HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.hpc.059-2001RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
APPROVING A REMEDIATION PLAN FOR 213 W. BLEEKER STREET, LOT
G, BLOCK 51, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO
Parcel Identification No. 2735-124-40-005
RESOLUTION # 59, SERIES OF 2001
WHEREAS, Ronald and Lori Schelling, owners of the proper~y at 213 W. Bleeker
Street, and the City of Aspen signed a Stipulated Agreement Order on May 29, 2001,
which established the circumstances under which the stop work order could be lifted at
213 W. Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, said agreement required HPC review and approval of a "Remediation
Plan," to address design changes that would be needed to comply with outstanding UBC
issues; and
WHEREAS, the HPC discussed said plan at their regular meeting on December 12,
2001, and approved the plan with conditions.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the HPC approves the "Remediation Plan," attached as "Exhibit A," for 213 W.
Bleeker Street, Lot G, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen with the following
conditions:
1. A building permit for this project shall be obtained prior to any work beginning on
the site. The building permit application shall be submitted within two weeks of
the date of this resolution. The permit shall be picked up within one week of the
date that it is ready for issuance.
2. The attached settlement between the Schellings and Margaret Block, the adjacent
property owner, is hereby incorporated into this resolution as "Exhibit B." The
Schellings shall complete backfill and soil compaction on their property and the
Block property in a manner that satisfies the terms of the settlement and the Chief
Building Official. All other aspects of the agreement shall be complied with.
3. The Stipulated Order between the City and Schelling's is attached as "Exhibit C"
and shall be complied with.
4. The property owner shall be required to submit a construction plan, with
milestones for completion of the project on a timely schedule, for review and
acceptance by the Chief Building Official. This plan shall be agreed upon before
the permit is ready for issuance.
5. Drainage from the gutter being installed on the west side of the house shall be
directed to a drywell in the front of the building, as represented in the meeting.
Page: 1 of 25
03/06/2002 03:21F
$ILVIA I)~VI$ PlTKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 D 0.00
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 12th day
of December, 2001.
Approved as to Form:
David~
Hoefer,Assistafft City Attorney
Approved as to Content:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Su~n~Rei~f, C~ai~
ATTEST:
Kathy Stricgland, Chief Deputy Clerk
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 12~ 2001
Department, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair
(if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure
connections as part of the Final Review Application; and
15)Replacement and design of windows on the historic pan abode
buildings shall be review and approved by staff and monitor.
! 6) The access well to crawl space on the historic cabin should be
reconfigured to allow the north east corner of the cabin to sit on
grade and the configuration shall be reviewed and approved by staff
and monitor.
17) Tower configuration shall be indicated as Alternate g4.
18) The gabled roof for the four-plex is approved as AC 3.2
Melanie second the motion. Motion carried 7-0.
Yes vote: Jeffrey, Gilbert, Rally, Melanie, Neill, Michael, Suzannah
213 W. Bleeker, Remediation Plan
Sworn in were: Stan Mathis, representing the Schellings.
Craig O'Brian, resident of 215 W. Bleeker
Paul Taddune, attorney representing the adjacent neighbor, Margaret Block
Tom Perry, Building Department.
David said pursuant to the stipulation order the applicant had to come
before HPC for approval of the remediation plan.
Copy of the stipulated order entered into the record as Exhibit I.
David said in addition there is an agreement between the Schelling's and
Mrs. Block, Exhibit II. Also building codes need to be complied with as
part of the approval. David said he is going to request that the agreements
be attached to the resolution as Exhibits. Mr. Schelling is required to pay
the City $120,000 and the appropriate way to track that is through the Clerk
& Recorder. When recorded, these agreements would have to be complied
with if ever the property was sold to another party.
Stan said he was asked to address how to reduce the overhang on the
adjacent property to the west. The overhang goes beyond the property line
and at the same time maintain some resemblance as to what you originally
thought you were going to get in elevation. Stan said he cut the overhang
7
Page: 3 of 25
03/06/2002 03:21g
$ILVlA I)~VIS PlTKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 D 0.00
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 12~ 2001
back to within one inch of the worst-case condition of the property line, so
therefore it's about eight inches. Not only in the code but as a matter of
good practice one needs a gutter because you really cannot drain water onto
the neighbor's property, so it became obvious to be that I was going to cut
the entire overhang off and that is what the wall section indicates. It is a
custom gutter that is in the same shape as the fascia and soffet and to be
painted the same as the fascia and soffet. At the front of the building you
will not see the end of the gutter, the gable fascia comes down and covers
the end of the gutter. That runs the inter length of the historic part of the
structure. In addition there needs to be down spouts and code we have to
have dry wells to take care of the runoff water. There will only be one
down spout on the lengthy gutter. It will probably be like a secondary
gutter inside the fascia gutter that will drain all the water to Bleeker Street
side. It will then go to some sort of drainpipe, preferably not a perforated
drainpipe to a dry well at the front of the house. We are too close to the
neighbor's property for any water to be spewed out.
