The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.11 Trainors Landing.A075-972735-131-00-100 A075-97 - 1 l Â·'(ja,4,44 LCAW &1 6 04661. A 075-97 Barbee Properties AH-1PUD Development n f 7 1. 11 1 - 1 -4...... .. I. P 5>\SELOAD INDE,< E.*&:, r - +. PARCEL ID:|2735-131-00-100 g DATE RCVD: ~10/08/97 #COPIES:~30 - CASE NO|A075-97 | CASE NAME:|Barbee Properties AH-1 PUD Development Proposal ' PLNR:~Chris Bendon PROJ ADDR:| <3610. i. elar..AkA CASE TYP:~AH-1 PUD, 8040 Greenline, Rezonin STEPS14 OWN/APP: Barbee, John ADR~ Cls/Z:I PHN:~ REP:~Vann, Sunny ADR:~ C/S/Zi PHN~915-6958 FEES DUE:~2160+270+165+310=29 FEES RCVD~2160+270+165+310=29 STAT: ~--- REFERRALS|City Eng, Housing, PArks, Env Health, Zonin ' REF:| *.m, . BY| C.Ku~ DUE:| ~SI- MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED ' Dec 2 97 fl pu M 9 + CO Ho :764 F 93 I ct *5 1/6 DATE OF FINAL ACTION: Bocc\Cc:-22312'NG REMARKS IPE 004-21 PZ: 1260 4 49.32- j BOA: CLOSED:~ BY: ~ HRG OFF: PLAT SUBMrrD: | PLAT (BK.PG):j ADMIN: I' .J E.9 1 4 111'111 lilli mi lilli lili .11111'11111 lilli 1111 lili . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35:ESUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 1 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO SUBDIVISION/PUD AGREEMENT FOR BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION/PUD THIS SUBDIVISION/PUD AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of November, 1999, by and between THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ~a/~ municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and MARY K. BARBEE, JOHN W. BARBEE and HALLIE B. RUGHEIMER (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Barbee Partners"), WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Barbee Partners have submitted to the City for approval, execution and recordation a Final Plat of a tract of land situated within the City of Aspen, Colorado and more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference (hereinafter referred to as the "Final Plat"), said property being hereinafter designated as the "Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD"; and WHEREAS, City has fully considered the Final Plat, the proposed development and improvement of the lands therein, and the effects of the proposed development and improvement of said lands on adjoining or neighboring properties and property owners; and WHEREAS, City has imposed certain conditions and requirements in connection with its approval, execution and recordation of the Final Plat, such matters being necessary to protect, promote and enhance the public welfare; and WHEREAS, following recording of the Final Plat, Barbee Partners intend to convey certain of the Lots within the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD to a qualified affordable housing builder (the "AH Developer"); and WHEREAS, Barbee Partners are willing to acknowledge, accept, abide by and faithfully perform the conditions and requirements imposed by the City of Aspen in approving the Final Plat; and WHEREAS, under the authority of Sections 26.84.040 (C and D) and 26.88.050 (C and D) of the Aspen Municipal Code, City is entitled to certain financial guarantees to ensure that (i) the required public facilities are installed and (ii) the required landscaping is implemented and maintained, and Barbee Partners are prepared to provide such guarantees as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the approval, execution and acceptance of the Final Plat for recordation by City, and for other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1 111111111111111111111111111111.11111111111111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 2 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ARTICLE I ANNEXATION, ZONING AND REGULATORY APPROVALS 1. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 11 (Series of 1999) adopted on April 12, 1999, the Aspen City Council granted final subdivision/PUD approval for the creation of four free market single-family residential lots (Lots 1-4); three Resident Occupied Lots ("RO Lots") (Lots 5-7); four category lots (Lots 8-11), each of which will contain one affordable housing condominium unit; Lot 12, which will contain the parking facility for Lots 8-11; and a Conservation Parcel. Ordinance No. 11 also rezoned Lot 1 R-15/PUD, Moderate Density Residential/Planned Unit Development, Lots 2-12 AH1/PUD, Affordable Housing/Planned Unit Development, and the Conservation Parcel C, Conservation, as said Lots and Conservation Parcel are depicted on the Final Plat to be recorded contemporaneously with this Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Ordinance No. 11 also exempted free market Lots 2,3 and 4 and Affordable Housing Lots 5-12 from growth management, waived the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD's Park Dedication Fee, and granted vested property rights. The property is subject to all of the conditions and restrictions set forth in said Ordinance. 2. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 12 (Series of 1999) adopted on N.k /2,- 1999, the Aspen City Council annexed a portion of the lands within the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD to the City, 3. Pursuant to Resolution No. 17 (Series of 1999) adopted on March 16, 1999, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission granted special review approval for the parking requirements for Affordable Housing Lots 5-12. ARTICLE II DEVELOPMENT AND USE REOUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS 1, Development Limitations on Certain Lots. (a) Lot 1 contains an existing single-family residence. Development on Lot 1 is limited to a single-family residence and such accessory uses and structures as may be permitted from time to time in the R-15 zone district or any successor to such zone district. The existing residence may be replaced, provided the replacement residence is located in the designated building envelope. Any expansion of the existing residence must also be located in the designated building envelope. Replacement after demolition of the existing residence on Lot 1 shall require a Growth Management Quota System Exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.050.A.2.c of the Aspen Municipal Code, as amended, (b) On each of Lots 2, 3 and 4, development is limited to one (1) single- family residence and such accessory uses and structures as may be permitted from time to time in the AHI/PUD zone district or any successor to such zone district. 2 111111111111111111111111111111.11111111111111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 3 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO (c) On each of Lots 2, 3 and 4, the maximum allowable residential floor area (including accessory structures) shall be 4,500 square feet, calculated in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time a building permit is applied for on a particular Lot. The same floor area limitation shall apply to a replacement residence on Lot 1, and to any expansion of the existing residence on Lot 1. By its execution hereof, City agrees that said 4,500 square foot maximum allowable floor area shall be vested in perpetuity, and shall not be diminished by future changes in zoning or other land use laws. (d) The single-family residences on Lots 2,3 and 4 shall be limited to a maximum of three (3) bedrooms each. This bedroom limitation does not apply to Lot 1. A minimum oftwo (2) off-street parking spaces are required for each residence on Lots 2,3 and 4, and for any replacement residence on Lot 1. (e) With the exception of existing uses on Lot 1, no development shall occur outside the building envelopes on Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 except the following: (i) Landscaping consistent with the Landscape Guidelines attached hereto as Exhibit B and made a part hereof by this reference. (ii) Underground utilities and irrigation systems. (iii) Individual driveways to residences on Lots, (iv) Fencing. (v) Vegetation removal for fire protection purposes. (vi) Off-street parking. (f) On each of RO Lots 5, 6 and 7, development is limited to one (1) single-family residence deed restricted to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority's Affordable Housing Guidelines for RO Lots in effect at the time a building permit is applied for on a particular RO Lot. A minimum of two (2) off- street parking spaces are required for each residence. (g) On each of RO Lots 5, 6 and 7, the maximum allowable residential floor area shall be 2,575 square feet (exclusive of a maximum 800 square foot basement), calculated in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time a building permit is applied for on a particular RO Lot. (h) The single-family residences on RO Lots 5, 6 and 7 must each contain a minimum of three (3) bedrooms. (i) On each of Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11, development is limited to one-half of a residential duplex, to be built in a zero lot line configuration. The maximum 3 1111111111111111111111111111111.1111111111111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:350 SUB-AGRE DAVIS SILVI 4 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO allowable residential floor area for each duplex unit shall be 1,550 square feet (exclusive of a maximum 500 square foot basement), calculated in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time the AH Developer applies for a building permit for the duplexes, and each duplex unit shall be limited to a maximum of three (3) bedrooms. Both duplexes are to be constructed by the AH Developer in substantial compliance with the schematic architectural plans that are attached hereto as Exhibit C and made a part hereof by this reference, although the AH Developer shall have the right to submit to the City for approval alternative plans and elevations for the duplex units, pursuant to such process as may be determined by the Community Development Department. Lots 8-12 shall be condominiumized by the AH Developer to permit conveyance of the four (4) duplex units to individual owners, a Condominium Declaration shall be recorded in connection therewith, and the duplex units shall be deed restricted by the AH Developer to the Housing Authority's Category 4 guidelines in effect at the time the building permit is issued for the duplexes or to such other guidelines as may be mutually acceptable to the AH Developer, the Housing Authority, and City. 0) On Lot 12, development is limited to covered parking for the affordable housing units on Lots 8-11. A minimum of ten (10) covered spaces are to be provided within Lot 12. Use of the spaces shall be allocated as set forth in the Condominium Declaration for Lots 8-11. Lot 12 shall be a common element which is owned by the Condominium Association that will be formed to govern and administer the four (4) duplex units. (k) The maximum height of structures on Lots 2-12, and of any replacement structure on Lot 1, shall be 25 feet measured pursuant to the City's height regulations in effect at the time a building permit is applied for on a particular Lot. (1) Following recording of the Final Plat, Barbee Partners will enter into a Deed of Conservation Easement with Aspen Valley Land Trust covering the Conservation Parcel and the portion of Lot 1 lying outside the platted building envelope, and will convey the Conservation Parcel to the City of Aspen subject to the terms of the Deed of Conservation Easement, and will subsequently convey Lots 1 and 2 to Mary Barbee, and Lots 3-12 to John Barbee and Hallie Rugheimer ("Barbee/Rugheimer"). Following the negotiation and execution by Barbee/Rugheimer and the AH Developer of a mutually acceptable agreement for the sale of Lots 3-12 to the AH Developer, and the satisfaction of any conditions to closing contained therein, Barbee/Rugheimer will convey said Lots to the AH Developer subject to the terms and conditions of that agreement, the Final Plat, and this Subdivision/PUD Agreement. (m) With respect to RO Lot 7, John Barbee and/or any member of his immediate family (individually and collectively "John Barbee") shall have until July 1, 2000 in which to qualify for ownership thereof in accordance with the Affordable Housing Guidelines in effect at the time of qualification. If John 4 11111111111111111111111111111111.111111111111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 5 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Barbee qualifies within said time period, then the terms and conditions of the Barbee/Rugheimer Agreement with the AH Developer shall govern the ownership and development of RO Lot 7, subject always to the provisions of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement. (n) Residential structures on RO Lots 5-7 shall adhere to the Architectural Guidelines attached hereto as Exhibit D and made a part hereof by this reference. (0) On Lots 2,3 and 4, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued until (i) Certificates of Occupancy have been issued for the four (4) duplex units being built by the AH Developer on Lots 8-11, and (ii) RO Lots 5 and 6 have been conveyed by the AH Developer to qualified buyers subject to the condition that residences be built on such Lots within 12 months following the date of the conveyance. 2. Common Driveway, Private Access Easement, and Individual Drivewavs (a) A perpetual, non-exclusive easement and right-of-way has been dedicated on the Final Plat across Lot 12 for purposes of access from South Garmisch Street to Lots 5-12 (including the covered parking to be constructed on Lot 12) and for underground utility lines. The AH Developer shall be responsible for constructing the common driveway, as hereinafter provided. The maintenance, repair, snowplowing and further improvement of said common driveway shall be the responsibility ofthe duplex condominium association and each of RO Lots 5, 6 and 7 shall reimburse the Association for 20 percent of such costs within 30 days following receipt of a bill therefor from the Association. These cost allocations can be amended at any time by the written agreement of the condominium association and at least two (2) of the RO Lots. (b) A perpetual, non-exclusive private access easement 20 feet in width has been dedicated on the Final Plat along a portion of the common boundary between Lots 3 and 4 for purposes of access to Lots 3 and 4 from South Garmisch Street. Only one curb cut shall be allowed for said private access easement. The first Lot owner that wishes to improve the private access easement, and to install any necessary common utilities therein (adequately sized to serve both Lots), shall have the right to do so on behal f of both owners, and upon completion shall deliver a copy of the invoice for the work to the owner of the other Lot. Said other owner shall be obligated to reimburse the Lot owner that constructed the driveway and utilities within the private access easement for 50 percent of the invoiced cost thereof no later than 10 days after a building permit is issued for the construction of a residence on said other Lot owner's Lot. Following construction of said shared driveway, the costs and expenses of maintaining, repairing, improving and snowplowing the shared driveway and any common utilities installed in the easement shall be shared, allocated and paid fifty percent 5 11111111111111111111111111111111.111111111111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 6 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO (50%) by Lot 3 and fifty percent (50%) by Lot 4, provided that the owner that builds a residence last shall not be responsible for paying any share of such maintenance or snowplowing costs until from and after the issuance of a building permit for the construction of a residence on said owner's Lot. Subject to that proviso, if one Lot owner pays all of a maintenance or snowplowing bill, the other Lot owner shall be obligated to reimburse the paying Lot owner for fifty percent (50%) of said bill no later than 10 days after receiving a copy of the bill from the paying Lot owner. In the event of a delinquency in reimbursing for half of the cost of constructing the shared driveway or for half of any maintenance or snowplowing bill as required above, the delinquent sum shall bear interest at 18 percent per annum from the due date to the date of payment in full. The Lot owner who has paid the invoice or bill shall have the right to file a civil action against the delinquent owner in the Pitkin County courts for purposes of collecting the delinquent amount, plus accrued interest. The prevailing party in any such action shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in connection with such action. (c) Except as provided in subparagraph (b) above for the shared driveway that serves Lots 3 and 4, the owner of each of Lots 2-7 shall be responsible for constructing the driveway within the owner's Lot that serves the residence thereon. 3. Utilities. (a) Water, sewer, gas, electric, telephone and cable TV service will be available from existing (or replacement) lines in Garmisch Street, and from extensions thereof into Lot 12 by the AH Developer as hereinafter provided. (b) All individual utility service lines from these main lines to the residences shall be installed by the individual owners of Lots 2-7 at their expense, shall be buried underground, and shall be located within the individual driveways where feasible. Areas disturbed by the installation or maintenance of individual utility lines shall be restored and revegetated by and at the expense of the Lot owner causing the disturbance as promptly as possible following the disturbance. (c) The residences on RO Lots 5,6 and 7 and the units on Lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 shall contain interior sprinkler systems. (d) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers shall be installed within the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD and not in any public right-of-way. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. Easements must be provided for pedestals. Utility locations and easements are depicted on the Final Plat and/or the Utility Plan attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. Revisions to such utility locations and 6 111'111111111111'l lilli lili lili lili 111 lilli lili lili . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 7 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO easements must be delineated on an amended Final Plat or Utility Plan prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a Lot affected thereby. 4, Landscaping. (a) Lots 8-12 shall comply with the Landscape Plan attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. The AH Developer shall be responsible for implementing said Landscape Plan, as hereinafter provided. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the duplex units, the AH Developer shall also plant six street trees along the Garmisch Street right-of-way or the adjacent Midland Trail in locations approved by the City Forester considering the storage of plowed snow. These trees shall be three inches or greater in caliper if deciduous or at least six feet in height if coniferous. The duplex condominium association shall be responsible for maintaining such landscaping, (b) At the time a residence is constructed on any of Lots 2-7, and at the time of construction of a replacement residence on Lot 1, the Lot owner shall comply with and implement the attached Landscape Guidelines. Thereafter, the Lot owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of such landscaping. 5. Drainage. (a) At the time a building permit is applied for on Lots 2,3 or 4, or for a replacement residence on Lot 1, the Lot owner shall submit to the City Engineering Department a detailed storm water drainage plan for the Lot. (b) Lots 5-12 shall comply with the Drainage Plan attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. When the AH Developer develops Lots 8-12, it shall be responsible for implementing said Drainage Plan. At the time a residence is constructed on RO Lots 5,6 or 7, the individual Lot owner shall be responsible for implementing said Drainage Plan. (c) Before a building permit is issued for a particular Lot, the Lot owner shall erect adequate silt fencing to ensure that no sediment-loaded drainage will be leaving the property during construction. This fencing shall remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the Lot. 6. Air Oualitv. (a) Before any building permits are issued for development within the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, the AH Developer shall submit an air quality mitigation plan to the City Environmental Health Department for approval. (b) All development within the Barbee Family Subdivision /PUD must comply with the Environmental Health Department's woodburning stove/fireplace regulations in effect at the time of issuance of a building permit. 7 lili'1111111111111111111111111.lili'111111111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 8 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO (c) Before any building permits are issued for development on Lots 2- 12, and for any replacement residence on Lot 1, the individual Lot owner must submit a fugitive dust control plan to the Environmental Health Department for its review and approval. 7. Improvement Districts. On behalf of all present and future owners of Lots 1-12, Barbee Partners hereby agree to join any future improvement districts that may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements that benefit the Lots under an assessment formula. 8. School Land Dedication Fees. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a residence on each of Lots 2-7, the individual Lot owner shall pay to the City a cash payment in lieu of school land dedication, calculated in accordance.with the regulations in effect at the time of application for the building permit. The AH Developer shall make a similar cash payment to the City before a building permit is issued for the construction of the four (4) duplex units on Lots 8-11. For purposes of calculating the payment in lieu of school land dedication, the building permit application for a Lot shall include an appraisal of the Lot's free market value. The City reserves the right to concur with the fair market value reflected in the Lot owner's appraisal or to obtain another appraisal performed by a mutually acceptable real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the Lot owner. 9. Park Dedication Fee. The park dedication fees associated with the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD have been fully satisfied by the conveyance of a Conservation Easement for the benefit of Aspen Valley Land Trust covering the Conservation Easement Area shown on the Final Plat, and the conveyance of the Conservation Parcel to the City subject to the terms of the Deed of Conservation Easement. 10. Work in Public Right-of-Wav. A Lot owner must first receive the approval of the appropriate City Department before any work is performed in a public right-of-way. This requirement includes, without limitation, approval for a mail box and right-of-way landscaping from the City Streets Department. 11. Damage to Public Right-of-Way. A Lot owner shall repair any public right-of-way damaged during construction on the owner's Lot before a certificate of occupancy is issued therefor. 12. Construction Hours. Construction activity within the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction activity shall be permitted on Sunday. Further, any construction activity that exceeds the City's Noise Ordinance may result in a stop work order. 13. Exterior Lighting. All exterior lighting in the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, including street lights, shall be downcast, sharp cut-off, and not used 8 1 111111 lilli 111111 lilli lili lili lili 111 lilli lili lili â€¢ 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 9 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO to accentuate landscape or architectural features. No exterior up-lighting and no exterior floodlights are permitted. The foregoing limitations shall not apply to existing lighting on the existing residence on Lot 1. 14. Parking Management Plan. Before a building permit is issued for the duplex units, the AH Developer shall submit a Parking Management Plan for Planning Office staff review and approval. The Plan shall address the phasing, staging, and construction parking on the site. ARTICLE III A. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS 1. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any residence or duplex unit in Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer, as specified below, shall accomplish the following subdivision improvements, all as depicted on the Final PUD Development Plan, the Garmisch Street Plan and Profile, and the Master Utility Plan for Lots 5-12, attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. (a) Barbee Partners and the AH Developer shall together investigate the extent to which the 6-inch water main in South Garmisch Street between the South Garmisch Street/Durant Avenue intersection and the entrance to the common driveway in Lot 12 has already been replaced with an 8-inch water main, and shall replace any remaining 6-inch main with an 8-inch ductile iron water main. The cost of said investigation and of any necessary new 8-inch main shall be paid fifty percent (50%) by Barbee Partners and fifty percent (50%) by the AH Developer. (b) The AH Developer shall extend a new water main from South Garmisch Street into Lot 12 for a distance of approximately 150 feet, and shall also install a new fire hydrant within Lot 12, to provide service to the seven dwelling units to be located on Lots 5-11, all as depicted on the Utility Plan attached to and recorded as a part of the Final Plat. (c) The AH Developer shall construct a new 8-inch sewer extension from the existing 8-inch sewer line in South Garmisch Street into Lot 12, and shall also extend electric primary, telephone and cable TV lines from the existing lines in South Garmisch Street into Lot 12, to provide service to the seven dwelling units to be located on Lots 5-11. (d) Barbee Partners and the AH Developer shall together construct a sidewalk, curb and gutter, and a 5-foot wide landscaped strip, along the frontage of Lots 2, 3, 4, 12 and 11 on South Garmisch Street. The cost thereof shall be paid based on street frontage as described in attached Exhibit E, as referenced below. 9 1111111 lilli 111111111111111 lili lili 111 llilli 111 lili . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB -:IGRE DAVIS SILVI 10 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO (e) The AH Developer shall construct the common driveway within and across Lot 12 from South Garmisch Street to the northerly edge of the subdivision, and shall also install a new street light at the South Garmisch Street/common driveway intersection. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. (f) The AH Developer shall construct a stop sign at the exit of the Lot 12 common driveway onto South Garmisch Street. 2. A construction schedule for the above-described improvements shall be submitted to the City Engineering Department at the same time that the financial guarantees described in Section B below are provided, 3. The current estimated cost of the subdivision improvements described in Paragraph 1 above, as more specifically set forth in a letter from Jay W. Hammond of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. to Sunny Vann dated November 18, 1998, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit E and made a part hereof by this reference, and as approved by the City Engineer, is $163,657.00. Barbee Partners' aggregate share of that cost is $22,352.00, and the AH Developer's share of that cost is $141,305.00. If John Barbee qualifies for ownership of RO Lot 7, he shall reimburse the AH Developer for one-seventh of the AH Developer's out-of-pocket cost of constructing the subdivision improvements described in Paragraph 1 above no later than 30 days following the expiration of John Barbee's one (1) year qualification period described in Article II(1)(m) above and the AH Developer's delivery to John Barbee of a written invoice summarizing such costs. 4. The AH Developer shall complete the landscaping of Lots 8-12 in accordance with the Landscape Plan attached to the Final Plat no later than six (6) months following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the duplex units. Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer, as the case may be, shall have the right to plant additional native vegetation within Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, as they may consider appropriate from time to time, without further approvals being required. 5. The current estimated cost of implementing the Landscape Plan for Lots 8- 12 and of maintaining said landscaping for a period of two (2) years after installation, as more specifically set forth in a letter from Thomas G. Stevens of The Stevens Group, Inc. to Sunny Vann dated December 7, 1998, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit F and made a part hereof by this reference, and as approved by the City Engineer, is $26,960.00. One hundred twenty-five percent (125%) of that cost amounts to $33,700.00. B. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES In order to ensure construction and installation of the subdivision and landscaping improvements described in Section A above, and to guarantee 100 percent of the current estimated cost of the subdivision improvements and 125 percent of the current estimated 10 1111111 lilli 111111 lilli lili 1111.111111111111111 lili â€¢ 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 11 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO cost of the landscaping improvements (including 2 years of maintenance thereof), Barbee Partners shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit from a financially responsible lender in the amount of $22,352.00, and the AH Developer shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit from a financially responsible lender in the amount of $175,005.00. If so provided in the Lot purchase agreement between them, the AH Developer may assume the Barbee Partners' share of the responsibility for providing these financial assurances. Said guarantees shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of the first residential structure in Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and the City Manager, and shall each give the City the unconditional right, upon default by Barbee Partners or the AH Developer, as the case may be, to withdraw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully complete and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any outstanding bills for work done thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty amount to be applied first to additional administrative or legal costs associated with any such default and the repair of any deterioration in improvements already constructed before the unused remainder, if any, of such guaranty is released to Barbee Partners or the AH Developer, as the case may be. Provided, however, that Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer shall be given fourteen (14) days written notice of default prior to the City's ability to make a call under a letter of credit and further provided that delays or other problems resulting from acts of God or other events beyond the control of Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer shall not constitute a default hereunder so long as a good faith effort is being made to remedy the problem and the problem is in fact resolved within a reasonable period of time following its occurrence. As portions of the improvements required are completed, the City Engineer shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he shall authorize the release of the agreed estimated cost for that portion of the improvements; provided, however, that ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost shall be withheld until all proposed improvements are completed and approved by the City Engineer, and with respect to landscaping improvements, an additional twenty-five percent (25%) of the estimated cost thereof shall be retained until the landscaping improvements have been maintained in a satisfactory condition for two (2) years. It is the express understanding of the parties that the procedure set forth in Section C below pertaining to the procedure for default and amendment of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall not be required with respect to the enforcement and implementation of these financial assurances and guarantees to be provided by Barbee Partners and the AH Developer as set forth above. C. NON-COMPLIANCE AND REOUEST FOR AMENDMENTS OR EXTENSIONS BY BARBEE PARTNERS OR THE AH DEVELOPER In the event that the City Council determines that Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer are not acting in substantial compliance with the terms of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement, the City Council shall notify the offending owner in writing specifying the alleged non-compliance and asking that said owner remedy the alleged non-compliance within such reasonable time as the City Council may determine, but not 11 111'11111111mill'1111111111111.111111'111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 12 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO less than 30 days. If the City Council determines that said owner has not complied within such time, the City Council may issue and serve upon the owner a written order specifying the alleged non-compliance and requiring the owner to remedy the same within thirty (30) days. Within twenty (20) days of the receipt of such order, the owner may file with the City Council either a notice advising the City Council that it is in compliance or a written petition requesting a hearing to determine any one or both of the following matters: (a) Whether the alleged non-compliance exists or did exist, or (b) Whether a variance, extension of time or amendment to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement should be granted with respect to any such non- compliance which is determined to exist. Upon the receipt of such petition, the City Council shall promptly schedule a hearing to consider the matters set forth in the order of non-compliance and in the petition. The hearing shall be convened and conducted pursuant to the procedures normally established by the City Council for other hearings. If the City Council determines by a preponderance of the evidence that a non-compliance exists which has not been remedied, it may issue such orders as may be appropriate; provided, however, no order terminating any approval previously granted by the City Council shall be issued without a finding of the City Council that substantial evidence warrants such action and affording the owner a reasonable time to remedy such non-compliance. A final determination of non-compliance which has not been remedied or for which no variance has been granted may, at the option of the City Council, and upon written notice to the owner, terminate any of such approvals which are reasonably related to the requirement(s) with which owner has failed to comply. Alternatively, the City Council may grant such variances, extensions of time or amendments to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement as it may deem appropriate under the circumstances, In addition to the foregoing, Barbee Partners and/or the AH Developer or their respective successors or assigns may, on their own initiative, petition the City Council for a variance, an amendment to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement or an extension of one or more of the time periods required for performance hereunder. The City Council may grant such variances, amendments to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement, or extensions of time as it may deem appropriate under the circumstances. The parties expressly acknowledge and agree that the City Council shall not unreasonably refuse to extend the time periods for performance if the owner demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that the reasons for the delay(s) which necessitate said extension(s) are beyond the control of the owner, despite good faith efforts on its part to perform in a timely manner. D. GENERAL PROVISIONS 12 111'11111111111111 lilli lili lilli.lilli 111111111 lili . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 13 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 6, The provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of Barbee Partners and the AH Developer and City and their respective successors and assigns. 7. This Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall be subject to and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. 8, If any of the provisions of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement or any paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or section or the application thereof in any circumstance is invalidated, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement, and the application of any such provision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or section in any other circumstance shall not be affected thereby. 9. This Subdivision/PUD Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties hereto with respect to the transactions contemplated hereunder, and except as otherwise specifically provided herein, may be altered or amended from time to time only by written instruments executed by all parties hereto that are affected by the proposed amendment. 10. Numerical and title headings contained in this Subdivision/PUD Agreement are for convenience only, and shall not be deemed determinative of the substance contained herein. As used herein, where the context requires, the use of the singular shall include the plural and the use of any gender shall include all genders. 11. Upon execution of this Subdivision/PUD Agreement by all parties hereto, City agrees to approve and execute the Final Plat for Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD, and to accept the same for recordation in the office of the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County, Colorado, upon payment of the recordation fee by the owners. 12. Notices to be given to the parties to this Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall be considered to be given if hand delivered or if deposited in the United States Mail to the parties by registered or certified mail at the addresses indicated below, or such other addresses as may be substituted upon written notice by the parties or their successors or assigns: City of Aspen City Manager 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Barbee Partners c/o Hallie I~,Rugheimer 1400 Story,Kill Road Bozeman, MT 59715 13 111111111111111111111111111111.11111111111111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 14 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO With a copy to: Arthur C. Daily, Esq. Holland & Hart LLP 600 East Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 13. The terms, conditions, provisions and obligations herein contained shall be deemed covenants that run with and burden the real property more particularly described herein and any and all owners thereof, their successors, grantees or assigns, and further shall inure to the benefit of and be specifically enforceable by or against the parties hereto, their successors, grantees or assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year first above written. CITY: City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corporation . 1- .\ ~ Mayor fac*Â»Â«,44Â»1 Kathryn S. ]~311, Cify Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 31 / fla etihl , 2 1 5l,1 John Wercellfet, City Attorney 14 11111111111111111111111111111.111111111111111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 15 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 1 6 7/(ALLed \ , t#kj, BARBEE PARTNERS: Mary K. Ba,64 U f7Â»met_, JolÂ® W. Barb~ee by Hallie ~[gheimer as 'his Attorney-in-Fact U -40112 ..R#6Â£.4.u Ha~fie B. Rugheimer ~ 15 1111111111111111111111111111111.111111111111111111 . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 16 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this C~-4 day of ~)2(e./y~60 ' 1999, by 12*Â£*la- 42- Act'.12#s Mayor and Kathryn S. Koch as City Clerk of the City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corporation. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: -7. // 2 6-+1 1 / 1 1 8 Ch 0 \..ysÂ« jfla yf-~0â‚¬34.1 CÂ£-i_ 1 Notary PubUâ‚¬ .../. /4 STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF ~dkca } ss. ' ,~ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this &Citt day of ~~ariotiikÂ£r , 1999, by Mary K. Barbee. 7 . 071,1 p ..... : D- . Witness my hand and official seal. . Mycommission expires: &)912*:g *jablt O. *p,~z Notkry'Public STATE OF 24640 ) SS. COUNTY OF ~4<Ch ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this (c\#, day of (~hk\)Â«nber , 1999, by John W. Barbee by Hallie B. Rugheimer as his Attorney-in-Fact. : , ,.Â· *Witness. my hand and official seal. i ' i +*My commission expires: 6~5~ .Dcâ‚¬1 -3Â»Â« 0. (3zpUTE 5 L, cOL , NotaÂ«Public 16 111111111111111111 lilli lili 1111.111111111111111 lili . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 17 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO STATE OF ClemA~ _) SS. COUNTY OF R4U11 ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this \91& day of ~.1 ~(1\Jer~Jer- , 1999, by Hallie B. Rugheimer. Witness my hand and official seal. .:'b'.:Â·: My commission expires: 4 19 1.Dcul . 1 . 7 -1 -- 141432*. Notary Public 'Â¢ff,~Â¢11/ ASPEN:0024631.09 17 .. EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION THAT PART OF LOT 1 OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER oF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST, oF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE DIAGRAM CERTIFIED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE, JANUARY 4, 1896 AS ATTACHED TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE SURVEY OF SAID TOWNSHIP AND RANGE APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL' S OFFICE MARCH 31, 1891, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT ONE, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE EAST ONE-SIXTEENTH CORNER SECTIONS 12 AND 13; THENCE S 8945'56" E ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 342.86 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE FORMER RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD COMPANY: THENCE S 4027'42" E ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 482.57 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SOUTH GARMISCH STREET; THENCE S 14Â°50'49" W ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 242.01 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 2 OF INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN BOOK 230 AT PAGE 496 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE S 3947'01" E 87.07 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT; THENCE S 14'50'49" W 115.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 3, BLOCK 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; THENCE S 75~09' 11" E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7 8 OF SAID BLOCK 11; THENCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 S 14*50'49" 1 20.50 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 13 OF -JZ SAID BLOCK 11, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN BOOK 206 AT PAGE 334 OF THE PITKIN ....0 --Z COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PROPERTY - ar J. DESCRIBED IN BOOK 206 AT PAGE 334 THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: ii 4. LU a. 1) N 75'09'11" 1 31.25 FEET lit -00 2) S 14'50'49" 1 78.00 FEET 3) S 03'55'43" W 1 64.99 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT -me 20, SAID BLOCK 11; -MZ THENCE S 14-50'49" 17 ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 210.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 11; THENCE -M . S 75'09'11" E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 150.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTER CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 11, SAID CORNER ALSO ==81 Z BEING A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ASPEN STREET; =91 4 THENCE LEAVING THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 11 S 14Â°50'49" W ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID ASPEN STREET 14.67 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY UNE OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE S 89~51'40" W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 804.58 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE -0 NORTHEAST ONE-SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SECTION 13; THENCE N 00-15'47" E ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 108.89 FEET TO A POINT ON LINE 1-4 OF THE LITTLE MACK LOAD CLAIM, UNITED STATES MINERAL SURVEY NO. 3956 AS PATENTED IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 212 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE N 14~57'52" E ALONG THE LINE 1-4 OF SAID LOAD CLAIM 707.96 FEET TO CORNER #4 OF SAID LOAD CLAIM; THENCE N 75Â°06'16" N ALONG THE LINE 4-3 OF SAID LOAD CLAIM 185.69 FEET TO THE IFESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE LEAVING THE LINE 4-3 OF SAID LOAD CLAIM N 00~15'47" E ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 476.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL OF LAND CONTAINING 17.695 ACRES MORE OR LESS. 2 20Â£8Â£ EXHIBIT B ~ 8 JZ BARBEE FAMILY SUBDIVISION -52 LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES -In 0 Prepared December 7, 1998 -0.- - LU 0- -ac -0 0 The following landscape guidelines shall apply to lots 2,3,4,5,6, and 7 of the Barbee -De Family Subdivision. The site currently consists of native grasses, aspen, spruce, 2 -U) Z serviceberry and sage. As such, these plant materials should be used to the greatest -0/ 0 extent possible. -Re General Intent ..mz -2 d It is the intent ofthis document to provide a guideline for landscaping that will emphasize -\â‚¬0 the use of native material found on the Barbee Family Subdivision site and to discourage the use of non native material. This will provide for a continuity among properties --IN whether they are deed restricted or free market. As such, this document applies to both - N â‚¬9 free market lots as well as deed restricted lots and is intended to provide for a level of ~ -M O quality and not to limit creativity. -I- Plant Material The following plant material is encouraged for use within the landscape plans for the homes within the Barbee Family Subdivision. Trees Aspen Spruce Crab Apple Canada Red Cherry Additional native trees Shrubs Serviceberry Scrub oak Potentilla Common Lilac Additional native shrubs Grasses Bluegrass Sod Fescue lawn mix Native grass mix for re vegetation Irrigation Alllandscape areas shall receive irrigation. Those areas within lawn shall receive permanent underground, automatic systems. Those areas within native grass areas should receive a temporary system consisting of surface piping, spray heads for grass areas and drip emitters for trees and shrubs and automated, clocked valves. The temporary system 111111111111111111 lilli lili lili.11111111111111 lili . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB-AGRE DAVIS SILVI 20 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO should be left in place for a minimum of two years. After this two year period, the system can be dismantled, or at the owners discretion be left in place for use during drought periods. Topsoil, Surface Preparation All topsoil encountered during excavation ofthe home and improvements shall be stockpiled at an appropriate location on the lot for re use. Topsoil should be screened before re use, A minimum of four inches oftopsoil should be placed on the surface and shall be hand racked to remove any material, such as rocks, greater than four inches in diameter in size. Grading Positive drainage should be provided around all structures. This should be graded at a minimum of 3%. All drainage created by site improvements shall be contained on site by the use of drywells. Surface drainage currently experienced on site that is not disturbed is - acceptable as it is considered historic. No drainage shall be allowed off site that is not considered historic. In areas of steep grade, no un retained grade shall exceed 2:1 slope. Those grades of 2:1 slope shall receive an erosion control net and must be seeded within the first growing season. Once the seed has established itself, the netting must be removed. All areas that cannot meet 2: 1 slope must be mechanically retained. Landscape Lighting Landscape lighting should be minimal. When used, only downcast fixtures should be used. Lighting should only be used to provide safety when required and not to call attention to landscape features. Timing ofLandscape Improvements All construction disturbance must be repaired within the first growing season after completion of construction ofthe home. Minimum Improvements While it is recognized that landscaping may take place over several years, at a minimum, all site grading and drainage, topsoil, irrigation and sod/seeding must be completed within the first growing season after construction of the home. .. EXHIBIT C 1111111 lilli mi lilli lili lili 111111111111111111 li llia 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 21 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 0 0 0800 1 4 1 6.1 1 1 Cy 2- 1 W. : 44 REL--1 %47% Aw 1 -2,=-22 ,< C - rA 9 V (33 -1MI- Fil T eli -- - U 3 6, i 69 1 I \ 0 *11 4 14-9. I -- h 4 - 4 -7- k 5 A A----- R 11 11 L.91) r 1----. -- - 10 4 , 1, , 1 1 91 6 1 4/01 1 0 W (9 -ITT----r Hall 5 0 â‚¬t ,+ 32,2,2LUM 1 6 44 33 64 Ott 9161\A 909 6 1% wte 111111111111111111 lilli 111111.11111111111111111 lili . 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 22 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO I\J 8 0 909 1, $ 1 1 ~ 0-,04-If . I . . . . , I 0-'t' '9/,9 10.,9 Ir /40;S f 1 - , O 0 50~21 ' 019/ I 1 + I (tj.... r-1 r--~-1 1 1 \37 M 0 -~-iy- 44 k lit - "Â»-4-El ~3931 GUEE I< 1 14 1 1 + 1 1% k TT L 1-2 4 1 3 % f A- '< *11 9 / i A ---IE 31---1 7--9 L__IQ.Qi___1 Â¢ El J L ._ Ir. _U K L_ i t-- 24 - I if-1- h m 1 1- ......-.4---1 .-Q- -0 4 .r \23. . -t!.1 ' 1 ..0, Q.' 4% fLo JL~ A .1 1\- k X Â¥ 43 KIL-< 1 1 4 #w JA n & 4\%9 lili , .01% 161 .0 -001 2 4 "058 ' m E 2 4 + 4% , %1 1,0 -89 1 El All Nl V'* -1&,r))2 13 4 6646 6 ricih \ -Ezy I 11 Â£1\ 4,979â‚¬ L. -- 024 Lzmaillu- m!15* 0_ _i- 2881. 074'UMN ~ Â£ 3 - 1 7 1 4 0 > 4 - ILl' 4M=Â·M i. 34 (i~ 4 Â® ~~~ Â® uJ (33 ~~~ 4'~tE 7Â¥2 1 - - 1-L-23 $ I M I -- --. Â·171-4, 1.1 - I - - 7117/11-4.. .A till . 1 7-70,j, NORTH ELE-VAT'ON Trrp. ;I ya. i 11 -0,1 7>72 46837 ELEVATION ~ ,Â·--~Fe" St'-O" -- --- BARB,EE /54*f /29 - . (t (.33 (23 t,98 0 7 16/ON AFF'2ADABLE -10 Ue, N 4 + M .-773 rill'll Li%-r-bl Il l %/% Â«\ \\ I lili 111 201~t 1 1 /'f. h 9 8 1 - -1- 111 - +46-Hz'.11 vL, UF~ ~ l_ - - fea*-CY,5*EX lilli 1 ~--(26" P 24=SREf ~ /11 1 11 -32\7 /-555 -7 447 / \1 3 1--- --- -1 i ' 947 ' N:X 2'702.4 Z. 7 -24.- 4' 0-9 01Â»0 .,9 T L // 45 4/1/A# 7&2d2#5 - ' 1|111 21 1_341 232> ,-2- ~ 2 -1 /73% Â© " h tly- Alk-- 'Cl/: 1 dr 1 -- -:- - TWI - r-Tm .1.--- -- - -- . t- -6 1 i -7:h- 77,2 25467 .ELE 14*7221' TYPICAL %09-,74 ELEVATIO N LA-rez. M 67@R s - -ELE.C. veÂ·r-EKS , 42-k toolo kÂ«6Â£ 316 - / | GAS ~30-Tba , p.-M.. .28" s 4 5 01 ~ 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 23 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO .. 8 EXHIBIT D - Barbee Affordable Housing ->i JZ Dec. 3, 1998 -4.1 BARBEE LOTS 5,6, & 7 ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES I> - =a Je - W 0- lit A. Intent -0 0 -90 Architectural expression is encouraged in conjunction with adherence to simple -,0 and basic criteria for sound architectural practice and design. Through choice of -MZ naturally occurring materials and colors, and by understanding the scale -aÂ® relationships between the building sites and the site as a whole, sensitive and --0 harmonious architecture can be developed. --0 @.Stz Issues to be considered in the architectural design include form and massing, -\ CD materials, roofs, chimneys, windows, walls, foundations, lighting, decks and patios --0 and the following criteria are required to the extent that they do not conflict with -.i- N any City of Aspen ordinances. - (9 -0 4- --0 B. Review - A Any new structure must be approved by the project's Architectural Design Review Committee prior to that structurek submission for application for a Building Permit. This committee is to be comprised of three members in any combination of existing homeowners or APEHI directors. Application for design approval by the committee of any new structure must be submitted to APEHI 31 davs in advance of the intended application for Building Permit. C. Form and Massing 1, Simple shapes are best, however, 'A' frame, domes or freeform structures are not permitted. 2. Shapes that are referential to the adjacent duplexes on Lots 1-4 are most desirable. D. Materials Materials chosen for the architecture should strive to make the building appear most compatible and integrated with the site and the duplexes. Color and texture should be carefully considered. Material choices should be kept to a minimum and emphasize a 'less-is-more' approach. Bright or reflective surfaces are discouraged. E. Roofs 1. Symmetrical gable roofs are preferred. 2. Flat roofs that are small in size may be used. 3. Gable or shed type dormers are preferred. 4. Any solar collectors should lie flat onto pitched roofs. 5. Skylights are not recommended. 6. Rooftop vents, equipment, antennae, etc. shall be confined within the roof or chimney volumes to the extent possible. 7. In general roof ornaments like scroll work or decorative elements are discouraged. Z Z â‚¬8ED .. page two; 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 25 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO F. Windows Reflective or mirrored window materials are unacceptable. G. Walls Stone, wood and natural cement stucco sidings are encouraged, however the use of stone and stucco as a single material is discoura-ged. H. Foundations Foundations should follow the contour of the site and exposed concrete foundation walls should be covered with an appropriate architectural finish material. I. Color Palette 1. Exterior wall colors should harmonize with the site and surrounding buildings. Accent colors on wall surfaces are acceptable if they are confined to entries and interior or recessed type spaces. 2. The predominant tone should tend toward warm, earthy hues of browns, dark greens, and grays. J. Lighting The objective is to provide night lighting discreetly, illuminating only what is needed for safety and convenience. Shielded type lights are preferred. K. Decks Decks should be extensions of the architecture while responding to the land form, Care should be taken to minimize any exposed undersides of decks. L. Landscaping 1. The exterior areas should be left in a natural a condition and as much of the existing scrub oak should be preserved as possible. 2. Issues to be considered in the landscape design include fencing, paving, irrigation, signage, grading, retention, erosion control, planting and revegetation. .. EltGUAEEM St,IVEYORS 6GM (970) 925Â·672 .0.2.1 RO. Box 2155 FAX (970) 925Â·4157 GOROCO,MYM --- Aspen, CO 81612 November 14 1998 Exhibit E Mr. Sunny Vann VANN ASSOCIATES LLC 230 East Hopldns Ave. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Aspen, CO. 81811 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 26 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO RE: Barbee Familv Prooerlv SubdMsion Improvements Agreement Infrastructure Cost Estimates Dear Sunny: This letter and attachments comprise a cost estimate and cost allocation schedule for public improvements at the Barbee property freemarket and affordable housing project on South - Garmisch Street in Aspen, Colorado. The Barbee parcel b the subject of a pending Subdivision / PUD application with the City of Aspen and this information will be incorporated Into the Subdivision Improvements Agreement for the propedy. Introduction The Barbee property comprises Lots 1 through 9 of Block 5 of the Eames Addition to tile Original Aspen Townsite, Lots 1 and 2 of Block ll of the Earnes Addition as wellasametes and bounds description totalling approximately 17.67 acres. Ofthe total 17.67 acres, 10.83 acres is located in the City 01 Aspen and 6.84 acres remains in Akin County. The property currently includes an existing residence addressed at 601 South Garmisch Street as well as a couple of small sheds and outbuildings. The owner of the parcel has submitted an application to the City of Aspen for Subdivision and Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval to create a mixed freemarket and affordable housing project The conceptual development program indudes four freemarket lots including one for the existing home as wen as the creation of three lots for single family resident- occupied (Fl.0.) attordable housing units and four lots for two duplex category 4 affordable housing units. infrastruch.,re Requiremerrts Attached are calculation sheets regarding lhe pubUc infrastructure requirements of the Barbee proposal. Included are improvements w~hin the public Itt*-of-way of South Garmisch Street including sidewalk, curb and gutter, landscaping, the allordable housing site entry, a possible water line replacement, pavement repair and a streellight In addition to the public right-of-way improvements, common improvements of a public nature will be required to construct the homes within the affordable housing site. I have provided igures forlhe possible replacement of an existing 6 inch diameter cast iron water main with an 8 inch diameter ductile iron water line in South Garmisch Street One of the -- . 111111111111 mi 1.111111111111111111111111111' lili 27 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 438302 12/06/1999 11:359 SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI - November 18,1998 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 2 approval conditions required by the City of Aspen Water Department for the Barbee Family Subdivision / PUD project was that the existing, older cast Iron water main be replaced from the intersection of South Garmisch Street and Durant Avenue to the vicinity of the Allordable Housing lot entry (about 90 feet). More recent conversations with the City staff Indicate that the water line south oi Durant may already have been replaced to approximately mid-block (south of the AH entry) with a ductile line but there appears to be some uncertainty regarding exactly how much of the line has been replaced. As I understand the City's requirements right now, the Barbee project istoexcavateor'pothole"the water main inlhe vicinity ofthe AH entry lo verify whether the line is older cast iron or newer ductile iron. If it is the older material, the replacement would be required down to Durant Avenue (or to where existing ductile iron is encountered). Cost Anoc.mon On pages 2 and 3 of lhe calculation sheets, I have endeavored 10 allocate the public improvement costs among Lots 2, 3 and 4 of the freemarket parcels and the affordable housing parcel On page 2 you will see a percentage allocation of the frontage distances with and without the AH entry conslruction. As an example, the affordable housing parcel would not be responsible lor the frontage cost of the landscaping component where their entry is located (schedule '81- They would, however, be responsible for prep work and asphalt repair in the entry area in a manner comparable to the other frontages (schedule =Al. I have put the streetlight at the AH erm and the entry itself entirely under the AH parcel For the water line, there isn't as much of a frontage component yet it does improve public infrastructure to the benefit of al! the Barbee lots. 1 have allocated the Garmisch water line replacement (which may or may not be needed) 50% to the AH parcel and 50% to all three freemarket lots. Utility-related improvements specific to the development of the AH parcel are allocated to that portion of the project South Garmisch Improvements: Lot 2 . . . . . . ~ . $ 6,63200 Lot 3 . . . . . . . $ 7,860.00 Lot 4 . . . . . . . $ 7,860.00 AH parcel . . , S 24.485.00 Total, South Garmisch ROW: . . . $ 46,837.00 AH Parcel Infrastructure: . $116,820.00 Total public cost . . $164657.00 .. 1111111 lilli 11111111111 lili lilli 11111111111111111111 lili 438302 12/06/1999 11:359 SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 28 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO November 18,1998 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 3 I hope these figures are helpful and suffident for submission to the City in preparing the SIA for the Barbee Family Subdivision / PUD. Feel free to contact me if I may provide additional information or detail. Vegy truly yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. CS~el lo. 42rzEZE- l,4 w. Hammond, P.E Principal, Aspen Office Jvlk .C71 .. 1 ...1 . ..,. , ..... ... ; 1 . 1 . .. ..1. i... 1.: N : ... ; 1 ~ i b . ... ..:..... O .. '...-... 7 S . . 1 ... . Gwam K * .31. 23 Cp * Â· :mi; = . 1 age C U.. 1 . 1 . 1 ... I ..: W Â£&02 0. . . . .. . . .. . -**<-0 0-0 -'-p---4/37- 1- 5..f.-6 -C 4 -1-.-:. #88-10 m 3 Â· 61: 6 ' p- m ..... ...96 ..!Â».7..:...... .... ~Bral$ 0 ' Â· : 1-\V # U : 1 ; 1 : ..1 1 : : .I S L.... t i. ' 13 i_ i.-* t.... .-I --1 .- . E-Â§ 2 t U' . -, 1 . 0 . I . ... I. .... Â¤ 3o Â· Â» ... . :I Â·- .' / O I . .-- ... .. - ....1 -: ..,--4.1.-1, -- ...f~, " .4- -m--: ... -.1-'~Â·-~-u Z r -. . I . 1 .. .- -1 ... .- .... -0.-- - . .. - I I . I --.4.-4- ... --- 22=-, = 1 0: . 233 p MQ 1) EMBE-20 1 Â· Â·Â·1 1 -P i 65: . 61 $.-. EmEN / . 1 P. ..1 -D U r- r i % 4-rt . 1 . ...-I .-. '-' I : I I ... . . I. er. V. . . 0 â€¢ 4 2- 6 LI pi-*: 5 - - ... giÂ§i + :rÂ· CD 4. i -. 1, . :". i .-t Â· 1 )~. .. . 74- i .-1 7- -I WA - I 1 I- ~ - -34 - I rl 7. .P.. .:, ' 111-3 . 0. gjfÂ® r tr\ 1. . t -.0 10 e - 9.:Â· i~ir=.Â·Â·Â·-~,Â·fÂ·~ R-: ~-nr 3- - C 0 - r -~~B"-7 t~ - - -~*- I . R . ~ ~r* , ~_ i -_4 - - . 4 . i. ... A , 11 v.r: 44 44 4, f V....4 4, Â· â€¢ 1 â€¢ â€¢ -u , A Ir- N r ./ * t ., I 9. U .6 -.- 6\....Di .. *St ......â€ž.... . tl 1 0 Â·0 8 8.81 Â· 414Â· Â· ~8 9 . -0 . .... 0- 0 * k W 1, Â· 71 In b b .14 . It Ul r -Il i 00 Â¥F :Mil 4 3 . .. 1 . . ... I. I . 0.. . U 0 D ...... 1...,4... ..1.. .1.-9 ..; ... 11...:.1. Â·Â· 1 ..1 = I Illill Ilill ililll lilli lili lili Illillil Ill mil Il lili 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 29 of 32 R 160.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ._2â€¢rULâ€¢=8&04Â· I 't=1 S.}A. DATE 11- 11 - 99! la .. jeLifbR.Ew SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. SHEETIOn L 0,1 118 W. 6th St. Suite 200 P.O. Box 2155 - Glenwood Splings. CO 81601 Aspen, CO 81612 (970) 945-1004 (970) 925-6727 CALCUIATED 8Y -~ DATE 11 17Â· 98 FAX (970) 945-5948 FAX (970) 925-4157 CDIECKED RV OATE â„¢tat F 10.. ti>eâ€¢.,ir -Plojâ€¢~ 14421. At'l :wle, * E -Â·~- :Â· i Â·Â·-Â· -~.. ~TE. :4 -01 GarÂ®,bel L :L,01>: 6/500~ ' 1...i iÂ·Flâ€¢+4ct: Li.â‚¬A Â¢39 6,500: i Ptl,ogi .,j- , .: i ,; ;. . i : 1 %:tv 6 144 Li K G Â¥*(5 . 6,306 ' . .. 1 . 1 . . : ..44 19, Soo: 6 : 1 . ' 1 /.7t 1 .. 1 . . 1 1 Â·Â·.! 1 -1 ..' .1 .. .. . I I â€¢ I. -.1 J 1 2..q +25 Â· LM 26 '*6/4-~, 1. i ..4!*fâ€¢,266 1 .. .. 1 -1 T.1 .... - 0 .."A.. .ibi.e.lhe;406 1 1 M "0,006.,. .., ... 1 1 .. .l: Â·Â·Â·'Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· i ---Â· .i.Â· ,Poll.6.#eb., 4 tag . *e0 ..~-: .1162Â·53 . i 1.: ,Â·:'i Â·1â€¢ Â· 1 ' . 1 . i.. i .Â·:Â· Â· Â· i Â·Â·r*.:FL?,4o i. i..:._ . . ..... . . I -1.--4..11Â«. i l -. ..::1 ~ ...L_L.. >te d.-4'..j-41-j#fi 1 li i , 1 -1 ... ..1 .1. 1 1.1 .. 1 1 . . .. 1 6. 1 1 .3661044. 1 ... 1* rsu, %40 I i lil .1., :li .]...#64,~HtÂ·:.Bl-(C.4d.Â¥6lj6;w~f ! (2 L;5>;I: ,;~~ ~ ~14.zr;,i*7<0 2 ~ r .. : 1 . : 1 -- rÂ·-Â· v ; * < -. 1:i.:'Â· .1. .1 1. 1,11 ; 1 . 1 i I . . . . . ...:i.:.:...1 . 1 : *. f.63'*04 1.:..: 0 Â·iliâ€¢Â· ,1 Â· .! 1-0 ,. i.; i I , . i . if: 1 .1 it .1 ...!i 1 1 . t~-Â£461*-,SAA,144: 1.-Â·... Li -6 1 -JZ : Â· 1 Â· -IMO 1 ....-0 . 1 1 1 ; 1 " i i! i 1-A, ..{.Fibâ€ž+Aies. AL_lâ€¢j : I i 1 , i 10 . 1 1 1 .1 ... 01- U.1 0= 1 . I ./ -. 1Â· Â·;Â·Â·, .- a: . ee L.. i . 1 .... 00 . -Ly f i. 2 4.416.64. N; 1 551 ZZE .; 1-i . 1. . . ' 1 ... A B : 2 951 19:. .ug' 4/4 4447 611~ - : . i'(Ri~, 1-..~ .2.1~ - . ==0) e a. ..=21 ....... ... I I .-=0 ' 1 i.1.Â· .. . t . . . . Ii.-N ... 1 ... : 1.e . . =22 . ... t -M O 1. i.! .il ..ge .. 1 . .: ... 1111111111'lilli ~ 0~ 1 ~ '09I &1 .. JOR-396<6..0 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. SHEET NO 3 0,1 118 W. 6th St. Suite 200 P.O. Box 2155 Glenwood Sp,ines, CO 81601 Aspen. CO 81612 CALCULATED RY <~5* nan: 11 -1% Â·98 (970) 945-1004 (970) 925-6727 FAX 870) 945-5948 FAX (970) 9254157 0\Erâ€¢,m W. PATE â€¢trat F 007. Eir/C#4 5â€¢ck,4.Â© :C~p r *4 1'*4 6.1,â‚¬3. Lot L Lot 1 Lit 4 A4 1,1 91 1'515- 1575- 1953. 2, 1,801 1111 1-319 ll.33 3. 1 419 4. /54 13% 13% 42 1 5. i ele :320 1%10 23:{0 G. 970 150 7 SO 930 7. -P Zoo 1 (50 -50) 2.6 Go ~ 2660 Z.660 19io- L 9. 4# 30,216 4 Z 10 A. 13,160 1 it. AÂ» 67,006 11 1 1 *11 5,350 :5 Te-TAus * 6, (031 1.11$00 6 7,%46 *14{,sal AN sker t e# &101,3 Re,u) ir-Tr. = 4 24,4%5- C.Â£4â‚¬-6 1 -S> .. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 438302 12/06/1999 11:35A SUB AGRE DAVIS SILVI 31 of 32 R 160 .00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ' 10>>1$0 1.-92& 13'.0.=& .. 0 Exhibit F 0 -00 'IHE STEVENS GROUP -0 - M INCORPORATED --Z ->â€¢4 - 0/ X -05 Ul 0- =12/ -me ...Mz December 7, 1998 -O/ e lan 0 - m - Mr. Sunny Vann --0 230 East Hopkins -le Aspen, CO 81611 -m.6 -\10 ...W- RE: Barbee Landscape Cost Estimate -Al -Ne Dear Sunny, . M Pursuant to your request I have prepared the fbllowing estimate oflandscape costs for the Barbee Family Subdivision as they pertain to the dced restricted duplex units. As such, it does not provide a cost for landscaping either the deed restricted lots or the free market lots. This cost estimate is based on the Landscape Plan dated December 7, 1998 prepared by my office. Plant Material Ouantity Unit cost Â£20 Spruce - 6 R. to 10 1 height 26 $400 $10,400 Aspen - 2"to 2 34" caliper 37 $150 $5,550 Shrubs - 5 gallon 45 $30 $1,350 Lawn Mix 10,000 sf S.09 $900 Native Mix 1,500 s.Â£ $.09 $135 Topsoil & Finish Grade 11,500 s.Â£ 130 $3,450 Irrigation 11.500 s.Â£ $.45 $5.175 TOTAL $26,960 These costs have been generated using the 1998 Williams Ranch contract unit costs increased slightly fbr 2 years of inflation anticipating a construction schedule of fall 2000. If you have any questions or require any additional information please contact me. Sincerely, 7Â®Mai+*---' Thomas G. Stevens 580 MAIN STREET SUITE 220 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Co) 970.963.6717 (D 970.963.6707 111111111111111111 lilli 1111.Ill lilli 111111111111 lili . 438299 12/06/1999 11 : 20A~DRDINANC DAVIS SILVI 1 of 3 R 15.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ORDINANCE NO. 12 (Series of 1999) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, TO BE KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS THE "BARBEE PROPERTY" ANNEXATION. WHEREAS, on August 18, 1997, the owners of the properly proposed to be annexed did file with the City Clerk of the City of Aspen a Petition for Annexation of territory to the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, the petition, including accompanying copies of an annexation map, has been reviewed by the City Attorney's Office and the City Engineer and found by them to contain the information prescribed and set forth in Â§31-12-107, C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, the owners of one hundred percent (100 %) of the area proposed to be annexed, exclusive of streets and alleys, have consented in writing to the annexation; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution (Number 69, Series of 1997) at its regular meeting on September 8, 1997, did find and determine said Petition for Annexation to be in substantial compliance with the provisions of Â§31-12-107, C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution (Number 78, Series of 1997) at its regular meeting on October 14, 1997, did find and detennine, following a public hearing, said Petition for Annexation to be in substantial compliance with Â§Â§ 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby find and determine that approval of the annexation of said territory to be in the City's best interest; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: 111111111111111111111111111111.111111111111111111111 . 438299 12/06/1999 11:20A 0 INANC DAVIS SILVI 2 of 3 R 15.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Section 1. That the tract of land described in the Petition for Annexation, commonly referred to as the "Barbee Property", and as shown on the annexation map, is hereby annexed to the City of Aspen, Colorado. Section 2. The City Clerk of the City of Aspen is hereby directed as follows: (a) To file one copy of the annexation map with the original of this annexation ordinance in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Aspen. (b) To certify and file two copies of this annexation ordinance and of the annexation map with the Clerk and Recorder of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. (c) To request the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County to file one certified copy of this annexation ordinance and of the annexation map with the Division of Local Government of the Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado. Section 3. The City Engineer of the City of Aspen is hereby directed to amend the Official Map of the City of Aspen to reflect the boundary changes adopted pursuant to this annexation ordinance. Section 4. That if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5. That this ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. . 2 1111111111111111111111111111.1111111111111111111111 . 438299 12/06/1999 11:20A-ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 3 of 3 R 15.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 26~h of April 1999, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12th day of April, 1999. ~% .- F ASP '" ' ... 4 1,5 - --- Ra~hel E. Richards, Mayor PAQ Tem 0. ~ 9**1. 3? VA.