The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcoa.lu.pu.Maroon Creek Lot 1 2.A08802 r--.. CASE NUMBER PARCEL In # CASE NAME PROJECT ADDRESS PLANNER CASE TYPE OWNER/APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE DATE OF FINAL ACTION CITY COUNCIL ACTION PZ ACTION ADMIN ACTION BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED BY (~ A088-02 2735-142-09002 Lots 1 & 2 MCC PUD Amendment Lots 1 and 2 , Maroon Creek Club PUD Scott Woodford PUD Amendment David and Jennifer Stockman Robert Trown & Associates 02/24/03 ORD NO _-2003 APPROVED 04/1 0103 D DRISCOLL :11111111111 III 1IIIIIQj~;! il:40A SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 16,00 0 0,00 ORDINANCE NO.6 SERIES OF 2003 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF.ASPEN CITY COUNCIl,- APPROVING A PLANNE]) UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)AMENDMENT TOAMEND THE PLATTED DEVELOPMENT ENVELOPES ON LOTS 1 AN]) 2 OF THE MAROON CREEK CLUB SUBDIVISION I PUD, CITY OF ASPEN. ParcelID: 2735-142-09-002 2735-142-09-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Applicant, Jennifer and David Stockman, represented by Kevin, Morley of Robert Trown & Associates, Inc., requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council grant a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a. duly noticed public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council approval, by a vote offour to two (4-2) for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council reviewed and considered the development proposal at a regular City Council meeting on February 24, 2003 and, by a vote of three to two (3 - 2), approved this Ordinance (on Second Reading) for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance. furthers and . is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare, ' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ON THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY2003, THAT: ..ii .... ..........iii.......i i........<ii<...... ......... t1 \\m!lwilii~~lfnill~M\~~~~ :,,_ SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO . R 16.00 0 0,00 Section 1 . .... .'. ... .... . Pursuant to the procedures and standards set. forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club is approved with the following conditions stated herein: 1. Prior to recordation of an amended subdivision plat, an. access easement shall be granted to the ownerof Lot 1 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision across Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision, In addition, a note shall be placed on the plat requiring that the structure built on Lot 2 be restricted in size to 6,000 square feet per the applicant's offer to reduce its allowable floor area ratio, 2, Prior to final approval of the driveway alignment, a tree permitfrornthe parks Department will be required. Mitigation for the nine (9) trees to be removed on site will be at the rate in effect at the time of building permit, as identified per the Municipal Code, Mitigation can be on..site with landscaping of the native restoration area, 3, The entire area west of the proposed Y -t\ll1). around which currently serves as the driveway, will need to be re-vegetated in nativeplantings only. The area in front of the house .and to the South of the y-tum can be landscaped for screening or per the discretion ofthe owners of the residence. 4, 'The common driveway servicing Lots 1 and 2 shall be kept free and clear of snow and vehicles at all times ofthe year per the requirements of the Fire Department. Section 2: . All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plari development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity, Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances, Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof, Section 5: >'>.....:.,'.,',.',....:.:'::':::'...:,'.',.....',."',.:i'<'...,:--...,.,.,;.,;,.../..,....:.:..':"..,...... .. ,........., ,'. ....'......" h-'I~ '1111II1I1111l~1I1 II ~;7~~~;~ ~1:40A SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 16.00 0 0,00 A public hearing will be held the 24th day of February 2003 at 5:00 p.rn, in the CityCouncil Chambers, 130 South Galena, INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLlSED as provided by law, by the City Council ofthe City of Aspen on this 2ih day ofJanuary, 2003. """'." FINALLY, adopted, passed, and approved this 24th day ofFebruary,2003, .'~Jf.(i . City Clerk , ('tJ .....,..;. " , IAII,,,,, ,'c, ' (" II "V.I' \\\/;~ \\"''" , '_' - v\\~j4:.-. .... . , '~r"'V*'AS TO FORM: '.,:,-,~:~\~.;;'; ~j"~r'~ ~/12/4J03 ~6lillWorc s or, City Attorney I..; ~. n - V\\\c. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Directo0-W!~ Scott Woodford, City Planner~ THRU: FROM: RE: LOTS 1 AND 2 MAROON CREEK CLUB I PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT (2ND READING) DATE: February 24,2003 PROJECT REQUEST SUMMARY: The applicants, Jennifer and David Stockman, represented by Kevin Morley of Robert Trown & Associates, Inc" requests the City Council grant a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club, STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At the January 7, 2002 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the P&Z voted 4-2 to approve the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club, REVIEW PROCESS: According to Section 26.445.110 of the Land Use Code, an amendment to a PUD found to be inconsistent with the approved final development plan by the Community Development Director shall be subject to final development plan review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Staff finds this amendment to be inconsistent with the approved final development plan, so review will be by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The purpose of the request to amend the development envelopes of the two lots is so that the applicants (who own both Lots 1 and 2) can construct one common driveway accessing both lots instead of having separate driveways to each lot. It is their desire to have a single, "custom and private" driveway servicing the two lots, both of which are owned by the applicants, Although they do not propose to sell the lots separately, an access easement will be dedicated across Lot 2 to Lot 1 in case there are separate owners in the future. -)- t'1 ."'") Lot 1 has already been developed with a single-family residence and has its own driveway access directly from Tiehack Road, while Lot 2 is undeveloped, If approved, the applicants plan to abandon the existing driveway on Lot 1 and re-vegetate it. To be able to facilitate the common driveway, it will be necessary to encroach outside of the platted development envelopes of both lots. Development envelopes are areas on a lot that cannot be built upon, but can be disturbed with driveways and landscaping. Areas outside of the development envelope must remain in their natural state, In exchange for encroaching outside of the development envelopes, the applicant is proposing to abandon other developable areas on each lot in amounts exceeding the area requested to be disturbed for the driveway, The exchange is summarized in the chart below: New Develo ment Envelope Re uested: Abandoned Development Envelope: 2,500 square feet 2,572 square feet New Development Envelope Requested: Abandoned Development Envelope: 1,432 square feet 1,582 square feet To help mitigate the additional impact to the site from the common driveway, the applicant is offering to reduce the amount of floor area ratio (FAR) on the undeveloped lot from what is allowed (10,000 square feet) down to 6,000 square feet. This requirement would run with the land regardless of present or future ownership. According to the Parks Department, there will be at least nine trees removed to mal,e way for the driveway, Mitigation for the trees to be removed on site will be $13,250,88. A tree permit will be required before final approval of the driveway alignment. Mitigation can be done on-site with landscaping of the native restoration area, The entire area west of the proposed Y -turn, which serves as the current driveway, will need to be re-vegetated with native plantings. The area in front of the existing house and to the south of the Y- turn can be landscaped for screening at the resident's discretion. In addition to the new driveway, two other changes requested are to shift the entry point of the driveway from Tiehack Road to Lot 2, so that it is entirely contained within the lot (the platted development envelope shows access in a slightly different location and across the adjacent lot to the north) and to move the garage entry on the house on Lot 1 from the driveway courtyard in front of the house to the east side of the structure (which requires additional encroachment in the existing development envelope). They then plan to reclaim part of the gravel driveway and re-vegetate it with native landscaping. BACKGROUND: The Maroon Creek Club Subdivision PUD was originally approved by the Board of County Commissioners and aunexed into the City in 1996, - 2- 1"""\ ("') i STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff does not support the request to amend the development envelopes because it is our opinion that it doesn't comply with the PUD Development Standards and several provisions of the Subdivision section of the Land Use Code, For staff comments on how the proposal does not comply with the PUD Development Standards, see Exhibit A. First, we feel that the proposed driveway is unnecessary because it duplicates the adjacent City street, Tiehack Road, by closely paralleling it and accomplishing the same purpose of access to all lots along the street. Section 26.480,050,B,b (Suitability of land for subdivision) precludes this duplication of public facilities. The specific code provision states the following: Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of publicfacUities and unnecessary public costs. Second, staff feels that the proposed common driveway will create a potentially dangerous situation for fire truck or other emergency service access, During the course of this review, the applicant has worked with the Fire Chief to design a driveway plan that meets their minimum requirements for width and fire truck turnaround capability, In addition, a vehicle turnout midway along the driveway has been added so that a car could pull to the side in the event an emergency service vehicle needed to get by. While it may be technically possible to meet Fire Department access standards in plan, staff believes that in reality, this proposal creates an unnecessarily dangerous situation, To ensure that the driveway is accessible year around, constant attention will have to be paid to snow removal and to making sure that the tumaround area is always free of parked vehicles. Section 26.480.050,B.a. (Suitability of land for subdivision) does not allow the creation of a situation that may be dangerous for the residents of a subdivision: Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitablefor development because (jfflooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health. safetv. or welfare of the residents in the /Jro/Josed subdivision. Staff also feels that the proposed driveway will unnecessarily create more impermeable surface and disrupt natural vegetation. Although the exact, final layout of the driveway has not been determined, the Parks Department believes that there will be 9 trees lost to make way for the driveway, Granted, a portion of those trees would be lost if the applicant decided to construct two individual, non-connected driveways, but the plan for a common driveway definitely increases the impact to natural vegetation. Finally, even though the two lots are jointly owned now, which would allow the common access to possibly function more smoothly, we are concerned about the ramifications of - 3- t"""\ n when one lot is sold separately. There is no mechanism currently proposed, such as consolidating the lots, that would guarantee that this scenario would not transpire in the future. If they ever were to be sold separately, a situation could arise where the new owner of one of the lots petitions the city to have the common driveway undone and the separate driveway access arrangement reinstated, Doing so, would create additional site impacts and require new re-vegetation. In summary, if the proposed common driveway were the only method to achieve access to these lots (for example, due to topographic concerns), staff would likely be more lenient in its evaluation and recommendation; however, there already exists an adequate driveway to Lot 1 and it appears that a reasonable driveway can be constructed to undeveloped Lot 2, We feel that removing a driveway, where there already has been impact to the site, and replacing it with a longer and harder to access driveway with new impacts to the natural vegetation, will not be a good planning solution and is not necessary. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION COMMENTS: The P&Z voted 4-2 to approve the application. Those who voted against approving would have been willing to approve it if the applicant were willing to reduce the FAR on the undeveloped lot from the offered amount, 6,000 square feet, to 4,000 square feet. The applicant felt that they were already offering less than the 10,000 square feet allowed, so were not in favor of that restriction, Initially, several members of P &Z also wanted to add a condition requiring a deed restriction preventing the sale of each property individually, but backed off that condition prior to approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club, RECOMMENDED MOTION (NOTE: ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No, _, Series of 2002, for a Plauned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club." CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A: FINDINGS-PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FINDINGS EXHIBIT B: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC) MINUTES - 4.. t"", f\ \;J EXHIBIT C: ApPLICATION EXHIBIT D: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION EXHIBIT E: 1/7/03 P&Z HEARING MINUTES EXHIBIT F: LETTER FROM SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE MAROON CREEK CLUB MASTER ASSOCIATION EXHIBIT G: SITE PLAN -5- r"\ ~ ORDINANCE NO. b, SERIES OF 2003 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE PLATTED DEVELOPMENT ENVELOPES ON LOTS 1 AND 2 OF THE MAROON CREEK CLUB SUBDIVISION I PUD, CITY OF ASPEN. Parcel ID: 2735-142-09-002 2735-142-09-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Applicant, Jennifer and David Stockman, represented by Kevin Morley of Robert Trown & Associates, Inc., requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council grant a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots I and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council approval, by a vote of four to two (4-2) for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council reviewed and considered the development proposal at a regular City Council meeting on February 24, 2003 and, by a vote of _ to _ L- --"l, approved this Ordinance (on Second Reading) for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ON THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2003, THAT: - 6- ~ n Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club is approved with the following conditions stated herein: 1, Prior to recordation of an amended subdivision plat, an access easement shall be granted to the owner of Lot 1 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision across Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision. In addition, a note shall be placed on the plat requiring that the structure built on Lot 2 be restricted in size to 6,000 square feet per the applicant's offer to reduce its allowable floor area ratio. 