HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.AM.375 N Spring St.A045-91
~
~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Bill Drueding, Zoning
FROM:
Leslie Lamont, Planner
DATE:
September 26, 1991
RE:
Insubstantial Amendment to the Volk Lot Split Plat
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The applicant seeks to amend the Volk Lot Split Final
Plan for lots 1 and 2 Volk Lot Split to revise the approved access
easement, building envelopes, and Spring Street right-of-way
dedication.
APPL:ICANT: Richard Volk and Eugene Seymour as represented by Sunny
Vann
LOCAT:ION: Lots 1 & 2, Volk Lot Split, Oklahoma Flats
ZONING: R-30, PUD
PROPOSAL: The Volk Lot Split was approved by city Council in 1989.
The final plat included a 30 foot access and utility easement
across the rear of Lot 1. A 20 foot area of Lot 1 adjacent to
Spring Street and a 24 foot area adjacent to Bay Street were
dedicated to the city for future roads improvements to widen the
existing streets. Although not required for a Lot Split the
applicant identified specific building envelopes for each lot.
A single family residence and detached accessory dwelling unit was
recently built north of Lot 1. The home owners, the Hamiltons,
received permission to from the City to improve a portion of the
Francis Street public right-of-way for access to their home. The
right-or-way is unimproved with the exception of the Hamilton's
driveway. with that improvement Mr. Volk and Mr. Seymour now wish
to utilize the partially improved Francis Street right-of-way for
access to Lots 1 and 2 of the Volk Lot Split. Use of Francis
Street would enable the elimination of the access easement with the
exception of a small portion that will be retained to avoid cuttin~
down several large cottonwoods that serve as a visual buffer
between the Hamiltons and Lot 2 of the Volk Lot Split.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Having reviewed the above and made a site
visit, the Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. We have no problem with a reduction in size of the access
easement to Lot 2. However, width and length dimensions ,for the
different width segments of the easement need to be shown on the
plat. Francis Street right-of-way needs to be shown and given a
width dimension so it can be shown that the total width of this
right-of-way and easement combined will equal at least 20 feet.
.:-.,
~
2. The proposed revisions to building envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 are
acceptable also.
3. The 5 foot encroachment into the reserved Spring Street right-
of-way needs to be shown on the plat. The existing improvements
need to be shown on the plat, however. The applicant needs to
understand that at any time in the future that the city needs to
utilize this right-of-way dedication reservation, he will have
either get a licence for or move this encroachment.
4. Bay Street needs to be given a width dimension and the end of
the right-of-way needs to be shown if it ends at or before the end
of Lot 2.
5. Construction in public right-of-way requires a separate permit
from a building permit. This permit is issued by the Streets
Department. For approvals of design details in the public right-
of-way, contact the Engineering Department.
6. A blueprint of the plat needs to be submitted to the Engineering
Department for approval before the final plat is submitted.
STAFF REVIEW: Pursuant to section 24-7-1006, an insubstantial
amendment to an approved plat may be authorized by the Planning
Director provided it is a minor change to a plat which the Planning
Director finds has no effect on the conditions and representation
limiting the approved plat.
Pursuant to section 24-7-908 A., an insubstantial amendment to an
approved planned unit development may also be approved by the
Planning Director. These two parcels have a mandatory PUD overlay
and the original lot split application was also considered within
a minor PUD context.
FINDINGS: The adjustment to the easement. is being requested in
order to utilize the new Francis Street right-of-way. But as
requested, by the Engineering Department, the total width for
access will remain 20 feet. Although an access easement is
deducted for floor area purposes from buildable lot area use of
Francis Street will negate that deduction thus more lot area, for
floor area purposes, is available for Lot 1. However the total
floor area will not exceed the allowable floor area for the R-30
Zone District.
The adjustment to the Lot 1 building envelope is necessary because
the existing single-family home is being preserved for accessory
dwelling unit purposes. The plat shall be amended to illustrate
the 5 foot encroachment of the existing home into the dedicated
public right-of-way easement. The easement was granted during the
lot split review and was requested for the occasion that the street
would ever need to be improved. If for some reason the City needs
2
~~
.1""'1
to use the easement the property owner would need to move the
encroachment or obtain an encroachment licence.
Setback variations available with a PUD review were employed for
establishing the building envelop of Lot 2. Amending the building
envelope for Lot 2 does not compromise the original approval for
that particular building envelope.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the insubstantial
plat amendment for Lots 1 & 2 Volk Lot Split, Oklahoma Flats, Aspen
with the following conditions:
1) Prior to recording the amended subdivision plat in the office
of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder, the Engineering Department
shall review and approve the plat; and
2) The plat shall be recorded within 180 days of approval by the
Planning Director and Engineering Department.