-1.:b i Kathryn S. 106h, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this 12th day of October 1999. //Â»4- ~chel E. Richards, Ma~or ~11=-I ATTEST : 43, 1 Kathryn s. 106E, City Clerk 6 4(9 4 52- ,# JPW-10/13/99-G:\john\word\ords\barbee-ann.doc 3 0 0 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL (Pursuant to Section 26.52.060.E. of the Land Use Regulations) STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as follows: I, SUNNY VANN, being or representing an Applicant before the City of Aspen, personally certify that Public Notice of the application for Conceptual PUD approval for the Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD which is located at 601 South Garmisch Street was given by 1) posting of notice containing the information required in Section 26.52.060.E.2., which posting occurred on December 30, 1997, in a conspicuous place on the subject property and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from that date, and 2) mailing Notice of said development application to all property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, which mailing occurred on January 2, 1998. Applicant: Mary K. Barbee John W. Barbee Hallie B. Rugheimer Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing ' -1 r .\ \ /072* U~ By ' .W' .-. Isunny#ann The foregoing Affidavit of Public Notice was acknowledged and signed before me this 0/,9 _71 day of January, 1998, by Sunny Vann, on behalf of the Applicant. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires : 3/0 -910--0-0 0 .k Notary Public DEC-23-1997 11:4b ENUM HbFEN/Mi l K 1 N L Ull Ut:V 'IJ ,;i=111 Â¤Dlli r. 2 1 .. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: BARBEE CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday. January 12, 1997 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, City Council Chambers. City Hall. 130 S. Galena St.. Aspen to consider an application for Conceptual PUD submitted by Mary Barbee. John Barbee. Hallie Rugheimer. and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing. Inc. requesting approval for 10 new residential units within the 70-30 affordable - free-market mix of the AHI zone district. The property is located at 601 South Gannisch Street. and is described as a 1 7,67 acre tract of land being a part of Lot l, NE1/4. NE1/4. Section 13, Township 10 South. Range 85 West of the 6th P.M. For further information. contact Chris Bendon at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department. 130 S. Galena St.. Aspen. CO (970) 920-5072. s/John Bennett. Mayor Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on December 27,1997 City of Aspen Account 300' Radius List 25-Sip-97 Parcel Number Schedule Number Owner Name Name 2 / Address 1 Address 2 City State Zip Code 2735-131-15-021 R000716 ADAMS HOWARD S PO BOX 11774 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-04-004 R000014 ALI-I HOLDING COMPANY/INVERNESS LODGEI A COLORADO CORPORATION 435 W MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-24-004 R004650 ANDERSON BRIAN W 213 RAYNOR ST ISELIN NJ 08830- 2735-131-00-021 R007881 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY EAMES ADDITION P.O. BOX 1248 ASPEN, CO 81612- 2735-131-37-701 R014699 BAILEY LILIANN E & BAILEY BRIAN L AS JT TENANTS 117 JUAN ST ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-00-100 R000082 BARBEE JOHN W 1 /3 INT RUGHEIMER HALLIE 13 1/3 INT PO BOX 788 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-37-705 R014705 BENSON DEE CHRISTENSEN CINDY AS JT TENAN PO BOX 11844 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-10-002 R000023 BERLIORST JERRY BERHORST CAROLE 7161 LINDENMERE DR BLOOMFIELD HILLS MI 48301- 2735-131-15-014 R001296 BERZINS INA 6030 E 1ST AVE DENVER CO 80220- 2735-131-24-007 R004813 BIEL ALEXANDER L BIEL LEE M 381 LOVELL AVE MILL VALLEY CA 94941~ 2735-131-07-006 R000309 BLACKWELL CLARENCE A BLACKWELL ANNE I I PO BOX 3244 ANNAPOLIS MD 21403.I 2735-131-10-001 R000016 BROWN EDWARD L PO BOX 2604 NAPERVILLE IL 60566- 2735-131-07-011 R001482 BRUMDER PHILIP G & ASMUTH ANTIIONY QUARLES & BRADY C/O 411 E WISCONSIN AVE STE 2500 MILWAt.JKEE WI 53202- 2735-131-15-003 R000207 CABELL JOE 1765 ALA-MOANA BLVD TIONOLLJLU III 96815- 2735-131-15-011 R000977 CAIN DOUGLAS M CAIN CONSTANCE MOFFITTRUSTE 1960 I IUDSON ST DENVER CO 80220- 2735-131-37-706 R014706 CALDWELL KARI A CALDWELL GRANT L 107 JUAN ST ASPEN CO 81611-188 2735-131-10-004 R000211 CALKINS GEORGE W 5100 E QUINCY AVE ENGIjEWOOD CO 80110- 2735-131-33-006 R008609 CARRUTI IERS MARILYN 101 E COOPER ST, #301 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-10-005 R000240 CASSIDAY BARBARA 8522 N 82ND ST SCOTTSDALE AZ 85258- 2735-131-10-006 R000280 CliU FAMILY TRUST2/3INT LU a IYI-KANG & NANCY-1/3 INT 38 CORMORANT CIR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660- 2735-131-03-851 R014737 CITY OF ASPEN 130 S GALENA ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-33-001 R008607 COLEMAN ISAIAI I PO BOX 11239 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-10-007 R000342 CRISTOL STANLEY J 2918 3RD ST BOULDER CO 80304- 2735-131-37-702 R014702 CUMNOCK CHERYL L & CUMNOCK ROBERT E AS JT TENAN 115 JUAN STREET ASPEN CO 81611-188 2735-131-15-004 R000208 CUNNINGHAM P PO BOX 11717 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-15-005 R000350 CZAJKOWSKI MICHAEL CZAJKOWSKI SANDRA J 90 LA SAL.,LE ST APT 16G NEW YORK NY 10027-,-Â· 2735-131-24-006 R004801 DINGWALL WILLIAM A AGREEMENT OF TRUST DINGWALL WILLIAM A'IRUSTEE 1539 LOCHRIDGIl RD BLOOMFIELD HILLS MI 483021~ 2735-131-10-008 R0005()8 DOPKIN HARIAN PO BOX 4696 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-24-014 R005006 ELLIS JAMES BYRON 171/2 FLEET ST MARINA DEL REY CA 90292- 2735-131-15-020 R000427 ELLIS PAUL DAVID PO BOX 3633 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-15-006 R000370 FARR BRUCE K FARR GAIL H PO BOX 5142 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-37-704 R014704 FLETCHER KAREN K & FLETCH IER JAY R AS JT TENANTS PO BOX 3476 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-10-011 R000639 FRIEDMAN RICHARD L C/O CARPENTER & CO 20 UNIVERSITY RD CAMBRIDGE MA 02138- 2735-131-24-008 R004852 GILBERT DONALD C & NANCY T GILBERT FARLIE INC - C/O 437 MADISON AVE NEW YORK NY 10022- 2735-131-15-019 R001494 GILLESPIE JOI-IN E 9112 W 1!EFNER YUKON OK 73099- 2735-131-07-010 R001017 GINSBURG ANNE 17309 WI IrrE HAVEN DR BOCA RATON FL 33496~ 2735-131-24-003 R004625 GLASER STEFANIE SOKOL 420 E 72ND ST #l D NEW YORK NY 10021~ 2735-131-10-027 R001448 GLAUBINGERLAWRENCE D GI,AUBINGER LUCIENNE 437 GOLDEN ISLE DR HAILANDALE FL 33009~ 2735-131-10-017 R000790 GLICKMAN EDWIN C 2322 LAZY O RID SNOWMASS CO 8165~ 2735-131-33-009 R008604 GOLDSMITH DOUGLAS DAVII) 101 E COOPER ST APT 102 ASPEN CO 8161 2735-131-10-022 R001057 GRAI IAM MAUREEN 3575 MAUTZ-YEAGER RD MAR[ON OI 1 43302-~ 1 Parcel Number Schedule Number Owner Name Name 2 / Address 1 Address 2 City State Zip Code 2735-131-24-021 R005192 GRANT BROTHERS LLP 60% GRANT WALLACE H & DOUGLAS 20 PO BOX 978 LONGMONr CO 80502- 2735-131-10-028 R001452 GREINER JERRY M GREINER TERESA U 1401 ROSELAWN WEST ROSEVILLE MN 55113- 2715-131-24-002 R004609 I IANG TEN ADVENTURES GARYNICIIOLSC/O PO BOX 8116 ASPEN CO 81612: 2735-131-10-019 R000910 HARTMAN a IRISH NA M UND 1 /2 COH EN FArn I HARTMAN UND 1 /2 2865 NE 24TII CT Fr LAUDERDALE FL 33305- 2735-131-07-001 R000537 HEIM WII.LIAM D 301 SEVERN AVE ANNAPOUS MD 21403- 2735-131-15-008 R000617 HEIMANN GEORGE R PO BOX 1312 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-33-002 R008611 HOUGH HAZEL C ONE BEACI I DRIVE APT #1002 ST. PETERSBURG FL 33701- 2735-131-37-707 R014707 JUAN STREET HOUSING COMMON AREA ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING A 530 E MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-24-010 R004879 KABERT INDUSTRIES INC PO BOX 277 VILLA PARK IL 60181- 2735-131-24-012 R004897 KABERT INDUSTRIES INC AN ILLINOIS CORP 321 W ST CHARLES RD VILLA PARK IL 60181- 2735-131-24-001 R004540 KANN TOMAS M 809 S ASPEN ST /18 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-07-002 R001045 KIRSCEINER CAROLE J 300 PUPPY SMITH #205-278 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-24-022 R008111 KL,IKA YVONNE S 32415 BURLWOOD DR SOLON OH 44139- 2735-131-10-015 R000760 KNOWLTON VERA JEAN 2552 E ALAMEDA STE 31 DENVER CO 80209|~~ 2735-131-24-013 R004904 L & RCOMPANY I IAROLD C LYMAN PRESIDENT 20430 LAKEVIEW AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331- 2735-131-10-016 R000789 LACY ROANE M JR PO BOX 20788 WACO TX 76702- 2735-131-15-022 R015382 LARKIN THOMAS J LARKIN MARYANN K 1 SHELDRAKE I.N PALM BEACH GARDENS FL 33418-682 2735-131-10-018 R000804 LE CHARD ALLAN P LE CHARD SIDNEY ANN 1002 BUCKINGHAM RD GROSSE POINTE PARK M[ 48230- 2735-131-10-025 R001237 LIFr ONE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 131 E DURANT AVE ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-24-011 R004896 LOCKWOOD CONSULTANTS INC 3200 SW FREEWAY STE 3300 HOUSTON TX 77027- 2735-131-33-005 R008606 MAC ALI'INE KENDRA M PO BOX 11433 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-37-703 R014703 MC CARTNEY CI IARLES H & DAHL-MC CARI-NEY BRENDA AS H PO BOX 12106 ASPEN CO 81612- 2735-131-10-010 R000586 MC CONNELL THOMAS W MC CONNELL KAY L 3814 OAKHILLS BLOOMFIELD I IILLS MI 48301- 2735-131-24-015 R005033 MENDELMMARK MENDEL GRACE A - JT TENANTS 809 S ASPEN ST #16 ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-10-030 R001487 MILTON ZALE TRUST AGREEMENT JACOBSON LIVING TRUST 2(}19 KENMORE CHIAGO H 60614- 2735-131-10-009 R000557 MULKEY DAVID A DR TRUSTEE 2839 QUEENS COURTYARD DR LAS VEGAS NV 89109-152 2735-131-15-009 R000648 NITSCIIKE DR RUPERT NITSCI IKE ELiZABETI I M 6701 N RHODE ISLAND ST OKLAHOMA CITY OK 73111- 2735-131-15-010 R000664 NOBLE GUY T 2571 NE OCEAN BLVD #4()5 STUART FL 34996- 2735-131-10-020 R001008 O'CONNOR ROBERT W O'CONNOR CATHERINE L 17896 SABI. E RIDGE DR SOUTH BEND N 46635- 2735-131-33-008 R008608 Orr JOHN 814 SECOND AVE CROYDEN PA 19021~ 2735-131-24-020 R005190 PODSAID PATRICK 2701 S DAYSI-IORE DR STE 315 MIAMI FL 33133~ 2735-131-10-023 R001093 REED LYNN W 6434 RIO GRANDE NW ALBUQUERQUE NM 87107- 2735-124-20-852 R014045 REEDER OPEN SPACE t'[TKIN COUNTY 506 E MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-10-024 R001107 ROARING FORK PROPERTIES 5055 26TI I AVE ROCKFORD IL 61109- 2735-131-10-021 R001033 ROBLES ENRIQUE ALVAREZ AL.VAREZ CRISTINA SIERRA GORDA #340 LOMAS CHAPULTEPEC 1100 M 2735-131-07-003 R001016 ROSE JON E ROSE RITA L 303 MAGNOLIA LAKE DR LONGWOOD FL 32779- | 2735-131-15-012 R001264 ROSS ROBERT M 17030 NANES DR STE 214 HOUSION TX 77090- 2735-131-15-016 R001307 RUDERMAN ERIC P RUDERMAN MIMI E 1790 FOREST ST PKWY DENVER CO 80218- 2735-131-24-016 R005054 RYAN ELIZABETH H 1/21NT COPE G RICI-fARD & NANCY M 1/2 IN 419 WINNEBAGO DR JANESVILLE WI 53545- 2735-131-23-001 R004639 SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP EAMES ADDITION BLK 11 LOT 13-20 1925 CENTURY PARK E S'FE 1900 LOS ANGELES CA 9()067- 2735-131-14-003 R000051 SAVANAIi LIMITED PARTNERSI lIP EAMES ADDITION BLK 11 LOTS 7-12 1925 CENTURY PARK E STE 1900 LOS ANGELES CA 90067- 2735-131-13-001 R009032 SAVANAI I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 1925 CENTURY PARK E STE 1900 LOS ANGELES CA 90067- 2735-131-33-004 R008605 SCHUBERT JANICE M 710 HEARTHSTONE DR BASALT CO 81621- 2735-131-24-019 R005169 SERRAC) PETER R FAMILY PARTNERS} I[P 3825 OCEAN DR CORPUS CIÂ·IRISTI TX 78411-121 2735-131-07-005 R001192 SEVERY CHARLES L & GALE L 73.39% JOI INSION MARGARET S 9.87% 30 DEXTER SrI DENVER CO 80220- 2 Parcel Number Schedule Number Owner Name Name 2 / Address 1 Address 2 City State Zip Code 2735-131-24-009 R005078 SHADOWMOUNTAINCONDOMINIUM COATS REID & WALDRON- C/O 720 E I IYMAN AVE ASPEN CO 81611â€¢ 2735-131-07-008 R001216 SIIENKJAMES R TRUSTEE OF SHENK TRUST 0304 HWY 133 CARBONDALE CO 81623- 2735.131-07-007 R001215 SHENK ROBERT D 0304 HWY 133 CARBONDALE CO 81623- 2735-131-24-017 R005073 SM-15 SEELBACI I WILLIA - C/O 45()00 S WOODLAND CIIAGRIN FALLS OH 44022-3 --~ 2735-131-10-003 R000030 SOLOMON RONALD E 1711 SW 301'II PL FTLAUDERDALE FL 33315- 2735-131-10-014 R000734 STEINER DONALD R 5536 SILVER RIDGE DR 51'ONE MOUNTAIN GA 30087- 2735-131-10-026 R001273 STEPHENS JOHN M 4433 ALLA RD #2 MARINA DEL REY CA 90292- 2735-131-07-004 R001308 TAYLOR HARVEY C W 301 N 9430 LIWY E HARTIAND WI 53029- 2735-131-24-005 R004783 TUCKER RC DR COLOROW - ATIN: 6420 STAUDER CIR EDINA MN 55436- 2735-131-10-031 R000080 TYDEN FAMILY FARMS PARTNERSICIP 60% INT GROOS NICHOLAS D 40% INT 210 N INDUSTRIAL PARK RD HASTINGS MI 49058- 2735-131-33-011 R008610 TYLER BERIT G 4900 N OCEAN BLVD APT 1216 Fr LAUDERDALE FL 33308- 2735-131-07-009 R001349 UHLFELDER FAMILY INVESTMENTS RLLP 633 N 4TI-I ST ASPEN CO 81611- 2735-131-10-013 R000693 VANDERWALL DEAN ROBERT 531 EAST POST LONE PINE CA 93545- 2735-131-15-017 R001364 VICKERY MARIE B 41 COUNTRY CLUB VILLAGE PUEBLO CO 8100~ 2735-131-15-013 R001274 WALDRON GAILYN L WALDRON GA[LYN PO BOX 10244 ASPEN CO 8161 lill/ 2735-131-10-029 R001479 WARSTLER ROBERT T 4920 HOLLY TREE DR DALAS IX 75287- 2735-131-15-007 R000400 WEISE RICHARD II 1303E AI.GONQUIN RD SCHAUMBURG ]L 60196- 2735-131-15-002 R000130 WiLIAMS LOYD 70 MIDDLE RD PALM BEACH FL 33480- 2735-131-15-018 R001467 WOLF HEINZ ANDELIANE TRUSTEES OF WOLF FAMILY TRUS 1221 MYRTLE AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92103- 2735-131-10-012 R000651 WUGALTER JOEL 245 E 54TH ST APT 23F NEW YORK NY 10022-472 2735-131-33-003 R008603 ZAUNER HEINZ JURGEN PO BOX 11947 ASPEN CO 81612- 3 . 0 To: Mayor and City Council From: Housing Office Board of Directors Re: Barbee Family AH Proposal Date: 9 January, 1998 Summary: The Housing Board met on Wednesday, January 7 to consider the Barbee Family AH proposal. The board reviewed the proposed mix of units, and found the project has moved forward on a good faith basis, consistent with representations made to the Housing Board in previous meetings. The Board had some concern about the number of Resident Occupied units, and developed a proposal with the applicants to improve the mix. Discussion of Issues: The Barbee family began discussing an affordable housing development on their property about two years ago. They were interested, first, in a fair division of the land among several family members and, second, in seeing the development of housing consistent with the community plan. Because the family had no experience in real estate development, they sought a partner for the affordable housing component. The non profit Aspen Pitkin Affordable Housing Inc. developed a partnership agreement with the Barbee family for this purpose. The Barbee's and APEHI discussed their proposal, informally, with the Housing Board before preparing a land use application. The Board reviewed the proposal formally at its meeting of January 7, 1998. As in the work session, the Housing Board found the proposal reasonable, and was pleased with the participation of APEHI. The Board was concerned about the proposed Resident Occupied units, and developed the following recommendation in an attempt to improve the mix. The Housing Board recommended approval of the application, as submitted, with a mix of three Resident Occupied units and four Category 4 units, under the following conditions: 1. One of the R.O. lots would be provided to a member of the Barbee family, should that i family member qualify for an R.O. unit. If no member of the family qualifies, the Barbee family would be paid $130,000 for that lot, and the lot would be retained by 15\43% / APEHI. 2. The remaining two R.O. lots, and the land for the four Category units, would be D'? \ retained by APEHI. The Housing Office will work with the nonprofit to determine f the final price of the R.O. lots and Category units, based on the final costs of the \ development and the appropriateness at that time of additional subsidy, subject to \ review by Council. .. 79&4 0 4 Sheetl Percent of Units Category RO Free Market Ute Park 70% 0% 30% Sister Cities 60% 10% 30% Lacet 47% 21% 32% Victorians at Bleeker 43% 29% 29% Williams Ranch 40% 30% 30% Barbee 40% 30% 30% East Cooper Court 33% 33% 33% Percent of Bedrooms Category RO Free Market Ute Park 70% 0% 30% Lacet 41% 16% 42% Sister Cities 40% 11% 49% Barbee 30 -06%- 30-2894- 36- 3556- Williams Ranch 30% 26% 44% East Cooper Court 30% 30% 40% Victorians at Bleeker 23% 32% 45% Percent of Floor Area Category RO Free Market Ute Park 41% 0% 59% East Cooper Court 30% 30% 40% Victorians at Bleeker 30% 32% 38% Sister Cities 26% 11% 63% Lacet 25% 16% 59% Barbee 24% 28% 47% Williams Ranch 20% 26% 54% Page 1 94 19 E 93 1 '#1'1 % 1% l\Â«Â¢19 4,1 1918~ 11*4 sl W 'fÂ¥4 "15 *64 9,4,0 *1 4.-B Wd â‚¬ --f+F tv ,Â«} 3 14 14 Â«,af v WN 19 .- * Â·p'WJ 41*4 114 00/04 9 94 e U. M 1 194 e-4 4% 44 41*'40 144 196 04 9 1/ Â»+0 + 1 *3'LOQ94- i-194 n * 914 v Â£â„¢ Be Â£28 'Ped ?97 -*1 0 90 48-L 14 7 7kmt 7 31g 1 01 9404 1 ty a. 1 +71+4* 11 1%40 -7Â»lp#D 4 94 If .. r 9 N. Fo ktdit c#* 6 â‚¬ *2 4*W 1FM '16 09 mi (47 (Wk 4. 44 [* 4 MAke MEA in Bo#-1 lot 1,1,-P *DU *(VA) 594 Â« ufF 6J__ el lat C dalÂ· 989)&~**1 1{30 AP g. 1* 4- fos 27200 -r â‚¬82) 1*%(un f Son, 64â‚¬NJL.4 a. S A 4 44 Nulip 4 4 da 414% 46 ow, l,1 -- 'Flf . IL. 16- 6* CA+I Â¥t ~hot-*4 ki TH 4Â®fL Nia# IN *14 -- 4 rz *w '4 4@fe k 1,61 -_ _ #41<K "01- c'v~ildl~~, bl -6, 0*DK..1-, Â£61 Nt- f#%04(,AVL< 1 ~ d*40 4 Ad U cy- Aw Aw# A AM MN~&45 + c#v 1-- .-- M f fk p 69% uM 4 - '992 HAB f #% ik 756 &4 h*\AAD ~- %61 j UNT %11*2 - *MheÂ»eihi m, 4- 20 *a 14,4,1 .Shlopolb - 602365 4 <334 - -PEN â‚¬68 â€¢46 Ok â€ž Â£= 669( Mje *- 4 c.k *) , . 0 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR THE BARBEE PROPERTY, LOTS 1 AND 2 OF BLOCK 11, AND LOTS 1-9 OF BLOCK 5, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PLUS ADDITIONAL METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIBED PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND PITKIN COUNTY AS REPRESENTED, PARCEL NO. 2735-131-00-100 Resolution #97 -32. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., applicant, for a Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval on an approximately 17.34 acre parcel of land, described as Lot 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen plus additional metes and bounds described property within the City of Aspen and Pitkin County as represented, for the development of ten new residential units consistent with the Affordable Housing - Planned Unit Development (AH1-PUD) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, the application was referred to the relevant agencies and the Housing Office, Fire Marshall, Environmental Health Department, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering Department, Parks Department, and Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on December 2,1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, by a 7-0 vote, the City Council approve the Conceptual Planned Unit Development for the Barbee property, with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department, as amended by the Commission; and, WHEREAS, the proposed development is further subject to Annexation, Final PUD, Rezoning, Subdivision, Special Review, 8040 Greenline, Growth Management, and Residential Design approval pursuant to the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the City Council should approve the Conceptual Planned Unit Development with the following conditions: 1. The Application for Final approval shall include the following: a) A land use application for Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review for parking, 8040 Greenline Review, a Growth Management Exemption, and any Park or other fees requested to be waived. b) A certified Site Improvement Survey of the property. All calculations shall be adjusted to reflect this site information. c) Alllegal instruments associated with the Conservation parcel and easements on proposed Lot 1. d) An air quality mitigation plan. The applicant is encouraged to develop this plan with the Environmental Health Department. e) A landscape plan or landscape guidelines for the entire development that is relatively consistent from parcel to parcel. The intent of this provision is to .. ensure a level of quality, not to limit creativity. All exterior lighting should be downcast and not used to call attention to landscape features. For the proposed free-market lots, assurance that when developed the landscape will be generally harmonious with the affordable lots shall be sufficient to meet this requirement. f) Architectural plans or architectural guidelines addressing how the proposed structures will respect the proportions, massing, and materials appropriate for residential development in the City of Aspen. Tile City's Residential Guidelines, as amended, should be used as a base. 2. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 3. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the Garmish Street side of the carport structure. 4. The applicant shall involve the Planning, Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments in designing the edge of the roadway and any street, sidewalk, drainage improvements that may be necessary. The storage of plowed snow shall be considered when locating the sidewalk, street trees, and street light. The applicant is encouraged to consider a roll curb or drainage swale as a less urban solution to the standard curb and gutter. 5. The applicant is encouraged to submit a development pro forma to the Housing Authority to review the Category designation for the duplex units. Both the City and the Applicant understand that a developer's financial information, profit, etc. is strictly personal information and not a standard for reviewing land use applications. 6. The applicant shall grant an easement to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for access to the existing manhole on proposed Lot #1. 7. The applicant should be aware of the following conditions that are generally associated with final approvals: a) Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension request, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Also, landscape improvements are reviewed to ensure reasonable access to maintain the public system. b) The applicant shall submit a drainage report prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that no sediment loaded drainage will be leaving the property during and after construction. c) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a fugitive dust control plan. d) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall gain the necessary - permits from the Environmental Health Department for any fireplaces or woodburning devices. e) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. f) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit GIS data including property lines, building footprints, easements, and encroachments. 4 .. g) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall repair any public right-of-way damaged during construction. h) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers must be installed on the applicant's property and not in any public right-of-way. Easements must be provided for pedestals. All utility locations and easements must be delineated on the site improvement survey. Revisions to utility locations and easements must be delineated on a revised site improvement survey prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. i) The applicant must receive approval for any work within public rights-of-way from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 8. The applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 9. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless othenvise amended by other conditions. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on December 2, 1997. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: /1 021 11 6Â»6 14>*46*J 16 h - City Attorney Sara Garton, Chair ATTEST: 19'24 **Edt ~ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk A t .. ORDINANCE N0.44 (SERIES OF 1997) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THE BARBEE PROPERTY, LOTS 1 AND 2 OF BLOCK 11, AND LOTS 1-9 OF BLOCK 5, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PLUS ADDITIONAL METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIBED PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND PITKIN COUNTY AS REPRESENTED, PARCEL NO. 2735-131-00-100 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer. Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., applicant, for a Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval on an approximately 17.67 acre parcel of land. described as Lot 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen plus additional metes and bounds within City of Aspen and Pitkin County as represented. for the development of ten new residential units consistent with the Affordable Housing - Planned Unit Development (AH1-PUD) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, the application was referred to the relevant agencies and the Housing Office, Fire MarshaII. Environmental Health Department, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering Department, Parks Department, and Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on December 2, 1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, by a 7-0 vote, the City Council approve the Conceptual Planned Unit Development for the Barbee property, with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department, as amended by the Commission; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions ofthe Municipal Code as identified in Sections 26.52, and 26.84, has reviewed and considered the recommendation ofthe Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare. Ordinance No. 44, Series 1998 Page 1 I . .. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: Pursuant to Sections 26.52. and 26.84. and subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter, the City Council hereby grants Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval for the Barbee Property. as described. Section 2: Conditions o f Approval: 1. The Application for Final approval shall include the following: a) A land use application for Annexation, Final PUD, Subdivision. Rezoning, Special Review for parking. 8040 Greenline Review, a Growth Management Exemption, and any Park or other fees requested to be waived. b) A certified Site Improvement Survey ofthe property. All calculations shall be adjusted to reflect this site information. c) All legal instruments associated with the Conservation parcel and easements on proposed Lot 1. d) An air quality mitigation plan. The applicant is encouraged to develop this plan with the Environmental Health Department. e) A landscape plan or landscape guidelines for the entire development that is relatively consistent from parcel to parcel. The intent of this provision is to ensure a level of quality, not to limit creativity. All exterior lighting should be downcast and not used to call attention to landscape features. For the proposed free-market lots, Lots 2,3. & 4, assurance that when developed the landscape will be generally harmonious with the affordable lots shall be sufficient to meet this requirement. f) Architectural plans or architectural guidelines addressing how the proposed structures will respect the proportions, massing, and materials appropriate for residential development in the City of Aspen. The City's Residential Guidelines, as amended, should be used as a base. 2. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 3. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the Garmish Street side o f the carport structure. 4. The applicant shall involve the Planning, Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments in designing the edge of the roadway and any street. sidewalk, drainage improvements that may be necessary. The storage of plowed snow shall be considered when locating the sidewalk, street trees, and street light. The applicant is encouraged to consider a roll curb or drainage swale as a less urban solution to the standard curb and gutter. Ordinance No. 44, Series 1998 Page 2 5. The applicant shall grant an easement to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for access to the existing manhole on proposed Lot #1. 6. The applicant should be aware of the following conditions that are generally associated with final approvals: a) Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension request, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Also, landscape improvements are reviewed to ensure reasonable access to maintain the public system. b) The applicant shall submit a drainage report prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that no sediment loaded drainage will be leaving the property during and after construction. c) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a fugitive dust control plan. d) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the Environmental Health Department for any fireplaces or woodburning devices. e) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. f) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit GIS data including property lines. building footprints, easements, and encroachments. g) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall repair any public right-of-way damaged during construction. h) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers must be installed on the applicant's property and not in any public right-of-way. Easements must be provided for pedestals. All utility locations and easements must be delineated on the site improvement survey. Revisions to utility locations and easements must be delineated on a revised site improvement survey prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. i) The applicant must receive approval for any work within public rights-of-way from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 7. One of the R.O. lots would be provided to a member of the Barbee family, should that family member qualify for an R.O. unit. If no member of the Barbee family qualifies, the Barbee family would be paid $130,000 for that lot, and the lot would be retained by APEHI. 8. The remaining two R.O. lots, and the land for the Category units, would be retained by APEHI. The Housing Office will work with the non-profit to determine the the final price of the R.O. lots and Category units, based on the final costs of the development and the appropriateness at that time of additional subsidy, subject to review by Council. Ordinance No. 44, Series 1998 Page 3 .. Section 3: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, and or City Council. are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein. unless amended by other specific conditions. Section 4: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided. and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence. clause. phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate. distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereo f. Section 6: That the City Clerk is directed. upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County- Clerk and Recorder. Section 7: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 12th day of January, 1998 at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers. Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City ofAspen onthe 15th day of December, 1997. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: P- 13,0..=Â¥- Cit*kitorney John ffennett, Mayor Attest: 114u.r.3 2-6Â« Kathryn S. WSch, City Clerk Ordinance No. 44, Series 1998 Page 4 .. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this /17 da f.~tg7441498. 0 Approved as to form: Approved as to content: 21>emÂ« (P- l/,- City-Xffrney John dennett, Mayor Attest: iu-Â¢ AL- Kathryn S. ch, City Clerk Ordinance No. 44, Series 1998 Page 5 o Vttl f MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Developipgnt Director-~7 ~~g,J Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Director Viel ('-*. FROM: Christopher Bendon, Planner UAwl RE: Barbee Conceptual PUD - 2nd Reading (public hearing) DATE: January 12,1998 SUMMARY: The applicant, Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., has applied for Conceptual approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The development proposed is for 10 new residential units falling within the 70-30 affordable - free-market mix of the AH1 Zone District. The site is located at the base of West Aspen or "Shadow" Mountain just south of Koch-Lumber Park. The property includes a substantial portion of Shadow Mountain which is proposed as a conservation parcel. This is a Conceptual PUD Review. The Final PUD Review will also consider the Annexation, Rezoning, Subdivision, Growth Management allotments, and any Parks or other fees to be waived. During the first reading of this ordinance, the Council had several questions regarding the unit mix and appropriate Categories for the affordable units. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority held a meeting to consider this application on January 7. A memo from Dave Tolen, Housing Director, to the Housing Board with two recommendations has been attached. In his memo. Dave suggested the LIousing Board either recommend approval of the project as proposed with the RO lots selling for approximately $130,000 or recommend approval ofthe project with some or all of the Category units being sold as Category 3 subsidized by the remaining RO and/or Free-Market lots. The Ilousing Board' s decision will either be attached to this memo (if it is ready for the packet) or will be presented during the hearing. Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend the City Council approve this Conceptual PUD, with conditions. APPLICANT: Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc. Sunny Vann, Vann Associates, representative. 1 . .. LOCATION: Approximately the corner of Juan and Garmish Streets. Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen, plus additional metes and bounds described property within the City of Aspen and Pitkin County as shown on the existing conditions map. ZONING: The portions of the subject property currently within the City of Aspen are zoned R-15-PUD-L and Conservation. Portions of the property in the County are zoned AFR-10 and R-15-PUD. The applicant is seeking annexation into the City for the County portion of the property and a rezoning to AH1 -PUD. This annexation and rezoning will be reviewed during steps 3 and 4 of the PUD process. LOT SIZE: 17.67 acres. 769,470 Square feet. This is an approximation, the final application will include a site improvement survey. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): 760,150 square feet. This represents the total property minus the proposed access easement. Most of the subject property consists of slopes of greater than 30%. FAR, however, cannot be reduced by more than 25% for slope considerations. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF DENSITY CALCULATION): 109,270 square feet. This includes the same restrictions as above and considers slope reduction. FAR: .3:1 of which 85% can be built as of right, 100% with Special Review approval. Based on the total site minus the proposed access easement and the maximum 25% FAR reduction for slopes in excess of 30%, 145,380 square feet can be built as of right. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence, assorted outbuildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: Same with 10 additional residences and two carrolt structures. PREVIOUS ACTION: The City Council considered this application during the 1 st reading of this ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application and recommended approval, with conditions, at their December 2,1997, meeting. 2 .. 