2. Prior to final approval of the driveway alignment, a tree permit from the Parks Department will be required. Mitigation for the nine (9) trees to be removed on site will be at the rate in effect at the time of building permit, as identified per the Municipal Code, Mitigation can be on-site with landscaping of the native restoration area, 3, The entire area west of the proposed Y-turn around which currently serves as the driveway, will need to be re-vegetated in native plantings only, The area in front of the house and to the South of the y-turn can be landscaped for screening or per the discretion of the owners of the residence. 4, The common driveway servicing Lots 1 and 2 shall be kept free and clear of snow and vehicles at all times of the year per the requirements of the Fire Department, Section 2 All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. - 7- I""; f) EXHIBIT A FINDINGS: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The proposed amendment to the approved PUD is addressed against the applicable criteria in the PUD standards below. A, General Requirements: 1) The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan, Staff Finding: I Does it Comnlv? INo Comments: In the Parks, Open Space, and the Environment section of the AACP, the intent is "to preserve, enhance, and restore the natural beauty of the environment of the Aspen area". Staff does not believe that the proposal would significantly degrade the natural beauty of the site, however, there would be more environmental impact to the site (i,e. more loss of trees) with the common driveway than there would be with two, shorter individual drivewavs to each lot. 2) The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area, Staff Findin Comments: Does it Com 1 ? No Most of the developed lots in the surrounding area are each accessed directly by a driveway from the public street: The common driveway proposed would be a departure from that attem, 3) The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area, Staff Findin Comments: 4) Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the Applicant. Staff Findin Comments: B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: Staff Findin Comments: licable - 8- C. Site Design: StaffFindin Comments: D. Landscape Plan: Staff Findin Comments: E. Architectural Character: Staff Findin Comments: F, Lighting: Staff Findin Comments: f""". n Does it Com I? No Staff feels that the application does not comply with the provision that states, "buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access," We feel that the proposed driveway creates an unnecessaril dan erous access to the lots. Does it Com 1 ? No With the common driveway proposal, staff does not feel that the plan preserves the existing vegetation as well as it could b usin s arate, shorter drivewa s to each lot. Does it Com G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area: Staff Findin Comments: licable H. Utilities and Public Facilities: Staff Findin Comments: 1. Access and Circulation: Staff Finding: Does it Complv? 1 Yes Comments: While staff finds the proposal to create problems with access and circulation, it does comply with the six specific criteria of the PUD, J. Phasing of Development Plan: StaffFindin Comments: - 9- ,-., ,') "EXHIBIT B DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC) MINUTES MEMORANDUM . To: Development Review Committee From: John Niewoehner, Community Development Engineer, DRC Caseload Coordinator Date: October 30, 2002 Re: Maroon Creek Club - Lot 1 and 2 Attendees: Scott Woodford, Community Development Department Ed VanWalraven, Fire Department Brian Flynn, Parks Department John Niewoehner, Community Development Department Kevin Morley, Applicant's Representative At the October 30, 2002 meeting, the Development Review Committee reviewed the following project: , Maroon Creek Club Lots 1&2: A minor PUD amendment to modify'the existing development on lots 1 and 2 to allow for a common driveway, ' DRC COMMENTS 1, Enaineerina Decartment: No comments at this time, 2, Community Develocment Enaineer: . Since vehicles will access Lot 1 by driving across Lot 2, an access easement is needed across Lot 2. 3, Zonina: No comments at this time, 4, Housina Decartment: No comments at this time, 5. Fire Protection District: . Since the driveway is more than 150 feet long, the driveway must be 16 feet wide, . All dwellings must have sprinklers. . The driveway must be designed to accommodate the necessary movements of a fire truck (including turning around). In addition, at the mid point of the driveway there needs to be a wide pull out spot in the driveway to allow two vehicles to pass. In order to limited the area of pavement, this area should be incorporated into the driveway area serving exclusively Lot 2, . The turn off of Tiehack Road needs to be 'softened' to provide access for a large fire truck, . Some of the driveway requirements for fire access may not be necessary if the existing driveway serving Lot 1 remains, If the Lot 1 driveway is replaced with grass-crete pavers, the pavers would have to be designed to DOT standards to support a fire truck, The grass-crete driveway would also have to be maintained year round (Le, plowed), 6, Parks Decartment: No comments at this time. ( , 7. Buildina Decartment: No comments at this time, A A j Page1 of 2 October 30, 2002 , MCC- Lot 1 and 2 8. City Water DeDartment: No comments at this time. 9, ASDen Consolidated Sanitation District: No comments at this time. 10, Environmental Health: 11, City Community DeyeloDment - Plannina: No comments at this time, 12, City Electric DeDartment: No comments at this time. 13, Holy Cross Electric: No comments at this time, 14, City Attorney: No comments at this time, 15, Streets DeDartment: No comments at this time. 16. Historic Preservation Officer: No comments at this time, 17, Pitkin County Plannina: No comments at this time, 18, ' County and City Disaster Coordinator: No comments at this time, 19, TransDortation: No comments at this time, 20. Parkina: No comments at this time, IDRC/MCC-lot1 &2 r 1""'1 r\ ROBER11 TRO\VN (0 l\S~OClATf~, INC. October 18, 2002 EXHIBIT C APPLICATION & SITE PLAN Mr. James Lindt Planner Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Minor PUD Amendment Lots 1 & 2, Maroon Creek Club PUD Mr, Lindt: Enclosed please fmd out application and supporting documentation for our request for a minor PUD amendment. This proposal is a simple request to modify the existing development envelopes on lots 1 and 2, These contiguous properties are ovmed by the same family, and their wish is to enter both properties from a single drive. This would give the main property (Lot 1) a more custom and private chive through their contiguous properties, while distancing themselves from the subdivision which is now under construction beyond the Maroon Creek Development. The intent of our design is to keep the drive very "low key", letting it sit on and run across the existing topography with as little distnrbance as possible. Where lhis is not an option, it would be our intent to vegetate the cuts or fills so that they look as natnral as possible, , Weare currently not allowed to run driveway between the two propelties because we do not have development envelope that runs between the two properties, Review of the submitted site plan will show how we are proposing to modify the existing development envelopes. In trade, we are proposing returning equal portions of the existing development back to native, un-developable land. Our proposal, as shovm on the submitted site plan, would indicate the following: Lot 1 Additional Development Envelope Requested: Abandoned Development Envelope: 2,500 square feet 2,572 square feet The abandorunent of the current drive will give the neighborhood much more privacy, screening the existing structure on Lot 1 from the cul-de-sac and the development beyond Maroon Creek. The large area of gravel running from the structure on Lot 1 to the cul-de-sac will be reclaimed and turned into landscape. The new driveway alignment will, although longer, greatly reduce the pitch of the drive servicing Lot 1. Lot 2 Additional Development Envelope Requested: Abandoned Development Envelope: 1,432 square feet 1,582 square feet The current Development Envelope meant for accessing Lot 2 is not conducive for an access, The existing envelope would force the drive pe'1'endicular to the existing grades which would result in a very large amount of require fill dirt. This alignment would also run the drive through heavy stands of existing native shrubs and plantings. The proposed aligrunent of the drive offTiehack Road would lend itselfto a much more gentle pitch on the drive, ,The aligmnent also avoids all of the existing native vegetation. Once on the property of Lot 2, the intent is to let the drive move in and out of the existing mature vegetation so that no trees would have to be removed. 25 Lower Woodbridge Rd.' Suite 104-B . P,O. Box 6820 . Snowmass Village, CO 81615 . (970) 9'23-2644. FAX (970) 923-2599 r"I f) Minor PUD Amendment, Lots 1 and 2, Maroon Creek Club PUD Page 2 As the drive crosses from Lot 2 to Lot 1, we anticipate the loss of (1) one aspen tree on 6ach lot. These would be easily mitigated through re-vegetation, We would like to offer a reduction in available FAR on lot 2, since it is not the intent of the current owner to sell the property individually. Lot 2 currently has 10,000 square feet of above grade FAR available for use, as calculated by the Maroon Creek PUD. We are willing to restrict this site to 6,000 square feet of above grade FAR as calculated by the Maroon Creek PUD. This reduction in FAR will help to mitigate the size of homes the drive serves. It will also help reduce the overall sense of bulk and mass of the structures in the neighborhood. We are also ready to provide a surveyed easement locating the drive across Lot 2 for the use by Lots 1 and 2, subject to the approval.of this minor amendment. The agreement made with staff is to stake the exact location of the drive with members of staff, and to then survey this drive alignment and all of the existing vegetation to provide an accurate depiction of the drive easement. The enclosed photographs depict the existing site conditions. The locations and direction that each photograph was taken is indicated on the submitted site plan. Review will visually show how the proposed drive location will benefit each lot, and the feasibility in which this drive can be constructed with a minimum of disturbance to each lot. We feel that the request for this minor amendment is one where all parties concerned will benefit. The Maroon Creek Club community will be enhanced by fewer curb cut. off Tiehack Road, and will be provided with much more vegetation along the road, The proposed reduced building FAR will allow for more sensitive site planning and the preservation of existing vegetation even as it exists within the building envelope, The owners of Lots 1 and 2 will be provided with an access worthy of the estate and amount of property contiguously owned, If you should have any questions or concerns with the submitted information, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Kevin G. Morley, AIA Robert Trown and Associates, Inc. Encl. c / I , T-7B4 P.002/002 F-Isa T":QOBifTROWN & ~dCIi\TE~1 me. October 11, 2002 Mt, James Lindt Planner AspeniPitlcin County P1amring Depa:r1:lnent 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 ! I I :Mr. Lindt: This letter of authmizationwould allow Robert TrOW!! & Associates, Inc. to act as the a the David and r ennifer Stockman with matters pertaining to, but not limited to the proce ' all items through the County and any other committee necessaxy. The property is defined Lot 1 Maroon Creek Club PUD, 1470 Tieha.ck Road, Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club PUD, _ Tiehack Road, Aspen, CO 81611 / I ! I 1 f Please direct 1m]' CClmlsponde:nce to: Robert Trown &.As500.!ates, Ino. PO Bcx 1528 SnowmassViIlage, CO 81615 Tel: (970) 923-2544 Sincerely, , /,' f2dPp." ~- .~~~ David Stockri1an. Owner Lot 11470 Tiehack Road Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club Asplm CO 81611 f" i 2.5 Lower Woodbddsc Rd.. . Suire 104.B .P,O. Bo>; 6820 ,SnoWlllass Village, CO 816J5. (970) 923.2544. F (970) 923-2599 , II . ' J c::rmi.fer Sto an. Owner 1 Lot 11470 illhack Road Aspen, C 81611 Lot 2 Maroon Cl-eek Club ABpen, C 81611 , j , j I i ,..."., () ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION 11e: Location: APPLICANT: Name: Address: Phone #: Conditional Use Special Review Design Review Appeal GMQS Allotment , GMQS Exemption LJ ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream Margin. Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane o Lot Split 0 Temporary Use o Lot Line Adiustment 0 Text!MaD Amendment TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): EXISTING CONDITIONS: descri tion of existin buildin s, uses, revious a La\- \ ~S 'N.\~\-i'0j S\=R.., LoTL \~\/o\G;:\Vi\ \o\-W\\-V\ OI~/O\\ b- \0 ceo ,SF, . . REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: PROJEcr: o o o o o ~ o o o o Conceptual PUD Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) Conceptual SPA Final SPA(& SPA Amendment) Subdivision Subdivision Exeniption (includes , condominiumization) o o o o o o Conceptual Historic Devt, Final Historic Development Minor Historic Devt. Historic Demolition Historic Designation Small Lodge Conversion! Expansion o Other: PROPOSAL: (description of ro osed buildin s, uses. modifications, ele, Modify existing development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 to allow shared accessJrom Lot 2. Abandon existing Lot 1 access, Trade envelope so no increased development envelope. limit FAR on Lot 2 to 6,000 sq, ft above grade, measured per existing PUD requirements. Subgrade FAR not affected by this application. Have you attached the following? FEEs DUE: $1!Sr7. 