HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.an.City/Thomas Property.1982
;;-,
~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Aspen City Council
Alan Richman, Planning Office
Thomas Property Annexation/Zoning
October 18, 1982
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ~~~
Introduction
On July 17, 1975 a parcel of land encompassing 39.2 acres was annexed to the
City of Aspen. This annexation of the Thomas property was done for the purpose
of preserving this property as open space.
It has recently come to the attention of the Engineering Department that a
0.347 acre parcel of land at the corner of Maroon Creek Road and Highway 82,
which was part of the open space acquisition, was not annexed along with the
remainder of the property. By your Resolution 27, Series of 1982, you indicated
your intent to annex this parcel. You referred the annexation to P & Z for a
recommendation as to the zoning of the parcel. P & Z held a public hearing on
this issue at their regular meeting on October 5 and recommended that you zone
the parcel "CO, Conservation.
Planning Office Analysis
At the hearing on October 5, P & Z considered whether this parcel should either
be zoned "PO, Park or "CO, Conservation. The attached vicinity map indicates
that the parcel is surrounded by lands zoned both "C" and "P". Following is an
analysis of the rationale for zoning the property "C" rather than "po.
The intent of the Conservation zone is "to provide areas of low density develop-
ment to enhance public recreation, conserve natural resources, encourage the
production of crops and animals, and to contain and structure urban development."
We do not expect to see any type of development permitted on this site and
would hope that the parcel would help to structure the urban environment by
extending the open space edge which now exists at the entrance to Aspen.
The intent of the Park zone is "to insure that land intended for recreation use
is developed in such a manner to serve its intended use whil e not exerti ng a
disruptive influence on adjacent uses of land." This land is not anticipated
to be used for active recreation use but instead is simply to be passive open
space. One consideration worth keeping in mind is that if a "T", Transportation,
overlay is placed on the Park zone it permits a bus stop as a subordinate use
to a park. This location may prove to be a good one for transit purposes at
some point in the future.
Since no plans presently exist for the use of this property for transit purposes
and since the Conservation zone provides the clearest signal to the public that
this property is not to be developed, the Planning and Zoning Commission con-
cluded that it should recommend to you that the parcel be zoned "Co. However,
they did wish to recognize that at some time in the future it may be appropriate
to consider the use of this property for transit purposes.
Council Motion
'f
The City Attorney's office has established the procedure for annexing and
zoning a parcel of land, consisting of two separate ordinances, ~ taking care
of annexation, the other zoning, Therefore, the appropriate motions are as
follows:
Move to read Ordinance .t:;2
Move to approve Ordinance 5<g on first reading.
Move to read Ordinance ~ .
Move to approve Ordinance ~ on fi rst reading.
if'"
J
,
$
"
rJ
I
.
,
.,..(
,4
"-
oj
~
~
,6
V'
&
~
)
r'
~
t!
?
J
,
(
,
-.l
,
7
^
en
--
\ !::!
\
\ .'
...
--
\
~
\, -.:.....
"
"-
~
\
,
..
'\
\
.-
..
'"
N
...
N
N
..
\
\
\
,
,
~
N
.
'\-----
.
'"
-l'
r""'\
, <:J
& ur ~
d. --: ~
V iJ 0
6(})0
.'
...
on
?
a.
u
1.,"'<
I
.1
,
!
.
.
~
\
\
,
,
1
,
1
I
j
.~
.~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Aspen City Council
Alan Richman, Planning Office
Thomas Property Annexation/Zoning
November 22, 1982
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Introduction
On July 17, 1975 a parcel of land encompassing 39.2 acres was annexed to the
City of Aspen. This annexation of the Thomas property was done for the purpose
of preserving this property as open space.
It has recently come to the attention of the Engineering Department that a
0.347 acre parcel of land at the corner of Maroon Creek Road and Highway 82,
which was part of the open space acquisition, was not annexed along with the
remainder of the property. By your Resolution 27, Series of 1982, you indicated
your intent to annex this parcel. You referred the annexation to P & Z for a
recommendation as to the zoning of the parcel. P & Z held a public hearing on
this issue at their regular meeting on October 5 and recommended that you zone
the parcel "CD, Conservation.
Planning Office Analysis
At the hearing on October 5, P & Z considered whether this parcel should
either be zoned UP", Park or "CD, Conservation. The attached vicinity map
indicates that the parcel is surrounded by lands zoned both "CD and UP".
Following is an analysis of the rationale for zoning the property "CD rather
than UP".