3) However, width and length dimensions for the different width
segments of the easement (on Lot 1) need to be shown on the plat.
Francis Street right-of-way needs to be shown and given a width
dimension so it can be shown that the total width of this right-
of-way and easement combined will equal at least 20 feet.
4) The 5 foot encroachment into the reserved spring Street right-
of-way needs to be shown on the plat. The existing improvements
need to be shown on the plat, however. The applicant needs to
understand that at any time in the future that the city needs to
utilize this right-of-way dedication reservation, he will have
either get a licence for or move this encroachment.
5) Bay Street needs to be given a width dimension and the end of
the right-of-way needs to be shown if it ends at or before the end
of Lot 2.
6) Construction in public right-of-way requires a separate permit
from a building permit. This permit is issued by the Streets
Department. For approvals of design details in the public right-
of-way, contact the Engineering Department.
I hereby approve the. insubstantial
subdivision plat amendment for Lots 1 &
2 Volk Lot Split, Oklahoma Flats, Aspen
pursuant to Section 24~7-1006 and 24-7-
908 A. of the Municipal Code with the
above cond' 0
/
3
r-,
~.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office
FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department
DATE: september 5, 1991
RE: SeymourjVolk Insubstantial Plat Amendment
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Having reviewed the above and made a site visit, the Engineering
Department has the following comments:
1. We have no problem with a reduction in size of the access
easement to Lot 2. However, width and length dimensions for the
different width segments of the easement need to be shown on the
plat. Francis street right-of-way needs to be shown and given a
width dimension so it can be shown that the total width of this
right-of-way and easement combined will equal at least 20 feet.
2. The proposed revisions to building envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 are
acceptable also.
3. The 5 foot encroachment into the reserved Spring street right-
of-way needs to be shown on the plat. The existing improvements
need to be shown on the plat, however. The applicant needs to
understand that at any time in the future that the City needs to
utilize this right-of-way dedication reservation, he will have
either get a licence for or move this encroachment.
4. Bay Street needs to be given a width dimension and the end of
the right-of-way needs to be shown if it ends at or before the end
of Lot 2.
5. Construction in public right-of-way requires a separate permit
from a building permit. This permit is issued by the Streets
Department (920-5130). For approvals of design details in the
public right-of-way, contact the Engineering Department (920-
5080).
6. A blueprint of the plat needs to be submitted to the Engineering
Department for approval before the final plat is submitted.
jgjseyvolk
cc: Chuck Roth
---.
.""",,
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
City Attorney
City Engineer
~g;,,~~~Jil!il.l
Leslie Lamont, Planning Office
Seymour/Volk Insubstantial Plat Amendment
Parcel ID# 2737-073-10-001
TO:
RE:
DATE:
August 29, 1991
===============~==============================================~==
Please review and comment on the attached application.
return your comments to me no later than September 6, 1991.
Please
Thanks
~~
d1 L /l'U- ~. o-YL -zh. ~
~~.
to~
/
'r~
,
~
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
Fire Marshal
FROM:
Leslie Lamont, Planning Office
RE:
Seymour/Volk Insubstantial Plat Amendment
Parcel ID# 2737-073-10-001
DATE:
August 29, 1991
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Please review and cOIlUllent on the attached application. Please
return your comments to me no later than September 6, 1991. Thanks
"
.1"""\
1"""\.
.
i, AUG 2 I i9Si
V ANN ASSOCIATES, INC.
Planning Consultants
.
! r',.,'
: Lb~~<3~~'------<
AUgust 14, 1991
HAND DELIVERED
Ms. Leslie Lamont
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Volk Lot Split Insubstantial Plat Amendment
Dear Leslie:
Please consider this letter an application for an insubstant-
ial amendment to the Volk Lot Split final plat (see preappli-
cation Conference Summary attached hereto as Exhibit 1). The
application is submitted pursuant to sections 7-908 .A.and 7-
1006.A. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations by Eugene Seymour
and Richard W. Volk, the respective owners of Lots 1 and 2 of
the Volk Lot Split (see Exhibit 2, Title Insurance Policy,
and Exhibit 3, Special Warranty Deed). permission for Vann
Associates, Inc. to represent the Applicants is attached as
Exhibit 4.
