HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.200 Sesame St.11A-86
,~
" ,
~.l:a.I..fvru.l .&>u~~ .;:)DEtEt.L
City of Aspen
2137 '01q"lif.'~'"
1""""-,.
s J E NO.
--STAFF: <;;
'PfJ1/flJ) '. "
27-336r
1. Conceptual Submission
2. Prel imi na ry plat
3. Final Plat
20
12
6
II. Subdivision/PUD
1. Concept ual Submi ssion
2. pr el imi na ry Plat
3. Final Plat
III. All "!yO Step" Appl ications
IV. All "One Step" Appl ications I
5
$1,900.00
1,220.00
820.00
$1,490.00
$ 6 80 .00
14
9
6
11
V.
Referral Fees - Environmental
Health, Housing Office
1. Minor Appl ications
2. Major Applications
Referral Fees-
Engineering
Minor Applications
Major APPlicationsl~
2
$
50.00
.
5
$ 125.00
80.00
200.00
_.___... ..4 .,;,;"'.~,.'..,:.,..:!j,t.'.J...-",..!....r:'/}~/uu ~/: :~.:.'.:;...'
. '., ....- - ----- ---.---------.- --- -------- ---- ------------ - ------ -- --...---.-.---,
.--------------------------------------------------------------------
"" cc '''''mG ""TE, ""-:v.:L.. "'""'" H~ "yes @
DATE REFERRED: ~ INITIALS:
=========================================~======== =================
REFERRALS:
------,.CCity Atty v"'" Aspen Consolo S.D. ____ School District
~ City Engineer Mtn. Bell ____ Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas
--------/ Housing Dir. Parks Dept. ____ StateHwy Dept (Glenwd)
-Y-. Aspen ~Iater ----r- Holy Cross Electric ____ Statellwy Dept (Gr.Jtn)
---- City Electric ~ Fire Marshall.~'\'.~ ____ Bldg: Zoning/lnspectn
____ Envir. Hlth. Fire Chief ____ Other:
. Roaring Fork Transit Roaring Fork Energy Center
==========================================~=======~===================
FIN~ ROUTING: DATE ROUTED:"j- / INITIAL:,
L City Atty City Engineer L Building Dept.
Other:
V CWciD
____ Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
!
Revic\~cd by: ( i,speD ~ cityC611ncil Sle5~1-~I>\.1" "8040G~~Q.llne"
O~, ~'3 5"", j q ~t <i1. n{~j~u""" ~~ c~J 5 "j.rVl.1 ,~J fh ~~
J:Jv (fD'tO !01..uJ,,>x I!.:/,;'; lliL b"u,rl"*' W~ "~~~J "', Let ~~'], ~"'1<'AJ Puh IJrJJ.W~
6 ~. .~ ill> fA''';'''' <,:.,Jk:, : ' "
,'1. A site specific subsurface soil investigation shall be
done by a qualified geotechnical engineer after the building
sites have been pr epared to determine specif ic foundation
design. The investigation resul ts and designs shall be
submitted to the Engineering Department and Building Department
prior to pouring the foundation.
,;.-,
, 2.
Revegetation shall include the type of plantin9s and procedure
of revegeta ting as represented in the Siegel a ppli ca tio n.
Revegetation shall be accomplished by no later than ~~Tebi!l
1987. A. new revegetation scheme shall be submitted for the .
Smith site; Lot 3, to the satisfaction of the Planning Office
prior to issuance of a building permi t. Any changes in the
revegetation schemes shall be processed through an application
to the Planning Office, and if they are determined to be
significant, shall be processed as an amendment to the 8040
Greenline Review approval.
.
.
3. liat~r meters s~all be located at or near the property line
and the wa ter 11 ne shall be sl eeved where is passes under the
Salvation Ditch, to the satisfaction of the I'later Department.
4. All util iti es B.hall be undergrounded.
5", /vl1,t~ Jv.Jk1 <<rv;&ul aJ rwrf,.. c1J) U e~-I a,j ~121t) t<l1 i1v'ffL1,:t{\~:
\.6-::> Access to the property shall be along the Salvation Ditch
~ through HOlly Gibson Park. Access easements obtained from
Pitkin County shall he submitted to the satisfaction of
the City Attorney prior to the issuance of a Building permit.
Vil~<l-"o 44~,QIJ ~ L< li:.",..J, #. Jv~w4,7~M~ i, ~{ "J,^tJ -4 il"
~,J, 1 LL €'f"'tW/'., D~,.J '" ~t()J.~f); H 9.1.lq~ llr4t>A'p,L". ,
7, ~ ~,.;t dwJ '. !~. ~.-J tl .iF.;) ~,j ,'" ; J<Jr.{;'4~ Jcr.) -L~ ~ ~o'
OJJ, I/.AP ,{, ~ f-k p~, (y/!;'-<. MJ;. W 1'#1'4< W1J)" 4" AI.l1. C, ~f4^":
p~/r(Q'1l1;il",/D~~/q;4 f.k"'q>ff~ HI... ~M;(4 Jliv;IJi;)]~,
C)
'!il
-----"~-_.- ---_._~
.,r.
MEIDRANOUM
TO:
City Engineer
Aspen Water Department
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Fire ~larshall
FROM:
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
Lots 3 and 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision - 8040
Greenline Review
RE:
OATE:
April 10, 1986
---------------------------------------~~------------------------
---------------------------------------------~~------------------
Attached is an application submitted by Gary Wright on behalf of
his clients Barry and Sharon Siegel and Robert and Glenda Smith,
requesting 8040 Greenline Review for .the construction two single
family homes, one on Lot 3 and one on Lot 5, Sunny Park North.
Subdivision. Both parcels are crossed by the 8040 elevation line
and therefore must be reviewed pursuant to Section 24-6.2 8040
Greenline Review criteria.
Please review this material and return your referral comments to
the Planning Office no later than May 5, 1986.
Thank you.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Bill Drueding, Zoning Official
FROM:
steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE:
smith Revegetation Plan (Siegel-Smith 8040 Review)
DATE:
March 30, 1987
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
Condition #2 of the Siegel-Smith 8040 Greenline Review approval
by the Aspen Planning and Zoning commission required the smiths
to submit a new revegetation scheme thaqt conformed to the type
of plantings and procedure of revegetation as represented in
Siegel's application. Their revegetation plan does meet this
requirement. It should be noted that if the Smiths desire to
plant trees on Sunny Park North Lot 5 this would be in keeping of
their conditions of approval and would be desireable. The intent
of the regetation scheme is to plant as abundantly as desired
scattered native species that would enhance the hillside, and to
discourage introducing many exotic species that would then call
attention to the distrubance of the hillside.
cc: Bob and Glenda Smith
,
.
("\
t)
,
D rn@rnowrg n
.a2t- U
_.uly 24, 1986
E;t€~ve E-tLtrs:.'t:ei n
A!spen and Pitkin
l:'~O Sn Gi::\lf=rH'~
A!3pen, CO B1f~l.:l
:
County Planning Department
Dei3.I'~ st:€?ve ~
Enclosed are multiple copies of a new access desigrl for Lots 3
and 5~ Sunny Park North Subdivision and the topographical slJrvey
from which the first was i~ part derived. These are submitted as
part of ongoi ng 8040 Grf2f:?1l1 i nc.,? ...revi ew of Lot 3"
The major areas of consideration at this point appear to be
architectural and access. Let me first discuss the architectlJral
design.
Thl""E?(7:~ cri t(.;;)l"oi a
as prf?S€~nt(2c:1"
Shar-'on Si {o?(.;:J~?l "
.f 1 001'" areas is
l"'E~si clencf2 \,oJi 11
determined the architectural form o.f the residence
The first is the program o.f the owners, Barry and
The arrangement and disposition of spaces arId
my professional interpretatiorl of tl,e way the
best satisfy their needs and lifestyle~
Secondly, the design is passive solar, necessitating ma>:imization
of south facing glass. Besides resulting in an ef.ficier,t
residence with an auxiliary heating requirement of 21.8 MBTLJ,
$450 annually at current electric rates, this satisfies some
community goals and desires for reduced energy conslJmptio11.
Thirdly, the roof form is also in part a response to snow. The
metal roof, choice of the owners, slopes north and south to
divert avalanching snow away from, rather than onto, the west
deck and main entryway to the house. On the north, with few
window~,;~, it: m~":\y acc:umulc:.-\t:Q'" On th€~ ~sout:h, m€-2Ji:in~~ ("Jill DCC\..\I'~'
mor'e rapidly than on other exposures.
I must also remind you, that the floor area is less t~lar' maximlAm
FhA.R", that the building department, in corlcurrerlt review,
accepts the roof as being below maximum building height, and of
Article 24-8.13 (page 1497, Supplement 13) of the MLlnicipal Code
of Aspen, regar~ding requirement for area and bt,llk redtActioll in
the R15 P.U.D. zone,
'!In no (-::~Vf:?nt: hD~J€-2r.ver' i:::\ F'"U..D. dt;.?si(;Jni~t::tDn not{,~,Jit.hst.:.,nclinq:!
shall compliance with this Ar-ticle be required for the
cioJn!:;tl'''ucticH1 c)Of ,,,\ !~~in(;11€~ family 1"'€~sidE~nC:E~ on l~ '~;€~Pi:':\!'-l::\te
lot" II
Peter Dobrovolny AlA
drawer 340 old snowmass CO 81654
$
927-3369
o
.
r'\
~
,
,
Regarding access, having failed development of a new ~subdi
\<'Jhi ch {.'Joul cl have pr"ovi ded i:\ new bui 1 eli ng envelope and acce,ss
above, we now prtivide accesS from Parle Circle Drive, ;the dnl
legal access to the lot(s), as shown on the attached
There is an alternative that I believe comes very
eV<::'~I".bCJ.dy what t.hf?Y Wc\llt.
Revegetatio~ will be as previously proposed, including
to the edge of Park'Circle Drive. Note that neither Ci
. County ha~e revegetate~ areas di pturi;'ed as a resLll t of
Cir'cle Drlve constn.lc:tlclfl; .
This access will work. It is not optimum, with sizeable
fill at ,.i1:her end and tight tLwning ,",'ldiL It also precl
future consideration of a nordic or pedestrian trail along
Salvat:iClrl Ditch alignment. However, denial of this, our best
e'ffol-t" consti tutes taki ng wi thout comp.msati on. Wi th no
inlcended fn~m me personally, denial 01- tabling on August 5
well initiate fJling of suits from either Siegel and Smith
Colorado National Bank, or both.
The alternative is driveway access along Salvation Ditch
parallel trail easement just to the south and west of the
from Smuggler Mountain Rcad:to the east end of Lot 3. Achieving
this solution will take some, time and the sincere participati6ri
of the owners, the City and the County.
All parties Mill have to give a little:
The owners will have less privacy~
The City will get somewhat less than an optimum trail.
The County will need to allow a private driveway through
Molly Gibson Park.
However, all p~rties will get what they want:
~ The owners will get approval to b~gin construction, now
desired (rnore on that below).
- The City gets a trail easement without the ~ilemma of
,cost of condemnation ~o save the trail.
- The County, I'not in the trailbusinessll, has no need to
dedicate a trail easement above the lots nor to partici
land swap to provide improved building .nvelope and access
above.
It's cogent to point out that the cost of earthwork to
eight foot wide trail parallel to and slightly below the
Sal vat i on Di t.~h shp~tl d bl~ in t.he ,same magni t.ude as t.he $5,
$7,OO() quoted 1:0 us for ear.t.hworMk for tl1E:-? dri veway access
presented and signi ly less than condemnation.
What I would
rf?vi sed 8040
Vii th condi ti
th€-!' a1 ternati
ievedon August 5 is approval
fh the'driveway access as
paF'ties begin to immediately
the Salvati be
'<C;;;.;"':',::'-'"
"';<:;;~<"~:;:
,
~
constr"uct i on purposes on I y
access issue is adequately
time as the alternative
way (Jr anot.her..
In conclusion, this is the
- it preserves the opportunity to maintain a trail alignment,
which the City Attorney instructs us should never have been an
issue inthi:> review, ,'t."
- it completes 8040 review with6ut~tabling and/or law suits,
- it sa..ti sf i es the c.){.olnel"'r;;' desi l~e.i:'C), comp 1 ei:e purchase and
begin cons'cr'uction.
Please accept my complet~.willingness, and that of the Siegels,
Smiths and their legal cousel, to do ever-thing in our power to
work with you to achieve a solution that is in everybody's best
int.el"'ests..
p)iiJJ
Peter. Dobrc~vC)1 ny
Enclosur-es
p..c. Wright and Schumacher
Bar-r-y and Shew"on 8i f2(~el
r'\
~
,
Page 2
8040 GREENLINE REVIEW
Section 24-6.2. of the City of Aspen Municipal Code
requires that all development above elevation 8040 or within
50 yards below that elevation be reviewed on the basis of
nine items of criteria, as follows:
See. 24-6.2. 8040 G.re,e~lin". review.
(a) Intention. To provide for review of all development
above the 8040 greenline within the City of Aspen and all
development fIfty (SO) yards below the 8040 greenline so as
to aid in the transition of development from urban uses to
the adjacent agricultural and forestry uses; to insure ,that
all development is compatible with the prevailing slopes; to
provide for the least disturbance to the terrain and ,other
natural land features of the area; to'guarantee availability
of utilities and adequate access; to reduce the impact of
development on surface runoff, the natural watershed, and
air pollution; to avoid losses due to avalanches. unstable
slopes, rock fall and mudslides; and to enhance the natural
mountain setting.
(b) Review criteria. In reviewing the development plan,
the ZOni.ig commission shall consider the following:
(1) Whether there exists sufficient water pressure and
other utilities to service the intended development; .
(2) The existence of adequate roads to insure fire
protection, snow removal and road maintenance;
(3) The suitability of the site ,for development considering
the slope, ground instability and possibility of mud
flow, rock falls and avalanche dangers;
(4) The affects of the development on the natural
watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion and conse-
quent effects on water pollution;
(5) The possible effects on air quality in the area and city
wide;
(6) The design and location of any proposed' structure,
roads, driveways or trails and their compatibility with
the terrain;
(7) Whether proposed grading will result in the least
disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land
reM~; ,
(8) The placement and clustering of structures so as to
minimi7.e roads, cutting and grading, and increase the
open space and preserve the mountain as a scenic
resource;
(9) The reduction of building height and bulk to maintain
the open character of the mountain. (Ord No.
11-1975, fi 1)
r-,
~
F'a{.:;Jf2 ,_,
The subject property is Lot 3, Sunny Pa0k North
Subdivision, located on Park Circle Drive in the City of
Aspen. The lot is effectively split by the Salvation Ditch
creating a small, steep building site immmdiately off Park
Circle Drive on the lower part of the site and. more
buildable building site on a fairly flat bench above the
Salvation Ditch. In this part of Aspen the Salvation Ditch
is run through a buried four foot diameter concrete culvert.
The resulting ground surface is a rc~gh but driveabl.
roadway. Access to the upper building site is provided via
the Smuggler Mountain Road and an improved driveway to be
constructed over the ditch roadway. The roadway is
sufficiently wide enough to require no cut and fill, only
mi nor' gradi "9 and ,....f:)i':\cl bc:\s(-2. Sf.?~:? ~,ttached documentati Dn
explaining access and use of both roadway ~nd ditch.
A site plan, Sheet 1 of the construction documents for
this project is attached. It shows a small garage shop
located on the lower portion of the site and the main house
located on the upper building site above the Salvation
Ditch. An iSCHnetl'"'ic: Vif.:~I,oJ on the !samesheet describes the
architectural character of the house.
The lot is 18,380 square feet in area.
Also attached is description of ownership of the
property.
This application addresses ~ach item of review criteria
as presented above.
III A verbal indication of ~ufficient water and water
pressure was given by the City of Aspen Water Department and
a written request for written verification was made March
27, 1986, copy 0" lettE?r attac:h,.d. Written response will bE?
forwarded to the Planning Department upon receipt. City
sewer main is located in Park Cil-cIe Drive.
Electrical power if;; -availc\l::)le at twC) locations lIe€:U"N this
property. Holy Cross Electric is currently investigating
the location of a transformer in the vicinity of the south
west corner of thm property to provide service to lots 3, 5
and 7 of this subdivision.
(2) Park Circle Drive provides access to the lower
building site, where the garage shop is located. It is
maintained by the City of Aspen. The City of Aspen will
provide road maintenance and snow removal on the Smuggler
Mountain Road as far as the upper par~ 9f lot seven. See
attached pI at~ shoVJi ng I'Neconf i gurecl 1 c,t Sf2V€-?n, th(.? roesul1: of
a land swap to provide for e>:tension of Park Circle Drive.
The Pitkin County Housing Authority is the current owner of
lot seven.
Road maintenance and snow relnoval will thlJS be provided
to the dl'""iveway tD b€-? constrt.{c't~(~d over the Sal'/e:\tiol'1 Ditch,
thi s c1r i veway pl"'ovi c1i n~J !~CCE~SS; to tlie bui Id:i r1(;} si te=:. on both
10.1:: thrNee and -f:ive. Jvlair1"t.enancf:? and ~-;now removal on this
pri vate droi veway {..J:i 11 !:.'H2 the I-E7"sponsi bi 1 i ty of t.h(-:? O\o'Hl€H"'S of
~.
r'\
Page 4
these two lots. There will
southern side of lot three.
be no vehicle access beyond the
'"
(3) Buildable area for a house is limited to the bench and
hillside above the Salv<.\tic:m Ditch. Slopes ("'ange fl"om les=;
than 10% on the bench to I:JVer' 45% em t,he l.lpper plJrtion o'f
the site. As the buildable area is small, the house will be
built on the bench and into the hillside, with the
foundation walls acting as retaining walls on the upper part
of the site. Sae attached report fr~n Doctor Nicholas
Lampiris addressing slope, ground instability, etc. See
also attached portion 0+ geolo~lic map of the Aspen a,-ea,
showing approximate location of ~ubject property.
(4) As the subjact proparty is part of a small hill, the
top of which is just above thanortheast property cornar,
the only drainaga and runoff occurring on tha proparty is
that from snow and pracipitation falling on tha proparty.
No major or minor d'....ainages occ:ur.. See attached roe-port from
Doctor Nicholas Lampiris.
(5) Being a single family residence, the project will have
insignificant, if iany, effE:-?ct on lidr quality in thf? city,
both during construction and after.
(6) As discussad in (3) abova, tha housa is dasignad for
the only available building site on tha property. The house
is dasignad to ba integrated into the site !m that final
gradad elavations around the site ara littla different than
existing elevations. Access to the building site is along
the Salvation Ditch roadway, preventing the nead for naw
road cuts on the hillside.
(7) Grading will be limitad to the immadiat. vicinity of
the house' and areas arol~nd it requiring backfill after
e>~cavation and c:on~5tr~uction o.f fDundat:i.on wi:\11s. Final
grade will be little different than axisting grada,
resulting in minim,al dis,turbance to the ter-rain. Existing
vegetation is sage brush and small service ber~y. No trees
exist on the building site. Revegetation of disturbed areas
around the site will be with native grasses to provide
stability, reduce maintenance and need for watering and to
create an appearance of ni:\tur.al vt"?(.:;Jetation ,ar'c)und t.he hou!se.
(8) structures are placed on the only buildable areas of
the site. Cutting and grading will be limited to the
vi ci ni ty of the structurE?~'; them:~el VG~~::' an'd ~Jl'~ades around them
will be returned to existing slopes. The Salvation Ditch
will be used as an access drive to the house, preventing the
need for cutting and filling for a driveway access. Other
areas of the site will be undisturbed.
(9) This neighborhood is composed of single family and
multi-family dwelling units, generally small in scale but
densely developed. A few blocks to the northwest of the
("',
t"\
;1
Pi.~ge 5
property is the Centennial 'housing project, massive and
highly visible. An appraisal of the pr-operfy and house as
designed, performed by James J. Mollica and A.sociates (not
attacheKO, state~; "The n€~i(:Jhbor-t1lJod i~; considr-ed fair- to
average in appeal primarily due to the high density of
development ..." and "Th,'1 ,",,~i ,jhbor.hood ha~o steadi I y
improved over-recent years as' more and more properties ~lave
become owner fJcc:upied." This project C'in only improvE' the
nei ghborho(Jd.
This application deals wi,th a single family residence,
designed to be incompliance with F.A.R. and building height
require~ents f6r the R-15 zone~ The house will be blAilt
into the hillside and stepped up the hill in order to reduce
visual bulk and to create architectural integration with the
building site" Exterior materials of construction are wood
siding and metal roofing. ~Jlors of both will be earth
tones to reducE-!' vi sual i mpcH:t..
Building sites on lots five and seven of this
subdivision are at a higher elevation than the building site
on lot thr<-2E? Re::i-i denC:E?!-3 con'!i;;i:rLtcted on these si tes (on'f? is
currently contemplated en lot 5) will h~ve a much greater'
impact on the open character of the mountains even if height
and bulk are reduced~
.-:-....-.,..,..---~'.,,_.-
tr"',
~
~-
.~
APPLICATION FOR
, 8040 GREENr.INI! ~ ON
- ---'--.-
.!!!!: 1 SUNNY ~ ~ SOBOtvrSlOll. Cl'1Y OF k;"l:ia
'!his Application is being su!:rl1itted purs.-tto th<> r"'lUir""",,*s of
Article VI Specisl lleveloprent l'>rmits. S24~.1 and S24~.2 8040 Greenline
rev-iew.
'!his JlfIplication is. being subnitted in COI1j~i"l1 with the
JlfIpliction of Barry and Sharon Siegel. IDt 3. Sunny Park lbrth Sd:Jdivlsion,
City of Aspen, 'ltl<! Siegels'pro!?"rty is an lrljacent property and to a great
extent the criteria and impact are similar or identical.
REVIm aUTERIA
1. '!here exists sufficient ....ter pressure and other utilities to
service th<> intend"" devel6pnent,
Jim Markalunas of the city water Oepartzrent indicated that the City
....ter line. wlitll suUkie"t Water pressur..-, is available to meet i:h..- needs
of tile I""op<>sed hare: '
lIeiko lIiulln of the /!Spell Sani taUon Elepartment indicated that there is a
sewer line located under Park Circle .bich is a.i~ fO llervice the
proposed l1o:ne, '
locati~~ ~~,,:fa~";:;t:S :-~r~c f:a;rect~~k~:WO different
2. Pdequate roads exist to insure fire protection, snow removal and
roa:l maint:e_. PropoSed access is by Park Circle liilich now connects to
SnUjgler Ibuntain Road.
Jim Wilson. City Fire Marshall, confirmei:l that a City fire h~rant is
located across Park Circle and is accessable and adequate for fire
protection.
Park Circle and SnUjgler Ibuntain Road are or will be maintained by the
City.
After the County sells IDt 7, the City will al~ mai~~" the, acceSll on
SnUjgler Ibuntein ROM.'ll", ~ fr~ sn~ler It>untain I1i>\!6 along
Salv"tion Ditch will be lMintained by the """ers elf IDt 3 and IDt 5.
3 & 4, '!he site is suitable for the prllposeddeql!lo~ of a single
family residence conslderingslo!?", 'lround Instabilitl1,mul flow, rock falls
and avalanche d""'lers. '!he dev'lloprent will have no n'''9at ive inlP,act "" the.
natural; W5l:er shed, run off. drainage, soil e~osion or consequent effect on
....ter pol;utlon. Please see the rep<>rt fran B!iMer and l\lJS09iates, Ni,,,,k
Iampiris Q,g ineer l!It~hed S!I El<hibit "A" "a!Id. i!1(:'O$ra-ted berein fo.' ,
confirmation of the foregoing. ' ,.", ,
5. '!he proposed hone is a single family residence of ~rtll<iIlIately
2,400 llq\W'e feet: ,and consequently will have little effect on air quality in
the City of Aspen.
l\coOrding to Ordinance lb. 5, 511-2.3 <if the Mtlnicipal Code of the
City of Aspen the proposed bane w.il1 have t.., certified """",burning devices.
It will use the list provided by '!he ErwirCllll1>intal lIealth Department to
select the """,,",uming devices so the air quality will not be negatively
effected.
6. Park Circle and Sntggler Mountain Rb8d are illplaoe. Likewise t the
dr iveway will he an up;rade of the existing road""'Y constnx:ted by the
Salvation Ditch Crnlpany adjacent to their covered culvert. l\11 design will
be done in mind with the lll<1Ximtnt canpatability with natural terrain arx1 the
Aft" :1\ YlIA1 l1
"
\
-'--
f'r""\,
v
~
t'\
I
O,,",ers is1tend to replao> and supplement natural vegl!tlltiOn in an llttempt to
get the home to blend in with th.. adjac..nt terralh.
'!he proposed single fanily building is de"Sig-h'ed to CbhfOiin to the
nlltural slope and terrain of the site (Pl~se see the topograJ;Mc ....1' and
sect,ion of building attRchfi!(] a.~ t=.:xhibit "8" and inco'rporated herein).
7. Mini.ma1 q~a:Hng .and excavation i5P['Opo~1 ~h fat' ECOncmic an:]
conserv.::'l.tion reasons. No pl.,')n:; lire ~.~ to e'xcavateexcept wher~.. it is
absolutely necess..:uy andev~ry reason.:'bleeffortwil1 be made to preserve
the natural terrain, ve'Jetationand land .feat:urcs. In addition planting and
landscaping are plannro as described above. 'Ihe ar-ea~1:,J!;excavated will
be the north wall of the hem> and consequently ~U::h d""rgn will offer hoth
vi!'>ual and en~rgycon!;ct"Vationbene:.fit$;. "
8. '!he ho""" is the only structure to be bttilt. dn the property and it
will be placed soc:h that th.. ..dsting Salvation !liteh Road y.ill ,serve Ma
driveway and only minimal c1Jtting and grad!"J willtoke place. '!he design
of th.. home will """Unize o!>"n "J?o'C<!,a.'1d ~n fact ,the desrgn of tru.. home
(with the north wall set into the slope) will preSt'!i!Ve the nioimtain as a
scenic resource "",J in Mditi,on the planned l~seli!ti"J ,arv.J. planting will
suhstantially enhan= the view of tbis area fran the toon, cif' A."J;len.
9, 'lhe cur,entcllari'ct:e.~ "f thelll()l1f1.€a1nIs 1i~~I~.i~~r~et\..".ji
the neighOO~~ fs,~I?i'{s,~ of,.il<>!=h ~~fe f(lind;f)r ~.:Il)~it,~ .f....j1l' '
d--lli"J lllUt..c '.' Jfi~ Juga il..nsH'}'. h!gfdYVi,,!l'>!e~~i"J;!i>uslng pro~~
~~oo~li.irt~~~i~.,,~l)fe~~~ -n:uit~~1~1'a1~~:~
the R IS ~e"!l: (~r a.. F,A,~. andl>!>t1dtrij~rgl1t,'ffiellbutll!wtl~ I'!' ~1ld;f1i
into the hillside for ast!lett",,~ energy ~~tViltt'?!l~~", '1l1e sidf"J.
will be nat~ral rOCK ariO """<'I. wtl:h".~ Clr~~.~~""!11e pro~'1"'l' .'l:fle
buHdi"J site 00 Tnt 7 of the sllbd iVlslon will be a higher elevation than
the building site prop:>S<!d for this home.
\\
AlJDITION1\L .!!!:!L~ ..Mti 'l::C1<lSttllllVi'l'id&s
'!his property is presently o...,ed, by CbtOl"lldO NittiOnal &nt<, , Glen""Od
Springs and is under contract to the arplicants !>Obert an:l Gl.,.,aa Snith. A
Drive....y and Ul:i1ity Ea""""'nt, will bP. ente.rel! in",?~l'1 the cUl"r"nt
"""e~ and Salvation Ditch O:>npony, a dr"ft ot, the I\3r"""""nt is attached as
Exhibit "CO and incorpori'tedhereinallll it is ~leived that in substance it
will be accepted hy the llal<,atlon Ditch CotlW"hy.
A topographical map has been attache<i ~~~'\' thl!! !'i'J:lt'~ximate lot'ation
of the property in relation to the City lOrd 'lb,""site of MpIm.
Cblol".OOo NaHona1.&nT< wiit be "ubjeding thIs property to a
restrictfv,~ O?V~ryan1; .~or driveway use and m.'Un!:'~~~ \ioft'~~hwill be,
affective to d"al with all sitmUons of th.. shared use"'Je that will """ur
bet""""n the """ers of l:JJt 3 and r..ot 5.
S~Y
Based on the foregoing theAppHc~ts sllbttits th'at the iht~ arv.J
specificr""iew criteria of 8040 GreenHne l1""iewOn Lot 5 SUnny ParK lbt1:h
SlIbdivisionhaiie been met and that it is awropdlltefor the Sniths to 00
pernlitted to construct the proposed single fanily h""", on the. property.
Robert .and Gl..,~i' Snith by theil" I\ttorneys
Wr!gnt , 'Schm.acher ' ,
bY:~-~, .
~~19ht
201 !>:lrth Mill Street, Suite 106
lIspen, O:>lorado 81611
en.9lIi~..h.app (303) 925-5625
2
~I
~
4tTJ,hl\l{>\+ C
MEMORANDUM
TO: steve Burstein, Planning Office
FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department ~
Th.ru: 'J'aV"Hammi5n<f;'''''cltyc'WrtgIneer" -*'
DATE: May 20, 1986
RE: Lots 3 and 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision-
8040 Greenline Review
--_._-------------------------'.--~-_._--------------
The Engineering Department has recieved the additional documenta-
tion that was requested April 19, 1986 and based on that informa-
tion and the original application that was submitted, we can now
make the following recommendations:
1) THe subsidence potential question was reviewed and a report
was considered that was submitted by a geotechnical engineering
firm, Western Engineering, Inc. of Grand Junction. Based on the
conclusions of ,th.is report, we are satisfied that the proposed
structures can be built without significant risk from subsidence.
We will recomIllend, however, that based on the conclusions of this
report, no structure be. built near the west boundary of lot 5
below the ditch pipeline unless'areportsubmitted by a register-
ed P.E. in geote8~nical engineering can offer conclusive evidence
that there will be no risk in doing so.
2) The question as to whether or not adequate foundations can be
constructed for the structures was also reviewed. Based on the
conclusions of the report by Western Engineering, we are satis-
fied that they can be. We will recommend, based on the conclu-
sions of this report, that site specific subsurface soil investi-
gation be done, after the build.ing site has been prepared, to
determine a more specific foundation design.
3) The information recieved on depth of excavation and placement
of fill for these structures was reviewed and considered ade-
quate.
4) The detailed information on revegetation for these develop-
ments was reviewed and that submitted by lot 3 was considered
adequate. We recommend that the plan submitted by lot 5 conform
more to that submitted by lot 3 in the type of vegetation and
procedure used in planting.
j g/NSunPARK
~
n
A t11f(h/J1{~1 P
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department~
Jay Hammond, City Engineer~
April 16, 1986
THRU:
DATE:
RE:
Lots 3 and 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision -
8040 Greenline Review
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
The application for the above parcels cannot be fully reviewed
until additional documentation is submitted by the applicants.
First of all, this documentation should include a more detailed
architectual plan which would indicate the depth of excavation
and any fill proposed on the sites. It should also include more
detailed information concerning the revegetation of the disturbed
areas to prevent possible erosion problems.
Secondly, this documentation should include a report by a registered
P.E. in geotechnical engin~eringwhich would indicate the feasib-
ility of using the foundation walls for these structures as
retaining walls for slope stability after excavation. This
report would .als() addressth~ potential for ground instability by
using results obtained from test hole drilling.
The following information was' of concern in determining the above
requi rements:
1. A geologie st ud:r recently dorie fOr the applicants by NicK
Lampiris in which he suggests a drill hole to test for: under$r:o~~~"
cavities be done by a soils engineer.
2. A 1983 report on an adjacent area done by then county engineer
Pat Dobie and Lincoln DeVore geotechnical engineers in which they
recommend "complete avoidance of this zone especially wi th any
permanent structures."
3. A 1980 memo to the Planning Office by Jay Hammond in which he
recommended denial of exemption from mandatory P.U.D. for lots 3
and 5 because of concern over reduced soil stability from cut and
fill and over possible erosion problems due to removal of vegeta-
tion.
JG/co/SunnyPkGreenlineRev
f1'l} Q
(,
JEROME PROFESSIONAL BUILDING
201 NORTH MILL STREET, SUITE 106
ASPEN. COLORADO 8161 ,
D m@ m D\'#[gn
· It. 'U
LAW OFFICES
WRIGHT & SCHUMACHER
.J'
GARY A. WRIGHT
B. LEE SCHUMACHER
ALLEN H. ADGER
DAVID l. MARSH
TELEP
, 25
19 May 1986
Steve Burstein
Planning Office
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
HAND DELIVERED
Re: Siegel - Smith 8040 Greenline Review
Sunny Park North Subdivision, Lots 3 and 5
Dear Steve:
I am writing in response to your Memorandun of 14 May 1986 received
several days later.