The intent of the Conservation zone is "to provide areas of low density develop-
ment to enhance public recreation, conserve natural resources, encourage the
production of crops and animals, and to contain and structure urban development."
We do not expect to see any type of development permitted on this site and
would hope that the parcel would help to structure the urban environment by
extending the open space edge which now exists at the entrance to Aspen.
The intent of the Park zone is "to insure that land intended for recreation
use is developed in such a manner to serve its intended use while not exerting
a disruptive .influence on adjacent uses of land." This land is not anticipated
to be used for active recreation use but instead is simply to be passive open
space. One consideration worth keeping in mind is that if a "T", Transportation,
overlay is placed on the Park zone it permits a bus stop as a subordinate use
to a park. This location may prove to be a good one for transit purposes at
some point in the future.
Since no plans presently exist for the use of this property for transit purposes
and since the Conservation zone provides the clearest signal to the public
that this property is not to be developed, the Planning and Zoning Commission
concluded that it should recommend to you that the parcel be zoned "Cu.
However, they did wish to recognize that at some time in the future it may be
appropriate to consider the use of this property for transit purposes.
Council Motion
The City Attorney's office has established the procedure for annexing and
zoning a parcel of land, consisting of two separate ordinances, one taking
care of annexation, the other zoning. You unanimously approved these ordinances
on first reading on October 26, 1982. Therefore, the appropriate motions are
as follows:
Move to adopt Ordinance 58 on second reading.
Move to adopt Ordinance 59 on second reading.
r-,
.""""-
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Alan Richman, Planning Office
RE: Thomas Property Subdivision Exception
DATE:
December 13, 1982
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Lot Size:
Zoning:
Applicant's
Request:
Review
Comments:
Lot 1 ~ 1/3 acre
Lot 2 - 31.0 acres
Lot 3 - 8-1/3 acre
Lot 4 - 54-1/3 acres
Total:
94.0 acres
Lot 1 - Conservation
Lot 2 - Conservation
Lot 3 - R-15 SPA
Lot 4 - R-15 SPA
The City of Aspen is requesting the parceling of a piece of
property which was brought into Aspen by two major annexations
in the 1970's. In July, 1975 the City annexed for open space
purposes the land included in Lots 1 and 2 of this subdivision.
In August, 1979, the City annexed for employee housing purposes
the land included in Lots 3 and 4 of this subdivision. The
purpose of this subdivision exception application is to separate
out Lot 3 from the remaining property so that it can be trans-
ferred to the purchaser of the Castle Ridge Apartments.
The City Attorney commented to us that the Purchase and Sale
Agreement for Castle Ridge requires the completion of this
subdivision prior to December 31, 1982. The Engineering Depart-
ment made the fOllowing comments regarding this application:
1) Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended to include
the fo 11 owi ng:
a) Vicinity Map
b) Show the point of beginning on the old Midland Right-of-
Way description
c) Indicate all adjacent platted subdivisions
2) Annexation of parcel A-1 (Lot 1) should be completed prior
to recordati on.
The Planning Office has the following comments regarding this
application:
1) The annexation and zoning of Lot 1 has been completed by the
recent adoption of Ordinances 58 and 59, Series of 1982.
2) Section 20-5(b) of the Municipal Code requires that no
subdivision shall be approved unless or until the applicant
shall have been awarded a development allotment wherever such
allotment is required for the proposed development of the
subdivided land. The Planning Office and City Attorney believe
that the proposed subdivision complies with this provision in
the following respects:
a) Lots 1 and 2 of this subdivision were purchased with
open space funds. No development is proposed for these
lots, and if it were, this change in use would be subject
to voter approval. Open space represents a type of use,
for which no allocation is required.
~ t"""\
Memo: Thomas Property Subdivision Exception
December 13, 1982
Pq.ge Two
b) Lot 3 represents the Castle Ridge Apartments. The
applicant has drafted restrictions limiting the use of
these units as employee housing and concerning condominiumization.
It should be required that any further development of the
parcel be subject to receipt of a GMP development allotment.
c) Lot 4 includes the land used for the City Water Plant.
Since the only potential development of this parcel is for
an essential governmental service, it is also not necessary
for the receipt of a development allocation to precede the
subdivision of this lot.
3) Since there is no development proposed within this subdivision,
it is appropriate to except it from the full review process.
Furthermore, the time constraints of the Castle Ridge Purchase
and Sale Agreement make it imperative that the subdivision be
completed in an expeditious manner.