00 18J: Pre-Application Conference Summary ~ Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement o Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form -p;r Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards A" "ms that are larger than 8.5" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an eleCtronic copy of all written, te. , ,Jicrosoft Word F onnat) must be submitted as part of the application. ;/ I i r f""'\ ,.' -'-.,,,," ,,~.. " r-.. f1 EXHIBIT D PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. ""--' SERIES OF 2003 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE PLATTED DEVELOPMENT ENVELOPES ON LOTS 1 AND 2 OF THE MAROON CREEK CLUB SUBDIVISION I PUD, CITY OF ASPEN. ParcelID: 2735-142-09-002 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Applicant, Jennifer and David Stockman, represented by Kevin Morley of Robert Trown & Associates, Inc" requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission grant a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council approval, by a vote offour to two (4-2) for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and ' WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ON THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2003, THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the " 10.. 1""'\ n platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club IS recommended for approval with the following conditions stated herein: 5. Prior to recordation of an amended subdivision plat, an access easement shall be granted to the owner of Lot 1 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision across Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision, In addition, a note shall be placed on the plat requiring that the structure built on Loti be restricted in size to 6,000 square feet per the applicant's offer to reduce its allowable floor area ratio, 6, Prior to final approval of the driveway alignment, a tree permit from the Parks Department will be required, Mitigation for the nine (9) trees to be removed on site will be $13,250.88, as identified per the Municipal Code, Mitigation can be on-site with landscaping of the native restoration area, 7, The entire area west of the proposed Y -turn around which currently serves as the driveway, will need to be re-vegetated in native plantings only, The area in front of the house and to the South of the y-turn can be landscaped for screening or per the discretion of the owners of the residence. Section 2 All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof, Approved by the Commission at its regular meeting on January 7, 2003. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND COMMISSION: ZONING John Worcester, City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair -11- {""\, ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk o - 12.. 11 ASPEN PLANNING &Z(jN1N~ () , -. EXHIBIT E 1/7/03 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES Tygre noted that the commission h determination. The commission di _. > > -~'-<~=wrr=-- unit at 1000 East Hopkins, off-site replacement as a last resort, capability of the neighborhoods with regards to deed-restricted units, the housing guidelines did not account for this type of replacement, the Ajax Homeowners tone towards deed-restricted units, concern for ADU rules, concern for the combining of the two units into one large unit, additional affordable housing was a plus, the Ajax Homeowners concerns, the Telluride decision and that the application doesn't meet the criteria, MOTION: Roger Haneman moved to extend the meeting to 7:30 p.m.; seconded by Bert Myrin. APPROVED 7-0. MOTION: Roget Haneman moved to approve P&Z Resolution #02, series 2003, recommending that City Council approve with conditions, a subdivision andPUD amendment, an ~mendmeIlt to the, GMQS exemption for affordable housing at 10M E.Hopkins, and a special' review to vary the ADU design standards to allow for a Category Affordable Housing Unit that is legally described as Unit 4, of the 1000 E. Hopkins pun; to be deed restricted as an ADU to allow for the free market unit legally described as Unit 2, of the Ajax Condominiums to be deed restricted as a Category 4 Sale Unit to replace Unit 4, ofthe 1000 E. Hopkins Pun as affordable housing mitigation with the revised condition #4. Seconded by Bert Myrin. Roll call vote: Johnson, no; Kruger, yes; Myrin, no; Cohen, no; Johns, no; Haneman, no; Tygre, no. DENIED 6-1. Myrin stated that the Telluride case will continue to impact decisions like this one even though this could have provided another employee housing unit. Eric Cohen excused himself at 7:30 p.m, MOTION: Roger Haneman moved to extend the meeting to 7:45 p.m.; seconded by Bert Myrin. APPROVED 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING: LOTS 1 AND 2 MAROON CREEK CLUB pun AMENDMENT Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing for Lots I and 2 Maroon Creek Club Amendment. David Hoefer said that the notice was provided, Scott Woodford introduced a letter from the Maroon Creek Master Association, Bill Lukes, with no evaluation for specific plans. Robert Morley, architect, stated 9 ,..."..,........,'.<... ';:>h,',"P i.. ;,.,,<.:~.; ';'<:;""i';'I:~.,<',,:":;:::iii:,.'~.;L'.:>' ..; f"l t"""'\ ASPEN PLANNING' & ZONING COMMISSION / JANUARY 7. 2003 that was correct no plans had been submitted to the homeowners association, David Hoefer asked if the homeowners association had to approve this application if approved by P&Z; this was just one step of two, Morley replied that was correct, it was part ofthe CC&Rs that the association approves this change. Woodford said that this was an amendment to the Planned Unit Development to amend the platted development envelopes to combine two driveways into one. The applicants, Jennifer and David Stockman, own lots I and 2 and wanted a single Custom and Private Driveway, which cuts into the platted development envelopes. Woodford utilized a colored site-plan drawing to show the areas of encroachment with no development. The request included shifting the entry point of the driveway from Lot I and 2; Lot 2 would be entirely contained on the property along the front portion of Lot 1. The applicant also offered to limit the building on the undeveloped lot to 6,000 square feet rather than 10,000. The driveway angle would also be shifted. Staff did not support the request because it did not comply with the PUD Development Standards and several provisions of the Land Use Code; staff believes it was an unnecessary duplication of a road adjacent to a city street (Tiehack Road). There would be additional and constant maintenance required to keep the proposed driveway accessible for fire trucks without cars parked in the driveway, There was also concern for the trees lost with this common driveway. MOTION: Roger Haneman moved to extend the meeting to 8:00 p.m.; seconded by Bert Myrin. APPROVED 6~0. Kevin Morley said that in Maroon Creek there were development envelopes that would be re-platted back to Maroon Creek, which could not be touched, Morley said that Tiehack Road was above the property and explained each driveway access to the lot in the subdivision, Morley said that there were native trees and shrubs that would have to be removed. Morley said they were offering to isolate 225 square feet more by definition, whgich would be committed to landscape area; they also offered a 4,000 square foot reduction not to build a big house next door, Morley said of the 9 trees that will be removed, all were not native; the original developer of Lot I planted some and the mitigation of9 trees would not be a problem. Morley said that the owners never intend to sell the properties separately and wanted to merge the lots without joining them; but would deed-restrict the lot for sale of both and not just one, Morley said that it was a win-win situation with more privacy and less exposure to the public, 10 f'., ,-. .'. ',. ...:.....:.;.:.,...::.....:;;.... ......: :-,:' .. .:',':..,," ... >.... .,' ,.....:.... '<. ,_:./ ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 7. 2M3 Robert Trown, architect, stated that it was rare for a client to want to save trees and not maximize square footage; these people want to maintain the second lot as open space without an immediate intention of building anything on it. David Hoefer stated that this was going onto City Council. The commissioners felt the access easement if approved by the fire department was agreeable. Jack Johnson expressed concern for the 6,000 square feet dwelling still being too large on the second lot. Robert Trown stated that the concept was not to merge the lots but to deed-restrict the lots so that they could not be sold separately, Ruth Kruger asked the elevation drop from the road to the lots; what was the grade, Trown replied that it was about 18 - 20 feet down from the roadway; the grade was between 8 and 10 %. Bert Myrin asked if the 9 trees could be moved. Morley replied that some could be moved. Trown said that the proposal stated that they were bettering the fire situation with better access, limiting the amount of development and willing to work within the constraints. Myrin said that trading 4,000 square feet of inhabited space for a portion of a driveway and 9 trees mitigated any environmental impacts more than heating an extra 4,000 square feet ofliving space. MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve P&Z Resolution #3, series 2003, for a PUD amendment to the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club with the requirement of an addition of 9 trees; seconded by Roger Haneman. Roll call vote: Johnson, no; Johns, no; Roger, yes; Kruger, no; Myrin, yes; Tygre, yes. DENIED 3-3. MOTION: Roger Haneman moved to approve P&Z Resolution #3, series 2003, for a PUD amendment to the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 ofthe Maroon Creek Club; seconded by Ruth Kruger. Roll call vote: Myrin, yes; Johns, yes; Kruger, yes; Johnson, no; Haneman, yes; Tygre, no. APPROVED 4-2. Tygre requested the agendas reflect less cases each week even if more meetings were necessary, The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m, Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 11 .,.....;,'.,..'..<.i.';:,.".,;:.,,,,'.c; '-""i'C"g,':.'.<-,-':','-,,'-"-' Sent By: William Lukes + Associates; 1""\ . (i EXHIBIT F: LETTER Fh.JM SITE AN]) ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE MAROON CREEK CLUB MASTER ASSOCIATION ~<<()'~l:l MAN~~cmCN ARCHITltCTURJ:: 7 January 2003 Scott Woodford. Planner Community Development Department City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 re: Maroon Creek Club Lots 1 and 2 Amendment to the PUD proposed by Mr, And Mrs, DavId Stockman for modification of envelopes to allow construction of a shared driveway -' Mr, Woodford: I am writing on behalf of the Site and Architecture Review Committee [SARC] of the Maroon Creek Club Master Association with regard to the application which is to be reviewed by the Piannlng & Zoning Commission later today. SARC is the entity which is responsible for all architectural and development reviews and approvals for single family lots at the Maroon Creek Club PUD, and Lots 1 and 2 are subject to the Protective Covenants of the PUD, and the Design Guidelines which have been adopted by SARC and the Master Association, On December 27. 2002, we received a proposed site plan from Robert Trown & Associates which is dated December 17, 2002 and subsequently requested and received the application letter dated October 18. 2002 and your staff report daled January 7, 2003, The applicant asked SARC to review the proposed plat amendment and provide you with a letter with our recommendations and thoughts that you could provide to the Planning & Zoning Commission members at their meeting today. No application for Association design approval for the proposed driveway, the architectural modifications to the existing house on Lot 1 ,or any structures proposed for Lot 2 have beensubmitted to SARC forrevlew and approval and so we cannot comment on the specific configuration. proposed to you, but the Association does not have an objection to a minoramendmentto the plat to allow such a shared access, based on the applicants' representations to the City and to SARC and the information that was provided to us. The areas of this proposal which would be subject to detailed review by SARC, and which may require specific conditions of approval include the fOllowing: 1. The applicant has proposed reducing the allowable 10,000 above-grade SF for this lot to a maximum of no more than 6.000 above-grade SF. This reduction would be a fundamental trade,off In Impacts for consideration of this proposal and we as~ that It be specifically and legally included as a condmon in any approval which the City grants. 2. Alignment of the driveway has been modified in this recent drawing to cross a portion of the Building Envelope on Lot 2. Since this reduction of the building envelope is of the applicants' own choosing and making. SARC will not be inclined to grant any variances to the Design Guidelines and the site specific requirements for landscaping and landscaping mitigation due to space constraints in the envelopes. the grade of the proposed driveway in relatlon to floor heights established in our Design Guidelines. and so forth, This site has addaionallandscaping requirements to malgate visibility of the Tiehack Bench lots from distant points across Maroon Creek which was required by the County in the PUD and which will continue to be a requirement for any development on Lot 2, as they were for Lot 1. !-lUST OJ.Hel' Kill. II:!.SIl Asp.:,. CIll.IlIt,l.l)() ~ I (} I ~ Y7tl.\l2.\I.t\\.i.lo) 1".1.lt 91.1).6986 i I Sent 8y: William Lukes + Associates; ~, ~ ( 970 920 6986; Jan-7-03 2:14PM; r) Page 2/2 7 January 2003 Page 2 3, We are concerned that the stand of oak trees and the existing aspen groves which are indicated on the plan as "to remain" and which are in the buildin9 envelope to varying degrees. will actually be removed for any construction on Lot 2. especially with the reduction In usable building envelope. 