Background
The Volk Lot Split was approved by the City Council on June
26, 1989. Vested rights status was granted to the project by
Ordinance No. 43, Series of 1989, on August 14, 1989. The
specific Council approvals included subdivision, planned unit
development and GMQS exemption. Stream margin review
approval was granted by the planning and Zoning Commission on
May 30, 1989. The Planning Office's case summary outlines
the various conditions of the approvals and is attached as
Exhibit 5.
As the accompanying approved final plat illustrates, access
to Lot 2 was provided by a thirty (30) foot access and
utility easement across the rear of Lot 1. A twenty (20)
foot area of Lot 1 located adjacent to Spring Street, and a
twenty-four (24) foot area located adjacent to Bay Street,
was reserved for dedication should the City decide to widen
the streets in the future. Although not specifically
required as a condition of subdivision approval, site
specific building envelopes were designated for each lot.
230 East HopKins Avenue' Aspen. ColoradO 81611 . 303/925-6958
,-.,
.~
Ms. Leslie Lamont
August 14, 1991
Page 2
proposed Amendment
The Applicants wish to revise the approved access easement,
building envelopes, and Spring Street right~of-way dedica-
tion. The revisions are dictated by recent changes in the
neighborhood, the City's adoption of new regulatory provi-
sions, and various site specific design considerations. All
the revisions, however, are believed to be consistent with
Mr. Volk's original representations and approval.
As the accompanying revised final plat illustrates, the
Applicants wish to reduce the size of the access easement to
Lot 2. Since the approval of the original application, a
single-family residence and a detached accessory dwelling
unit has been constructed on the property located immediately
north of Lot 1. The owners of the property, Skip and Ruth
Hamilton, apparently obtained permission from the City to
utilize a portion of the adjacent Francis Street right-of-way
for access purposes (see accompanying property survey). The
right-of-way is fifteen (15) feet in width and is presently
unimproved with the exception of the Hamilton's driveway.
As Francis Street is a public right-of-way, and is now
partially improved, the Applicants would also like to utilize
the street to access Lots 1 and 2 of the Volk Lot Split. The
use of Francis Street would allow the majority of the
approved access easement to be eliminated. A small portion,
however, would be retained to save several large cottonwoods
that are located within the right-of-way. The retention of
these trees will benefit both Mr. Volk and the Hamilitons, as
they presently provide a visual buffer between the proper-
ties. It should be noted that the Applicants' use of the
right-of-way is acceptable to the Hamiltons, and that all
three parties will share maintenance responsibilities.
with respect to the approved building envelopes, the revi-
sions to Lot 1 are dictated by the City'S recent approval of
Mr. seymour's detached accessory dwelling unit. Both lots
are required to provide an accessory unit as a condition of
subdivision approval. As you know, detached units were not
permitted when the subdivision was approved. The Council,
however, expressed. a desire that the existing structure
located on Lot 1 be retained for affordable housing purposes.
Mr. seymour has recently renovated the structure, and will
execute an accessory dwelling unit deed restriction prior to
issuance of a building permit for his single-family resi-
dence. As the structure is located outside the original
building envelope, the boundaries must be revised to accommo-
date the approved unit.
~.
,-."
Ms. Leslie Lamont
August 1.4, 1.991.
Page 3
The proposed rev~s~ons to the building envelope on Lot 2 are
dictated by the architectural design of Mr. Volk' s residence.
As the accompanying site plan prepared by Bill Poss and
Associates illustrates, the proposed residence generally fits
within the original envelope. Mr. Volk, however, wishes to
expand the envelope at the rear of the lot. to accommodate the
landscape features planned for this area of the property.
Please note, however, that the expanded envelope avoids the
existing stands of mature cottonwood located along the rear
property line, as well as the steeply sloping hillside
located below Gibson Avenue. The lot's front yard setback
has been also been increased to more accurately reflect the
proposed building footprint.
The detached accessory dwelling unit located on Lot 1. is
located partially within the reserved Spring Street right-of-
way. The final plat, therefore, must be amended to reflect
a new reservation. As the available right-Of-way in this
area measures sixty (60) feet, and the encroachment is
limited to approximately five (5) feet, sufficient area would
appear to remain to accommodate any future expansion of the
street. Given the limited amount of development in the
surrounding site area, it is unlikely that the entire right-
of-way would be required for expansion purposes.