Planning and
Zoning Recommendation:
At their regular meeting on December 7, 1982, the Aspen Planning
and Zoning Commission recommended that you grant subdivision
exception to the Thomas property, subject to the following
conditions:
1) Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended to include
the fo 11 owi ng:
a) Vicinity map;
b) Show the point of be9inning on the old Midland right-of-
way description;
c) Indicate all adjacent platted subdivisions.
2) The applicant agrees that any further development of Lot 3
will be subject to receipt of a development allotment.
Council
Action:
Should you concur with the recommendation of P&Z and the Planning
Office, the appropriate motion is as follows:
"I move to grant subdivision exception to the Thomas property,
subject to the follow.ing conditions:
1) Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended to include
the following:
a) Vicinity map;
b) Show the point of beginning on the old Midland right-of-
way description;
c) Indicate all adjacent platted subdivisions.
2) The applicant agrees that any further development of Lot 3
will be subject to receipt of a development allotment.
~-
eIT
-.-
PEN
~>'<'''''' : _.... _~. ~,'_'" _;> "".~},'>a.
MEMORANDUM
-~.......... ",C?\t'C~.I~rD
\'0' t~,i").I~i t'r,~ nil
;) i)':~:J \~''':.~'':T ~:jL~: ..\', ,)' ,. ";;'1 \ " 't
11!:;":" , ::,', l,i
j:< NOV 10 '1982 JJl
i.:,:A:;-:" " "'~~~:",_.'. , r;~"":':"';;,J
ASPEN i r"h'\~ Cv~
PU\NNJj'<<iOffa
DATE: November 16, 1982
TO: Alan Richman
Dan McArthur ~
FROM: Paul Taddune
RE: Castle Ridge Subdivision
The Purchase and Sale Agreement for the Castle Ridge
Subdivision requires that the City provide for recording
a subdivision plat prior to December 31, 1982. It is
imperative that the subdivision be accomplished by this
date. Please provide my office with an immediate status
report to assure that the actual subdivision and record-
ing will be accomplished by December 31, 1982.
PTJ/mc
cc: Sunny Vann
Wayne Chapman
Ron Mitchell
Y~vi"
3: 1.: ~ "'"
\."':,
<S ,,~L\&
5;.oR.
~~2.
O'^"
\)e <- l A~ <:..J,,\ c..o,^",...'J, 0 '^- \U..c... \~
3-\. w"'., \.-.e-I...l ~ "...~,',\ N,- ,>",""-,'"",,,,,-
"'~ ~ ~ \A-\ ~~ \...",..." ",,,,,-,,, ~""" ~tL~
l',.JJ.... \~ '-<>'''\ ~O""'A.,J;l., S-.e:.e ~ ,<;: i@"-
\....,&..,,~ "''''''\ '\, ~\.I, .A_)
A. \.;)\......
'~"
~
~
"'~-~;~-"'"
PEN
APPLICATION FOR
SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION
THE CITY THOMAS PROPERTY SUBDIVISION
The request is hereBy made on behalf of the City of Aspen,
Colorado, a Municipal Corporation, under Chapter 20, Subdivision
Regulations, Section 20-19 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Aspen, Colorado, for suBdivision exception presentation with
respect to parcelling of the City Thomas Property, property
described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made part of this
Application by reference hereof. The Application involves
dividing a single property conveyance of approximately seventy-
nine (79J Acres into 5 Parcels.
Parcel I - Being approximat;ely 15,126 square feet,
bounded By road!1:'that separates it from
the other property.
Parcel 2 - Being divided into 2 Lots of approximately
6 and 17 Acres with a 4 Acre road easement.
Parcel 3 - Being divided into 2 Lots of approximately
8 and 42 Acres. The 8 Acre Lot has 80
employee housing units.
The subdivision of the property is necessary for the purpose of
dividing and transferring the ownership of the 80 employee units.
There are special circumstances and conditions affecting the
subject property such that subdivision is sought. The subdivision
is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right; that the granting of the subdivision exception
will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other property in the area in which the subject property is
situated.
The Zoning for the parcels are as follows:
Parcell - This property is being annexed to the City.
The Zoning will take place at the time of
annexation.
Parcel 2 - Zoned "c" for conservation.
/"
.
. :..-':'-,"
'""'"
'""'"
-2-
Parcel 3 - Zoned R-15, SPA. The Applicant is
willing to convenant the 80 employee
units on Parcel 3 and is writing lengthly
restrictions for any purchaser of this
lot.