4, Our Design Guidelines require a shared curb cut for the Lots 2 and 3 driveways. This is to occur at the common property line approxlmately where the Lot 1 &2 shared drlveway is proposed to access Tiehack Drive, The proposed adjustments in the development envelopes would not preclude this being worked out later so we have no objection to their request, but the curb cut as shown and as worked out with the fire department does not address the common access issue with Lot 3 which we had requested that the applicant address before SUbmitting any plans for SARC's review, From the poinl of view of the Association, the combining of driveways for Lots 1 and 2 wouid probably be a visual enhancement and perhaps even a practical enhancement for the immediate neighborhood, assuming Ihatthe above issues are addressed to the Association's satisfaction and assuming that the net result will be a much smaller house on Lot 2 than is currently allowed. Nevertheless, any proposal will be subject to SARC's review of much more detailed plans and proposed landscaping, and will have to involve the owner of Lot 3 to address a common driveway access point: we will not waive that requirement and allow a separate drlveway as shown which encroaches into the lot 3 access area. We do not view the modified alignment and joining of the driveways as Intrinsically negative or duplicative of the Tiehack cul-de-sac because there are some specific positives to it, s(.Jch as eliminating and re-vegetating the existing driveway to Lot 1 and addressing grade and retaining wall conditions Which I am not sure were fully contemplated or known at the time of the PUD approval by the County, Further, the development ofthe Urschel parcels which have their access adjacent to Lot 1 has created almost a blind driveway situation where both the existing driveway and the Urschel access enter the cui de sac without sighllines to the other; moving the driveway would certainly improve this situation. Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance, Sincerely, MAROON CREEK CLUB MASTER ASSOCIATION Site and Architecture Review Commltte.. By: '1 . l- VV - William Luke. AlA Architectural Advisor, Maroon Creek Club Master Association ,~ .- " copies: Kevin Morley / RT A Gary Albert, President of the MCC Master Association Brian Martin, MCC sent by fax to all parties JanualY 7, 2003 (1 :59pm) '"...c,-".... ~.. ---:-\ IIU"" 00 ll,l' l r-" ~ ",:- . Iii ..!; ;Ir..'.' lil"il ~ ~I ~: " , ,.PROPERTY~-_'" / I I J I / ./ .. 1 I I ! I / I I / I ! i 1 ! . I; / I I !' . 1/ !.I \y / ') I / I I I, I \ ' .J.--. +---.J I / I ' ,l" I / \1 A ( \ / / \ / \ i I ( I \! / \ f I \ / /,/ /,X . /1 / /\ / / . \ / , / / \ / ./ .//\ . / //)( (/ /........ ' . / " / y ... I /~ ...... I /' "i ~ l"" . I '-.. ........ ( '-.. ~, '- }, - '- ~, '" ." ~, '~-- / / 9 /// i i f , t I / j , i , ;.. i ./ I ) // . /' /---... I ! f .I I ,I j / I ]' i 'Ill (It i ! ! J j. / ,I ./ ! ./ -,/ ! J i ~ ~ ~ o ~ 000 r.n~ ~',O', o " ("') ~O ~.. ~~ > p-<Z /\ ~ ~ ./ \ O~ ~/ . '-.. ~~oo/ .7- tI1)oool /' . ~ >: 0 /, /~,~, / ! I ~Z / / C') ("') / t;;t tl'j / ~", ./ ~,I pI iL< ,/ H'I I / / I I / /. " I I i I ! " ''"--,> i8 I? !9 { / : .' I DB" ,'. ;1 ': t, BID' ,j '. .1 .1l!.II ",',:~..' , , , ~ II , ; J ; ,_. PROPERTY LINE i , ! ~ " " " -_._:.:..-,...!.. t:X4lttM'"tr ~cn:: "PeAl-\. I"""; f1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA February 24, 2003 4:00 Executive Session - Property Acquisition I) Call to Order II) Roll Call III) Scheduled Public Appearances IV) Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the agenda, Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V) Special Orders of the Day a) Mayor and Councilmembers' Comments b) City Manager's Comments c) Board Reports VI) Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Resolution #12, 2003 - Aspen Golf Club Locker Rooms b) Resolution #13, 2003 - REMP Spending c) Resolution #18,2003 - Contract Burlingame Ranch Infrastructure d) Resolution #14, 2003 - Contract Dustless Street Sweeper e) Resolutions #15 & 16, 2003 - Contracts - Mill Street Well Rehabilitation f) Minutes - February 3, 10,2003 VII) First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #15, 2003 - Request to de-list Holland House From Historic Inventory P.H. 3/24 b) Ordinance #16,2003 - Code Amendment - Trash Compactor Zone P.H. 3/10 VIII) Public Hearings a) Ordinance #1, 2003 - Adoption of Uniform Fire Code b) Ordinance #5,2003 - Code Amendment - Infill Continue to 3/24 c) Ordinance #6, 2003 - Maroon Creek Club Lots 1 & 2 PUD Amendment d) Ordinance #7,2003 - 1000 East Hopkins PUD Amendment e) Ordinance #12,2003 - Wheeler Fees f) Resolution #17, 2003- Tippler T own homes Extension of Vested Rights g) The Residences at Little Nell Continue to 3/24 IX) Action Items a) Little Feet (Childcare) Funding b) Burlingame Parcel D Selection of a DevelopmentTeam X) Adjournment Next Regular Meeting March 10,2003 COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. ("'\, ~..'\ .-1 , " , \c. ;... MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Y Scott Woodford, City Plann~ LOTS 1 AND 2 MAROON CREEK CLUB I PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT (1ST READING) THRU: RE: DATE: January 27, 2003 PROJECT REQUEST SUMMARY: The applicants, Jennifer and David Stockman, represented by Kevin Morley of Robert Trown & Associates, Inc" requests the City Council grant a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club, STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At the January 7, 2002 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the P&Z voted 4-2 to aPDrove the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club, REVIEW PROCESS: According to Section 26.445,110 of the Land Use Code, an amendment to a PUD found to be inconsistent with the approved final development plan by the Community Development Director shall be subject to final development plan review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Staff finds this amendment to be inconsistent with the approved final development plan, so review will be by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The purpose of the request to amend the development envelopes of the two lots is so that the applicants can construct one common driveway accessing both lots instead of having separate driveways to each lot. It is their desire to have a single, "custom and private" , driveway servicing the two lots, both of which are owned by the applicants. Although they do not propose to sell the lots separately, an access easement will be dedicated across Lot 2 to Lot 1 in case there are separate owners in the future. Lot 1 has already been developed with a single-family residence and has its own driveway access directly from Tiehack Road, while Lot 2 is undeveloped, If approved, the applicants plan to abandon the existing driveway on Lot 1 and re-vegetate it. To be - 1- / r\ \,,) , , 1""""\ ,I able to facilitate the common driveway, it will be necessary to encroach outside of the platted development envelopes of both lots, Development envelopes are areas on a lot that carmot be built upon, but can be disturbed with driveways and landscaping, Areas outside of the development envelope must remain in their natural state, In exchange for encroaching outside of the development envelopes, the applicant is proposing to abandon other developable areas on each lot in amounts exceeding the area requested to be disturbed for the driveway. The exchange is summarized in the chart below: 1,432 s uare feet 1,582 s uare feet To help mitigate the additional impact to the site from the common driveway, the applicant is offering to reduce the amount of floor area ratio (FAR) on the undeveloped lot from what is allowed (10,000 square feet) down to 6,000 square feet. This requirement would run with the land regardless of present or future ownership, According to the Parks Department, there will be at least nine trees removed to make way for the driveway, Mitigation for the trees to be removed on site will be $13,250.88. A tree permit will be required before final approval of the driveway alignment. Mitigation can be done on-site with landscaping of the native restoration area. The entire area west of the proposed Y-turn, which serves as the current driveway, will need to be re-vegetated with native plantings. The area in front of the existing house and to the south of the Y- turn can be landscaped for screening at the resident's discretion, In addition to the new driveway, two other changes requested are to shift the entry point of the driveway from Tiehack Road to Lot 2, so that it is entirely contained within the lot (the platted development envelope shows access in a slightly differentlocation and across the adjacent lot to the north) and to move the garage entry on the house on Lot 1 from the driveway courtyard in front of the house to the east side of the structure (which requires additional encroachment in the existing development envelope). They then plan to reclaim part of the gravel driveway and re-vegetate it with native landscaping, BACKGROUND: The Maroon Creek Club Subdivision PUD was originally approved by the Board of County Commissioners and armexed into the City in 1996, STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff does not support the request to amend the development envelopes because it is our opinion that it doesn't comply with the PUD Development Standards and several provisions of the Subdivision section of the Land Use Code, For staff comments on how the proposal does not comply with the PUD Development Standards, see Exhibit A, - 2- ,'-'" r-\ , First, we feel that the proposed driveway is unnecessary because it duplicates the adjacent City street, Tiehack Road, by closely paralleling it and accomplishing the same purpose of access to all lots along the street. Section 26.480,050.B.b (Suitability of land for subdivision) precludes this duplication of public facilities. The specific code provision states the following: Spatial pattern efficient, The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs, Second, staff feels that the proposed common driveway will create a potentially dangerous situation for fire truck or other emergency service access, During the course of this review, the applicant has worked with the Fire Chief to design a driveway plan that meets their minimum requirements for width and fire truck turnaround capability, In addition, a vehicle turnout midway along the driveway has been added so that a car could pull to the side in the event an emergency service vehicle needed to get by, While it may be technically possible to meet Fire Department access standards in plan, staff believes that in reality, this proposal creates an unnecessarily dangerous situation. To ensurl; that the driveway is accessible year around, constant attention will have to be paid to snow removal and to making sure that the turnaround area is always free of parked vehicles, Section 26.480.050,B.a, (Suitability of land for subdivision) does not allow the creation of a situation that may be dangerous for the residents of a subdivision: Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmfUl to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the , proposed subdivision, Staff also feels that the proposed driveway will unnecessarily create more impermeable surface and disrupt natural vegetation, Although the exact, final layout of the driveway has not been determined, the Parks Department believes that there will be 9 trees lost to make way for the driveway. Granted, a portion of those trees would be lost if the applicant decided to construct two individual, non-connected driveways, but the plan for a common driveway definitely increases the impact to natural vegetation. Finally, even though the two lots are jointly owned now, which would allow the common access to possibly function more smoothly, we are concerned about the ramifications of when one lot is sold separately, There is no mechanism currently proposed, such as consolidating the lots, that would guarantee that this scenario would not transpire in the future, If they ever were to be sold separately, a situation could arise where the new owner of one of the lots petitions the city to have the common driveway undone and the separate driveway access arrangement reinstated, Doing so, would create additional site impacts and require new re-vegetation. In summary, if the proposed common driveway were the only method to achieve access to these lots (for example, due to topographic concerns), staff would likely be more lenient in its evaluation and recommendation; however, there already exists an adequate .. 3- 1"""'\ 1 /""'>, f J driveway to Lot 1 and it appears that a reasonable driveway can be constructed to undeveloped Lot 2" We feel that removing a driveway, where there already has been impact to the site, and replacing it with a longer and harder to access driveway with new impacts to the natural vegetation, will not be a good planning solution and is not necessary. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION COMMENTS: The P&Z voted 4-2 to approve the application. Those who voted against approving would have been willing to approve it if the applicant were willing to reduce the FAR on the undeveloped lot from the offered amount, 6,000 square feet, to 4,000 square feet. The applicant felt that they were already offering less than the 10,000 square feet allowed, so were not in favor of that restriction, Initially, several members ofP&Z also wanted to add a condition requiring a deed restriction preventing the sale of each property individually, but backed off that condition prior to approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club. RECOMMENDED MOTION (NOTE: ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN TIlE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No, .f2.., Series of 2002, for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club." ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A: FINDINGS-PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FINDINGS EXHIBIT B: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC) MINUTES EXHIBIT C: ApPLICATION EXHIBIT D: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION EXHIBITE: 1/7/03 P&Z HEARING MINUTES EXHIBIT F: LETTER FROM SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE MAROON CREEK CLUB MASTER ASSOCIATION - 4- 1""'"\ " , t) ORDINANCE NO. b, SERIES OF 2003 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNc:rCApPROvING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (pOl>) AMENI>MENTTO AMENI> TilE PLATTED DEVELOPMENT ENVELOPES ON LOTS 1 AND 2 OF THE MAROON CREEK CLUB SUBDIVISION I PUI>, CITY OF ASPEN. ParcelID: 2735-142-09-002 2735-142-09-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Applicant, Jennifer and David Stockman, represented by Kevin Morley of Robert Trown & Associates, Inc., requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council grant a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council approval, by a vote of four to two (4..2) for a Plauned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council, by a vote of _ to _ C--.J, approves a Plauned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots I and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ON TilE 24111 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2003, THAT: .. 