1 . Geotechnical study requirements have been completed for both lots
together and will be delivered to you by Peter Dobrovolny.
2. ~e plans submitted to you for Smith dated 24 April 1986 inchrle a
landscape and grading plan. I assume that this request applies primarily to
Lot 3 because I am not certain \\bat you want more specifically. ~e plan
indicates the use of ground cover and flowers as well as evergreen shrubs
and shOW3 the intended use of railroad tie planters. We will promptly
provide more information if you will be specifiy lilhat you need.
3. A visual impact analysis must be considered to balance two factors.
~e first consideration is to create a structure lilhose visual impact is
mitigated. For both Applications it is believed that the overall design as
well as the vegetation and planting will help the hones to appear minimally
obtrusive visually. (Please see perspective view of the Smith house facing
downtown Aspen page 1 of 5) ~is must be balanced with factor two, the
impact and effect of excavation. Both homes have done an excellent job of
balancing those two factors. Cbviously, the extreme with maximun excavation
to produce a house that is substantially underground is unacceptable as a
residence while a tall, boxy, brightly colored hone is equally unacceptable
on the other extreme.
I am confused about your questions regarding area and bulk requirement
of R15 P.U.D. Zone District as the Municipal Oode of the City of Aspen, S24-
8.13 (Page 1497, Supplement 13) states:
"In no event however a P.U.D. designation notwithstanding,
shall compliance with this Article be required for the
construction of a single family residence on a separate
lot."
r)
("')
WRIGHT & SCHUMACHER
steve Burstein
19 May 1986
Page two
You have been supplied same photographs by Peter Dobrovolny at least
one of mich locates both lots on the photogrClfh. !he 9niths are \rorking to
get the requested super imposition.
Although you are not requesting specific information as to 1 through 4
of your Memo I think it is very important to bring you up to date on 1 and 2
mich deal with easement and a trail.
Peter Dobrovolny has contacted Craig Ward regarding the Nordic Trail
System. It is not accurate to say the applicants have no intention to
accanodate any trail through rots 3 and 5, how=ver it is their goal to use
the existing Salvation Ditch Road for their driveway if the necessary legal
hurdles can be traversed. We have been informed by Mr. Ward that he has
sane concerns as to the feasability of creating a Pedestrian/Bicycle/Nordic
Trail following the Salvation Ditch frcm the Aspen Club to the Hunter Creek
Trail. Tb acquire such a trail requires each and every land owner mose
property is crossed by the Salvation Ditch right-of-way to grant an
easanent. We have been informed by Mr. Ward that he is meeting sane
resistance in this concept. 'Ihe proposed omers (Smith and Siegel) of IDts
3 and 5 \rould certainly be open to consider other alignments for such. a
trail.
Gary Wright has met with the O:>unty Attorney, 'Ihcmas F. Smith,
regarding the use of the Salvation Ditch Road to access these lots across
property owned by pitkin O:>unty. A subsequent meeting is being scheduled
with Gary Wright, Tan 9nith and a representative of the Housing Authority
because pitkin O:>unty is currently the omer of rot 7.
I am curious my this is being considered the "Siegel-Miller 8040
Greenline Ieview"? !he actual omer of rots 3 and 5 is O:>lorado National
Bank, Glenwood Springs and Jack Kerr is handling the matters for the bank.
!he prospective purchasers are: IDt 3 - Barry and Sharon Siegel; IDt 5 -
Bob and Glenda 9nith. Gary Wright is \rorking with both prospective
purchasers as attorney and Peter Dobrovolny is working with the Siegels in
an architect and land use capacity. If you have any additional questions or
I can provide additional information please to write or telephone.
Sincerely,
Wright & Schumacher
bY:~
A. Wright
Gl\.W/vs
cc: Barry and Sharon Siegel
Bob and Glenda 9nith
Jack Kerr
Peter Dobrovolny
!hans F. 9nith, Esq.
.~
,..,: "
i"'l
~~~~~!Pff~
420 E, HOPKINS STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
13031 925-5532
MEMORANDUM
TO: STE',jE: BURSTEIN.. PL.ANNIi\!8 OFFICE
FROi'f]: rlSST~ FIRE CHIEF~ nSPEN l,./lJLU!\lTEEf-=< FIRE DEPT
RE: SIEGELlS[vJITH/COLO!~AD(j N~1T'} L B~)NKJ 8IZiiH21 GREENLINE REVIEW
DATE::
iV1AV 28.. 1 '386
================================================================
Orl !Yiay 2tS'! 1985~ Bari""'Y Sie!;lel t"'eoussted that; the Fire DeDi:'tr'tmeyyc
do an onsight insoection of lots #3 & #5# in order to be able to
cOfl1rne'l"lt Oi'"l YC1Ul'""' CCI"('lcer'('IS exoreE"~s(.?d i'('! your" 5/j.Lr/86 lettel'"~'" On
lY!(~y 28, 1'386.. orf(? fi"j""e ofoficer ~(fld thlCe -fire-me'!"l \lisited.. it',1alked
and cOfficletely insoscted the sight, may you note that we drove
there frclfll 'the fir-'s bary! 11'"/ eYH::iYH?' ::s.six,:, our 'fir"'::i:,'l:; attack tr"'uck
and one of our larcest vehicles~ We have the following comments:
lu access to the lots in case of fire, either structual or wild
fj,y"e is fi''''cml three {3) di'ffe'r"'eyd:; locatio)"'ls; 1'i1r.i\iY"i road~ d)'';'iveway
(middl(-?) 2'(f'ld .che tp:1oey' .("'oad.. We dr...o....'e .eel each lc'C'aticl)"l~ backed
uo and turned around in the truck.
2., Each tr"'Ucf..:. ciarries aOO.r'''c,ximatelv 121210 pallc'Y"15 of water -Fc,r aTl
i.mmediate attack l>\!hile we ~n~e corry,eet;: 1)"10 to a hydt"'a"r'"d::. There is
a hydr"al'Yt'; withi"fl e.;12j~ elf the J:n"cIPf?y..ty 1irle and has ve)....y easy
access.
I 0,"', celTIC': 1 tt 5. i Cl'r'"! :
due to the close oroximitv to the fire deoartment
giving a Quick response time~ a fire hydrant at such
pet! .flt:.. al",d the th)....€~e Clf" fl'lOy"e d:i ff€~'r'''e'r'":t .attack oed. rd::s
seem that this ~.lcdJJ.d be a verv easy J.ocat iO"f! i;o fipht a
a!3p"r"'eciate YCIlXr"' CQ't.leerYr fell.... adeauate fj.'re orotectiOYI
hapoy to be give the oCDortunity to visit the siphts
ccn"lst ruct i OYL,
a cle,se
it kh:)uld
fi.",'e. We
arid we'-e
Dt"'i ell'''' tel
Hopefully tl1is ct"nswers aYIY ouesticl"(',s you rflay hatVf2 hG.id~ a'("IC~ if" we
can be of~urther a5sistance~ olease do not hesitate to contact
rilE.
Si~~~~
Clifford Llttle
"'Y?;i,"'V' ",::-.~...."' ,,--
A'0'!'
(i
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM:
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE:
Siegel-Smith 8040 Greenline Review
DATE:
May 30, 1986
=================================================================
ZONING: R-15 (PUD).
LOCATION: Lots 3 and 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision, east side
of Park Circle on Smuggler Mountain.
Siegel - Lot 3 Smi th - Lot 5
Lot Size: 18,380 sq. ft. 15,858 sq. ft.
Proposed House: 2,685 sq.. ft. 2,471 sq. ft.
Garage: 724 sq. ft. 696 sq. ft.
Shop/Garage: 984 sq. ft.
Countable FAR 3,793 sq, ft. 2,567 sq. ft.
(approx)
Allowable FAR: 4,317 sq. ft. 4,136 sq. ft.
APPLICANTS REQUEST: The owner of the two lots, Colorado National
Bank, and the parties possessing contra.cts on the lots, ~1r. and
Mrs. Barry Siegel (Lot 3) and 11r. and !Irs. Bob Smith (Lot 5) have
submitted a joint application for permission to each build single
family houses. Propose4 primary access to the houses is the
covered Salvation Ditch as it extends south from the intersection
with Smuggler Mountain Road at a higher alignment than Park
Circle. The two separate requests are being handled in a single
application to save the applicants expense and time.
BACKGROUND: The Sunny Park North Subdivision was created through
approval of the County Board of County Commissioners on November
1, 1965 and was annexed into the City through the Berumen Annexation
on July 5,1966,
APPLICABLE SECTION OF MUNICIPAL CODE: According to Section 24-
6.3 of the Municipal Code development within fifty (50) yards
below the 8040 elevation is subject to special review by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. In reviewing development plans,
the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the follCMing
review criteria:
1. Whether there exists sufficient ~later pressure and
other utili ties to service the intended development;
~
~' 1
r1
2. The existence of adequate roads to insure fire protection,
snow removal and road maintenance;
3. The suitability of the site for development considering
the slope, ground instability and possibility of mud
fl~l, rock falls and avalanche dangers;
4. The affects of the development on the natural watershed,
runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent effects
on water pollution;
5. The possible effects on air quality in the area and
city wide;
6. The design and location of any proposed structure,
roads, driveways or trails and their compatibility with
the terrain;
7. Whether proposed grading will resul t in the least
disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land
features;
8. The placement and clustering of structures so as to
minimize roads, cutting and grading, and increase the
open space and preserve the mountain as a scenic resource;
tf-
9. The reduction of building height and bulk to maintain
the open character of the mountain (Ord. No. ll-1975,@I)
PROBLEM DISCUSSION:
A. Referral Comments:
1. Engineering Department: In a memorandum from Jim
Gibbard of the Engineering Department dated April 16,
1986 (attachment C) additional documentation of potential
ground instability and slope stability in the form of a
geotechnical engineering study ~las required prior to
full Engineer Department review. One of the main
concerns was the possibility of underground cavities
due to mining that could cause subsidence under the
proposed development sites. In a May 20, 1986 memorandum
the Engineering Department (attachment D) reviE!llled the
"Geographical and Geotechnical Subsidence Investigation
for Lots 3 & 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision" prepared
by ~'1esternEngineers, Inc. and made the following
comments:
a. The Engineering Department is satisfied that the
proposed houses can be built without significant
risk of subsidence.
b. No structure should be built near the western
boundary of Lot 5 unless a report submitted by a
f:';,
I)
regi stered Professional Engineer in geotechnical
engineering can off er conc1 us ive evidence that
there will be no risk in doing so.
c. Based on the conclusion of the Western Engineers
Inc. report, the Engineering Department is satisfied
that adequate foundations can be constructed. Site
specific subsurface soil investigation should be
done after the building site has been prepared to
determine a more specific foundation design.
d. The depth of proposed excavation and placement of
fill for these structures is considered adequate.
e. The detailed information on revegetation for Lot 3
was considered adequate. The type and procedure of
revegetating Lot 5 should conform to that submitted
f or Lot 3.
2. Nordic Council: In a letter from Craig Ward (attachment
E) dated May 5, 1986 it is stated that the proposed
developments appear to jeopardize the Master Plan trail
alignment along the Salvation Ditch. Other options for
automobile access to these lots should be explored. A
pedestrian trail does not appear to be compatible with
a private driveway, especially when the houses for both
lots are so close to the trail.
3. County Planning Engineer: In a memorandum from Tom
Newland, Pitkin County Planning Engineer (attachment F)
dated May 15, 1986 the following comments are made:
a. The use of the Salvation Ditch for vehicular
access to Lots 3 and 5 as it crosses the Molly
Gibson Park conflicts with the intended Pitkin
County trail system alignment.
b. The proposed access along the Salvation Ditch
conflicts with the 1979 Aspen/Pitkin County Trails
Master Plan proposed trail al ignment and jeopardize
a critical northern link. No alternative alignment
was proposed by the applicant.
c. This trail has become a real ity from Hunter Creek
to the applicants' property.
4,
Water Department: In a memorandum from
dated April 14, 1986 (attachment G)
comments were made:
Jim ~larkalunas
the following
a. For both Lots 3 and 5, the owners will be responsible
for the water line from the point of attachment at
the water main in Park Circle, meters must be
located at or near the property line, and the
r'1
r)
water line should be sleeved \~here it passes under
the Salvation Ditch,
b. Water pressure should be adequate for residential
purposes, however the pressure cannot be guaranteed
at 40 psi becuase of other influences such as
house plumbing and service line friction losses,
5.
Sanitation District:
single family homes can
dated District.
6. Fire Marshall: Jim Wilson stated in a May 29, 1986
memorandum that the Fire District access and hydrants
(one is located in Park Circle) are in conformance with
local fire codes. The lots are located in a 101'1
wildfire hazard area, so no additional fire precaution
w ill be necei;sary.
Heiko Kuhn stated the proposed
be served Py the Aspen Consoli-
B. Staff Comments: The Planning Office has the following
comments regarding the two development proposals.
1. Environmental Suitability:
a. Subsidence and Slope Stability: The Engineering
Department is satisfied that the proposed structure
can be buil t without significant risk of subsidence
due to mine cavities. It is still ncessary to
undertake site specific subsurface soil investigation
at the time of foundation excavation so to design
the foundation to act as retaining walls on the
upper parts of the houses.
b. Excavation and Regrading: The proposed development
plans for both Lots 3 and 5 call for excavation of
basements and back rooms of the house, stepped
into the hillside. The Smiths estimated that
approximately 185 cubic yards of dirt will be
moved on Lot 5, while no estimate was given ~ the
Siegels. The Siegel excavation appears to be
somewhat smaller, as the building site is on a
larger bench.
The Smiths propose to use all the excavated dirt
on the site creating berms and leveling areas. We
feel that this proposal results in a significant
disturbance of the terrain, contrary to the
intention of review criteria (7) of Section 24-6.2.
The Siegel s proposal resul ts in mi nimal regrading
of the lot surrounding the house and garage shops
and appears to be more compatible with the existing
terrain. They will need to move the excavated
~
o
dirt of the site to a suitable location, and this
matter should be arranged prior to the issuance of
a building permit to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Department.
c. Revegetation and Landscaping: The Siegels have
presented a plan to provide a native appearance of
the revegetated areas surrounding the structures.
Given the steep hillside (up to 50% grades),
potential erosion, existing natural appearance of
Smuggler Mountain, and the visibility of the site,
we feel this is an essential component of the Lot
3 proposal. The general approach is highly
appropriate and should be closely followed by the
applicants to ensure success. There should be
some decidious trees planted downhill of the house
similar in nature to the present trees lining the
Salvation Ditch.
The Smith's plan calls for rail tie walls, some
twenty-one evergreen trees, and el even de ci duous
trees. No mention is made of native grasses.
This plan does not mitigate the impacts of site
disturbance as well as is possible. . We agree with
the Engineering Department that the type and
procedure of revegetati ng Lot 5 shoul d conf orm to
that submitted for Lot 3.
d. Other Environmental Concerns: There appear to be
no significant wildlife, wildfire, or avalanche
hazards on Sunny Park North Lots 3 and 5.
2. Visual Impacts: Criteria (8) and (9) of Section 24-6.2
encourage techniques "to preserve the mountain as a scenic
resource" and "reduction of building height and bulk to
maintain the open character of the mountain". While
the proposed houses are quite large it should be noted
that they are less than the maximum allowable FAR (see
chart on page 1). Reduction in size may be necessary
to mitigate visual impacts.
Nei ther house substantially steps back along the
hillside nor has roof lines that approximate the slope
of the hillside. We believe that if either house is
allowed, the predominant roof line which is visible
from the Park Circle area downhill should more closely
resemble the hillside slope. In addition, roofs should
be earth tone to better blend with the hillsides
as is represented in the Siegel application. Building
materials should be natural materials.
Both structures are very close to the 25 ,foot height
restriction. The Smith's structure would rise to
approximately the 8050 elevation while the Siegel
~
residence would rise to approximately the 8038 elevation.
The Siegels submitted a perspective study to show the
structure from different vie~lplanes. The structure
will be most visible from the Park Circle and Smuggler
neighborhoods and somewhat visible from a few spots in
the center of town as well as on Red and Aspen ~lountains.
Even though the two immediate neighborhoods contain a
variety of newer architectural styles which are not
particularly sensitive to reduce visual impacts, we
feel that these proposed houses have greater impact as
they are on the edge of the open mountain terrain.
The steep slope backdrop gives greater visibility to the
house.
3. Vehicular and Trial Easement Conflicts: The applicants
propose to use the Salvation Ditch for vehicular
easement to their properties. Both propose two car
garages off the Salvation Ditch. In the Aspen Comprehen-
sive Plan: Park/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Element
(July, 1985) adopted by both the City and County a
long-term priority "Pedestrian/Bicycle/Nordic trail
following Salvation Ditch from the Aspen Club to Hunter
Creek tract.. As noted bY the Nordic Council and the
County Planning Engineer, there appears to be an
inherent conflict between the dr iveway proposal and
trail plans. The trail has already been installed by
virtue of considerable effort through Centennial and a
portion of the r'lolly Gibson Park. This trail would
make for a loop to the north and east that is easily
accessi ble to dense adjacent nei ghborhoods. The trail
has been a major priority of both the City and County
and appears to be feasible even if it may take some
time to acquire easements east of Lots 3 and 5.
Furthermore, a major segment of the Salvation Ditch
passes through the County (Molly Gibson Park) and the
County is committed to accommodating the trail while
being asked to give a driveway easement for uses of
Lots 3 and 5.
From prel iminary investigation the Salvation Ditch
alignment works the best for the trail and realigning
up the hillside creates problems of access and snow
removal thatw ill sever ely compromi se the trail.
The PI anning Off ice bel ieves that al terna tive arrangements
should be made on Lots 3 and 5 to allow for the trail
to be located on the Salvation Ditch.
The Siegels propose a garage off Park Circle and a walk
up trail to the house uphill from the di tch. This type
.of configuration has been effectively used in Snowmails
Village, and should suffice without use of the Salvation
Ditch on Lot 3. A short term construction easement on
(/"'\
'"
the ditch would be necessary.
Lot 5 is virtually inaccessible from Park Circle,
however, it is accessible from the access road off
Smuggler Mountain Road that will serve Lot 7. Further-
more, there is a bench at that elevation approximately
large enough for a single family house. Building
there should cause little or no hillside disturbance
and reduced, visual impact. The geotechnical study
indicates this area is buildable with regard to subsidence
potential. Waster can be provided there, al though a
fire hydrant and pump system may be necessary (for both
Lots 5 and 7).
We believe that a building envelope should be delineated
for Lot 5 on the bench. Variance for setbacks or
possibly a lot line adj ustment that would trade the
Salvation Ditch area for more County (or BLM) land on
the bench may be required.
This site has more useable level area and better views
than the proposed site in Lot 5. The major disadvantage
is the winter access up Smuggler Road, although the
County has agreed to maintain the road up to the access
road for Lot 7 ofsuririy Paik North Subdivision.
RECOMMEliIDATIONS: The Planning Office recommends the Planning
Commission approve the 8040 Greenline Review of the Siegel
Residence on Lot 3, Sunny Park North Subdivision, subject to the
following conditions:
1. A site specific .subsurface soil investigation shall be
done by a qualified geotechnical engineer after the building
site has been prepared to determine the specific foundation
design. The investigation results and design shall be
submitted to the Engi neering Department and B uildi ng Department
prior to pouring the foundation.
2. Revegetation shall include the type of plantings and procedure
of revegetating as represented in the application. Ten (10)
addi tional deciduous trees shall be planted east of the
house similar in nature to the present trees lining the
Salvation Ditch. Revegetation shall be accomplished by no
later than May 1987. Any change in the revegetation scheme
shall be processed through an application to the Planning
Office, and if it is determined to be significant, shall be
processed as an amendment to the 8040 Greenl ine Review
approval.
3. Water meters shall be located at or near the property line
and the water line shall be sleeved where is passes under the
Salvation Ditch, to the satisfaction of the Water Department.
4. All utilities shall be undergrounded.
f""\
5. Removal of excavation dirt shall be arranged to the satis-
faction of the Building Department prior to issuance of
building permit.
6. A temporary construction access easement shall be obtained
from the County, City and Lot 5 for building of the house
prior to issuance of a building permit and to the satisfaction
of the Ci ty Attor ney.
7. The garage in the house shall be deleted from the design and
the predominant roof line of the house, as it is visible to
the downhill area of Park Circle, shall more closely approx-
imate the hillside slope. Natural building materials and
the roof shall be earthtoned, as represented in the applica-
tion. The structure shall be located so as not to conflict
with the Salvation Ditch Trail. The redesign of the structures
shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning
Commission prior to issuance of building permit,
8. The applicant shall dedicate trail easements along the
Salvation Ditch through his property. Such easements shall
be submitted to the satisfaction of the City Attorney prior
to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
The Planning Office recommends tabling the 8040 Greenline Review
proposal for Lot 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision until the
applicant can investigate the possibility of siting his house on
the bench to the northeast of the property, Access, building
envelope, revegetation, water pressure, fire protection, suitable
architectural design arid building materials and possible need for
variances are all areas that shall be adequately addressed by the
applicant and reviewed by the staff prior to further hearing by
the Planning Commission of the Smith 8040 Greenline Review.
SB.530
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Steve Burstein, planning Office
RE:
Siegel-Smith 8040 Greenline Review
August 5, 1986
DATE:
=================================================================
ZONING: R-15 (PUD) .
LOCATION: Lots 3 and 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision, east side
of Park Circle on Smuggler Ho untain.
Siegel - Lot 3 Smith - Lot 5
Lot Size: 18,380 sq. ft. 15,858 sq. ft.
Proposed House: 2,685 sq. ft. 2,471 sq. ft.
Garage: 724 sq. ft. 696 sq. ft.
Shop/Garage: 984 sq. ft.
Countable FAR 3,793 sq. ft. 2,567 sq. ft.
(approx. )
Allowabl e FAR: 4,317 sq. ft. 4,136 sq. ft.
APPLI~NTS REQUEST: The owner of the two lots, Colorado National
Bank, and the parties possess,ing contra.cts on the lots, Mr. and
Mrs.. Barry Siegel (Lot 3) and Mr. and Mrs. Bob Smith (Lot 5) have
submitted a joint application for permission to each build single
family houses. Proposed access in the amended application is a
driveway extending from Park Circle across the hillside to
building sites above the Salvation Ditch. The two separate
requests are being handled in a single application to save the
applicants expense and time.
BACKGROUND: The Sunny Park North Subdivision was created through
approval of the County Board of County Commissioners on November
1,1965 and was annexed into the City through the Berumen Annexation
on July 5, 1966.
P&Z tabled action on the Smith-Siegel application on June 3, 1986
based on concerns with access to the proposed houses, site
considerations and visual impacts. Subsequently, the Housing
Authority worked with the Planning Office and applicants to
reconfigure Sunny Park North Lots 3, 5 and 7 as well as to create
3 other lots to be accessed off Smuggler Hountain Road higher up
the mountain. This new subdivision would have allowed for
building sites to be placed on a higher bench rather than on the
1
f1""",
hillside. On July 21 the Board of County Commissioners rejected
the concept of Smuggl er Heights.
The Siegels and Smiths submitted the amended driveway access
proposal on July 14, 1986 which is being reviewed by the P&Z
tonight.
APPLICABLE SEC'l'ION OF MUNICIPAL CODE: According to Section 24-
6.3 of the Municipal Code development within fifty (50) yards
below the 8040 elevation is subj ect to special review by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. In reviewing development plans,
the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the following
review cri teria:
1. Whether there exists sufficient water pressure and
other utili ties to service the intendeddeveloJ?1l1ent;
2. The existence of adequate roads to insure fire protection,
snow removal and road maintenance;
3. The suitability of the site for development considering
the slope, ground instability and possibility of mud
flow, rock falls and avalanche dangers;
4. The affects of the development on the natural watershed,
runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent effects
on water fOllution;
5. The possible effects on air quality in the area and
city wide;
6. The design and location of any proposed structure,
roads, driveways or trails and their compatibility with
the terrain;
7. Whether proposed grading will result in the least
disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land
features;
8. The placement and clustering of structures so as to
minimize roads, cutting and grading, and increase the
open space and preserve the mountain as a scenic resource;
9. The reduction of building height and bulk to maintain
the open character of the mountain (Ord. No. 11-1975,@1)
PROBLEM DISCUSSION:
A. Referral Comments:
1. Engineering Department: The Engineering Department
commented on the new access design in a memorandum
dated JUly 26, 1986 in which the following issues were
2
mentioned:
a. A geo-technical engineering study prepared by a
registered p. E., should be undertaken for the
design of adequate retaining structures associated
with the driveway. The steep slope on the upper
100 feet of the driveway is of particular concern.
b. Revegetation of the road cut and fill should
confo rm to plans submi tted for the Lot 3 si te.
c. The applicant should comply with any recommendation
made by Fire Marshall Jim Wilson.
In a memorandum from Jim Gibbard of the Engineering
Department da ted Apr il 16, 1986 (a ttachment C) addi tional
documentation of potential ground instability and slope
stability in the form of a geotechnical engineering
study was required prior to full Engineering Department
review. One of the main concerns. was the possibility
of underground cavities due to mining that could cause
subsidence under the proposed development sites.
In a May 20, 1986 memorandum the Engineering Department
(attachment D) reviewed the "Geographical and Geotechnical
Subsidence Investigation for Lots 3 & 5, Sunny Park
North Subdivi.sion" prepared by Western Engineers,
Inc. and made the following comments:
a. The Engineering Department is satisfied that the
proposed houses can be built without significant
risk of subsidence.
b. No structure should be built near the western
boundary of Lot 5 unless a report submi tted by a
registered Professional Engineer in geotechnical
engineering can offer conclusive evidence that
there will be no risk in doing so.,
c. Based on the conclusion of the Western Engineers
Inc. report, the Engineering Department is satisfied
that adequate foundations can be constructed. Site
specific subsurface soil investigation should be
done after the building site has been prepared to
determine a more specific foundation design.
d. The depth of proposed excavation and placement of
fill for these structures is considered adequate.
e. The detailed information on revegetation for Lot 3
was considered adequate. The type and procedure of
revegetating Lot 5 should conform to that submitted
3
~
for Lot 3.
2. Nordic Council: In a letter from Craig Ward (attachment
E) dated May 5, 1986 it is stated that the proposed
developments appear to jeopardize the Master Plan trail
alignment along the Salvation Ditch. Other options for
automobile access to these lots should be explored. A
pedestrian trail does not appear to be compatible with
a private driveway, especially when the houses for both
lots are so close to the trail.
3. County Planning Engineer: In a memorandum from Tom
Newland, Pitkin County Planning Engineer (attachment F)
dated May 15, 1986 the following comments are made:
a. The use of the Salvation Ditch for vehicular
access to Lots 3 and 5 as it crosses the Molly
Gibson Park conflicts with the intended Pitkin
Co unty trail system alignment.
b. The proposed access along the Salvation Ditch
confl icts,w ith th e 1979 Aspen/Pitkin County Trails
Master Plan proposed trail alignment and jeopardize
a cri tical northern link.
c. This trail has be<X)me a reality from Hunter Creek
to the applicants' property.
4.
Water Department: In a memorandum from
dated April 14, 1986 (attachment G)
comments were made:
Jim Markal unas
the fOllowing
a. For both Lots 3 and 5, th e owners w ill be responsibl e
for the water line from the point of attachment at
the water main in Park Circl e, meters must be
located at or near the property line, and the
water line should be sleeved where it passes under
the Salvation Ditch.
b. Water pressure should be adequate for residential
purposes, however the pressure cannot be guaranteed
at 40 because of other influences such as house
plumbing and service line friction losses.
5. Sanitation District: Heiko Kuhn sta.ted the proposed
single family homes can be served by the Aspen Consoli-
dated District.
6. Fire Marshall: Jim Wilson stated in a ~1ay 29, 1986
memorandum that the Fire District access and hydrants
(one is located in Park Circle) are in conformance with
local fire codes. The lots are located in a low
4
f!"'\
~
wildfire hazard area, so no additional fire precaution
will be necessary.
B. Staff Comments: The Planning Office has the following
comments regarding the proposed access, site plans, and
building designs for the two proposed residences:
1. Driveway Access: The proposed driveway would cut into
the existing hillside, then follow, for part of the
way, an old largely revegetated cut along the hillside,
and finally, switchback onto the Salvation Ditch
alignment. The Engineering Department raised a serious
concern that retaining structures may be needed for a
considerably long distance of the hillside traverse
where the hill is presently very steep. It appears
questionable that the proposed boulder piles would be
adequate for retaining the driveway.
We feel that this proposal is unacceptable because of
the cuts and fills necessary, the need for extensive
retaining structures, environmental disturbance (including
removal of several cottonwood and aspen trees, as well
as possibly undermining the roots of an evergreen), and
visual impacts from Park Circl e and the Smuggl er
neighborhood. Greenline review criteria 6 and 7,
compatibility of the terrain and minimal disturbance of
the terrain respectively, IVould not be met inour opinion.
The Planning Office supports in concept the alternative
proposal stated in Mr. Ilobrovolny I s letter of July 24,
1986 to provide driveway access along the Salvation
Ditch and a trail easement parallel to the Ditch.
Given that the Smuggler Heights Subdivision proposal is
dead without County participation, it appears that this
arrangement is the best alternative sol ution for all
parties involved. The Planning Office has begun to
work with the applicants and the County to arrange for
a driveway easement through the County-owned Molly Gibson
Park and a trail easement through Lots 3 and 5. We
believe that this approach will both meet the access
needs of the applicants and the trail needs of the
communi ty IVithout raising the spectre of whether the
Planning Commission can require the trail to be accom-
modated through the 8040 process.
2. Visual Impacts: Criteria (8) and (9) of Section 24-6.2
encourage techniques "to preserve the mountain as a scenic
resource" and "r~duction of building height and bulk to
maintain the open character of the mountain". While
the proposed houses are quite large it should be noted
that they are less than the maximum allowable FAR (see
5
r'\
chart on page 1).
Neither house substantially steps back along the
hillside nor has roof lines that approximate the slope
of the hillside. We believe that the predominant roof
lines which are visible from the Park Circle area
downhill should more closely resemble the hillside
slope. In addi tion, roofs should be earth tone to
better bl end with the hillsides as is represented in
the Siegel application. Building materials should be
natural materials.
Both structures are very close to the 25 foot height
restriction. The Smi th' s structure wo uld ri se to
approximately the 8050 elevation while the Siegel
residence would rise to approximately the 8038 elevation.
The Siegels submitted a perspective study tq show the
structure from different viewplanes. The structure
will be most visible from the Park Circl.e and Smuggler
neighborhoods and somewhat visible from a few spots in
the center of town as well as on Red and Aspen Mountains.
Even though the two immediate neighborhoods contain a
variety of newer architectural styles which are not
particularly sensitive to reduce visual impacts, we
feel that these proposed houses have greater impact as
they are on the edge of the open mountain terrain.
The steep slope backdrops give greater visibility to the
ho uses.
In Mr. Dobrovolny's July 24,1986 letter, three principal
arguments are. given in favor of the Siegel ho use
design: (1) spatial needs of the Siegels, (2) solar
access and (3) snow fall and meltage. While we certainly
respect the spatial needs of the Siegels, it appears
that criteria (9) of the Greenline Review, "the reduction
of building height and bulk to maintain the open
character of the mountain", may require some reorgani-
zation of architectural elements so to better conform
to the character of'this site and surrounding hillside.
Placing the principle gable (facing west) out from the
angle of the slope wi th a height to the ridge 0 f 30
feet above the bottom grade (on the Salvation Ditch)
does not appear to be in keeping wi th character of the
mountain. Transparency for passive solar access on the
south elevation would not need to be reduced by following
the "step back" design concept we suggest. With regard
to snow fall, minor roofs might be used to direct
snow fall away from the garage entrance.
In the prior. Planning Office review (May 30, 1986
memorandum) it was suggested that the proposed Smith
6
~.
('.,
house be sited within a delineated building envelope on
the top bench of tot 5. This part of the lot still
appears to be the best building site because of its low
visibility anq flat grade. However, given the diffi-
culties in securing access, utilities and possibly
variances in setbacks without the participation of the
County in the proposed Smuggler Heights reoonfiguration
of lots, the Planning Office concludes that the building
site proposed by the Smiths on the hillside is the most
workable alternative. Breaking up massing and bringing
the predominant roofline. to approximate the slope of
the hill becomes a very important design modification
to make the Smith house more compatible with the
existing terrain.
3. Revegatation and Landscaping: The Siegels have presented
a plan to provide a native appearance of the revegetated
areas surrounding the structures. Given the steep
hillside (up to 50% grades), potential erosion, existing
natural appearance of Smuggler Mountain, and the
visibility of the site, we feel this is an essential
oompo nent of th e Lot 3 pro po sal. ,The gener al approa ch
is highly appropriate and should be closely followed by
the applicants to ensure success. There should be some
decidious trees planted downhill of the house similar
in na ture to th e present tr ees 1 ining the Sal vation Di tch.