Thxs Application should be deemed the presentation pursuant to
Section 20-19 of the Municipal Code.
In conclusion, please ~ept the City of Aspens P.O. #7728 for
the sum of $475.00 for the filing fees.
Thank you for your cooperation in processing this Application.
Should you have any questions or need additional information,
please contact Louis Buettner, Engineering Department at
925-2020 Extension 219.
;i
'"'"
,,-...
11E110AANDUH
TO:
Alan ~ichmant Planning Office
Jay Hammond, Engineering Office ~
FROM:
DATE:
December 1, 1982
RE:
City Thomas Property Subdivision Exception
Having reviewed the above application and made a site
inspection, the Engineering Department has the following
minor comments;
1. Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended
to include the following:
a. Vicinity Map
b. Show the point of beginning on the old f1idland
Right-of-Way description.
c. Indicate all adjacent platted subdivisions.
2. Annexation of Parcel A-I (Lot I) should be
completed prior to recordation.
t"""\
MEMORANDUM
TO':
City Attorney
jEngineering Department
V Assistant City Manager
Martha Eichelberger, Planning Office
A.1an Richman
FROM:
PLANNER:.
RE:
.~
,-,
.,"~ ". ....""-".1
~rn~
_ ,r--\,. ,,< (\:-: I I. 'c",. 1\ "\
-'~'"".'...."-.".-'.\'."""':...".\"> /' : "". ':'....
,. ,"''l,'' ". - '........,._": "._._.....', j- .,1,
~,y, l ",,,",,.' \, ....', "~'.,, - '"..-'" ""."".'1"
III."'.'..'."'......... ,....~....-\
\; />..".-".., ,- ,., \\\ ~1" ",
\,.. .r,,? .. _ .
t,'":'\ . r-.\\';:;V.... "~ \"'.,)
,,, ',. c'
"\\'\ '-,_....._~,.,-
. C.._ __--. ...,u'\ CO,
\_;--~- ~N! ..>\ ". ,,0<' .r:r;
fr:~?~c':", ."'ir- A{':'f.~""'~
?lft.N'N~1't"';.:o v
DATE: August 6, 1982
City Thomas Property Subdivision Exception
,
.~~
,.~;
Planner Alan Richman has attached an application submitted on behalf of the
City of Aspen requesting division of the City Thomas Property Subdi.vi.sion
from a single parcel of approximate1y.79 acre.s into 5 parcels,
The item is slated for the September J, 1982 City Planning and Zoning Commission
agenda, so please give any referral comments you may have back to the Planning
Office no later than Monday, August 30,
Thank you very much,
~~
~;L~
1 ():
rtfo//IA- :
~/
JJATti- ..
~ I~ {f.P-L
.@o ~ rl ;z:::-4 ~ ~-, ~. ,..
~~~~~
~ ~ ~,..;t; ~
~
~.
...
,
o '
~
~
:;7~
~
.
~~
,
~,
~
~
A....L r ~
~ A-.
~~
-IL~
~.x~
. _ -. '". . _.~... .--. -',"-'---"'''^"--
,t'''''\.
~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Alan Richman, Planning Office
Thomas Property Annexation/Zoning
September 28, 1982
On July 17, 1975 a parcel of land encompassing 39.2 acres was annexed to the
City of Aspen. This annexation of the Thomas property was done for the purpose
of preserving this property as open space.
It has recently come to the attention of the Engineering Department that a 0.347
aCre parcel of land at the corner of Maroon Creek Road and Highway 82, which
was part of the open space acquisition, was not annexed along with the remainder
of the property. The City has moved to rectify this mistake by the Council's
adoption of a resolution of intent to annex this parcel. The matter has now
been referred to you for a recommendation concerning the zoning for the annexation.
The zoning which surrounds this small parcel includes the golf course, which
is zoned P, park, and the Thomas property open space, zoned C, conservation.
Either of these designations would be appropriate in this case. At the time
of noticing the public hearing for this zoning action the Planning Office felt
that the parcel should be zoned P, park. However, a close look at the intent
of these two zones shows why we now feel it should be zoned C, conservation.
The intent of the conservation zone is "to provide areas of low density develop-
ment to enhance public recreation, conserve natural resources, encourage the
production of crops and animals, and to contain and structure urban development."
We do not expect to see any type of development permitted on thi s site and
would hope that the parcel would help to structure the urban environment by
extending the open space edge which now exists at the entrance to Aspen.
