Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.HoagHoag Subdivision P.U.D. 0 "Tc 7o r boG Re�oL v ".ems Sue%Y euR�L'l�►�GI �EQs, ► C• 4/17/il a�oG 1 Ar� J r`✓ r- z ►a7-�gJ.�� .S� LO-T 4 ► J O ,(St SUR>Z)Nt-:oOPt 21 832A A Delp�-E. er � LO-T a? 4 . iyoA r., s p a DAVID L,,v/t7,L&k& + OFKIJS •-,Rc4'7'tcT ;� FL�a.I�Q . p.s• sex •t%? • Asp* • C*Lcw4 c) $►fail . �(6")92if-2401 - Al. WNrr (p I TOTAL ,4 tar 4, 464 TOTAL 12900 Loo�� r-)LA�s "Flo, 0 0 r O R"TI4 A DvPLr- �r <2 j' J U1�G - 3 - -LNTU Rom: LJ? 1�i1 4 • -4AOwlbol' st;t•i • Asv%.►r D,d,,D 44, }stag A%vc- �TccT .ao pL�a�lr . ro- *d-( -11q • A,%psN • oLoq�ao e:att - (aos)42.7•2-401 - -;:- L tc.,kLE t/16-c 1 - o �, k MPMnPAMnTTM TO: Richard Grice FROM: Dave Ellis RE: PUD Exemption - Lot 4, Hoag Subdivision DATE: May 17, 1979 After reviewing this application and making a site inspection, the Engineering Department has comment on several of the items presented in the application. Contrary to the statement in the application that all utilities are present in Ute Avenue, our records show that there is only water, sewer and gas and that an extension of some distance will be required for power, telephone and cable TV. Although there is a road above the building site, there is no evidence presented that it is a legal private access across Lot 5 to Lot 4. Even if it were a legal access, it would provide poor access as the road is poorly maintained and frequently closed due to avalanche runouts in the winter. It is important to note that what are called snowslides are in fact the lower edges of avalanche runouts. The runouts frequently cross the upper road throughout the length of the Hoag Subdivision carrying debris with them. Even at this date, there is evidence of avalanches having crossed the road this year. In reviewing the title commitment on the property, we are concerned as to whether or not the proposed structure will be within the aerial tramway easement which is reserved for the Little Annie Ski basin. Considering these comments, the Engineering Department recommends granting of the PUD exemption subject to the following five conditions: 1) All necessary utility extensions shall be underground. 2) Due to the presence of avalanche runouts, the structural design of the building shall take this into account and be approved by a registered structural engineer prior to issuance of the building permit. Secondly, the owner shall record a covenant running with the land holding the City harmless from any liability associated with avalanche hazards. 3) Parking and site access shall be from Ute Avenue rather than the upper road. 4) A clarification should be made of the tramway easement and the building located outside of the easement. 5) The calculation for the setback from Ute Avenue should not include the ten foot strip of land reserved for future right-of-way expansion. CC: Clayton Meyring DE/ss • TO: FROM DATE: M E M O R A N D U M RICHARD GRICE, PLANNING DAVE ELLIS, CITY May 24, 1979 ENGINEER` RE: PUD Exemption - Lot 4, Hoag Subdivision As a follow-up to the Planning & Zoning Commission's approval of the PUD exemption of Lot 4, Hoag Subdivision, I had a meeting with David Hopkins, the designer of the project, to clarify item 5 of my earlier memo on May 17. This recommended condition of approval was that the calculation for the setback from Ute Avenue not include the ten foot strip of land reserved for future right-of-way expan- sion. After discussing the project in detail with Mr. Hopkins, it would appear that the overall advantages of calculating the setback from the current right-of-way line outweigh the disadvantages, and therefore, the engineering department is satisfied with the set- backs as originally shown. A change in the method of calculating the setback would create adverse impacts on existing large trees and would also place the house within a few feet of the upper trail easement. In addition, should the ten foot strip of land be required for right-of-way, it is extremely unlikely that it would be used for actual paving but rather for sidewalk, drainage & grading. Mr. Hopkins also clarified the location of the tramway easement to the west of the building location and the location of the parking off Ute Avenue. As a result of our meeting,items 3,4, & 5 of the May 17 memo have been satisfactorily resolved. jk cc: Clayton Meyring David Hopkins DAVID LAWRENCE HOPKINS ARCHITECT AND PLANNER •OX 715 A!P[N, COLORADO 81611 (303) 9$5-2401 April 10, 1979 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission City Hall Aspen, Colorado 81611 Ladies and Gentlemen: Respectfully submitted for exemption from mandatory PUD procedures are these schematic drawings of a "duplex" for the Hoag-3-Venture, to be located on Lot No. 4, Hoag Subdivision, City of Aspen. The lot has 21,832 sq. ft. and the structure will cover 1,550 sq. ft. approximately. The total area of the "duplex" will be about 3,300 sq. ft., excluding porches and overhangs. The following is offered for your consideration in review of this projec . 1) All utilities are located in Ute Avenue. Water pressure should be 40 to 60 pounds pressure. #6Uj-e, � v -jod 2) Access is directly off Ute Avenue with additional road above the building site. 3) No unstable slopes or rock, land or mud slides are in evidence. No unusual soil conditions were encountered in 4!ft the excavation for the residence on Lot No. 2. The stand of mature evergreen trees within which the building is situated indicates lack of avalanches in that location. There have been low velocity snow slides .in the near vicinity, but main chute is 100' west of Lot No. 2, and 330' from this structure. Special con- sideration will be given in structural design of the building to possible avalanche danger. 