The Smith's plan calls for rail tie walls, some twenty-
one evergreen trees, and eleven deciduous trees. No
mention is made of na tive grasses. This plah does not
mitigate the impacts of site disturbance as well as is
possible. We agree with the Engineering Department
that the type and procedure of revegetating Lot 5 should
conform to that submi tted for Lot 3.
RECOMMEND!\.TIONS: The Planning Office reoommends that the Planning
Commission grant the 8040 Greenline Review of the Siegel and
Smith Residences on Lots 3 & 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision,
subj ect to the following conditions:
1. A site specific subsurface soil investigation shall be
done by a qualified geotechnical engineer after the building
sites have been pr epared to determine, specif ic foundation
design. The investigation results and designs shan be
submitted to the Engineering Department and Eluilding Department
prior to pouring the foundation.
2. Revegetation shall include the type of plantings and procedure
of revegetating as represented in the Siegel application. t I.
Revegetation shall be accomplished by no later than ~OC ~lUr
1987. A new revegetation scheme shall be submitted for the
7
t""\
~
Smith site; Lot 3, to the satisfaction of the Planning Office
prior to issuance of a building permit. Any changes in the
revegeta tion schemes shall be processed through an appl ication
to the Planning Office, and if they are determined to be
signif icant, shall be processed as an amendment to th e 8040
Greenline Review approval.
3. Water meters shall be located at or near the property line
and the water line shall be sl.eeved where is passes under the
Salvation Ditch, to the satisfaction of the Water Department.
4. All util ities shall be undergrounded.
5. The predominant roof lines of the houses, as visible to
the downhill area of Park Circle, shall more closely a.pprox-
imate the hillside slope. Natural building materials and
roofs shall be earthtoned, as represented in the applica-
tions. The redesign of the structures shall be submitted to
the satisfaction of the planning Office prior to issuance
of building permit.
6. Access to the property shall be along the Salvation Ditch
through Molly Gibson Park. Access easements obtained from
Pitkin County shall be submitted to the satisfaction of
the City Attorney prior to the issuance of a Building permit.
SB.,530
8
.-
'r"~
lo
~J-
t""'\
f\
,
CIT~~~~ii" .
130,sout :. ," '" ." reet
;:':!.l;:~:~~:<;t~>"tft~:'~01tJ,~,~;,i~F?[:1,'10": ',"
asp e'n':co 10 t,~HI-ou;;81611
,'" ':':C~(~:'i/:: ,:::'.i::,\ .j,~:~Vf."~\:-
303 E92'S:;2l) 20
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 28, 1986
TO: Building Department
FROM: City Attorney'
RE: Trail Easement - Sunny Park North Subdivision
,
Attached for your information please find a copy of an Agreement
to Grant Nordic Trail Easement for sunny Park North Subdivision.
Please be advised that no c/o should be issued until a site
specific easement is granted,
PJT/mc
Attachment
cc: Engineering Department
1'pIa-nnIiiij'"6:f:i:icEf
city Clerk (w/ original easement)
~
~ ,.,.,!if'
...;~
.~
n
AGRE&-IENT 'It) GRANT NORDIC TRAILEASE11ENT
Made and entered into this /t/J", day of August 1986 by Barry and
Sharcn Siegel as owners of Lot 3, Sunny Park North Subdivision and Robert
and Glenda Smith as owners of Lot 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision, City of
Aspen, pitkin County, Colorado.
This Agreement is given for the use and benefit of the City of Aspen.
NCW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby admitted and acknowledged the owners of Lot
3 and Lot 5 hereby covenant and agree to and with the City of Aspen that
they shall and will execute a Easement Agreement with the City of Aspen
which will cause and effect a ten foot wide Nordic Trail as set forth in the
July 1985 Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space!Trail
Element.
The owners of Lot 3 and Lot 5 shall give a good and sufficient
easement, ten feet wide, in perpetuity over their lots, running more or less
adjacent to'the Salvation Ditch Road as is now in place.
'vi: WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands and seal this
,Jj day of August, 1986.
dl;r/~Gh~;it · ;J
;3;ar ' Siegel , ,
/",
~y Sl~~'-c ,-/
( /J ,'~:J/
Robert Smith
~I d '/
/' ' .'V,.<-G:~ -dAJi--c,;t ."
Glenda Smith
State of Colorado )
)ss,
County of pitkin )
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this /1-/11] day of August 1986
by Sharcn Siegel and Barry Siegel.
Witness my hand and official seal,
'Mycomnission expires: F'-' /3, /qf7
.,My,adpress is:01.c' / '7), YYJ-<-.L/S L P/"'C-
,'J" ",/"" r-J"" 11A...... c.. 1" (.. "
(~\W~4.x., '~ -- -7~--.J '
'(':i> ~ "'... "
~,;,.-t ~-. ~f~ r;;
I.ur;.~\~' "
,'-IV' \''':'-
~ . - -"!
'?), State of" Colorado
...::/ / .;:"'.- :,,'
N~~i~--Lv,jd6 -
)
)ss.
County of pitkin )
The foregoing was aCknowledged before me this di:b day of August 1986
by Robert Smith and Glenda Smith.
Witness my hand and official seal,
My comnission expires :~...I 13. ,I q .f'}
My address is:~CI7),~.e/.>/ ""'/<'.?
/?.-f " ,__ //.... ,""') ~ J , / ~.
/,
/
/
BANNER
Apr'i 1 .1.., l'-lfj!,
PE)ter~ DO[')y""c)vol ny
P.. D. BD'" c'AO
Snawmass, CO. 81654
RE: Lot 5, Sunny Pa~~~ Nofth Subdivision
Dear Mf"~ Dobrovolny:
I h.ave:~ complet.ed m')l geologic it1V'est.ig~:ttion of ',th'e abovf.~
f"E\'fer.erH::\!;':Ic.1 lot nE"lE\I"'SfTluggJ.t~~r Mountain, f-fSp'en, r':;oJ.t1riad(J~
Thj.s l~s~.; t.han one hE.d+ aC:I--,E~ lot lies above F'21/....k Circle,
roughly be'twebn the Park Circle Condominiums to the west~ and
th~ Mollie Gibson Shaft to the northeast. The Salvation 6itch
Pipeline runs ap~roximately no~th/south through the lot as
shown oM the accpmpanyi~g~ map.
The site slopes fram gently to steeply west, and is cover~d
with sagebrush and ottler dryland shrubbery and grasses.
Large bou],ders, mostly granitic, ar-e $r:att~r~d ab01Jt the
site. The bur'j,ed Salvation Ditch F'ipeline is overlain by an
access ~oad throlAgh the propertYM The~e is 2 fairly flat
b'2"ch '-',coa,":. th,-,' centm" o'f 1::.h", PI"'OPC",.'ty '"hich jc; con",i,d.,,"ed tD
be the bUlidlng envelop2w rh15 prorerty l~es along a mInor
ro.i.d<;;}F2 CDnnE~c::tE:'d to thc::? m,::~:i,n bDdy Df Smu(.Jqler i"!CJuntai.ri to t.he
east. They's is a depression behind tills ridge which collects
and contains ~tanding water"
The geology o.f the sitp consists of a fairly thick seqlAsnce
of glacial mo~aine mater'ial (QIJIC) o.f the third valley glacier
which moved dDwn tt,p Roaring Fork Valley in Quaternary tim8.
This material consi~ts of'unstratified and unsorted clays,
silts, sand5~ cobbles and boulders" WithOtJt a drill hole, it
is impossible to predict which b~drock unit und~rlies this
Site, but it appears that it cOLilci be any unit between the
Perniian age Beldon S~lale~ and the Precambrian age quar'tz
nlor'zonit~~ There are fault traces rlJnl,ing ,From northeast to
S-i-Outl"H....n.::-st i!i 't.hi~5- pCH-ti njl of (.~~~)pE.)r'l, bU.t because of the
surficial cov~r of g],acial deposits, their exact position and
numbf:!lr 2:'1:Y"€~, unkntH~Jn~ In ,:-:\nyt:.:;:.vent, thf.!!'"'e i~; nD ev:i r.:Ience of
Neogene (recent) fnovement on these fault~.
BANNER ASSOCIATES, INC,
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS
SUITE 6, 605 EAST MAIN
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 . (303) 925-5857
BANNER ASSOCIATES. INC,
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS
2777 CROSSROADS BOULEVARD
GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506. (3031 243-2242
BANNER
L,ot 5, Sl(rlrlY Par.k Nor'th Subc1ivision
{.)pr.il 1, :\.9f:11'~1
r::'<::"GF:: T~~JO
There are a n\"tmber of mine shafts on the hillside above the
~~j.-!:.'.t?:: v'$hich fi.~nt:(~r'. th\~~ Smuq(JIG~r Mouni.':,.3in mi.ninfJ complp}-:. Th(:::,
nE't.~""clrk o-~: tlJnnels i.:,s kncn~Jn to p;::~Sf.~~ untiel'" t.hc:? TONn of
Aspen and connect with the Aspen Mountain mining aFea. The
tunnels berleath the city are -Full of w~te~. There is no
evidence o.f mirling activity flear Lot 3~ but the~e are
certainl~ tlJnnels bel(Jw the pr'operty wittlin the bedrock
llr,its. I do not expect a sub5ide~ce p~oblem, bt,lt 'to be
('1'H;:n'..(,:~ CE'::.'Ir-ti::\i n, I SUI;.H:.Jf,:!~;tt,h'3t., cl!...u"'i rH:,:j the ~~;:j. te 5peci.f i c ~;Di,1~;
i,r1v25t{gatior1 for fOIJ!ldatiorl ds%igi1, or1e deep hole (dept~) ,to
be: c!c0cic!ec! .by t~hE~ s\:)il~; f:~ngirlef:,'~r') he"! dr-.tllc-::!'d at t.hE~ h()mG:5it.\~;.)
to test 'For any cavil:je~5 in the material ben~ath the siten
The hi 11 ~::-:i. (::]e ~:ihrJt~J3no E:,vi clt-;:or~lct?,~ (jf :i. r"1<.?,t.'f:\b i 1 i t. 'y' '! but t:hE~~ie €:U*'f?
lJnconsolidatecJ deposits so that surface and subsur.face waters
SllOllld be diverted arour,d the home anci undue wetting of t~)P
soils through faulty i~rigaticn practic:es sho!Jld be avoided~
The Salvation Ditch Pipeline is topographically below the
site and therefore should not adversely affett the proposed
hDtnE:\" The -:~;oi]' 5 (~~rJqJ. nerr-n,... 5houl d pr*ovi de you f.....ecommendii:I.t:.,t ons
_;::tnd de-:.signs for'" '(~.h€:"! i::1.dvi3f:,;;~ci ci!""ain{:\qt:::~~;~ Cll". OUf'" -firm (.:'.::1.n dE~si.gn
the dr'ainages fc)~ you~
Domestic0ater 'and waste disposal will he ~rovided by' the
'-own of Aspen. Access to the site may Meed to be improved,
but is 01ready available" l'here is a supplementary report
p!''"F'p,::;l./"''E:~d foro, r'::':i t.:ki n COl...tnt.y ~"Jhi C:t1 .::':i.clcl~"es~5es the 5ub~:;;i cL::!nc.::e
pl....oblr.:fTl jU-:::i-t f")O!,-tl''"1 of th.i.~3 siten -rhi'?:; Y"e~1or..t sht.:)ulcl also he
referred to the soils engineer. If there are further
qlJestiorls, please dono't hesitate to corltact \J~.
Ei nCf21""c~1 'i,
N:_/':::l k
r:':c'h,II"I::"o;, ""'':;D('9'[" A'T',,"S 1',1['
1ad'7~ ".
Nicholas Lampiris, PhD.
Project Geologist
, ,.'. .~,
. . "'-, ~
j ~.Lo-t I '
. .;
,
"
\
" ,"
\
\ \
{-.
"
,
"
.
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
,
.
,
.
.
.
,
,
,~
:?N
,""
) ,
,111
/1
fit
,
:~
,,-
]~
,;:1
:~
" '
,-" it
'i'!
:::z:
, :
, f\
" 1:;:
,'1
,
,
.
,
.
.
.
!
,
I
} ,',
, <!'~
'1
, " .' '" / r'"
''\,- \ -',,, I
\ , ;;.K9"
V' ,
\ \ r ,
. ,
\ I 1 ( ,
\ I I , I
\ I 1 I I
\ I I 1 ,
I ,
I I I 1 I
I \ I I
I I
I I I I I
I
I , I I
I I I '?-~ ,
I I I
I I I r
~L.WTI
'f,""
:',{
,
.
.
.'
';r'
'.'-',':,
0" ./-'"
r
!
"
I
I
I,
\
r
,
,
.
I
,
I
.
,
,
,
,
,
(
I
.l.~~'tiit''SNn$Uld
ri:7J:l'4 :Ni71.l.':f~1!f
n.1'11'l i'J
111'10;
'~J.1fl\. ~
'7' '2:1~'iOO"'aao'S
~N"iJ?..1I'lI""CllW
0.1. '3;1I;;lN'Il';.L2 '.v1"X'I'W ,0<;;; " ,;.1H ~i;llmll'7.:a
, .,..,.,'::', <% <3"~--'" ': dT.l.'V~ ~Nt:z,~
'~~-:'~~J '.Ii ' : ~~, :ri~V-M01.'1'v
'.:i.=l~' L.~'~/-i' ; ~'t~iir~..,i~
:LJ 'I:M< c?z t ...k. " :'::$\~'7..o
J:dflb~"~~~\?; \!!.-'r-;;fil~ .ii4ri-~.t~;JJO<M
" U";M'\~';':;;;iil 'Gat' " ",'_::':0J;":Si;zI~ li1f ,
-:::6fr.,r~t.~ ., :~lq .0"'....
;-,;;-...-..' . ',0 .\,. 11-...v~
,,'-,-~ <4~
",~.;,.
!^-~~ ''Z
!l?1~~.
'OlJ.tC;; 'I'
, 3'1~iiI~
"
',"
"
i
I
r
"
Itll
iR
:m
I
i~
I
i1:
.""
'1;1
\\\
N
,J>:
'11
,ill
~
fp.
I~
.
.
'i
~
if
,'::I
J>.,
1,
,
. ,
i
J!!i
,
!fl.
.
'it!
l::1
';Jl\
Ill'
I
I
~;
iI
E
tf
-'
J
,zv
~
)J
M
I
",,'''<
~fl~d~~~~~'!:~~~~~~ "
, "'Nnka;Ll~ .'" ,
\
\
\
,0,'
.'" ,.
" ~,';
?\
',t:
()II ' d ' 4t~ ~
~Il 186HZ ~ iJfl~
@~Dm~illl~
I
f
I
f
I
\
'J",
'~,
\
\
\
\
\
\.
\
\
\
\
\.
'\
\.
\.
,
"
'.
\
'\
'\
'\
-,
"-
--',
,
"-
"
'~
"
.I~ .un I
,
"
"
'\
'\
'\
,
'\
"
"
'\
\
,"" '"'",'
\
\
\ '
\
, \.
\.
~ I.
I %>~I " \.
\ I, "
. \. \. \e.
\ \ ~
\ ',\,' '\ \~\ \~, \"
I '\
\ \\ \ \\ \ ----\,
\, \ \ \'\ \. '\
I \ \ \',
\ \\ \,
I \ \ '. ',; \\
, '",;" I
I \ '. \ '.. ,'\'
\ " I ;' ,
, " ' " ~ 'j ,1 ~ ,,{ ,
\ \ ... ,ii', ,'. .\ ,~, .
\ \, (i:\~ \f;P ,
" 1,1 \d
\ \ " ,: \,', '\ ""?
I ~ 'C, I'V:
\
, \,
I, \ '
, 1
. I
"
, I
,
, /
. ~ ' I \
, \
, \
'I ',\
..","
\
,
\
,\
\
I
I
I
\
\
'~
\ \
,
I
,'.', ',~ 0
\
I
\
I ,..
j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
I
I
\
\
\
\.
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
'\.
'.
i
I
I
I
I
,
\
\
\
\
,
\
,
,
,
"
<;;1(
:'
,.,
I 1,'~' !
f. _ ~ . r
, \
r\ "
1 t\ I' ~
,
I
,
,
,
\
\
\
I
,
\1
I
I
1\
,\
1\
\
\
\
\
I
\
\
\ \
\ \
\ '.
'\. " ~,:"
\ ..... '\, ",
"'\ ,\ ....
\
\
\
, I
I
\
\
'\
'\ \ "-
\ ,
, \
',' "-
\\ \
" \ I
, j
, '\ \
, \ ~ . . .
"'. ''',
',,)' "
'" "
....... ~ "~ 0
':',:-:-, :",:;,~~
'" . ......" .
,\ "..;
,
"
\
\
I
\
\
\
I
1
I
,
, '\ '
" \,' ....,
, . \ " '\,
'\. " ..
, '.'"
" "
"
....... '.....
"
\
I
!
\
\
\
\
,
\
,
,
'.
" '~
'.
\
"'
\ \.\,
0" "
"l' ':""'!';
',,"':'
,
I
\
"
,
,
"
\
"-
"
"-
'\
\.
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
",
\,
\
\.
\
\
."
\
\
\
\
I
'\
"
"
'\
'\
\
\
\
,
'\
'\
'\
'\ "
'.
\
\
I
I I
, 0'
"', i70i$l ",.,f.,
, \1 I
~t<<<tlS>
I
NO!.J.~11..ld\r 3ttLNI(l;;:l..J.j..j';~~~zr ~'<I d.~N?j.itL.;;!v:;:! jf<;< i1VH<? ,~~ <1N'Ii ",,~:~:;;1J..'7W,-\,?'N
. ' a1'l110<s!p~gaNn <Oe '~'
~ ;;letl1M 2l1L..:0 'NOu..jv~~.l\1C:? <l!1i' 0.).' R?.if6 NOll~l\~ aMl ::l~NI'1 (!a:^:a:a1~' :a4'O.l~n ' :i~VM -~~N'1 ':iNrI ~O~d ~waN 4al.'t.101 'a.;a at"",
., i.~6) ~.;;; M a3l~I1.fW@\f ~ O.J. N01.j.'1.L:1~^;a~ 'M01~ $4 ..:.-. ~i7LL~nl:lJ'I1 1alQ;aIt;. ~ CJ't 'i3-..a 'O.J..N
WI.l."I"61'!nOd.l9NI~Md oj.. ~l)1.t '~.J.J.<;d .J;:lNld11n'll 11f.r1 ~'NI::.t~.;:fNI!9i'l'8"aL 4S1liffJ4!'l0 ;:l<;l oj.. ~6 ilNV $oJ:
iiOIj..'q'I1NnO;l ~N~;;u.>16 c?J. d!Jl'?\'I1J:a;;.y ~9I'tt ~.LI~ 9Ni.111,114ol ;;;!~.l<::l.'V' ~'K02t ~<;a11"1H~NZ7I.l.'1~J.lh;a^Nl 'IOG ~,.dl!l\1~t1~
*
--
, . ').' < :.. .., ,:."..:..~..:,.._",::~,,,,;;.itv..^~";,,. ''''<,i ";"""V,:,;,.,"">A7"':'':;;'o;/~;,:::'i,~.:;;;,:i'",:''"::>#40~c,:",,;~~,~ ;:,':idfl::;,~,jj''''';'''-~';;;;'f,:;!H_:;;;,:-tt'*W~'\.,:'cA\~?(~:z;L~~
~bl (~t A1nr ,. ,'.. ~I't }.t'4JOl'<?~~>,~~. -?-J:~tJ2~. ~1.d(
,Nol~(JCJn~_' .'., ,.0 '..'. " .
.dO' 9;" ClNV '~, ~j.01oJ-~~7J71f\IM8f\
~~1f~~~J4$NOI~
""~:dO'~ "V 9r~~;;f.~ ~N"t'.-a
.og~~t.l.ft?17j.J~-a,tlr';;'N~'(~/'~~ ~
~ NV ~~~)~9(:JO~)-11"'df1~-;1NtrW~ ~A
~.::I ~f'IOu..Y1Jd~Y';f;f<l NO~ ?d~n'/ tA~
p'
r""-:+,,c,"
:;~~~~~.
"'" I~'O~
, ';c~," 0 HkSQ i1l.d WpWI'>6&l
; A;(,."",~~;i..1
()^
....6<::'
~'\;, 0 ~ """
~ ~,
~
~~
"-
"
.---OU
'-- -----
,-- -- ---.r- - ----
.~
.,~ ,
'(....;_.:~.
~_:>:_,:_....;..~
~,
4-'<, ~ "
. ..*'<<:r
~,
~
":3\
v'
~
~
"2
cl-
~
--
k.,_.
"-
",
~~l~,
"..
....,--,
\
\
\
\
""
'\
\
""
--"'"""
"
\
\"
"'"
~
'"
'\
'"
"-
'~
\
""
"'-
"
"
"-
"
"-
"
"'-
"
\
\\
\
~
\
~
" \
\
\ \
,
\ \\
\ '
\
\
'--,
-',
\
,
\
I
\
\
\
I()
..-
, 0
, ()
r--,
\
9-~
~
\
<:>
<)
o
~
,
,
39cf;:l V'J o;.(j[1:;) J..No::7 ~ U-$lYJ
(Jr# H71f'i1::t ~:::lHM '71 ~Sf'l11 C:lflOj..No,?
....:O(J~ -1V}'Zl3J.-['11 ,,&tl- $clnO~V7 t-f?lI'1!d-
f\lf'I'OH<.;. ~cJflo).Ncn p.lcI1 ANa I'OIJ..V.LN:3C",;:l;j,-j
""
"\
\
\
\.
\
'"
\
'-,
\
"""
\
"
"'"
'"
"'-
""
"'"
'"
",""
""
'-...
"'-,-
"..
~.....,.
"
~
)v
Tj
-r
Z-
~
'--
(\
~
--
-f"
\,
\\"
~ ~':
~
"'"
'" ',-
'-
~ ~
..' .""
"-..,
\
\
"~'_.
\
\
\
\
\
\
--~;
'"
\
\~
\,
\
,
-"-',;"---
,rfr
\
"\
\
l
..
\
\
\
.,~ '''''\ .
~"~,
r'<,
\
~
,
:~.
I
,."^
~
r'\'
L.--
H\
~,
---:,,-
- ,,~ '"" .^,o
1""\
.b"
V.'
1"""\
,
; .r""i
,t, ,>.' '., ~
, .>."~
" ^~ "'N "
, ." ,atl fa ..j'e"q;Pfjl'#'~;Cl6'~~lIiliS'.i::>'$"~'\i\u't:;r: -Ui~.rl'
SlIti d ..lad s~ t,i'Yt ~";' ~Yq.:.ltillj":':"t't~M $:j~t'i:ls:,it.:i":l-O J\;r;'wg"":'
.~~ ~~:;~.~~!"~~~~g;~~i~l:1~~,;;: ,;~
, '. tpoOMp.Je 4-uaq:s',:; Y)f4.:;.''\'!:rle''tl:!'''--ptil? '$ JO& 'r'd''''ptiO'tliJ, :.1" N;
':;",., .. ii'! ;':;<".~::"iUl:l6.:.1' f5u\.:\t r"'~J .';':,,/;,'\:' ::y7c:.r:}/'~:bw
a r ~+ ::> fuM:.ta,::l- ~a:h?'ti'iUll, .J0';3 (]::r'(.i.J1t'nO _" S::/(:il:ft~'l!i":t'a::r;f(jl'l'j;''''''';
.': ,'; ',.. .,;.::,'~..> ..",,(~:~:, :;:iigr'Cil'J.' f.;i\!1i'd ;';6u1":Jo'r;" .'
,l P.J~dq;Uffi~aX'5',,'t/t ':;;~'$llUlfT';-:)' P'(J\\i"$f't~""';i!J)l:lP'.i.::i ".,
\
~_ L_.~.'.~'~_.
.' ,'~ ,.
tjLZtJf'1 /~ "A~," N r0' ,
". 'I 1),Q: 1
.'- .
, '
"-.
"
~
"
"
"
-----
~
"-., "" ''-'' ,"', ' ) ~ "\
__:::::::-"'..,.., __c~,..",""""'" '" """, :
, " ..,r;y4~ ,,,----',:;;,:. "t-,.,-
, .......... '" ~
"". ",-,~, ',"-.. "" ~
'-<., ,," ""',,'
-" "
" '"
"--"-. , "- ", "\.
~,[. "- "'\
........,~ -..." ~ '\.., ""\. "\.
~ ~'"", "'\"",
." ",-'
~ ~ '.
''-. ,
~" ,""
'"', "'- ""
.-:~
'.
..........
-....;,..
,
'~
"" /---::.--'
! ""
I
'1, ,~'
!.' -.,........,
'--I '""- "-
~
'~
I
"
I , .
----...
()~..
,.
"
'-,
""
----... ' '
2;;n
"":;?
'-.-."
-----
--'" "
'"
'.
'.,
I
I
~
'.....,"'.
\J)
i'
,0
t)
-
,-
'''-.
t,'Q
" ' :i' ",!
" I
9 (.<" "
"...., , 't:?:x i ," )",
""9 S !
('''<;;","1
~"".,'
..'. "-"
~
'M
\
,
, I'
'"
"-"
Q
..........0 . ; ""''"' '''-',
/ :;; j ',,-, '-'
"d/'I ','.
~' ""
~
,
"
~
,
()
-
JJ~OI
~,"" ..
"~'?\
y
-~
'"
'.
\
?/Q... ,
{;' I
'-- -'
I
\
'~
'-':'~::\
"
'\.,
'~ N'
"~
r
~, ,...j",
"\
o
"
1-
,
"
,~
------ ----...'
----
~
, -.,.,
.........
;" ,
""~-
'0
,{"
,
\;,
,~l
\
\
"\
011
..." ('"
, '
~~~".,~'\\
'- '
0{Q
.::.x....
.,
!."
r--,
!"'\
./
PEN
~
130
asp
reet
611
MEMORANDUM
To; Planning Office
Fr: Attorney's Office
Re: Siegel and Smith Easement
Date: November 6, 1986
Enclosed is a draft of the Siegel/Smith easement. In order
to complete Exhibit "A" I need a plat of the area depicting the
easement. Is this something you can help me with?
Any further comments would be appreciated.
*
1'1
."")
TRAIL EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY
THIS GRANT OF EASEMENT, made and entered into this
day of
, 1986, by SHARON AND BARRY,SIEGEL, as owner
~o___f Lot 3, Sunny Park North Subdivision, City of Aspen, and
GLENDA AND ROBERT SMITH, as owners of Lot 5, Sunny Park North
Subdivision, city of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado (hereafter
.,,,,,>~
referred to as "Grantors" and THE cm OF AsPEN, a home rule
municipal
corporation,
Pitkin
County,
Colorado
(hereafter
"Grantee").
WIT N E SSE T H
WHEREAS, Grantors are the owners of certain real property
"
being part of Lots 3 and 5, Section 7, Township 10 South, Range
84 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian in the city of Aspen,
Pitkin County, Colorado, and;
WHEREAS, the Grantors are desirous of conveying to Grantee a
perpetual and non-exclusive trail easement and right-of-way over
and across that part of said real property described below under
certain terms and conditions hereafter enumerated, and;
WHEREAS, the Grantee is desirous of accepting said easement
and right-of-way under the terms, conditions and agreements
hereby specified;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the waiver of Park
Dedication Fees pursuant to the Aspen Municipal Code, and other
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
~
-r;
f1-
which is hereby acknowledged, it is agreed as follows:
L
DESCRIPTION
Grantors hereby grant and convey to Grantee, its successors
and assigns forever, the following described p~rpetual and non-
exclusive trail easement and trail right-of-way located ten feet
in width located on the West side of the center line of the ditch
and pipeline as now constructed in place, and depicted in Exhibit
"A", with the additional right to Grantee to deviate from said
trail easement and right-of-way to the extent necessary to
construct and maintain a trail and irrigation improvements
hereafter described, and to provide, if necessary, a retaining
wall on the westerly edge of tne aforementioned trail easement
and right-of-way.
'i
II
USE
The trail easement and right-of-way shall be for multi-
recreational use, including but limited to, cross country skiing,
hiking, bicycling, equestrian and other uses.
III
MOTOR VEHICLES
The use of motorized vehicles (except for the construction,
maintenance, repair of improvements, creation and maintenance of
nordic ski trails) and 'camping and campfires is prohibited.
IV
COMMERCIAL USE
The trail easement and right-of-way shall not be used for
=
t"'\
,
commercial purposes.
v
DEDICATION
Grantee recognizes said trail easement and right-of-way as a
dedication pursuant to the provisions of Section 7-143(2) (a) (b),
Park Dedication Fee, (or any amendment thereto), of the Aspen
Municipal Code in lieu of payment of a park dedication fee.
VI
ACCESS
\)
Grantors expressly retain the right to traverse said trail
easement and right-of-way with vehicular traffic for the purpose
of accessing the property encumbered hereby, provided however,
that said reservation is contingent upon Grantors failure to
obtain an access easement from Pitkin County (or any other person
or entity) providing an alternative access to the property
encumbered . hereby. If necessary, the location of said access
shall be jointly determined by Grantors and Grantee. Grantors
agree, upon obtaining alternative access to the property
encumbered hereby, to refrain from crossing said trail easement
and right-of-way with vehicular traffic.
VII
OBSTRUCTIONS
Grantors agree not to obstruct, impede or interfere with
said trail easement and right-of-way, and Grantee agrees not to
interfere with the rights of Grantor for ingress and egress to
the property encumbered hereby,
I""""
-I~
VIII
MAINTENANCE
Grantee shall police and maintain the trail, and , further
adopt and enforce reasonable rules and regulations for the use of
the trail.
XI
INDEMNIFICATION
Grantee agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Grantors
from any claims or losses arising from the construction and
maintenance of said trail, except those claims arising from the
negligent or careless acts of the Grantors, their heirs, success-
ors and assigns.
X
CARE
Grantee agrees to use reasonable care in the construction of
said trail and to avoid damage to the land and improvements
thereto, and further agrees to restore such land and improvements
to their condi tion immediately prior to such construction by
appropriate grading, planting and repair.
XI
WHOLE AGREEMENT
It is expressly agreed that this Agreement contains the
entire understanding of the parties relevant to the subject
matter hereof and that there are no verbal or written representa-
tions, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the
,-,
~
t
sUbJect matter 'hereof ,not expressly incorporated in this writing,
XII
MODIFICATION
It is agreed that neither this Agreement nor any of its
terms, provisions,
conditions, representations or covenants can
,
be modified, changed, terminated, amended, superseded, waived or
extended except by an appropriate written instrument duly
executed and subsequently recorded by all parties.
XIII
SEVERABILITY
If any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be held
invalid, illegal or unenforceable, it shall not affect or impair
the validity, legality or enforceability of this Agreement itself
or any other provision hereof; and there will be substituted for
the affected provision a valid and enforceable provision as
similar as possible to the affected provision which shall, to the
maximum extent possible, provide for the intent of the parties as
set forth in the original provision.
XIV
TITLE
Grantor warrants title to the property encumbered hereby is
in the names of Grantors, and further warrants that said title is
good and sufficient as against all the world, and covered by a
general title commitment policy issued by a local title company.
xv
ALL j.:I-,,:,{'.\ r\"6L b i?i~, ( ~"_'SC '^,T'
Grantor warrants that the property encumbered hereby is free
of lienholders who have not consented to this grant of a trail
~
~I"""\~
=
(""\
,.. 'I
.
easement 'and right-of-way to Grantee.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereto set their hands
and seals on the date and year shown.
CITY OF ASPEN, ,COLORADO
By
William L. Stirling, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch
city Clerk
Sharon and Barry Siegel
Glenda and Robert Smith
ATTEST:
./
1"'\
t1
,...
~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen City Council
FROM:
Robert Anderson, City Manager
Steve Burstein, Planning Office ~-<-
THRU:
RE:
Sunny Park North Lots 5 and 7 (Siegel-Smith) Request to
Waive Park Dedication Fee
DATE:
September 3, 1986
===================================================================
APPLICANT'S ~UEST: The Siegels and Smiths request COuncil to
waive the park dedication fees in consideration for dedication of
a ~ail easement across their properties.
APPLICABLE SECTION OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE: Section 7-143 establishes
the procedures for land dedication or cash payment at COuncil's
election for the purpose of acquiring park lands.
BACKGROUND: The Siegel and Smiths residences were given 8040
Greenline Review approval by the Planning Commission on July 5,
1986. COndition #7 of tha~ approval states "the applicants shall
dedicate a trail easement generally along the Salvation Ditch
acceptable to the Planning Office and in conformance with the
Aspen Area Oomprebensive Plan: Park/Recreation/Open Space/Trails
Element prior to the issuance of a building permit". Planning
and Zoning did not make any recommendations regarding how park
dedication fees be handled., The applicants have begun working
out the terms of the trail easement in conj unction wi th their
request for an access easement from the COunty for use of the
Salvation Ditch.