1 . REVIEW PROCEDURE: Conceptual Planned Unit Development. The City Council shall consider and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application at a public hearing. BACKGROUND: The property is currently in two jurisdictions. The applicant has requested annexation into the City and this action will take place concurrent with final approval from City Council. The Community Development Director has waived the requirement of a Site Improvement Survey for this Conceptual PUD application with the understanding that one will be provided with the Final application. STAFF COMMENTS: Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments and a memo from Dave Tolen have been included as Exhibit " "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve this Conceptual PUD application with the following conditions: 1. The Application for Final approval shall include the following: a) A land use application for Annexation, Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review for parking, 8040 Greenline Review, a Growth Management Exemption, and any Park or other fees requested to be waived. b) A certified Site Improvement Survey of the property. All calculations shall be adjusted to reflect this site information. c) All legal instruments associated with the Conservation parcel and easements on proposed Lot 1. d) An air quality mitigation plan. The applicant is encouraged to develop this plan with the Environmental Health Department. e) A landscape plan or landscape guidelines for the entire development that is relatively consistent from parcel to parcel. The intent of this provision is to ensure a level of quality, not to limit creativity. For proposed Lots 2,3, & 4, a minimum threshold requirement and a statement that ensures the landscape will be developed compatible with the remaining proposed Lots shall be sufficient. All exterior lighting should be downcast and not used to call attention to landscape features. f) Architectural plans or architectural guidelines addressing how the proposed structures will respect the proportions, massing, and materials appropriate for residential development in the City of Aspen. The City's Residential Guidelines, as amended, should be used as a base. 2. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 3 0 . 3. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the Garmish Street side of the carport structure. The structure is not an officially recognized historical resource. 4. The applicant shall involve the Planning, Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments in designing the edge of the roadway and any street, sidewalk, drainage improvements that may be necessary. The storage of plowed snow shall be considered when locating the sidewalk, street trees, and street light. The applicant is encouraged to consider a roll curb or drainage swale as a less urban solution to the standard curb and gutter. 5. The applicant is encouraged to submit a development pro forma to the Housing Authority to review the Category designation for the duplex units. Both the City and the Applicant understand that a developer's financial information, profit, etc. is strictly personal information and not a standard for reviewing land use applications. 6, The applicant shall grant an easement to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for* access to the existing manhole on proposed Lot #1. 7. The applicant should be aware of the following conditions that are generally associated with final approvals: a) Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension request, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Also, landscape improvements are reviewed to ensure reasonable access to maintain the public system. b) The applicant shall submit a drainage report prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that no sediment loaded drainage will be leaving the property during and after construction. c) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a fugitive dust control plan. d) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the Environmental Health Department for any fireplaces or woodburning devices. e) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. f) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit GIS data including property lines, building footprints, easements, and encroachments. g) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall repair any public right-of-way damaged during construction. h) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers must be installed on the applicant's property and not in any public right-of-way. Easements must be provided for pedestals. All utility locations and easements must be delineated 4 .. on the site improvement survey. Revisions to utility locations and easements must be delineated on a revised site improvement survey prior to issuance of a certificate ofoccupancy. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. i) The applicant must receive approval for any work within public rights-of-way from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 8. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Barbee Conceptual PUD with the conditions outlined in the Staff memo dated January 12,1998." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Comments from Referral Agencies Exhibit C -- Application 5 .. EXHIBIT ~ Staff Comments: Barbee Planned Unit Development A development application for a PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements: A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: Community Vision: The proposed development increases resident housing opportunities, encourages a balanced permanent community, may provide residents with a transportation alternative if they choose to walk to town, work, etc., and is a relatively sustainable development pattern. Community Vitality: The proposed development is 70% affordable, addressing the community' s desire to provide affordable housing opportunities within a reasonable walking distance to employment and recreation resources. The proposed development is an in-fill site within, or approximately within, the original townsite. Increased residential density, especially for local working residents, within the functional town promotes a sense of community that cannot be achieved by placing that critical mass in a remote location, regardless of where the metro area or extended metro boundaries exist. Open Space and Environment: Providing housing opportunities within walking distance to employment, entertainment, recreation, and other residences reduces the need to use a vehicle for every trip. Also, compact development within the townsite reduces the need to extend services and carve-up land on the outskirts of town, and preserves those natural open space areas for their wildlife and aesthetic functions. Where appropriate, the development proposal is preserving areas clearly not appropriate for development. All development proposed is within the flat area at the base of West Aspen Mountain which is being preserved with a conservation easement. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: Surrounding development on approximately the northeast side consists of multi-family housing, a park, older lodge conversions, and future potential mini-base development for Lift 1 or 'Town Lift.' There is virtually no development, or potential for development, to the Southeast of the site which is compatible with the open space easement proposed. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Staff Comments 1 .. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The surrounding area' s development or redevelopment potential will not be affected by this development. D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. Staff Finding: The application must receive development allotments for 10 residential units. The Growth Management Commission will consider this case and make a recommendation to City Council during the Final PUD review process. 2. Density: A. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Furthermore, densities may be reduced if: 1. There is not sufficient water pressure and other utilities to serve the proposed development; 2. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development; 3. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of slope, ground instability, and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls and avalanche dangers; 4. The effects ofthe proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution; 5. The proposed development will have deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city; or 6. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features ofthe site. Staff Finding: The density proposed on this site is far below the allowable based on the gross lot size. There are sufficient utilities and services to accommodate this development. The access way to the RO and Category lots is adequate for fire protection service. The portion of the property where development is proposed is suitable for development. The applicant has not provided an Air Quality Mitigation Plan. A condition of conceptual approval should be that the applicant supply this plan with the Final application. The location of the proposed development does not appear to be in severe conflict with the natural terrain and features of the site. B. Reduction in density for slope consideration. 1. In order to reduce wildfire, mudslide, and avalanche hazards; enhance soil stability; and guarantee adequate fire protection access, the density of a PUD shall also be reduced in areas with slopes in excess of twenty (20) percent in the following manor: Staff Comments 2 .. a. For lands between zero (0) and twenty (20) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be that permitted in the underlying zone district. b. For lands between twenty-one (21) and thirty (30) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be reduced to fifty (50) percent of that permitted in the underlying zone district. c. For lands between thirty-one (31) and forty (40) percent slope, the density shall be reduced to twenty-five (25) percent ofthat allowed in the underlying zone district. d. For lands in excess of forty (40) percent slope, no density credit shall be allowed. 2. Maximum density for the entire parcel on which the development is proposed shall be calculated by each slope classification, and then by dividing the square footage necessary in the underlying zone district per dwelling unit. 3. For parcels resting in more than one (1) zone district, the density reduction calculation shall be performed separately on the lands within each zone district. 4. Density shall be further reduced as specified in Chapter 26.04, Definition of Lot Area. Staff Finding: The application specifies the percentages of the property falling within the described slope classifications on page 28 of the application. The proposed density requires 16,500 square feet of Lot Area. After all reductions, the property yields approximately 109,000 square feet of Lot Area. While a Site Improvement Survey has not been performed on this property, the exact Lot Area for the property should not affect the proposed density. 3. Land Uses. The land uses permitted shall be those of the underlying zone district. Detached residential units may be authorized to be clustered in a zero lot line or row house configuration, but multi-family dwelling units shall only be allowed when permitted in the underlying zone district. Staff Finding: The application includes a request to rezone the property to AH1 -PUD. The present zoning, both City and County, allows for residential development in varying densities. The applicant is proposing the duplexes in a zero lot line configuration. 4. Dimensional Requirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; 1. Internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. Staff Comments 3 . If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying zone district, provided that the total area of alllots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone district. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final plat development plan. Staff Finding: This PUD will establish the dimensional requirements for the lot created. Only one variation to the underlying zone district is proposed. This is to the minimum lot size for Lots 9,10, and 11. The minimum lot size for a fathering parcel this large is 3,000 s.f. The minimum lot area per unit in a duplex configuration, however, is 1,500 s.f. This essentially allows for a duplex on a 3000 s.f. lot but does not allow for the duplexes to sit on their own fee simple property. Upon completion, the developer usually condominiumizes the shared property to separate ownership and allow each unit to sit on its own land as a limited common element. The smaller lot and a zero lot line setback allows for the creation o f duplexes on individual lots rather than with a shared ownership. This also saves the applicant having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. The proposed dimensional requirements are as follows: Requirements Common to Entire Development Zone District: The applicant is proposing the lower portion of the site (the lots) be rezoned to AH l-PUD with the upper portion rezoned to Conservation. Staff is suggesting the existing free-market home be zoned R-15. This would eliminate future confusion concerning "the mix" of affordable and free-market units. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 Feet Maximum height (including viewplanes): 25 Feet. Minimum percent open space: No requirement (building envelopes) Lot 1 (existing free-market) Zone District: Staff recommends R-15. Lot Size: 102,000 S.F. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North and East sides 10 feet each. Lot 2 (free-market) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 11,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Staff Comments 4 .. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 3 (free-market) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 11,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 4 (free-market) Zone District: AH]-PUD Lot Size: 11,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 5 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH 1-PUD Lot Size: 5,850 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 2,325 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within tile following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 22 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, 23 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: south side 15 feet; north side 10 feet. Staff Comments 5 .. .. Lot 6 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 5,280 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 2,325 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented ort final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: Varies, 20 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum rear yard: Varies, 17 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope oil final plat. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 7 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 8,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 2,325 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat ancl within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 25 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, 24 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: south side 10 feet; north-side varies, 22 feet a closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Lot 8 (category unit) Zone District: AH 1-PUD Lot Size: 3,090 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 38 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 10 feet; east side 0 feet (shared wall). Staff Comments 6 .. Lot 9 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 2,220 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 30 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 0 feet (shared wall); east side 6 feet. Lot 10 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot S ize: 2,190 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: ~ No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside ofthe building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 18 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 6 feet; east side 0 feet (shared wall). Lot 11 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 2,330 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside ofthe building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 0 feet (shared wall); east side 16 feet. Lot 12 shared access parcel) Zone District: AH 1-PUD Lot Size: 9320 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 10 covered carports in two structures Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Staff Comments 7 .. Trash access area: Minimum 10 wide, unobstructed. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 5 feet (from east side). Minimum rear yard: 15 feet (from lot 5 subdivision line) Minimum side yards: south side 8 feet; north side 25 feet Conservation Parcel Zone District: Conservation Lot Size: 593,990 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 0 Minimum Percent Open Space: 100% Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and minor improvements associated with passive recreational use or which are necessary for community health and safety reasons may occur on this parcel. 5. Off-street parking. The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. b. The parking need of any nonresidential units. c. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. d. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. e. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the City shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change Staff Finding: The underlying zone district, AH1 proposed, requires parking requirements to be established through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposal includes at least 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit, which is the minimum for development city-wide. This Special Review will occur during the Final PUD review. Staff does not see any problems with the number of spaces proposed. 6. Open Space. The Open Space requirement shall be that of the underlying zone district. However, a variation in minimum open space may be permitted if such variation would not be detrimental to the character of the proposed PUD, and if the proposed development shall include open space for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD through a Staff Comments 8 .. common park or recreation area. An area may be approved as a common park or recreation area if it: a. Is to be used and is suitable for scenic, landscaping, or recreation purposes; and b. Is land which is accessible and available to all dwelling units or lots for whom the common area is intended. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas shall be deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the planned unit development (PUD), together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Any plan for open space shall also be accompanied by a legal instrument which ensures the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and communally owned facilities. Staff Finding: The Conservation parcel will be deeded to the City with the surface easement granted to the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The legal instruments to protect this area should be submitted with the Final PUD application. The applicant is encouraged to work with the City Attorney and the Parks Department in preparing these restrictions. 7. Landscape Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces. It shall provide an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species that are regarded as suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding: The Conceptual Development Plan includes a Landscape Plan for the Category parcels and the access parcel. This plan provides a reasonable amount and variety of plantings. Landscape guidelines for the remaining parcels should be submitted with the Final PUD application. The intent of this is to ensure some consistency between parcels without significantly restricting personal choice. If landscape guidelines for only the affordable lots are submitted and approved, a reasonable assurance of landscape compatibility should be provided for the free-market lots. The Parks Department had a concerns about the snow storage area at the end of the access parcel. During high snow years, Parks is concerned the snow storage may encroach on the Midland R.O.W. and public trail. The applicant should present how this snow encroachment can be avoided or mitigated. 8. Architectural Site Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency with the proposed development, architectural character, building design, and the preservation of the visual character of the City. It is not the purpose of this review that control of architectural character be so rigidly enforced that individual initiative is stifted in the design of a particular building, or substantial additional expense is required. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, upon Staff Comments 9 .. appropriate use of materials, and upon the principles of harmony and proportion of the buildings with each other and surrounding land uses. Building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion. Staff Finding: Building envelopes have been placed appropriately considering the natural terrain and surrounding land uses. The conceptual plans and elevations for the Category units have been included in this application. The proportions, massing, and materials seem appropriate. The RO structures should be of similar architectural character to the Category structures because of their proximity. Both the RO and free-market structures must be developed consistent with the City's Residential Design Guidelines, as amended. Any design waivers necessary and appropriate may be considered during Final review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed a desire for combined vehicular entrances to reduce the street presence of driveways and garage doors. Entrances could be combined for proposed Lots 2-3,4-5, and 6-7. The applicant represented this combining of entrances could be studied prior to final submission. 9. Lighting. Alllighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Staff Finding: Lighting shall be downeast. No lighting of landscape elements or architectural features should be allowed. 10. Clustering. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. Staff Finding: The development has been clustered. 11. Public facilities. The proposed development shall be designed so that adequate public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development at the time development is constructed, and that there will be no net public cost for the provision of these public facilities. Further, buildings shall not be arranged such that any structure is inaccessible to emergency vehicles. Staff Finding: The Engineering and Streets Departments are asking for the development of curb and gutter with this project. The Planning Department is hoping the same operational goals for drainage, snowplowing, etc. can be achieved with a less urban treatment. The Streets Department suggested a 4" roll curb and/or drainage swale could be used. The Planning and Zoning Commission was receptive to a dranage swale with no curb. Also, the placement of required street trees (required through subdivision) should be coordinated Staff Comments 10 .. with the Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments so that the storage of plowed snow along Garmish Street can be accommodated without crushing the trees. The proposed access way and fire suppression has been designed to accommodate the Fire Marshall's requirements. The Sanitation District will require a line extension, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes. Also, the existing house has a manhole near the front steps. An easement to access this manhole should be granted to the ACSD. 12. Traffic and pedestrian circulation. a. Every dwelling unit, or other land use permitted in the planned unit development (PUD) shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. c. The proposed development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding collector and arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. Every residential building shall not be farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadway or drive providing access to a public street. e. All nonresidential land use within the planned unit development (PUD) shall have direct access to a collector or at-terial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. f. Streets in the planned unit development (PUD) may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent city regulations and ordinances. Staff Finding: The proposed access way meets these standards. The land owners sharing Lot 12 will be responsible for maintaining safe access. Staff Comments 11 ASPEN PLANNIP~ AND ZONING COMMISSIO77 DECEMBER 2. 1997 COMMISSIONER AND STAFF COMMENTâ‚¬ Â¢ BARBEE CONCEPTUAL PUD .--1---------------------------------------1 TEXT AMENDMENT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS 920 WEST HALLAM STREET - LANDMARK DESIGNATION 7 9 ASPEN PLANNI~ AND ZONING COMMISSIO~ DECEMBER 2. 1997 Sara Garton, chair, called the regular aspen planning and zoning commission meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. with Bob Blaich, Steve Buettow, Marta Chaikovska, Roger Hunt, Tim Mooney, Dave Johnston and Jasmine Tygre present. Other staff present were David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, Chris Bendon, Mitch Haas, Amy Guthrie, and Julie Ann Woods, Community Development. COMMISSIONER AND STAFF COMMENTS Julie Ann Woods said the next aspen mountain master plan joint P&Z meeting was on 12/16/97 at 5:30 p.m. after the regular city P&Z meeting with 2 items. She said that would be that last of the commissioners meetings for this year. Woods noted a joint council/BOCC lunch meeting on 12/17/97 with the AACP approach. Woods gave a tentative January 1998 schedule. Jasmine Tygre said following-up on the Aspen Club parking lot, it seems the main access is on Ute Avenue. She stated the formerly main parking area off Crystal Lake Road has a house site with a fence around it leaving about 20 spaces. Tygre noted with the club' s change in use to almost a spa, it is more retail orientated with higher traffic impacts. Woods confirmed that from a staff site visit last week, the single family lot side (Crystal Lake Road) was being re-configured to about 20 parking spaces. She said more parking was allowed on the Ute Avenue side because it was closer to the club, which was an issue worked out with the planning director as an insubstantial amendment. Tygre inquired about the number of spaces approved by city P&Z for the Crystal Lake parking lot. Sara Garton stated that city council over-turned the P&Z decision when Dick Buetera went for an appeal. Garton asked about the limos that were supposed be servicing the club. Woods noted the Aspen Club was paying for improvements made to Ute Avenue and would look into the limo issue. NEW BUSINESS: BARBEE CONCEPTUAL PUD Chris Bendon, staff, stated the applicant proposed 10 new residential units, within the 70-30 affordable - free market unit mix, in the AH1 Zone District. He noted the site was at the base of Shadow Mountain south of Koch Lumber Park. Bendon stated this was conceptual review with final review to consider rezoning, 1 ASPEN PLANNING ARD ZONING COMMISSION DfECEMBER 2. 1997 subdivision, special review, 8040, growth management and any residential design reviews necessary. Bendon presented a site map noting the terrain, portion in county jurisdiction, existing house and deeded conservation parcel. He pointed out the proposed placement of the units, access and cariort. Bendon reviewed the proposed conditions stating "e" the landscape plan would be part o f the PUD but should not limit creativity and the applicant has submitted a landscape plan. He noted changes in condition "f' deleting all but the first 2 sentences. He said the existing shed could remain as a cultural landscape feature, although not deemed historical. Bendon asked the engineering department to look at other than traditional curb and gutter solutions. He noted the street trees may be able to be located along the trail. He distributed a new engineering memo and parks memo. Bendon stated an improvement survey had not been done and due to the area size, no density or FAR problems as anticipated with the proposal. He said the engineering department had concerns with driveway widths, open mines, wells, trees and Juan Street. Sunny Vann, representative for the Barbee family, provided the family property history with 1 /3 divided interests and at least 2 members would like to remain on the property. He said the property was not subdivided by the city/county line, and an annexation petition has been submitted with approval from the city on the first 2 steps. He stated the final annexation approval will be done with the final PUD. Vann noted the property had 4 different zone districts, Conservation, R-15 and 2 different zone districts in the county. He said the residential portion o f the property would be rezoned AH with a free market component zone and the rest to Conservation. Vann stated since the Barbee family was not a developer, Aspen- Pitkin Employee Housing, Inc. (APEH Inc.), Reid Haughey representative, agreed to act as the developer. Vann provided the proposed breakdown scenario for the development and sales ofthe units. Vann described past and present street, road, easements, access and building envelopes on the property. He said this was one of the best projects that could be done to benefit the community with a sensitive solution to housing needs. 2 ASPEN PLANNIMM AND ZONING COMMISSIOW DECEMBER 2. 1997 Steve Buettow commented the driveways on lots 5,6 & 7 were on a steep slope which would probably not comply with ordinance 30. Vann described the entrance pattern from the street to the garages. He said the distances were staggered and the parking structure utilized the staggered grade. Roger Hunt stated general approval with questions about lots 2,3 & 4. He asked if Lots 3 & 4 could be turned because of frontage versus depth to help the visual appearance. Vann replied the intent was to allow street front for each lot. He explained there were 4,500 maximum square footage buildings on 11,500 sq.ft. sized lots with no addition to the FAR. Haughey noted that what Hunt suggested was tried but circulation warranted this configuration. Jasmine Tygre asked i f there was a height variation needed. Vann answered the project complied with all dimensional design requirements of the zone district except the duplex owners will need a variance for their lots being adjusted. She said this was an appropriate site for the project but the long, thin lots may make the homes look larger than in actuality. Bendon commented the appeal for the skinny side being the public side was having the ability to meet ordinance 30 with all the requirements in a limited range with less bulk. He said ordinance 30 did not address this design amenity of allowing a private backyard. Buettow reminded the commission ofthe "Rapids" project on a narrow city lot with garages on the streetscape which brought co-usage of drive-ways into nice piece of architecture. He asked if the garages could be designated at the rear of the lots with lot line usage for driveways. Vann stated the purpose of ordinance 30 was to provide the opportunity for someone to show compliance to this ever- evolving document. Vann said that the city code placed enough constraints on the building and land use issues, so the intent was not to dictate lack of originality up front. Buettow reminded Vann this was a PUD which meant "plan in advance" to take advantage of looking at shared driveways for example. Garton inquired as to the R15 zoning for Lot 1. Bendon replied in AH1 PUD zoning, the 70-30 fits with 10 units in the PUD. He said for precedent reasons, this would not allow 11 units. Vann said it clarifies the technical use with a designated building envelope in the conservation district. Garton complimented the Barbees for being able to keep this property in the family and work with the AACP to provide employee housing. She voiced the shared concern with the co- commissioners on the suburbia feel kept in tact but urged the soft transitional feeling. She appreciated Bendon' s comments because they were in keeping with 3 ASPEN PLANNING XND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 2. 1997 what that parcel has been. She hoped that engineering would not require the curbs and gutters of urban design. Tygre noted shared driveways can be utilized and with proper landscaping to look quite beautiful. She stated that most of the comments have been advisory. Haughey said the message has been heard for the feel of this parcel. Bendon said there was no requirement to retain the old shed but would like it to remain somewhere on site. Vann requested the currently adopted regulations be applied fairly across the board and would be happy to comply with those, but piece-meal attachments concerned him. He questioned native stone quarried in Aspen other than marble, because colorado sandstone came from Arkansas. He asked how this condition would apply to the project. Chaikovska agreed with Vann and requested the condition change as listed in the motion below. Blaich agreed that in fairness to the applicant, "lf' should end before "in addition..." MOTION: Jasmine Tygre moved to approve the conceptual PUD with the conditions as amended below. 1. The Application for Final approval shall include the following: a.) A land use application for Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review for parking, 8040 Greenline Review, a Growth Management Exemption, and any Park or other fees requested to be waived. b.) A certified Site Improvement Survey of the property. All calculations shall be adjusted to reflect this site information. e.) All legal instruments associated with the Conservation parcel and easements on proposed Lot 1. d.) An air quality mitigation plan. The applicant is encouraged to develop this plan with the Environmental Health Department. e.) A landscape plan or landscape guidelines for the entire development that is relatively consistent from parcel to parcel. The intent of this provision is to ensure a level of quality, not to limit creativity. All exterior lighting should be downcast and not used to call attention to landscape features. For the proposed free-market lots, assurance that when developed the landscape will be generally harmonious with the affordable lots shall be sufficient to meet this requirement. f.) Architectural plans or architectural guidelines addressing how the proposed structures will respect the proportions, massing, and materials appropriate for residential development in the City of Aspen. The City's Residential Guidelines, as amended, should be used as a base. 2. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 4 ASPEN PLANNIP~AND ZONING COMMISSIO~ DECEMBER 2. 1997 3. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the Garmish Street side o f the carport structure. 4. The applicant shall involve the Planning, Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments in designing the edge of the roadway and any street, sidewalk, drainage improvements that may be necessary. The storage of plowed snow shall be considered when locating the sidewalk, street trees, and street light. The applicant is encouraged to consider a roll curb or drainage swale as a less urban solution to the standard curb and gutter. 5. The applicant is encouraged to submit a development pro forma to the Housing Authority to review the Category designation for the duplex units. Both the City and the Applicant understand that a developer's financial information, profit, etc. is strictly personal information and not a standard for reviewing land use applications. 