The intent of the park zone is "to insure that land intended for recreation
use is developed in such a manner to serve its intended use while not exerting
a disruptive influence on adjacent uses of land." This land is not anticipated
to be used for active recreation use but instead is simply to be passive open
space. One consideration worth keeping in mind is that if a T, transportation,
overlay is placed on the park zone it permits a bus stop as a subordinate use
to a park. This location may prove to be a good one for transit purposes at
some point in the future. In fact, it was this possibility which led the Planning
Office to initially conclude that the parcel should be zoned P.
Since no plans presently exist for the use of this property for transit purposes
and since the conservation zone provides the clearest signal to the public that
this property is not to be developed, the Planning Office recommends that you
recommend to City Council that this annexation parcel be zoned C.
w."1
... ,.r_,,;.'
..,..;--.....,
,i,,;:",;,:,j,,',.-
....."
,
. '"""','
,-,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Engineering Department
. CjA:y Attorney
~lanning Department
FROM:
DATE:
Kathryn Koch
July 28, 1982
RE:
Request for Annexation
Attached is a Petition for Annexation and plat of
same. The Petitioner is the City of Aspen. Please start
the process for annexation.
Attachments
kk
. ,,-..
'""'"
. ,
i
I
!
i
I
I
1
I
I
,
i
I
,
I
I
i
I
I
PETITION FOR ANNEXATION
The City Manager for the City of Aspen does hereby petition the
City Council of the City of Aspen pursuant to Section 31-12-1076
C.R.S., 1973 for annexation for the property described on Exhibit
"A" to the City of Aspen.
The City Manager being duly sworn states:
-1. That it is desirable and necessary that the area set
forth in Exhibit "A" be annexed to the municipality.
2. That the requirements of Section 31-12-104 and 31-12-105,
C.R.S., 1973 exist or have been met.
3. That the signer of this. petition represents the landowners
of 100% of the property including the area proposed to be annexed
exclusive of street, roadways and alleys.
4. That the city of Aspen approve the annexation of the area
set forth in Exhibit "A".
5. That the mailing address of the undersigned landowner
representative for purposes of this petition is 130 So. Galena Street,
Aspen, Colorado 81611.
STATE OF COLORADO l
l s.s.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
The undersigned being sworn, says that the facts set forth in the
foregoing petition for annexation are trueto the best of his
Subscribed and sworn to before me
knowledge, information and belief.
h
19 --4..Z::.
My commission expires (5~;I~~
.
~
. -'e,~
Notar Publ:LC
~
. .",....."
t"""\
a/
...
EXHIBIT "A"
A tract of land being a'part of Lot ll, Section ll, Township 10
South, Range 85 west" 6th. Principal Meridian, Pitkin County,
Colorado described as follows:
Beginning at a point being the intersection.of the South
right-of-way line of Colorado State Highway No. 82 and the West
line of Said Lot II ,said point being South 3lD 31' West, 234.85
feet from the East quarter corner of said Section 11, (A 1954
Bureau of Land Management Brass Cap Monument).
Thence South 02' 59' 58" East (This bearing is S 03" 00' E on
the deed recorded in Book 270 at Page 215, pitkin County Clerk
and Recorder)" 289.34 feet i[l.long the West line of said of Lot
~l to the Northerly right-of-way line of Maroon Creek Road;
.
thence North 32 30' East, 123.00 feet' along said road right-
.
of-way; thence North 00 13' West, 119.24 feet along said
Toad right-of-way to the South right-of-way line of Colorado
"
State Highway No. 82; thence North 50 43' West, 104.26 feet
along said highway South right-of-way to the point of
Beginning, containing 0.347 acres more or less.
./
/iJ'"
.y
. ,.....,
.~
~-, ..,.
.,
EXHIB.I,T u'A T,!
y
SU eDIVISION. PROPERTY DE SCRIPTIONS
PAR.CEL A-I
A TRACT OF. LAND BEING. A PART OF LOT II, SECTION II, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85
WEST, 6th: PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS;
BEGINNING AT A POINT BEING THE: INTERSECTION OF THE' SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82 AND THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT If, SAID POINT BEING
SOUTH 31031'WEST, 234.85 FEET FROM THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION II,
(A 1954 BUREAU. OF LAND MANAGEMENT BRASS CltP MONUMENT).