PLANNING OFFICE COMMENTS: The Salvation Ditch trail is an
important segment of the trall system; and the dedication of
trail easements through the Smith's and Siegel's property is a
community beneht., The dedication of the trail, while required
by the P&Z, more properly constitutes a voluntary grant by the
applicants which would not typically be obtained in an 8040
Greenline Review., Therefore, we believe that waiver of park
dedication fees is reasonable., We support the waiver of park
dedication fees if it can be shown that the value of trail
easements is at least as much as the park dedication fee (estimated
at $2,400 for each house). We recommend tha~ the Siegels and
Smiths demonstrate the value to Council's satisfaction.,
SB ., 3 9
~ ,~...
..
c^
c~
...'
Barry and Sharon Siegel
Bob and Glenda Smith
Sunny Park North Subdivision
Lots 3 and 5
--Mayor Bill Stirling
City Council Members
Charlotte Walls
Pat Fall in
Tom Isaac
Charles T. Collins
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Acceptance of Trail Easement
For Park Dedication Fee
Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council Members:
Finally, after two months in Planning Office review stages and two
more months being tabled, our 8040 Greenline Review for the above
'~mesites has been granted conditional approval by the City of Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission.
As you may be aware, the major delay in the 8040 Greenline Review
process was caused by questions arising related to the proposed Nordic
Pedestrian Trail planned to follow the existing Salvation Ditch Road.
Unfortunately or fortunately, the Salvation Ditch Road crosses our
property and thus the trail issue. For us, the trail has postponed
construction such that it is questionable whether we will be able to
occupy our properties this year. In addition, we have incurred
substantial fees for interest expenses, lawyers, architects and the
Planning Office. All of this was to accommodate the trail easement, which
became a condition of our building permit - even though the former City
Attorney told us and the Planning and Zoning Commission that this was not
a proper criteria for 8040 Greenline Review and if the ,City or County
wished to acquire that land, a condemnation process was appropriate. We
are sure you can imagine our frustration!
The value of the trail easement and the ability to maintain the
continuity of the trail far exceeds the required Park Dedication Fee.
This is certainly an appropriate situation for the City to accept land in
the form of an easement in lieu of money. Section 7-143, Park Dedication
Fee, permits the Council to accept a land dedication and we are requesting
that is what you do. We would appreciate if you have any questions that
you contact us directly; the Siegels may be reached at 925-6227 or
925-7791. The Smiths may be reached at 925-3937. Thank you for your
prompt attention to this matter.
~ ~~
~~~~?//
-" arry & Sharon egel
~J2J ~
& Glenda Smith
Bob
cb.mayor.ltr
./
-~
".
.~
..J
cl""'l
c~
17-142
ASPEN CODE
17.143
Sec. 7-142. Violations and penalties.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to erect, construct, en.
large, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish,
equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure in the City
of Aspen.or cause the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of
any of the provisions of this code.
(b) A violation of any of the provisions of the code shall consti-
tute a misdemeanor, punishable upon conviction by a fine not ex-
ceeding three hundred dollars ($300.00), or by imprisonment not
exceeding ninety (90) days, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
A separate offense shall be deemed committed on each day or por-
tion thereof that the violation of any of the provisions of this code
occurs or continues unabated after the time limit set for abatement
of the violation. (Code 1962, S 4.1-4; Ord. No, 7-1971, S 7; Ord. No.
9-1974, S 4; Ord. No. 12-1977, S 4; Ord. No. 33-1981, S 4)
Sec. 7-143. Park dedication fee.
No building permits shall issue for the construction of any
residential building within the City of Aspen, Colorado,
until there shall have been paid a park dedication fee, either
by land dedication or cash payment in lieu thereof at the
election of the city council for the purpose of acquisition of
land for active and passIve park and recreation purpoeee
and for capital improvements to such park and recreation
lands:
(1) If council elects a cash payment, the amount of aueh
payment shall be calculated by multiplying one per
cent of the current market value of the land by the
number of residents attributable to the residential
building. The number of residents attributable to the
residential building shall be calculated in the foUow.
ing manner:
Type of Dwelling
Studio
One-bedroom
Two-bedroom
Three-bedroom
Supp, No, 28
Number of Resid,,,,t.
per dwelling unit
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
470.6
)
)
)
.,_4/
/:...
.
.,
I
i
"
'.
i
)
(""1""'\
r~
17-143
BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS
17.143
Type of Dwelling
Number of Reside,,"
per dwelling unit
3.0
Four-bedroom
and .5 for each additional bedroom
(2) If council eleeta a land dedication. the follclwiq
procedure shall be utililled to compute the amount of
land to be dedicated:
(a) The amount of the cash payment that would haft
been required had council elected. .hall be
computed pursuant to sub-paragraph (1) abcml.
(b) The developer .hall dedicate that amount of laDcl
whose current market value equals the amount of
the cash payment computed above.
Supp. No. 26
470.7
)
.
I
Revic\~Cd by: (~s~ . City council ,':;"j'i-~"""'~'"
, l ,- 0 0 i I \ ~:l-r, '2. " " -1 I ~ I f"""",' j t
o~' 11/-1::;) ~ ; I" ~, .~ , ., -~ It" U"""' ~ ,,-r~1I "'" 1-1''-'"'.'', L...!Pr~ ~ > ?f"f't(',,",-
J:Jv (fD'1D !G1..uv}.", fG/';'; /i tL b'u,~ l"tA ~~J) fi,;"'b"0' ,;, ~~l", 3,H' 'j"M'" r;')i I~,':J\ "..JI""".;,
"
,';.''-
, 2.
OthJ to ~J, 0!<h',;'k1 i ""'..Ltc~ ,
1. A site specific subsurf3.ce soil investigation shall be
done by a qual ified geotechnical engineer after the building
sites have been pr epared to determine specif ic foundation
design. The investigation results and designs shall be
submitted to the Engineering Department and Building Department
prior to pouring the foundation.
Revegetation shall include the type of plantings and procedure
I
of r evegeta ting as represented in the Siegel a ppli ca tio n. i
. I'
Revegetation shall be accomplished by no later than ~V,1ebiY "
1987. A nel-l revegetation scheme shall be submitted for the !
Smith site; Lot 3, to the satisfaction of the Planning Office
prior to issuance of a . building permi t. Any changes in the
revegetation schemes shall be, processed through an appl ication
to the Planning Office, 'and if they are determi ned to be
signif icant, shall be processed as an amendment to th e 8040
Greenline Review approval.
o
3.
Water meters shall be located at or near the property line
and the water line shall be sleeved where is passes under the
Salvation Ditch, to the satisfaction of the Water Department.
All util ities shall be undergrounded.
4.
5. ILl ::I;,,J h.;JJ.;.'1IV(V;{itwl,t a-A 1'4. <Jt.V c< wvtJlr'__~ t(, '''f'(''.iT:JJ c,; tk 'ff2,<tt~:
,,6':) Access to the property shall be along the Salvation Ditch
'~ 'through ~1011y Gibson Park. ,Ac~ess easements ol?taine~ from
Pitkin County shall be subr:titted to the s~t~.sfact~or: of
the City Attorney prior to the issuanCe of a Bu~ld~ng perm~t.
r) '\"J""'""o <.I".n,,',j c</lV>.i {, ~;f"..,.::J, ,I}. JU,;.,<:A'1 ,;:<<;" p'''y:Ccl L ",,0 ;t,~}.~, .;-j. ~j t, 1:1.,
J j' D .J. \' /' ) It' :~ ! I.'{} ;; _/ ,,1
c.c]yn"tl,k Ii ,d~ h_t'Jt';"" " 1'-{;1 ,I" '.'l' 0; ,t..",~ ",().) I I'i J" 0>'.1',' p<",y. ,
7 1L ~f':.J~-'t..j:,J..JL :~' !v.JJ/..J; c> ,btj f~,;Jr,.,<f, v f'c{."'(~ ,!{,fJIL: ::-, .L~:t<
zJJJ, (iUv i.{Ic, ~ rt'l Nt'>!'^",. ()(;, A, ",,) )," un:. c"c:";O",c' v.O:iJ. Jto A:.'.:f~' h'v;, I:/ii",l/J>lj';' ;)f'I;/':
,yV:;rc:i rl''''ifi '\,~..: 'UI<,""~)0_' /r, b"i,I;,~,,'(~J
I~-\
\~.'
_.--'-__-0.'.
"
;1
(
~
I
('")
-':.: '
.~
;,
---
......,
"
"
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
"
"
'"
"-
-1'0 '- "-
""'0 .....
....::!')
'.. Ii. 11;,I,7"'J.'" ",\
.. 21(' ','.. /'
.J'/Y4'CCL E/(
(.....
\ "
",------"""'"-
( , , ........"
'--- '\
, ~--- \
........'" \'
\ \
\ \
, \ ' '\'
J "
/ "'"
/ \
/ \,. 0,
\ '\--......-..
\). -
\(:;\
\",,<;>.\
\~~~ \
~'f.-\
---. \ ~~ \"'--
\ ~-:.. \\
\~~
\,
"3.
<:::>
=
Z.
'~
-z.
'.
~
<)
'...
'\0
\
\
"
"
""
"-
---"-
-
~
~
~
'"
/E LCJC//"
",.vA'",,;"
----//.r,,~._y """'0'/117)'
-
?A/(C'EL PEING F
;T.tJ Lc)T 7 &, /?/!-:
T.tJ THE C'/7Y.:?/,
&'/V/IIe-'i"
h,r~~,... CCVN7
1Y4,r"~()t)"1V /..,~.
S4S."lI'iJiJ"J./ JS~'
l,
. ~
j.1
I' , "'.IV.....E/?
#/JYA'E
oJ'/YEJ'/K
Lt:JT<;t-
, <'>
-=:x.
""
.....
"'"
Lt:J7: J:
_ . ~!VA:E?\,
;Y.1;,v>>.rd/--Y /N~E.rT~.:r/Y7
':-0\
~I
I
~i
'~
.tJ##E/i'
;'Yb'C6".!EA". ff'..-'!CoL/ET C7LU8
,
i.z(t~~/' .
-to''b
'V.
A/,tJ/(T/t,
-"
-::".
.":>>
X
'L/LJIJ/V/J'/CJA/
I:
. ~-'v"<<~;f"
.,oc/Y,vy EVINS
I!""'\
(1
"
BA,NNER
!"Iarch 31, 1986
Dobrovolr1Y
Bo,,: 340
,CO. 81654
RE: Lot 3, Sunny Park North Subdivision
De,ar Mr., Dobrovolny.
I have completed my geologic investigation of the above
re:ferenced lot nea,'- Smuggl~~r Mount.ain, Aspen, Colorado..
The, 18,()()o plus sqL.t~::u'''e foot lot. lies above Park Circle,!
roUghly between the Park Circle Condominiums to the west, and
the Mollie Gibson Shaft. to the northeast. ThE> Salvation Ditch
Pi~eline runs approximately north/south through the lot as
on the accompanying map.
The site slopes from gently to st.eeply west, and is cove.!'-ed
wi~h ~agebrush and other dr-viand shrubbery and grasses~
Large boulders, mostly granitic, are scattered about the
site. The burieci Scd.vat.i.on Dit.c:h Pipeline is oVE~I""lain by an
access road through the property. There is a fairly flat
bench near';the east cOl'"'ner Df i:.he proper-f):, whi eh i ~~
dered to be the, bui I ding F'riv("l cJpe. Th i s pr'oper-ty lies
orig a minor ridge, c:onnech,d to the m"in body of SmugglE'r
tain to the east.. Th(~r8 i~::) a df.~pressj.6n behind. t.h:i~5
r dgewhictl collects and contains standing water..
The geology of the site consists of a fairly th'ick sequence
glacial moraine material (Qmc:l of the third valley glacier
moved down the Rc)aring For-k Valley iriQuaterTlary time..
material consfsfs r.:lf unstrati'fied and unsorted clays,
, sands, cobble. and boulders. Without a drill hole, it
impossible to predict which bedrock unit underlies this
, but it appears that it could be any unit between the
F'er"inian age Beldon ShEll f.~ ~ c\nd .t7.hE-~ Pl....ec:ambri an age quartz
~. onite.. Thet-e ar€~ 'fault. tr<.::\cE~S 1'~unn'1.,ng from nD!'.th(-?ast to
southw'est in thi sport i on o.f Asp(~?n 'J but becau::l8 0+ the
sl.\~'ficial cover llf gl(':1c:ial depDsits, their exact position and
number' are unkno"JIl. In any event, there is no evidence of
Ne6g(~ne (recent) movement on t:.h~~SE~ .f aul ts.
~.:Jrt,':;;":.'
,/(;,.,;
'.': -\ ..<: '.; :. ."'.. ,~
;i'C,~:"~;;:.:>
.. ;"(.;:;r;~
SUITE 302 CITY PLAZA BLDG,
517 E, HOPKINS AVE,
ASPEN, COLORADO 81S11 . (303)
., .'- ;~1,\ \, '
;<:\!:\ ;',>-,;"',,
li';,~-~>;)::): }!;:\::~~'~
",".'.....:...".'
,..,::.
("'\
~
>r
BANNER
Lot 3, Sunny Park North Subdivision
i"larch 31., 1986
Page T"JO
There are a number of mine s~lafts on the hillside above the
site which enter the Smuggler Mountain mining complex. The
network of tunn~ls is known to pass under the Town of
Aspen and connect v.,ci th thF.:~ (-i~5p(~?n r1CJ!...lntai n mi ni nq .:;\['-8a. The
tunnels beneath the city are full of water. There is no
evidence of mining activity near Lot 3, but there are
certainly tunnels well below the property within the bedr'ock
its. I do not expect a subsidence problem, but to be
cert.a.in, I suggest tI'.,at, c1Ul'"ing the site specifj.c soils
igation for foundation design, one deep hole (depth to
ded by the soils Emgineer') be drilled at tt1e homesite
fcir any cavities in the material beneath the site.
side shows no evi"dence cif instability, but these are
df~posi t.s ~;o that~:it...li'-fa(:e and sub~sl..(l'-'face ~AJ,.J.ters
d be di vel'~teclal"'ound the hom€~ c\nd undue wet t i ng of the
thr6ugh faulty irrigation practices should be avoided.
vation Ditch Pipelino, i~.; tnpoglraphically !::lelo,J the
therefore ",I""Juld not advPI'-;5"ly affect the, proposed
Th~ soil~ en~i~eer' ~hci~ld' p~6Vide you reco~mendations
gns for the ad0iied drainages, or our firm can design
nages foro you~
ic water and waste e1ispolal will be provided by the
of Aspen . Ac:c(~~sS tc:> the :::5-i '((0 m,o:-iy need to be :i. fTiproved ~
but s already available. If there are further questions,
~ase de not hesitate to contact us.
~3i nCE'.'r('~~l y ~
B~!:"~=.~ A;S(~7nos,.:!\IC.
//-vt:tVJ1/V" I~
Nicholas Lampiris, PhD.
Project Geologist
encl.
NL/cl k
"
~
~
~
'.",''';':6',,","'';i0<;''sJ,o.:)>'. ':",':.~'.' .,.""...,:<,',',:.;
~
LN/N....
/0
..---
r'
.'~"-
.
!/'
6_" . ,(!),/',
~ .;..---
4iii;;.:.;.
---...... ----
~---
,.--- "-
"-
.....~--
------ ""-.
--
,
\
.
"
-"
-"
"
--
"
-
--
--
--
--
,,--
-
-
-
--
-----
'"....:_.
~
, ...,;,
I
'~"1i'
-'
~"
~'",
.
oo'IF'
/'
,~ /
/
/~'
/"
,o~
)/
/
/
.'
...,;;,.~"" ,IJ.
.... .......;.#'
..'-. i
.. ~~
,-,,",-
",^
./
~i:
,*~~...... .'"'
.;,.'" "".......
,..r"'
.
r . .
. ,
.
,
,.-
.'
/
/
, ,
,
/
.
.
./
,
,
~ ... . .
.;;>
.
.
.'
.
.
.
,
~OIO_
7.
,
.'
,
/
./
/
...
/
'"
'"
. .,
.' .
-
/
....
....
-
---
. -
"'~-' --
iiiiti* ;,;,;;;1>....
".
--
....
--
piftUfJ15
...--
....--
.... ...-
,-"WIIf!' ..
fiii#
oirell
eALVoA:rioN
- -
-
-
-'_.~-
SUNNY PAKK Mimi ,""; - '4,,' -.......~,..,., ,/'
PKOPOSEtJ ~. 8Mm,t 'ReS/DalCE ,.,'. .
,
\
\
,
1""'\
("')
i~ rn@rno~. ~ n
.Al29. ~
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department ~
DATE: July 29, 1986
RE: Sunny Park North Subdivision, Lots 3 & 5, 8040 Review
==~=================================
The Engineering Department has reviewed the new access design for
the above application a~d would ~ike to make the following
COmments:
1. A study should be undertaken by a registered P.E. in geotech-
nical engineering to determinewhethir or not the. proposed
retaining structures will adequately provide slope stability for
the cut and fill areas and whether or not any additional retain-
ing structures should be provided in this proposed access design.
The area of particular concern is the steep slope on the upper
100 feet of the driveway.
2. Revegetation should conform to the plan last submitted by lot
3 in type of vegetation and planting procedure. particular care
should be taken in the excavation for the driveway so that root
damage to the large pine tree and the aspen trees is minimized.
3. The site 'plan showing the proposed access design was sent to
Jim Wilson for referral on fire and emergency access. The appli-
cants should comply with any recommendations he will make.
jg/slpstbl
cc: Jay Hammond
BOARD OF DJRECfORS
Bob Wade, President
TooyMorSe', Vice President
Jim Mollfc::i:SecretarYiTreasurer '
PeterF'or'sch -,
Skip Hamilton
Tom Isaac
Greg Mace
George Madsen
Carolyn Moore
Jeff Tippett
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Craig Ward
TRUSTEES
Executive Committee
Bill Mason, Chairman
Tom Blake
Jim Chaffin
Arthur Pfister
Frederic Benedict
Ruth Humphreys Brown
O.v: Edmundson
Elizabeth Fergus
JacK FrIshman
CM:Kittrell
Chades Marqusee
Barry Mink
Ken Moore
Robert Oden
Tage Pedersen
Marjorie Stein
ADvtSORY BOARD
Bob Beattie
'Bill KOCh
111l/}l~~t E
ASPEN SNOWMASS
NORQICCQVNCIL
Mr. Steve Bumstein
City Planning Office
130 S. Golerle
Aspen, COB16 f f '
Dear steve,
MiiyS, 1986'
After visiting the Sunny Perk North subdivisiori16sCweekl
have conCel1lsth6t the proposed develprrlentsforJot~ $ end 5
win jeopardize' the Master Plan traiL alignment along the
'Salvation Ditch, I believe thet we must explore other options for
automobile access to, those lo1sJnol"df:lrJo preserve the treil
alignment. I do not believe th6tapedestrien trail is compatible
with.a 'private driveway,'espeCially wheiftllEfnouses Tor both
lots are so close to the tfail,
i
Sincerely,
~
~i
~
<?ill
~
~
~
JJj
I would liI~e toettend 011 City P &. Z meetings conceming
developments in this subdivision.
&'
(
Craig C. Word
Executive Director
~
,
ii!
~~
."'-<
;;:J
~tJ
i'...
i#J
"
!Wi
~
,,~
~
~
III
Iiil
i%J
'iiJ
.iiPl
iii
'"
i%;i
III
~
~1'j
P.O. BOX 111'815' ASPEN, COLORADO "8161:l' 3037925:47110"
~
1Ji
)'i:1.l
~
~
jlt1if!4;'f.(:;1' F
MEMORANDUM
r
,
\.'
I,
i
:l'
U~i
Off' e
r' ,..."" n"7[g ~
,,::: ,L,~ w \:::'. f\
....q"---I:II
: ,
MAY I 5 l:jtjb}
181
TO:
Steve Burnstein, Aspen/Pitkin Planning
FROM:
Tom Newland, Pitkin County Planning Engineer
Siegel/Miller 8040 Greenline Review
May 15, 1986
RE:
DATE:
================================================================
I have reviewed the material you have furnished me on the appli-
cant's submission, and would like to forward to you the following
advisory comments:
Effect on County Park and Trail System: Title IX of the Pitkin
County Code defines the rules and regulations concerning use of
the Pitkin County Trail System. This title has been amended to
have these rules apply to parks as well as the trail system
(Article 3 of Title IX). Sub-section 2-1.1 of this title states
"That no motorized vehicles whatsoever including automobiles...are
permitted to use the Pitkin County Trail System." In order for
the applicants to use the Salvation Ditch easement as access to
thei r properties, they must use Smuggler Mountain Road (county
road 121) and part of the Salvation Ditch easement as it crosses
Molly Gibson Park. I believe that a uSe of this kind on Molly
Gibson Park, which is owned by Pitkin County, is in direct
opposition to the rules and regulations mentioned above and in
the Pitkin County Code.
This proposed access along the Salvation Ditch also goes against
the trail alignment proposed in the 1976 Aspen/Pitkin County
Trails Master' Plan. This trail, called the Salvation Ditch
trail, is considered.a critical northern link to the trial system
that will eventually encircle Aspen. Use of any portion of the
ditch for vehiclular access will place serious constraints on the
development and operation of this proposed bike/cross-country ski
trail. It is interesting to note that the applicant has not
addressed this important issue by proposing an alternate route
through their properties that could accomodate the trail.
For your information, this trail has become a reality from Hunter
Creek to the applicant's property, and is really an uncompleted
trail, not a proposed trail. Allowing vehicular access to use
the Salvation Ditch would undo several trail easements already
obtained to build the trail, and would probably disrupt the
completion of this public facility.
~
f"")
()
/J111, I k ,/\\'h t G.
ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
STEVE BURSTEIN, PLANNING OFFICE
JIM MARKALUNAS
LOTS 3 & lS,UNNY PARK
APRIL 14, 986
"
In 0 of April 10, 1986, we have indicated
as stated in your a hed letter, that water would be available
to Lot 3 of Sunny Park.
In respect to the structure to be located on Lot 5, which
appears to be below the 8040 line, this structure can receive
water from the Water Department provided it meets the same
conditions as set forth in, our. l",ti:er of April 1, 1986 regarding
Lot 3, and that is, the owner will .be responsible for the
water line from the point of attachment at the water main
located in Park CirclCiJ.. The Il\eter m\lst be. lQcated at Q:r: near
the property line:. The water line should alsQ be sleevCiJd
where it passes under the Salva,tion pitch. Exhipit B (drawing-
showing Topo line and location of house 011 lot) is not entirely
clear as towhai: portion (if any) of the hQusCiJ might be abQve
the 8040 line. 1 aspumi;! tpat fhefopleft of the drawing
reprepents ap!:'ofile. This, profile is not clear as to the
804q :LinCiJ. III Citf,E)mpting fo interpret the drawil19rit appea!:,s
that the fixture!;"il1tI1CiJJCiJ9-rg5(Il\\>{Q\lIcl,bCiJ,>atgr. nE)~!:'~h.e:M40
line. Therefore, the pi~ssUre would b~ adequatE{ !oi"'iesid'el1tiil.:C
purposes. City water main pressure should be approximately
40 psi at Or ne~:;tI1CiJ 804()CiJlevCitiQn...,Il9\>{CiJyer, we canl1ot-
g\larante:e this pressure because of other influengep slICh. as
house plumbing and service line friction lossep. ' '
In summation, the same special conditions should apply to
both lots 3 & 5. The applicant may apply for a water tap
permit in accordance with standard procedures.
JM:ab
.;: ...' <'i~'l<"
/""'\
~
MEK>RANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Tom Newland, County Engi neer
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
Siegel/Miller 8040 Greenline Review
RE:
DATE:
May 1 4, 1986
-='=='======'=='='=-==.==='====,=====-============-===-=.========,=======,=======
Attached is an 'application -submitted by Cary Wright on bebalf of
his clients,tbe Siegel's and Millers, requesting 8040 Greenline
Review for the construction of two single-family houses on Lots 3
and 5, Sunny PalCk iNort"h ,!>ubdiv Ision respectively.
Access to the ihouses is: proposed along the Salvation Ditch where
it intersects the Smuggler :Mtn. RoaCi at the second .switchback.
The Ditch then runs thlCougn Pitkin tOlfrity owned land before
entering !tbe City"s righl;':::of-way along Park Circle, then Lots 5
and 3.
Please note the vic::inity lIl<iP attached and the "Draft Driveway and
Utility Easement "witbin the Siegel portion of the application,
I would appreciate your comments no later than May 19, 1986.
SB.12
r"I
,
~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Office Files
FROM:
Steve Burstein
RE:
Siegel-Smith 8040 Greenline Review
DATE:
June 4, 1986
=================================================================
~Ieeting with Ron ~litchell, Karen HcLaughlin, Craig Ward, Glenn
Horn, Paul Taddune (briefly) and Steve Burstein. The following
steps were decided to be taken:
1. County will be approached to ask if they have made
arrangements with Lots 3 & 5 owners to provide vehicular/-
driveway access across ~lolly GIbson Park to Lots 3 & 5.
If not, is the County willing to dedicate a trail
easement along the Salvation Ditch? What steps must be
taken to dedicate each trail easement?
2. Is the County \~illing to relocate the driveway to Lot 7
so that is does not encroach on Lot 7 and extend this
same easement to serve Lot 5?
3. Is the County willing to accomplish a "trade" in which
Lot 5 can be reconfigured so to give Lot 5 a larger
area on the upper bench for siting of a house in
exchange for an easement on the Salvation Ditch?
4. City Council should be asked whether it is willing to
condemn trail easements on the Salvation Ditch through
Lot 3 & 5, and will give the City Attorney and Planning
Office the power to negotiate on the price for purchase
of trail easements or proceed to file on condemnation.
This matter will be discussed at the June 23, 1986
meeting of City Council.
s. The City intends to act on the issue of trail easements
as quickly as possible and schedule a rehearing of the
Siegel-SMith 8040 Greenline review at the earliest
possible date of P&Z. Prior to the P&Z meeting,
appropriate progress will be made on this issue and
other issues relating to the proposed placement,
inclusion of garage, and architecture of the Siegel
residence.
6. To the extent possible, we should ensure that there
would be adequate grounds for the Board of Adjustment
to grant a var iance on set-backs for siti ng a house on
,*.-,'
t.o""
~
f""'\
the bench of Lot 5, especially if no lot reconfiguration
will be allowed.
cc: Glenn Horn
Karen McLaughlin
Ron Mi tchell
SB.65
r--____
( , , "",
'- --- \
\
\
\
\
\
\
, \,
'\
'\
,\",
\ ~
\ ;.,...
'" .~
\ ''\--... ">
\ ----
',1\'
(:\ \
\ ~';. \
\~'\ \
-.. . \. ~~\
, '"A"'Z. \.
\ ~- \
\ ~~~ \
-'t.~ \
\.
,,'
"
(""'
\ '\.
\
\
'\.
'"
'-"''-
.-c---- --:.:..,
"
/E LCCJP
-
&/V..yE.Ii'
:..../6'~6"L.c.K.- ""'...-fe~UcT t7LU8
~,
J'/Y4'CCL E/?
----
,-
'---.
"
'-
/142".2""
/J:J,d~'
LCT ,:;
d/V"/YE"f'
//V'hEK -
hLZI//LLc
-~
........,
"-
"-
'\.
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
'\.
,
"-
",-
'-
''--....
,
L~T'"
..?'.Iv"....v4""',-f'"
",PE/VNY EJ?7/\'S
"2..
C>
=
2-
~
7-
r)\
'"::.\
"/)"
:,0(,.:::' ','"
." .~..' .
"
"
<)
"-
...
""'0
-PO
~
"'#HEA"
,--"'/hI".'}' <."'ArNT)"
, t"O>
'3,
C'>.
<--
'"
.... ~
$ ~~~ .- ~'....
1$ 'l r! ';; ,
.,{'<i '~"/1"'" ~ "-
.~1 ___ '1
&' I, \
IN.2.,l3'pt)\' A '.Z~',) ~
"
LoT 7
le'
;>J-,I" ,
f 1" "'/VA/Eli"
-rJ jV/lYA'E"
~'OD J"/YE.f'/K
L~T J
vA/Ncrf'
/y.;"6(.-)'.Td/"y' /N.v...r..rr......?'..::"'/yT
.~:.: .
"
~.
?A.Ij'CEL DE/A
;TCJ L,oT 7 ""
T,:> THE C/T)
"'#N"-/i'
.....,.T...r;.}-'/ Cc<
;Y 4.rJ:1t1&....v /.."
S4S."U'p.tJ-J../ ~
,
r
r) n
,~~~~ COLORADO NATIONAL BANK
~ "'Iim@) ~ GLENWOOD
~"Ill\~\~
I),
"
March 31, 1986
City of Aspen Planning Department
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Sunnypark North Subdivision, First Filing, City of Aspen
To Whom It May Concern:
By virtue of the Public Trustee's deed dated January 28, 1986, Colorado
National Bank - Glenwood is owner of both lots referenced above. With
reference to these lots, both have been sold under approved contract to
Barry and Sharon Siegel (#3), and Robert and Glenda Smith (#5), subject
only to receipt of a non-exclusive easement from the Salvation Ditch
Company and an approved building permit by the City of Aspen.
_ urs truly,
oh !.1:;,1"~ r
. e President '
JAK /bjm
Ninth and Grand
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(303) 945-7422
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 520
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
/"""'I,
rj
DRAFT
DRIVEWAY AND UTILITY EASEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of March, 1986, by and
betw"en Salvation Oit"h Company, a Co1oraCiO"Corporation, ("Grantor") and
Colorado National Bank, Glenwood Springs, a Colorado corporation
("Grantee").
RECITALS:
1. Salvation ~itch Company by Easement Agreement recorded 16 September
1977, Reception No, 197440, in Book 335 at Page 80 was the Grantee of an
easement '..hich encumbers Sunny Park North Subdivision and is twenty-four
feet in width, six feet on the East side and eighteen feet on the West side
of the ditch and pipeline as constructed in place, together with the
perpetual, nonexclusive easement and right-of-way over a road as constructed
in place which parallels the ditch described above and is within the
eighteen feet West of the center line described above.
2. in that Agreement Salvation Ditch Company agreed that only one road
crossing this ditch and pipeline easement and right-of-way shall be
permitted on each of the following lots: Lot 3, Lot 5 and Lot 7.
3, Colorado National Bank, Glenwood Springs, is the owner in fee
simple of Lot 3 and Lot 5 pursuant to a duly executed and issued Pubiic
Trustee's Deed,
4. This Agreement is to affirm the rights of the owners of Lot 3 and
Lot 5 pursuant to the E"sement Agreement recorded in Book 335, at Page 80.
NOW THEREFORE, for 'good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
suftie Leney of which are hereby admitt"d and acknowledged it is agrred as
follows:
[, Description. The Salvation Ditch Company hereby grants onto
Colorado National Bank, Glenwood Springs, its successors and assigns a
nonexclusive easement eighteen feet in width located on the West side of the
center line of the ditch and pipeline as now constructed in place, subject
expressly to the Salvation Ditch Company's absolute nonexclusive right of
access to inspect, maintain, operate, uSe and repair its ditch and pipeline
as required for the transportation of water across and under the above
described lands, together with the right to uSe so much of the above
described road as shall be reasonably necessary to enable workmen and
1
t"""'\
n
DRAFT
J,
equipment to properly and conveniently inspect, maintain and' repair said
ditch and pipeline, and together with the right of ingress and egress to
said road over a road as now constructed.
2. Mutual Easements. The Grantor and Grantee acknowledge to each
other for the easement of ingress and egress over a roadway in place for
vehicular traffic in connection with their respective properties and the
propurtias of Lot 3 and Lot 5 as described above.
3. Obstructions. The Grantee agrees not to obstruct, impede or
interfere, with the reasonable use of such roadway for the purpose of
ingress and egress to and from Lot 3 and Lot 5 and the Grantor agrees to
make a reasonable effort not to interfere with the rights of the Grantee for
ingress and egress except a. is reasonably necessary for pipeline
maintenance, inspection and repair.
4. Maintenance. Salvation Ditch Company shall have. absolutely no cost
whatsoever concerning this easement except as it elects in its sole
discretion for the purpose of,its pi15eline and water transportation
facility.
5. Effective Term. This Agreement shall be effective in perpetuity
and be a covenant that shall run with the land.
6, Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to
the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the Grantor and Grantee
and the Grantee is 'hereby specifically authorized to convey the rights and
duties pursuant to this Agreement to any successors in inten,st.
7, Whole Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this Agreement
contains the entire understanding of the parties relevant to the subject
matter h"reof and that there are no verbal or written representations,
agreements, warranties or promises per~aining to the subj"ct'matter hereof
not expressly incorporated in this writing.
8. M~dification. It is agreed that neither this Agreement nor any of
it s terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can he
modified, changed, terminated, amended, superseded, waived or extended
except 15y an appropriate written instrument duly executed and subsequently
recorded by the parties.