4) Natural watershed, run-off, drainage, soil erosion or water quality will not be adversely effected. i • • - 2 - 5) A "duplex" in this location would have negligible effect upon air quality. 6) The building shall be dug into the slope so as to af- f�ord protection from possible avalanche. It shall be located behind large trees so that it will be par- tially screened from view. Trees will tower above it, and few trees will be removed, none of major importance. Driveway and parking will require minimum grading and no tree removal. 7) Most material from the excavation will be hauled away. Minimum fill will be used onsite. The design of the structure has been based upon preserving the trees and the natural character of the land. No trees shall be cut .for construction purposes. 8) Building placement and height permits the evergreen trees to dominate the site as they do now. The height of the structure "steps" with the slope. The "open" part of the site will remain "open". If the required parking can be allowed on the upper road, the view of the site from Bte Avedue would be unimpaired. Our request for exemption from PUD requirements is predicated on a design that will have minimum impact on the site, neighborhood, and community. In 1977 the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a "duplex" that I designed for Lot No. 2 in this subdivision. The slope on this site is 10°1A less, and the trees offer more screening on Lot No. 4 . We submit our design of the residence on Lot No. 2 as evidence as what can be done on a difficut site, and feel that our design for Lot No-4 will have even less impact. truly urs , David L. Hopk s DLH: prf Encl. MEMORANDUM TO: City Engineering Department City Water Department City Building Inspector FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office RE: Lot 4, Hoag Subdivision P.U.D. Exemption DATE: April 17, 1979 The attached letter requests P.U.D. exemption for the construction of a duplex. This item is tentatively scheduled for review by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Conunission on Tuesday, May 15, 1979. In order to make that date, I need your written comments returned to the Planning Office no later than Tuesday, May 8, 1979. Thank you. MEMORANDUM TO: City Engineering Department City Water Department City Building Inspector FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office RE: Lot 4, Hoag Subdivision P.U.D. Exemption DATE: April 17, 1979 The attached letter requests P.U.D. exemption for the construction of a duplex. This item is tentatively scheduled for review by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, May 15, 1979. In order to make that date, I need your written comments returned to the Planning Office no later than Tuesday, May 8, 1979. Thank you. Ameefi. lual TiI le Assn. u0 in.. Cu nu lnllnwnl MI I 101/3 9 I COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE (') ISSUED BY S '` rr 'i` I '1` L GUARANTY COMPANY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, A Texas Corporation, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shalt issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance ' with its By -Laws. This Com►nitivlent is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." S'1,1;NVIVR'1, TI'1`11E., 00\1E G(/4's`; OUARANTY CUM1'ANY a�v: pPPOq .,Z�e ,uevmN� Chairman of the Board President 406000 Serial No. CC �4323 • SCHEDULE A Order Number: 8549 1. Effective dale: FEBRUARY 13, 1979 AT 8:00 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to he issued. A. ALTA Owner's Policy JACK BARKER Proposed Insured: Commitment Number: CC 64323 Anumni of Insurance Premium S 120,000.00 $194.75 B. ALTA Loan Policy FIRST NATIONAL BANK IN ASPEN AND/OR $ 9G,000.00 $ 20.00 Proposed Insured: ASSIGNS C. g Tax Certificate $ 5.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitinent and covered herein is fee, sionple and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: LITTLE ANNIE, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 4. The land referred to in this coninoinent is described as follows: Lot 4, HOAG SUBDIVISION, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. Au homed Counter qn to Page 2 ti ! !. NVA t.I , ! I1 L . GUARANTY COMPANY 1652 • 0 Order Number: 8549 Requirements Commitment Number. CC 64323 The following are the requirements to he complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the lull consideration for the estate or interest to he insured. Item (b) Proper instruments) r-seating the estaI, of inteicsI to he insured nuist he executed and duly filed for record, to -wit: (c) Deed from Little Annie, limited partnership, to Jack Barker (said Deed should except and reserve unto Little Annie, limited partnership, an easement across Lot 4, Hoag Subdivision and Fractional Lot 4, Hoag Subdivision, for purposes of installing, maintaining and operating ski lifts, cables, gondolas, tows, aerial tramways and other devices similar or incident thereto). (d) Deed of Trust from Jack Barker to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County, for the use of First National Bank in Aspen and/or assigns to secure $96,000.00. 406003 Page STl:WART'1'I'I'LFA' GUARANTY COMPANY 1] E xceptions 0 Order Number: 8549 Commitment Number: CC 64322 1 he policy 7I policies to be issuer) will contain exc(!pIlons to the following unless the same ale disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public Icculds. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in houndary lines, shnitage in ilea, cncloachnmnls, and any tact, which a correct sulvey and inspection of the plemises would disclose al d which .ue not shown by the Iu1hhC records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or mate) ial theretofow or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but pri01 to the (late the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate of inlet est or morlgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6.Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any and all tax sales which have not been properly redeemed or cancelled. Treasurer's Certificate of taxes due has been ordered. 7.Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States as reserved in United States Patent recorded in Book 175 at page 299. 8.Easements and covenants as set forth on the recorded plat of subject property. 9.Any tax, assessment, fees or charges by reason of the inclusion of subject property in Aspen Fire Protection District, Aspen Metropolitan Sanitation District, The City of Aspen and The Aspen Valley Hospital District. 1O.Deed of Trust from David H. Farny to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County for the use of The First National Bank in Aspen to secure $72,000.00 dated February 24, 1978 recorded February 27, 1978 in Book 344 at page 01. Exceptions numhCled are hereby omitted. Page 4 s r l : ��',1 I.,'1' 'r I'r I, l-, 1654 GUARANTY COMPANY • 0 M E M O R A N D U M TO: RICHARD GRICE, PLANNING FROM: CLAYTON MEYRING, CHIEF BLDG. INSPECTOR C DATE: April 24, 1979 RE: Lot 4, Hoag Subdivision - P.U.D. Exemption I have reviewed the preliminary plans and visited the site for the proposed construction of a duplex on Lot 4, Hoag Subdivi- sion. From the plans and information submitted, it appears the building would meet the regulations of the zoning ordinance except for providing the required off-street parking. Item #8 in the architect's submittal is not clear on where he would propose a parking area nor does the site plan show location. I would recommend a P.U.D. exemption be granted if satisfactory evidence is submitted regarding off-street parking. jk MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office RE: Hoag Subdivision - P.U.D. Exemption DATE: May 18, 1979 The attached letter of application requests exemption for the mandatory P.U.D. requirements of the Aspen Municipal Code. The requests relates to Lot 4 of the Hoag Subdivision located off Ute Avenue, City of Aspen. The application was referred to City Engineering whose recommendation is for approval of the exemption subject to five conditions. That complete memorandum to the Planning Office dated May 17, 1979, is attached for your review. The Planning Office recommends you approve the exemption subject to the conditions outlined in Dave Ellis' memo. • 0 DAVID LAWRENCE HOPKINS ARCHITECT AND PLANNER BOX 71S ASP[N, COLORADO 81611 (303) 925.2401 April 10, 1979 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission City Hall Aspen, Colorado 81611 Ladies and Gentlemen: Respectfully submitted for exemption from mandatory PUD procedures are these schematic drawings of a "duplex" for the Hoag-3-Venture, to be located on Lot No. 4, Hoag Subdivision, City of Aspen. The lot has 21,832 sq. ft. and the structure will cover 1,550 sq. ft. approximately. The total area of the "duplex" will be about 3,300 sq. .ft., excluding porches and overhangs. The following is offered for your consideration in review of this project: 1) .All utilities are located in Ute Avenue. Water pressure should be 40 to 60 pounds pressure. 2) .Access is directly off Ute Avenue with additional road above the building site. 3) No unstable slopes or rock, land or mud slides are in evidence. No unusual soil conditions were encountered in 3rr the excavation for the residence on Lot No. 2. The stand of mature evergreen trees within which the building is situated indicates lack of avalanches in that location. There have been low velocity snow slides in the near vicinity, but main chute is 1001 west of Lot No. 2, and 330' from this structure. Special con- sideration will be given in structural design of the building to possible avalanche danger. 4) Natural watershed, run-off, drainage, soil erosion or water quality will not be adversely effected. - 2 - 5) A "duplex" in this location would have negligible effect upon air quality. 6) The building shall be dug into the slope so as to af- fford protection from possible avalanche. It shall be located behind large trees so that it will be par- tially screened from view. Trees will tower above it, and few trees will be removed, none of major importance. Driveway and parking will require minimum grading and no tree removal. 7) Most material from the excavation will be hauled away. Minimum fill will be used onsite. The design of the structure has been based upon preserving the trees and the natural character of the land. No trees shall be cut for construction purposes. 8) Building placement and height permits the evergreen trees to dominate the site as they do now. The height of the structure "steps" with the slope. The "open" part of the site will remain "open". If the required parking can be allowed on the upper road, the view of the site from Dte Avenue would be unimpaired. Our request for exemption from PUD requirements is predicated on a design that will have minimum impact on the site, neighborhood, and community. In 1977 the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a "duplex" that I designed for Lot No. 2 in this subdivision. The slope on this site is 10% less, and the trees offer more screening on Lot No. 4 . We submit our design of the residence on Lot No. 2 as evidence as what can be done on a difficut site, and feel that our design for Lot No-4 will have even less impact. V ry tru, urs, David L. Iiop. ' s DLH:prf Encl .