THENCE SOUTH 02059'58"EAST (This boaring Is S 03000'E on the deed "corded In book 270 at page 215
p'ukin c~unty Clerk and Re.ardor) 289.34 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID .1.0T II TO
THE NORTHERLY .RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF MAROON CREEK ROAD; THENCE .NORTH 32030' EAST,
123.00 FEET ALONG SAID ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY: THENCE NOIlTH 00013'WEST, 119.24 FEET ALONG
SAID ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE Of COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY NO.
82; THENCE NORTH 500"3'WEST; 104.26 fEET ALONG SAID HIGHWAY SOUTH RIGHT-Of-WAY TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 0.347 ACRES MORE OR LE~S.
PARCEL A-2
A' TRA.CT Of LAND BEING PARTS. Of LOTS 8,9, AND 10, AND THE. SOUTHWEST QUARTER Of THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12. TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST, 6th. PRINCIPAL
MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO DESCRIBED AS fOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A. POINT BEING THE INTERSECTION Of THE SOUTH RIGHT-Of-WAY LINE Of
COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY NO.82 AND THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE CASTLE CREEK ROA D. BEING
SOUTH 10032'20"EAST, 332.91 fEET "fROM THE WEST QUARTER OF SA III SECTION 12, (A 1954
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT BRASS CAP MONUMENT); THENCE SOUTH 16036' EAST, 135.87 FEET,
ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT:OF-WAY fENCE: THENCE SOUTH 200 54'EAST, 2006.31 FEET ALONG SAID
EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY FENCE; THENCE SOUTH 32' 10' EAST, 67.10 FEET ALO'NG SAID EAST RIGHT-Of-
. WAY FENCE; THENCE NORTH 180 14' EAST, 1107.77 FEET; THENCE NORTH 25028' EAST, 715.83 FEET:
THENCE NORTH 210 47'EAST, 282.37 fEET; THENCE NORTH .10051'EAST, 90..71 fEET TO THE SOUTH
RIGHT-Of-WAY LINE Of COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82; THENCE ALONG A NON-TANGET CURVE
TO THE. LEFT, RADIUS Of 905.00 FEET, A DISTANCE Of 416.88 fEET (CHORD BEARS SOUTH
87041'WEST. 413.21 fEET) ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE SOUTH 74027'WEST, 272.30
FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH'RIGH;r-OF-WAY; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, RADIUS Of
1196.00 FEET, A DISTANCE Of 919.54 FEET (CHORD BEARS NORTH 83031'WEST. 897.06 fEET) ALONG
THE SOUTH RIGHT-Of-WAY TO THE POINT Of SEGINNING.
EXCEPT A TRACT Of LAND FORMERLY BEING COLORADO MIDLAND RAIL ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY IN LOTS
8 AND 10, AND THE SOUTHWEST .QUARTER Of THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER Of SECTION 12, AS DESCRIBED
IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 628 OF PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS, MORE PARTlCULARILY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE Of THE THOMAS ESTATE PROPERTY 8EING 1823.79 FEET
SOUTH 400 19' EAST fROM THE WEST QUARTER CORNER Of SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85
WEST, 6th. PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO (A 1954 BUREAU Of LAND MANAGEMENT
BRASS CAP MONUMENT); THENCE SOUTH 18014' WEST, 66.44 fEET ALONG SAID EAST LINE; THENCE
ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, RADIUS OF 30S.10 fEET. A DISTANCE OF 540.42 FEET (CHORD
BEARS SOUTH Is054'WEST, 473.76 FEET); THENCE SOUTH 31021'EAST, 8.00 FEET TO THE EAST
LINE Of THE THOMAS ESTATE PROPERTY; THENCE SOUTH ISO 14' WEST, 131.3.5 fEET ALONG THE
EAST LINE OF SAID PROPERTY; THENCE. NORTH 310 2J"WEST, 93.IS fEET: THENCE ALONG A .CURVE
TO THE RIGHT, RAOIUS Of 40S.10 FEET, A DISTANCE Of 221.14 fEET, (CHORD BEARS NORTH 150
49'30"WEST, 21B.46 FEET): THENCE ALONG A.' CURVE TO THE RIGHT, RADIUS OF 663.65 FEET, A
DISTANCE Of 100.00 fEET (CHORD BEARS NORTH 04001'EAST, 99.91 FEET); THENCE NORTH 08020'EAST, 245.00 fEET
.THENCE ALONG A CURV~ TO THE LEfT, RADIUS OF 448.22 fEET. A DISTANCE OF 235.07 FEET (CHORD
BEARS NORTH Oso 41'WEST, 232.39 FE ET) TO THE SOUTH RIGHT",OF-WAY OF THE MAIN LINE Of THE
RAILROAD: THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, RADIUS OF 2964.80 FEET, ADISTANC.E OF 136.07
fEET (CHORD BEARS NORTH 490Il'WEST, 136.07 fEET); THENCE NORTH 47'52'WEST, 458.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 880 24'EAST, 154.18 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE RAILROAD MAINLINE
BEING .2376 fEET MORE OR .I.ESS NORTHWESTERLY fROM _ THE EAST LINE OF 1.0T':lZI, SECTION 12
(OF THE KIMBERLY SURVEY); THENCE SOUTH 880 24'EAST, 1~4.18 fEET; THENCE SOUTH 47052' EAST,
215.00 FEET; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LifT, RADIUS OF 2764.80 FEET A DISTANCE Of
454.01 fEET (CHORD BEARS SOUTH 52034'EAST,.4~3.50.fEET) TO. THE EAST LINE OF'THE THOMAS
ESTATE PROPERTY; THENCE SOUTH 250 28'WEST, '147.~0 FEET ALONG SAID EAST LINE;. THENCE SOUTH
isoI4:WEST. 57.06 fEET ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING
27.934 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
.
. ~
-1-
I
,
I-
I
,
f.."
!
t":"?' .~~.
r .
I
I
I
i
I
r
I
,
I
!
f
,. .
;'.
;~
i.
f;.
r
,
L";:'":
1 .'.~
r
C".,
"
,~
.
.-
~.
(""\,
.'.
" .,
EXHIBIT "A."
~ARCEL A-3
A TRACT OF LAND BEING PART OF THE NORTHWE.ST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, AND LOTS
5 AND 6 OF SECTION 13, AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF 'THE SOUTHWEST QUARTE.R Of SECTION .12,
TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, .RANGE 85 WEST, 6th. PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO DESCRIBEO
AS FOLLOWS;
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13, SAID CORNER BEING THE SAME CORNER.
AS APPRDYED BY THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE'FROM THE"OFFICIAL PLAT DATE NOVEMBER B, 18BB,
WHENCE AN UNAPPROVED 1954 BUREAU OF LANa MANAGEMENT BRASS CAP MONUMENT BEARS NORTH 33.
58'EAST, 45.95 FEET: THENCE SOUTHOoo03'40"EAST, 875.00 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE NORTHWEST
- QUARTER OF SECTION 13: THENCE NORTH 90000' EAST, 714.79 FEET; THENCE NORTH DO" DO', 208.11 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 90000' EAST, 160.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00.00', 170.00 F.EET; THENCE SOUTH 90'00'WEST,.
160.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00000', 38.11 FELT; THENCE NORTH 90000'.EAST, 85.21 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 00'00', 526.89 FEET; THENCE NORTH 90000'EAST, 24.79 FEET: THENCE NORTH 00'00', 120.00
FEET; THENCE NORTH 90'00'EAST, 213.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00' 00', 300.00 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 90000'WEST, 4BO.00FEET; THENCE NORTH 00' 00', 141.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 90.00'WEST,
557.20 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF LOT 6, SECTION 13; THENCE SOUTH 00003'40"EAST, 1229.33
FEET ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 6 TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 13,'( A 1954 BUREAU
OF LAND MANAGEMENT BRASS CAP MONUMENT); THENCE NORTH 89036' EAST, 671. B7 FEET ALONG "HE
SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13 TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE WES,.
. LINE OF THE MAMMOUTH PLACER MINERAL. SURVEY NO. 6930 AM; THENCE NORTH 44' 10' EAST, 78.51
FEET ALONG SAID PLACER WEST LINE "0 CORNER 5 THEREOF (A STONE MaNUM EN,. IN PLACE); ,.HENCE
NORTH 33'15'EAST, 450.45 fEET ALONG THE WEST LINE .oF SAID PLACER TO THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY
LINE OF CAS"LE CREEK ROAD; THENCE NORTHERLY ALDNG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID ROAD
NORTH 15' 53'EAST, 975.00 FEET; NDRTH 090 14'EAST, 738.34 FEET; NORTH 07' 01' WEST, 262.69 FEET:
NORTH 33'27'WEST, IBI.OO FEET; NORTH 440D9'WEST, 150.70 FEET; NORTH 52046'WEST, 276.67 FEET; .
NORTH 43017'WEST, 111.14 FEET; NORTH 2304I'WEST, 223.61 FEE,. ,.0 THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 13:
THENCE NORTH 89052: WEST, 738.67 FEET ALONG SAID NDRTH LINE TO THE paiN,. OF 8EGINNING.