6.. -- n Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club is approved with the following conditions stated herein: 1. Prior to recordation of an amended subdivision plat, an access easement shall be granted to the owner of Lot 1 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision across Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision. In addition, a note shall be placed on the plat requiring that the structure built on Lot 2 be, restricted in size to 6,000 square feet per the applicant's offer to reduce its allowable floor area ratio. 2, Prior to final approval of the driveway alignment, a tree permit from the Parks Department will be required. Mitigation for the nine (9) trees to be removed on site will be $13,250.88, as identified per the Municipal Code, Mitigation can be on-site with landscaping of the native restoration area, 3. The entire area west of the proposed Y -turn around which currently serves as the driveway, will need to be re-vegetated in native plantings only. The area in front of the house and to the South of the y-turn can be landscaped for screening or per the discretion of the owners of the residence, 4, The common driveway servicing Lots 1 and 2 shall be kept free and clear of snow and vehicles at all times of the year per the requirements of the Fire Department. Section 2 All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity, Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. .. 7.. ,1"'"\ '-, f) INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLlSED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 24th day of February, 2003, ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk Helen Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed, and approved this day of ,2003. ATTEST: Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcestor, City Attorney - 8- "....., r'1 t) EXHIBIT A FINDINGs: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The proposed amendment to the approved PUD is addressed against the applicable criteria in the PUD standards below. A, General Requirements: 1) The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Findinl!:: I Does it Comply? I No Comments: In the Parks, Open Space, and the Environment section of the AACP, the intent is "to preserve, enhance, and restore the natural beauty of the environment of the Aspen area". Staff does not believe that the proposal would significantly degrade the natural beauty of the site, however, there would be more environmental impact to the site (i,e, more loss of trees) with the common driveway than there would be with two shorter individual drivewavs to each lot. 2) The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area, Staff Findin Comments: Does it Com 1 ? No Most of the developed lots in the surrounding area are each accessed directly by a driveway from the public street. The common driveway proposed would be a departure from that attern. 3) The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Findin Comments: 4) Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the Applicant. B, Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: Staff Findin Comments: licable C. Site Design: - 8- f'""\ f'""\ Staff Findin Comments: D. Landscape Plan: Staff Findin Comments: E. Architectural Character: StaffFindin Comments: F, Lighting: Staff Findin Comments: n No Staff feels that the application does not comply with the provision that states, "buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access." We feel that the proposed driveway creates an unnecessaril dan erous access to the lots. Does it Com 1 ? No With the common driveway proposal, staff does not feel that the plan preserves the existing vegetation as well as it could b usin se arate, shorter drivewa s to each lot. Does it Com G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area: licable H. Utilities and Public Facilities: Staff Findin Comments: 1. Access and Circulation: Does it Com Staff Finding: Does it Comnlv? I Yes Comments: While staff finds the proposal to create problems with access I and circulation, it does comply with the six specific criteria of the PUD. , J. Phasing of Development Plan: Staff Findin Comments: .9.. ,-., , ' r-, f) "EXHIBIT B DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC) MINUTES MEMORANDUM To: Development Review Committee From: John Niewoehner, Community Deveiopment Engineer, DRC Caseioad Coordinator Date: October 30, 2002 Re: Maroon Creek Club - Lot 1 and 2 Attendees: Scott Woodford, Community Development Department Ed VanWairaven, Fire Department Brian Flynn, Parks Department John Niewoehner, Community Development Department Kevin Morley, Applicant's Representative At the October 30, 2002 meeting, the Development Review Committee reviewed the following project: Maroon Creek Club Lots 1&2: A minor PUD amendment to modify'the existing development on lots 1 and 2 to allow for a common driveway. ' DRC COMMENTS 1. Enaineerina DeDartment: No comments at this time. 2. Community DeveloDment Enaineer: . Since vehicles will access Lot 1 by driving across Lot 2, an access easement is needed across Lot 2, 3, Zonina: No comments at this time. 4, Housina DeDartment: No comments at this time, 5, Fire Protection District: . Since the driveway is more than 150 feet long, the driveway must be 16 feet wide. . All dweilings must have sprinklers, . The driveway must be designed to accommodate the necessary movements of a fire truck (including turning around). In addition, at the mid point of the driveway there needs to be a wide pull out spot in the driveway to allow two vehicles to pass. In order to limited the area of pavement, this area should be incorporated into the driveway area serving exclusively Lot 2, . The turn off of Tiehack Road needs to be 'softened' to provide access for a large fire truck, . Some of the driveway requirements for fire access may not be necessary if the existing driveway serving Lot 1 remains. If the Lot 1 driveway is replaced with grass-crete pavers, the pavers wouid have to be designed to DOT standards to support a fire truck, The grass-crete driveway would also have to be maintained year round (Le, plowed). 6, Parks DeDartment: No comments at this time. 7. Buildina DeDartment: No cornments at this time, -A ? " I""'- n Page1 of 2 October 30, 2002 MCC- Lot 1 and 2 8. City Water DeDartment: No comments at this time. 9. ASDen Consolidated Sanitation District: No comments at this time. 10, Environmental Health: 11. City Community DeveloDment - PlanninQ: No comments at this time. 12, City Electric DeDartment: No comments at this time. 13. HolY Cross Electric: No comments at this time. 14. City Attorney: No comments at this time, 15. Streets DeDartment: No comments at this time. 16, Historic Preservation Officer: No comments at this time. 17, Pitkin County PlanninQ: No comments at this time. 18, County and City Disaster Coordinator: No comments at this time, 19. TransDortation: No comments at this time. 20, ParkinQ: No comments at this time. IDRC/MCC-lot1 &2 -, A , f ." . ... '. ...' ROBER11 TROWN & l\~~OCIf\TE~, INC. October 18, 2002 EXHIBIT C APPLICATION & SITE PLAN Mr. James Lindt Planner' AspenlPitkin County Planning Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Minor PUD Amendment Lots 1 & 2, Maroon Creek Club PUD Mr. Lindt: Enclosed please find out application and supporting documentation for our request for a minor PUD amendment. This proposal is a simple request to modify the existing development envelopes on lots I and 2. These contiguous properties are owned by the same family, and their wish is to enter both properties from a single drive. This would give the main property (Lot 1) a more custom and private chive through their contiguous properties, while distancing themselves from the subdivision which is now under construction beyond the Maroon Creek Development. The intent of our design is to keep the drive very "low key", letting it sit on and run across the existing topography with as little disturbance as possible, Where this is not an option, it would be our intent to vegetate the cuts or fills so that they look as natural as possible. Weare currently not allowed to run driveway between the two propelties because we do not have development envelope that runs between the two properties, Review of the submitted site plan will show how we are proposing to modify the existing development envelopes, In trade, we are proposing returning equal portions of the existing development back to native, un-developable land. Our proposal, as shown on the submitted site plan, would indicate the following: LotI Additional Development Envelope Requested: Abandoned Development Envelope: 2,500 square feet 2,572 square feet The abandonment of the current drive will give the neighborhood much more privacy, screening the existing structure on Lot 1 from the cul-de-sac and the development beyond Maroon Creek. The large area of gravel running from the structure on Lot 1 to the cul-de-sac will be reclaimed and turned into landscape. The new driveway alignment will, although longer, greatly reduce the pitch of the drive servicing Lot 1. 1!!U Additional Development Envelope Requested: Abandoned Development Envelope: 1,432 square feet 1,582 square feet The current Development Envelope meant for accessing Lot 2 is not conducive for an access, The existing envelope would force the drive perpendicular to the existing grades which would result in a very large amount of require fill dirt, This alignment would also run the drive through heavy stands of existing native shrubs and plantings. The proposed alignment of the drive offTiehack Road would lend itselfto a much more gentle pitch on the drive. ,The alignment also avoids all of the existing native vegetation. Once on the property of Lot 2, the intent is to let the drive move in and out of the existing mature vegetation so that no trees would have to be removed. 25 Lower Woodbridge Rd.. Suite 104-B. P.O. Box 6820. Snowmass Village, CO 81615. (970) 923-2644. FAX (970) 923-2599 , ^ n , i Minor POO Amendment, Lots I and 2, Maroon Creek Club POO Page 2 As the drive crosses from Lot 2 to Lot I, we anticipate the loss of (I) one aspen tree on each lot. These would be easily mitigated through re-vegetation, We would like to offer a reduction in available FARon lot 2, since it is not the intent of the current owner to sell the property individually. Lot 2 currently has 10,000 square feet of above grade FAR available for use, as calculated by the Maroon Creek POO. We are willing to restrict this sile to 6,000 square feet of above grade FAR as calculated by the Maroon Creek POO, This reduction in FAR will help to mitigate the size of homes the drive serves, It will also help reduce the overall sense of bulk and mass of the structures in the neighborhood. Weare also ready to provide a surveyed easement locating the drive across Lot 2 for the use by Lots I and 2, subject to the approval of this minor amendment. The agreement made with staff is to stake the exact location of the drive with members of staff, and to then survey this drive alignment and all of the existing vegetation to provide an accurate depiction of the drive easement The enclosed photographs depict the existing site conditions. The locations and direction that each photograph was taken is indicated on the submitted site plan. Review will visually show how the proposed drive location will benefit each lot, and the feasibility in which this drive can be constructed with a minimum of disturbance to each lot. We feel that the request for this minor amendment is one where all parties concerned will benefit. The Maroon Creek Club community will be enhanced by fewer curb cuts off Tiehack Road, and will be provided with much more vegetation along the road, The proposed reduced building FAR will allow for more sensitive site planning and the preservation of existing vegetation even as it exists within the building envelope. The owners of Lots I and 2 will be provided with an access worthy of the estate and amount of property contiguously owned. If you should have any questions or concerns with the submitted infonnation, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Kevin G, Morley, AIA Robert Trown and Associates, Inc. Encl. f ,,"",' 7-784 P.OC2/CC2 H5C "H'EoBiii' mOWN & A&;OCJATE~11 we.. October 11, 2002 Mr, James Lindt Pla.tmer AspenlPitldn County Plam:ring Depa:rtm.ent 130 South Galena Street AsplltJ" CO 81611 I I I :Mr. Lindt: This letter of authorization would allow Robert Trown &; Associates, Inc. to act as the a t for the David and r ennifer Stockman with matters Pertaining to, but not limited to th~ prace ing of all items through the County and any other committee 2lecessa:y. The property is defined Lot 1 Maroon Creek Club P'UD, 1470 TiehackRoad, Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club PUD, _ TiehllQk Road, Aspen, CO 81611 Robert Trawn & Assooia.tes, Ina. PO Box 1628 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Tel: (970) 923-2644 I j ! 1 J f Please direct any COIrespondance to: Sincerely, , ), (hJPp,' , .',~~ David Stock",SIl, Owner Lot 11470 TiehackRoad Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club Asplm CO 81611 2S Lower Wooclbddgc Rd, . Suire l04.B .P,O. Be.... 6'820 'Snewmass Village, CO 81615. (970) 923-2644. F (970) 923.2599 If. ' I an, Owner I Lot 11470 ie~kRoadAapen, C 81611 Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club Aspen, C 81611 , j , j I j I I f f""'\ A ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION .ae: I Indicate street address, lot & bloc Location: APPLICANT: Name: Address: Phone #: \{\ REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: PROJECT: o o o o o ~ o o o o Conceptual PUD Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) Conceptual SPA Final SPA(& SPA Amendment) Subdivision Subdivision Exemption (includes , condominiumization) o Conceptual Historic Devt, o Final Historic Development o Minor Historic Devt. o Historic Demolition o Historic Designation o Small Lodge Conversion! Expansion Conditional Use Special Review Design Review Appeal GMQS Allotment GMQS Exemption U ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream , Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane o Lot Split 0 Temporary Use o Lot Line Adiustment 0 Text!Map Amendment TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): EXISTING CONDITIONS: descri tion of existin buildin s, uses, revious a o Other: La\- \ ~S ~\~\-1~ St: R.... LOT 2. \~ V",",<AV\t \ohN\-\-V\ 01\1*"'/0-.