Review Requirements
Pursuant to Section 7-1.006.A. of the Code, an insubstantial
amendment to an approved plat may be authorized by the
Planning Director if the amendment would have no effect on
the original conditions of approval. As the Planning
Office's attached case summary indicates, the proposed
amendment complies with all conditions imposed upon the
original Volk Lot Split approval. As a result, no purpose
would appear to be served in requiring city council review of
the proposed plat amendment.
section 7-908.A. also provides for Planning Director approval
of an insubstantial amendment to an approved planned unit
development. Al though the property was designated mandatory
PUD, no variances from the strict application of the dimen-
sional requirements of the R-30 zone district were required
by the project. In fact, PUD review of the project amounted
to little more than a formality, as the subdivision regula-
tions essentially governed the design and approval of the lot
split application. The above notwithstanding, the Applicants
believe that the proposed plat amendment is consistent with
the application's prior PUD approval.
/"""..
,-.,
Ms. Leslie Lamont
August 14, 1991
Page 4
upon approval of the requested amendment, the Applicants will
prepare a revised final plat for review by the Engineering
Department and recordation with the Clerk and Recorder. The
Applicants will also revise the approved subdivision improve-
ments agreement to reflect the amendment as may be required.
Should you have any questions, or require additional informa-
tion, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
SV:cwv
Attachments
cc: Eugene Seymour
Richard Volk
I"""',
r\
Y/b
EXHIBIT 1
PROJECT: .5h
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPL CATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
(, I J Ii
. /\XAI~
~(.~ \/ CVW-^v
REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE:
OWNER'S NAME:
1.
(J;l 7r ? )
Describe action/type of development being requested:
/)}'A"; AJ? rU-r:t".1-4 .e:'1:L;U2-nthVt I~A..J.~---e-~ 0::-u~/ Sf)
Type of Application:
SUMMARY
~\--. r -f,J (j;v~J,
2.
3.
Areas is which Applicant has been requested to respond,
types of reports. requested:
Policy Area/
Referral Aqent
~~C,;~
to--\..\ls
Comments
4. . Review is: (P&Z Only)
(CC Only)
(P&Z then to CC)
5.
Public Hearing:
(YES)
(NO)
"
6.
Number of copies of the application to be submitted:
7. What fee was applicant requested to submit: / !.) ~ r 0
8. Anticipated date of submission:
-9. COMMENTS/UNIQUE CONCERNS:
frm.pre_app
08-14-1991 20:53
I~
1 21. 54 8977
-> :....""';,~~.-.~;\;. .J.'''16'~'(~~~"'~~r',.,:,..;,:..
."......"
SAl..IVA DIAGNOSe .iSVSTEMS P.01
.,
. .
----.,--..-..-."'-..-...--.,--..-.,-.~' ~--_.._"'_.._--_.'-_.'_._..I-
';10'''"
kwyers Jtle
Insurance @rporation
NATIONAL HI!lDQUlllTl1lt
RICMIIOND. YIRalNIA
EXHIBIT 2
OWN."" I'OLICV NUM.."
113.00.021963
SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE BAND
THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS. LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION, a Virginia corpcration, herein called the
Company, insures, as of Oate of PoliQy shown in Scheduie A. against loss or Qamage, nolsxceedlng Ihe Amount of Insurance staleQ
in ScheQule A. sustained or incurreQ by the insured by reason 01:
1. Title to the ealate or Intereat described in Schedule A being veated other than as slated therein:
2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the title:
3. Unmarkelllblllty 01 the trtle:
4. L.ack 01 a right 01 access lI:l and from thaland.
The Company will also pay the oosta. attorneys' fees and expenses incurred In defense of the tille, es Insured, but only to the extent
provided In the Conditiona and Stipulations. .
Attest;
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Company has caused this policy to be signed and seeled, to be velld when Sohedule A Is oountellllgned
by en euthorlzed officer 01 agent of the Company. all in accordance with its Bv.Laws,
~1it1e In.su~e @rporatlon
By: 01 2C, oJ cw-.r.1oV'
Prealdent-
.2" fJWtA.. g;
Secretary.
EXCWSIONS FROM COVERAGI
The following matters ere expressly excluded from the coverage 01 this policy and the Company will not pay loss Or damage, costs. attorneys' fees Or
expenS8ll whiCh arise by reason of:
1. (a) Any law, ordinance 01 governmental regulation (inoludlng but not t1mtled to bUilding and zoning laws, ordinances. or regulations) restrtcting, regulating.
prohibiting or relating lI:l Q) the occupancy. use, or enjoyment of Ihe land: (ii) the character, dimensions or Iocetton of any improvement now or hereafter
erected on the land; (II~ e separetton in ownership or a change In the dimenaions or area of the land or any paroel of which the lend is or Wall a
pari: or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any vioiation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations. except to the extent that
a notice of tha enfoteement thereof or a notice of a defect. lien or encumbrance resulling trom a violation or alleged violation affecting the land
has been recorded in the. publio records at Date of Poliey.