Stan said he also raised the elevation of the bottom of the soffet to about
two inches, and maybe three inches so now it aligns with the fascia that run
across the face of the shed roof covering the entry. That was actually offset
in the original submission. The fascia that comes down on the side of the
gables that returns back to the shed over the entry is what is indicated on the
drawings. The original drawing was a foot and that put it two inches over
the neighbor's property. The reason the bottom of the soffet was raised up
is to keep the vertical dimension of the fascia as it was approved previously.
The only difference is that the soffet is higher. There are no alternations to
any other part of the design.
Paul Taddune stated he represents 215 W. Bleeker, the Block residence.
The Block house is an historically designated structure. The subject project
jeopardized her foundation. Other impacts were the roof overhang and the
higher pitched roof was causing snow to cascade against her house etc.
That caused hear to file legal action against the Schelling's. Paul agreed
with David that the remediation plan is going to incorporate the terms of the
settlement agreement. Paul stated that all of the settlement agreements have
not been performed. The Schelling's were to notify Mrs. Block when the
backfill was going to occur in order for them to contact HP Geotech to
observe the backfill. The backfill which was done without a permit was not
Page: 4 o{ 25
03/06/2002 03:21g
SlLVII~ DOVI$ PITI(IN COUNTY CO R 125.00 D 0.00
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 12~ 2001
done properly and does present some jeopardy. The backfill needs to be
redone and in addition Patillo recommended mud grouting on Mrs. Black's
foundation which we do not feel was done. A subsurface drain was to be
installed that would drain out onto Bleeker Street which should be part of
the settlement. If those components could be rectified we could have
compliance.
Jeffr,ey asked what has to be done regarding the backfill?
Tom Perry said it should have been inspected. We are talking civil rather
than building code issues as to which way to go. It should be part of the
process.
David said his concern is that the compaction comply with the building
codes.
Paul said unfortunately you have an historic property that is in compliance
and one that is not. The fill should be removed and reinstalled and
inspected as it is reinstalled and that would preserve both buildings. We do
not want to undermine the foundation of the Block residence.
Stan Mathis said if there was a specification calling for a specific
compaction density test and that wasn't tested as the lifts were put in then
by virture of the fact that the excavation is so close to other structures by not
having the right standard, the soil not being in a "fluffed" state you have the
opportunity for the soil that was not excavated at the other structure to
move. Compaction is important. The drainage is a building code issue.
Suzannah asked when the backfill was done? Paul said the backfilling was
done after the agreement and the agreement calls for Mrs. Block to be
notified. Paul said he was driving by and saw Schelling doing some work
and that was in violation of his building permit.
Jeffrey asked about Schelling's license?
Tom Perry said he has no license at all and he does not have a building
permit for that structure at this time. Everything is starting over. He should
be going through engineering even for the drywell and engineering would
Page: g o'F' 25 9
03/06/2002 03:21P
5ILVIA D~VI$ PITKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 D 0.00
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 12~ 2001
be looking at the drywell. What is holding up the building permit is HPC's
approval of the appearance of this structure. Drainage issues, structural
issues, fire issues will be dealt with as part of the building permit process.
David said it is his position that it would be meaningless for this Board to
basically approve a remediation plan that didn't incorporate both the
concerns of Mrs. Block and our concerns. Unless the Schelling's are in
compliance with both of these agreements they basically have a situation
where they cannot complete the house. David said he brought everyone
together in the hopes of resolving these issues.
Stan Mathis said there are above grade issues which are visual and then
there are issues below grade that effect the stability of both structures
actually. Stan requested approval for the elevation presented and then work
out the building issues.
Amy said that is staffs recommendation, for HPC to give approval with the
condition that they get a building permit; that they give us a construction
schedule that sets up dates for completion of the project and that they
address whatever they are out of compliance with on their agreement with
the Block's.
Suzannah said the permit should include specifics on this agreement and
somehow it is going to have to be shown that the construction complies with
the permit.
MOTION: Rally moved to approve Reso. #59, 2001 in which HPC
recommends approval of the elevation section provided at the Dec. 12th
meeting with the following conditions:
1. That the applicant is required to obtain a building permit and that
they must apply for that permit within one week of this date and they
must pick up the permit within two weeks of it being ready to issue.