\ tz..v- 10 OCO . SF, , PROPOSAL: (descri tion of ro sed buildin s, uses, modifications, etc, Modify existing development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 to allow shared accessJrom Lot 2, Abandon existing Lot 1 access. Trade envelope so no increased development enveiope, limit FAR on Lot 2 to 6,000 sq. ft above grade, measured per existing PUD requirements, Subgrade FAR not affected by this application. Have you attached the following? FEEs DUE: $ 1"!St7. OC> ~ Pre-Application Conference Summary ~ Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement o Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form ~ Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review StandMds N' '"ns that are larger than 8.5" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written, te. ficrosoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. OCT, 18.2002 12: 10PM" PITKIN COUNTY TITLt n, r"""I j NO. 4869 P. 2 CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP Pitkin County Title, In~., a duly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the State of CJlorado hereby certifies that J, STOCKMAN AND Dj STOCKMAN are the owner's in fee simple of the follo,ing described property: , , LOT 1, MAROON CREEK CLUB, as shown on the Final Subdivision Plat & PU'1' for Maroon Creek Club, recorded November 15,1993 in Plat Book 33 at Page 4, i ' COUNTY OF PITKI~, S1 ATE OF COLORADO , ENCUMBRANCES: Deed of Trust from: J. Stockman and D. Stockman --, to the Public Trustee of the County of PITKIN for the use of : Affiliated Financial Services, Inc, 9riginal Amount : $5,160,000,00 Dated : December 5, 2000 Recorded : December 5, 2000 Ifleception No. : 449432 I , The above Deed of Trust was assigned to Thornberg Mortgage/Inc. by instrument recorded June 25, 2001 as Reception No. 455786, ! , ...' , Subject to easements, rlights of way and recorded matters. I , , This certificate is not t~ be construed to be a guarantee of title and is furnished f9r informational purposes only, , er 20, 2002 @ 8:00 A.M, , OCT, 18.2002 12: 10PwI PITKIN COUNTY TITLE Cf'lY OF ^ ~N CATE ~E?'..) NO. , ;l["5fot> ~ &As I , r:;:- ~ "- \--- ~ ~ lG - ~ ~ ~ fi!5 - - ;;;1 :i!; ..,~ ..- '."."I'''''',k ,.. !! CITY Of ~ HRET\.AlO , 0A1'e REf> NO. i.;lf5j<:>D \i-Z~ 8~6 o'clock ' oM. NO, 4869 P,3 ~,} 7~". :;.~~ Recorded at Reeeplion Recorder RECORDING REQUESTED BY: WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: ], Stockman and D. Stockman clo Charles T, Brandt, Esq. Charles T. Brandt & Associates, P ,C, 420 Eas, Main. Suite 204 Aspen, Colorado 81611 SPEer...,. W ARR"'NTV DEED "TH , TmS DEED made this ~ day of December, 2000, between LW1, INC., a Colorado Corporation (hereinafter "Grantor"), and 1. STOCKMAN and D. STOC~AN, as joint tc:nants (hereinafter I'Grantees"),. whos~ legal address is 0/0 Charles. T. Bnndt. Esq., Charles T. Brandt & Assoeia~s, 'P.C., 420 Eal;i"t MaiTl. Suite: 204, Aspen, Colorudo 8]611 WITNESSETH, that thc Grantor, forand in consideration of the sum ofTen Dollars ($ 1 0.00) and otb.er good and valuable consideration., the rcceipt and sufficieruJy of which is hereby acknowledgc~ has aranted. bargained.. sold and c:onveye~ 3.nd by these presents does grant, bargain. sel1, convey and confinn unto the Grantees.. asjoint tenants and not as tenants in common. their heirs, succeSSors and assigns. forcvet"J aU the real property, together with improvements, lying and being in the County of Pitkin. State of Colorado, described as folloW's: LOT 1, MAROON CREEK. CLUB. as sbown on tbe Final Subdivision Plat & POl:> for Maroon Creek Club, recorded November 15, 1993 in Plat Book 33 at Page 4. COUNTY OF pITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. TOGltTHltR with all and sin~lar the hercditamcrits and apptirtCtl,anc:cs thereto belonging or in anywisc:'appertaining. and the: reversion and reversions,. rema.indeTand rem.aindera. rents, issues and profits thereof, and 3.11 the estate, right. title, interest, claim and demand,what5oevcr oftbe Grantor, either in taw or equity, of, in and to the above bargainCd premises, with. the hereditaments and appurtenances; SUBJ"F.(""'T TO THE FOl,LOWING EXCEPTIONS: Real property '=es for 2000, due and paya.ble in 200, subject to building lind zoning regulations, and those =.ccptions listed on Exhibit A attached hercto and incorporated herein by this reference. All documents are recorded in the records ofPioon County, Colorado. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described with the appurtcn.:mces. unto the Gnntces. their heirs, successors and ass~gns forever. The Grantor. for itself, its successors and assigns does covenantand "sr=that itshall and wiltw ARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above-ba.rgaincd premises in the quiet and peaceable pos5eS&ion of the Grantees, their heirs, SUccessors and assigns. against all and every pen;on or persONj; claiming the whole or any part~reof, by, through or under the Grantor. its. successors 'and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the GrantOr has executed thi3 deed on the date set forth. above. STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF PITKIN f1-= re"Iqq.\lIlOd.~.llc~el "rCommbsion _'''')112003 111111I1111I1111I1111111 JIIIIIIIII 11111 11I11111 1I11 1111 4411431 12/~/211le1l 114.1111" SPEC ... llIlVIS SILYI 1 0' 2 ~ 111.1111 D 785,1111 Nil... P%TKIN COUNTY CO 12: 10PM PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, ... ,..~, ('1 P. 4 OCT,18.,2002 h , :t NO. 4869 EXHIBIT A 1. , , Right Of wey for ditcl;1es or canalS constructed by the authority of the United States as reserved in United Slates Patent:;> reco'fjdedSeptember 1.3. 1934 rn Book 162 at Page 400. Easements.. 'rights .01 way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of sUbject property recorded "November 15. 1993 in Plat Book 3~ at Page 4 and Amended Sheet 2 recorded March 31, 1994 In Plat Book 34 at Page 23 and Assignment of Plat to Maroon Creek Limited Liability Company recorded February 17, 1994 in 'Sock 742 at Fage: 1 17 and 121, , 'Those terms. CQnditi~ns. provIsions. obligatlons. eil:sements. restrictions. assessmenls and aU matters as set forth ir; Master Okclaratlon of Protective Covenants for Maroon Creel< Club recorded December 2.. 1993 in Book 733 at 'Page 598 and First Amandment thereto recorded February 17. 1994 in Sook 742 at Page 83, Assignman~and Designation of Successor Oecrarant for Maroon Creel< Club recorded May 11. 1994 in 800l< 750 a~ Page 242.. Second Amendment thereto recorded June a, 1994 1(1 Book 752 at Page 754 and Amended aii'd Restated Third Amendment thereto recorded July 26. 1~94 i,:Book 756 at Page '597. Fourth Amertdrrient thereto recorded July 26,' 1994 as Reception No~ 396947. and Assignment of Successor Declarant for Marocn Creak Club recorded May 11, 19941n Book 750 at Page 242. deleting there.from any r!lstrictlons indicating preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, colof'. religion, sex. handicap. famlliil/ status or national ongtn. 2. 3. 4. " , ". Terms. conditions, previsions. obligations and aJl matters as set forth in Subdi'W'ision Improvements Agreement reCQrded November 12, 199~ In 800k 730 at Page 606. I Terms. conditions. prbvisions, obligations and all m-atters as set forth I" Final F=Jlat Resolution of the Board of COUt"'lly Commi:isionors recorded August 13, 199~ In Book 721 at Page 245 as Resolution No. 93~104. t .Aviga[ion Easement granted to Pitkin County recorded November 12. 199:3 in Sook 730 ~t Page 690. Terms. conditions, prpv;s.ions at\d obligations of Water Service Agreement batweer:t The City afAspen and Pearce Equities Group' II, I..lmited liability Company, a Utah Limited L1ab11ity Company. recordeCl November 15. 1993 ir Book 730 at Page 797. Assignmenr and Assumption of Water Lease Agreement recorded November is. 1993 in Book 730 at Page 865, Assignment rJ,n.d Assumption Agreement recorded January 7. 1994 in B90k 737 at Page S99 and: Am"ended Assignmel"lt and Assumption Agreement recorded April 11 , 1994 in aOOk 747 at Page 191 and First Amendment thereto recorded October 17.1997 a:s Reception NO. 409559. , , , I Terms, conditions. provisions and obllgstl'onsas set forth In "french. Conduit and Vault Agreement With Holy Cross Electric A:ssoc~tion. Inc., recorded July 11. 1994 in Book 7SS at Page 55. , I Terms, conditions, provisions. obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution orthe Board of County Commissioners recor4ed August 28, 1995 In Beok 791 at Page 821 as ~esolutjon No. 95-128. : Subject property was' ~nnexed to trle City of Aspen please reler to the rallowlng documents: I , , Annexation Plat, recorped February 6,1997 in Plat Sook 41 at Page 76. Ordinance, recorded Febraury 21, 1997 as Reception N9. 401985. Terms, conditions, pr9"isions, Obligations and all matters as set forth in- Ordir'lance No. 40. Series of 1996 by Aspen City CoUnctl recorded April B, 1997 as ReceptlonNo. 403224 and re-recorded May 15, '1997 as Reception No. 40442.~, regardll'lg rezoning Maroon Creek Club SuCdivision. , Terms. conditions, p~'Visions and obligations as set forth in Amended and Restated Easement Agreement reCOrded July 13, 200~ as Reception No. 444995, 3. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. ll. 12. D. 111111I1111I1111I11111111111111I111111111I1111111111111 44ael 12/1!I2MI 14or/lep gEe liD DlW15 $11....1 2 .f 2 R, 11,11 g,7e!.ee N 1.11 ~lTklN COUNTY co ::::: ::::. ..... OCT. II. 2002" 9:12AM KAUFMAN & PETERSON" /1.-'72 - "V .,,,""- NO. 7379 HRETT PAlO ("J .."..... .,.... ,,0 .... v:,.:J _:> r:~ ..., ~ c;;.o..... c..J OA~ "Ie? ",{ , (f7-IJ 0'- ~~,O 1,_1 C57-ld'l..F,-~O l0")/)' Recorded af o'clock .M. Reception" Recorde.r -j' i<\ o r - .. r-u ll; " N~I Ol ~~,; N olfj;:; Q) -~CI ?2' ~~ ~ ~, ~ ." ..... D.1II; ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;.. """"""- , .. - =-- -8, - ~ - -. ~- ~ -- . ........ . -- ~~ -. - "=, -~ =~ RECORDINO RBQUESTBD BY: WHEN RECORDf.D lU>TURN TO: 1. SlocktTll1n !lnd D. Stockman clo Brooke A. Peterson, Esq. KaufmnR &. Peterson. P .C. J IS EBSL j-CymB" Avenue, Suite 3D; Aspen, Colorado 8 1611 SPECIAL WA1UUN'l'YDEED TIllS DEED mode this..lL..- day of July, 20oJ2, between WILLIAM H. PLUMMER (hereinafter uGrantor"). and J, STOCKMAN and D, STOCKMAN, ns joilll tenants (hereinafter "'Q[lIntces"), whose legl'll address is lOS Conyers Fann Drive, Greenwich, COllnedicur 06831. wlTNESSETH. ~hal the Grantor, for ana in eonsidcrlJlion orlhe; sum ofTen DolLars (SIO.OO) and other go~ end valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has grllntcd,',bargo.ined. sold and conveyed, and by these prese.nts does grant, blugain, sell, convey and confirm unto the' Grantees, as joint lenants alld not as teno.nlS in common, !.heir heirs, .successors and assigns (orever, all the real property, togetherwilh improvements. lying !md being in the County ofPil.kin, Slate of Colorado, described as rallows: LOT 2, MAROON CREEK CLUll, " shown on the Finat Subdivision Pl.t & PUD for Maroon Creek Club, recorded November is, 1993 in Plot Dook J3 at.Page4. COUNTY Or- PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. TOGETHER with alt and sinSl.Itar the hereditaments 3.nd appllrtenances thereto belonGins 01' in anywise appertaining. and the reversion and reversiolls, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, 3.nd nil the es[l\le. righl. tille, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the Grantor, either in law or equity, of. in and '10 the abQve bargained premises, with the hereditl\ments' and appul"tenances; SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS: Real proparty laX'" ror 2002, doe lltId payable in' 2003, ilnd those e.xl:cptions listed on E..'thibi,A attilch.ed hereto and incorporated hc~in by this rcfcrcn~,~' All cJocLlmencs ~re rec.orded in the reearth ,,(Pitkin County, Colorado. TO HAVE AND 10 HOLD the said premises above bargained and described with. the I1ppl1rtel1allces, unto the Grantees, lhei, heirs, :illCCcssors and 4Ssigll~ forever. The Gl'a.l'Itor, for himSelf, his heirs, stlcc~sson and !lSsigns does covenant'3.nd agree that he shan,and will W ^RRANT AND FOREVER DE'FEND the aboyc.bargElined premises in the quiet and peaceable pOSS~3ion of lhe Grantees, their heirs, suc.cessors and assigns, Ilgah1S[ aU 1nd every person or pcrsons claiming the whole or any part thereof, by, [hrough or under the Grantor, his heirs, successors and assigns, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Orantor has ex.euted lhis,d..d on the date ~.d .william H. Plummer STATEOr- ;' ol",,,,la COU~ OF P, I 1<.,.__ ) ) ss. ) , .,': n,e roregoillS il1~tnlment war. a.ekr..nwledged before lDll' IhisJl_ day or July, 2001 hy William It. Plummer. :' WITNESS my hand and official Sial. .' My coml11isSioll expires; III, a.3 ( J rc,Ia"'c~""","",erlftclllb au~ UyO:unm.~......;...~ hlO~'U03 .... ~ 'l!!l - ~ - S ffi :': ...... u lo:! "" = - i Dl51 N"" cOel Dl~ tO~ '<t~ P. ....... OCT,11,2002 9:12AM KAUfMAN & PETERSON () NO, 737 9 p, 2 t) EXHIBIT A 1 . Righto( the proprkltor or a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the Same he found to penalrate or Intetsecllhe premIses hereby granted and righl 01 way rot dItches or canals constructed by the aUlhority of the United States as reserved in United Slates Patents TecordedMarch 15, 1992 In Book 55 at Page 21, August 26, 19111n Book 65 al Page 189. August 28, 1911 in Book 65 at Page 191. Seplember 13. 1934 In Book 162 at Pege 400, June 16, 1944 In Book 187 al Page 562 and May 20,1963 In Book 160 Of Page 155. . 2. Eaaemenls, rlghts oC way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of subject property recorded November 15; 1993 in Pial Book 33 al Page 4 and Amended Sheel2 recorded March 91, 1994 In Pial Book 34 el Page 23 and Assignment of Pial 10 Maroon Creek limited Liability Company recorded February 17. 1994 In Book 742 al Page 117 and 121. . ), Those terms, cof\dllions, provIsions, obligations, easements. restrictions, assElssmenls and all maners as set forth In Master Declaration 01 Proteclive Covenants lor Maloon Creek.CllJb recorded December 2, 1993 In Book 733 at Page 59B and Firsl Amendmenl thereto reeordedFabruary 17. 1994 In Book 742 at Page 83, AsslgnmenL a.nd Designation or Suecs.ssor Oeclaranl for Maroon Creek Club recoroed May 11, 1994 In Book 750 al Page 242, Second Amendmonllherelo recorded June 9, 19941n Book 762 al Page 754 and Amended and Reelaled Third Arnendinentlherelo recorded July 26, 1994 In Sook 758 at Page 697. ._..~' ". Terms, conditions, pro....lsions, obligations and all mattars as sellorth In SubdivIsion Improvements AgrB,emer'1t recorded November 12. 1993 In Book 730 al Page 60e and amended thereto 11'\ Instrument re"'1lded March 10, 2000 as Reception No,441279. ,t s. T arms, conditions, provlslons, obngatlcns and all matters asset lorth In Final Plat Reeolt,dion of Ihe Board of County Commisslone.. recorded Augusl13, 1993 in Soak 721 at Pege 245 as Reaolulion No. 93.10<1, 6, AYigalion Easemenl granted to Pitkin County ,ecoroed November 12, 1993 In Soak 730 al Page 690. , ' 7. Terms, condittons, proviSions and obligations of Water Ser"tica Agreement between The City at ,A,3pan and Pearce equiUes GlOup It, Llmlled L1ablRtyCompany, a Utah Limited Uabllity Company, recorded November 16. 