(b) Any governmental pOlice power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exerolSe thereot or a notice of a defect, I>en or
encumbrance resurting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land haa been recorded In tha public records at Date of Policy.
2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exerciSe thereof hIlS been recorded in the publlo records at Date of Policy. but not excluding from coverage
any taking which has occurred prior to Oate of PoliQy which would be binding on the righta 01 a purchaaer for valua wtlhout knowledge.
3. OeftlClS, liens, encumbrances. adverse cialms or other matters:
(a) oreated, auffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant;
(b) not known to the Compeny. not recorded In the public records at Oale of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disolosed in wrIting
to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date Ihe insured claimant became an Insured under thla pOIiQy;
(c) rnulling in no loss or damage 10 the Insured claimant:
(d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or
(a) reBulting in Io8a or I:lamage whICh would not have been sustained ij the insured cleiment hed paid value for the ealate or intereet Inaured by this pol.cy.
~oliOy 11SJ01 L1II'lO In u.s...
036-1:1-113191-0OOI
eMr II'ItIt AlT" 0-.1'1,,', PoIle~ (11).21-11)
08-14-1991 20:54
1 21r-'i4 8977
~' ,..-"". ...~ , ," '~"'.
SALIVA DIAGNOS~SVSTEMS
'~_._.--....;... ..4.'L7--
Iil-~'
P.02
CMI !IlMlIR
PC'1'-339'7
k!,wyerslltle
Insurance @rporauon
NATIONAL HEADQUARTER8
RICHMOND, VlllQINI"
~ ~18 PClt.ICV
Dl'1'l 0'1 l'CUCY MIXltI'1' OF I1IBUIWICE
ot/Ol/et .. t:13 P.M. . .111.000.00
POLICY "-.
113-00-021963
1._or~:
waaII K. ~ All) 3ODI'1'H!t. tIIMGJft. ~ rJI '!'HI SIMDJR
r>>IILY '1'!Uft' U'.rA Dl1.'ID MAIDl 1. 1'"
2 . '!'HI IftA'1'I (It ....~....~ DI '.l'tII LAItD HIIlIUf AND MIlCH IS OCI'JDID BY 'l'HIS POLICY' IS:
II III SDIU
3. '!'HI1ftA'1'I (It .....~_I ____ 'l'O HIRIDI' IS Nt t\lft 0'1 POLICY' ,,_~..... DI:
&!WIll K. BllIGJR All) JUD.n!I!t. .-.d.. 0lH'IUrl'IIB 0'1 '1'IlB SEllM'XIR
r>>IILY '1'IlDI'1' U'.rA Dl1.'ID MAIDl 1. 1'"
4. '1'HI LNlD .__ 'l'O DI ml l'CUCY IS ~ AI ",Tn-:
U1r 1. YCUt Im' SPLIT. ~.w13 'l'O '!'HI PLAT ~ ~ AOOUS'1' 14. ltlt IX PLAT
lOOK 23 Nt IW3I 24. ~ C1I PrftCIl. STA'l'I C1I t'I'lI'J'DUlO.
~~(hvdf
t... Av.. izi4 AQIInt
PrDaH CCUN'1'Y 'l'I'l'LI. DIe.
601 B. !D'ICIJflI AV!.
AIIPI.If. 00Il:IWI0. 81811
(303) t21H'766
'!'HI POLICY' ru I" llID4If (If 'DIll 8C9Itm.I ICJB'l' AI.IUa!: wrm '!HI lIBFRIN'1'ID NIIeIft CII '.l'tII
OOYIR ~;
--
~~!m '00 ~III\O '" u.s."',
- _.~- ..- .. --. .--'~._-.__._-.--
""
<'l\
'::r
(-'''.. .M. ci\'-'::J1' '~,:'iU".~""~"" ,.,.....,...
N~'r"-,..I. . _ f..,:'. , '\1~w' t ~,
.:'TI~~~::::""':'~~~~~~~::::::~:::~~:~II.---~'I~.:4'.'.'.~'-"'I~...'2 7 8' ~ 7;"'.~'E~IBIT 3
~1~"" ~1chard W. Volk, Russell D. Volk, Dasa A. M~tzlcr.
and Denice C. Jte1c.h I
I
LORE ITA DANNER
PIHIH CrY. RECOROER
rc,.<<If":,J.f
~ti
:..J.... ,
~ }t, itJlh.r Cit)' ~nd .