6. The applicant shall grant an easement to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for access to the existing manhole on proposed Lot #1. 7. The applicant should be aware of the following conditions that are generally associated with final approvals: a.) Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension request, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Also, landscape improvements are reviewed to ensure reasonable access to maintain the public system. b.) The applicant shall submit a drainage report prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that no sediment loaded drainage will be leaving the property during and after construction. c.) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a fugitive dust control plan. d.) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the Environmental Health Department for any fireplaces or woodburning devices. e.) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. f.) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit GIS data including property lines, building footprints, easements, and encroachments. g.) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall repair any public right-of-way damaged during construction. h.) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers must be installed on the applicant's property and not in any public right-of-way. Easements must be provided for pedestals. All utility locations and easements must be delineated on the site improvement survey. Revisions to utility locations and easements must be delineated on a revised site improvement survey prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. 5 ASPEN PLANNING AMVD ZONING COMMISSION ~CEMBER 2. 1997 i.) The applicant must receive approval for any work within public rights-of-way from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 8. The applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 9. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. Roger Hunt second. ALL IN FAVOR, APPROVED 7-0. The Commission continued to discuss the views and guidelines to follow current codes, residential building design standards and ordinance 30. They brought many solutions and suggestions to the applicant for more work on the conceptual PUD to be brought back for final review. PUBLIC HEARING: TEXT AMENDMENT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS Amy Guthrie, staff, presented the notice. David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, said the notice met jurisdictional requirements. Guthrie asked for a continuance based upon drawings added to the code revisions that needed to be included in the presentation as well as the following concerns. She said ordinance 30 has been rewritten, re-organized with additional standards. She noted the character guidelines had been lost and working with DRAC the issues have been re- incorporated. Guthrie commented that an intent statement has been added to the residential design standards memo Exhibit A and on page 3, SITE DESIGN 11#3. Fences. a new standard had been added. Roger Hunt stated that hedges needed to be added and Bob Blaich added berms to the fence standard. Guthrie noted the change in ordinance 30 replacing primary mass with secondary mass in which "10% of their total square footage in a mass which is completely detached from the majority of living space, ..." Steve Buettow noted due to the size ofthe houses (15,000sf) being requested, the architects now break up the massing with new elements. 6 .. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council AO THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Directo/~62~ Julie Ann Woods, Deputy DirectorkA I Al C) la .9- 1 FROM: Christopher Bendon, Planner 11 RE: Barbee Conceptual Planned Unit Development - 1st Reading DATE: December 15, 1997 SUMMARY: The applicant, Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., has applied for Conceptual approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The development proposed is for 10 new residential units falling within the 70-30 affordable - free-market mix of the AH1 Zone District. The site is located at the base of West Aspen or "Shadow" Mountain just south of Koch-Lumber Park. The property includes a substantial portion of Shadow Mountain which is proposed as a conservation parcel. This is a Conceptual PUD Review. The Final PUD Review will also consider the Annexation, Rezoning, Subdivision, Growth Management allotments, and any Parks or other fees to be waived. Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend the City Council approve this Conceptual PUD, with conditions. APPLICANT: Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc. Sunny Vann, Vann Associates, representative. LOCATION: Approximately the corner of Juan and Garmish Streets. Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen, plus additional metes and bounds described property within the City of Aspen and Pitkin County as shown on the existing conditions map. ZONING: The portions of the subject property currently within the City of Aspen are zoned R-15-PUD-L and Conservation. Portions of the property in the County are zoned AFR-10 and R-15-PUD. The applicant is seeking annexation into the City for the 1 .. County portion of the property and a rezoning to ALI1 -PUD. This annexation and rezoning will be reviewed during steps 3 and 4 0 f the PUD process. LOT SIZE: 17.67 acres. 769,470 Square feet. This is an approximation, the final application will include a site improvement survey. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): 760,150 square feet. This represents the total property minus the proposed access easement. Most of the subject property consists of slopes of greater than 30%. FAR, however, cannot be reduced by more than 25% for slope considerations. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF DENSITY CALCULATION): 109,270 square feet. This includes the same restrictions as above and considers slope reduction. FAR: .3:1 of which 85% can be built as of right, 100% with Special Review approval. Based on the total site minus the proposed access easement and the maximum 25% FAR reduction for slopes in excess of 30%, 145,380 square feet can be built as of right. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence, assorted outbuildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: Same with 10 additional residences and two carport structures. PREVIOUS ACTION: The City Council has not previously considered this application. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application and recommended approval, with conditions, at their December 2, 1997, meeting. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Conceptual Planned Unit Development. The City Council shall consider and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application at a public hearing. BACKGROUND: The property is currently in two jurisdictions. The applicant has requested annexation into the City and this action will take place concurrent with final approval from City Council. The Community Development Director has waived the requirement of a Site Improvement Survey for this Conceptual PUD application with the understanding that one will be provided with the Final application. 2 .. STAFF COMMENTS: Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve this Conceptual PUD application with the following conditions: 1. The Application for Final approval shall include the following: a) A land use application for Annexation, Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review for parking, 8040 Greenline Review, a Growth Management Exemption, and any Park or other fees requested to be waived. b) A certified Site Improvement Survey of the property. All calculations shall be adjusted to reflect this site information. c) All legal instruments associated with the Conservation parcel and easements on proposed Lot 1. d) An air quality mitigation plan. The applicant is encouraged to develop this plan with the Environmental Health Department. e) A landscape plan or landscape guidelines for the entire development that is relatively consistent from parcel to parcel. The intent of this provision is to ensure a level of quality, not to limit creativity. For proposed Lots 2,3, & 4, a minimum threshold requirement and a statement that ensures the landscape will be developed compatible with the remaining proposed Lots shall be sufficient. All exterior lighting should be downcast and not used to call attention to landscape features. f) Architectural plans or architectural guidelines addressing how the proposed structures will respect the proportions, massing, and materials appropriate for residential development in the City of Aspen. The City's Residential Guidelines, as amended, should be used as a base. 2. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 3. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately lot 4 of Block 5 ). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the Garmish Street side of the carport structure. The structure is not an officially recognized historical resource. 4. The applicant shall involve the Planning, Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments in designing the edge of the roadway and any street, sidewalk, drainage improvements that may be necessary. The storage of plowed snow shall be considered when locating the 3 .. sidewalk, street trees, and street light. The applicant is encouraged to consider a roll curb or drainage swale as a less urban solution to the standard curb and gutter. 5, The applicant is encouraged to submit a development pro forma to the Housing Authority to review the Category designation for the duplex units. Both the City and the Applicant understand that a developer's financial information, profit, etc. is strictly personal information and not a standard for reviewing land use applications. 6. The applicant shall grant an easement to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for access to the existing manhole on proposed Lot #1. 7. The applicant should be aware of the following conditions that are generally associated with final approvals: a) Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant will be required to gain approval for a I ine extension request, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Also, landscape improvements are reviewed to ensure reasonable access to maintain the public system. b) The applicant shall submit a drainage report prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that no sediment loaded drainage will be leaving the property during and after construction. c) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a fugitive dust control plan. d) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the Environmental Health Department for any fireplaces or woodburning devices. e) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. f) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit GIS data including property lines, building footprints, easements, and encroachments. g) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall repair any public right-of-way damaged during construction. h) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers must be installed on the applicant's property and not in any public right-of-way. Easements must be provided for pedestals. All utility locations and easements must be delineated on the site improvement survey. Revisions to utility locations and easements must be delineated on a revised site improvement survey prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. i) The applicant must receive approval for any work within public rights-of-way from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 4 .. 8. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Barbee Conceptual PUD upon first reading with the conditions outlined in the Staff memo dated December 15,19977 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Comments from Referral Agencies Exhibit C -- Application 5 .. ORDINANCE 30. 42~ (SERIES OF 1998) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THE BARBEE PROPERTY, LOTS 1 AND 2 OF BLOCK 11, AND LOTS 1-9 OF BLOCK 5, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PLUS ADDITIONAL METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIBED PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND PITKIN COUNTY AS REPRESENTED, PARCEL NO. 2735-131-00-100 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., applicant, for a Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval on an approximately 17.67 acre parcel of land, described as Lot 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen plus additional metes and bounds within City of Aspen and Pitkin County as represented, for the development of ten new residential units consistent with the Affordable Housing - Planned Unit Development (AH1-PUD) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, the application was referred to the relevant agencies and the Housing Office, Fire Marshall, Environmental Health Department, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering Department, Parks Department, and Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on December 2, 1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, by a 7-0 vote, the City Council approve the Conceptual Planned Unit Development for the Barbee property, with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department, as amended by the Commission; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified in Sections 26.52, and 26.84, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare. Ordinance No. , Series 1998 Page 1 .. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: Pursuant to Sections 26.52, and 26.84, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter, the City Council hereby grants Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval for the Barbee Property, as described. Section 2: Conditions of Approval: 1. The Application for Final approval shall include the following: a) A land use application for Annexation, Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review for parking, 8040 Greenline Review, a Growth Management Exemption, and any Park or other fees requested to be waived. b) A certified Site Improvement Survey ofthe property. All calculations shall be adjusted to reflect this site information. c) All legal instruments associated with the Conservation parcel and easements on proposed Lot I. d) An air quality mitigation plan. The applicant is encouraged to develop this plan with the Environmental Health Department. e) A landscape plan or landscape guidelines for the entire development that is relatively consistent from parcel to parcel. The intent of this provision is to ensure a level of quality, not to limit creativity. All exterior lighting should be downcast and not used to call attention to landscape features. For the proposed free-market lots, Lots 2,3, & 4, assurance that when developed the landscape will be generally harmonious with the affordable lots shall be sufficient to meet this requirement. f) Architectural plans or architectural guidelines addressing how the proposed structures will respect the proportions, massing, and materials appropriate for residential development in the City of Aspen. The City's Residential Guidelines, as amended, should be used as a base. 2. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 3. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north ofthe existing parking pad (approximately lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the Garmish Street side of the carport structure. 4. The applicant shall involve the Planning, Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments in designing the edge of the roadway and any street, sidewalk, drainage improvements that may be necessary. The storage of plowed snow shall be considered when locating the sidewalk, street trees, and street light. The applicant is encouraged to consider a roll curb or drainage swale as a less urban solution to the standard curb and gutter. Ordinance No. , Series 1998 Page 2 .. 5. The applicant is encouraged to submit a development pro forma to the Housing Authority to review the Category designation for the duplex units. Both the City and the Applicant understand that a developer's financial information, profit, etc. is strictly personal information and not a standard for reviewing land use applications. 6. The applicant shall grant an easement to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for access to the existing manhole on proposed Lot #1. 7. The applicant should be aware of the following conditions that are generally associated with final approvals: a) Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension request, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Also, landscape improvements are reviewed to ensure reasonable access to maintain the public system. b) The applicant shall submit a drainage report prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that no sediment loaded drainage will be leaving the property during and after construction. c) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a fugitive dust control plan. d) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the Environmental Health Department for any fireplaces or woodburning devices. e) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. f) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit GIS data including property lines, building footprints, easements, and encroachments. g) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall repair any public right-of-way damaged during construction. h) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers must be installed on the applicant's property and not in any public right-of-way. Easements must be provided for pedestals. All utility locations and easements must be delineated on the site improvement survey. Revisions to utility locations and easements must be delineated on a revised site improvement survey prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. i) The applicant must receive approval for any work within public rights-of-way from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. Section 3: All material representations and coinmitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or Ordinance No. , Series 1998 Page 3 .. documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, and or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. Section 4: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 7: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 12th day of January, 1998 at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council ofthe City ofAspen on the 15th day of December, 1997. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: City Attorney John Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Ordinance No. , Series 1998 Page 4 .. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of ,1998. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: City Attorney John Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Ordinance No. , Series 1998 Page 5 .. EXHIBIT ~ Staff Comments: Barbee Planned Unit Development A development application for a PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements: A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: Community Vision: The proposed development increases resident housing opportunities, encourages a balanced permanent community, may provide residents with a transportation alternative if they choose to walk to town, work, etc., and is a relatively sustainable development pattern. Community Vitality: The proposed development is 70% affordable, addressing the community's desire to provide affordable housing opportunities within a reasonable walking distance to employment and recreation resources. The proposed development is an in-fill site within, or approximately within, the original townsite. Increased residential density, especially for local working residents, within the functional town promotes a sense of community that cannot be achieved by placing that critical mass in a remote location, regardless of where the metro area or extended metro boundaries exist. Open Space and Environment: Providing housing opportunities within walking distance to employment, entertainment, recreation, and other residences reduces the need to use a vehicle for every trip. Also, compact development within the townsite reduces the need to extend services and carve-up land on the outskirts of town, and preserves those natural open space areas for their wildlife and aesthetic functions. Where appropriate, the development proposal is preserving areas clearly not appropriate for development. All development proposed is within the flat area at the base of West Aspen Mountain which is being preserved with a conservation easement. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: Surrounding development on approximately the northeast side consists of multi-family housing, a park, older lodge conversions, and future potential mini-base development for Lift 1 or 'Town Lift.' There is virtually no development, or potential for development, to the Southeast of the site which is compatible with the open space easement proposed. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Staff Comments 1 .. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The surrounding area's development or redevelopment potential will not be affected by this development. D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. Staff Finding: The application must receive development allotments for 10 residential units. The Growth Management Commission will consider this case and make a recommendation to City Council during the Final PUD review process. 2. Density: A. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Furthermore, densities may be reduced if: 1. There is not sufficient water pressure and other utilities to serve the proposed development; 2. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development; 3. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of slope, ground instability, and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls and avalanche dangers; 4. The effects ofthe proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution; 5. The proposed development will have deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city; or 6. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding: The density proposed on this site is far below the allowable based on the gross lot size. There are sufficient utilities and services to accommodate this development. The access way to the RO and Category lots is adequate for fire protection service. The portion of the property where development is proposed is suitable for development. The applicant has not provided an Air Quality Mitigation Plan. A condition of conceptual approval should be that the applicant supply this plan with the Final application. The location of the proposed development does not appear to be in severe conflict with the natural terrain and features of the site. B. Reduction in density for slope consideration. 1. In order to reduce wildfire, mudslide, and avalanche hazards; enhance soil stability; and guarantee adequate fire protection access, the density of a PUD shall also be reduced in areas with slopes in excess oftwenty (20) percent in the following manor: Staff Comments 2 .. a. For lands between zero (0) and twenty (20) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be that permitted in the underlying zone district. b. For lands between twenty-one (21) and thirty (30) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be reduced to fifty (50) percent of that permitted in the underlying zone district. c. For lands between thirty-one (31) and forty (40) percent slope, the density shall be reduced to twenty-five (25) percent of that allowed in the underlying zone district. d. For lands in excess of forty (40) percent slope, no density credit shall be allowed. 2. Maximum density for the entire parcel on which the development is proposed shall be calculated by each slope classification, and then by dividing the square footage necessary in the underlying zone district per dwelling unit. 3. For parcels resting in more than one (1) zone district, the density reduction calculation shall be performed separately on the lands within each zone district. 4. Density shall be further reduced as specified in Chapter 26.04, Definition of Lot Area. Staff Finding: The application specifies the percentages of the property falling within the described slope classifications on page 28 of the application. The proposed density requires 16,500 square feet of Lot Area. After all reductions, the property yields approximately 109,000 square feet of Lot Area. While a Site Improvement Survey has not been performed on this property, the exact Lot Area for the property should not affect the proposed density. 3. Land Uses. The land uses permitted shall be those of the underlying zone district. Detached residential units may be authorized to be clustered in a zero lot line or row house configuration, but multi-family dwelling units shall only be allowed when permitted in the underlying zone district. Staff Finding: The application includes a request to rezone the property to AH1-PUD. The present zoning, both City and County, allows for residential development in varying densities. The applicant is proposing the duplexes in a zero lot line configuration. 4. Dimensional Requirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; 1. Internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. Staff Comments 3 .. . If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying zone district, provided that the total area ofalllots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone district. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final plat development plan. Staff Finding: This PUD will establish the dimensional requirements for the lot created. Only one variation to the underlying zone district is proposed. This is to the minimum lot size for Lots 9, 10, and 11. The minimum lot size for a fathering parcel this large is 3,000 s.f. The minimum lot area per unit in a duplex configuration, however, is 1,500 s. f. This essentially allows for a duplex on a 3000 s.f. lot but does not allow for the duplexes to sit on their own fee simple property. Upon completion, the developer usually condominiumizes the shared property to separate ownership and allow each unit to sit on its own land as a limited common element. The smaller lot and a zero lot line setback allows for the creation of duplexes on individual lots rather than with a shared ownership. This also saves the applicant having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. The proposed dimensional requirements are as follows: Requirements Common to Entire Development Zone District: The applicant is proposing the lower portion of the site (the lots) be rezoned to AH1 -PUD with the upper portion rezoned to Conservation. Staff is suggesting the existing free-market home be zoned R-15. This would eliminate future confusion concerning "the mix" of affordable and free-market units. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 Feet Maximum height (including viewplanes) 25 Feet. Minimum percent open space: No requirement (building envelopes) Lot 1 (existing free-market) Zone District: Staff recommends R-15. Lot Size: 102,000 S.F. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North and East sides 10 feet each. Lot 2 (free-market) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 11,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Staff Comments 4 .. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 3 (free-market) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 11,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 4 (free-market) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 11,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside ofthe building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 5 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 5,850 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 2,325 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 22 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, 23 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: south side 15 feet; north side 10 feet. Staff Comments 5 .. Lot 6 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 5,280 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 2,325 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: Varies, 20 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum rear yard: Varies, 17 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 7 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 8,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 2,325 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 25 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, 24 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: south side 10 feet; north-side varies, 22 feet a closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Lot 8 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 3,090 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside ofthe building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 38 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 10 feet; east side 0 feet (shared wall). Staff Comments 6 .. Lot 9 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 2,220 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 30 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 0 feet (shared wall); east side 6 feet. Lot 10 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 2,190 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 18 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 6 feet; east side 0 feet (shared wall). Lot 11 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot S ize: 2,330 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 0 feet (shared wall); east side 16 feet. Lot 12 (shared access parcel) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 9320 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 10 covered carports in two structures Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Staff Comments 7 .. . Trash access area: Minimum 10 wide, unobstructed. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 5 feet (from east side). Minimum rear yard: 15 feet (from lot 5 subdivision line) Minimum side yards: south side 8 feet; north side 25 feet Conservation Parcel Zone District: Conservation Lot Size: 593,990 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 0 Minimum Percent Open Space: 100% Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and minor improvements associated with passive recreational use or which are necessary for community health and safety reasons may occur on this parcel. 5. Off-street parking. The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. b. The parking need of any nonresidential units. c. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. d. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. e. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the City shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change Staff Finding: The underlying zone district, AH1 proposed, requires parking requirements to be established through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposal includes at least 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit, which is the minimum for development city-wide. This Special Review will occur during the Final PUD review. Staff does not see any problems with the number of spaces proposed. 6. Open Space. The Open Space requirement shall be that of the underlying zone district. However, a variation in minimum open space may be permitted if such variation would not be detrimental to the character of the proposed PUD, and if the proposed development shall include open space for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD through a Staff Comments 8 .. common park or recreation area. An area may be approved as a common park or recreation area if it: a. Is to be used and is suitable for scenic, landscaping, or recreation purposes; and b. Is land which is accessible and available to all dwelling units or lots for whom the common area is intended. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas shall be deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the planned unit development (PUD), together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Any plan for open space shall also be accompanied by a legal instrument which ensures the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and communally owned facilities. Staff Finding: The Conservation parcel will be deeded to the City with the surface easement granted to the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The legal instruments to protect this area should be submitted with the Final PUD application. The applicant is encouraged to work with the City Attorney and the Parks Department in preparing these restrictions. 7. Landscape Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces. It shall provide an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species that are regarded as suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding: The Conceptual Development Plan includes a Landscape Plan for the Category parcels and the access parcel. This plan provides a reasonable amount and variety of plantings. Landscape guidelines for the remaining parcels should be submitted with the Final PUD application. The intent of this is to ensure some consistency between parcels without significantly restricting personal choice. If landscape guidelines for only the affordable lots are submitted and approved, a reasonable assurance of landscape compatibility should be provided for the free-market lots. The Parks Department had a concerns about the snow storage area at the end of the access parcel. During high snow years, Parks is concerned the snow storage may encroach on the Midland R.O.W. and public trail. The applicant should present how this snow encroachment can be avoided or mitigated. 8. Architectural Site Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency with the proposed development, architectural character, building design, and the preservation of the visual character of the City. It is not the purpose of this review that control of architectural character be so rigidly enforced that individual initiative is stifled in the design of a particular building, or substantial additional expense is required. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, upon Staff Comments 9 .. appropriate use of materials, and upon the principles of harmony and proportion of the buildings with each other and surrounding land uses. Building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion. Staff Finding: Building envelopes have been placed appropriately considering the natural terrain and surrounding land uses. The conceptual plans and elevations for the Category units have been included in this application. The proportions, massing, and materials seem appropriate. The RO structures should be of similar architectural character to the Category structures because of their proximity. Both the RO and free-market structures must be developed consistent with the City's Residential Design Guidelines, as amended. Any design waivers necessary and appropriate may be considered during Final review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed a desire for combined vehicular entrances to reduce the street presence of driveways and garage doors. Entrances could be combined for proposed Lots 2-3,4-5, and 6-7. The applicant represented this combining of entrnces could be studied prior to final submission. 