1993 In Soak 730 al Page 797, Asslgnmenl and Aesumpllon of Water Lease Agreement recorded November 15, 1999 in Book 730 at Page 865, Asslg"menland Assumpllon Agreement recordad January 7, 1994 in Book 737 at Page 699 and Am~nded Assignment and Assumption Agreement recorded April 11. 1994 in Book 747 at Page 191. B, Terms. condlUons. provfslona. obUgatlons and all man~u'! as set lonh In Resolution of the Pitlllin County Board 01 CQunty CommIssioners recorded AuglJst 28. 1995 In Book 791 at Page 821 as Flesolullon No. 95..128. Easements. rights ot 'Way and a.U matters as d~cloaed on PIal of subject property recotded February 61 1997 in Plat ~ook 41 at Page 76. Ten:r\.sl condltlonsl provlslons. obllQatlons and all matters as sellonh In Ordinance No. ~4. Series of 1996 by City Council 01 the City 01 Aspen recorded February 21, 1997 as Receplion No, 401985, Terms. condItions, provisions. obligations and- all mattfJ11J as set forth in Ordinance No. 40, Series of 1996 by A.pen City Cou"cll recorded April 8, 1997 as Reception No. 403224 end re-recorded May 15, 1997 ae Reception No, 4001428. 9. to. tL 12. Easement and rIght of way for Prtvale access as set lonh In Rule and Order recorded December', 1999 as Recepllon No. 4252.24 and amended thereto In Instrument recotdad February 22, 1999 as Receplfon No. 4279}O, and Corrected In instrumenl recorded May 10. '899 as Reception No. 430812. 13, Terms. eOl'lditlons, provlslon3 and obligations as sat fonh In Agreemanr recorded September 22, 1999 as Aec6p.tlon No. 435797. 14. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Court's Order of Inclusion recorded April 9, 2001 as RecepUon No. 453237, .,,1 11\111\ 1111\ 1\1111 \\11\ 1\111\11111111\1 ~11I1111111111\ ~~~~~:~:a: 33P S!L.vlA OFl\lIS PITj(I~ eovNTT 1;0 R 19." D 2"'.9' Return to: 6ROOKE PETeRSON KAUFMAN & PETERSON 315 E, HYMAN, SUITE 305 ASFl~N, CO 81611 Sent By: William lukes + AS~_Jiates; (), n EXHIBIT F: LETTER Fk\JM SITE AND ARCmTECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE MAROON CREEK CLUB MASTER ASSOCIATION -~-_._--:-------.I'-Y~".T~-~ r~ ;.. .." .... -,Y.l-"'o:;;----IT...... AR<:UITI\CYl'RI::" 7 Janual)' 2003 Scott Woodford. Planner Community Development Department City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 1'8: Maroon Creek Club Lots 1 and 2 Amendment to the PUD proposed by Mr. And Mrs. DavId Stockman for modification of envelopes to allow construction of a shared driveway -. Mr. Woodford: I am writing on behalf of the Sne and Architacture Review Committee [SARC] of the Maroon Creek Club Master Association with regard to the application which is to be reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission later today. SARC is the entity which is responsible for all architectural and development reviews and approvals for single family lots at the Maroon Creek Club PUD, and Lots 1 and 2 are subject to the Protective Covenants of the PUD, and the Design Guidelines which have been adopted by SARC and the Master Association, On December 27, 2002, we received a proposed site plan from Robert Trown & Associates which is dated December 17,2002 and subsequently requested and received the application letter dated October 18, 2002 and your staff report dated Janual)' 7, 2003. The applicant asked SARC to review the proposed plat amendment and provide you with a letter wtth our recommendations and thoughts that you could provide to the Planning & Zoning Commission members at their meeting today. No application for Association design approval for the proposed driveway, the archttectural modifications to the existing house on Lot 1, or any structures proposed for Lot 2 have been submitted to SARC forreview and approval and so we cannot comment on the specific configuration proposed to you, but the Association does not have an objection to a minor amendment to the plat to allow such a shared access, based on the applicants' representations to the City and to $ARC and the information that was provided to us. The areas of this proposal which would be subject to detailed review by SARC, and which may require specific condnions of approval include the following: 1. The applicant has proposed reducing the allowable 10.000 above-grade SF for this lollo a maximum of no more than 6,000 above-grade SF, This reduction would be a fundamental trade-off In Impacts for consideration of this proposal and we ask that it be specifically and legally included as a condnian in any approval which the City grants. 2. Alignment of the driveway has been modified in this recent drawing to cross a portion of the Building Envelope on Lot 2. Since this reduction of the building envelope is of the applicants' own choosing and making, SARC will not be inclined to grant any variances to the Design Guidelines and the site specific requirements for landscaping and landscaping mitigation due to space constraints in the envelopes. the grade of the proposed driveway In relation to floor heights established in our Design Guidelines. and so forth. This site has additional landscaping requirements to mttigate visibility of the Tiehack Bench lots from distant points across Maroon Creek which was required by the County in the PUD and which will continue to be a requirement for any development on Lot 2, as they were for Lot 1. f.l1l~'1' (1/01-11;.- KCI\ II",!"." Asp ~:,,' C(ll.()~,\l)() R,61 ! ~ 7u. !}!.\I.tl9 29 r,~ lC 91. ').691\ '" Sent By: William lukes + As..ciates; r'1 970 920 6986; Jan-7-03 2:14PM; n Page 2/2 7 January 2003 Page 2 3. We are concerned that the stand of oak trees and the existing aspen groves which are indicated on the plan as "to remain" and which are In the building envelope to varying degrees. will actuaRy be removed for any construction on lot 2, especially with the reduction In usable building envelope. 4, Our Design Guidelines require a shared curb cut for the Lots 2 and 3 driveways. This is to occur at the common property line approximately where the Lot 1&2 shared driveway is proposed to access Tlehack Drive. The proposed adjustments in the development envelopes would not preclude this being worked out later so we have no objection to their request, but the curb cut as shown and as worked out with the fire department does not address the common access issue with Lot 3 which we had requested that the applicant address before submitting any plans for SARC's review, ~. From the point of view of the Association, the combining of driveways for Lots 1 and 2 wouid probably be a visual enhancement and perhaps even a practical enhancement for the Immediate neighborhood, assuming that the above issues are addressed to the Association's satisfaction and assuming that the net result will be a much smaller house on Lot 2 than is currently allowed, Nevertheless, any proposal will be subject to SARC's review of much more detailed plans and proposed landscaping, and will have to Involve the owner of Lot 3 to address a common driveway access point; we will not waive that requirement and allow a separate driveway as shown which encroaches into the lot 3 access area, We do not view the modified alignment and joining of the driveways as Intrinsically negative or duplicative of the Tiehack cul-de-sac because there are some specific positives to it, such as eliminating and re-vegetating the existing driveway to Lot 1 and addressing grade and retaining wall conditions which I am not sure were fully contemplated or known at the time of the PUD approval by the County, Further. the development of the Urschel parcels which have their access adjacent to Lot 1 has created almost a blind driveway situation where both the existing driveway and tha Urschei access enter the cui de sac without sightlines to the other; moving the driveway would certainly improve this situation. Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance. Sincerely. MAROON CREEK CLUB MASTER ASSOCIATION Site and Architecture Review Committee By: 11 ~ J_ rv ,,'- William Lukes AlA Architectural Advisor. Maroon Creek Club Master Association t - -- " copies: Kevin Morley I RT A Gary Albert, President of the MCC Master Association Brian Martin, MCC sent by fax to all parties January 7, 2003 (1 :59pm) Mlu DO II" '1. If > I'!.-I! Iii -II ,IJ ,I.. /"""j I I I ! i. I ! " PROPERlYUNE r ;'<11 loti ~ loti 000 --.,;:.'_........ ':""\ I I I ! / I i/ / I I..., I . 1 ! I I ! \ . I ,.' J j..-. -!-' I . , / I / I \ii~ \I' , \ I II I \ )/ / \ I ! \ " / \ I I \! / Vi ;/ ,//\ / / / \ / --)' , // \// /' //\ ,,/ ../ \ '" , I( . / "" i ^ "I I' "-I. /' ""- /', .,.~'~)"'-"" "',,- ~ " "'~O&".~ '-~, 9 ,- ,/ / L " I j J ..- / t'""'\ . ! r) EXHIBIT D PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. _, SERIES OF 2003 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE PLATTED DEVELOPMENT ENVELOPES ON LOTS 1 AND 2 OF THE; MAROON CREEK CLUB SUBDIVISION I PUD, CITY OF ASPEN. ParcelID: 2735-142-09-002 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Applicant, Jennifer and David Stockman, represented by Kevin Morley of Robert Trown & Associates, Inc., requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission grant a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club; WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing; and, J WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council approval, by a vote of four to two (4-2) for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and2 of the Maroon Creek Club; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public heal~ safety, and welfare, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ON THE 7m DAY OF JANUARY 2003, THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to amend the platted development envelopes on Lots 1 and 2 of the Maroon Creek Club is recommended for approval with the following conditions stated herein: - 10.. A r1 \. Y 4, Prior to recordation of an amended subdivision plat, an access easement shall be granted to the owner of Lot 1 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision across Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club Subdivision. In addition, a, note shall be placed on the plat requiring that the structure built on Loti be restricted in size to 6,000 square feet per the applicant's offer to reduce its allowable floor area ratio, 5, Prior to final approval of the driveway alignment, a tree permit from the Parks Department will be required, Mitigation for the nine (9) trees to be removed on site will be $13,250,88, as identified per the Municipal Code, Mitigation can be on-site with landscaping of the native restoration area, 6, The entire area west of the proposed Y-tum around which currently serves as the driveway, will need to be re-vegetated in native plantings only, The area in front of the house and to the South of the y-tum can be landscaped for screening or per the discretion of the owners of the residence, Section 2 All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity, Section 3: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Approved by the Commission at its regular meeting on January 7, 2003. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND COMMISSION: ZONING Jasmine Tygre, Chair John Worcester, City Attorney - 11- ("\ (" 'i,.) ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk - 12- / /'"' /'"' ( " : /1 -. ....... -~._~ "",~ ,--. '~ , ')'-- )--....... / --.... .~".r--' , , / e{ < "---' 1/ ~ , '\....., ~ /1/ " "'~ / // / / , I / i ,/ ! / / / / I / /~ I,,', , r~' /- / ~' / ~Z , / ~'~ / Z ~ / / ~ 1 . ,,/"/8<~ _../ 7JJ. ~ ~ ''--' ' /~ -< 15 f~ >0, , ' ,,~ ~ / ", ,~:21 /~S>g ,,~ .~ \ . " ;;; I, ,,', ~ b /U"~',.~ /O'~ . / ~ r:r;, , " ./ 7JJ. 0 U"'\ ",-f' ' ;;1 ,i/ /"'("-~-"--:, / ~ ~"I f/'" '". 0 ill / / NI,' 'I I"""i ~. l/,// h.' -,I;? / Il.; / ;' '(Jf 1/ ,// ~ ./ A/"--~ /. / ,/' 'r~ '~l" ~I /! ' i "" / i R'l, II, ' ! 9' I QI ~. ' , I / l! ~j I I i I '8 1,1' 51':1 ~,: .1 01 .' Ii <Ill '01 lP '1~ /',1 ~j t ~ ,'I' / / i ! '~// ' /;' J / ,'~ /,,!! /" j;' j f f / l r " I " ~ .....,._,."'.._~- " , " , RNI1.iUWdOlld I" ! , 11 ; i /. , ./ i i -.- --.:......1- I [- ---1 'I r/ "",1 ~J if ",If . "',7 <1' fiJl. 4H I ;' j I I 1'\ I "'\ I 'iI\ ' I ~i / ' \ ! I ,\. / " .' / ~, I ' "\:l\ I ' '" / \ ;;~~_..~.""',... /,,- " I i / I / I r'-T'--t . \ ( I ) { , / ( I. / /1/\ . i I I. / / I ! ; I / I / ,/ /' / i .i I l I ; I " I / I ' I 1/ 1/ / 1/ )' I / I I I / I /, , IIi .~ .~ ~ :ff o , .. f i I i i 3Nn iU;"I:litdO' , I , i-lid: " ! ! i ,I I / ;/ / / / , .1 111 11'! I' r~ , ,II iji" :!..,T ii'+ . 00 ""RIll, i' ! , ....o,_.c.: 1""\. f'\ I5l f\ /..-..." Rezoning or text amendment, Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived, However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments, ;;e&U"'A~~cIJ!- gnature , The fo~gOing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before m~ day of (50 - ,2002>, by - ,)~..5 ~"\ , ~~w;;""''''''\'''''W;'''"~4ttBtr~~,'II..' ,,'~'~:' RE: LOTS 1ANi2 W.ROQ~~i:Rfd('CL~. PLAN~ NEDUNITQEV OPMENT (1'00) AMENDMENT N OTICEIS"HE BY GlVENth,3t ,a public hearing I will beheld 0 Monday, February 24: 2003, at a meeting to" be n at 5:00 p.m. before, the Aspen City Council. Council Chambers, C.ity ~al1" 130 ~. Galena Street, to consider an apph:catlOn submlt~ tedby D'avid andJe~1n\f~r~t()~t:'Jl~,~;,:;requesting, , approval 01 a Plalln,ed Ul1itDevel,op\l1ent(l'UD) Amendmen~, to ,?T~,nd Yile p'ia,U'e~ development envelopes of Lots r:ll~~,??l tli~ M,~r~o~l f~e~~ Club, pursuant ~oSectY:~l},?,6}~?_}??i.~f}:~e Lall.?- UseCod~, ,The applicantis seeki~g to i\men?, ~h~_ developmenttvelopes in ordertq:....cQ.n,~~!!;I~t.~ common ,drive ay across both lo.~s,.. . For further in rmation. contact SC(ltt Wop,d.I(l~d at the City 01 pen Community Development De. partment. 13 ,Galena St.. Aspen. CO (970) 920- 5102,scottw@d:a:spen:co.us'-ATTACHMENTS', s/HelenKlanderud", Aspen City Council Published ill ,The,Aspen Times-onFebruary 8. 2003(0050). " OPYOFTHEPUBLICATION / ~\ SARAH OATES ~~_. PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL f' (\ ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (El, ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: L-d--s L:t.;f , ifJ.. << SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 7- z:.~103 , Aspen, CO ,200_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, ~C( 1.A.-1'6S 1-.1(V/ J {-. (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certifY that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: X;ublication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper ora paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days pri?1- to the public hearing, A copy of the publication is attached herqto, ----. p'ojii;;'~jnot[fe:By posting of notice, which form was obtained from th~ 'Cortllnuruty 1}ev!llopment Department, which was made of suitable, ~waterproofmate?1fl1s, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofletters not less than one inch'in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day pf , 200_, to and including the date and time ofthe pUQJic hearing, A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto, '~ _ Mailing of notice, By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26,304,060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code, At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S, mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto, (continued on next page) .