9. Attorneys' Fees. In the event that this Agreement or any of the
provisions contained herein become the subject .of lltigation among the
parties the prevailing party shall be awarded its reasonable attorneys' fees
and costs as a part of any judgment,
10. Severability. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be
invalid, illegal or unenforceable, it shall not affect or impair the
validity, legality or enforceability of this Agreement itself or any other
provision hereof; and there shall be 'substituted for the affected provision
DRAFT
2
f"""\
~
a valid and enforceable provision as similar as possible to the affected
provision which shall ,to the maximum extent p088~ble, provide for the
intent of the parties as set forth in the original provision.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have ,executed this Agreement effective
the day and year first written above',
Colorado National Bank, Glenwood
Springs, a Colorado corporation
by: "
John H. Kerr, Vice President
Salvation Ditch Company,
a Colorado corporation
by:
George S. Stranahan, President
State of Colorado )
)88,
County of Pitkin )
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of
1986 by John H. Kerr as Vice President for Color<1do~i"nal B<1nk, Glenwo'od
Springs, <1 Color<1do corporation.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
My address is:
Notary Public
State of Color<1do )
)ss,
County of Pitkin )
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of
1986 by George S. Stranahan as President for Salvation Ditch Company, a
Colorado corporation.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
My address is:
Notary Public
in.salvat
3
DRAFT
,~
n
March 27, 1986
Jim Markalunas
City of Aspen Water Department
130 So. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Mr. Markalunas:
I met with you in your office today to discuss a client
of mine who is contemplating building a single family
residence on Lot 3, Sunny Park North Subdivision in the
City of Aspen,
The subject property and proposed construction on it
is close enough to elevation 8040 ft. to necessitate
8040 Greenline review. One of the review criteria
is whether sufficient water pressure can be provided
to the house,
As I indicated to you today, the highest floor elevation
in the house is at elevation 8026, making the highest
point of water delivery, a shower head on that floor,
to be at elevation 80)2, below the 8040 line.
You indicated that providing water at sufficient should
be no problem and that water at a pressure of about
50 p.s.i. could be anticipated.
In order to expeditiously process this application for
my client, I ask that you confirm our conservation of
today in writing to me, with whatever conditions for this
specific site you deem appropriate, such as water ,meter
location as you suggested,
Thank you for your assistance.
Si7;&~~
Peter Dobrovolny ~
Peter Dobrovolny AlA
drawer 340 old snowmass CO 81654
$
,~.----
927-3369
~.
~'''.r
-;...~-_.,
"'~~~:2i8~~::q;';*jQ;~~;~' ,;
">,:,~~)t;,; \i#>;':
, 4i1<~
',M~i&
,.
",,:
L
t""'\
,
r'\
/l
MEK>RANDUM
TO:
Ci ty Engi neer
Aspen Water Department
Aspell~ Cern-sol idat,ed S,anit,atiorr Jlt-~"rict"
Fire ~,lar shall ' '," " ~,,;Ii
FRor~:
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE:
Lots 3 and 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision - 8040
Greenline Review
DATE:
April 10, 1986
----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Attached is an application submitted by Gary Wright on behalf of
his clients Barry and Sharon Siegel and Robert and Glenda Smith,
requesting 8040 Greenline Review for the construction two single
family homes, one on Lot 3 and one on Lot 5, Sunny Park North
Subdivision. Both parcels are crossed by the 8040 elevation line
and therefore must be reviewed pursuant to Section 24-6.2 8040
Greenline Review criteria.
Please revie\~ this material and return your referral comments to
the Planning Office no later than May 5, 1986.
Thank you.
-rllese i~'" f'IlQ('oSE'~ s/"'t:t.e FAI"1IL'I /'JOMes c,.... 1!>e
'5el:.vet> l'\V "N':/e. "...Pc.... co.."'...,"'....,.'='''' SAJoo,,.,.,1'Io_ 1">151<<"<:'-'-:
d~..& ~/7
tv ~
,4SI'8'1- C~ I-SO "I ~A-TEfo::;;.
SA... .:1'",1'.. _ 1:> L I 71t-.<:. r
11 ,.. "'",~e It--
1""'\
f"'\
,
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO:
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
FROM:
Jim Wilson, Fire Marshal ~
Lots 3 & 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision
8040 Greenline Review
RE:
DATE:
May 29, 1986
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------~--------~--------------------------------------------
,..... ... ..,.. , .,......... ... ,_ .,....,..,... ,..,...... ,....." .. ...,.. ....,_,.. _._.'...'_" ,.. '....'.... C'. _. ."..,. _ . . _,..,.".._.,. ., -,... _..._ ..". ,..... ... . ... ,..... ... .... .., .~
I have completed my review of the 8040 Greenline submittal for
Lots 3 & 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision, and find Fire
Department access and hydrants location to be,in conformance with
local fire codes. The lots are located in a low wildfire hazard
area, so no addi t ional fire pre~a.utions ;"{lih;;' necessary.
JW/ar
~
^
,
"
,
,.,f~
:':f,/~,~
'iJ;~.
_',.''{;.'I''.'. ..
CITY ol11~
(~~~:'J~;t~S;3:~,"
13 0 s~lll~
asp et:'~'5t~Q.O
30'j':'9'21'
. '~
~
,
PEN
April 1, 1986
Peter Dobrovolny AlA
Sunup Ltd Architects
Drawer 340
Old Snowmass, CO 81654
Dear Peter,
This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter of March 27, 1986
which confirms our basic understanding as to availability of
water to Lot 3 of Sunny Park. I would like also to include
the need to provide a meter pit and shut off valve, at or near
the property line adjacent to the public right of way, Since,
no doubt, the water service line will cross the Salvation Ditch,
our regulations require that the owner of the premises be respon-
sible for said service line, including any water that might
be lost due to leakage should the line be damaged because of
ditch work. I believe the Ditch Company will require you to
"sleeve under the ditch". You may apply for a tap permit at
our convenience.
, nc:re~
J'm Markalunas, Director
pen Water Department
JM:ab
-"--"~".'.""'...-;;'-'..'-
~",'
,....",
,I"")
14 July 1986
Aspen, Co,
81611
~rn@@OWjg ~
I~)I I'
~I -IJl14~ II~
Planning Office
130 South Galena
Re: Driveway Access
Sunny Park North Subdivision, Lots3 and 5
Siegel - Smith 8040 Greenline Review
Enclosed please find the new Proposed driveway access for Lots 3 and 5,
using this access we will not have to use the salvation ditch as an
access to our property as originally planned.
Please consider this amendment to proposal with all other aspects
previously submitted.
We expect to be on the Aug 5, agenda to have our 8040 Greenline Review,
If you ha~ any questions please contact us at 925-3937.
Barry and Sharon Siegel
Bob and Glenda Smith
cc Gary Wright
Jack Kerr
.~"111'''~
~CNBa!
tS =:=:
~(!)mne~
~"Jm~\~
'"
COlOIV\LJO NATIONAL BANK
ClENWOOD
f1
March 31, 1986
City of Aspen Planning Department
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Sunnypark North Subdivision, First Filing, City of Aspen
To Whom It May Concern:
By virtue of the Public Trustee's deed dated January 28, 1986, Colorado
National Bank - Glenwood is owner of both lots referenced above. With
reference to these lots, both have been sold under approved contract to
Barry and Sharon Siegel (#3), and Robert and Glenda Smith (#5), subject
only to receipt of a non-exclusive easement from the Salvation Ditch
Company and an approved building permit by the City of Aspen.
o:"!~11"~ f
. e President
JAK /bjm
Ninth and Grand
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(303) 94S-7422
Mailing Address:
P,O, Box 520
Glenwood Springs, co 81602
~"'mm~
~CNB~
E 3.
== ~
;E:l!).:;;;..eJ:s;
~ "". ~
~iJJjl~~\.~
r:"\ ("\
. - ~
COLOAADO NATIONAL BANK
CLENWOOD
,d
i: ~i, G ~ D"W~
I' ".'~ .. I
(.:\ "..-",.
\t\\\ JUl 231986 \
H\'11 I
July 22, 1986
Steve Burstein
City of Aspen
Planning Department
130 S. Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: Siegel/Smith 8040 Greenline, August 5, 1986
Dear Steve:
Per our recent phone conversation, please accept this letter as bank
authorization for the 8040 review with alternate access to lots 3 & 5 via
Park Circle.
Should you have any questions, contact the writer at your convenience.
Yours truly,
Jo A, K.'; ~t
. e President
JAK/bjm
Ninth and Grand
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(303) 94S, 7 422
Mailing Address:
P,O, Box 520
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
,,-,~-.
f',
'~(-
tj
INbEx
1. Application for 8040 Greenline Review on lot 5 Sunny Park North
Subl:!ivision, City of Aspen
2. Exhibit "A" - Report from Banner and Associates, Nick Lampiris
Engineer
3. Exhibit "B" - 'lbpographical Map and Section of Building
~,
4. Exhibit "c" - Draft of Driveway am utility Easement 1\greement
~
t""\ .1"'\
~~.~!..~!lWAY .0.r:P. UtILITY EAsF:MR/.rT DRAFT
THIS AGREEJ.lRNT is ent"red into thIs _ day of March,1986, by and
between Salvation Dtten C'"",pn"y, " Colo'C,~do co"porlltion, ("Grantor") and
Colorado National Bank, (:lenwood Springs, a Col',rado corporation
("Gr"ntee"),
~ECITALS :
~-----
1. Salvation Ditch Company hy Ea."m".,t Agreement recOl."ded 16 Septemb""
1977, Reception No. 197440, in Book 335 at Page 80 was the Grantee of an
easement which encumbers Snnn_y F.::tr'lt North Subdi.vtsfon and is twenty-.four
fe'~t in width" stx .fe~t on the En~t s5de and eighteen fe~t on the W~st side
of the ditch and p:lp"line as construct(>d In p1~c", togeth,.;r with the
perpE'!tu::tl t nonr;oxcl w~ive e.R~~m~n_t "'r1d r tght-of-'p3,Y oV~r .:t T.o:td :1$ con<<;;t r'11Ctf'!d
in place whlch parallels' the dItch ,dese" lhea "hO\'e and i" wlthin th"
eighteen f~etW~8t of thp: l::el)t~t" line (te,~clihed abov~.
2. In that Agrecm0nt Snlvntion Ditch Company agreed that only one road
cmsslng this ditch and plpellne "nBement "nd right-of-way "1,,.11 be
pe"mitt"d on each of the fo11.o"'tng lot.: Lot 3, Lot 5 and Lot 7.
3. Colorado I'R,tion.l1. Bank, Glen\1ood Springs, is the OWner in fee
simple of Lot 3 and Lot 5 pursuant to " duly ""ecuted and l.."ed Public
Tru~tee"'s Deed.
4. This Agreement is to affirm the rights of the Owo,.;rs of Lot 3 and
Lot 5 puraM"t to the ERRement Agr('('meut recMd...d In Book 335 at Page 80.
NOW TflF:REI'ORE, :for I(ood ",,,] valuable consl<leraUon, the receipt And
81lff:l.cIency of which nr"-I1"r,,11y admitted and acknowl",dg"d It is !!grred a.
fol.lows:
1. Description. The Salvation Ditch Company hereby grants onto
Colorado Natinn:l1 Bank, Glenw00d Springs, 1. ts f:;~!r.:eefl~!)r.~ -1ndas,si.gns a
n,one'Xclustve et\1:u;~ment f'!fghteen f~'et inwldth loC::~te~t on the. West sidet)f the
center line of the'dltch and pipelb" as now constr'Jct"dln p1..~ce, subject
expresqly to the S.ntvation D't ten Company"'s ahsolute none1l':c:l1J~ive right of
A,c.ce:qg to in.spect, mBintatn, o'f)er..ate, u~e 1Ind r.ep,-:'JJ.r itR ditch al1,d pipeline
agr~quired for the tr.ansportA',t:1.0'l of ~"~t~r ;tcrog~ ,1no. under~nc. I1bove
descrihed L'tnd8, together 1-7lt.h ti~Q ri.gh',.o r-.o U~P, gO much of the above
descrihed ro.",-r1 .1:R: ~ho3.11 be rCt\r:ion:l.hly necf-',$s;!ry to enahle, work::men and
1
A
^
, ~
equipment to properly and conv~ri!ently in~pect.
ditch and pipeline, and togeth"r.,1th th" right
said road over Jl 'r.oad as t10W construc.ted.
, , " 0
" " , . ~"
maintain <lnd repair said
of ingress and egress to
2. Mutual Easements. The Grantor and Grl1ntee acknowledg~ to'each
other for the ea~em"nt of ingres~ and egress over a roadway in place for
vehicular traffic in conn~caonwlth their respective properties !lno the
properties of Lot 3 and Lot 5 as described above. '
j ~', '
, ,
3. Obstruct1ons. the Gra~tee <1gree~ not to obstruct, impede or
'irlterfere-;-with the reaMnable Us" of such rOl1dwl1Y for the purpose of
ingress"nd egress to and from Lot 3 and Lot 5 "no the Grantor agrees to
make a r"asonable "effort not to' interf'''t'e wIth the rIghts of the Crant'el!! for
Ingresa and egr"ss e"cept "A.. is r~!lSonably necessary for piPetil\e
m,dntenance. !nspectIrm and'repair.
4. MalnteMnce. Sah,Kton Ditch Company shall hll;;'~ abMltlte1y no cost
--
whatsoevet' concerning this eMeml'!1,t ">lC"pt AS Itelectsln !.taaole
discretlon for the purpose of its pipeHne and w"ter tra'rispon"tion
facility.
5.
and be a
Effeetive term. Thi~ Ap;'r"l>~ent shrill he
coveMnt tii;,i:shAll. run ,dth th" land.
,dfecttve In perpetuit}.
6. llIndInl':Effect. ThJ.SAltred1lenl:lOhaitbe1:i{ndlng up~n ~nd inure to
the benefit of theli;lrs, succ,,"ssors and Msigns of the Grantor And Grantee
and the Grsntee is hereby specif:ically authorized to convey the rights and
duties pur~uant to this Ag1:'e~'m('.ht to arty succes:sots in Interest.
7. Whole Agree"!ent. 1t is expressly agreed that this 'Agreement
".', ,>,;,,,,,,,,,,,,contaIna the entire tiiid:er<;tanding of the parties relevllot td'the subJ~€f.
<" "'Y";~~", ':'iill1hel:" Iteteof and tnl!lt there' are' il~''''erbitlol:" i:irltt;'n tepre\'i4lTit'at':'lona, '
,',;'<",: : '" 'agre"ments, warrAntiea or promise~" pii!r't"Ining to the subJect'mlll:ter hereof
not e"pl'~ssly Incotpol:"ated in "'dUng. '
":j:S:''-;':\y( ,':';:,,':"--'::" '-",";.
"" "" 8.\'MoJifi~~'~[0~:::i
its te'rms, prov.islons., condit ton~, rep-re~ent"'tlon$ or covenanv:; can be
modified, chanp;"d, terminAt"d, nmend"o, sup,-'rseded, ",aj "eo or e"tended
. except by an .i1pproprlate wri tten instrument dulj~ ex:~cnted and subs~quently
recorded ryy the p~rttes.
9. Attorneys' Fe"s. Tn the eVent that thIs Agreement or any of the
pro"i"ion8 cont,1lnedheiein hcco",e the snbjlOct of. lltigation 'among the
partIes the prevailing pArty shAll he aWl!lrded its re,sonsh1" attorneys' fees
and costs as a part of any judgment.
" ',' _" - ' , ' ~.- _' ,:"" ~,' .:--_","j '- " J.-
10 .Slverithilft:y. Xf ani'pi-o,,{~ioog (jft:hla Ag~eelllentahail he
Iovl!llid, illegal or unenforceable, itshall. not ,He'd or impa,!r the
vl!lUdl.ty, legall.ty or enforceability of this Agreement, Itself or any other
provision hereof; and there Shall be substituted for. the affecteo pro,.ision
2
DQ^ r:r
"
1"\
n
!
.', ~..
. .. ..,
"
a v"Ud and enforceable provision M '~i';":ii"r
provision which shall ;to the m~xi~um
intent of the parties as set forth 1,n the'
, .. . '0,"','''' ."".' ~. '. ..'"<.> :',;0;:.) ~~~;':I;;;;:i:')':.., H "_
IN mfN~ss ~i!ltRJtOt, 'the'pa'fi:ies' have
dRY and year (i.ist ,written ~bov".
. ,'I
....r,_:.".
State of Colorado )
)ss.
County of Pitkin )
The foregoing was 'aCknowledged before
1986 by John H. Kerr:is Vtce prestdent for
Springs, a Colorado corporation.
WHnMs my hand Il!1d official "eat.
My commiqqion p-xpircs:
My address i,,:
'by:
George S.
'.f':>, ~,
Stranahan, preside~t
me this day of
Colorado~i.onal ~ank,
,
Glenwood
State of Colorado
)
)ss~
)
:,'1"
'q"
County of Pitkin
.;""
4.".
,
I.
''',,'
The foregoIng \litis
'1986 by George S. StranAhan
Colorado corporation.
a
,
;',',',;"","<'
", . Witness my hand ~';d off.5d,"'li';a1;
My cllrilm1'sslon exptres:
My addres!'; is:
,'..",
"'0'
","
'f
'i',';"
'"."
.';'.
DRAFT
".1.
~ . ;J~ . ,
,l~, _ J J. ,~<J~ .~~,. ~ 4~._ .J ~ ~ .1>.4
"
,1:)1. ,,;
'. .'4~.
:, ..'-.." ~'^O
/" '
1'"'\
. . i
n
,o<)S
\ \ iY\i,)
)\1\0\'\11 ~'1 'fi' '
tI;.o
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF P1TKIN COUNTY
COLORADO
FROM:
JAMES LUCAS ADAMSKI, HOUSING DIRECTOR
RE:
SMUGGLER HEIGHTS: A LAND USE PROPOSAL
DATE:
JULY 17, 1986
=========i==================================~=~~~==~~~====~=~~==~
ISSUE/BACKGROUND:
During recent 8040 Greenline reviews being conducted by the
Ci ty of Aspen for lots 3, 5 and 7 of the Sunny Park Sub-
division, it was determined that several problems existed
with these potential building sites. Lots 3 and 5 are
presently under contract to local citizens, and lot 7 has
been obtained by the County through a "land swap" which took
place during the development of the Centennial project.
!l~~.'I"~rJ/:.!d~{ The lots traverse a steep hillside on the southeast side of
'I L L~7..'" Aspen, and houses placed on the lots as presently configured
'tf"":"f', '" would cut against the visual intent of the 8040 Greenline
.! " t.p__~ bYII~,,, review process.
I~;m ~d '
-e..lI~I'f "'~ ""The extension of City utilities up to these three building
'it ill1J-.,....: sites would result in very high insta);.lation costs to the
landowners. ,Access to lots 3 and 5':i:s. proposed along the
Salvation Ditch. The Nordic Council would like to install
and maintain a cross-country/pedestrian trail along the
Salvation Ditch, eventually connecting the Hunter Creek
trail to the Northstar preserve. This trail is listed as a
proposed trail in the Trails Master Plan of 1979 as amended
to the 1966 Aspen Area Master Plan. Easements for the trail
alignment have been granted from Hunter Creek to Molly
Gibson Park.
All of
on lots
sell lot
these concerns add up to serious construction delays
3 and 5, as well as the inability of the County to
7 with a bonafide, approved building envelope.
Previous discussions with you and others concerning the
downvalley comprehensive plan indicated that the County may
not be fulfilling all the desired housing needs of local
employees. The apparent excess of multi-family dwelling
units shows that the condominium approach to the local
housing problem may not be the complete answer. Small deed-
restricted building lots, located close to town, are what
local res idents prefer. These lots could enab le employees
to buy affordable land located close to town that single
family dwelling units could be build on.
'. 1:~1
) {.f. \0'
\I._I ,>l' "
ff!.;"''r ..,)
In an effort to maximize the
and with the cost of running
County is attempting to put
productive use.
utilization of public assets,
local government rising, Pitkin
it's present assets into more
STAFF PROPOSAL:
These issues could be resolved through a single land use
proposal called Smuggler Heights Subdivision. The proposed
subdivision would eliminate the 8040 Greenline concerns that
have been hampering development of the Sunny Park North
lots, reroute access to these lots away from the Salvation
Ditch through access above the lots and develop some deed-
f€.HSil1el;~ j..,.\,. ~;,~
S ~\ viv~ ~ fk, 111<0"", not ~
I
r")
i"'""\
;
restricted employee lots close to town.
proposal would benefit the County government
single family residential sites for the local
This land use
by developing
employee.
Figure 1 shows the existing conditions around the proposed
subdivision. The lots would be located on a small bench
near the middle portions of the Mascotte and 99 mining
claims (currently owned by the County). These mining claims
were used to create the Midland Park Subdivision, an
employee dwelling unit project completed in 1977. Although
the Midland Park proposal stipulated that the remaining
sections of these mining claims were to be deeded to the
County as open space, this idea was never persued. In
addition to the Mascotte and 99 Lodes, the county owns an
adjacent claim, called the Silver Brick Lode, immedeately
above and contigous with the Mascotte Lode (see figure 1).
As a result, these 30-plus acres have remained County
owned, non-restricted and partially P.M.H. zoned.
The Sunny Park North subdivision is located immediately to
the west of the proposed subdivision (see figure 1). Lot 7
presently has deeded access through the Mascotte lode off of
Smuggler Mountain Road (county road #21), and the County has
agreed to maintain this access in the winter. Lots 3 and 5
could also be accessed through this road, but property line
adjustments to these lots would be necessary.
Figure 2 shows the area with the proposed Smuggler Heights
Subdivision in place. Lots 3, 5 and 7 of the Sunny Park
North Subdivision would be adjusted to include portions of
the bench within the lot boundaries. This will allow the
owners of these lots to place their building envelopes on
the bench, reducing the potential visual impact of their
future dwelling units. Access will be granted to all three
lots through the existing Lot 7 access. In addition to
these lot line adjustments, three additional lots could be
created on the bench and accessed by the same cul-de-sac
created for the Sunny Park North lots.
By deeding additional property to the owners of lots 3, 5
and 7, the County will receive granted easements to the
Salvation Ditch across lots 3 and 5.. This will allow the
Nordic Council to pursue it's cross-country trail. Exten-
sion of utilities to these new building sit~s becomes more
affordable when there are six lots dividing the costs of
hook-ups instead of three. This proposal will bring three
deed-restricted single family lots onto the employee housing
market. The monies received from the sale of these parcels
will pay for the project development (see Jigure 3 cost
estimates).
ACTION NEEDED:
The Smuggler Heights Subdivision land use proposal is now in
the beginning stages of development. A vote o~ conceptual
approval is all that is requested from the Board today.
2
.
t""l
r\
y'
, .....>-:: '. '...',
..., <,\,' \\\ '. ' ,\\~",,'" FIGURE 1
.~'Mt:J~L.ERHEIG~TS':
-,' ,:', " \ \ \ \ \, '- '''<\\ \,\ .
7'.~" '\ ',. \. \ " _ ". , .' .. \ ' . '.'
", \ '" \ '---.. '< \<,0." .
~--:::-.,_,"z~.\;>..:~:<,,,,"'. . ' "~-~::~'\:.':
'\~>~T< " '.>{,
'.'->, "'>"-- ".,. ' . ')\\ '
~"'.,,' .\,'
"'. '~\',
, "'.:.'''\.'.' ,..,
i' -\.,,-\.\ \'"
,/ ~ ;,,",',
\ \.\\\,\'
'.\\ \
! /)\(.,
,I .\ '
. ,"<
EXISTING CONDITIONS
/
\
/
/
/
/
'.
,
"")
(
\
. . I
. \: \
-.\, ".\ -~\,
'\)'. "
I' \ I ,
i\ " './ \ '
\ .'1' \ I
., \ ,"
, . .\ l'-....
"l..., I~~/'~.t.'~.'.n?~ial
..,'i" "t.~~1
- ,'\ \". I
,,/\ 0:- -'-
,J\)-,:;';-i.~~:.,
,,,,,~"'~".......,,'
.'-.., _:._.'Y_...'.,.'...~. "-
"~. ;..<. .,.' \"
._~~:~~:' :==J.~, ~~~" '~' '~:>::
.,.~."..",
,'~>'~
'c.?'
'>l'\:'giiil(r1oo'
.~. /,>;;~; /j;-.~,~
'.1// <
::" \ '. .,<',i1d ,.~,!
'::&7 (
! .
I
.\ ,
),
\
/
- ----::~.,-
.
n
~
FIGURE 2
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION
/
~,#
/
/
/
/'~
;
/~ OPEN SPA,CE
~
,#,#/
/
/
;
~
,~~
"
."
J)
I""""
"""
t.J
.
- Figure 3 -
ESTIMATED COSTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
SMUGGLER HEIGgTS SUBDIVISION
1) PLANNING
a) Conceptual and Detailed Design........,........in house
b) Surveying and Final Plat....................... $ 2000.00
c) County Planning Submission:
- Subdivision Review.,.. ..".. ,.............. $ 1680.00
- 2-step Land Use Review.... .,............... 1400.00
- Referal Agencies...,.......,............... 500.00
- Final Plat................................. 700.00
TOTAL............... $ 4280.00
d) City Planning Submission:
- Annexation Review/Approval., ............... $ 1490.00
TOTAL............,.. $ 1490.00
TOTAL PLANNING COSTS.............................. $ 7700.00
2) ENGINEERING/LAND DEVELOPMENT
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
TOTAL
12" Sewer Line w/2 drop structures......$ 60 _
8" Water Line w/ 1 fire hydrant......... 40-
Raod Upgrade w/ cul-de-sac.............. 12-
Engineering. . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-
Legal Fees for Crossing Salvation Ditch. 6-
15% Profit Margin....................... 16-
ENGINEERING/LAND DEVELOPMENT COSTS.... .$141 -
75000
50000
15000
11000
7000
19000
177000
3) TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS............. ". $146700 to $184700
4)
DEFERRED COSTS
a) Sunny Park Lot 3 Participation......... . $ 7500
b) Sunny Park Lot 5 Participation......... . 7500
c) Sunny Park Lot 7 Participation......... . 10000
TOTAL DEFERRED COSTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $25000
5) TOTAL COSTS TO FORM 3 DEED RESTRICTED,
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS................. $121700 to $159700
OR $40500 TO $53000 PER LOT
3
~,C'"".."'
..,'.'.' ., :m>o""~'. ,"~. '
, .,'.. ..'
,;
l
,
~'
!
>-
>-
~
\ I
,
,
.
,
I
"
,
-
..
"
h
"
I
:
"'"
,.
-
,..
~
........
. .'
"
\
. \ \
. .
.,!, i' ...,. .
, . .', I :~. ,"
I . .'.:' t'
4.... "' -"",
.... .1_'
.. . ..,...
o\. ...l
.,-
,
~"
~,
~
.<<\
"r
~!
\\\1
:>
I
;Z
\ ~
\
:z
,'~
a
~
z
~
},\:
~
:s
4;::.'
::r.
~
~" ~
, . J
~::.:::J :
~
~
~
~
%.
~
~
.;0
~
z
~
,.~
,>
~,
Ji\
:s
""'4\
~'
z
''4
~
a:
.....y
~
% .
::1"
~
~
1t\
'l)
~
.
-I,
(l
-.....,-" ) ? ,
"r ~(i
'\' , J
. .
,
\
~\
~-
~
.....\
1~1
II<i
':::1
!I."',
!\';O;';i
,'''',''\
~ I \;~~.
~ I 1<1
i:1 \\
~\
n\
\.:)
z
~'
.~'
\'ll
P
~
'\\\
.~
z
\\l
-1
\!)
,
in
.,
"\
'"
1
1!5,-,
2:~
~4 I
~~ ,:
" /
,
~.-1'(i)
I r - J ;z:
j I <:)
': ~
. I 1;\\
! T-..f
: ,
,
, I
" f
I
- -.-1-
; I
, ---I
..
~ ~h~
~~5:~~~
Ul li.~~ ~j
~~<::E,<\\\
~~~~;z;,~
~ ~t ~ ~ ~
-.........-..............
'..,
~lt ~ ,'tt
~. ts:::l ,~~
i~-:;~m
"I-:'~ m~
~ ~~.~ ~~~
-~~\;)I-~~
~ Xr~:z::>,\\\
~ <S Q \Il- ~ >
~ f. III ~1\.-
~ ~~~,~"~~
7:
~
%
~
, ,
,
I
.
,
,
"
I
J
, ,
r
.
@
~
~
I!\
'~
.
@
~
-- --; ~
. \tI,
.
:z:
~-
::J
~
~
~
-'- -~
-,
, '"'' . --
"
-...-........-..-.-..............:."
:---"-
, '-
.........
I.t\
~~
~
-.r
~
~~
~II
~;.
~
~
~
~
-
z
~
~
.
,
~
~
-
>
-
11:
1
~~
-~
~~ I
~\IJ "
,. I
!
,
,
,~-- ; CD
, r - J ;z:
,. l ~
': ~
. I ~
; T--f
: I
,
, I
: I
CID
I
.~
"
.'
~ ~ ~f
G ~~~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ID ~~~ ~j
~~<::E~I\\
\-. ::r h III ~ :t
X ~:.{: t-
" ~ ~~..,.~,~,~
~~ ~..'tt
'""t\4 ~~~
};~~~~\\l
,. ~ ~ ~ \\' \U ~
~ ~fl~~F);
F. ~:<{~i=m~
~X>'Z>n\
:;,; (S~Ul_~>
<{~~Il'l~\\.._
\:\ ::s -~
~~ ~ ,~~ ~
.
,
.
I
@
~
---.; ~
. \t\
.
.~
, .
-...................
, .
-.-. -.-.-. --..~....
:-.
. ' .' . . ", ,.1
"
.....
'...--------..........--
.
..
.
/
,...
,-' .-
:t
l\\
)-
~ .
~
~
~
~
I
..
!,
~
~
"'t'
~
~
~~
~II
~~
~
~
~
~
.
z
f
~
~
~
~
>
~
:J
I!\
~
z
')I.
'~
IL
>-
'Z
Z
::s
\\'
..
U\
~
.
~
\J
Z
~
\K
~
~
~
g
z
~
~
~
\Q
c
'.ll~.~J .'<1 ,<11 , ,.<7 tO~
'0"'0'>0
" f \Sl
z
. f j -<(
" m ~ '" ~
- ~ 'i!l
z ~
~
-.
: .
II II
"' ~ '\:> ~
~
Ii --,-_-4
l- II
-.- --- "tl
' -
_~ ..I
:,'{",
:1:\
'It
" ,IZ
".. I'-z.
,,<7 ,Z-V
'"
.<7 ,"1
.<7 ,<7Z<
,.o.''') r'Z
L
"
''I
I
I
I
J""'
: ~
~J."'D" ! r 5
I ~", i
I:! ~
, ,,: i
,,0./..0,,* I , ~
-1:\
~
i tml
,', . ~ I
I I ~
I ~i 1/"
I, j /'-'~
I k/<~. f . !
", d, 0... r '
., Z
" ", ,',' ';~:.2~~~~~ ~
:/,',
. ",,'
,,,,'",
i:l
",;", \!l
., "'.'...:;jc '"'
'-
,;:~/..'~
I
I
L
a
I
., ,_ .' 1>;,'~'"
.~
~
\'l
.-, ,~,
_......_.i..~:;,;;;.;.;''''''!-....
'-.,', ,
~
," !l
',,),i'
, , ..;<
~'
. ",0 I..,t
tlt7,~
fIO.U
"-~"-,:,,,,"
"
.OI'ZV ,'"
'r
i
o ....'
I', ,1-Jt:iI>,
',,'( ,
0' "~I'
'~ ~
~ ~
II
~
" ~
~
~
I';'"'
~'.' ,
~' ~,'
""" ~ 0 _ .
-( ,-,..."..
.",
,j,,:,
utf'i8, '
!i~" "'" ,
" ,.p., ;!,(;1 ~ ,
,.
<I
~
l
:I
~
~
~
...
I
<(
.
_<:1,
oll
~.. '<f' :-:.
~
'i-I
......
~
i
....
~
~,
~"
~
%.
~
,~
~
)-
Z
'Z
.:3
'S'
.
~
-
-
'.; '-"",~ '",A
,;... "
- Co; ~
, -&'1:\ -Q-
", :l~I.~.:a-e-.. " '
"i1""::-~~*
~.' ~,"~' ~~
u: lU
al~. '~
~ z~' ~,f"""
~~ ~~,
.
'~T
i
'~~
~
,V,'"
~
~.
..~
~
~
~
\\)
,~
z
m
~
~
.~
~
.;(::)'
~r.'
1;' ''.,'~ ',,'C '
',,-';c." '.''''. ""')
:u~
'"M
., -
~
,', ~
~
't
.,
'\
\
}.