. c:j c.: CI'Iln".' DenVer . ~I"'" ,>I CI.I,,,,,.j,.. ~1.nII\U"1 ;11\01
to""'" .
,.:, ~ t. Richard W. Volk, Trustee UTA d~tcd Marc:h 10, 1984
... . ,
9: "-P
.:u.l000
\,;...--
':-<'<~
...~
JUH
9
II 07 AI{ '66
,
'\
....h..\4' k~lladcJln" i. 2.17 North
Wichita, Kan$as 67201
Water Street, P.O. aox 1201
!'
.x.:IIilXXY.Xx.xXXx.XXx.r;aiK~~y.XxXJCXXXXXXXxx~~"'K.S.~,r"I'IICCOl'
'.
I
I
:
;\
Ii
"
Ii
I.
i:
I
See Exhibit ^ attached hereto and tnad~ a pan hc:rc=of b)' this rc!crencf:.
Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other &ood .'
>OOU..AU. !;
ve ~1;l"'W". tl"'II~III'\I.M,I"lIl1d"'M~eu. .11': h) Iht'>C'J"!tlotl'll'.\k. ,'MJI. I:
suctC~~~t~ .....'I~l\" jlllt\C'I. alllflc tnl r",,"<'I~, II'FC'lhC".llh lR"",n.~mtm'. ;
t:xx~'Ul. - XXD:x~tDd~ \
,
I:
I:
I:
WITSESSETIt. 1t\.Jllht ~fI"llItt~l. I.., anll In ("'"h.tJtt~htln of Ihe ~"'II\ tll
l: and valuable considerations
I' 1M fC\"fIJl' Ind ~lhl:lC'nc) cd .'hKIII' herd.) ....lIC...lclifeu. h~
I, ~~J,I1Io.U:II.c"tu~ .rMJc~lnjl",l.unll.tfK' FtlnlCt'lX.. his
i1'lI)"XIUUltX~~
j: dCloC.ibcl$ ....1011'...":
It b~1ng the. express intention oC the partlcs th41t this inttrumC!.nt
convey nll real property interests transferred to grantors hereunder
under and by virtue of that certain Special Warranty D~ed rec.orded in
nOQk~~ ~t rase 3~3 of th~ Pitkin County real property records.
I
,
i
,
,I
Ii
I
j;
.,
I.
"
\.
j: "'XDc:MltXJ:~XDCIxDtClln1CX
s~I..:r DOCUMENTAR'(
,
JJi
9 19ffi
l)-
I
r
I
I
r
i
II
~
"OGI;TUtR ""111\ .11, .".1 M....ul;&. Ihe hf~o!ll.n~"I. .no! Irruntn~nu:' Il"'~tn b.:IM~,nt. ", II, an) _1>0( ~rr<'n.ln'nF. IniJ tllf mC""1fl alld
~~I"""" rtnlllin.A-1 alld <<"1~1I1Jc". /'tn''', 1))lIt. ~1I&i !"..II" Ihc"".I. 'fill ;!lIll\: C"~II'. ,,~hl. h"~. 11I1~'t... (I.un, :uW dtllo;Jlld ..h;6'"~''' "I lit!'
F'.""II"'. (III"" In 1;1" '" ,C'IjIl'I). 101. III a'lo,ll"IIo~'J"""\ "~fJ:.I1l,'J 1\n'1I1l..c:.. 11,11. !I". btl,,;llljllll:~' ~IIJ Jrru'ltll;6l1."".
1(, itA"" ""liTO 11(11.11 Ik ',IlI.1l"'tnll~' ~j'"" tlol'~"ll't": ~,,.J1k"1I1,...t "''''.Ih.' "N'"I1Cll""'C".lIl1b'lllt f:llIllu'tH); hil'O SUf.&~~~sr$
"'I,n.II.'t\I:' '1oI'r,..""..,.II." thcm~IVC$ tl\l:i1'" hl'u.all",...."'..n"lltl'l\.'C'II';aI1\(.'..."'II'"."..&' \ll'I'l\;onli/lnJ.affltlh..l
the)' ~h"l: an.l..III\\.<\llk....-.:' ^"!lo HJIU 'Ut OI.FL '\;l'lhc ~1....I..l,all=..lIltll r'l1"h'-.('llIlh..~....I" "",II"'~.t~hll' "''''''''''''",'lllo. r:.,.I\"t'KK
1115 SutCtkk'l,fJ;....j:.Ih. .,;&''''1 ;6l1~l..Jt"'I~ ""hl'" '" """"11' 1'1;6."""" II", "Itlc 101 'll~ r.'1Ihtll'l.l. h~, Ih.....!:" ,., ll'IJ..'llh~ r'"Ill.."..