2. Attached to this resolution shall be the agreement with the Block's,
the adjacent neighbor and all aspects of that agreement must be
complied with particularly the compaction issues.
3. Stipulated order between the City and the Schelling's shall be
attached and complied with.
Page: 6 of 25
03/06/2002 03:211:
SlLVI~ DglVI$ PITKIN COUNTY CO R 15'5.00 D 0.00
10
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 12~ 2001
4. The owner and the Building Dept. will come to an agreement about
an ongoing work plan for completion of the project.
5. Subsurface drainage going out to Bleeker Street which is part of the
gutter drainage, the dry well in the front of the building.
6. The Block agreement should be incorporated and addressed in the
building department drawings.
Motion second by Melanie. Motion carried 6-0.
de, ffrey, Gilbert, Rally, Melanie, Neill, Suzannah
110 E. Bleeker - Conceptual, Partial Demolition, Variances
Sworn in were Sven Alstrom and Herb Klein.
Notice of publication was entered into the record as Exhibit I.
Amy said the proposal is to make an addition on the west side of the
existing 19th century Victorian. Staff has concern about the location of the
addition, it is far to forward on the lot to meet design guideline 10.8. It is
too competitive with the historic resource and changes the perception of the
width and overall size of the original building and it must be slipped back
on the lot. One of the reasons it has not been proposed that way is because
the garage at the back of the property is side loaded. After discussion with
the Engineering Dept. it is conceivable that the City would allow relocation
of the garage doors onto the alley side in order for them to come right in
from the alley. The garage is not an historic building. The applicant is
requesting a 500 square foot FAR bonus. Restoration efforts need clarified
in order for the recommendation of the FAR bonus. On the partial
demolition standards, where the addition is proposed the intent is to
demolish an entire wall and staff doesn't feel the design is appropriate right
now. Staff recommends continuation with very specific direction.
Sven said since the last worksession the addition has been pushed back 14
feet behind the brick facade of the house and the porch is nine feet behind
the brick faCade. The FAR bonus request has been reduced to 350 feet,
which is roughly 70% of the bonus. The access location of the stair on the
rear of the building has been changed so that the rear fagade of the historic
house is not altered at all. They are proposing to leave the laundry room
unaltered. The length of the addition has been reduced by three feet. The
Page: 7 o¢ 25
03/06/2002 03:211:
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 D 0.00
11
R 125.00 O 0.00
DISTRICT COURT, COUNT OF PITKIN
STATE OF COLORADO
506 E. Main Street, Suite E
Aspen, Colorado 81611
MARGARET W. BLOCK, TRUSTEE OF THE MARGARET
W. BLOCK QUAL~IED PERSONAL RESIDENCE TRUST
#2, MAGGIE MCGOVERN AND DANIEL MCGOVERN
RONALD L. SCHELLING AND LORI L. SCHELL1NG,
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND THOMAS MCCABE,
JIM MARK_ALUNAS, RACHEL RICHARDS, TONY
HERSHEY, AND TERRY PAULSON AS MEMBERS OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN
Paul J. Taddune, Esq.
Paul J. Taddune, P.C.
323 West Main Street, Suite 301
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Telephone: (970) 925-9190
-Telefax: (970) 925-9199
E-Mail: taddune~compuserve.com
Atty. Reg. No. 10824
Daniel M. Fowler, Esq.
Fowler, Schimberg & Flanagan, P.C.
1640 Grant Street, Suite 300
Denver, CO 80203
Telephone: (303) 298-8603
Telefax: (303) 298-8748
Atty. Reg. No. 6357
· COURT USE ONLY ·
CASE NO. 01-CV-131
Division Two
Page: 10 of 25
03/06/2002 03:21g
SILVIA DAVIS PlTKIN COUNTy CO R 125.00 D (~.00
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION
and Lori L. Schelling (hereinafter collectively the "Schellings").
THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION is entered into as of the
21st day of September, 2001, between the Plaintiffs, Margaret W. Block, Trustee of the Margaret
W. Block Qualified Personal Residence Trust #2 Aspen Residence, Maggie McGovem and
Daniel McGovem (hereinafter collectively" "Plaintiffs"), and Defendants Ronald L. Schelling
RECITALS
A. Plaintiffs own real property and the residence thereon in the City of Aspen
commonly known as 215 West B leeker Street, Aspen, Colorado, more specifically described as
Lot F, Block 51, City and Township of Aspen, County of PitkJn, State of Colorado.