~
,
<:l
.~
't
"
1'1
jl
,
I
-- - - 11
l I I
II
I'
II
II
II
I'
II
\ II
I,. II
t II
~t...~,
\
(~:\.ll'l~
1
i
i
l
Z
I:l
~
~
.~
~
~
<
;
~
I
1 ~ - - -- -'1
'I
I
,I
,I
rr---Ll
t I
I
I'
II
"
z
~
~
:>
1II
.J
Ul
~
~
,~ .
<:)
Z
;4..;;.,,,.,,;,0~'IOX'~i"~,,(i:t' ,Ii'
I'
II
II
II
_____'1
'I
~ I
l ,I
f" , I
j II
, I
, f
"
I'
tit
II
II
J - -----
I
/
\.l
'i
-q.
1
"QI~
.,,-
,
\
"\,
'\f'
&
z
,'.~'
H
<(
~
uti
z
~
~
*
l
111
,~
::t
'~
~
-<::,
~
.~ -.,',
~
~'
>
,r
,~,
11\.
'f
'~
)/.
"
l
)0-
z'
Z'
:s
~,
l\\
-.- ."
-- ,~-:'..."..."
I
,
,."......,/"...
I
I
I
,
"
,
,
, I
""'.~i
I
a
..~
~
\)
..:;."~
%
iU
L
\\\
'<(
"o,~ ..'
.,....i.',;.. .,
,::",:',,;
.. 1
':"
~,
.
..
~
~ ~
i ;f
~du
~I\I~~ ~
~~ ~ i
-1&g~~
;c ~ \l:> '\l!
,. Y ., ....... .;
\ll"
,\)
z
~
-
tS\
\U
'~
::t:
" 1-,
~'
~,
~
;Z,
\U
....1
~'
~
~,
~.
" , ~ ,o.~'~,' '-";',.""C"
.~ ,. .
,:'"..
-/
, 1\t?IJ.'9'~^ '~f.L~~ It7J.VW OJ.
3&nOH dNrJO.Gi<t .LNl'1J;~~2t
/117171
---
:,""'ttVM ~l'IJ!'l~;2j:
~ 4KO~''I*-''~
",' ,'-""" ",,', , '"
- ,. ., - - . . --....... "lOOf
" '"
- : " - ", '- '- ,. - .~
,,'-'",','"",:;....~
- - - -~ '~~'&~IM
. . 1-1a:r'~~~^ia - >! ,~~<S, , 80tJ1
'- .........
"
/
... - - --
,
,
,
,
"
,
,
,
',- 1710g
'-
-..
- - - ,-
, --
,
,
y
,
BOOS
;;.,,-'
-*
./,J(.....
'~" ','" ": ;.'''': ~ - "'-i-o.
, I /--
/
H" 1 '
'",.,.).1, ,"
...' .1'. /
,.".. , I
"
,
,
\
,
,
,
,', : 1:tog
-'
,
\
\
\,1-
J!!.s
'lIO!,
.... - ---
~
"
,~
~
.
-~--'~
81178
~'
, .
~
scoS...
z
f
~
, '-..
~,\,','
z
,~
i
.~
'","",,0,
n
-
i
~-
~.
.~
~
~
:.~.
4'
.%
':3
.~
~ "'^,,
'~
'~';"
. "-'1"
'0 ::;;.
,..Hi:",.j
o ~' ,";
"",i;:
'-";-,
,,-,,",
,
,
;'
/
Ij~O)
, ,)
,"~r ;"
/
J ,,/. / ~.~
~ . - ", : ______., ,,',,'" ..",4",,,
,- ~~ ~.,. ,
,,' '.'",',' "/ . '
, ,.,. --- '/ ,: ."{Y' :::::,
,-- , "./ /;/ --.//' ;, -;;c>~~~~l;{\:\iL
//--- - . ~.----.~:-:;:.-;/./' " ,', ,~:)~::::.I:.:'-:.:
'.-:; ~',:'> :/ "'////:-- /->:,;/ /) / .~ ;;~~:
,/
./
".: f1/ / '
""/' /' /
.,.. /' /
~"'~O~ /' ./ "."/
",.,.'::?": '/ ,//
"'., itO~ ';,.-
{:,.::~"t \ ,//':;~
.
,','I.
~" ,c."'"
~,,;;..'.~~~~
m'\~
\J.'"
;;t'
'\\l
"~
~
UX'
'tl
?=
~
4
ts
z
, '\u
:..J
~.
'~/:i>':! ;~>- "',.,j;;
,o~r.
~'
,,",,
~.. '^
',""
~,' ,
""(,"'0'.-_-"':
..~
^
("')
MBII>RANDOM
DATE:
Tom Newland, County Engineer
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
Siegel/Mill er 8040 Greenl ine Review
May 14, 1986
TO:
FROM:
RE:
======= =================='============== ===========================
Attached is an application submitted by Gary Wright on behalf of
his clients, the Siegels and Millers, requesting 8040 Greenline
Review for the construction of two single-family houses on Lots 3
and 5, Sunny Park North Subdivision respectively.
Access to the houses is proposed along the Salvation Ditch where
it intersects the Smuggler Mtn. Road at the second switchback.
The Ditch then runs through Pitkin County owned land before
entering the City's right-of-way along Park Circle, then Lots 5
and 3.
Please note the vicinity map attached and the "Draft Driveway and
Utility Easement" within the Siegel portion of the application.
I would appreciate your comments no later than May 19, 1986.
SB.12
^'
(""1
March 27, 1986
c
c
As I indicated to you today, the highest floor elevation
in the house is at elevation 8026, making the highest
point of water delivery, a shower head on that floor,
to be at elevation 8032, below the 8040 line.
f
t'..
I
.'
~
rJ
~
.'
i1
~
(,
.~
~:
.,
!,'t
?
.;./
~
~
i1!
'~
i
i
*
f.i
ii,'
}.;,
}.
;>
'i.'
~,
r
Jim Markalunas
City of Aspen Water Department
130 So, Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Mr, Markalunas:
I met with you in your office today to discuss a client
of mine who is contemplating building a single family
residence on Lot 3, Sunny Park North Subdivision in the
City of Aspen.
The subject property and proposed construction on it
is close enough to elevation 8040 ft. to necessitate
8040 Greenline review, One of the review criteria
is whether sufficient water pressure can be provided
to the house,
You indicated that providing water at sufficient should
be no problem and that water at a pressure of about
50 p.s,i. could be anticipated.
In order to expeditiously process this application for
my client. I ask that you confirm our conservation of
today in writing to me, with whatever conditions for this
specific site you deem appropriate, such as water meter
location as you suggested,
~, .
J:
-.f'
~~
?,
,
Thank you for your assistance.
S~7ii&~~
Peter Dobrovolny ~
;,
,
Peter Dobrovolny AlA
drawer 340 old snowmass CO 81654
~
-
I
"
927-3369
,'"j..,\
-,
^
t"'\
)
MEK>RANDUM
FROM:
Peter Dobrovolny
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
Siegel/Mill er 8040 Greenl ine Review
May 14, 1986
TO:
RE:
DATE:
=========================~=========================~======~======
At the site meeting on May 8, 1986 you requested further information
on items of concern that the Planning Office has identified at
this time for the development proposals on Sunny Park North
Subdivision Lots 3 and 5, Following are the items for which the
Planning Office and Engineering Department need responses by May
19 or I will be unable to review this project for the June 3,
1986 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission meeting:
1. Geotechnical st udy including (a) analysi s of the ground
instability potential on the sites and (b) feasibility
of foundation design serving as a retaining structure,
submitted to the Engineering Department by May 19,1986.
2. fobre detail ed information on the vegetation techniques
and schemes proposed on Lots 3 and 5 to ascertain that
the pI ans will wor k submitted to the Engineering
Department by May 19, 1986.
3. Visual impacts analysis submitted to the Planning
Office by May 19, 1986. It has been noted that neither
house substantially steps back along the hillside, show
significantly reduced heights or bulk from the Area and
Bulk Requirements of the R-15 (PUD) zone district,
attempt clustering as allowed in PUD, nor have roof
lines that approximate the slopes of the hillside.
There are some of the possible measures that would
reduce visual impacts. I request that photographs from
several important perspectives in the city on which the
buildings are superimposed (or a similar perspective
study) be submitted to the Planning Office.
I would like to take th~ opportunity to mention other areas of
concerns which are in theprocesB of being reviewed by the
Planning Office and referral agencies. There may be additional
information on these matters that you or Gary Wright would like
to give to the Planning Office, but I am not requesting specific
response at this time.
1. Access to Houses: Easements across Pitkin County and
Ci ty of Aspen property and along the Salvation Dit ch.
--..-
^
~
A "draft driveway and utility easement" has been
submitted within the Siegel portion of the appli-
cation. It is being reviewed by the County Engineer,
City Engineering.Department, and City Attorney.
2. Issue of how to meet the long-term priority of a
"pedestrian/Bicycle/Nordic Trail following Salvation
Ditch from the Aspen Club to Hunter Creek Trail" (p.38
Aspen Area COJllprehensi ve Plan: Park/Recreation/Open
Space Trails Element, July 1985) Note: It appears
that the applicants have no intention to accommodate a
trail along the Salvation Ditch through Lots 3 and 5,
nor offer any alternatives to that alignment.
3. Fire protection standards for water flow, length of
driveways, turn radii and wildfire mitigation. The
applications have been referred to Jim Wilson, Fire
Marshall and comments have not yet been received. Jim
Markalunas' comments are attached.
4. Steepness of slopes as relates to site disturbance,
excavation, stability, drainage and erosion. Statements
have been made by the applicants that all of these
concerns would be minimal and some mitigation measures
are di scussed.
cc: Jack Kerr, Colorado National Bank, Glenwood Springs
Gary Wright, Attorney
Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department
Jim Wilson, Fire Marshall
SB . 514
^
~
MEHORANDDM
TO: Sunny Vann, Planning Office
FROM:
*
Jay Hammond, Engineering Office
DATE: Hay I, 1980
RE: Sunny Park North Lots 3 and 5, Exemption from Mandatory
P.D.D.
Having reviewed the above application and made a site inspec-
tion, the Engineering Department has several comments regarding the
application.
First of all, the applicants reference to previously approved
exemptions from mandatory P.D.D., specifically lots 2 and 4 of the
Hoag Subdivision is not entirely appropriate due to notable differ-
ences in the two siteS. Both lots in the Hoag Subdivision are in
an area of good water service, both lots are far less obtrusive than
the Sunny Park North sites, and the slopes on lots 2 and 4, while
subject to the fringes of snowslide activity, are inherently more
stable due to well establish~d pines on both sites.
Secondly, both Sunny Park North lots are subject to 8040
Greenline review and th~applicants contention in an earlier let-
ter dated June 8, 1979 that the 8040 Greenline was principally
intended "to protect the environment and visual integrity of Aspen
l1QuM:ajcn" . l~ .ir1~p1:'1:'~f-l:.'
The.En9'in~E;rin.g'Depi.i.r't.men.l:.a.lso has several problems with
thi; aPl?lication i.nt.e:P~s. .cif the specific criteria of both the
P.LI.D. alIa ~04()!Glf!i;~nlinea!';:ff9g(}",s:
A!';. Il(}J:e.O! .iIl<jll\e~g7~na)uI1L flfo!11 gim Hcu;kaltlna~<:l.at:edgtlly
9, 1~79, .wat.er'i;lervice to the Duildlng site is niaiginal
due t.<> their 11 It it:1.ld.e .
Trafff? on pa;rksJ-rf1e}-s a.rready parHcularl:( heavy.
The County has r>roposed ini:erconIl~~tiIlg the dead-end a~
it now exi~ts ar(}und the trail~r park into the Spruce
Street area in all attempt to relieve congestion through-
.out the area. Construc.tion of two additional duplexes
would only serve to increase the existing problems.
The development plan fails to adequately sho", 11m" pro-
posed cut and fill to accomodate the road and buildings
will be accomplished. I am inclined to feel that sub-
stantial cut and fill would be required resulting in re-
duced soil stability, possible erosion problems due to
removal of vegetation, and a substantial visual impact.
Inclusion of retaining walls and/or rip-rap type slope
stabilization .Viould. rep1.l1t in S1.lbstcmtial site distur-
bance and, due t6 the highly visible nature of the lots,
considerable eyesore.
In view of these concerns, the Engineering Department recom-
mends denial of exemption from mandatory P.D.D. for lots 3 and 5
of the Sunny Park North Subdivision, We also feel that, should
the applicant wish to pursue this construction, that he submit a
more detailed development plan addressing the above concerns and
be subjected to both P.D.D. and 8040 review.
1)
2)
3)
.
,-.
,
t'"1,
MEK>RANDUM
FRO~I:
Karen McLaughlin, Assistant City Attorney
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
Siegel/Miller 8040 Greenline Review
TO:
RE:
DATE:
May 14, 1986
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Attached is the "Draft Driveway and Utility Easement" prepared by
Attorney Gary Wright to accomplish access to the proposed
building sites on Lots 3 and 5 of the Sunny Park Subdivision. A
vicinity map showing the Salvation Ditch along which the access
easement would be created is also attached. I request your
opinion with regard to the legality of the easement and whether
further documentation is necessary to demonstrate proof of access
to the building sites.
If you would like additional background information on this case,
please call me.
5B.13
(
.
\
\
"-
""
""
---'\.
-
/E
LCJC?P
-
~:-
n
I
~
;
-.;;;
"
"-
'\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
"-
"-
"-
""
"
~o '''.....
"-;90
~
<\
....
...
vlY4'G'G'L E/(
,,~\
",--------
( . ""'"
'- \
. r-- \
-",,- \
\ \
\ \
\
. \ '\
J ""
/ "'"
/ \
/ \,. '.
\ .'\;-......--
\). -
\~\\
\"'<;>, \
~~ \
\'S~".;.
~~\
_.. '\ -'" -
....,,~ ..
""A"Z. \
\ ""- \
\~~~ \
\"'-:-
.......'.)~.
"<'/'
"3..
c
=
~
":l;;>
~
~
~
~
">
""A/A'E,f'
---//.r...",o'Y """"o-/YTY
-.......
. ,
........
"'"
"
.l~' .
A'~ .
,I
I" "''''WE",
,.,I ,iV-'1YA'E'
'00 J'/YE.J'/X
'0'
~14 ~qT S
Jdlt~7/(),.y ~C}<"':'UHL'
"'......A'E-1'
:..../b'C5.1r..r.' ~A'~4'UcT ~LUB
L",?,,,,
.....
-::;x,
<'::>
~
'"
L"'?' 3
~)C/.lYE...r
h~Q"..y..rd/...v /...yJ-"....-...rT~/'.:f"...yT
'P.Jv'..-Y..:.""--f"
r'E/Y,yy EWlNS
.~:.: .
'\
/"A-1'CcL Oc/NG
T'" It.:!>T 7 &, A,
T.:!> T//c C/TY.:?
"'/V/YE'"
~T...r;~,... ccu..v
IV 4.z....l"t1~.;V /..,,'
S4S.2/'",!)"W 4S~
.:--e:
'9..i
1
I
V
f" J
" I
M
I
I
I
f
,.......,
(j
April 4, 1986
City and County Planning Department
City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen
reI 8040 Greenline Review application for Siegel
residence, Lot 3, Sunny Park North Subdivision,
submitted April 1, 1986
Attached are copies of a letter from the City of Aspen
Water Department to be included with the above application.
~~2. 1 reltJ
'l~ it/M
; eter Dobrovolny
Peter Dobrovolny AlA
drawer 340 old snowmass CO 81654
~
927-3369
~
..-"
~
ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUH
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
STEVE BURSTEIN, PLANNING OFFICE
JIM MARKALUN1\S
LOTS 3 & lSUNNY PARK
APRIL 14, 986
"
In 0 of April 10, 1986, we have indicated
as stated in your a hed letter, that water would be available
to Lot 3 of Sunny Park.
In respect to the structure to be located on Lot 5, which
appears to be below the 8040 line, this structure can receive
water from the Water Department provided it meets the same
conditions as set forth in our letter of April 1, 1986 regarding
Lot 3, and that is, the owner will be responsible for the
water line from the point of attachment at the water main
located in Park Circle. The meter must be located at or near
the property line. The water line should also be sleeved
where it passes under the Salvation Ditch. Exhibit B (drawing
showing Topo line and location of house on lot) is not entirely
clear as to what portion (if any) of the house might be above
the 8040 line. I assume that the top left of the drawing
represents a profile. This profile is not clear as to the
8040 line. In attempting to interpret the drawing, it appears
that the fixtures in the bedroom would be at or near the 8040
line. Therefore, the pressure would be adequate for residential
purposes. City water main pressure should be approximately
40 psi at or near the 8040 elevation. However, we cannot
guarantee this pressure because of other influences such as
house plumbing and service line friction losses.
In summation, the same special conditions should apply to
both lots 3 & 5. The applicant may apply for a water tap
permit in accordance with standard procedures.
JM:ab
r-\SPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFI~.
.' . . . .. .... .. . . I, ...~
. 130 S. Galena Street '
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-2020
'f~ l::obr-(yJ6!(j
~~~ ~IL~
RE: ~ V> ':z,.~:; - ~.! ~~'\ O"'~'L ''--h~l- ".i'1> '-(" C'-'-i' " \'"
Dear ~;fe V
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of your <Cclt!, (.;V-r$.n!i'/'VL application for complete-
ness. We have determined that your application
Y is complete.
is not complete.
The additional items we will require are as followS:
Disclosure of ownership (one copy only heeded) .
Adjacent property owners list (one copY' only needed).
Additional copies of entire applicatiO'fl.
Authorization by owner for representative to submit
application.
Response to the attached list of items demonstrat-
ing compliance with the applicable policies and
regul ations of the Code, or other specif ied material s.
A check in the amount of $
_ is due.
~-
A. Since your application s complete, we have scheduled it
f or rev iew by the ' n ill /I^c:; .o..() .
We will be calling you i e need any additional information
prior to that date. In any case, we will be calling you
several days prior to your hearing to make a copy of the
revie~randum available to you. please I'lOte that it
(is) is not your responsibility to post your property with
a sign, c we can provide you.
B. Since your application is incomplete, we have not
scheduled it for public review at this time. When we have
received the materials we have requested, we will be happy
to place you on the next available agenda.
Please feel free to call S~t Rrs-t.eJtYl , who is the planner
assigned to this case, if you have any questions.
Sincer ely,
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNIN'G OFFfcE
MtU<..7?t~ k J~;P~
,'..~.,,-","' ,-' ~... ,'';'>'''~&''M''_ .. -.W...."_...."""_~_,~_U"_._ ,C:.W'
t"",
N
LA W OFFICES
WRIGHT & SCHUMACHER
JEROME PROFESSIONAL BUILDING
201 NORTH MILL STREET, SUITE 106
ASPEN. COLORADO 8161 1
GARY A. WRIGHT
B. LEE SCHUMACHER
ALLEN H. ADGER
DA VID I. MARSH
TELEPHONE 303-925-5625
3 April 1986
Steve Berstein
Planning Office City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: 8040 Greenline Review for IDts 3 and 5 Sunny Park N:>rth Subdivision,
City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado
Dear Steve:
I am writing to request that the attached Application in behalf of the
Erniths be revie~ concurrently with the Application of Barry and Sharon
Siegel on IDt 3. I am the representative of both the Erniths and the Siegels
in the purchase of this property fran Colorado National Bank and althou::Jh
Peter Dobrovolny prepared the Appliction in beha1f of the Siegels you are
authorized and instructed to inc1trle me in all ccmnunications regarding
either Application.
I realize that this is a very busy time of the year and many
Applications are pending. I would request your help and I will offer my
canplete cooperation to have this Application presented as soon as is
reasonably possible. I am infonned that the earliest date is May 21st but I
would appreciate anything you could do to schedule an earlier review.
If you have any questions or require additional information please give
me a call.
Sincerely,
Wright & Schumacher
rr;'M~
G1\.W/vs
Encl.
co: Robert and Glenda Ernith
Barry and Sharon Siegel
Peter Dobrovolny
,Jack Kerr, Vice President
GEOPHYSICAL & GEOTECHNICAL
SUBSIDENCE INVESTIGATION
FOR
LOTS 3 & 5, SUNNY PARK NORTH SUBDIVISION
ASPEN, COLORADO
May 1986
Client:
Colorado National Bank
P.O. Box 520
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
Prepared by:
Western Engineers, Inc.
2150 Highway 6 & 50
Grand Junction, CO 81505
[W.O. II 1656]
,7
I.
I
i
~i,1
,i
WORK SCOPE AND STUDY PLAN
The purpose of the investigation summarized herein was to attempt to
identify subsurface mine workings beneath Lots 3 and 5 of the Sunny Park
Subdivision in Aspen, Colorado, and evaluate the effect that any identified
cavities may have on proposed residential structures for the two lots. The
purpose of this investigation also included making a preliminary evaluation of
soil conditions in order to determine whether it will be possible to construct
adequate foundations for the proposed structures.
The originally-envisioned study plan generally consisted of the following:
1) Perform a detailed gravity survey to identify any low gravity areas
that may indicate the existence of cavities.
2) Perform seismic refraction and normal resistivity surveys at several
locatious across the, site to obtain general information on the
overburden character and depth as well as depth to water table.
3) If any suspicious anomalies are revealed by the other methods, perform
Bristow resistivity surveys in those areas to try and further identify
the cause and location of the gravity anomalies.
Although areas of low gravity readings were encountered
investigation, time and weather considerations prevented use of
method for further investigation of those areas.
during the
the Bristow
-1-
",
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS
Microgravimetry
Method:
Precise gravity measurements were taken at grid points covering most of
Lots 3 and 5. The grid points were set by survey methods on IS-foot centers.
Elevations of the grid points were determined to the nearest 0.01 foot by
differential leveling.
~
Gravity measurements were taken with a LaCoste & Romberg, Model G Gravity
Meter, No. 735. Measurements were repeated at an arbitrarily chosen base
station at approximately I-hour intervals. The times of all readings were
recorded so the measurements could be corrected for the drift in the measured
gravity detected at the base station.
The elevation of the instrument was measured to the nearest 0.01 foot from
the grid point stake. The position of the instrument relative to the grid point
was noted to the nearest 0.5 foot. The instrument was placed as close as
practical to each grid point. The average elevation of the ground surface
within 3 feet of the instrument was also measured. The elevation of the
instrument and the ground surface in the vicinity were used to correct the
gravity measurements for the free air and Bouguer anomalies, respectively.
The gravity measurements were corrected for drift, latitude, free-air, and
Bouguer anomalies and then plotted on the grid map. Grid points for which
gravity measurements were obtained are shown on Figure 1.
Limitations:
The magnitude of the effect that subsurface mine workings would have upon
gravity measurements was expected to be in the range of 20 to 100 ~als. The
procedures used in the field were adequate to obtain measurements accurate to 10
- 15 ~als. Gravity variations in the range expected for the mine workings can
-2-
be caused by other subsurface conditions; for example, variable overburden
thickness over bedrock, overburden layers of variable thickness, lateral
variations in the overburden material, and variable depth to water table. The
interpretation of gravity data is then dependent upon knowing which of these
conditions are preBent and to what extent they influence the gravity
measurements.
The gravity data obtained at the site was
refraction and electrical resistivity soundings
conditions effecting the gravity measurements.
supplemented with seismic
to estimate the subsurface
The gravity measurements obtained varied several hundred J\gals across the
site and therefore, were not in themselves conclusive about whether mine
workings exist beneath the site. The range in the gravity measurements was
caused primarily by the variable thickness of low density bouldery glacial
deposits over denser glacial deposits indicated by seismic refraction data.
Also, lateral variations caused by the bouldery and heterogeneous nature of the
overburden is believed to have contributed significantly to the variability in
the gravity measurements.
Seismic Refraction
Method:
Seismic refraction lines were run at four locations on the site to provide
data on the depth and nature of the overburden. Two of the lines were 150 feet
long, the other two were 100 feet long. The locations of the seismic lines are
shown on Figure 1. The interpretations of the seismic data are shown on Figures
2 through 5.
The seismic refraction method permits calculation of depths to near-surface
soil and rock layers by determining seismic velocity variations between layers.
The survey is performed by producing seismic waves at varying distances from the
ends of a line and measuring the time of arrival of the wave at each end. In
this survey the seismic waves were generated manually with a sledge-hammer
-3-
equipped with a switch to start a timer in the seismograph at the instant of
impact. Arrival times were detected by geophones at each end of the line and
measured in milliseconds. Several times were measured to each geophone from
each hammer station to obtain a good average and reduce error.
On a time-distance graph plotted from the data, each subsurface layer is
represented by a straight line segment representing a constant velocity.
Compressional wave velocities of these layers are equal to the inverse slopes of
the line segments. Depths to increasingly high velocity material can be
calculated from the locations of the velocity breaks on the graph, or by time
differences between arrivals to each end of the line. The latter method can be
used if there is an' overlap between readings to either end from the same
velocity layer. This enables the calculation of the depth to the velocity
interface beneath each hammer station in the overlap, and provides a profile of
the interface over a segment of the center of the seismic line.
Limitations:
The organization of seismic refraction surveys and the interpretation of
the data are generally well-established and straight-forward. There are,
~owever, no inflexible approaches to interpreting the data, and ambiguities and
un..."rtainties are common. There are also two major potential problem areas
inherent in the method: velocity reversals and blind zones. The velocity
reversal problem exists when higher seismic velocity material overlies lower
velocity material. Refraction data analyses are based on the assumption that
seismic velocity increases with depth. The blind zone problem is the inability
of the method to discern the existence of layers because of insufficient
velocity contrast or thickness.
Results obtained from shallow refraction investigations are useful because
they rapidly provide information on the bedrock configuration and can be used as
a guide for subsequent drilling. Due to the problems mentioned above, it is
normal practice to use exploratory drilling in conjunction with the seismic
survey in cases where accuracy is essential. Also, it should be remembered that
the results of refraction analyses are depths to velocity interfaces and not
-4-
1:;
'3',
necessarily depths to soil unit boundaries. Inherent limitations in the seismic
refraction method increase the ambiguities in interpretation, and decrease the
accuracy of the results obtained. Ambiguities and uncertainties in
interpretation commonly cause errors in calculated depths of 10 to 25 percent.
Results:
The seismic refraction data indicated two distinct overburden units over
bedrock. The upper or surface unit consisting of bouldery glacial deposits had
an average velocity of 1225 fps (feet per second) and ranged from 1160 fps to
1300 fps. The depth of the upper unit ranged from 8 to 16 feet on an undulating
contact. The second unit had an approximate average velocity of 2300 fps, which
ranged from 1900 to 2825 fps. The velocity of this unit is too low to be
bedrock and was interpreted as older glacial deposits.
At the lower end of the site (SL-2) the second overburden unit had a
velocity of over 3200 fps indicating it was partially or wholly saturated and
the velocity interface was interpreted as water table.
The seismic data indicates bedrock at
of the stte and 40 feet at the lower end.
7350 fps.
a depth of 60 feet at the upper end
The velocity of the bedrock averaged
Electrical Resistivity
Electrical resistivity soundings were conducted near the locations of the
four seismic lines. The data was used to corroborate the seismic data and to
determine if lateral variations occur in the overburden which would affect the
gravity measurements.
Method:
Electrical resistivity sounding methods are based on the differences in the
resistance to electrical current flow of different earth materials. Resistivity
is a unit volumetric measure of resistance. In earth materials the degree of
-5-
'*.,
I
I:::
"
';".
saturation, the presence of dissolved conductive solids,
these solids within a soil or rock matrix or the presence
all effect the resistivity.
and the mobility of
of voids or cavities
Field measurements' are taken by the placement of two current electrodes
through which an electrical current is introduced to the soil, and two potential
electrodes which measure the drop in potential of a distance between the current
electrodes. For this survey the spacing (nA" = distance) between the electrodes
was equal. This is called the Wenner Array. In addition, a potential electrode
was placed at the center of the array and measurements were made from it to each
of the other potential electrodes. This is called Lee Partitioning and allows
for detection of lateral variations in the resistivity of the soil.
The apparent resistivity is then calculated by the formula:
V
R=27rA-
I
,I
"I
il
where ViI is equal to the resistance across the potential electrodes according
to Ohm's law. By progressively increasing the "A" distance of the array the
depth of penetration is increased, being approximately equal to the "A"
distance.
The field measurements were interpreted by apparent resistivity
plots, and as Barne's layer values. The later is an empirical method.
plots are found following the discussion as Figures 6 through 9.
depth
These
Results:
The resistivity data were not quantitatively interpreted in terms of depths
to anomalies. Instead, visual confirmation of resistivity anomalies with
seismic depths were made. Also, the Lee Partitioning plots indicated
considerable lateral variation in the overburden materials, which is believed to
have contributed to the variation in the gravity measurements.
-6-
f~.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the gravity survey were very erratic with a number of
anomalous areas indicated. The anomalies included areas of both high and low
gravity readings. For the purpose of this investigation only, the areas of low
gravity readings were c.onsidered since they would indicate the possibility of
subsurface cavities. However, it should be noted that an area of very high
gravity readings was encountered along the north boundary of Lot 5. The reason
for this anomaly is not known. The locations of these low anomalies are shown
on Figure 1. A total of 10 low gravity anomalies were encountered as shown on
Figure 1 -- 6 on Lot 5 and 4 on Lot 3. These low gravity areas can be caused by
conditions other than underground cavities. Some of these conditions may
include variations in subsurface horizons such as the overburden bedrock contact
or the contact of two different soil layers, isolated areas of low density
material, and buried channels. The concern at this site is based on the
possible existence of tunnels. Tunnels should be indicated by the survey as
roughly linear trends of low gravity readings. Of the 10 low gravity anomalies,
it was seen that 4 were very isolated and localized -- limited to a lO-foot
radius area or less. The remaining 6 low gravity anomalies showed a somewhat
linear trend. However, of these 6, 4 were found to be completely surrounded by
areas of higher gravity readings and were limited in length from 30 to 45 feet.
The two remaining anomalies exhibiting somewhat linear trends were found at the
limits of the survey, one along the southern boundary of Lot 3, and one along
the western boundary of Lot 5.
In order to obtain background information on the mine workings in the area,
we had several discussions with Mr. Steffan Albouy, a local miner. Mr. Albouy
is currently working mines in the area and has the original records of both the
Smuggler and Molly Gibson Mines. He provided information on the most likely
general trend of the main tunnels and drifts, the probable maximum size of the
drifts and stopes, approximate depths to water table, and generally how close
the mine workings could be expected to come to the overburden-bedrock contact.
Based on this information, the ,most probable trend of tunnels from the Moliy
Gibson Shaft No. 1 which could impact the two lots runs SW-NE from the shaft on
Lot 7, crossing the lower elevations of Lots 3 and 5. This area is indicated on
Figure 1. Mr. Albouy also indicated that there is a possibility of drifts
extending from the main tunnel toward the lots. However, he was doubtful that
-7-
this would be the case. Mr. Albouy indicated that the drifts were generally
about 5' x 7' in dimension and the stopes would be less than 15' in width. He
expected that the water table would be about 10 feet below the level of Park
Circle.
In consideration of the information provided by Mr. Albouy, only one of the
low gravity anomalies which exhibited a linear trend would conform to the
expected trend. This is the one along the west boundary of Lot 5. However,
this anomaly is limited in extent to the area below the ditch pipeline where no
construction is proposed. The anomalous area along the south boundary of Lot 3
originates south of the site and trends in a direction completely inconsistent
with that anticipated based on Mr;Albouy's information. It should also be
noted that, of the anomalies which exhibited linear trends, 4 were found to run
in a north-south direction similar to the one along the south boundary of Lot 3.
These directional trends are all very inconsistent with Mr. Albouy' s
information. However, their direction is nearly paral~el with the valley and
would be very consistent with alluvial and/or glacial features.
The general conclusion drawn from the gravity survey was that, while
numerous low gravity areas were encountered, only one is consistent with the
direction and ~rend expected based on the information available. This was an
area along the weot boundary of Lot 5, trending NW~SE and limited to that part
of the lot below the ditch pipeline where no buildings are anticipated. This
conclusion was based on the limit, isolation, trend and location of the
anomalies.
As was previously discussed, the results of the gravity survey were much
more erratic than was expected. The most probable reasons for this variability
was indicated by the seismic refraction and resistivity surveys. These surveys
showed two layers of glacial deposits overlying bedrock. The contact between
these two layers was found to be undulating. Along seismic line 4. the
variation in gravity readings correlated very well with the indicated horium
between the two soil layers indicating that this contact significantly
influenced the gravity readings. However, the correlation with the other 3
seismic lines was not as good which indicated that other factors than variations
in this horizon contributed to the gravity variations. It is expected that the
-8-
(~
overburden-bedrock contact is also irregular. Based on surface observations
plus geologic knowledge of the glacial deposits in the area. the overburden is
very bouldery and heterogeneous. It is also likely that the glacial deposits
(especially near the valley bottom) will be intermixed with soils of both
alluvial and colluvial origin. The resistivity soundings revealed that the soil
conductivity varies unpredictably with both depth and lateral extent. This
combined data indicates that the erratic results of the gravity survey were due
to the extreme heterogeneous nature of the overburden soils along with the
undulating character of the contact between the two soil layers as well as the
overburden-bedrock contact. Because of these wide variations, it was difficult
to make any reliable and conclusive interpretations based exclusively on the
gravity measurements.