1-': WI1"L.....~ WIIl.:K1 ,(II. lilt rt""1..,.., I... vc: C'''.UII'J 1111' 1I~(.r.~ ll~' iJ"l~ \(111'1111 .!"",
T~f2w!-lIG'JII
;!j;~-o A#~
Russell O. \'olk
Yn-..//
( /.
J<-'A~_ j1 j(T~L...,..
1,)a~"A' HeLzler /? "'t
// /.. . r". /.-", J-
~~.~ . ..~:.l .---1
Denice C. Reich
~l.\n tll n':..i....;II'.
,.
Cit~. 41nc
{"1IIf11~ "I
Denver
1 he 1I",",,,'nf 'n"r\I"~,.n:. ,;... ~.IIl,""II'.!~;.',jk.-I.'n IlK III II..
"I (''''111","'. n". t:'tA...... \1... tot Junt'
DoOIsa A.. H(ib.hr. ~Ild 1>enicC' C. Reich.
.' .
Ci ty and
. I" 8(. .l'~
(""III~ 111
I\ich:l.rd
Ilcn\'C!'r
\0:. Vton,.
l'.u~l'ctll 1J.
.~I~
\'011:.
. ,
,.'
.,.
"
.'
\\111I",,1"\ h41l";JpJI"".I;J!~',,: ,
~h \"~l"m:',,,:, t'r"" ..,.., t" /? :e. .
'~/ _ ~J1
\.. {j':...()'~/, '.1 "i.""lL~_
{1,')' ...
.. :u-
J.I:..:.':..kJ~ >1-'-"':"'04_ !'.r
1"01:"" ..
\.!
.; . /'U,.., \\.
~ \ \. '. "'... ,
.......,.('... .'
. (1;- r' . .
"! '~"""I~!..';.:'.'~.I.I :~~i'.\ lIl'II!'
r..",_!!.. K,". 7."". M'lt "1 \\\1111\"1\ 11111' 10.....",........., ....... '0... ;.1... ",...~,.. ..' :.......
,.,
.1""'>\
~.
EXHIBIT 4
August 13, 1991
HAND DELXVERED
Ms. Kim Johnson
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: permission to Represent
Dear Ms. Johnson:
As the owners of Lot 1 and 2, respectively, of the so-called
Volk Lot Split (a Planned Unit Development), please consider
this letter authorization for Sunny Vann of Vann Associates,
Inc., Planning consultants, to represent us with respect to
our application to amend the Volk Lot Split final plat. Mr.
Vann is hereby authorized to act on our behalf with respect
to all matters reasonably pertaining to the aforesaid
application.
Should you have any questions, or if we can be of any
further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
sincerely,
~
Yf~fA/(//P
Richard W. Volk
2929/Buff~o Speedway, Apt. 704
Houston,,~~ 77098
(713~:8~~1(}\--__ _',
V(~~
Eugene seymour\
1465 Monaco Drixe
Pacific Palisades, CA 90272
(213) 478-0971
SV:cwv
"....,.
'-'.
,
EXHIBIT 5
CASE SUMMARY
August 15, 1989
Planner: Leslie Lamont
ASPen Planning and Zoning commission May 30, 1989: Approved the
conceptual PUD plan, stream margin review, and consented to a two
step consolidated review process for the Volk Lot Split with the
following conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of a individual building permit for Lot 1,
covenants to be approved by the Engineering Department, shall be
submitted with the final plat to ensure that the lowest floor of
all structures are located a minimum of 2 feet above the base
flood elevation, and that foundations are engineered to prevent
flotation, collapse or lateral movement.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the development on Lot
1 shall be required to have a foundation or basement constructed
to comply with the current FEMA regulations and to the approval
of the Engineering Department.
ASPEN CITY COUNCIL JUNE 26, 1989: The Council approved the
consolidation, GMQS exemption, Lot Split/Subdivision, and Final
PUD review for the Volk property with the following conditions:
1. Prior to submittal of the final plat, the reserved dedication
of right of way easements, 24 feet along Bay Street and 20 feet
along Spring street, shall be shown.