B. The Schellings are husband and wife and own real property in the City of Aspen
commonly known as 213 West Bleeker Street, Aspen, Colorado, more specifically described as
Lot G, Block 51, City and Township of Aspen, Colorado, located to the east of and sharing a
common boundary with Plaintiffs' property.
C. In or about August 2000, the Schellings commenced construction to restore a
locally designated historic landmark miner's cottage located on their property. During the course
af construction, the Schellings demolished the historic landmark structure, excavated two large
basements upon their property which caused subsidence on Plaintiffs' property and reconstructed
a pitched roof which overhangs onto Plaintiffs' property.
D. In or about October 2000, a stop work order was issued to the Schellings by the
City of Aspen Building Department on the basis that the historic structure previously located on
the Schellings' property had been totally demolished, contrary to City approvals for the
restoration of the historic structure and landmark designation.
E. This civil action has been filed by the plaintiffs in which their claims against the
Schellings are for trespass, nuisance, negligence, unlawful forcible entry and detainer, injunction
and declaratory relief, arising out the demolition of the historically designated structure on the
Schellings property and the reconstruction of a residence thereon, all as more specifically alleged
in the Complaint, which is incorporated herein by this reference. The Complaint further alleges
that the City Defendants unlawfully re-instituted gnvemmental approvals and entered into an
unlawful settlement agreement. ~
F. Plaintiffs and Schellings desire and intend to settle all claims arising out of the
aforesaid litigation, whereby the Schellings have agreed to remediate and repair all damage in
accordance with recommendations from Patillo Associates Engineers, Inc. dated August I, 2001,
a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A" and to pay to Plaintiffs
the costs incurred by them, as set forth in this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation.
G. ffthe City of Aspen is willing to grant approvals to the Schellings, the Plaintiffs
shall support said approvals, subject to the terms of this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation.
NOW, THEREFOR.E, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth
below, the parties agree and stipulate as follows:
1. In consideration for the Plaintiffs' support of the approval of the remediation plan
to be submitted tothe City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission and the settlement of the
litigation, the Schellings hereby agree to perform, comply with and complete at their sole cost
and expense the following remediation to assure that the construction occurring on their property
~ill not encroach upon or cause damage to the Plaintiffs' property:
(a) There shall be no encroachments into, on the surface of or above the surface of
Plaintiffs' property by the Schellings. Although it is the intent of this Settlement Agreement and
Stipulation that there be no encroachments, Plaintiffs agree that no legal action will be taken
against Schellings or their successors or assigns by Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs' successors or assigns
to remove any concrete foundation material below the surface of the ground that may have
seeped underground onto 215 West Bleeker. This estoppel, however, shall not preclude Plaintiff
or Plaintiffs' successors or ass!gns hereto from removing said concrete to the extent that it might
encroach onto Plaintiffs' property in any respect, such that Plaintiff may represent to future
property owners that any such underground encroachment may be removed by such subsequent
owners. The overhang encroachment shall be removed as promptly as practicable and the
Schellings shall request the gas company to remove, at the Schelling's expense, the gas service
pipe jutting onto Plaintiffs' property. All such encroachments shall be removed no later than
thirty (30) days after the City of Aspen issues a permit allowing the reconstruction to proceed.
Any and all claims for the right to continued encroachments by adverse possession or otherwise
shall be deemed to be waived and abandoned by the Schellings and the Schellings shall be
estopped from asserting any such presently existing or future claims.
(b) The Schellings shall place and maintain ice breaks and gutters and down
spouts feeding to the engineered dry wells on the Schellings' property to avoid snow, ice and
water cascading onto the Plaintiffs' property;
(c) The Sc'hellings shall resod, at their sole cost and expense, the front yard east
of the Plaintiffs' sidewalk and north of the Plaintiffs' residence after the water tap is made, but in
no event later than June 1, 2002;
(d) A new fence, approved by either Margaret W. Block or Margaret Saunders
McGovern, the daughter of Margaret W. Block, who currently resides in Pacific Grove,
California, shall be constructed along the boundary line between the Schelling's property and the
Plaintiffs' property;
(e) The Schellings shall, as soon as practicable but not later than sixty (60) days
after approval of the remediation plan by the City of Aspen, remediate the subsidence that has
occurred on Plaintiffs' property in strict conformance with the report of Pattilo Associates
Engineers, Inc, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A". In
addition, the walkway on Plaintiffs' property shall be regraded by the Schellings so as to slope
toward the Schellings' property, and the wooden boardwalk leading to the side entry shall be
returned to its normal height and proximity to the wall of Plantiffs' residence. TheWs
SILVIA DAVIS PlTKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 D 0.00 ~
shall provide wr/tten notice to Margaret W. Block and Margaret Saunders McGovern of all
phases of construction, particularly the work to be performed pursuant to Exhibit "A", so that the
Plaintiffs can monitor the work to assure that it is being satisfactorily performed.
(f) Plaintiffs shall cooperate with the Schellings in order to allow the construction
to be completed along the west facing side of the Schellings structure in a manner that shall cause
no interference with Plaintiffs' residence or property. The completion of such construction
requiring temporary use of Plaintiffs' property shall take no longer than twenty (20) days to
complete and shall be in strict accordance with a plan.to be submitted to Plaintiffs and approved
in writing by either Margaret W. Block or Margaret Saunders McGovern, which approval shall
not be unreasonably withheld or delayed.
(g) All such work and obligations to be performed by Schellings shall be of good
quality and workmanship and shall not cause further subsidence or damage to Pla'mtiffs'
residence.
2. The SchelJings, as a condition to the recommencement of construction shall pay
the Plaintiffs the sum of Twenty Thousand ($20,000) Dollars as a c~ntribution toward
engineering, surveying and legal expenses incurred by Plaintiffs. Such amount shall be paid no
later than ten (10) days following execution of this agreement by Plaintiffs and Schellings. In
addition, the Schellings shall pay all invoices for monitoring as required in the remediation plan.
3. In consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, Plaintiffs agree that the
above referenced lawsuit shall be settled in accordance with the terms of this stipulation and the
terms hereof shall be incorporated and enforced as an order of the Court.
4. Each party hereby acknowledges and agrees that this Settlement Agreement and
Stipulation is made in order to amicably resolve the disputes hereinabove referenced.
5. Each party hereby acknowledges that he, she, or it has carefully read this
Settlement Agreement and Stipulation, understands the contents of this Settlement Agreement
and Stipulation, and has executed the same as their own free and voluntary act after having this
Settlement Agreement and Stipulation explained to such party by such party's counsel.
6. This Settlement Agreement and Stipulation may be executed in counterparts and,
as executed, shall constitute one agreement binding upon all of the parties hereto,
notwithstanding that all said parties may not be signatory to the original or same counterpart.
The parties agree that telefax, signed copies of this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation shall
be deemed effective, and that each party will forward originals to the other party, when
requested.
4
7. This Settlement Agreement and Stipulation shall be deemed to be an agreement
made under the laws of the State of Colorado and fur all purposes it shall be construed in
accordance with and governed by the laws of such state.
8. The parties agree that the aforementioned civil action and all claims including
each and every claim for relief contained therein shall be settled and dismissed with prejudice
upon full performance o~'the obligations of Schellings pursuant to this Settlement Agreement and
Stipulation.
9. Th/s Settlement Agreement and Stipulation is binding upon the heirs, successors
and assigns of all of the parties.
10. The parties represent, warrant, and agree to each other as follows:
(a) The facts stated in the recitals hereof are true.
(b)
Each party hereto has made (or has had the opportunity to make) such
investigation of the facts pertaining to this Settlement Agreement and
Stipulation, the claims underlying this Settlement Agreement and
Stipulation, and all matters pertaining hereto as such party deems
necessary, and no party relies upon any promise or representation by any
other party, or by any officer, agent, employee, representative or attorney
of any other party with respect to any such matter.
(c)
Each party hereto has read this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation and
understands the contents hereof, and has taken such action as required by
law for the approval of the person so signing.
(d)
Each party hereby represents and warrants that she or it has not heretofore
assigned or transferred, or purported to have assigned or transferred to any
person or entity not a signatory to this Settlement Agreement and
Stipulation, any claims or matters herein released. Each party hereby
agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the other parties, to the
extent permitted by law, from and against any loss, cost or expense,
including, but not limited to, attorneys' fees ar/sing out of or occasioned
by, or arising in connection wi~: any such assignment or transfer, or any
purported such assignment or transfer, of any claims or other matters
released herein.
SILVIA DAVIS PITI<IN COUNTY CO R 125.00 O 0.00
11. This Settlement Agreement and Stipulation contains the entire agreement for
settlement between the parties hereto and any other prior agreements of whatever kind regarding
settlement or compromise of the above-entitled actions are deemed merged into this Settl6Knent
Agreement and Stipulation.
Se~. 2, 200] 4:43P!~ 'PAUL
I,Io,~2497 P, ¥
12. The partfes further stipulate and agree that the clajj:as against the $cbelllings shall
be dismissed without prejudice and an appropriate order may be entered dismiss/nS said claims
without prejudice as provided herein without fur[her notice to or by any of the parties.
13. In *he event ofa~y litigation commenced to enforce the terms of this Aga'eement,
the prevailing party shall be entitled to costs, expert witness fees, and attorneys~ ~'ees.
Mm'g~ret Block
Maggie McGovem
Lon L. S~hel~
Daniel
Represented by:
PAUL J. TADDUNE, PC
Paul J. Tac~dune, Esq.
323 West Mainfitreet, Suite 301
Aspen, CO 81611,
(970) 925-9190
Represented by:
ALLEN, WERTZ & FELDMAN, LLP
ought'. Allen, Esq. -
520 ~a~t Cooper Avemte, Suite 230
Asp~.~ CO 81611
(970) 925-8800
Page: 15 0¢ 25
0210B/2002 03:21P
$ILVlA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 D O.0e
6
' /P~. t
12. The parties further stipulate and agree that the claims against the Schelllings shall
be dismissed without prejudice and an appropriate order may be entered dismissing said claims
xvithout prejudice as provided herein without further notice to or by any of the parries.
13. In the event of any litigation commenced to enforce the terms of this Agreement,
the prevailing party shall be entitled to costs, expert witness fees, and attorneys' fees.
Dated this ,2~>-r day of 5~ t'~TS-,,\,,*,,~ff ,2001.
Margaret Block
Ronald L. Schelling
Maggie McGovern
Lori L. Schelling
Daniel McGovern
Represented by:
PAUL J. TADDUNE, PC
Represented by:
ALLEN, WERTZ & FELDMAN, LLP
By: By:.
PanlJ. Taddune, Esq.
323WestMain S~eet, Suim 301
Aspen, CO 81611
(970) 925-9190
Douglas P. Allen, Esq.
520 East Cooper Avenue, Suite 230
Aspen, CO 81611
(970) 925-8800
6
12. The parties further stipulate and agree that the claims against the Schelllings shall
be dismissed without prejudice and an appropriate order may be entered dismissing said claims
without prejudice as provided herein without further notice to or by any of the parties.
13. In the event of any litigation commenced to enforce the terms of this Agreement,
the prevailing party shall be entitled to costs, expert witness fees, and attorneys' fees.
Dated thii~ .tjX- day of _~.S i? ?;.,~-~:-z. ,2001.
Margaret Block
Ronaid L. Schelling
Maggie McGovern
Daniel McGovern
Lori L. Schelling
Represented by:
PAUL J. TADDUNE, PC
Represented by:
ALLEN, WERTZ & FELDMAN, LLP
By:.
Paul J. Taddune, Esq.
323 West Main Street, Suite 301
Aspen, CO 81611
(970) 925-9190
By:
Douglas P. Allen, Esq.
520 East Cooper Avenue, Suite 230
Aspen, CO 81611
(970) 925-8800
12. The parties further stipulate and agree that the claims against the Schelllings shall
be dismissed without prejudice and an appropriate order may be entered dismissing said claims
without prejudice as provided herein without further notice to or by any of the pm'ties.
13. In the event of any litigation commenced to enforce the terms of this Agreement,
the prevailing party shall be entitled to costs, expert witness fees, and attorneys' fees.
Dated this >._~.T day of q~C~T>_ ~,c,..,- 2001.
Ronald L. Schelling
Maggie McGovern
Lori L. Schelling
Daniel McGovern
Represented by:
PAUL J. TADDUNE, PC
Represented by:
ALLEN, WERTZ & FELDMAN, LLP
By: By:.
Paul J. Taddune, Esq.
323 West Main Street, Suite 301
Aspen, CO 81611
(970) 925-9190
Douglas P. Allen, Esq.
520 East Cooper Avenue, Suite 230
Aspen, CO 81611
(970) 925-8800
Page: 18 of 25
03/05/2002 03:21P
Se~.12..2,_0~z 4:44PM ~PUlL TADS, UI,IE s-u~m~T TO ~0.0,,~97 ?. II
August! 1, 2001
Nlra. M,7, rgaret Block
215 West Blocker Skeet
ASpen, CO 81611
Kc: Residence at 215 Blocker
Page: 19 of 25
SILVI~q DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 O 0,00
Dear Margaret:
Our off~ce t~as recently recdved additional information regarding the excavation
problem at 213 West Bleokex, adjacgnt to the east side of your home. Copies of
the 15[P IG~otech report to Schelling Devetopnmnt dated July 20, 2001, and Doug
Allen's:letter and attaoh~nents of July 27. 2001, were forwarded ~'us by Paul
Tadd3me's office. Our comments and recommendations are presented herein.
The Hi~ Geotech m'port recommcmda tha~ a ~hree foot dc-Mth of crashed rock
backfill be removed/n the v/cinity of the adjo/ning properties, filtJer £abrie plkced
OVer the remakdag crushed rock and up the side of the excavation (adjacent to the
line-grained mils on your property), and well-graded soil be compacted up ro
fmlah grade elevation.. They also recon~ucnd improved surface drainage between
the twa braidings. '.
Oot commeat~ regarding the proposed backfill mitigation are a~ fellows:
'1.
This appe~r~ to be a reasoaable proposal, based on our technical
co110eLm.~,
The excavation mad backfill replacement should ~robably extend
farther ~o the north, albng the pzcwioualy baokfllled foundation
because of evidence o£filt settlement and unlmown
mater/at/compaction
Mitigation should include filling and sealLug of the gap between
the Block foundation and.the adja~.m~ ~oil, termed by the
excavated ~lope failure, to prcvellt water hnS/trafion. Perhaps
beroonitc clay slurry would be appropr/atc.
The proposal backfill material should be tested and approved by a
geotechrdcaI cng/neet and. reviewed/approved by Mt's. Block'pr/or
to construct/on.
The geot~¢hnical engineer should he rata/ned by Schel/hg
Development to observe the excavation and backfill opm'don to
assure confornmuce Mth thc in.t~nt of the proposed repairs.
Comtrucfion observation reports and coropaction tcstin-
0
mr P3 L
a~~~l',,u~,u P ~LUEPR J NT
Ho,0497 P. ]2
TO ~199 M, u3
21 $ W-. :Bt~ker
' AugUst 1~ 200t
Pag~ ~vo
The dr~Lnage improverae~a~ ~eeomme~ati°ns ar~ an {mp0rtant part
of the proposal. Because of the limited space between ~e
building% the high grade o.£t/ae alley, and the flat slopes to the
norttl, zff'ective improvements ar~ difficult t,O realize. We a~ggest
that gueteva and dowmpou[q be empIoyed ~r the west reef eaves
of 213 West Blacker, commcfirrg to shallow subsm3ice drain 3ipes
which wouM lead to a sump or dryweg aystem, tt would be
ad~rantag:ou~ ~o install a concret~ catch basin near the boundary
between the lots that will accept var&ce water rmioff'for both
pmpertie~, The catch b~in could also be comleeted to the
subsurface drain system. A plan for the draiwa§e improvements,
prepared'~y a qualified cng/near, $hould be provided for Mrs.
Block's review mid approval prior to coastmcfiori.
The information included wSth Mr. Allen's letter of Iuly 27, 200I, describes a
chemical grou~: martial ~at wa, apeeifieally designed to prevent swelling of
expam[ve clays. This is pr~obably aot appropriate for excavation' stabilization
purposes, and we doubt it wa~ used by mi experienced grouting cmi~truetim~
cotr~any such a~ Denver Grouting Services, inc., in tiffs case, The grouting
specLfieat/on mid ~mmllafion may be moot issue~ if the proposed baeifill
mifigafi, on is executed. Noneflleless, with additional information it would be
helpfiil to mld~x~kmd why tt]e grouting failed in the problom area~
T~a oompletes our review of file most meant subrrdtiats. Please conta~ me if
you hax/e any questions or require fin'dxer informatiori.
copy:
Plan and Section Drawings of Observed Excav'afion
5/I5/01 (2 ~heets, S 1 & 32, dated 7/17/01)
Pall/Todd, me ~ 925-9199
Page: 20 or' 25
03/06/2002 03:21F
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 D 0.00
APPROVED AND ENTERED as an order of the Court this
__.day of October 2001.
District Court Judge
DISTRICT COURT, COUNT OF PITICTN
STATE OF COLORADO
506 ~. Main Street, Suite E
Aspen, Colorado 816I I
MARGARET W. BLOCK, TRUSTEE OF THE MARGARET W. BLOCK
QUALIFIED PERSONAL RESIDENCE TRUST//2, MAGGIE
MCGOVERN AND DANIEL MCGOVERN
· COURT USE ONLY
RONALD L. SCHELLING AND LOP,/L. SCHE]~LING, CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO, AND THOMAS MCCABE, JIM MAKIC~LUNAS,
RACHEL RICHARDS, TONY HEKSHEY, AND ~RRY PAULSON AS
MEMBERS OF TH~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN
Paul J. Taddune, Esq.