At the beginning of this project. we anticipated that anomalies would be
encountered which mayor may not indicate the presence of subsurface cavities.
The original work plan included closer examination of any suspicious-appearing
anomalies using specialized resistivity techniques. However, due to time
limitations based on the submittal deadline and adverse weather conditions which
limited the field work, these resistivity surveys were not performed.
Seismic refraction surveys and normal resistivity soundings were made at
several locations across the sites. The results of these measurements are
shown on Figures 2 through 9. The seismic data indicated that the upper soil
layer is somewhat less dense than the lower layer and is between 8 and 16 feet
thick. It was also found that the depth to bedrock for the portions of the lots
higher in elevation than the ditch pipeline are underlain by between 55 and 60
feet of glacial till overburden. The area closer to the valley bottom below the
ditch pipeline was found to have approximately 40 feet of overburden. The
seismic wave velocities encountered during the seismic surveys indicated that
the overburden soils are very dense -~ particularly the lower one. The estimate
of bulk specific gravity' of the soil including voids and moisture based on the
gravity measurements was 2.54 -- also indicating a dense, well-consolidated
soil.
The resistivity soundings confirmed the existence of 2
previously discussed, they also revealed lateral variations
which helped to explain the erratic gravity readings.
soil layers. As
in soil character
-9-
Based on the information provided by the seismic and resistivity data, it
was possible to estimate soil strength characteristics and make an evaluation of
the impact which a subsurface tunnel, of the dimensions indicated by Mr. Albouy
and located at the bedrock-overburden contact would have on a residential
structure on the surface. The glacial soils at the site are dense, bouldery,
clayey materials and could be expected to possess strengths on the order of 500
Ibs/sq.ft. for cohesion and an internal angle of friction of 35 degrees. Using
these estimated soil strengths along with a maximum cavity width of 15 feet, the
critical depth was found to be about 25 to 30 feet. This means that cavities
below this depth, 15 feet in width or less, will have negligible impact on the
surface. At these depths, the influence of the load applied by the structure
foundation is very small compared to the soil loads. For mine workings located
at the 50-foot depth, the safety factor against surficial subsidence caused by a
mine collapse is about 1.5, based on this analysis. A 1.5 safety factor means
that the forces resisting subsidence are 1.5 times greater than the forces
tending to cause subsidence.
Although the gravity surveys indicate the possibility of a mine tunnel on
Lot 5, the erratic nature of the readings proved inconclusive. The overburden
depth and character indicated by the seismic surveys provided adequate
information to evaluate the possible effect that a mine tunnel of the maximum
dimensions indicated by Mr. Albouy located at the bedrock-overburden contact
would have on the surface. We consider the safety factor of 1.5 adequate for
safe foundation support on the surface at the site. Based on the information
provided by Mr. Albouy, we believe this to be a conservative number. He
indicated that it was very unlikely that a continuous tunnel as wide as 15 feet
would exist. A small decrease in the tunnel width would significantly increase
the safety factor.
Based on the investigations discussed herein, it is our opinion that' the
subsurface conditions at the site, along with information provided by Mr.
Albouy, indicate that there is no significant risk to structures built on Lots'3
and 5 due to collapse of subsurface mine workings. Since one. possible tunnel
was identified along the west boundary of Lot 5 using the gravity measurements,
we recommend that no structures be built on that portion of Lot 5 below the
ditch pipeline unless further investigations are made.
-10-
~\
The general character of the overburden at the building sites revealed by
the geophysical surveys indicates that, based on soil character considerations,
adequate foundations can be constructed at the anticipated building locations
for the proposed structures. We do recommend, however, that a site-specific
subsurface soil inv!!stigation be performed for each building site to provide
more specific data for foundation design -- such as soil bearing characteristics
and lateral loads for high retaining walls. It may be possible to perform these
investigations after the building site has been prepared.
Submitted by:
WESTERN ENGINEERS, INC.
~b!kt(
Lawrence E. Violett
Engineering Geologist
~~
Bruce D. Marvin, P.E.
Vice President
LEV/BDM/sr
-11-
"
TH~ T AILlNG$
CONDOMINIUM
~.......,-
~illl.t~nClitjj.:'Sij
'>$)
0'0
~
:;':>0
o
" 0
""
"
.
'"~co '~\':::
~~~~~
~~~.
'."~";~'>'~>
. ~0~'<.S
:\:\, S"
?:\.~"~,,
.
.
"--.~
~
~ ~~
~ ~
'~o ~
',~ ~~
'" '-'''' -<>~~ 0 0
" '-" ~ <S'10~ \,
, " "- ~o, ,
" "-"., .
"'---' " '-. 0", ~ Ok. ",
'" '~O//,: ~ -I'l/k '"
. " , '" O,-y " ,
. "", ',,, ."''' ", .
"X "'>~". ~"'v<-->"" 0",
')<', ..,,~* '" ~ 0~~ """
"~ '~,,~ 0>0 "
' " ~\, ,~ :.+: ( ""
", "'O^ <5'< . '~~ 00..""
' "0. " '1>- "
. \, ^ ~ //0 h"
C'",;",,<s>:'I/::: " ~~~
0,.(' , " '-"
& '. '\
-1'1/1-' \ \
o
-----....~
---'b,
,
.
o
~~. .
~(ar~~~
o
8000
.
80/0
r
.0
-l
I
.
.
.
c.:>
.
80<"0
o
.
.
.
o
8030
.
o
. r
~ 0 0
-l
.
.
(J'J .
.
. -<> 0
.
.
.
. "~~
.
I . \~"'"
.
. '\~~
' .
I I \ ~':"
. \ ~~":\
I . ;;:. '. """ ;;:0;;:
. 6'0";-0 ~'~ -"'0
~~ Z;;:CIl
I . m -j
. I 0
"b ::;Or"
Or:o
I 'd . :0-<0
. ^CJITl
. z-)>
I . ~,~
. CJITlITl
CIlr
0 ~' CIlOm
I . Z-j
. 'lj,~
. \:' :\'
I ~~\: ~Z
Ul ::0 . 0
r r 0
I r~ )>;;:
"0
I "r
:Or
0-<
CIl ~CJ
I 0 ()
)> ;;:-
r )>ITl
I fT1 -jCll
~t mO
~ Z
I " i"; Q'lj,
0 I\) ()~
q -'--~--~'~"-
I
\ ------"" .y, 0)>
'/ ~ z'"
-j
-~--
0 --
- -
L NI~ 0 .
rr r m
I ~ X
"1J
1 _ r
)>
CJ CJ
-, CIl
N (f) m ::l .
)>
~.
CLIENT I DESCRIPTION: S"'''''yt'a.'-k.. Norfl1 lo+'$:' <1-5 '
Se(::,vy\\~ II'ltapY-e.l-o::hoVl )
5e.\~vY\\('" U VIe. - i
W.O./(;..5b
PAGE
OF 4-
DATE: 5 18/8(,;,
4-j-i --)_1.+- - -:- J-i--.Jd- -;.1 L -. _u~. L.1--! 10.4--+-1=' ..\-. ~_J(_ol.__LL ~- i-t-
_J_L_~_.J .-}. .:- :__I__-l_:Jr~V\t:jDJi5T~l{~E ~f.Mt'It.. ; -T' +-. __~oJ-~. 14-+ 1..++
~ I ' 'I t ! I, I 'I i ! j : [
-~---- _~I -~- '-~"'""--1" ---'\._-->".--'--ll'"'~'--'l'-"I'--- -"-"+~-+--~-r- ~+-~_-1_--1--&.-'T,i -',-
! :' ;:~ ;! I il,: 1 j ! i 'I'! 1 ioD i
. 'J "~'-t Jl~L "..--c:-
..~;-+--;.~I~~' ~-Tr ; ~ffh'ii> 'VzfrJ:..de~(~rrT ,-j'-r-ni, Ty-i -'I ( -
-" _.....' ~- .._.~.~-::c-~.,~ ..,--+--t--L.-1 !l<l:.'-tzz.-,e<.:'I....!._..&..J-
'1'7.1;;' '1"'1 ' i ! D ,- BS[) +l<.: V.. V-z. ' f i L: H' ; (I c- ......., b' & I
. :.IJ,~--_.t--tGo.-;"......-~j-~ ~ -,,-.t-"'--I~-. ~-l"'lt - 7fl~~''1._-+-
t;.~'i~ ir--""27:5'-i'-hlp~'d~sj -,,\{~ ,+ vr-.l-'j-+--~'J-+ ~ui:-1f';~?1"'1t't' "rt
..~,. .}r, ..-.,,---j'-'+-n ;;5~7Cf':1.' '4':~iVf\- +-j--t..+...\t-+. +'-j--
I ". . ..' . 'h!. u.-. .....:....'" d 51 s' _I_\!~'" .... ,"!:'i.j._L~......t.....L..L ._J._L..
----.-i'-..-.~'--.T ':~'. '~--k" .. -'--'~'''. ... J"lO'\.....~. .~ ,:.. ': i : ,: /: :
,._,~,..;.--i.._j..~,.-:-,:-._.~~-_.~.~ A~ .2t~g: "-+~-t~-,._~~..~ .~"-"--&.z.. :~~~r-,4.~+._.~,--}~+",-+_:~w
" 'i_I:!' I' "-', I'" 5'11 I" 'I i , , , .
~t":\~q~~~:;:.~P~ \..1 F-'S,,-_.,:"---"r~'-'-,~)(> .. ~--t---&>'._."..i"-- '-'~'._j_._~--~-+--tt....t-g'f~ '-~-""+"-'1""- ~~<<
. . , .. .,: fi!s . S.(.! $,\ : .,i i :: 'M~, :
-;:...... -V,::.Tz..'rz:..fp.sm\ "~'TT-'. . ,8~ ,1:T-'rJ(;:rs:~~TY, ':::'~t:csi'
~-"v'lz:/i{.'ff?$"~~i-i'Ti'j . $, ~~3Ar:'r'\1-rt'T?Vft-T'
S ~- ''1I'':~i~'iit;:--t-i-r' ,'-".Tjl';"-', It'~-''rT :-jcT1:-y-t-r...r!....
.~"'-"':Y5"""'"'''' ..~r.._....--t...,..+-+-~-+_...."'.._., . :;-~-..\-~~-,..;--,---<- r
'- {'" ; i ; : i : 1f1.5: : ,!: '1 (;, II... \.i l r
== -..i"__.L_,_-<,___~. " .';..' "'t---r-L-..-:.._-,:.-~,,,:.. ~+"'-r" : ..-. .:.. ......,.. ..__.'t"_.'+'._~+-"+~~---+-;""T.;-t-.
'i ':..,. 5' ' :",'" it'l,; jJ...r -. . I 3,5.!' i r ! II .II '
V..__ . '-!-_M"""~'---~~'-;~'.~'~-:;"."-+-"-'i~flR.SP ,,'~?'" )\(~.. '-'-~'-:' ,.:.;_.._~---t~--T:-~:1--r~+--
t, . -~,L'i'i=~r'1: 0 : :1 ~;~~;tJ,~'H:(~I(id~tt;:ri:~A;j]~J'l~t:.
: 1~~ "~r....~t" r-_.~~,~;) . _ : i : j ;' ; , .1
. ",...:-..~~.-:t- $),., ";._"..}_'''''':_'<o'';''-''''", "'-'."~_."l".."-"r-'-"i-'""~'t~--:-,~c,~~-t""T-: -,,:S'"t>"-l-"'T'
.._..l,,".f<l='lb'" N,(. \~,.,/- 11.~ 'I'f.S lVt 10.7 ....,'...,~
.~~ "~_,,.,._~;.,,~.L__+_,.,~/ L..",!_.._
, ::.. r I I ("--t.",-: f' , , I <.i. S"D
10," ''t.1 I~.", ID.5 1.D '.!Ii.--:....j..-~.
- I 'r' I. f"
M&~ P, '" jl.l+"++-r"l'~l-
BY: LE.\J
f..~e,
.4<> , 'fo.
..kf"o"-"L.
I I .v
}
,... L , ",,~~,6.\e,L
'" .,......"~-~....._.-.~
, .-0"
. ,...~ ..._!j:>.., ..fu 'l{o l' ?b. 0 ~ r 10(." !!~ \ ~O,.I00
~~f'\1~"e:1._-; - ~ "..+.-..L."".-,.. ..j''';'~,,~,~.~,~.~~..", ;.. t
~'l ~ ~~~:~~. i:t~fr~~$U\iPN,
TiC... " .....1.... ..,...,..! .,....~,,<Jtde~:I <?\q.c.\o-.[.Peposih.... "
f ' '''i".__~,;j{ekx..,;it ,S: ~7...COtp:' '1~.SI 1,0
" 10,(..,' ' ,
t~.n.t ...1lf-l' 'llf.o
,J{:i;."
."I~O
f;~""'i
...._,.,,_L,.~,.~.....
+~.~l-~"-1~~.'.H~
. ." '"1 ."'-1'''-.'+-''''
; ."c--)c.-....i'-.~. i
1, ___1.. 1 . .~I!
. .~.~-r+I-r.t!..rtIT
. , r . , . I . . DO~O
,~...-i".~~".-..~,.;._, ~,;,_.._-,J,-~~.,..,~....~"-'---1--~--'--.'?, ..~..~
~O~flY c;.\o..c..\old~,,;-ts ,.l ':.+.j..
"~\' ".+:.....L.,.... :
. .. v'pOC-II,'1 .~ 2Y;~fps~I. r .,"
, "T!" ~ --+"..T.'~~i""~"
: .-r..... ~.~ .'.'T' -L.--,~ ._~t"'.-4--"~---"'+'._--.'
! , i . " l..'. .L . ,goCO
'''.'~'"'-TV~l-1'~-r !.. ':-;--r--rT''"r-MT-'
'.i"'-+'-"'~"-:-~+'"C'''':~'":'"''~.:jc' -:-i~" :""-'.;.....",.....1-"'-:..-:-.-
i .. .. ,. j ,t ,
..!. . 5~5 f.~~~::flcf-.~i:E~;~.I~\Syt~.~~]
I/XY/F:::-Y/,.k;;~ .:'[':11'.
CLIENT / DESCRIPTION: .sv':f\t..yi>wi<< No..-\-",-) Lo-t.,. ~...s
5e.\5fflIC r'{1:teVy'(e~+\bV\
Sei"bv'v'\iG LiV\.e. -Z- BY: LE\f DATE:SrI8!8f,
i i Iii M '\)' I '.'. 'il - J I !. il'. Ii'. ' i '.. . i , I j I '. I , I
"+--r-r-t'! ..-,":7.. ~;~fi":J-ti'J2- ! 'Y1::i;-,tJ'-+-i-~.Ji-.,t"'f-lr-t-+.-t--t-t-.
--t-- I II <!-t4"T-r___ ~tti~T-I- TT1"-r':'1'~T-IJ-' -i' t-i-l-Tt. 1--t-r'
+..-+--+--t---T" . '-,;--, ..: -I' .-111. W' .! ',' (-'1"-1"'-+,"", 1'-"'i'~I-"+-~-;''t
: j I ...j ...\1 I .~~., . .L__J ',' I.: ;; L _ 1 I I \ -! 1 "'! -: 1
'--TT}- --TTij' ti!itE.Di1?---. '~i;+.t"1-'1-""'-1 ."" i'T-it.t--~-::,r-+-rT-
--,--'-i-W~__L'~VFY- ,.'11 ~~~-rlTr1J., '-CL-J- 1..1 ~~rf1tJB-m-
'5l'~ ;S1~l _ t ; i 11 1- j j j t- _ 1 ,; ,
. 1. r:-: . '--l.-'+I' .-t. -:t>,\~$-+--L-+.J-i- ....="\I-+-t
_~.'..~. ..j... i (I. },..::~,,1_.I!Ge~U:+ _-i-L.-)-~~~ '.' ,,__:.. st~_-l-.l2J=-i'~I~~Ll
: i~! -r~"~T-r _r( ~~ ~)l: ' II I P, lfI'~" If8.S: '!'!, ~ 'l. T:~\ i !
-j.tr--!'- '+~"r~FLl-t']f:J;'~',-j' t, Wr+':''i ..'-t-+"j;....ti -t-t-T--t'.
'"_"~_"I -""., i. -+.~.~ b. .:1.., , ,.;......_____ .-'~-- . ILL iiJ-r-""'---
_"-l,_~.~._L "'~,__L..J~~1:t:,~tf:~1 -1 ~ '"._~~f _~-+~.J.~,_,J":-,j-'....J.- ~-_m~~.:~~~.}~,'.J;-~+:'
.~.: "i i , , '.' ;7.5 x ! I , " ; I : l)' '15 q .
: 'd_.f<"~', ~ ~-'~--'~;._.--r'~"l--l-~r-t ~J.i-1mj.'r'.-~; 'T--'"r-t.".'t"'~+'~:-i'-""t~'" :-~--'~lt=-,--.,;:~--,!-_.~t '-":'-"T~"""
'~~--:"'" ,~.~-- T-7--t-r"r-r-- r:~.~!""';'- ~~~~~i'~"' ,'-~i;:~-...,.'~_'m...t'''''j_.~-t.,. ~-~-"-r'- J~-t~.J"-~i~- ," .-1-_
+-~Ft-+ ;;;1-r--[--L~ f'is+-l--+ . '1:i.:.ti...,.ti~7'-"1'- ;""-+b--i;:.:tscf~~ .lJj-~
"~~I'. ~~... -'-. . . -<-...J........i-.+-i;.l"_......L.- I ....-€> ...;J...;...J..-f'-: .~!\-+lfz::;
: ) i.,.'" ',;.;\ 1 II i I )1 '/~ : l: ; i.1 I I ! ; ;;
1 1-'-"-+""" 'HL-r.~......,----r- ...i--r-...,....+,.~ .;.....t'-l--+" --T'''+~---''
. , ! I ! l.l' . . , j !. I '! I.! ; /.;: '. !'" . - ' sI ~ I . I
...... '''''''-lLl-.-+-t ,.-j---t+'H I _.+.....j--+-t-..+.~s-.'i!:'t".....i.j.Jq.:.--~.-T..+--..,..-t...
_.,~t--1~' .-1_ L.__L-_L~++', \ J. '. I . !. L:_J._. _,i~L_"l",~m' x .'~,m___.~.' ~._.+-__..L__.L__l.' .4,,~.--+-
i" ,"~, i 1'1+++-1'1.., 1FT.'.! i I., , i' I li'I"
~---+-+--. '1 ~-' m__.".--+-.-t--1--"r-'-1-1. "",i:-m_-T'~t-~'1-~o.+"-'.1~-t-"+' -. ' "1' '''-'+-+-i-'-+.~-+_~y.m_+..;-t~"-
'.': "l l f ! (.... i' 1 ! l \ ' I .~ .~ I . .: !~! ' 1 .,
_LL1 ': _I~. 'T-~-'~-Z;"D';1,:~i )':.fJt~""~_?" +~" "~~h1'-r:'h i 11.l-1=q:.J.,-
- -"'''--~'-1 -.J.'--T.t~ "'=fT'~- ..;;',....1.... H h'C,,,,,,,'--I'" . . "--!'-;-:-""";"
__. -_.~.L~._--..........J....L-t' ...L_p' I .~....:.._.,__:. +.~ ;_....~ .~fl<o..~ ..--..:..-i...i....:. . +.....:....,--
i.~~opj.!pfje , ' I , if: :, j ~' , I Z. : i t ,"I L~'~,. _.'.',i.:_,_.~.:'.""""
--~ --.--~~ '1-----~~~~T~ -'-l~ ~-~--;---:-.~+---1-"--'---> .1- -,.-. -> -------t.-..-~._.-...1". . '. -- .
I ~ I . j 1 , 1, ~' t i . i :
,_,__">......~,. ,~__,-'-.~--.--'__ I I. I . .1 : . t. i \ --...~4,--.;..~ ""-~.~,--+--;..- tr-.'~"""'
r:~=::~~t~ri=f~~{l~~~ . ~-t2tFF
:--,.(?i.),'i"'G:.~ot.:"d"...,~!e ') ".. ,-1"
...-.,..--G'7'!..... . r '-=.._ '..,~.... - .8elo<\1''''''7''l'R
--j-+."...+--:;. ..-"BJulc1e1y' G\ a.~i6,J ~ eJfC><5 itst.. -lr"
; . -,:...-t~--'l--r--T'--:'-"-l-~J"-'T---i-'J~rp~~\i~~ ~^\i3'5"'T;, ' "1"'-.'1"-, --'f'~" ._~ - r'-..'r-T
"-'~,":~"F~~~~~; '~lf;.-r1~FF':T."~:~1~~'.. ~; ."::<>v+~ ~1~T~' -'~.'~-;-
. -:-'-"~'~--'~;--':--"-'-"-'1'i;;-;;:.ta:e'r.+.-tiG\il:h:1E-o~a.s, ........ .,...,-.,--------r~-;..'t-+-.
.. ;m+....j-r"i...i+.j--j'-"r..:r'"J~<>.:tev~~le'" . ..-'-......-j ..,+ .., ,'...I'-r.'+'"+'''
;' '! t'o1 ~O-..Jl . " . .." . 1 ill J
.....-;--- . T''''-r''id;;;c:.;i{i:iG3'.iSO#; .,_._~-_.; . l-j'1"', 1
. ,:.~~:~~:,. :1:.~~::.JLJ:J~'.,+ iT'!_ '. . ."!,'. t...FI:t-FT
.. ~_...._. ......,.. .. ;......Jr---i71k;YJN"/I...c--.;+. -"~--'_...'..."'--:"'-r-'-'.'~'!--:
"'''''t-t"..-t-".;._'--t...-t..,,_.+-.,~~".. i . .t.",...~..:, -i.:.:,;-.~t--"i:'~'---} ! .. '~--~'V.-
'4.,..j.A'!'I-+iBE?ci;-=,\;. ;\{~~..t .~'I ISPX::~s';
i. : ' .': j'-f" i ,. ).' ,,! I ; . ' 't';., ' i
"i~:"r.:t-:r+rri'--:'" ':-1:J:.:1 .':::'+r:':",L:~Il
w.o. \G.,Sb
z..
OF 4
PAGE
" ~,..~...1;:;:.::.="":;;;::"'-C:'c.;"""o,'
""c;;";~'.c".~.:.c..'-C.".;,c.,J:., __ cc_'_...."'"_.""__'_,..~".___'_+._.m.~_."~,~_,__,_.~_"~_,"~'",.,..~,.,_
*.
CLIENT / DESCRIPTION: ::>~I'\i\.'/?a.Y'~No~ll.ct~:,+S
5e.isVVlic.. J:V\te-VPn::...+a...+\OV\ .
Sef~l'Y\ic.. UYle.--3
w.o.I(;,5G.
PAGE 3 OF 1-
BY:LE..V
DATE: sjleJeb
""1"'#' 'I I"
.-+.. ,....\-+-+;-t--1.-........ --"--+ -t .-L....L
I ~"~"7~-~- I 1 I !J~ME;! ~t A.tlIuE:._4?
: B'15(';":"YU.d.3~'''-'.' +Jd.....J. i i +- L
: S3 '3(<) . , j. I I I ' 'I -L
-::;;;, .Y~~L'jSL~48: T T'~i~ (~\v'fu.(g. I
""> Jm< ~ d,)..".$ *:- --+ -4+:! !. _ .:"*
.~_.; "t-;;""'-I'--i -j"-H-j -r-, 5114'~1 to ..J..' 1- I I "j- , -4-H-~ - I
t .......' , I r J.j) . "-\ I l! , it'. 70'
",' . .,...---:--..:1,-.,- -it-I ~r'S+',.(i'-=f'" ..-. I j--" . '--, '1"'11I.\ - T
i'- . -: ; ';-'~-r-!,q L+j..D~TnJ;';1' I I I i ~$C"+'S-I.t~'f._. -T--I-
^,I~._!-~-~-+t~.. _11_ -j ~!2.L "'t'
~~-- M;;~ ~~-~i.:.~.--:--:!!~=~~q~~.+.iI~~..L t1;r-~.....~..;.~ttLL~t,-!-I' ~lJ.L: -
v ~ ; ; , i' - \.i 1." j J : ' I ~ + ;, I'". .
0''',,--,:::. -"e{)b. ~-"'-"'. ...,....,...-t-,-(.--. ".'. :z:~.--r....r-...,-T.-I-.- ---r-+-=-1)i/;1.- 7~'"
<..'LI."::-. -j-.-t ..~f'>-_'''-r-t...J..-- '.' -' -+ 'tJ."':.:.._"~' 'i~.~:>; !_j__L_~L..L. ~.,-?~11'\ .Lt. "vb :y"rc
\', ~ If,z..~~~' " Ii 'f!I.O Iii !. "! i; I' !
'~'-;:--(;;S4~1.. '-;-TTj--Ti i ! ,",f .~T--, , ! i I J '
.... ,3T-'rTf'i--tl }j5iJ)-j~~+otf.1~I;:tcd"I.1.' ,,~-~-.~t"1l1- f" .1=..... ,,(
. ......'.'..-r--r-'..-t ..-.c.,....J'.~ ..--'i'h... ..- '''-'. T-r-t---,. '~_"'r--I ! I.-t.. -.-+-.l
+--++4-J-i--! TI.\ ,bJd.\J;.--Lt.a~'t;klb-l~t .LI...-.ihlTI + I
.....j..-. ".'~ --I-~_...L' =t:..--~ !:t+-:_++~.~-..c:~. ..:.....,. I!''',.,..~-L. '..+--+-
, I......" tt> I I ' i . I I I ' I I., I .'. I Zf),~ "/ 1=tJ' , I
~... -,-.... I i1t'- "t.l'5 ~-i-~:--;--.+----i-l--1 ' ~.*"'<.~t.-L
,,1_ _l~ ______ _.__ -I-:t4=....!?ZL:..J2,'Z,.":"'JH 115 :+r+J.-..;---,~~\.- ..L_
-l.'~ !' I i'" I I I I x' i
-.+ i'iob _.u --r-t -1--;'-"'~:-r-1~- TL~_, T~ --,---+-,.-t--<-~-l-j~t-~;--
_. +-,--'___-+-' I":. ,.2.'-.~3 ,.."/1 -_.J~'Lr IZ'~~'-'r--L'-r..t'''-1'-'L-'''';---!--~'1 :_.
It> ' . I ,_ I 'i' I I i 1
---'---- {".S ~ _;_ -+ ._,_ -,--t-4 _ L_ tit. .~D1 ~ t~.] --~- -..4 ~_ ,_L_~_. !- 1 1- c_
oj:, ! ~ I l \ I I ; f: i I ; .
"""..(}., : i< I '. .' ___
'''1' ~._,Ib -l"T'i--~f"'l--- se. Pi~~-~,-it~d)~t"t-'.I~T~'F"i-f- -I--~Y"'li--tl--~~-I+-'
....~wOV\~i@Gi-1'd.I'6,'^'\J:-4 "+J:'ijTE\tPiEIiilii~T\t,*-rT-':-l"Ti"-i'l-t~'.(.iiet'r"
...;...':t;t:~;ail;~~;1d. . I . ..' _.__.,...I_,.tT.tI:tttJ:Tj-:;J
...__.._,._ ;.. +...:.....;.-......---+-..:..t2..L:;l-:r+..J."..,',.-L--ia--l..'t--.~. _.;.....)_.~~.L~. i $QO.9....
; , : . . t UOu.1CleY-YCo:lo\~"'04 ~osrrs ~~ : i. j '1. j I' 1 l! i :
1'-:--':--- ..... -'r'--: ','verb c..i y :::s '1366 .fft,i--:----r--l.i-i"'t--t.t-.L. '1'''-''- j"i"
"-'.'1---1---"';---" ""'-'~"--~f,--""t'""".~-r'i-"~ ,(- . ",' .T-,3'~l' -r-"'"it' ~-;-,.,,,,,,..L_"l'-..-i-,,-,,-t-"';-P.--t~'~'~i- '. ;i~ri--"~~~
.".-- ..,.".I_...;.._,..___--+-.++.;..--L.JI..'1.; .J~....i_-l..~_i,' .-+... ;-..l--..;.....+:....J..-t'.....t. ..-1-.11..,..\.--.J...
j ! ~.I i ' _i....-:-J -, . . : ..' '. > 1 . I,: '1 'I 1 1" I j
r _"",,!___,~._"' , I..i Ii,',.,!: il11! r .1 I J"','~J : i I ~. L
~ ' .. ,-'."~"-"1"'--~;""-" r1-c-'1-'--r-.~T"...-t~'T~,,;,.~"t-1-T--r.'''''l' --r":r 'i,"'J...i-'-'"lj-'-! rtt--d --,
..,_._,..-_.--t'~.""--~,---,,,-~! .. J "_-~~_:" 1 ~. :.! " '_'''''_''''~''~, _-'I_'~"e....._._
.' "" 'I" ,.." I i J I i I
j . '" .. I ' ,. 1,'-:',...,[....... 1 ..... ,.." "'l.,-' : I.. f '.L"'" \.,!.
,- ..-.."..._f........t. ..~t.-,....,-i '. ~-+-._.r.--l>o\t1di~'--i'~ t;t~~i\~, --0 ".-..J'os.-i'rS ....... .'i~t~-1"..-.~.; -'t-"i~-'. i"--t'-i'~Tl.'-._.
. '-!'+ .......- ''s1 +i;:"l'e(r-'i'~" . .... .........-4..L..i+-t.0--J-t-+T+--
._-~-.~'i..... .,."..:~:-_--.,.-..,-f-~:,.\..-~'-,h._",_,,-,~': 'l-.....--+~-~..".. ,,,,.----L-...;... - .:,..-*.~-.._'".~..-b___{..~-,+-""'...-::e._";-~~J c., ..~,-,-~;_.+-~J_
,.., ...... ...! :.....!.:j'-J~\?y\1--j ~.~?S~$ .1 .'.4-i---.L..u -f--:-..l-.;.L
....-...-L~_~~~r:-.~~~=:~=,..!...,.. :'].=tI--HI...L:". :=F=Fi.-J,:~:-.'=..L~-t+-:.i.t 1(. :~,C
.. ..' , '. ! .......t , L ~ f j I
.......- .:......!.---...,----- . 1.:":5'1,9 .iT-r'-, .-t-r-r.T--FIC:;.u\~ErZI.:.....
.,.....!Be<iroc?~~~?1G[~-d~Itl::~I-..'...,..,.~T-;-'
.' ), ,- /; : ' ; ; T'i < I
i
--+---1--
-4 I
1.'.(
-++
.,-,,~,~~~...:=- ". . ':::;;::;E:~Z-;:::::~~'N'.
__~,.,~~;.;~:~~_~<;_~,:~~:,::"::;",-- ..,_;_,:;,.,;_:::C:"::::~;;;:__
CLIENT / DESCRIPTION: :5u.V\~'y?<I."'~ Nor+~) \..oi;~ ~c1.5
Sd~Mi(. I:vrtevt're.to.:fioll1' .
.:)eCSW\.iL Linc....- 4-
w. o. '''-<;G.
PAGE 4
OF tf-
. .
iA
--;-vr
. I,""
--,,-+-,-+-~.-
. '.l\
-++11--1
t ,u_
DATE: S/It:,Jeio
I I I ! I ' I I I
-, i -t-+-l--rt!- Jl-+ . i
kb _++--+"-1 _ _ - -1 _+
-L-t._J4 a 1- _L~_J
I ~~=~3 'llt: ft N;' : . 1
-+ -+-tl~\d:t.~ftf-t-
iLl : I .
-i--4----""...t- 1.:+""-1
~ v,:,.;-; ~.
-t-T-t2..; 'i1i.1VC I
f i I I Ii! ~'I
--+-k-L-L--k,L_J-L.+
i 1 ~'k~' __' I . i f-'\~:=. !IO" i i I I
-,- -;-~_. t -) / ~- ;,--~~; - (I ---; ~ 1-::~- --~ - '-;1~b'1~Z~~-f;'---r-rr
'1-li7"" .-~-;--r--I--t-l- ;1$S' -. -'~-~--''''''-+'TJi'T~T-l+rt'-
4-i'- ~ "~,,,-" z;;'-~111'-:ir-N-i-" ;:::.-r--:-r ~!' c-t-t-ri.
-..-....-'- I " -' I .fu~--.....l.';;tb._---'-""tt:t '() . ."