2. If a special improvement district is formed the appli~ant is
required to join for the improvement of the width of Spring
Street in the entire Oklahoma Flats Addition.
3. The side yard setback, on the west side of Lot 2, shall be
doubled.
4. Every attempt should be made to preserve the trees on Lot 1.
A thorough landscape plan is required, before a building permit,
demonstrating how development will mitigate .the removal of the
mature vegetation on site.
.
5. A tree removal permit, pursuant to 13-76 of the Municipal
Code, is necessary for the removal of any tree with a 6" or
greater caliper.
The fOllowing are other conditions that pertain to final PUD in
addition to those approved by the Planning and Zoning commission:
14
~
~
,
6. Prior to the issuance of a CO the dwellings shall have
complied with stove and fireplace regulations and will have to
obtain a permit for any stoves or fireplaces from the
Env ironmental Health Department. Any fireplaces must have gas
logs.
7. Prior to a building permit: the owner will determine whether
asbestos is present and will have to contact the Colorado Health
Department Air Pollution Control Division to find out what air
pollution permits, if any are needed; and measures such as
watering of disturbed dirt and prevention of mud-carryout onto
city streets will be required, techniques to be approved by the
Environmental Health Department.
8. During construction, owners will have to comply with the City
of Aspen I s noise ordinance, which sets lower limits for noise
between 10 pm and 7 am.
9. Prior to 'the issuance of
each residence is required
Sanitation District.
a co, a separate service line for
subject to the approval of the
10. Before the service lines are covered an inspection by the
Sanitation District is required as groundwater and infiltration
into the service lines can be a serious problem in this area.
11. Sewer connection fees must be paid prior to connection.
12. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, for both lots, a
detailed stormwater drainage plan will be submitted.
13. A final plat shall be filed prior to the issuance of a
building permit for either lot and shall include:
a. covenants that future purchasers and builders provide an
accessory dwelling unit per single family home; and
b. an indication that no further subdivision may be
for these lots nor will additional units be built without
of applicable approvals pursuant to Article 7 and
management allocation pursuant to Article 8.
granted
receipt
growth
14. council urges the applicant to make every
preserve the existing structure on Lot 1, and have
about incentives we might work with, like tap fee
whatever.
attempt to
discussions
waivers or
ASPEN CITY COUNCIL JULY 5, 1989:
approved on first reading Ordinance 43.
vested rights for the Volk Lot Split.
The Council unanimously
Ordinance 43 establishes
15
~,
.
ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 14, 1989:
approved Ordinance 43 (Series 89) on
vested rights for the Volk Lot Split.
16
~
The Council unanimously
Second Reading establishing
..-"
.,
,
:~;
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
city of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: ~821?~
DATE COMPLETE: / ~ /
I
PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
2737-073-10-001 A45-91
STAFF MEMBER: LL
PROJECT NAME: Sevmour/Volk
project Address:
Legal Address: Lot 1. Volk
Insubstantial Plat Amendment
Lot Solit. Plat Book 23. Paqe 24
APPLICANT: Richard Volk/Euqene Seymour
Applicant Address: 1) 2929 Buffalo Sodwav. Aot 704. Houston
77098 2) 1465 Monaco Drive. Pacific Palisades. 90272
REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann. Vann Associates
Representative Address/Phone: 230 East Hookins Avenue
Asoen. CO 81611 925-6958
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
PAID: (YES) NO AMOUNT: $203
NO. OF COPIES RECEIVED
4
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
1 STEP:
2 STEP:
P&Z Meeting Date
PUBLIC HEARING: YES
NO
VESTED RIGHTS:
YES
NO
CC Meeting Date
PUBLIC HEARING: YES
NO
j
VESTED RIGHTS:
YES NO
paid~()~~
Date:
Plann' Director Approva :
\ Insubstantial Amendmen or Exemption:
---- -- y
---------------------------------------------------------------
~;~L;~-----------------------------------------------------
city Attorney Mtn Bell School District
. city Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn NatGas
Housing Dir. /'1tOly Cross State HwyDept(GW)
Aspen Water V Fire Marshall State HwyDept(GJ)
city Electric Building Inspector
Envir.Hlth. Roaring Fork Other
Aspen Con.S.D. Energy Center
DATE REFERRED: W;)Pf/CU INITIALS: /Jf--
===========================================J~==r=1:============ ,
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: Q ..5 <1 INITIAL: ~
___ City AttY~City Engineer Zoning ___Env. Health
___ Housing ___ Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: