Department. The proposed design will also serve to delay the off-site peak flow impact, potentially reducing the on-peak storm flow conditions on adjacent and downstream properties. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC December 8, 1998 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 4 I hope these items will be adequate for the completion of the drainage aspects of the application for the Barbee Family Subdivision / PUD. Feel free to contact me if you have further questions or require additional information. Very Truly Yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 527 4 01~ .41.it,&61"ji ~" Jay W. Hammond, P.E. crl.1 26073 1 " Principal, Aspen Office ' '~mm,44* JH/jh 97072[)Rl RCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC r,R fle.f Lee . ,-Dra}* a 1 â‚¬_ SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 118 W. 6th St. Suite 200 P. 0. Box 2155 SHEET NO | OF Z Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Aspen, CO 81612 (970) 945-1004 (970) 925-6727 CALCULATED BY -54 DATE 11' 17 Â·18 FAX (970) 945-5948 FAX (970) 925-4157 CHECKED BY DATF SCAt F -Sarbte- ELâ€¢Ily 36&%4%>i#. / RU,D, 033>Mt .1 e Cal tolat,0-~o LeÂ·65 5- 8,0Â°16. EL. (AA C*,*re-~ e'~-O 45, LE / 5. C-. c D. 19 9 AO Grabs Fleatto-,0 1 ben_JA e-ak lills;Jew Artf~. Cd j i [ 7 M C .%_ 0 .ulÂ·A , 170 30,12-1 5% MEA[Â»th . 25 70 1 3,0 00 9% 6>Crot {-Ji || . 20 -3,0 ,6b 100 . 25:5- Q-- CIA C. c 60Â¢~#del Gâ‚¬-,ffic; ent Â©C Ke-no C' 12 1 1 +0-Â·h ,Â«1 Z[Ikle.0.~ c;1 1 C , q (0 -Ill bl r (2 90 - Yll i M too 1 r--3 A 2 ,1 A - 0-\CLA @20-50 6,96 Itr) 0,05, 621 63 = (,LES) ( 0.0% 14/*0 0-1-5, 32( la- 9 = %14,44 Fr~li.\r - ,ZZG GIS JOB-FAC~tÂ£.- SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. SHEET NO ~. op A 118 W. 6th St. Suite 200 P.O. Box 2155 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Aspen, CO 81612 (970) 945-1004 (970) 925-6727 CALCULATED BY - -~ DATE Iii-1.98 FAX (970) 945-5948 FAX (970) 925-4157 CHECKED BY DATF SCA! F 39Â° foo-,el uo-n 01 1 -h "\00.- 1 -d.518 C o,1olittil- .1 7 C ki#d 0 lo, 142_ -2>\*1 Fi 04-r rk ,+ '15- LS , 23% 1 7,000 -fig: A 9 / 0.) odlc. s '15' , 154 26-, 37-9 U. 40â€¢fe/ , Ig 5-1 3 1 41 7- /00 0* S-1 1 | Q = (,53,4/) (.01 Fef, r~) 0/-5,LZ.( Fr'0-~) = 1, SG E A 3/11 r = 0, 53 2 C F= S Di-(TfcÂ·*~ = 0, 7.-9 3 CCS 6 90 rn 11 = 4 5-S Z *t i = 9 / 0 Dry U,)40/ 6 5 ' I,D, 9 61 6 lu' Dir 4 1 (64462 45 ue< c>Jrfa te 67&4,0Â«8;0-1 2~) - - r FINAL PLAT OF BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PLA~~NED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF THE NE1/4NEH/4 OF SECTION 13 TOWNSHIP to SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE Bth PM. COUNTY OF PITKIN. STATE OF COLORADO 21Â£EI_2_QU *th-*C~Â£-2-<4 â‚¬4 :< tÂ«evy 42 - -40Â£-222â€¢â€¢//-Â£Mm_riziL %~. : ill li ig 11 :i i%2**=ak=1 a. ~! 1 tW*!EliE| 2 .0-ly GRAPHIC SCALE , 6 /...' . 66 1 to 6 ....., \444\.4 Z .4 22371,41 -2.'-ax\Â«h Ock<, 1 ./ - 1 k Rk***SA~>34 rs*333 00Â»04Â» 46 - - I = ~1:51 --- 1 -7. 1 \\ a - 66 25= ..mi[Iuit,UetAL.:ULL 3 \ x22Sse~ r I li - -- 4 --- ....... --60 == 1 _ZI -- 1 12 = 4 1.Câ€¢/1.2 -72-1 .... -- // 9\ i 13 Eb 1/ 01% ..14 ... =A , /r - #1 1 i 9 -- H /2 E 2 22 /// i Mi 44-LSA#<03312?347 --4-, 1- 1 4 4: SE ~ ~ -4Â·.y Ic'-"T'l' k_'21--M----1 . ...... -a-.......... 1 1 IUM-'00 9.T ' ELEE&584--84Â· 1------------- .1-' i*i-Â«92*83Â·<bi ....... 1 C i 1 44:223> . 0\%. L --- li 1 li il *Â«4333:tial . 1 - 22**Ii 1 11 i I F n ili - ' 5.EFeaEBEE 'i _ _-p __ f 13 1 Â»46 \ 44>-<69% ~ RE~t.==:==17 . 4%8419Â» i . . 1 24:,Â»44. e..61:26J : 1 1 1 0 1 ~ EOGGe(FEE-Ey- - 1 1 - 1 1 1 Â· 1 1 1 il 1 1 /1 1 1 11 1. /1 SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC CrVIL CONSULTANTS CARBONDALE. COLORADO 81023 502 WAIN STREEr, SUITE A3 EN=*EE~ (870) 704-03" -L#- I./. ff'- -, 3.3 9/BA.:*Tru-*,Li:L+.ILAL/94.-4,FW$#Ad-LLrlJft*7 ;-il: it 1, - -2/20, ./ g 1 . -~Mpal#%%127'al.*k r. i /2.Â»2Â«/ l Fl ' 14 ; Â·4 < ?lk~.b.tzeejunlf~w#binitdfÂ» - = -1 ! 49*4- Alk--: ~i}7 Â·Â· wICN~ -4.:1..L 1 .,A= --- -. Drout 2 -tr 0 - d _,-C r 'A.-9 ~ r /41. AL i -r! 2112~ - - 1 --I ./ I. LrkÂ« r>- A ~3,/M--, U. 'Ll... *., I) *v -7...2-1..Ati #73 4 7?kNI.~- 1 - - , am:g=Â»=zeÂ· #ri-'457 - * AQU. 1.Hi/ 794+4 Â·i A -4 r .. 4 *Â·LErlÂ·Â·LiNH 1-i I r , .. . - - ' -. . 41 --r f . , . 11 . 1 .mil 1 - I .... 4, r.-i r - Afl . + . + 9%/ - 111- - 1 :=,--1 1@h . 1 0 - - Â· -Â· 7~%2:X / irâ€¢du r-.) 1 .-- 1/ i .I -. - . . F U. , 4-- +4.- - - 2 -/ Â· - lt/09.i:/:1,"52"lillÂ·- - - - <q ./: thkÂ©--lial.-1/ - _ -, 5 ,/44: Koch Park - F f ' 4 : O. I - 1 j,Zfm.0- - 41 f l-- R , 11. /1 --1 *f...71 li I Â· .1 4 -1 . SITE -L ' 1 4 0 mÂ·962 -Â· --Uk:41 - .. . -h*e-1 Rubey Park 9 --2- /-4 .. 1 # ... -Â» ~ k. -tr ' ' - l 1 N . n. - 11 0Â«64 4(11 loil I / Juan St. AH Acts. . 429 4 1 tri. - -uw - .2, h /4 5.30 " :3 , .. f ' L i i.:-pz: *'> 3-44 / C-9.Â· 44 + 1 , 0,0 MP+Me, I -1 --.1 2% E; 8~-ct..4#4 19 .O d 9- -39 %4 -- f 4 4 -tÂ» 11 , Ii, U % - -4- ta , - ' 4 43 -7 1 , 1 i -22.1 391.~4~1 %17 . 1 1 I ' . A \ 0 -11- -f 1 n/. r //2 / 1, . . , \4 // / i / /7 . j l I. / i . , 1 / 1 . - 77-_____ 1 . IM. 2'