9. Lighting. All lighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Staff Finding: Lighting shall be downeast. No lighting of landscape elements or architectural features should be allowed. 10. Clustering. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. Staff Finding: The development has been clustered. 11. Public facilities. The proposed development shall be designed so that adequate public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development at the time development is constructed, and that there will be no net public cost for the provision of these public facilities. Further, buildings shall not be arranged such that any structure is inaccessible to emergency vehicles. Staff Finding: The Engineering and Streets Departments are asking for the development of curb and gutter with this project. The Planning Department is hoping the same operational goals for drainage, snowplowing, etc. can be achieved with a less urban treatment. The Streets Department suggested a 4" roll curb and/or drainage swale could be used. The Planning and Zoning Commission was receptive to a dranage swale with no curb. Also, the placement of required street trees (required through subdivision) should be coordinated Staff Comments 10 4 , . with the Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments so that the storage o f plowed snow along Garmish Street can be accommodated without crushing the trees. The proposed access way and fire suppression has been designed to accommodate the Fire Marshall's requirements. The Sanitation District will require a line extension, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes. Also, the existing house has a manhole near the front steps. An easement to access this manhole should be granted to the ACSD. 12. Traffic and pedestrian circulation. a. Every dwelling unit, or other land use permitted in the planned unit development (PUD) shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. c. The proposed development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding collector and arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. Every residential building shall not be farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadway or drive providing access to a public street. e. All nonresidential land use within the planned unit development (PUD) shall have direct access to a collector or arterial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. f. Streets in the planned unit development (PUD) may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent city regulations and ordinances. Staff Finding: The proposed access way meets these standards. The land owners sharing Lot 12 will be responsible for maintaining safe access. Staff Comments 11 . e . MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission AÂ« THRU: Stan Clauson, Community Development Director L/~ Julie Ann Woods, Deputy Director ~~@~3 - n 1 -1v- FROM: Christopher Bendon, Planner U\* RE: Barbee Conceptual Planned Unit Development DATE: December 2, 1997 SUMMARY: The applicant, Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., has applied for Conceptual approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The development proposed is for 10 new residential units falling within the 70-30 affordable - free-market mix o f the AH1 Zone District. The site is located at the base of West Aspen or "Shadow" Mountain just south of Koch-Lumber Park. The property includes a substantial portion of Shadow Mountain which is proposed as a conservation parcel. This is a Conceptual Review. The Final Review will also consider the Rezoning, Subdivision, Special Review, 8040, Growth Management, and any Residential Design Waivers necessary. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward a recommendation of approval for this Conceptual PUD to the City Council, with conditions. APPLICANT: Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc. Sunny Vann, Vann Associates, representative. LOCATION: Approximately the corner of Juan and Garmish Streets. Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 ofBlock 5, City and Townsite of Aspen, plus additional metes and bounds within City of Aspen and Pitkin County as shown on the existing conditions map. ZONING: The portions of the subject property currently within the City of Aspen are zoned R-15-PUD-L and Conservation. Portions of the property in the County are zoned AFR-10 and R-15-PUD. The applicant is seeking annexation into the City for the 1 .. County portion of the property and a rezoning to AH1-PUD. This annexation and rezoning will be reviewed during steps 3 and 4 of the PUD process. LOT SIZE: 17.67 acres. 769,470 Square feet. This is an approximation, the final application will include a site improvement survey. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): 760,150 square feet. This represents the total property minus the proposed access easement. Most of the subject property consists of slopes of greater than 30%. FAR, however, cannot be reduced by more than 25% for slope considerations. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF DENSITY CALCULATION): 109,270 square feet. This includes the same restrictions as above and considers slope reduction. FAR: .3:1 of which 85% can be built as of right, 100% with Special Review approval. Based on the total site minus the proposed access easement and the maximum 25% FAR reduction for slopes in excess of 30%, 145,380 square feet can be built as of right. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence, assorted outbuildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: Same with 10 additional residences and two carport structures. PREVIOUS ACTION: The Commission has not previously considered this application. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Conceptual Planned Unit Development. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the application at a hearing and recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial to City Council. BACKGROUND: The property is currently in two jurisdictions. The applicant has requested annexation into the City and this action will take place concurrent with final approval from City Council. The Community Development Director has waived the requirement of a Site Improvement Survey for this Conceptual PUD application with the understanding that one will be provided with the Final application. 2 .. STAFF COMMENTS: Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Application for Final approval shall include the following: a) A land use application for Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review for parking, 8040 Greenline Review, a Growth Management Exemption, and any Park or other fees requested to be waived. b) A certified Site Improvement Survey of the property. All calculations shall be adjusted to reflect this site information. e) Alllegal instruments associated with the Conservation parcel and easements on proposed Lot 1. d) An air quality mitigation plan. The applicant is encouraged to develop this plan with the Environmental Health Department. e) A landscape plan or landscape guidelines for the entire development that is relatively consistent from parcel to parcel. The intent of this provision is to (Â» 6Â¢RA ensure a level of quality, not to limit creativity. All exterior lighting should be downcast and not used to call attention to landscape features. f) Architectural plans or architectural guidelines addressing how the proposed structures will respect the proportions, massing, and materials appropriate for residential development in the City of Aspen. The City's Residential Guidelines, 616 a.â€¢Jd should be used as a base.~In-midifiEn, non-native stone-mi--Uld uged spar~NU -~-or-norused at-att-ontff@ exteriors. Adobe, terra cotta tile, alumillum,-or 6 i vinyl-siding shouldnot be used on the exteriors. Excessive-Wse of log ' timbers and using log timbers in a non-structural way should be avoided. ~ Exterior materials that express load-bEaring qualities should not be used - above obvious non load-bearing materials. Lighting should be downcast and not used-to call attention to architectural features. 2. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by tile City Engineer. 3. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the Garmish Street side of the carport structure. 4. The applicant shall involve the Planning, Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments in designing the edge of the roadway and any street, sidewalk, drainage improvements that Clt> curb or drainage swale as a less urban solution to the standard curb and gutter. may be necessary. The storage of plowed snow shall be considered when locating the sidewalk, street trees, and street light. The applicant is encouraged to consider a roll 10 3 = .. 5. The applicant is encouraged to submit a development pro forma to the Housing Authority to review the Category designation for the duplex units. Both the City and the Applicant understand that a developer's financial information, profit, etc. is strictly personal information and not a standard for reviewing land use applications. 6. The applicant shall grant an easement to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for access to the existing manhole on proposed Lot # 1. 7. The applicant should be aware ofthe following conditions that are generally associated with final approvals: a) Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension request, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Also, landscape improvement are reviewed to ensure reasonable access to maintain the public system. b) The applicant shall submit a drainage report prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that no sediment loaded drainage will be leaving the property during and after construction. c) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a fugitive dust control plan. d) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the Environmental Health Department for any fireplaces or woodburning devices. i . e) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and record an \Plw\ agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. f) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit Gl S data including property lines, building footprints, easements, and encroachments. g) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall repair any public right-of-way damaged during construction. h) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers must be installed on the applicant's property and not in any public right-of-way. Easements must be provided for pedestals. All utility locations and easements must be delineated on the site improvement survey. Revisions to utility locations and easements must be delineated on a revised site improvement survey prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. i) The applicant must receive approval for any work within public rights-of-way from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 8. The applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 4 .. 9. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Barbee Conceptual PUD with the conditions outlined in the Staff memo dated December 2,1997." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Comments from Referral Agencies Exhibit C -- Application 5 .. EXHIBIT ~ Staff Comments: Planned Unit Development A development application for a PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements: A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: Community Vision: The proposed development increases resident housing opportunities, encourages a balanced permanent community, may provide residents with a transportation alternative if they choose to walk to town, work, etc., and is a relatively sustainable development pattern. Community Vitality: The proposed development is 70% affordable, addressing the community's desire to provide affordable housing opportunities within a reasonable walking distance to employment and recreation resources. The proposed development is an in-fill site within, or approximately within, the original townsite. Increased residential density, especially for local working residents, within the functional town promotes a sense of community that cannot be achieved by placing that critical mass in a remote location, regardless of where the metro area or extended metro boundaries exist. Open Space and Environment: Providing housing opportunities within walking distance to employment, entertainment, recreation, and other residences reduces the need to use a vehicle for every trip. Also, compact development within the townsite reduces the need to extend services and carve-up land on the outskirts of town, and preserves those natural open space areas for their wildlife and aesthetic functions. Where appropriate, the development proposal is preserving areas clearly not appropriate for development. All development proposed is within the flat area at the base of West Aspen Mountain which is being preserved with a conservation easement. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: Surrounding development on approximately the northeast side consists of multi-family housing, a park, older lodge conversions, and future potential mini-base development for Lift 1 or 'Town Lift.' There is virtually no development, or potential for development, to the Southeast of the site which is compatible with the open space easement proposed. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Staff Comments 1 .. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The surrounding area's development or redevelopment potential will not be affected by this development. D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. Staff Finding: The application must receive development allotments for 10 residential units. The Growth Management Commission will consider this case and make a recommendation to City Council during the Final PUD review process. 2. Density: A. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Furthermore, densities may be reduced if: 1. There is not sufficient water pressure and other utilities to serve the proposed development; 2. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development; 3. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of slope, ground instability, and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls and avalanche dangers; 4. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution; 5. The proposed development will have deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city; or 6. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features ofthe site. Staff Finding: The density proposed on this site is far below the allowable based on the gross lot size. There are sufficient utilities and services to accommodate this development. The access way to the RO and Category lots is adequate for fire protection service. The portion of the property where development is proposed is suitable for development. The applicant has not provided an Air Quality Mitigation Plan. A condition of conceptual approval should be that the applicant supply this plan with the Final application. The location of the proposed development does not appear to be in severe conflict with the natural terrain and features of the site. B. Reduction in density for slope consideration. 1. In order to reduce wildfire, mudslide, and avalanche hazards; enhance soil stability; and guarantee adequate fire protection access, the density of a PUD shall also be reduced in areas with slopes in excess oftwenty (20) percent in the following manor: Staff Comments 2 .. a. For lands between zero (0) and twenty (20) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be that permitted in the underlying zone district. b. For lands between twenty-one (21) and thirty (30) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be reduced to fifty (50) percent of that permitted in the underlying zone district. c. For lands between thirty-one (31) and forty (40) percent slope, the density shall be reduced to twenty-five (25) percent of that allowed in the underlying zone district. d. For lands in excess of forty (40) percent slope, no density credit shall be allowed. 2. Maximum density for the entire parcel on which the development is proposed shall be calculated by each slope classification, and then by dividing the square footage necessary in the underlying zone district per dwelling unit. 3. For parcels resting in more than one (1) zone district, the density reduction calculation shall be performed separately on the lands within each zone district. 4. Density shall be further reduced as specified in Chapter 26.04, Definition of Lot Area, Staff Finding: The application specifies the percentages of the property falling within the described slope classifications on page 28 of the application. The proposed density requires 16,500 square feet of Lot Area. After all reductions, the property yields approximately 109,000 square feet of Lot Area. While a Site Improvement Survey has not been performed on this property, the exact Lot Area for the property should not affect the proposed density. 3. Land Uses. The land uses permitted shall be those of the underlying zone district. Detached residential units may be authorized to be clustered in a zero lot line or row house configuration, but multi-family dwelling units shall only be allowed when permitted in the underlying zone district. Staff Finding: The application includes a request to rezone the property to AH1-PUD. The present zoning, both City and County, allows for residential development in varying densities. The applicant is proposing the duplexes in a zero lot line configuration. 4. Dimensional Requirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; i. Internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. Staff Comments 3 .. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying zone district, provided that the total area of aillots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone district. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final plat development plan. Staff Finding: This PUD will establish the dimensional requirements for the lot created. Only one variation to the underlying zone district is proposed. This is to the minimum lot size for Lots 9, 10, and 11. The minimum lot size for a fathering parcel this large is 3,000 s.f. The minimum lot area per unit in a duplex configuration, however, is 1,500 s. f. This essentially allows for a duplex on a 3000 s.f. lot but does not allow for the duplexes to sit on their own fee simple property. Upon completion, the developer usually condominiumizes the shared property to separate ownership and allow each unit to sit on its own land as a limited common element. The smaller lot and a zero lot line setback allows for the creation of duplexes on individual lots rather than with a shared ownership. This also saves the applicant having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. The proposed dimensional requirements are as follows: Requirements Common to Entire Development Zone District: The applicant is proposing the lower portion of the site (the lots) be rezoned to AH 1-PUD with the upper portion rezoned to Conservation. Staff is suggesting the existing free-market home be zoned R-15. This would eliminate future confusion concerning "the mix" of affordable and free-market units. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 Feet Maximum height (including viewplanes): 25 Feet. Minimum percent open space: No requirement (building envelopes) Lot 1 (existing free-market) Zone District: Staff recommends R.-15. Lot Size: 102,000 S.F. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North and East sides 10 feet each. Lot 2 (free-market) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 11,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Staff Comments 4 .. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 3 (free-market) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 11,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 4 (free-market) Zone District: AH 1-PUD Lot S ize: 11,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 4,500 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 5 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 5,850 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 2,325 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 22 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, 23 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: south side 15 feet; north side 10 feet. Staff Comments 5 .. Lot 6 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 5,280 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 2,325 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: Varies, 20 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum rear yard: Varies, 17 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: 10 feet each. Lot 7 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 8,550 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 2,325 s.f. Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 25 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, 24 feet at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: south side 10 feet; north-side varies, 22 feet a closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Lot 8 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 3,090 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 38 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 10 feet; east side 0 feet (shared wall). Staff Comments 6 .. Lot 9 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 2,220 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 30 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 0 feet (shared wall); east side 6 feet. Lot 10 (category unit) Zone District: AH 1 -PUD Lot Size: 2,190 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 18 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 6 feet; east side 0 feet (shared wall). Lot 11 (category unit) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 2,330 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 1,400 s.f. plus optional 500 s.f. basement Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet (from south side). Minimum rear yard: Varies, 10 feet from property line at closest point, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: west side 0 feet (shared wall); east side 16 feet. Lot 12 (shared access parcel) Zone District: AH1-PUD Lot Size: 9320 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 10 covered carports in two structures Minimum lot width: As represented on final plat. Staff Comments 7 .. Trash access area: Minimum 10 wide, unobstructed. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the following setbacks: Minimum front yard: 5 feet (from east side). Minimum rear yard: 15 feet (from lot 5 subdivision line) Minimum side yards: south side 8 feet; north side 25 feet Conservation Parcel Zone District: Conservation Lot Size: 593,990 s.f. Maximum internal floor area: 0 Minimum Percent Open Space: 100% Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and minor improvements associated with passive recreational use or which are necessary for community health and safety reasons may occur on this parcel. 5. Off-street parking. The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. b. The parking need of any nonresidential units. c. The varying time periods of use, wheneverjoint use of common parking is proposed. d. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. e. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the City shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change Staff Finding: The underlying zone district, AH1 proposed, requires parking requirements to be established through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposal includes at least 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit, which is the minimum for development city-wide. This Special Review will occur during the Final PUD review. Staff does not see any problems with the number of spaces proposed. 6. Open Space. The Open Space requirement shall be that of the underlying zone district. However, a variation in minimum open space may be permitted if such variation would not be detrimental to the character of the proposed PUD, and if the proposed development shall include open space for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD through a Staff Comments 8 .. . common park or recreation area. An area may be approved as a common park or recreation area if it: a, Is to be used and is suitable for scenic, landscaping, or recreation purposes; and b. Is land which is accessible and available to all dwelling units or lots for whom the common area is intended. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas shall be deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the planned unit development (PUD), together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Any plan for open space shall also be accompanied by a legal instrument which ensures the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and communally owned facilities. Staff Finding: The Conservation parcel will be deeded to the City with the surface easement granted to the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The legal instruments to protect this area should be submitted with the Final PUD application. The applicant is encouraged to work with the City Attorney and the Parks Department in preparing these restrictions. 7. Landscape Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces. It shall provide an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species that are regarded as suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding: The Conceptual Development Plan includes a Landscape Plan for the Category parcels and the access parcel. This plan provides a reasonable amount and variety of plantings. Landscape guidelines for the remaining parcels should be submitted with the Final PUD application. The intent of this is to ensure some consistency between parcels without significantly restricting personal choice. If landscape guidelines for only the affordable lots are submitted and approved, landscape plans for the free-market lots should be included with building permit plans prior to actual construction. These plans can then be reviewed and included as minor amendments to the PUD. These plans, however, should be similar in treatment to the surrounding parcels. The Parks Department had a concerns about the snow storage area at the end of the access parcel. During high snow years, Parks is concerned the snow storage may encroach on the Midland R.O.W. and public trail. The applicant should present how this snow encroachment can be avoided or mitigated. 8. Architectural Site Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency with the proposed development, architectural character, building design, and the preservation of the visual character of the City. It is not the purpose of this review that control of architectural character be so rigidly enforced that individual initiative is stilled in the design of a particular Staff Comments 9 .. 4 . building, or substantial additional expense is required. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, upon appropriate use of materials, and upon the principles of harmony and proportion of the buildings with each other and surrounding land uses. Building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion. Staff Finding: Building envelopes have been placed appropriately considering the natural terrain and surrounding land uses. The conceptual plans and elevations for the Category units have been included in this application. The proportions, massing, and materials seem appropriate. The RO structures should be of similar architectural character to the Category structures because of their proximity. Both the RO and free-market structures must be developed consistent with the City's Residential Design Guidelines. In addition, non-native stone should not be used or used sparingly on the exteriors. Adobe, terra cotta tile, aluminum, or vinyl siding should not be used on the exteriors. Excessive use of log timbers and using log timbers in a non-structural way should be avoided. Exterior materials that express load-bearing qualities should not be used above obvious non load-bearing materials. 9. Lighting. All lighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Staff Finding: Lighting shall be downcast. No lighting of landscape elements or architectural features should be allowed. 10. Clustering. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. Staff Finding: The development has been clustered. 11. Public facilities. The proposed development shall be designed so that adequate public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development at the time development is constructed, and that there will be no net public cost for the provision of these public facilities. Further, buildings shall not be arranged such that any structure is inaccessible to emergency vehicles. Staff Finding: The Engineering and Streets Departments are asking for the development of curb and gutter with this project. The Planning Department is hoping the same operational goals for drainage, snowplowing, etc. can be achieved with a less urban treatment. The Streets Department suggested a 4" roll curb and/or drainage swale could be used. Also, the placement of required street trees (required through subdivision) should be coordinated Staff Comments 10 .. . with the Parks, Streets, and Engineering Departments so that the storage of plowed snow along Garmish Street can be accommodated without crushing the trees. The proposed access way and fire suppression has been designed to accommodate the Fire Marshall' s requirements. The Sanitation District will require a line extension, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes. Also, the existing house has a manhole near the front steps. An easement to access this manhole should be granted to the ACSD. 12. Traffic and pedestrian circulation. a. Every dwelling unit, or other land use permitted in the planned unit development (PUD) shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic, c. The proposed development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the at-terial and collector roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding collector and arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. Every residential building shall not be farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadway or drive providing access to a public street. e. All nonresidential land use within the planned unit development (PUD) shall have direct access to a collector or arterial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. f. Streets in the planned unit development (PUD) may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent city regulations and ordinances. Staff Finding: The proposed access way meets these standards. The land owners sharing Lot 12 will be responsible for maintaining safe access. Staff Comments 11 CO/51 __ tÂ« AR 9~Â·- 1 1*Ati-trttfwl ttri -30 744 3* t - U *fl __- 96K ]FACk k k al [ akkdA or &44 + g.60 - 1*im 1\Al# Ril TAL/'p-Mi 7 L 4665 1*80 31*92-./k ffeieÂ·ua mei-k g.,AQUWQL 000 - Cg~kv 141 - (1+ *44 r#die (&69 f ped k~ 91'ts hol [443 111 FRK F#2 qpybO Ccti *der e *6 wi j 4%-42~4 2 po_ _ Â¢71 ~-ji~1(r~ /1 / 64 4914 84 %4 42&& -,473#45 Â»iN A mi#- q * Elti .. ---- WHIC- Â»Al, rlÂ«, O% 00â€ž M- -G.-c~ *63 964.4 GowÂ»-4 ~14 U Al FAL/05 of EktA Ue. t..6.- Ve.,7 111:&44-ir 41 b 6 2+1 2- 4-- **4 fek#5-r 1-07/6 .47 - *t /4&+ 04*t b <40'w- A F*,4 1241 U* 4 rek.zÂ£4- %ufL - 04 620Alt- 25 I Ant,1 61-re.4- -Faa 942% 2-- 11 (A *r~4~ --_ f wl#lt,L b~- 6%6449 4ee~lÂ·Â·Â·Â· 0-20' -1 cÂ©L -7744 (?4@ twdsÂ« 14/ 2-, - 34 --44-~ 475626444 144.11 *rek-- 1*l wedÂ» 04.*0 042 -- - Â»)#04 M' bc-W 49,1 *7 -el*4 f,A/6 ti' 11 *OF -- 'ottl AE*l#~' 41, 165Wd r,le# 9(W- 42% \Ale.0 - 334125/24 11 4* 0*Ut, 4 3% ur OVW. 0 9*16 0#,4 * 44Â¥e 0 Gth* *6 To: Housing Office Board of Directors < 9*.t 6- Astk Câ€¢h OahÂ¥;l Frorn: Dave Tolen, Executive Director oud'PIAVAâ€¢s 4/"Se'l"Â£":. *424*A,1 .') Re: Barbee Family AH Proposal Date: 31 December, 1997 Summary: The Barbee family has submitted an application for ALI rezoning on their property at the base of Aspen Mountain. The proposal calls for three new free market lots, three RO lots and four Category four units. The City Council has asked the housing Board to review the unit mix. Background: The Barbee family, in partnership with Aspen Pitkin Employee Housing, Inc. has proposed an AH development on its land which the Housing Board previously reviewed in a worksession. Their proposal is for three new free market lots, three Resident Occupied lots and two duplexes consisting of Category Four three bedroom units. The application for AH rezoning has been reviewed initially by the City Council, and Council is asking for the Housing Board's advice on pricing of the units. During our earlier discussion, the Board was generally supportive but raised some concerns about pricing of the units. We advised the applicants to proceed with the understanding that the Housing Board would prefer Category Three units to the proposed Category Four units. The development is being undertaken by a partnership, consisting of the Barbee Family and APEH Inc. The partnership agreement has the following general terms: 1. Upon successful rezoning, the land for the Category and RO lots will be transferred from the Barbees to APEH. 2. APEH will reconvey two RO lots back to members of the Barbee family, if they qualify. If they do not qualify, APEH will sell the RO lots and the proceeds will go to the Barbee family. 3. The third RO lot will be sold to a qualified household and the proceeds used for construction of the Category Four units. 