Paul J. Taddune, P.C. CASE NO. 01-CV-131
323 West Mare Street, Suite 301 Division Two
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Telephone: (970) 925-9190
Telefax: (970) 925-9199
E-Mail: taddune~C~.compuserve.com
Atty. Reg. No. 10824
Daniel M. Fowler, Esq.
Fowler, Schimberg & Flanagan, P.C.
1640 Grout Street, Suite 300
Telephone: (303) 298-8603 page: 22
Telefax: (303) 298-8748 o3/o6/2oo2 o3:21P
$ILVIA DAVIS PlTKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 O 0.00
Atty. Reg. No. 6357
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
This matter having come on before the Court pursuant to the Settlement Agreement and
Stipulation of the parties submitted herewith and the Court having approved and entered such Settlement
Agreement and Stipulation as an Order of the Court and, pursuant to Paragraph 12 of said Stipulation all
claims against Ronald L. Schellhag and Loft L. Schelling in the above-captioned matter be and they are
hereby dismissed without prejudice.
DONE th~s~,~'--',-~(~:, day of ~ 200I.
.... ,.z'~CATE OF
I ce~ ~at a copy of ..
Foregoing was mailed to
Goun~l of ~cor~
This ~
BY T~ COURT:
( /District Court Judge
STIPULATED ORDER
The Aspen City Council has concluded by a preponderance of the evidence that Ron Schelling violated
Historic Preservation Commission approvals and the building plan at 213 West Bleeker, Aspen. Thus,
the Aspen City Council, and Ronald and Lori Schelling agree, that the City Council may impose the
following penalties upon Ronald and Lori Schelling:
Require Mr. and Mrs. Schelling to submit a remediation plan to the City of Aspen for its
review and approval, said plan to result in a residence conforming to the original
approved plans pursuant to permit # 1379.2000 issued August 22, 2000 retaining the
variances shown thereon pursuant to HPC resolution No. 11, Series of 2000 and
rendering attached to this Order. Until approval of remediation plan no construction,
demolition, or other alteration of the property at 213 West Bleeker shall occur except
completion of the foundation diaphragm and backfill that has been permitted as limited
exception to the red-tag because of safety considerations. The remediation plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission.
There shall be no increase in the FAR, now or in the future, said covenant and agreement
to be evidenced by a recorded covenant recorded against the property.
The landmark status of the property is revoked and removed from the property . The
property shall remain on the inventory but will not be eligible for any further HPC
benefits other than the variances originally granted by HPC.
Mr. and Mrs. Schelling shall pay a penalty in the amount of $120,000.00. Said penalty
shall be payable upon the first of the following to occur:
A.
(1) $25,000.00 payable contemporaneously with written acceptance by the City of the
remediation plan and reinstatement of building permit for construction.
RECon tracts,013 StipulatedOrderSchelling06121
(2) $25,000.00 payable one year from the date of signing of this Stipulated Order;
(3) $25,000.00 payable two years from the date of signing this Stipulated Order,
(4) $45,000,00 payable three years from the date of signing this Stipulated Order, or
B. Contemporaneously with the closing of a sale of the property by the Schelling.
However, in the event that the Schellings are actually in receipt of money from either
Palomino-Barth Architects or Jack Palomino, Architect, in connection with his activities
relating to the property, to the extent the above sum is unpaid by the Schellings, all
money from Palomino to the extent necessary to pay the balance, if any, of the penalty
shall be paid to the City of Aspen by the Schellings to reduce the above amounts.
Payment of the remaining $95,000.00 shall be evidenced by a promissory note secured by
a second deed of trust encumbering the property which is the subject of this order.
Mr. and Mrs. Schelling shall write a letter of apology to the community concerning the
damage to the historic resource, which shall be reviewed as to form by the City Attorney
and which shall be submitted to the Aspen Times and the Aspen Daily News no later than
then (10) days after signing of this Stipulated Order.
AGREED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL at its regular meeting on the 29th day of May,
2001.
Page: 24 otr 25
03/06/2002 03:21F
SlLVIA DAVIS PlTKIN COUNTY CO R 125.00 D 0.00
KEContracts,013 SfipulatedOrderSchelling06121
Agreed:
CITY OF ASPEN
Terry ~au~so~yor Pro Tem
By: ~ ~'~_:... ] [,
DaC?d Hoefer, As~C~Attorney
ATTEST
Kathryn Kocl~l~ity ~lerk
Lo~ S~hel]ing~ ' - <~
Allen, Attomey for Schellings
RECon~acts .013 StipulatedOrderSchelling06121