"7'.1
EXCEPT A TRACT OF LAND BEING PART OF NORTHWES,. QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE B5 WES,. 6th. PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN DESCRI8ED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE .NORTHWEST l:ORNER OF SAID SECTION 13, SAID CORNER BEING THE SAME AS
APPROVED BY THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE FROM THE CUTSHAW SURVEY OFFICIAL PLAT DATED
NOVEMBER 8, 18BB, WHENCE THE UNAPPROVED 1954 BUREAU. OF lANe MANAGEMENT BRASS CAP
MONUMENT BEARS NDRTH 33' 58'EAST, 45.95 FEET; THENCE SOUTH B9052'EAST 73B.67 FEET ALONI
TH~ NORTH LINE OF. SAID SECTION; THENCE SOUTH 23' 41'WEST, 506.46 FEE,.; "THENCE NORTH BS-.
52 WEST, 534.72 FEET TD THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID SECTION ; THENCE NORTH DO'03'4D"WES
464.23 FEET ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL A-3 CONTAINS 51.03.0 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
.
-~
THE PROPERTY OESCRlpTION IS QUALIFIED BY THE IN,.ENT AND POSITION OF! THE 1954 UNAPPROVED
.BUREAU .oF MANAGEMEN" BRASS CAP MONUMENT AND THE CUTSHAW 1888 SECTION CORNER AS IT
REFERS TO BOUNDARIES.
.~
:',.:'.
..
j.J
,.
.....,
"':.':~'
. "","',',
,.
':"2-
.~,.
1"'.
PUBLIC NOTICE
1""\
RE: Consideration of Zoning of Lot T, Thomas Subdivision
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before
the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, October 5, 1982, at
~ meeting to begin at 5;00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 130 S.
Galena, Aspen to consider zoning Lot 1 of the Thomas subdivision, which is
in the process of being annexed to the City of Aspen, to p, Park. For
further information contact the Planning Office, 130 S. Galena, Aspen,
925-2020,ext. 224..
s/Perry Harvey
Chairman, Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on September 16, 1982
City of Aspen account
~
.~
.
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I hereby certify that on this 16th day of .September ? 1982, a true
and correct copy of the Notice of Public Hearing regarding
Consideration of Zoning of Lot 1, Thomas Subdivision
was deposited into the United States mails, postage prepaid, and
addressed to the following:
1. City of Aspen
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Attn: Wayne Chapman, City Manager
2. County of Pitkin
506 E. Main Street
Aspen. Colorado 81611
Attn: Curt Stewart. County Manager
3. James and Alberta Moore
P.O. Box 707
Aspen, Colorado 81612
~0Jd:ILt0 2l~~_
Martha Ei che.l berger
. ,
.
~,
.~
'""'"
CITY OJF ASPEN
"
130 south galena street
aspen, colorado 81611
303-925'-2020
MEMORANDUM
'.
DATE: September 14, 1982
TO: Lou Buettner
FROM: Gary ESary~
RE: Thomas Property Annexation and Rezoning/
Castle Ridge Subdivision Exception Application d ~r~
U/~" /l,,",~"" ~
Alan Richman informed me today that we need an adjaCent~st to
complete the above-referenced application. Given the press of
time, if we don't already have such a list, I suggest that a title
company be contacted to provide one (from the Castle Ridge fund?)
'I' t.i . ,,;
.if~ If 1t V' ~s tV'q
ce, Ron Mit,hell f' ~ t ~ r16~ :,,,/,'
~cV ~~ A \":-.dlJ~, ~
1 :/ ~'U ^
,. \~ ,('(' l..J ~ V It 9 ~./:r )
V ~ 'it.f.,. /
60V r\~ q ~/>/j / - '
~ r<' . l
Thanks.
GSE/me
1~~
~~jJ
. .
"
S EP 1 ,1: mal
CITY . "."
J'd'..oENGINEER <::)0 !I
~~~ CG\.o~'r 11
,.....- -
.;'. .
.'
'" ., c~ :t
!
~,
lj
r:"l
MEMORANDUM
l
TO:
Engineering Department
City Attorney
Planning Department
FROM:
Kathryn Koch
DATE:
July 28, 1982
RE:
Request for Annexation
Attached is a Petition for Annexation and plat of
same. The Petitioner is the City of Aspen. Please start
the process for annexation.
Attachments
kk