--_/ i ~~~ .-l-'--:p! -t-~-+-Li-~~q.,.:'\ :"" ~. \+.-~' ...~--..---~.-.j--tf I L
" _ . ; Ii! i \!, I ~", 11.5 J' i 'I z~ i I ' I
~.-1-_- -4L4-........., __.__~.+_-L......,(> _ .., ___.C_-+-'-_', I . 1--'--
r~.S ""f i J I' I . l I 'i" ^ \ , 't. :.1'1 oJ.' I i I
.+____+_, \...... ","'..+_-'- -+-1..--+-1_-+_";,,,_j---1._-+-- ....os___.~. -,..-';'_-ltl.--r.--,-{ -_-l-...Ll-
"j ; J ) (', i!) i I r I ! I J, ;~D ; ::.,1"t,'3f: I 1. 11 .
....~____;---+-_ - --t--r-t-- -r--+-.J_~+.-+..+--.---I- _+_.L.~, - - .. 'c'--' ..4:.-oU'---"--+--+ i . ...
, . .! I I! I ~ i I I I .', j 1 ,! I I "I ~.. ,
.'_',: , j . :1 ;'- . . " :: : '.' ::' : . : "-O'---r--+~;,; I i j
. "-~-+-4--4 .-.1f, +--L:t~-1-'tf.,Ut'",--'f--t-!r-A-f\'-c"-Y1.1t'--+--t---l-L+-+-++-
."--.' ----pd;~<4:'-+-U.i !-+l\~~'lrted~'-i-T,j---t"'T- i.,,~~ "i:,.I. -;--1---1'+1. \ +-
----..t--'--l@;GMdtol1l;tL"+---"-, . ....-....--i..--!-.....---i--+...--.---;..--.....-t.. - ...t--~-+-.. ..-+-.....-i--+--
, , , ' . \ ( 1 : . ! . : I ! , ! i ".' " j! .' 1 I j
: i :: r ! !---l. :: I',. j. ! I. ~ 'i j i ! + . !-+-+.-+-
~.~-"""-~'~-!. '--'.+"i-r-r-i .i,..~."'t--'T~f-l~---r-^t.-r..-r...r'~T--T-..-r."" -"-;-"1\' i -- f~'l' t..' j 1'-
._.---l--.. I I I I I /.-'-.......- i I l,-+--._~_. I
. i : If' ! I ' f : , . ( I I ! ! i Ii, I ! JI ~ I
-- +-':'-+-4--1 ..--;- T -L-i- -... '7-T-+--f r..-.,.,-j- --;....~---- T --+1 ---~--+-;--
---T--"T-+'-il"+-~-"1----;--ll --;-_! -1-+--":-_J- -t---~--+--t-"~j~ }--t- +~~-
:_ ~~...~---!.-,1......l",6......-,,~ Profi ~., ,-+ _ ~__.,._ ~ - --+-+.... --L....!-.-....-4--
, ' ---.--.,:!:... ~ 'li'II'
t:1:ev - '---;- - ;-T--;---!B;;:"\c:fe '6.(~~,J d. - o;~b -.. _L -j--l-'E.t;~: 4-.. r-L.-~-+
8P~--"--..,..,.......J.-'--T~'''VY ..~- . ... .~_d___....._,_-"-..eOLD- "..-- I -l--
_ _ ~L ~_io'-j.~. ~e~?~..'..'i ~ \\~(:):i?s. 1a~<-- :' n: 'r:' _L_<_~j .:..-1t--+_-:-
I' 1, I'! __ ~ ' t4,~ Ii: l
'-'''1 -+ .....-(-, II ' -t--'-1 -~ TT ."1 r: .' -:-t j- t-:--~ T';---, i -+-
. --"" - · '---;-4-- i -otlJ;;:;;-~\:r~-I~ J-;~-~~-t-: ~-l+-'-:t--'JI-TrT:---
-->yq,O -- '1 :'-TJ~..j t r r I ~-: .;' '-r-.-'~ T - m'--i l-~-~;~t 1- rr -r--ri
----.-. --:- ,~e.to?it -~1'9'?5t)-r:;'--;"-~"":-1 ;-'"1 ---r-+iT I .
_ , _~_, _ L-+- -j--l--,---~- L_ -t _ _~.'j' ].., - ----'-- +- --L -- _L -t- !. -- ...:..--+-"-.
; ~ ('j.ll,:ll , ~i'I..l.Jll,I;1
.' ,{ , I I, ' ., ' J' I I
t ~ --~--"'-l--+-T-r;-r--~-;-I-~j-"'---~~--'- ;~-- --:- '--l----~-l-Tl-.:--;--
._...:, ._._~:"'_.-1.. _^,' ._._~.___ '..,,__~,. .._~,_' '''', ..,_,~__.,_""., ._3_____;, ..,_j_!.,_..,J,.."c-l--._,_,t-~,-~l-_ -l,,-.,,i,,~.~,-._.l.- +--+._-~._-+-..-
.......... ..i .. :.__..(d~f't~ >10 b<:d voc,\<:. I:, 0yeJ;crtl<.'i't ;p~fr), .;;-L-i..J..--1---~
. _.~3'2C>_j__,_-.---+-J._--+,.,."''-~-.,...~-+--.W.--~--<-~:7.'\$lT-..l- TI ! : +
...-j .;:~tltitftHj111Ut8 H~w1tt
I. : !{ ~.; i 1 : ; 1 . l' 1 !' i -- f : \
,.. ",' .-..t"..-~ -'T-"-'~'. --'-';~-"'l'. . _.,"~..,_... '.1" ..-~-~"..,..~~~- ..~..t.+--" ! '--:~-~u...-;-.~.t--"r.,..'t'~.-+~
f L" J I .
BY: U=.."
.._,.+-~
. ! .
.~ 1 i
-:tt:l
: 1 ; :.......
. _.,,----:---._.+....-.J~_
, , . i
i.:...=
_....___ I - ~,_
. i.;;- I
.___,_."~____._L...
. I v i
--.l-.+.-~---t--
. f:: '
-r--';h
. ! . .
<<
~c.=-"_...__.:.=.c,~"
CLIENT I DESCRIPTION: SlUtll>( "<I.d, NP';-\o,)Lo~345
~es\$~il.l'(\-l SOUJl\.d 1VL.3 : \:.L-I
Act'f>o.\"'C.l'\t R~ii>t\lil'i -Plo"\- ~ · \1 I
. I BY: LE~ DATE: 5 18 8[,.
1 +.-l.l,L,~_j_-L! ! ,~~,IjI~b~ei+fJ'f,~~t: _~_~ii.Jl~_ ~~-tt~LL-i_tt'-
\ I' t, '1 J "J ~I!:) ..' J LI2-1o I I j!fO ; Nl' '~, j 1 '~
'i +".;-1-1- ,I I :'-;- (J"I 'TI-t1'-:~i]ir+~+- --.'t.t -r--
,"-; ~"'--i"~'+'r-.! '!-~rJ~~ti;;J~~~j-~! I 1 '1-1 -' .'
I II 1 ~ -;'l---<tMFf-' 1-' ~,-+---+. ,.~-_. . t ~---+--+ -1 '
I : ~ rJ.. , ,: \ "'r- l' J ,I I I . I II I oar
I ,. i · 'itM'jj" I.' II I i
, I ;'-;-1 I I. ~M'spe ~ofCl.li
. i ! ! -- -lte~dv-h. 11\' I ," ! ! ---r:-t" s., I I. 1\iJ t "--;:-~ .' ;
-'-~r'-T'- ._''''t.~-l..~-6T't.t-Y'~..~il 1...... .....L,! ".....J..n'?'^f\t>.';..vY"''/.__
illj :,.c:*i,,", "I'Iji!l' :-
. .: -,--"'''.i)i.<;V>,- :l.ill' ~9""...~~sf) '. " ....\-'1-"....,!:.. . >1. . ~-t-1
,I ! L..., ;' I' ..' "!' "1'" II 1
: s- i! j. i " :' ' : ! i->-;"'+~-~i I j, ! I 1 :}.~ I!; . 1
_i_.l....J._+ ' :-+-t- I ! :! . ++t I i i. i f!-t1-+ . -1 -tt++
""---r-~...t tT -r.t! --r--if:,1 !"11 r41.--rT-l-! - . "1j-1-r't--r+-r'
'---"'''~,-,-- ',:-.r-l I I i t~'-r+'Il-- --',--r---r -t -- I . I -r---~-t---
; '. .1 ; { ; J-LJ I.' 1 . ~. 1 I' ! 1'1 ; I 1 . j . '. . ..' ! I I
;-Ttr:,p-n-.! I.llillfl'i-i'ti,"-r--n r l-r--rtt.;,'
-. : .,' ~~-,.. ~t--r-:. .....~~~'-~ ~. -,~..,-"., ..-4-+-.
-.~'t-t. ...., L-H I'~ '1" :. ',J-.;;- I I I +.+ ~~~~1~-'
11:-1-:-1 - '. j\, :.tfJl. ",i.'- '! t 1,.1. '.1' ..~.LJ).1 IT! ! '1..-~~~I.~~1~Wt.' ~1:W\\eI'ett.:I'"
,I/), 'I : I I' '+1\' i' / , I I J I
-:-,,~+-t "it" r n ,", ,I ,I ~' TT
,-;.>o!o----i....V; -~. -i--j ,--t--t--., T I .........' "'-+. --....., I , I
.--:-~++ .-I!--i-H-t--+,+y ~,--i'~i- ++;: -+--+-+-- ..+-~ tl i I
~:i:fC-- :J~L-jCt-:rI:.=LTt:~~t[ti_ T-I '111I,-'l..' ~~:i-l-J-.~ti- I :1=r..
: '...l : :, 1. !.,!' i : . \:; t j "; l! ! I'
- .%,-1 ~.. " -~~'~~~l...ll -=1...r! ]..\'.]j,I--r r~J....I""I I1'; ~,~t=:"~,~~- !l:,---l,:~}]~.
.---z=r-:---r'.--;-. . '! ..'1. r+ ,
-,-,'-;'- -.r: --~---r--t-t-i-: -;-r-h.. T,' ! t+-+---- t-r-,-'''-i-'L'-
_~",,:,_,-_.J .+ -- '---!--i-'-+'~.'Z" --.!"T--'-L I I' t.. ,-+-+-'--', -- -1-4--,
.-.+-+-,~ ,.. L --D- -Lt-~ -- : -, ,-t-I 'j-,'T' 'T-~-t-'~---I T+-+--:"
..,............;..'2$ .~ -- --' -- .- -'+'-~-' , I 111- ._~.........-4-~..' ---j--&.-.,,-
.\. -~---~,.,~-~,-/, -, :-t '~l "+'t+ ,p t-Fj
1 --..~t -l-ri---..- Ti-T "--+1-;--'- --j-- -t--i-~.'~ +-t-!-+'
-.;-. 'ilc-l "t-'-i'1'~--I:' -J-T, -~-II --i-1-r:--
. t ' J.. -tt..: r-r~- ,. ~"T- 1'1'-; t..:--,.~..t+l: l -;-
~ -~6\~ t..~, \ I'--'~ ! ~ t --;--- T-~~'.;--;- -+1 ! I I :
T---r-'~" -; ,---;---,--+-11, -----I -1" -'---j ~ -1 '-----', - 4--.+ '-1+-.~-+'
1.:. i :, l ' 1 I j : I 1 ,
- ".. ~~ :- ;---~"_;_--r.'i-'''' ,. ',-- --,- """,..[..--t---+-,---,-, r' --i-+l--'-.
\ ' : I , I j . I I '.I~ 1 : '. ! I I:
):~:=rJ::'i=,!---rl::r=J.t1"- "" ."tr=r.!--i:J=r::1+F
'f..-----I--'-+-.;~-~.J---i----+,--+..~,-,~ I ' 1__
': .-. --';--1 --i~-t-~~-~,..j-T --~,j--+~-i-.1--+-+'." .,t--
........_--~.._..+----. ----y... ..' .,..L__ ..... ,~.._..I---+--~'-""'Ei-l'li>i'"--+---"-'
:, ': ":m:__L~._~_..~.._l~L -L_ .L.--~,-L-l ~_+._.J.,1..._;~~I~1.~_~,~~.9,'___~~..
I : I ; i ' 'Ii! i 'i i
..., ...-...,..+--.,..-,--t-...'(-.. -'i-- ""-1",-1-+--+, 'AI
. i I ; j : ; - } i - !: i
< ., .. "
W.O_ \(,.SC:.
PAGE
OF q.
"",,--,,_,-,^,,_w~_,,::,,
'1"0
\
CLIENT / DES~RIPTlON::5'U.I/\V\.fPo...,(K~~'It"JLDhp4-5
RC.SiStiV\''1~Ov-.II\d.\V\~: RL-L.. W.O.1G:,S'"
Prppo-rEV\+ ~esi'st\V~'\'t f'lo1.s BY:\""E...\) DATE: s/!9lBb
+-\-l.J. I .11 .1 ~'.' J TT I-t-U' 1'. l:::wl', .--
. :_LL.+' cl '1 . IT. I '! II 1 I 1
~ I' \ -r T - _.i~-'
. _+_+.l-l-.\---r.. I .' ~J:::.",L...ll.-.)t.;!.",\-~J. \ J./'15"J... Jc,!.>,-_. . 1-...l
I I , I I ' ' I: ,i'pa.'1'^'L.rJ:.v~".t~n'f'1T't.J' I I I I
'Lrl.x~-:.-t-t t=>1-rrrl'. r'r'''~t~p'>r-ft I'" j ." r"1 I
.~-l-++... \ o+~ ~Avt-j i \ ~;t'1i' ~l\ .\. \_ t \ .-1-~'++-R=' .\
_-,__~...,.. "'. .o..L~<+' -I 1 ....-'t-~L--+):.. I 4-4-41 1~~.J-!fL.-~I!.*- .-
I I : I ; I ' =>tt \At~!F'-td ~rt" I ! . ....riA\! : .
'-:i."-r-r-r.-t--H-f.1 \ fJ .~~ q -T ,! u. !. i-t-
...........~.....-+-1.,.. .".-."..'+t1.' I ." +. ,--~T'+ --.-t' T --+-f2'1 ';="fc r1}..L -T'
....;.....:....J.....r!;._- I I '._. j_I..;...+-l'-~ti" t11. ,\ . I
. '-i:J ill' . I ' :ll"! I: I 'A ,., "
.' . H" "," 1"': I 1, i ,1\ '1 I, j'
""'"-+1' .... I I ...., -, . ! ,". I --if::. t-l' 1 I i-H-\ l-r-T. '
I::T~=- 'IJ~iji'=1-t-r.~:tr-TJ-[1~j:t1-t 'T" _yrtt'L-I"\-t::
: ' : Ii' i \ 1 I; I'. I \ Ll' ! i I I' II! I
....r-..-- it- ;-TTlu',-i It i ':--'n---l \ -1.--r- 1 ! i Y'. -\ \: : "
. ._.__:..-l-tb.- ._ \ .. - """"'=1=' .J'...-\ I -. I
, ' I I I I il-\, !.\ L ' ! I I I, Ii' I ' 1.1 .~' Ii
'__'.'_"'-+---'-- -+-fi .l~--+'c,.. .' '1 ".\-,..-t- '4'-I'''-r-r-'.-L+. i-+--<.-
"I! ,i.' ' ' . .., I! ' 11r\~<l<)" ..h,
't ..)., t1 . I >\. ! ..1 T \ ~''1 \ I I : -r r~r6~;~~&ct<.-
'-r:sr:-T- +-++/", -:- I IH~l--+-r I - -li,{sict4 -~-p
~ ----: _ 'Tl.-t~T-1 < . ,...\ ~,-l-+-J=tt~ '-'i'l..~-t+-l-
-.-;-a----"t'5- -?J-r J I J ; j" -~-t-t ' I' V ..: '. I r
_ ' _ .L_L . _' 0,+_ _+ _~.~--/....J-+... .....l...J........\- '- _,,_I._L...\....-1...-LJ....
.~ .~.\. --~'-k :.....i,-Ji-~-+-4=+t.;-;'-+\\ -\--i-t' .=-Jjr~.++i~_L
.c. fl _ __ _..':. ..J ---;--1 - +.+ -r-t--+--c -to ~, +--1- t -l--J il' --,A,-~++J.1..-.t--I.-T-JL
'.. ' ' I , I ; , , i I I : I I ., 1 I I
_r'"'" ___ ---1-- _,~__,,_._............-'--~-i-' . - -.-- - ....,.----+-t-. -.....--r--;- .-
. . . I 1 i : I: If . I I \, I ffii : I , I ! ' i \ I.
--+~r-.'2i>,...;...-- ~.~ i I . ~ tl.'-"i-...J i tl ~' I~ I -+1 i ".......J,.t" 1 I '
__ 'r' --' _ 1- .. ,_,.. .Co.-" . --r . I -1.. ---'- . _L-" ..' .J.-..... ,- , .____+......L-
... ..' .' " ,."
-t:- 1 I : f \..L t ' j I; .J' I '
_ ':;F-~-' "'T' '" ,-,,-,..-t'1 .~ "--T" ,"1 : T"', -1'1~'- t. I ,~-~r
. _;::<. .._._~, ~ _., ..~.+-t-J-.' - _~L, -r-+--1=-L-t--. +-+-~. +-4-+--T" .
H- i . I I I ': '. \ I I . . I . I \ I
::=~.~ '~'_L.:_~1J-~'~,...~~~~-=-~~c,-r ;.-c~- ~* ~~~I=r:=-r.-;..-r~,
~__ ,~L--- ..~~~ ,_LLt ...:.....J_~. l.,~_\-+- ,....1---.1..1.1. .~.i_J .J~-
, ' , l ,I . .1' " ( , ' J
. ' I I "I,' I ,\' \ ,
_ .,.._ . ,.-,~-c--,-~t-j- i+' .-",-+ :-+-'1'r,"+'~'
< ___.\----;- '''''+''',' rt-t-l-';-1"" -\--1----'-." .4+1 ---' -!.+.JI._.+_-j-_ --1--+-r";"
. " "I \ ,I I , . I '. ' . \ I ' .
,'_~~-- ." '-T':-~" 11 I \ -' ;,-~--rt--l' - -tr ';jj~~ t~_.~~~--; T~-':--
,_---,~- .,... . . 1 ,': I ,,~$-.-t~~ : \ ~7 -;--. ,'-. ---;-- ,i.~-
. __~~.:.._L- .-,_-\-_L._:'j- '''''';'-''''--+-+1-1_.+.-,;.,...\.--..-1 ..,_,I_.J...._J. ,-' ..L.--f _L__....I--1'~-'-
l' I 1\ j 0 I 1 t i \ 1 ) .~ I 1 j Ii' l \ 1 I
__" -'-__1_ ,_ __ +-_:_~ ~ -l---t-- - +- ~-+-+-t----<l_Lt..~--J--~.--t-- _~.+..4 . r- --~, +~...t.
. , '...l I , ." ," I, I " '
.... T T .,. 1'-"1' (-:..,---,.-t. r'T~- i'--~"'-- ~---t---:' +-\'1--- ...-....-;-~.--~'
I... I 'T" ...---t-:-.t-,.." .~....- ~ -"'r-} -1- ''''':--1-;''-' .~-; ..-:' __LL~,~
I ,..._...............-_......>---,..~_....j,_..L.1'. I \....4...C .1--1_______...1-.....-..-.--;-........."
IT' " ." I \ ' I I ! 'I I \' ,. \ I ' I
.' ...". '-1- -,+-.--.-t .-;-_+-i-.~.-t--T..l ."....ri-~.-l-.-1- T--"-t...+--+--
'''r't \ ~. . ---~. r'" t--- '~'j"~ .. . ti-" -1--:-, \-~ ..~ --;-.; 1~\ d.ut,g,.--i .-
i."'" ....t ..1..... _' . _+ -- --' .,'_. ..-..--" <..' --.. I -- ,-,~'- -"\. -t..,... . .... 7,-
.: ,. ' I I I \ I . IJ ' I . ..
......, _'1__' + ... ,_.., .....1. __. ..... ~-- -' -\ "t--.. -' , "-, ....l-ri --t--+- II 'DIU
. ,I I I ' . i' I i I I Ii" .,. /
--
PAGE z.. OF if
T
,
,,,-,-__,'..."~___"~M._m'_"'.-"
>....,"~"';;~.-:.;;;...:...:.,~..::::o.."'"",-"';:;.-..--
___.~..,--_""~"cO.,,,
^.,"'~"'. ...--...'~"
-~---"---~",,,~~-,,,---,._~'---"'';'''' ..
'-,
~.
CLIENT I DESCRIPTlON:Su..'lI.l\'1\Jo.\e. \{Cy+~}.D1~~cjt;
'ee~\d\vI1'i Sov..V'\d \ II\~~ RL- 3
A\>pO-f'el^v-t ~eSib-ri\J ;""1 ~\o-\~
-F+i--! I
--\-+-' .
I i
"-;---1
I I
w.o.1bS("
PAGE .3
OF -+
BY: LE.'J DATE: 5/1'1/5'"
! . \ ii", II I I I
_.l-L-+--+.--1-..',' .+.L"l-- ,l-+-j-
I~ .11 I II \'1 i ,I I I Ii'
M f.~re.~i15. .~.\,.t{p,~-::\fit1Jf- -' I
i-h-T','n'" 'if'l~t+i'::+- ,...
. -+-+J_.\...-'-'-'i---L..~ I . ,_'
; ,I :) 1 il ..... 1 . 'I' .....\
1! ' \ I
1\-1 \ ~~U.'11i 1 \ \ \\ ! \ \ i ".\+\\ ;
i ;i :~; IT1'D'fi~ .. It. T1
~-.tr'-l .. I'~ ,o.v\ti 1\ '\"r-r-'i-' !-'!'~T--r- ,i- I 1-j
..1....L.> ' i . '-L_~~&o.lh")\-.l-+-'-'...L. ..L..L--\-.,- -.1....1---'1"'--.' -' ..
: i \~t I 2C':.$~+"f'~+'O\c"") i ....;__',J_l. I i J..J...4 I i -1- - \ \ I ,-.
! r- ....'. ,.1- I I t.' ~__.f:>:Ip.'j~,:?+'\.~eV'I~j'.LLJ-J.lj .1....1.- E\ J...
I " I "'. ' I I ,I' Ii I I ' I " ,
.+-+--1-\- _"_~" ,""" '~~:i; : .-..' -;- '1-r1,' '~\I .~- ~~-1' ~-+--L, ~II-~~-T- ';--t~- -
! i II . )( \ ~ i ' I I I I 1 L 1 i \
~. ~ril}i~. \: l GP~fm =\$1 \ .\ -H,: ~fr jl-~
, . I I i ,I i Ii! I \ " .1' " i I,L'. \: j. \
;i'\l .TT tTTt-t1Tti..1 MTrliT
:i 1\ I"rrr' .' ;-iT-1' . i1-r1-- 1--'-1--1'
~i.-;t. I' 1"i1-! iJ ;---'-I-""r-~'.'rrl ;_.t.~.., I
--+._.,-+ .j I ! 'r- r": --:--+..," -t....J + -t' ,-, . 'I""", ,~..
~l:. ! ",' ;J
....;::,___~:_. ..=-;. ' . I I'", ....-.,.....;...-1. 1 ,. ....+_+..,....L.-,,~_~...L~~,.
..;........iTl~ 1 II. l f4-+-" l' I' i . . T\'"-: ; j t .~ \<' 1 .. i \ \p O!-l\ . .
. ..... 1. . . ' . .' 'I "I ! .
~ _--+_+--1- -1,_ ..,-ti .!-\ .!..-.. + ...J,..-l--t- ..1.-..;.........- -. _.1 , ._'.~..,_...-i-.._L
....._},""'~...,.... _':' ,,'_.-+\ .', .' . , .' I ! ' . . . I . . I I , ""," ~' ' I
.... _ I I I: 1+' i \jj'\' , . I I :. I' . : ' I, l I' I !
.._...,.......,....~---T'-+- . ,'--+ , _._.,_....-......,-.-r--"...l-....' '.-i'--T"-r':'-+-'+"''.....'"
'.V 'I Iii i'l ! ! I I )'.\,' i !.\ II it' . \ ' I " .,J ,L I
=,~Th =: FH n:_mf~FF~fIJ\~~..-r++i-iIT~l=Ft:\.T.
.-.~-2:b ,-+ ,,..-\.-1--. . -, .J.:';S-- ! -+--.' tJ ......,.....................l.J.-l-
,~! "..:,!' I ~. '" ,. I' I: I I : I !'; I I
.:;>~~ ~.j=t1j:ti~ wt:\c+t1='~j:.1.=t:\!-f.!!tt.t+.t
..J.+- . ...0.-+..1-+.-+,--1- I..._+-..~.. ..' .. '/?<.~, ...1-_1..-1- _..\.-.J..,J..J.' .1.;.-+cc..L
. " !!' I I I '. . I', : I 1 ' I I : . ! I I
.~~,~T !:,J"-~Tt::=.~"TT:1:LI k.__;..l . .1t:.-r-:'=J:~1..:.t-..t=tJt..tL.C_O=~..
I i~ ,. '. : '.1j--rC', " , ' I " 1 i .\', IL" I ': -~r'!
'-r~-r- .+..t'l'--r"y;'-r. y ,-i,y,..t-t'. \ .t't-i'-r..t..\ 'l--:..r'! 'it'T-----:-
r-~~- I ii" -...ri-l~Vl-.1..l'.,T-.i-t"- \1'+" t-1"il..-..tt ii'''!-!' -'l'j'" .
__i. ......, .. C" . ',__1_,--"-'r'--r--j--i'--1-,t- . ;...1--.....1- 'T r- -t'.-t-...+.-...l.-....l-I -1-'-1--+"1-' ....j. \' .
, '. : ' : , ' , ' . I , I. I"!' I I I ,'I I
-......t'n.(-iT'l--t--t" \.._~__L .r'\-1'- 'J-rt--+'r-t":-T'1-\'1-t-' T-
_......,.--~-o ...~_J ,. ........\---i"",--k . ..._...-I_...I,...-!c...+"'"
, ! I. . :: ',I" I ! , : ' I ! ! i i 1 i : . I
-it.! t':':'=-lj~,.Ltt)::rt::t:tiJ.:::tlntttttl-1tlt
I 1 I J t \! ~; :' I' i \ J i '( , \ J \ ; \ I
"--r~"'- ..._ +_..._ ('r -j ..1-" ',' ,"-r -' -:...+ +--- -;- -- 'rt -r'-r-- . .-\--.t 'f'+-
.. +~.....J____ ;-'......l1---'.-'--'--\ '....-;-. "I.--t), i---,- -t.-t...:._~ .;_.~ +.+..~..+-t.
.__.---1--,........: .___..._.._ ._!.................-'._,_......:..."......+-,-.~_:.....l..___,....,_......--I--'-_..l_' I
'-'-1'.; '+'+'1- .+.-:.\d-r-+-+-1:-\ ..l.. +_\+++-\.-\-+,1, .i1.+.~--!.r "--+--1'--\-+--'
I '-H' ' I ill' .. ',r' '1.' -l.: . , I I I ' !' ,,' r
.f11tHJHFi;H=TItBjfErttTIjJ~~~;~
; ! I. ,:!' I \
I..
I ,.
=tl...L+2..'S~r
'.' t. I.
CLIENT / DESCRIPTION: $U.""'it'<l....k. Novi.... JLO~~o\.S
Re.s\s+lvN1SC()"V\cl\~: fCL-lt' W.O. '~5(' PAGE q. OF4
App'tf~v\'+ t:e.'~i~:;hv~i/ t'Lot.s BY: L'E.V DATE: 51\~186
i I i -t1 'I i! r T 1'1 I I ': ! i .
-r ;- _lffj-t~~~~+Mg.hlJ~~~13)f\w\-~~-' ~-
l i I ! i i i I hi I !1 I I I I '. I .
I ~I ! ti.~ orl--;- 510-1 I I 'fjl;o;-t-t 10""1 1:00 I, '-
r r .~i '. I Ii! " 'j I
T, I f V1\~dft_ I
I I ~,. Lbe. iPo.fir!l-fOYts:) i
I I' -. -r Ii.~ 1~-Pt,;ffc.~u:\V-.j;- -T-, I
- .1'~-Y'I..~.ch-(~)l.- -+--+- - ~- .....L.-
, . _ t ;-t:, I ~I I ! I I' : I I I I
_~ T;.7; ..L _i~-T"\'-+il-++--l---H--Ln I I!
, , , I 1\T' I " I ,I, 'I I '
:-r;~--H! i \flf~\ ~~erll(\~'jt T -c-t- I - t
'.+- -, .~.\ ,--- I I I ,++-...r.,
I 'I" ;.. \1' I I ' I I I
. I I .:'-t-. ---t ' \
i '. ._i'.-I- -L... \..~_ I I 1 Ii'
I:s- ,"" i +' i <'{ "\ ., il ...J I I ' j
~i ! '-I--'~~-i-\l. I -++4 ---'--.: '-l I '~I'!: r'
J~__~.__ - I r~~ I i'\....L.=+H+- ... ' I r--j-
_~_L.L _ .-1-,--~-~. r "t-~i. I I ! 1 I I ...J '__
i-"'::lil-l..t5' .,: I , t!. \ t! 1 I 'K I. i -r::i:::::t Ii I .'_~.J=~ .e~ .
1-4""",, . J'.-l-4-. . r ::;:.1. Al-. -+.' -f---+-... ! 1\ T ..j..--l-~Tr-j.-:I 1-+--l....:. . 'tI,.'!..~..1t.~+.m
. . l' I I' i I I , I \ i : i i I fir - . _, '''}"'';-' ''-,
I !.f~:-i+ . T .t i\'i;-tt-:\.t i !! +--j-f- f- -1 T ;- f1;
I---+'._-,---J i -'-+\-'-.'-J]~'~~ -+. -+--1-- ........L. -L.;...-
I-~..--L, L ' : li. -f 1 +. ---' :~~. LH-' !, I -. r-LL...l-.-
!M.~'..L. !! )....Lb.(.. I .w...~. '_ ! I -- I-L! .
'p- '.! ! I i ;:1''\ , i.,' 'I' i I I l- f'l =HI i' I r
I ' , i , ' .\ ". I !., .;- '--t ' . j , ,
r-1"""4---r-T1 .... It I , C-r , ,...- ',\;"'J'~ " i' I I L..... II ; --
, ,;; : i \ .--1--1_--1 ~ i j II .,:.'. . . ' t
-Tr.....rl"t '! !;~-; !\-rpl~t'~'-"""-~1'-'!._4- -+1+ i '--I--'--r-+_I_.
--,..-., -r- .-t-~l'....J- ....L-+-.-t-...L..l- . I- .
" ,I I I r /: j I! :! . I d.l I I' l.
: I".~~, " '. ~ t 'J--l . .' I! . , I
"'j'---r---r---I'- i '7 "-. - +. --,-, ...... I ,.-'--..,......-1... "'+-'-' , ,. '." , -
.. ( 1 ~L ,1/ I _LJ.....~-l 1 I 1...j.4l.L.+ I I II 11 . I
.11 ..j ':+.. ryl.!-.:Y I . '-".: - +,:").'/-"'.I--l.,++.J,.._l+t.+~I-! !._r#,.1 t- ,,--+..t- t-!....
.. I I' .+. ,-~_-J.- --+-l~TI" I.-t... f-' ... --+-+ 1'- !--+j-+.I -.
r i ,I . ,; 'I;;! I j" H I I
~-r.tt-- ir-Vr-j i :+:-+-r-' - ,-t'-t-t-.f---, I ! .: 1-
-+-I--+-:+- . . . J....;.. ._.~--+..- -. ..... -+-+ 1'-- i-. 1--. ~- , I
I--'l..~ I I i -!Jr: ' I I L . Ii i I i Iii
ii' i I It i , I ii' i ' !1j I I I!; : I r
_.!.--J-.L.....J_ .-. -'--J- .-+-+-+__1-1-.J.......j.._+- .....,----1-_+-- ---r4 -. -,--r-+-'
, : I . ; ;':' I I I !! I I I I I I
-........+---'---"- "-''1'--'-- +--4-'+" _..~ ..J..-+--, -t .....
r i; : 1; I L' ;: ; I I j 1 , i J j-.j !
; ..-; --r-:. ~~_=t - 1 .;. :-: t r-; r-irrt--r ,- -t: '-ri- . , ,
-+-+.-... -, i..J. .1-; .1Tl --,-..:...L- !-i_LLi.-L ...LJ_-LL. -L-L U
j I ;; I ; j I r I 1 ~ I! I 1 I ~ 1 I J. T 1
,-T,'-'~- ,T;' :--r 11:-,- :-rt~'-'I;,~-r- 11 t+- ]ii t!::1.:.LtRt<t:--
.-t-~-~""""'l ~ ~. ,. .+.- -+. -t +_..L_., -~--_.. '-"I-~R' -r-'- ",-t...Ji .c. ",c..,. . ...JL..._
-t--L-[....;....~.-LL+-_~.I.. !._.L..,_.i 1-'~-'1-.l---~- 1_;"".-1:-_. A~
I ; 1 ( of: j, r : . f.,' ; i; !' I ,j
.
H
"'-1--
,
I
, ;
i
I
:
1 '
....
tS<oO