4. The Barbees will contribute the value o f one of their RO lots toward the construction of the Category units if necessary. The Barbee family and APEH are requesting approval of the RO and Category Four mix, with the understanding that APEH will endeavor to construct the duplex units at the lowest feasible cost and sell them at no profit. They are proposing to sell the RO lots for $130,000 and to use some of the proceeds of unit sales to fund future development expenses. They are requesting the Category Four designation based on the feasibility e . analysis prepared by Reid Haughey. The analysis projects that sales proceeds of four Category Four units and one RO lot will not be enough to construct the Category units, and that perhaps the proceeds of the second RO lot will be necessary. APEH believes that they may be able to reduce costs through project management, and commits to using those savings to reduce the cost of the Category units. They feel a commitment to a lower category at this point is too risky. Discussion: There are basically three ways for the applicants to reduce the price of the Category units to lower levels: cost savings through project management, further subsidy from the RO lots or further subsidy from the free market lots. APEH is willing to agree to use all cost savings to benefit the category units. I have compared their feasibility analysis to our East Hopkins project, which also consisted of four units. Construction of the East Hopkins units and their sale at Category 4 prices still required a small construction subsidy. While APEH may be able to reduce costs on these four units, it seems likely that all of the proceeds from one RO lot will be necessary to bring the units in at Category 4. There are two ways to increase the subsidy from the RO lots. The first is to sell them for more than the proposed $130,000. Reid Haughey's memo raises this possibility, but the APEH board does not favor this approach. They prefer to maintain overall affordability by selling the RO lots for the proposed $130,000. The second way to subsidize through the RO lots is to retain the proceeds of all three. I have asked the applicants to explore this possibility with the Barbees. In this case, an additional $130,000 to $260,000 will be available to reduce the price of the Category units. Finally, there is the option of having the Barbee family further subsidize the project with the proceeds of the free market lots. They have previously said that they are unwilling to do this. This issue points out one of the difficulties of this project. In most AH projects, the owner of the free market units also develops the AH units, and is responsible for developing those units at the category levels that are approved through the land use process. In this case, the owners of the free market lots are proposing to satisfy their obligation under the ALI zone district by transferring land to the non profit. They make a very good argument for doing this: they are not in the development business, and do not wish to undertake the risk of housing development. They have creatively brought in a non profit partner to undertake the AH development. As a result, however, the free market side of the development has been separated from the ALI side of the development. The family is further concerned that they will be unable to proceed with the proposal if it requires additional subsidy from the free market lots. They believe that the proposal has nearly the same value to the family as other free market options, such as a lot split, that do not include AH units. .. Recommendations: Staff suggests that the Housing Board consider one of the following recommendations to the City Council: 1. We may recommend approval o f the project as presented, with three RO lots and four Category 4 units. This would be subject to the commitment of APEH to use any cost savings to reduce the price of the category units, and a commitment to sell the RO lots for no more than $130,000. 2. We may recommend that the project be approved only with a mix of lower category units. We would leave to the partnership the issue of whether this should be paid for from the proceeds of the RO lots or from the free market lots. In this case, staff recommends that some or all of the units be designated as Category 3. Att: Memo from Reid Haughey dated 12/31 AH Land Use Application 0 , .. DRAFT MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Project Planner Thru: Nick Adeh, City Engineer From: Ross C. Soderstrom, Project Engineer Date: December 2, 1997 Re: Barbee Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, and Vested Rights Physical Address: 601 South Garmisch Street. City of Aspen. CO Legal Description: A 17.67 Ac. tract of land being a part of Lot 1, NE 1/4, NE 1/4, Section 13, Tl OS, R85W, of the 6th P.M., lying partially in both the City of Aspen and Pitkin County, CO. After reviewing the above referenced application and making a site visit, I am reporting the combined comments made by the members o f the DRC: Summary: As a conceptual application, the applicant has addressed the major elements and requirements of the development and there are no apparent problems which would preclude the development as generally proposed. The major area of concern is the adequacy of the fronting street right-of-way, in particular the geometry and width to accommodate the vehicular and pedestrian traffic, drainage and utilities. Some dedication of right-of-way may be needed on the western side of S. Galena St. for these surface improvements and features although the extent of possible right-of-way dedication may not be fully addressed until an Improvement Survey is submitted and the actual conditions of the existing right-of-way are measured and evaluated. The applicant will be required to complete the standard requirements and conditions associated with the several forms of development requested in the application. For the applicant's benefit, the following comments are made at this time, based upon the submitted conceptual plans, to minimize future revisions. 1. Improvement Survey & Rights-Of-Way: The application did not include an Improvement Survey which is a basic element of the application. Without this document to represent the existing legal extents, easements and encumbrances to the property and the adjacent rights-of-way, only conceptual and preliminary recommendations may be made regarding the placement and orientation of the development with respect to the surrounding infrastructure. Of particular concern is the R-O-W width of S. Garmisch St. along the frontage of the proposed subdivision and the irregular intersection of S. Garmisch and Juan Streets. Dedication of R-O-W along the westerly side of S. Garmisch St. may be necessary to provide adequate paved street width, pedestrian walking area, landscaped area and surface drainage improvements. If R-O-W dedication is necessary, a possible scenario would be to shift proposed Lots 2 through 4 further 1 OF 6 DRC21 a97.DOC DRAFT .. Memo - Barbee Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, and Vested Rights DRAFT west to provide the additional width along S. Garmisch St. since the subdivision has ample open space over the westerly portion of the property. 2. Utility Services & Easements: The location of the surface utility structures, e.g. fire hydrant, electrical transformer, telephone and cable TV pedestals, should be shown on the proposed landscaping plan, in the absence of a utility plan, to verify the serviceability of the utilities to the buildings within the site plan. Presumably the new electrical transformer may be either placed west of the covered parking and behind the hammerhead in front of Lot 5, or on either side of the driveway at the corner of Lots 5, 6, and 8. The fire hydrant would need to be placed on either side of the driveway at the corner of Lots 5,6, and 8, and opposite of the electrical transformer. Water and electric utility meters and service connection points must be accessible to service personnel in the completed project and not obstructed by garbage or recycling containers, other structures or vegetation. Any new surface utilities requiring a pedestal or other above ground equipment must be installed on an easement provided by the property owner and not located within the public right-of-way. As stated in the application, the 20 ft wide water main easement into the development will run through the driveway (Lot 12). Any required easements for utilities shall be shown on the final subdivision plat submitted for city council approval and shall also be shown on the plan sets submitted for building permits. 3. Projected Traffic Volumes, Streets and Pedestrian Area: Generally, the existing widths of S. Garmisch St., Juan St., E. Durant Ave. and S. Aspen St. are adequate to accommodate the additional vehicular traffic volume expected to be generated by this development. Where the paved width of S. Garmisch St. fronting the subdivision is less than twenty (20) ft, the developer will need to construct and widen the paved street width. The intersection o f S. Garmisch St. and Juan St. most likely will require some re-construction to improve the width, alignment and grading of the roadway and to improve the storm drainage which will result in better traction of vehicles turning the corner, particularly under wet and icy conditions. Again, the extent of this work is partially dependent upon the width and geometry of the existing Right-of-Way which has yet to be determined. The section of S. Garmisch St. from Juan St. to W. Durant Ave. may also require some re-alignment within the right-of-way width to permit adequate spacing of improvements between the edge of pavement and the right-of-way line. This may be coordinated and constructed by the developer with the replacement of the 6" CIP by the 8" DIP required by the City Water Dept. As a point of clarification, we do not expect the number of additional vehicle (trips) per day (vpd) per household to vary between the detached single family residences and the duplex units because the underlying socio-economic parameters typical of other communities and upon which such traffic projections are based may not be as applicable in Aspen. Since all of the residential units in this development are proposed to contain at least three (3) bedrooms and the local business area is relatively small, (shorter driving distances) we would make a slightly more conservative estimate that all the residential units will generate 9.95 vehicle trips per day for a total of 96 additional vehicle trips per day, an increase of 15 vpd from the figure estimated in the application. However, we concur that no apparent additional improvements to the adjacent streets would be required as a result of this development with the 2 OF 6 DRC21 a97.DOC DRAFT .. Memo - Barbee Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, and Vested Rights DRAFT exception of localized pavement widening, re-aligning, grading and reconstruction of the corner of S. Garmisch St. and Juan St. A five (5) ft sidewalk will be required of the developer along the S. Garmisch St. frontage of this development. To accommodate a sidewalk, a planted median of at least seven (7), and preferably ten (10) ft width, a five (5) ft wide drainage swale and a three (3) ft shoulder at the edge of pavement (totaling approximately 15 ft to 20 ft from edge of pavement to the easterly edge of sidewalk), some right-of-way dedication may be required. The additional width of the landscape medium will provide additional snow storage area along the street since this area receives less direct sunlight during the winter months and consequently retains more snow for longer periods of time. 4. Site Drainage and Erosion Control: We concur with the recommendations in the application for storm drainage. To develop detention facilities for Lots 2 through 7 will necessitate that the native vegetation will need to be removed to permit grading of the lower portion of the sloped areas southerly and southwesterly of these lots. The site grading should be contained within the lot boundaries although would be most effective if it were permitted to extend outside of the proposed building envelopes to intercept the up-gradient flows further from the on-site improvements. Given the location of this proposed subdivision on the outer edge of the developed area of the city, plus the relatively steep grade along the S. Garmisch St. frontage, we believe a drainage swale of approximately five (5) ft width, rather than curb and gutter, would be an acceptable means of conveying local drainage along the westerly side of S. Garmisch St. This street-scape design would probably preclude on-street parking although retain a more rural character. The new development shall not release more than historic storm run-off flows (in non-concentrated fashion) from the site and any increase in historic storm run-off flows must be first routed and detained on the site. A drainage plan and report by a currently licensed Colorado civil engineer shall be included in the site development plans submitted for the subdivision approval. The report should provide general construction techniques (minimum standards) for erosion control and sediment transport control to be employed by the developer(s) when the several residences are constructed. If the lots are developed individually, the property lines shall be fenced with construction and sediment fencing prior to construction and shall be securely maintained until the later of either establishment of the permanent ground cover or issuance of a C.O. for the project. 5. Driveway Access: Due to the relatively large number of vehicles using Lot 12 for access and the distance of Lots 5, 6 and 7 from S. Garmisch St., the driveway width of Lot 12 onto S. Garmisch St. should be a minimum of twenty (20) ft with fifteen (15) ft radii rather than the sixteen (16) ft driveway width and six (6) ft radii shown on the site development plan. This will permit simultaneous, two-way vehicle traffic in the driveway and meet the minimum requirements for fire and emergency service access. It does not appear that these modifications will cause any changes to the site design. The driveways for Lots 2,3 and 4 will be limited to ten (10) ft in width since the lots are proposed to be only 55 ft in width. Given the irregular intersection geometry of S. Garmisch St. and Juan St., the driveway to Lot 2 should be located at the northerly end of this lot to provide better sight distance between the driveway and the intersection. Due to the existing topography of the site, this location appears to be easier 3 OF 6 DRC21 a97.DOC DRAFT .. Memo - Barbee Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, and Vested Rights DRAFT to construct and will probably receive more winter sunlight and thus be drier and less likely to contribute to vehicles sliding at the driveway apron. An alternative for either Lots 2&3 together or Lots 3&4 together would be a common driveway (of eighteen ft width) centered on the common property between the subject lots. A common driveway would serve to reduce the number of curb cuts/driveways on the street and may increase the area of available on- street parking i f there is sufficient right-o f-way width to permit on-street parking. If the two standard 10 ft width driveways on Lots 2&3 or Lots 3 &4 are positioned on either side of a common property line, they will need to be separated by 25 ft to permit a single parking space between them (assuming that on-street parking is permitted). 6. Mine Closures and Tailing Clean-up: Ilze openings to the several mine shafts and portals will need to be closed and secured prior to development of any housing units or within one (1) year after conveyance of the open space parcel to the City. The Colorado Geological Survey and the Bureau of Mine Safety will provide recommended design details and procedures for the closure of mines. The location of the mine opening and the extend of the tailing or debris piles around each mine opening will be shown on the Improvement Survey. The Environmental Health Dept. will request verification of the proper disposal of mine tailings which must be disposed or mitigated. 7. Tree Mitigation: Due to the relatively small number of trees which may need to be relocated or replaced on the site, the proposed landscaping plan may fulfill the need for tree mitigation. The proposed landscaping plan needs to be verified with the City Parks Dept. 8. Fire Access & Projection: As discussed above, the addition of a fire hydrant within the affordable housing complex and the widening of the driveway width o f Lot 12 will suffice to provide fire access and adequate fire flows to these units. Depending upon the type of development proposed for the east side of S. Garmisch St. opposite of this proposed subdivision, an addition fire hydrant may be required of the property owner on the east side of S. Garmisch St. in the future. 9. Parcel Annexation and Survey Monuments: Depending upon the existing delineation of the property boundaries and the existing survey monuments found during the Improvement Survey. documentation of the boundary survey and survey monument may be required to be recorded with other government agencies in addition to recordation in the office of the county clerk and recorder. These records shall be filed before or concurrently with the recordation of the subdivision/PUD plat and the proposed annexation of the parcel presently in located in the county. 10. West Aspen Mountain Trail: The location of the existing hiking trail shall be included on the Improvement Survey. If the trail lies outside of the subject property, the applicant will provide an area map (e.g. U.S.G.S. topographic survey) showing the approximate location of the trail and the limits of the 4 OF 6 DRC21 a97.DOC DRAFT Memo - Barbee Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS-Exemption, and Vested Rights DRAFT subject property for review of how the proposed open space parcel may fit into the City's park and trail system. 11. Water Wells and Water Rights: If there are any water wells on the subject property, they will be properly capped and abandoned prior to development of any housing units or within one (1) year after conveyance of the open space parcel to the City. If the property carries any associated water rights, these will be conveyed to the City of Aspen as required by the City Water Dept.. 12. Sanitary Sewer Easement: If none exists, the applicant will grant an easement to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for access and maintenance of the existing sanitary sewer main and manhole located at the bottom step of the stairway to the existing house on Lot 1. 13. Redevelopment of Lot 1 : If or when the existing house on Lot 1 is removed, the owner will dedicate up to ten (10) ft width of right-of-way to the City dependent upon the existing width of the right- of-way and the needs of the City for such widening. Correspondingly, the front setback line and building envelope for this lot should be set based upon the revised front lot line after such adjustment, if a lot line adjustment is necessary. 14. Underground Improvements: The owners should provide as part of this application, in written and/or mapped form, any information known :o them personally regarding the existence. or absence, of underground improvements such as underground storage tanks (USTs), wells, vaults, cellars, pipelines, etc. which may be located on the property. 15. Street Lighting: At least one street light should be installed by the developer on the westerly side of S. Garmisch St. in the vicinity of 16. Rock Removal: The rock out-cropping along the southerly and westerly sides of the intersection of S. Garmisch St. and Juan St. will need to be cut back to permit the construction of the sidewalk and provide an easement for the existing sanitary sewer main and manhole. 17. ADU Parking: If any ADUs are developed in the free-market homes, on-site parking will be provided for the unit(s). 18. Standard Conditions of Construction: The standard conditions regarding construction practices (e.g. dust, debris and drainage control on and around the site, traffic control, temporary facilities and parking, etc.) will be required of the developer at the time of construction. As-built records in GIS compatible format will need to be submitted to the City GIS Dept. to update the city records for the several stages of development. This condition also applies to the individual development o f the free-market lots. 5 OF 6 DRC2 !a97.DOC DRAFT . 0 Memo - Barbee Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, and Vested Rights DRAFT 19. Subsequent Reviews: Due to the multiple step development and review process for this application, these review comments will be refined and revised as the application is further refined. There are no apparent problems which would preclude the development as generally proposed. 6 OF 6 DRC21 a97.DOC DRAFT .. MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, Planning Office From: Nancy MacKenzie , Environmental Health Officer 1-Â£11- Date: November 14, 1997 Re: Barbee Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, Vested Rights Parcel ID # 2735-131-00-100 =============================================== The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and has the following comments. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Section 11-1.7 "It shall be unlawful for the owner or occupant of any building used for residence or business purposes within the city to construct or reconstruct an on-site sewage disposal device." The plans to provide wastewater disposal for this project through the central collection lines of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) meet the requirements of this department. The ability of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District to handle the increased flow for the project should be determined by the ACSD. The applicant has failed to provide documentation that the applicant and the service agency are mutually bound to the proposal and that the service agency is capable of serving the development. A condition of approval is that the applicant must provide documentation that they and the ACSD are mutually bound to the proposal and that the service agency is capable of serving the development. ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Section 23-55 "All buildings, structures, facilities, parks, or the like within the city limits which use water shall be connected to the municipal water utility system." The provision of potable water from the City of Aspen system is consistent with Environmental Health policies ensuring the supply of safe water. The City of Aspen Water Department shall determine if adequate water is available for the project. The City of Aspen water supply meets all standards of the Colorado Department of Health for drinking water quality. A condition of approval is that the applicant must provide documentation that they and the City of Aspen Water Department are mutually bound to the proposal and that the service agency is capable of serving the development. 1 0 0 WATER QUALITY IMPACTS: Section 11-1.3 "For the purpose of maintaining and protecting its , municipal water supply from injury and pollution, the city shall exercise regulatory and supervisory jurisdiction within the incorporated limits of the City of Aspen and over all streams and sources contributing to municipal water supplies for a distance of five (5) miles above the points from which municipal water supplies are diverted." A drainage plan to mitigate the water quality impacts from drive and parking areas will be evaluated by the City Engineer. This application is not expected to impact down stream water quality. AIR QUALITY: Sections 11-2.1 "It is the purpose of [the air quality section of the Municipal Codel to achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity possible by requiring the use of all available practical methods and techniques to control, prevent and reduce air pollution throughout the city..." The Land Use Regulations seek to "lessen congestion"and "avoid transportation demands that cannot be met" as well as to "provide clean air by protecting the natural air sheds and reducing pollutants". The major concern of our department is the impact of increasing traffic in a non-attainment area designated by the EPA. Under the requirements of the State Implementation Plan for the Aspen area, PM-10 (which comes almost all from traffic driving on paved roads) must be reduced by 25% by 1997. In order to achieve that reduction, traffic increases that ordinarily would occur as a result of development must be mitigated, or else the gains brought about by community control measures will be lost. In addition, in order to comply with the municipal code requirement to achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity by using all available practical methods to reduce pollution, traffic increases of development must be offset. In order to do this, the applicant will need to determine the traffic increases generated by the project, commit to a set of control measures, and show that the traffic decreased by the control measures is at least as great as the traffic increases of the project without mitigation. We recommend that a condition of approval be that before final submission the applicant provide information to the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department which documents that proposed mitigation measures are sufficient to offset any increases in PMio caused by the project. FIREPLACE/WOODSTOVE PERMITS The applicant must file a fireplace/woodstove permit with the Environmental Health Department before the building permit will be issued. In metropolitan areas of Pitkin County which includes this site, buildings may have two gas log 5 fireplaces or two certified woodstoves (or 1 of each) and unlimited numbers of decorative gas fireplace appliances per building. New homes may NOT have wood burning fireplaces, nor may any heating device use coal as fuel. Barns and agricultural buildings may not install any type of fireplace device. FUGITIVE DUST A condition of approval is that a fugitive dust control plan is required which includes, but is not limited to fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove mud that has been carried out, speed [imits, or other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line or causing a nuisance. DEMOLITION Prior to demolition the applicant should have the building tested for asbestos, and if any is present, should consult the Colorado Health Department regarding proper removal. 2 .. I r i CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: NOISE ABATEMENT: Section 16-1 "The city council finds and declares that noise is a significant source of environmental pollution that represents a present and increasing threat to the public peace and to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of Aspen and it its visitors. .....Accordingly, it is the policy of council to provide standards for permissible noise levels in various areas and manners and at various times and to prohibit noise in excess of those levels." During construction, noise can not exceed maximum permissible sound level standards, and construction cannot be done except between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. It is very likely that noise generated during the construction phase of this project will have some negative impact on the neighborhood. The applicant should be aware of this and take measures to minimize the predicted high noise levels. 3 . r-1 7Mpen Â»onsofidated- 6anitati~ Ibistriet 565 North REG,t#JYED Aspen,Colorado 81611 NOV 5 1997 Tele. (970) 925-3601 FAX #(970) 925-2537 Sv Kelly Â· Chairman ASt;tet i r-4 t AtrM Paul Snlith T]-cBS. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Alichael Kelly Frank Loushin Louis Popish Secy. Bruce Matherly, Mgr. Chris Bendon 'r \ Community Development 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Barbee conceptual PUD Dear Chris: The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District currently has sufficient treatment capacity to serve this project. We do have a downstream constraint in First street that we will eliminate through a system of proportionate surcharges to new upstream connections. The project will require a short line extension to serve the employee and R.O. units. The line extension process involves a line extension request, a collection system agreement, and, if service lines are to be used by more than one dwelling unit, a shared service agreement. All three items will need to be approved by our Board and completed on standard district forms which are available at our office. We currently have a manhole that is located near the front steps ofthe existing house. It is our understanding that the existing residence would be moved to the south. We would need to ensure that the applicant would grant any additional easements that the District may require to maintain the existing public collection and proposed addition to the system. All of the free market units should be connected to the public system by individual service lines. We would like to review the drainage plans at detailed submission to ensure that no surface run- off or subsurface drainage is allowed into the public system. The landscape plans at this stage would also be reviewed to ensure accessability for the maintenance of the public system We can estimate the total connection charges for the project once detailed plans are available. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, @u.Â«,tc,7~>u,Gily b Bruce Matherly District Manager EPA Awards of Excellence 1976 1986 1990 Regional and National , NOV 14 '97 03:40PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC P. 1 . e MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, Community Development Dept. FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office DATE: November 14, 1997 RE: Barbee Conceptual PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, Vested Rights Parcel ID No. 2735-13140-100 REQUESI: The applicant is requesting to annex the County portion of the property into the City and to subdivide the property into 12 lots for development purposes and a conservation parcel. Lot 1 contains an existing single-family residence. Lots 2,3 and 4 are to constitute the projecfs free-market component. The affordable housing portion is to include three Resident Occupied single-family lots and two Category 4 duplexes. The duplexes are to contain three bedrooms and approximately 1.400 square feet of tloor area, plus a 500 square foot basement. The RO residences will be reslricted to a minimum of three bedrooms, maximum size of 2,200 gross square feet, a maximum 500 square foot garage and an 800 square foot basement. BACKGROUND: The Housing Board discussed this project earlier in the year. At that time, the Housing Board agreed that this project should fall under the RO guidelines approved in the 1997 Asper,Pitkin County Housing Guidelines. RECAMMENDAMON: The Housing Board recommends approval of this project, but would also like the opportunity to re-evaluate the designation of the duplex units to Category 4. A condition of approval is recommended that would allow the review of the pro formas at the time of final approval to evaluate whether any or all of the units can be categorized to a lower category. keterraRbarbea.ah I 0 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon FROM: Sara Thomas, Zoning Officer RE: Barbee Conceptual PUD, Subdivision. Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, Vested Rights DATE: November 4, 1997 The proposed Barbee project will require a rezoning of the parcel to two zone districts. the Conservation Zone and the AlI1 Zone District. The applicant is proposing to grant a conservation easement on the portion that is zoned Conservation and will not be developing in that portion. The dimensional requirements for the portion of the parcel which is rezoned to AH1/PUD will be determined during the PUD approval process. The precise lot areas will be verified at the time that a Certified Site Improvement Survey is submitted by the applicant. The applicant is proposing to construct the following structures: 4 units with a maximum floor area of 4500 square feet. 3 units with a maximum floor area of 2575 square feet, including a 500 square foot garage and an 800 square foot basement. 4 units with a maximum floor area of 1400 square feet including a 500 square foot basement. Ten covered parking spaces will be constructed for these units on a separate lot. It should be noted that, based on the current methods of calculating floor area. a portion of the basement square footage and garage square footage will be included in the floor area calculations. All setbacks, heights and FAR calculations will be verified when working drawings are submitted to the Building Department for building permit review. The drawings included in the application packet do not contain adequate detail for this level of review. . AR,-*tivm. I . RECEIVED VANN ASSOCIATES AUG 1 8 1997 Planning Consu],tants ASPEN/Pr[KIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT August 18. 1997 ILAND DELIVERED N/Is. Kathryn S. Koch. City Clerk City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Barbee Property Annexation Dear Ms. Koch: Enclosed herewith is a petition for annexation for a portion of the Barbee property which is located adjacent to the Aspen city limits near the base of Shadow Mountain. The petition is submitted pursuant to the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, Part 1, Article 12. Title 31, Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, as amended, by Mary K. Barbee. John W. Barbee and Hallie B. Rugheimer, the owners of the property. Four copies of the required Annexation Map accompany the petition. The Barbee property consists of an approximately 17.6 acre metes and bounds parcel of which approximately 6.8 acres (the portion to be annexed) is located within unincorporated Pitkin County. The remainder of the property is located within the city limits. The petitioners wish to annex the unincorporated portion of the property into the City, and to develop a small, mixed free market/affordable housing project pursuant to the provisions of the City's A.Hl/PUD zone district regulations. The petitioners are presently preparing a development application for the property for submission to the City next month. With respect to the annexation process, it is my understanding that the City Council must first adopt a resolution finding the annexation petition in substantial compliance with the Municipal Annexation Act's petition requirements. The resolution would also set a date and time for a public hearing at which the petition would be formally considered. Upon a finding that the petition complies with the annexation criteria of the Act, and following the successful completion of the land use approval process, the Council may adopt an ordinance formally annexing the property. Should the development application not be approved, or the conditions of approval be unaccept- able to the petitioners, the petition may be withdrawn and the annexation process terminated. 230 East Hopkins Avenue â€¢ Aspen, Colorado 81611 â€¢ 970/925-6958 â€¢ Fax 970/920-9310 .. Ms. Kathryn S. Koch August 18, 1997 Page 2 I would appreciate it if you would consult with the City Attorney and schedule the petition for consideration by the City Council at their earliest available meeting. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly. VA!~ ASSOCIATES -\\ r i 1,- * t 'Sunny VaIin, AICP 4 i f 2 SVEWV i Enclos,fres CC: John W. Barbee (w/encl.) Arthur C. Daily, Esq. (w/encl.)~~ John Worcester, Esq. (w/encl.) Julie Ann Woods (w/encl.) c:\bus\citv.ltr\ltr34097.kkl .. PETIT]ON FOR ANNEXATION (Barbee Property) TO: The City Clerk and the City Council of the City of Aspen. Colorado PURSUANT to the Municipal Annexation ACT of 1965. Pari 1. Article 12. Title 31. Colorado Revised Statutes. 1973. as amended. the undersigned hereby petition and request the City Council of the City of Aspen. Colorado. to approve and complete the anne>.alion to the Cil> of Aspen of certain unincorporaled lerritor>' located in the Count> of Pilkin. Suile of Color-ado and more particularly described on kxninit -1 allach,ed hereto and made a nan hereof b> this reference ]\ Sl '111,/,r, 1 u - PETITION the peziti:~':ie:-3 uneul Â» 10 11:,vcs: 1 4/ 1\ 1 4 J !. J j.1 3 f h is desirable and necessarv thal the above described area De allnexed 10 1]le Cir> of.Aspen. Colorado. bio less than one-sixth (1,6) of the Derimezer of the area proposed 10 be annexed is contiguous with the Cit> of Aspen. Colorado. A communit> of interest exists between the area proposed lo be annexed and the City of Aspen. Colorado. The area proposed to be annexed is urban. or will be urbanized iii the near future. 5. The area proposed to be annexed is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the City of Aspen. Colorado. 6. In establishing the boundaries of the territory lo be annexed. no land held in identical ownership. whether consisting of one tract Or parcel of real estate or two or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate. has been divided into separate paris or parceis. ,All requirements of the Municipal Annexation .Act of ]965. Part 1. Article 12. Title 31. Colorado Revised Stalutes. }973. as amended. Sections 31-12-104 and 31- 12- 105. exist or have been met. 8 No annexalion proceedings have been commenced for the annexation to a municipality other than the City of Aspen of all or part of the area described above. 9. The annexation proposed in this pelition wil] not result in the detachment of area from any school district and the attachment of the sanie area to another school district. .. 20 -uc) ypivÂ«-3---< < ~lohn W. BarbeeG \-/1202 *;alz .Avenue Glenwood Springs. CO 81601 Date of SigninG 1, 1 11 1 3 1 ()03 Hallie B Thi_L.Ll}-1 . I ./. i , i i n i i Â·4(h : hiei-/ '\1}i! 1<CaL, Bozeman. MT 5971 5 .;219 01 >]ER]n. .. ~-- -~ -- EXHIBIT A TO PETITION FOR ANNEXATION THAT PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH. RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M.: ACCORDING TO THE DIAGRAM CERTIFIED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE. JANUARY 4.1896 AS ATTACHED TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE SURVEY OF S.AID TOWNSHIP AND RANGE APPROVED BY THE U-NITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE MARCH 31: 1891. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1; THENCE EAST 337.73 FEET. MORE OR LESS .ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1 TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE FORMER RIGHT OF WAY OF THE COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD COMPANY ' THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY SOUTH 42Â°23' EAST 156.62 FEET. MORE OR LESS: TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXATION (ANNEXATION MAP RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 8 AT PAGE 81); THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE MOUNT.AIN EDGE ANNEXATION SOUTH 42Â°23' EAST 320.82 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH GARMISCH STREET EXTENDED, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WESTERLY EDGE OF THE SOUTH .ANNEXATION (ANNEXATION MAP RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK AT PAGE ); THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LIN-E OF SOUTH GARESCH STREET EXTENDED AND THE. WESTERLY SOUTH ANNEXATION LINE SOUTH 14Â°50'49" WEST 77.15 FEET, MORE ORLESS, TO THENORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 2. BLOCK 5, EAMES ADDITION; THENCE N 75Â°09"11" WEST 346.50 FEET ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTH ANNEXATION; THENCE SOUTH 14Â°50'49" WEST 1,015.12 FEET MORE ORLESS ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTH ANNEXATION TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1. THENCE N90Â°00'W 44.99 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1, NORTH 171.67 FEET: MORE OR LESS, TO LINE 4-1 OF THE LITTLE MACK LODE CLAIM, UNITED STATES MINERAL SURVEY NO. 3956 AS PATENTED IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 212 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 14Â°57' EAST 650.59 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO CORNER NO, 4 OF SAID LODE CLAIM; THENCE NORTH 75Â°03' WEST 173.72 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1, NORTH 474.94 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 6.835 ACRES OR 297,734 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO PREPARED BY DAVID MeBRIDE RLS 16129 JULY 15, 1997 0- 0- PETITION FOR ANNEXATION (Barbee Property) TO: The City Clerk and the City Council of the City of Aspen. Colorado PURSUANT to the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965. Part 1. Article 12: Title 31. Colorado Revised Statutes. 1973. as amended. the undersigned hereby petition and request the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado. to approve and complete the annexation to the City of Aspen of certain unincorporated territory located in the County of Pitkin. State of Colorado and more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. IN SUPPORT OF THIS PETITION. the petitioners allege as follows: 1. It is desirable and necessary that the above described area be annexed to the City of Aspen. Colorado. 2. No less than one-sixth (1/6) of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the City of Aspen: Colorado. D. A community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the City of Aspen: Colorado. 4. The area proposed to be annexed is urban, or will be urbanized in the near future. 5. The area proposed to be annexed is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the City of Aspen. Colorado. 6. In establishing the boundaries of the territory to be annexed: no land held in identical ownership: whether consisting of one tract or parcel of real estate or two or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate. has been divided into separate parts or parcels. 7. All requirements of the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, Part 1, Article 12, Title 31. Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973. as amended, Sections 31-12-104 and 31- 12-105, exist or have been met. 8. No annexation proceedings have been commenced for the annexation to a municipality other than the City of Aspen of all or part of the area described above. 9. The annexation proposed in this petition will not result in the detachment of area from any school district and the attachment of the same area to another school district. .. 10. The annexation to the City of Aspen of the area described above will not have the effect of extending the municipal boundary of the City of Aspen more than three miles in any direction from any point of such municipal boundary in any one year. 11. The signers of this petition are the landowners (as tenants in common) of one hundred percent (100%) of the territory included in the area proposed to be annexed to the City of Aspen. exclusive of streets and alleys 12. The signatures and mailing addresses of the signers: and the dates o f signing. are set forth below. 13. This petition is accompanied by four prints of an Annexation Map containing among other things. the following information: a. A written legal description of the boundaries of the area proposed to be annexed to the City of Aspen; b. A map showing the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed to the Citv of Aspen; c. Within the annexation boundary map. a showing of the location of each ownership tract in unplatted land (no part of the area proposed to be annexed is platted); d. Next to the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed, a drawing of the contiguous boundary of the annexing municipality. 14. None of the territory proposed to be annexed to the City of Aspen is presently a part of any' incorporated city: city and county, or town. 15. Attached to this petition is the affidavit of the circulator of this petition, to the effect that each signature hereon is the signature of the person whose name it purports to be. THE PETITION-ERS HEREBY RESPECTFULLY REQUEST that the City Council of the City of Aspen approve the annexation of the area described above to the City of Aspen. LANDOWNERS/PETITIONERS: Mary K. Barbee 818 Willow Trinidad, CO 81082 Date of Signing: ,1997 .. John W Barbee 1202 Walz Avenue Glenwood Springs. CO 81601 Date of Signing: ,1997 14,960-64 4*i.Â»,-006.aul Hallie B. Rugheimer ~ 1400 Story Mill Road Bozeman, MT 59715 ./ Date of S igning: ~'~--U.,40~â‚¬-199 7 U J EXHIBIT A . I TO PETITION FOR ANNEXATION THAT PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH. RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M.. ACCORDING TO THE DIAGRAM CERTIFIED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL S OFFICE. JANUARY 4. 1896 AS ATTACHED TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE SURVEY OF SAID TOWNSHIP AND RANGE APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE MARCH 31. 1891. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTH-WEST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1. THENCE EAST 337.73 FEET. MORE OR LESS ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOU-NDARY OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1 TO TRUE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE FORMER RIGHT OF WAY OF TILE COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD COMPANY : THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY SOUTH 42Â°23' EAST 156.62 FEET. MORE OR LESS. TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXATION (ANNEXATION MAP RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 8 AT PAGE 81): THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXATION SOUTH 42Â°23' EAST 320.82 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE RIGHT OF W.AY LINE OF SOUTH GARMISCH STREET EXTENDED. SAID POINT BEING ON THE WESTER_LY EDGE OF THE SOUTH ANNEXATION (ANNEXATION ]\4AP RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK .AT PAGE ); THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH GARMISCH STREET EXTENDED AND THE WESTERLY SOUTH ANNEXATION LINE SO-UTH 14Â°50'49" WEST 77.15 FEET. MORE OR LESS. TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 23 BLOCK 5. EA.MES A-DDITION: THENCE N 75Â°09"11" WEST 346.50 FEET ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTH ANNEXATION; THENCE SOUTH 14Â°50'49" WEST 1.015.12 FEET MORE OR LESS ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTH ANNEXATION TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1; THENCE N90Â°00'W 44.99 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT L NORTH 171.67 FEET: MOR-E OR LESS. TO LINE 4-1 OF THE LITTLE MACK LODE CLAIM. UNITED STATES MINERAL SURVEY NO. 3956 AS PATENTED IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 212 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECOR-DS; THENCENORTH 14Â°57' EAST 650.59 FEET. MOR-E ORLESS: TO CORNER NO, 4 OF SAID LODE CLAIM; THENCE NORTH 75Â°03' WEST 1 73.72 FEET: MORE OR LESS. TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1. THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1.NORTH 474.94 FEET. MORE OR LESS. TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 6.835 ACRES OR 297,734 SQUARE FEET MOR-E OR LESS. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO PREPARED BY DAVID MeBRIDE RLS 16129 JULY 155 1997 .. PETITION FOR ANNEXATION (Barbee Property) TO: The City Clerk and the City Council of the Ciry of Aspen. Colorado PURSUANT to the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, Part 1. Article 12. Title 31. Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973: as amended, the undersigned hereby petition and request the City Council of the City of Aspen. Colorado, to approve and complete the annexation to the City of Aspen of certain unincorporated territory located in the County of Pitkin: State of Colorado and more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. IN SUPPORT OF THIS PETITION, the petitioners allege as follows: 1 It is desirable and necessary that the above described area be annexed to the City of Aspen. Colorado. 9 No less than one-sixth (1/6) of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the Cit>- of Aspen. Colorado. A community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the City of Aspen. Colorado. 4. The area proposed to be annexed is urban. or will be urbanized in the near future. 5. The area proposed to be annexed is integrated with or is capable o f being integrated with the City of Aspen: Colorado. 6. In establishing the boundaries of the territory to be annexed: no land held in identical ownership, whether consisting o f one tract or parcel of real estate or two or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate. has been divided into separate parts or parcels. 7, All requirements ofthe Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, Part 1, Article 12. Title 31: Colorado Revised Statutes. 1973. as amended, Sections 31-12-104 and 31- 12-105. exist or have been met. 8, No annexation proceedings have been commenced for the annexation to a municipality other than the City of Aspen of all or part of the area described above. 0 The annexation proposed in this petition will not result in the detachment o f area from any school district and the attachment of the same area to another school district. .. 10. The annexation to the City of Aspen of the area described above will not have the effect of extending the municipal boundary of the Ciry of Aspen more than three miles in any direction from any point of such municipal boundary in any one year. 11. The signers of this petition are the landowners (as tenants in common) of one hundred percent (100%) of the territory included in the area proposed to be annexed to the City of Aspen. exclusive of streets and alleys 12. The signatures and mailing addresses of the signers. and the dates of signing. are set forth below. 13. This petition is accompanied by four prints of an Annexation Map containing among other things. the following information: A written legal description of the boundaries of the area proposed to be annexed to the City of Aspen; b. A map showing the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed to the Ciry of Aspen; c. Within the annexation boundary map, a showing of the location of each ownership tract in unplatted land (no part of the area proposed to be annexed is planed). d. Next to the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed. a drawing of the contiguous boundary of the annexing municipality. 14. None of the territory proposed to be annexed to the City of .Aspen is presently a part of any incorporated city, city and county. or town. 15. Attached to this petition is the affidavit of the circulator of this petition. to the effect that each signature hereon is the signature of the person whose name it purports to be. THE PETIT]ONERS HEREBY RESPECTFULLY REQUEST that the City Council of the City of Aspen approve the annexation of the area described above to the City of Aspen. IJA:*DOWNERS/PE.*ITIONÂ©Â¤3>3 / 1- A. 1 1 N I b v yyt %140 /A (/ , i B Jary K. Barbef,6 ~ 818 Willow < ) Trinidad: COV 1 082 ~ Date of Signing: / ,1997 2 1 (U .. John W. Barbee 1202 Walz Avenue Glenwood Springs. CO 81601 Date of Signing: :1997 Hallie B. Rugheimer 1400 Story Mill Road Bozeman. MT 59715 D ate of Si gning .1997 < EXHIBIT A < , TO PETITION FOR ANNEXATION THAT PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH. RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. ACCORDING TO THE DIAGRAM CERTIFIED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE: JANUARY 4,1896 AS ATTACHED TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE SURVEY OF SAID TOWNSHIP AND RANGE APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL'S OFFICE MARCH 31, 1891: DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1; THENCE EAST 337.73 FEET, MORE OR LESS ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1 TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE FORMER RIGHT OF WAY OF THE COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD COMPANY: THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY SOUTH 42Â°23' EAST 156.62 FEET, MORE OR LESS. TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXATION (ANNEXATION MAP RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 8 AT PAGE 81); THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXATION SOUTH 42Â°23' EAST 320.82 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH GARMISCH STR-EET EXTENDED: SAID POIN-T BEING ON THE WESTERLY EDGE OF THE, SOUTH .ANNEXATION (ANNE>LATION MAP RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK AT PAGE ); THENCE .ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH GARMISCH STREET EXTENDED AND THE WESTERLY SOUTH ANNEXATION LINE SOUTH 14Â°50'49" WEST 77.15 FEET, MORE OR LESS. TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 2. BLOCK 5. EAMES ADDITION; THENCE N 75Â°09"11" WEST 346.50 FEET ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTH ANNEXATION; THENCE SOUTH 14Â°50'49" WEST 1.015.12 FEET MORE OR LESS ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTH ANNEXATION TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1; THENCE N90Â°00'W 44.99 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1 : NORTH 171.67 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO LINE 4-1 OF THE LITTLE MACK LODE CLAIM, UNITED STATES MINERAL SURVEY NO. 3956 AS PATENTED IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 212 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; THENCENORTH 14Â°57'EAST 650.59 FEET, MORE ORLESS, TO CORNER NO. 4 OF SAID LODE CLAIM; THENCE NORTH 75Â°03' WEST 173.72 FEET, MORE OR LESS. TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1 ~ NORTH 474.94 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 6.835 ACRES OR 297,734 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO PREPARED BY DAVID McBRIDE RLS 16129 JULY 15, 1997 STATE OF COLORADO ) 1 SS AFF} DA.1 IT OF CIRCULATOR COUNTY OF GARF i E LD ) AFF}ANT. John W Barbee. being first dul> sworn upon oath. deposes ancj Sals: Affiant is and was the CINCU12110r Of 1]ie fOI-(Mll)]1-12 Petition joI- Annexation (BarDee Properni n Each signature appearing thereon is the signature of the person \\ ' hos. 11 21 !11 0 11. 13 11 :- D Ort 5 1 0 be FURTHER AFF].ANT S.74.ETH \07 412.92 <4 f~ f C f ~-Â«-7 LQI - '- V - V / . u 1 --- ~.1 0%4 \\ Barbee Subscibed and srÂ·corn te before me trus O.4-4 0131 01 4<6-4- 6 C 1 907 bi john W Barbee. e L H itness 117 v hand and official scal. Al> commission expires: 5-2 9- 99 .Am,1111"4,44, 0/1 0 -Â».6-%540' 6. 44 >u,-ujt>t (j awd---u-~ ~ j 0 - .- C tf>... 9.4 OF COLON'P .ASP! 1 0020796 Dj BARBEE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, f -W .- L PITKI N COUNTY, COLORADO BLOCK 54 \ LOT 3 Pr,4 - i LITTLE~ C 14 SUBA 1 %2 E IC= ERROR OF LEGAL DE 0.44' S4 A SCALE 1 INCH - 50 FEET 0 25 50 75 /00 1 - l l LLUP-AL L; L J L 1 1 1 I ~Â·-M.4.-MÂ·+9 17 ~ WEST OF hâ‚¬ 6Â« P M , ACCORDING TO THE O\AGRAM CERT\Â¥\ED BY THE UN\T 4 ANNEXAT ION PARCEL , ~' ~ U.1 - 0 THAT PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT I OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE 9 NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 m \ STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL 'S OFFICE, JANUARY 4,1896 AS ATTACHED TO THE ~' ~~ 4 @ GENERAL LAND OFFICE SURVEY OF SAID TOWNSHIP AND RANGE APPROVED GO BY THE UNITED STATES SURVEYOR GENERAL S OFFICE MARCH 31, 1891, 1&1 - DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: \ BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1, g THENCE EAST 337.73 FEET, MORE OR LESS ALONG THE NORTHERLY -0- 04 BOUNDARY OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT I TO THE SOUTHERLY L I NE OF THE 20 FORMER RIGHT OF WAY OF THE COLORADO MIDLAND RAILROAD COMPANY , --- THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY SOUTH 42 23' EAST 156.62 FEET, F MORE OR LESS, TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE MOUNTAIN EDGE *-- ANNEXATION (ANNEXATION MAP RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 8 AT PAGE 8!) 7 -4 21 9 THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE MOUNTAIN EDGE ANNEXATI ON SOUTH 42 23 EAST 320.82 Co -- FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE RIGHT Of WAY LINE OF SOUTH GAR).11 SCH STREET EXTENDED, SA I D PO INT BEING ON T~WESTERL~hpGE OF THE SOUTH -2 22 ANNEXATI ON (ANNEXATION MAP RECO~D IN PL~~OOK - AT PAGE -) , THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH - 2 - 00 GARM I SCH STREET EXTENDED AND THE WESTERLY SOUTH ANNEXAT I ON LINE SOUTH 14 50'49- WEST 77.15 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER 2 --- -M 23 9 Or\l-- 1 OF LOT 2, BLOCK 5, EAMES ADDITION, a THENCE N 75 09''It- WEST 346.50 FEET ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID --* SOUTH ANNEXAT ION; --* THENCE SOUTH 14 50'49- WEST 1,015.12 FEET MORE OR LESS ALONG THE 24 11 BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTH ANNEXATION TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID --* GOVERNMENT LOT I; --* THENCE N90 00'W 44.99 FEET WORE OR LESS TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER --- ill OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT I; 26 THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SA D GOVERNMENT LOT 1, NORTH --* 171.67 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO LINE 4-1 OF THE LITTLE MACK LODE CLAIM, -\ UNITED STATES MINERAL SURVEY NO. 3956 AS PATENTED IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE --- 0 / 212 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS; 26 0 0 OF SAID LODE CLAIM; --- THENCE NORTH 14 57 EAST 650.59 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO CORNER NO. 4 --- l 0 THENCE NORTH 75 03' WEST Izi. 72 FEET..MARIE OR LESS, TO THE WEST --- 4 LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT I; ~ 27 5 75*09 THENCE ALONG THE WEST L I NEVF SAID GOIRNMENT LOT 1, NORTH 474.94 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 6.835 , 50.' t,ZM 2 ACRES OR 297,734 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO 44.99 SOUTH LINE EAMES ENTRY GOVERNMENT LOT I S goÂ·00'00-1, /~'~ - - - - - - O , 786.93 25.00 S 14'50'49-W i U n / LI TTT h 1 r , '.7 441 6 ... A'.' I . . â€ž h ,Â·- -'- 1 2 9. Ti 0 , :. I - 4. . ./ * Â¥,4.41 . 4; 4,4 . 1 1.. r. r . 0. ' f " '79 0 - : 47 '68, 4 6 ,. : ,.4 â€¢h. t/* 979 0 1 1 . . 4. ' >;44* r ~ 0 1 , 1' .. . 1.0 : 41 i \ , 0 I. I .0 . . . 0 L. . 0 AL ' A . ... . .:.. 0 - 0 .....: . D . . 0 . . . 0. . 0. I. . I . .1 .... .... .... . . 0 1:,1. I e 4 4 1 I . . 4 . . .. 4 . I. ,, 0 .4 , .. . 4 . ==1 . A D . 0 :Al: ..... A. A. 0 .. . I . 0 . 0 .. , . .......ADA .. I. , 0. . 0 0.1 .. 0 1 .... D 0 ./ I . 0 . ... ... .. A 0 . 1 , ., , D 0 0 ....0 .: . , .0 10 1 . . . 0 .1 . 1 -7 1 . D , I. . C I. CD ., 0 D D : 1 . . J -~ 2, 9 a IN\ 4*4 1 8 4 au *.b,4 -,9.- 54. \ S- 2 *uwaw- m 1 w--7 4 000 s BunnÂ¥ Ct To, Basalt 0- t *on 0, 1 0 : 0 4 Aspen 4 1 , 4 1 Institute + ; Hunt/ 4 90 1 1 ~ Tent m \\ 1 Music 1 Hillmn .h M .** 8, Lake % 4. fap 4 % h . + R .V j , . D.4 St i Wei . Aspen *' St % . 4 4 ., . 82 , 0 , 1 1 1 -*- - .. ~ Hospital 44 0- 4 / PROJECT SITE . *Â¢ 14 Mall . N St 4 1 + Â«.11/41 q w...i- B 14 0 1. 4* 0,4, Alp. Rd 46 61 1 / L D,. 0 q .'4 ca) \---at:34.*. Re w. 4 0 le ./1 11 9 K 0 42 1 4 6 4 '411.43 Aspen ~ Afouiltain Music . School To Twin~Lakes 1,14 i.'-i" r f Vicinity Map 11 . .t Sheet Index - #,1 . . . I M 44 1. Property Investigation Map .irl! Â· 44..f .0 2. Existing Conditions Map 2 011. 3. Lotting Plan 4. Site Development Plan ...e & 1.' 5. Landscape Plan 4 1 9. - ':r Â¥%;C' 9â‚¬5 I. 4,1 Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD ,N - al, b 0 . Â·jr. 16 ' : ..9 IL 6-~ *FUS> *ov.i 4 j r .p...... \ BARBEE PROPERTY INVESTIGATION \ 06 47 4 4 47 SLOPE SUMMARIES CITY PARCEL COUNTY PARCEL BLOCK 54 0 - 20% 35,024 SQ FT. â€¢/- 52,488 SO.FT. â€¢/- \\ - 40% 24,195 SQ FT. â€¢/- 9.659 SO FT. â€¢/- 20 - 30% 15,220 SO FT. â€¢/- 30,020 SO.FT. ./- 30 OVER 40% 397,303 SO.FT. â€¢/- 205,567 SO.FT. â€¢/- LOT 3 TOTAL 471,742 SO FT. ./- 297,734 SO.FT. ./- 11 1 4 LITTLE\~LRUD \-61 2 1 | ~ 44 PREPARED BY 44 41 4, 4 ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS. INC. SUBD. N~ I / 4 210 S GALENA STREET P 0. BOX 2506 / / PHONE/FAX (970) 925-3816 LOT I <44 2 ASPEN, COLO. 81611 WEST COOPER AVE. A 0 job no 26211 JUNE 20, 1996 REV/SED 6-26-96 / REVISED 10-1-97 --- jil' 1 /. - --- --- 2 - \ d' 90'00 '02:2~ .-I- 337.73 - 4 - â‚¬6 - * . 2 o , 1 A 4 4 2-)-0. .l Â· ... \ I\ 4 . 4 \ \ - ----- \ SCALE \ 1 0 -- ---,--4- H \ 1 - 9 k j 1 1 Nal - 50 FEET I / th MOUNTAIN EDGE :'p ANNEXATION 0 25 50 75 /00 ,:j l ...~~ -- - - 19 CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 2 FEET VÂ·4 7 - 2 ALL TOPOGRAPHY FROM THE 1992 1 -- , , f 1 1 . C ./.\ t.: 1 1 ,/ , .1 , -- % , It # ~1 XÂ· Â·\ - 4\ CITY OF ASPEN AERIAL SURVEY \. j 0. / 1 11 ... \ .1 . 1 i. \ L \ r ..\ I k. I ./ . .- 1 / 6.1\ % . I I --% / &/3/ ' -::3 i i i .\ 1 I ' .\ , \ , 1 , + 4 -- \% .6 \ \\1 ''\ R , 1 1 1 , 1 ', \COUNTY PARCEL\ , - 1 1 \ \0 41 - 4, \ 0 0, \ 1 - 11 N. 1 tril '*,1 -- Q l.~ -- ~684 ACRES â€¢/- ' .2 / t.~ 'tx - 1 1 -Vi 1 \ 1 AA 4\ f. 21 1 < \1\\:231 3 I J -. I -- / -~ ,-,320,:. 1 ' ' --7 i 1;iii ,, . t - '' ,\:lit '1 4 + 41 30 1 /P \ 11 \ \ \1*4Â· i f I , fl'~ i -4 -0-Fl-I,i\\\ i.'~ 44;E: ~j ;i . i Ir i . 11,. 41 ' '' 'll' Â·' '' Â·Ii \ 4 . I b .... - 3 11 + . \\ r--UnxÂ·. \ 1 0 1, ~~81 421Â» , 3 '' ' 1.:713'.,11'< (7 1, pil'f>,\\1\ 11,/\ , /1 1 ./1 41, 1 /: T a 1, 'C 1 1 -- 1 4 11111,1 11 ' '1 AVE 1 '.%> 'li\ \\ \ \\ '\, . i\\ i X \,\iii\ \ \' \- ./' , ' .4 #11 1 1 ' il , ' 11 '11, 1 â€¢1 11 1 1 1-- 1 . - 1 i,\\93\ I \\ \,4\131 I Â£ .- \*,Zf,YA;At\\,i,# , , , J,' / / .hpl' '*,b' 2, :'11 71' 11']1~ill.-7----- . \\14 \,\'\\\\\\L\\ '',,4\, . // /,/-71!Ii 'Ii''I:L 1(!11'~ill f ,, !\ \ ' 4 #l < , 1 1, ~ 1 --~_r-.._ Ill' 1 11 1, f ] 1, 1,0-~---*- /,9 -- 1--- *Ii <*2*: < <* .1 1-1-J--Â·Â·- FÂ· 4~ rj>~4\til.~\\\),%\ ~ $.\ ../.,-''flp - 1. i l )1 ~Il['1*11 1~L ~11~ 1~!l \4 k. -- / 21 'Â·Â· fjm{' d 0 ,.1 .t 111& 111'llit j, 11 1, 11 , 1 / BLOCK 4 ..... #/- I ' Xe- - , --- , 1/ ...11 '4, I. : /1 ' 1 ,-- t.. ' --7- I - / - , -/4 5 - --,-, Il * ' , - 4 \ f 1 % - J 0 X: \ 4, I :Wil =1- r - - . : >ROCK -2~. - 14 ' 'cl \\ <\ - 4 ~\ - 29 0 - f? . 2*3'Art . It lit,\ ~ ~ .9. 2 - N 73 03 4 3% \31 \ 11 *A \C-- ----- 1 + g.... - . - 40. I 000'2 \Â·4):h\Â·\2%2*~Spo<*<~.et~~3 -Â·> - 0Â£ -i.. \ \\.*.-- \ .\ f \ i . 10 \ 21 -r- -2--149=: 2.<64=AC\,~ 1 11, t - 1 Ill:1 \43, \ -- 7\ i\\1X I / 4 16Â«Â«9. , - f .f'- 7144,0. - \2%Â»\4 . \% , -t>4>%/821Â»41236: ./ \ . . kj e. .. -4. \ .,1 /' & I: C..... I ..i .2.. + " - \\. -- \1 \ 112 : il: j i \\\ \ til i \\\ \\. 4 1 -11 2\ \ 2- NA Acb r, .1, i , - , .4 - r , 1 - 0,4 \ N ::4 :43 ~1 M c*40 - --I . \ il 1 - 1.. 19\\Ait\Â· 1,1 -\ 144> i 4 r fo-p *41 -.2 \~/ 4,4.4/7 . 1 1 9, 400 -- -- - - - A->2Â·<~~ 1 1,\I\\\ ,\> 1 \ \\\\ M 44- 35#M#**,7# , . r ~R \,~ Â» A \'I--uler- 4 jrke----,C v ie --- - r N. 1- 94 .-/ :-j , A \\; --- %\\\\\R \I,fiek \1*\?IliA 1 . 4\ . CERT I Et CAT ION > . \\\\\ ~\ \\, N ~ \\ 4~ 444Â· 4Â¢11'#JAW'*:f \NÂ« Â» 1,1. 99\64 6 1 m _22<Z k.- *r'- -- 6 \Â» \ 34 --1 , ------- Irk-x 4 . - \ * '944\Y. \34*4~1%2>3~~k ~ ~kilÂ»nl--a- ~ 11'Â¥l ~~D 29Â»202 I. I 1.-*--1 -8 , 930 \224Â»20 â€ž 44.41 N 41\\ 4 4 \ 1 , -- ./ . lili \ -- 1/.I- i *' \ 0 9 \ 4 \\ 44\Â«Â« . O I r --- 2% \>42>6<23Â»<0\ X \ -- \ 1-- 1. DAVID W McBRIDE. A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF COLORADO. HEREBY CERTIFX~THAT THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED FROM ~~' RECORD DOCUENTS AND TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATCON WAS OBTAINED FROM 49\. ' ' 46. cÂ¥-2 3623>64~S , ,\ Airk, / 1 % . - \ ASPEN AERIAL SURVEY WAPS AND th CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE 64\ ~ '\~ % , 'ii. All & BELIEF. THIS CERTIFICATIONL ID UNLESS WET STAMPED ON AN ~')\ n \\1 i \\ I - ORIGINAL BLUEPRINT. ,/ 4\% 4 (2< 6 6\ 9\ Fle--- ---<- I'' ' SIGNED THIS - DAY OF \\ p \\ \1\\\ 190.-4 \ Â»t . \ . 1 \\% A - I 1 04*\43 - \\ F \ \\ * . Â»\ , ...,4- , \ -- 6 7 4 1 \Li A,Â· 4 1/Â»1 \: - ...4 A, . -~...4.- - 1 h . \*,-i - JUAN-ST DAVID W. MIBRIDE RLS 16129 ) X.OX:>i 3< ,*<-~4*j., i :brt*\Q\.\*4 4<%*43*0\Y~X39%33\43*0 :<4*e CJ,,>44\,\I\\ Â¢, ,:4,:4 )-*- 4 CZ-Â»VI3EET--- 5 \ 1 7\ t U ,- 5 + l . -- ...1Â«3 Â·\.2.24 . f t t ,: .//. :\Â»: Â» /1 \; O f \4321 hDE -, ,--P ---p--- 41*i~%406\91.-\2#r: 2.2 ~43.2~ . 7 44\ 3 it>41*1Â·- 4-4 1 / -1- 7-- -- -/ O. %\ \ b..':. 33..i.: :Â·0. i \ 1 Â»..: av 4 4 --- -S 41 - - ------- N ..6 9,\. ,Â· r ..41\ , h.% t,4~ f < :64.Â«#.Ax 1 . *5 't '1Â·t C - 1 . X \ [-6 1 + 1 -- - ------ â€¢c 1 -10\ \41\ .1 I : 6 - 3- 1 ,- 181 4. . 1 -1 BLPOX 1 _ - 9, A 4, , ,/ I k / A zx 2.X~\Â©.\ A)<.,4.-Â».,4 â€ž re\V ...2.4,7\\I\,9\: '.\ \33* It \1'/ 1/ I . -- ' ' tâ€¢ ...h - V ,.1, 1101 -1 L~ % \p, ,<L<,1\ . -6% - 4 ...Â¢% ~\%> .-. 2\+:\\\, \R \~ AX\, \, : -- \. 0, A \,% t\ .14\ .-' 12 . 2Â«\\Â« \ \ /2 1 7, 11 \ I. I 73.09 \ .... I' . PN.e t. I . ,\/ \ 1 -1 . \Il\. \ \\~ \\\ 16,4.. 1 , / . /0. I \ . \ \..\ \ I . \ I .t< . 3- 0..ailso, 00* ..\ 4 I H. .. ..\ , k .2.-I . \ ' \ \, 11 fi>3 \ ;. L.\ i .1, < \\ 9, i. \ . \ \ . I I .\ 9 - 4, 'A , 1~ ~ \/ \ \ 4. R -- N . .- -- . 1 . 0 \ L \\ ~ \ ---- . i , 7\ '1 j ' k G t â€¢ , A. 1 - , 11 5= LT-~:;-42-*6.,. . I, #;112~4 vfA k ~ 1~~ .4 K if 2 / - if\\1-4\\'' . , C. ./ 3 C X 12 1 ilf\\, I \.' ~to~<tijf~~~1~~ffif~~~~ p I ... = :a . \ 4 \\ X\\ i -2 ., . 43. '\\ N -i . li . \, .r , 11 ~j /j .2 %3>6\ \ , v ' / P 14 0 --- , L -0.- ----- 44'- '\'f'\; \ \2 1\1 1t 15 ~----- 12Â«- - .k\. 221 1 \ 6- I.\ --- \4 / --I \ 1 1 \ ....h/4. \\ 4.\ \4 .>94.33Â«~~~4941 1\Trfs* ic <r ,#.' \ \.\ 16 - \\ 1 - , 1- \ ~\\ 4. i~\ C,he, 13 . 1,11,;. tp ; \ --2 -A - --- - 1\ 1 1 6TgARCEL 4 /'~~ (< .... .-I X. I \ \ Ul - --% \ .fi J ,~ ~/ 0 17 --- \ ' 0 --- Â· 0 U, -- 7{1 1 Â¢ lit, f.\,\ , 4 \ \\ , 19 -K 1/. \ 1 - \ . , \ , - 'ti< . . \ *-- & j 2 ~ \ t --- *7*-v.X--_ <42 - h .. \ 6\\ % ~ ~ <+ 1 Â»fi,J j< 12 -~ s* h'' ' .1,1 i , Â£ ' 1,1 1 3 ''' \ t\\1 1, 11\ 1'\4~11\\< 1 \ 1<,\* f 1 '21 ! tri 't\, \ %,\,1 1 1 )5 3 .* 2 , 1 4< : s i <Â·. 1 92:- ~ 114Â«c - /& 210. 4 Â£ \ 22 23 - n N h 4 \ \ '. 1 Â·-l t, 1 1 4 ' 1 ' i. \ \ 11 0 1. i,{11, \ 0 - 1 \ \ EX 26 . - 2\ .. ' A ./0 \24,41 \ *Ne# 1 1 Xi- 1 1 Â» Â». h . - \ \Â¢,\ 1 AN.=C ,\ d\ft, 1 112'111 C 1 9 t. , 0? 4 1 \ . / 1 4 al ' 3, .i ' f*.'lit 4 11 k \ .\ 1- - 24 - - l - - 11 /,14\ r \0 l , 25 ' 7 f-- It.-... , - 1 \ ~ j Â«, :1*1~q~>\ 44\~\~4 *144 L 4. 1- ~I' \ i \\:3 \ -1 1 1 - i %1 \ 4\ / , * 04 11'11\1'V ~4 / 1 \ N \ Sa \27 I I \ 't .,1/ : ) / \ 8 :-. : - -Â·-1_ \ cr' + Â·09Â·// 0Â£ - - 41< \ <150.00. ' Â·",''l H ,\"tt,J,1141 11,\ \1 ' ' c \ '\ ~1 >1<3 Â·1 Ip\-\IATAbAt~,4 ~rg~RA~ZB,0~1NUFK<v-vi~3494\-~t~ ~4 Y~yU; \AÂ·*Ppj\ V'' \ \ 1\.. .% .. 4-:h.\.., L\\,Â» .\.. \4 \ 4 '+1",* I i-./ 1 \1,1.~lt\\ 1~\,\ 4 .Â» f.-31Â»94<1.-**\ *Â«\. ;~ ' ~ ' SOUTH LINE EAMES ENTRk GOVERNUtNT L~T j <2 1'411 lib: 1"t,/ 'fs goÂ·00Â·00.' 're \ v.\\'\ 'n 1 \ I /. 1 :. 2 -1. > h. '' 0... 4 \ 1.. \,11'll,''d , it, ,1 1786 930 , th \ 25.00 * / S 14'50-49-W , 1 l SA-3 , 1- i K 1 C l N 00'00'0 Â«253>. d 902 >18 .66*491 -LENRd .00-012 1 I \ 1 3 / r 0060 -0 1 / / 1 1 ri / 9-0 / i - -Ulk ' //// P.MT:.'M , 211 1 \ - 1 1 49f/4/ /-- - 1 1.00 / j - 6000 - - - / // 1 f ------ 7960 - i - - / 7 fi ( 1 1/I ESL-â€ž \\\ j /) ---- ------- -------- M-*. --i.---- ------ - - - -7970 3 1 - 53 1 1 - . 7 9 4 0 - - 222 0. i }j ./ 7 ego - 1 - - / 1 . .. I l --- *-Ii-*-I- -~ --- 0 /04 24 - , I --Â«fifff/{f/:11//ff// i. --- 1-LA i I 1 0 I r\ 6Zg-c--IN----..--I-i----*---- --I---I---- -~- e --. 1.1 7- 7950 -00 f 11 I A/v 1 9// 1 --1 - l 1l â‚¬4>- . END>- / 1> f ill' f / 1 /< 1 rlil - F~ I ____lot 7 + j 1 11 9 20 / *23 4 6 LÂ« 11 1 / L --4*c-=2. Â«-1 /6, 1 00 lili 1 1 1 1 f / /// /t-, W 144 1 ' - .*-, / \ \8 1 h ~ 1.-/- 4-10620/â‚¬9- E 1 Ul 1--4 f // -XS*X ~ 1 1- 207~ E <59, 16>~ /1 'fic ''U'- /-- 1 4--OT :032<04-4Â»6=de'~~ ,~ 1---~h>,2 ' #MVEÂ·*teNT- Wi PTH hi & 00 \\//\ 1 W /2 , lot_12__ __ : /4 / 2 14% L .. 4/,tri'/(6, i L ' , ,-ho UD.75-4.. #424 / / / 1 el 41 . Â£447, ./ -<-7 11< 0 le--31 . 1 Zi \ \4\ 79 4/1541.A ''1 Â·,: k nla =ovee Mewr <Â· , / -I- 1 1 6, 1 2* '.0- Lot 8 l / , \f /117 lil 1\-4ll/ . ry-Â£21 ~%~ 9 .1/J 41/,i~~;~ -___-Lot_9_ +___ C 1 1~gry. 34 -' -4,3>'c.vau I L \\\ f i Le 15 /*.21/,0 6 2 4 1 Â¥ 4122 / ff f C /4 Ill , 1 14 . BA len Re 4/ 2%41 2 ISAL>Et -/ f / 1 / 1 \ 1/~-~47,04 L 1 37 tÂ»*ilel 1 Â«2321, Vaa # LMHAL ' t -4 Lot_1{L_ FEA. U ' 2,;7 - .C-4 / 1 I /4- 600- 1 - - Â¢--- f-j 4,~3 / ; __lot.11.- Plant Schedule / l - Â£-uu Â· Â·Â· ., ablall...--7 002 /24* , 1 4 / , , /- 0 (3; FOPUL-lÂ» T.m=/Aul--d>'Fe'Â£2 â€ž1=39'*Al 6 --'*-LE -GITY Lie.1-tr 4 I -- h b -...4/:Illiditili,IL,3, F.4.,1 46* Fl=,2-.A rl/NeS.,-le lan,AUAA j 60, ept-Un =arf-UNB \ 4 -I...4 .0.. f , ' 61) Â£5â‚¬1/%:36,5 laÂ·4,,4/\C:>El-4 ' â‚¬DA/15, DAX - r,rj /%/b< el--AtÂ·-lateF- Al-h-11. Fer>Ut.A dDE>Bvlorap-BAILY - forsÂ·U T LL-A M NJ ricat:AA PoTE+J 7-7 4-6Â» 9 : )-B".6% L.Aw# AAIX = LOW WÂ»TiEÂ·3- MBSGUe *l-eN O (45 eff-I Kiet,4 V U Le,Afllip <11Â«*45,Â·-d L I L.A<L f/ .6- 1 , '. ... 1 Fil 4,\ 1- S . - -44 l/L / 1 -9 / k Barbee Family Subdivision/PUD 1/ U 1 1- ~~ 1 : I ~ v- landscape P\an k - dE,7-mDE,~ /907 The Stevens Group, Incorporated ~~ Aspen, Colorado 81611 Hote.-r-H 0 312 E Aspen Airport Business Center (970)925-6717 (970)925-6707 (fax) - 25 0, 5 P /0 to 40 A / 20 0 L fÂ« N ,~ BLOCK 54 . i\-06/ LIT*\ 21-1 95Â£ i i X SCALE 1 INCH - 50 FEET 0 25 50 75 /00 CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 2 FEET ALL TOPOGRAPHY FROM THE 1992 CITY OF ASPEN AERIAL SURVEY \ K E b NE 18 C/D /.. M.% 2 30 a -0 Â£ e 12 -2 r- b 1- RENEE BLOCI~ O U # E E - /6 - 08 25 622 32 - 8 R R 0 *427 41#2: --- I f . ..t- r --- 1 / Agc 1 ~~~~,&-3 -4-2 1 . 4\4 OU\.3 - , F 7/,1 1 4 r<4 9Â»\2. 0\\2 I~ 44446* I . 900. BL CK 11 944 - 24Â« - - f- W 22-,U- 0.Â»\Â«NN - -31 4Â£4AL-~-J-2321-----, -ELTÂ«39*A- Â«Â¤~ElÂ» - 4 <\ 9 , g "1 10 -~ r - 11 \ 1 1-2-*------ 1-*~ 1 1,2 .. 1 . -- I *t- x . f / C \ 2-6Â»L f.4 4 x , 9 . * \I. l \*Ard I 4 1rn I- --~ L L 0 -- - 1 -p b 16 - 7. 0 1 17 'l 1 6 \ --1--f===q J - I \ 2 --47,9 POOL ~ -4 ~ 4/ \ \\ 7-0 L-J 1 - 3\2 L-21--------2------ ----i=- I -3: ,\ At.hz'* . --4 t- I \ .. t - 5 %. -- -*-- ~- W - I.-. h , I - , 1 ,- 0 11 , \ P. / \\ l 41 . 1 --/ / 1 1 . \4.*44-: 1 1 e. \ \1*4>41 -ZE:-----60 / . h.:X\ \ V. / 44>/7 ... I \\ \00 <Z - \JP X- \07% 0 1.4.. >Ch J N Â»../ p U 4)3 25.00* C i f 're- IC-W il - l-224 -221015*7 and/uo!5!A'Pqns Alil.LIEd 00 de'N suo!1!puoD BURS!)<3 il e , -1- 4 .. . i f -4 . . A A. . .. 1i I . . ! i . ... 4 . . .\ . 4 . . lk . I 1 . .. .. 195- ' .L . . -< .. . . I . 1 9 .0 . 9 \ . 4 . 0 ... W.,3... . e I N . PV:, ~:-d.til . a 2. 1? 7%4 1 - ' lii y r %.~ . . I ' - f Â· 4> % A 4 91# . .'2 r, j h. : p .. .. . 4 2 . . 0 f : Ali- 1 l e 4 . . tr . -: =t.911=2==215-=.1 - 2 -10 - p 1.1. 11 111111 1 1 1 . ./1 - ...7 375. -- p -2-2-%*--rl - F ....111 Hb/-~/Kpi 7 C / / / / j 1 1 \1/- ~ ~~ ~--~ Â«-~~ ~~-~~Â«~ ~f Â«~Â»~f~fÂ« ffo-~ -9~~f-----ffÂ«fff-Â«0--fO(f~~~~ ~Â«_ I /1/ //// //// / I - r ( (1(/ \1 / - j Â· ---- -- Â· - 3 j i i__j j /<'Â«-,3 ) < < f;> ) 3.3 1 i - * - i l l "' / ( 3 ) / 21 n / / / / 1/ .i 3 /1/1// 9/ f i 0 )(f 1 / 1- Efft j - 1.-k- 'tr 312 Â£ Aspen Airport Bus\ness Center ~,A Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970)925-6717 (970)925-6707 (fax) 0 4% ec> 100 3 op 5 ifilf f 4 0 . ... .0 . . ,, . .. . ,, . .. I . . ... .. .. ... 4 .... . 4, 11 .44 j a , ... .... -. - i 1 1 .4' ;1 - . i 0 ,~ 0- 0 - 0 L - 1illillillillillillillillilip . I . Ii. 0 .. . A . '' 0 2191.- . 1 0 D a - 0 ..... . 0 0 0 00 -- 0 . . 4 - t. i . h.4 . 0 -I . . 0 . 0 0 - I . I . 00 0 . . .. , // . /31 f f j t j i j, Â¢ j f f t j f 3-Â«m p 11 1 1 The Stevens Group, Incorporated *CAL--8 : 1.- 229 '- 29 " 16 OTH 312 E Aspen Airport Business Center - 1/ Aspen, Colorado 81611 f - (970)925-6717 (970)925-6707 (fax) Y40,= 5 p tO 20 40 N ./ , Â¢1=96.- . - 0 0-- - - - - - .-22 - 0 / 2. - - - - - 41 - I- - 9 7.-jo 1 1 4 4 11 ul - - : ~11 ; 1 5 Eli 0 . li 1/1 71: . fl !8 9 A - 1 - . E 11* I / f % d. 4 - f // d 1 2 & '' L 1 M '115 1 0 - 0. , 0 - Â»my 4 L f *i 4 m , 1 2 - I. 4 - li; I. I 4 - 1 .111 1 1 Â£ ... d -- .H r * f 1 - A 1 -- l# 4**:5 n r *1,1 -- I R 1- . '4 - , i i ..4 il ~I-- I i 1 . <4--/2.---1.~ .-.--- NÂ« I 1 f 2 - , Â¢ 1 0- , .... iii k . 1. 1 - - >*Sk. Niek , 01,+t .$ j f 1 ' 4 il ~. 1 1 *Li'-/Imideaml~-11,~- #,2 L j' 1 , , 11- , , Â»Â«Â«Zer---+ 1;4 194 C j - r :I1 , 719 4 (17 .f / -k - 'lli; 11-- - I =0 ' lit , 41 . Â»f" ..... . .. ..0 . I .