~, JAN-Q3-2003 FRI 1 (0. AM ~'(\ 11M FAX NO. - /. " P. 22 ',',,', AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUlR.tW BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), A.SPEN LAND USE CODE it'; .f" \.Dr II 14""10 11E.~ 'p!..c:J..P ADDRESS OF pi{9P~RTY: [,loT '2.. M~ r 21:1= L9 /.,f, fUl:>, Asp.", co j.,lCo.,l4 U p.,..R., \'"\ ,200? .\,.'...."..,1..,:.:, SCIIF.DULF.D pli!iuc HEAttlNG OATE: . fj .n '.,' STATE OF COI,()'RADO ) '/ ';'~:'1,\ ) !-is. COl\llty ofl'itldii ) ,.::(..',: ~ :t\~ . ! ",:'" - T,. \':eJ\N.'~ t\~LE.:L__~- (namc, p1ease print) beil~g Qr reprc1~~tirg an ;\ppl~cant to tl.;c'~~f Aspe):, Col<)rado: here,by personally certify that I ha"e comphcd with thc pubiLc notice reqUirements of Sectlon26.304.060 (E) ofihe AspeliL.and Use Code in the following manner: Pul;lic~iloA: of no/ice: By the publication in the Icga1 notice section of an oflicial papcr bfh paper of gcneral circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days priQr to the public hcaring, A copy of the publication is aI/ached herelo, 4'i~' _~ POSlili~;hrnotice: By posting of Mtice, which form was obtained from the COIlln,1Li~ity Development Department, which was made of suitable, water~roof mated als, which was not less than twenty-twl) (22) inches wide and twenty .six (26) inches high, and which was composed or letters not lcss than aile inch in height. Said notice was posted ;n a conspicuous place on the S\{I:iJ~ct property at least fil'tcen (15) days prior to the public hearing and wa~ c(lnti~~(,uSly visible fronl the :;~Iay of _-p'Cf:'y-\"~'5:" ,200 ~., to and inclu~i,vg )he date and timc ol'the public hearing, A photograph ofrhe posted notice (I'il-!n) is ar/ClcJwdherelo. ,:~:':;,::n .; .'_ Mililtf1g o/notice. 13y thc mailing of a notice obtained from thc Commlmity Devclopnlent Department, which contains the information described in Section .r". "", u. ~ .' 26,3Q4"ll60(B)(2) ot the Aspen Land Use Code, At least fifteen (15) days pnor to thc 1?1.\1?li6 hcaring, notice was hand delivcred or mailed by first class, postage prel;,ti4 t,t.S, mail to all owncrs of property within three hundrcd (300) reet of the pro~96y subject to thc developmcnt application, and, at least fiftecn (15) days pri6~ tei t]le public hcaring, notice was hand delivered or mailed by tirst class post~g;~ prepaid U.S. mail to any fedcral agency, state, county, municipal govel;t~m~nt, school, s<lrviee district or other governmental or quasi-governmental ageri.cl~ tl}at owns propcrty within three hlllldred (300) fect onhe property subjcct to th?;~e~elopmcnt application. The names and addresscs of property owners shall ~e ~flOse on tbc current tax records of Pitkin County as they appearcd llO 1l10rf;~ha'tt sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing, A copy of the oWI1~b <tnd governmental agencies so noficed is attached hereto. t:'~.~ /. r{\:,~ " ',,\";;^,. I'! f7h ) ,; ': ~'; l )';,;l ",;t;:~; !,'" i, By: William Lukes + . .. rown , --.--' Associates; At: ~3 2599 n) , 970 920 6986; -~Jan-7-03 2:07PM; Page 1/2 n W ILL I A M L U K E 5 + ASS 0 C I AT E 5 l'RO~~CT MANAG~M~NT ARCHITECTVR.I:: 7 January 2003 Scott Waadfard, Planner Community Develapment Department City of Aspen 130 Sauth Galena Aspen. Colarada 81611 re; Maroon Creek Club Lats 1 and 2 Amendment to. the PUD propased by Mr. And Mrs, David Stockman far madiflcatian af envelapes to allaw canstructian af a shared driveway Mr. Waodford: I am writing an behalf af the Site and Architecture Review Cemmittee [SARC) of the Maroon Creek Club Master Associatien with regard to the applicatien which is to be reviewed by the Planning & Zaning Commissien later today. SARC is the entity which is respensible fer all architectural and develepment reviews and approvals for single family lets at the Maroon Creek Club PUD. and Lots 1 and 2 are subject to. the Pretective Co.venants of the PUD, and the Design Guidlilllnes which have been adapted by SARC a,nd the Master Assaclation. On December 27, 2002, we received a proposed site plan from Rabert Trown & Assaciates which is dated December 17, 2002 and subsequently requested and received the applicatian letter dated Octaber 18. 2002 and your staff report dated January 7, 2003. The applicant asked SARC to. review the propased plat amendment and previde you with a letter with aur reco.mmendations and theughts that yeu ceuld provide to. the Planning & Zening Cemmissien members at their meeting today. No. applicatien fer Asseciatien design approval for thepraposed driveway, the architectural modifications to the existing house en Let 1, er any structures prepesed for Let2 have been submitted to. SARC for review and appreval and so we cannot cemment en the specific cenfiguratien proposed to you, but the Asseciatien dees nat have an objection to a minor amendment to the plat to allow such a shared access, based on the applicants' representations tothe City and to. SARC and the informatien that was previded to us. The areas ef this propesal which weuld be subject to. detailed review by SARC, and which may require specific cenditiens ef appreval include the fellewing: 1. The applicant has propesed reducing the allewable 10.000 abeve-grade SF fer this lat to. a maximum ef no. mere than 6,000 abeve-grade SF. This..reductien weuld be a fundamental trade-off In Impacts for censideratien ef this preposal and we ask that it be specifically and legally included as a condition in any appraval which the City grants. 2. Alignment ef the driveway has been medified in this recent drawing to cross a partion ef the Building Envelepe en Let 2. Since this reduction ef the building envelope is ef the applicants' ewn choesing and making, SARC will nat be inclined to. grant any variances to the Design Guidelines and the site specific requirements far landscaping and landscaping mitigatian due to space constraints in the envelepes, the grade ef the propesed driveway In relatien to fleer heights established in eur Design Guidelines, and sa farth. This site, has additional landscaping reqUirements to. mitigate visibility ef the Tiehack Bench lets frem distant points across Maroen Creek which was required by the Caunty in the PUD and which will centinue to be a requirement fer any develepment on Lat2, as they were for Lot 1 ~ PI!:>;'I OH'II:I- Ho~ l!'~I'':l ASPl.'!'. COI.Ol<:,~un l! I (, 1 ~ ',J 70.<)l..<l.to') l.') I ,)( '/ ~ ',J 691' '" Sent By: William Lukes + Associates; 970 920 6986; Jan-7-03 2:08PM; (') Page 2/2 t"'1 7 January 2003 Page 2 3, We are concerned that the stand of oak trees and the existing aspen groves which are indicated on the plan as "to remain" and which are in the building envelope to varying degrees. will actually be removed for any construction on Lot 2. especially with the reduction in usable building envelope. 4. Our Design Guidelines require a shared curb cut for the Lots 2 and 3 driveways, This is to occur at the common property line approximately where the Lot 1 &2 shared driveway is proposed to access Tiehack Drive. The proposed adjustments in the development envelopes would not preclude this being worked out later so we have no objection to their request, but the curb cut as shown and as worked out with the fire department does not address the common access issue with Lot 3 which we had requested that the applicant address before submitting any plans for SARC's review. ~. From the point of view of the Association, the combining of driveways for Lots 1 and 2 would probably be a visual enhancement and perhaps even a practical enhancement for the immediate neighborhood, assuming that the above issues are addressed to the Association's satisfaction and assuming that the net result will be a much smaller house on Lot 2 than is currently allowed. Nevertheless, any proposal will be subject to SARC's review of much more detailed plans and proposed landscaping, and will have to Invoive the owner of Lot 3 to address a common driveway access point: we will not waive that requirement and allOW a separate driveway as shown which encroaches Into the lot 3 access area. We do not view the modified alignment and jOining of the driveways as intrinsically negative or dupiicative of the Tiehack cul-de-sac because there are some specific positives to it, such as eliminating and re-vegetating the existing driveway to Lot 1 and addressing grade and retaining wall conditions which I am not sure were fully contemplated or known at the time of the PUD approval by the County. Further, the deveiopment of the Urschei parcels which have their access adjacent to Lot 1 has created almost a blind driveway situation where both the existing driveway and the Urschei access enter the cui de sac without sightlines to the other; moving the driveway would certainiy improve this situation. Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance, Sincerely, MAROON CREEK CLUB MASTER ASSOCIATION Site and Architecture Review Committee "lv t 1- - "", Wiiliam Lukes AlA Architectural Advisor, Maroon Creek Club Master Association copies: Kevin Morley I RT A Gary Albert, President of the MCC Master Association Brian Martin, MCC sent by fax to all parties January 7, 2003 (1 :59pm) D A n ROBERT TROWN & ASSOCIATES. INC. Aspen/Pitkin Community Development 130 south Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Tel: (970) 920-5090 Fax: (970) 920-5439 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 12/27/02 PROJECT: Maroon Creek Lots 1 and 2 ATTENTION: Scott Woodford I SENT VIA HAND DESCRIPTION: Scott: Enclosed please find (12) twelve copies of the revised site plan as approved by Orrin Moon at the Aspen Fire Department. Also included are (12) twelve copies of the plan reduced to l1x17 size. Please let me know if you need any additional copies, or if you should need additional information regarding this submittal. See you on the 7th of January. We are also in the process of getting a letter from the Homeowners Association regarding our proposal. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Kevin. COPY TO: SIGNED: 25 LOWER WOODBRIDGE ROAD - SDITE 104-B - P.O. BOX 6820 - SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO - 81615 TEL, (970) 923..2644/923-6131 FAX (970) 923-2599 EMAIL: kmorley@rtaaspen.com t'-, () MEMORANDUM TO: Plans were routed to those departments checked-off below: X ........... City Engineer X ......... Community Development Engineer X ........... Zoning Officer o ........... Housing Director X ........... Parks Department X ........... Aspen Fire Marshal X ........... City Water X ........... Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District o ........... Building Department o ........... Environmental Health o ........... Electric Department X ........... Holy Cross Electric o ........... City Attorney o ........... Streets Department o ........... Historic Preservation Officer o ........... Pitkin County Planning o ........... County & City Disaster Coordinator 0......... Transportation FROM: Scott Woodford. (scottwlqlci,aspen,co.us) Community Development Department 130 S, Galena St.; Aspen, CO 81611 Phone-920,5102 Fax-920,5439 RE: Maroon Creek Club Lots 1 & 2 - Minor PUD Amendment to modify the existing development envelopes on Lots 1 & 2 to allow for a common driveway access from Lot 2 to Lot 1, There will be no net increase in the size of each development envelope, only the shifting of the envelopes to accommodate the location of the driveway between the lots, DATE: October 23. 2002 DATE OF DRC MEETING: October 30. 2002 at 1:30PM, . NOTE: IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND THE MEETING, PLEASE EMAIL YOUR COMMENTS TO JOHN NIEWHOEHNER Gobun@ci.aspen.co.us) BY NOON ON OCTOBER 30. 2002. COMMENTS WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE DRC MINUTES, n ,-" ROBER1' TROWN t9 AS00CIATES, INC. October 18, 2002 EXHIBIT C ApPLICATION & SITE PLAN Mr. James Lindt Planner Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Minor PUD Amendment Lots I & 2, Maroon Creek Club PUD Mr. Lindt: Enclosed please find out application and supporting documentation for our request for a minor PUD amendment. This proposal is a simple request to modify the existing development envelopes on lots I and 2. These contiguous properties are owned by the same family, and their wish is to enter both properties from a single drive, This would give the main property (Lot I) a more custom and private drive through their contiguous properties, while distancing themselves from the subdivision which is now under construction beyond the Maroon Creek Development. The intent of our design is to keep the drive very "low key", letting it sit on and run across the existing topography with as little disturbance as possible. Where this is not an option, it would be our intent to vegetate the cuts or fills so that they look as natural as possible. Weare currently not allowed to run driveway between the two properties because we do not have development envelope that runs between the two properties. Review of the submitted site plan will show how we are proposing to modify the existing development envelopes. In trade, we are proposing returning equal portions of the existing development back to native, un-developable land. Our proposal, as shown on the submitted site plan, would indicate the following: Lot 1 Additional Development Envelope Requested: Abandoned Development Envelope: 2,500 square feet 2,572 square feet The abandonment of the current drive will give the neighborhood much more privacy, screening the existing structure on Lot I from the cul-de-sac and the development beyond Maroon Creek. The large area of gravel running from the structure on Lot I to the cul-de-sac will be reclaimed and turned into landscape. The new driveway alignment will, although longer, greatly reduce the pitch of the drive servicing Lot 1. Lot2 Additional Development Envelope Requested: Abandoned Development Envelope: 1,432 square feet 1,582 square feet The current Development Envelope meant for accessing Lot 2 is not conducive for an access. The existing envelope would force the drive perpendicular to the existing grades which would result in a very large amount of require fill dirt. This alignment would also run the drive through heavy stands of existing native shrubs and plantings. The proposed alignment of the drive off Tiehack Road would lend itself to a much more gentle pitch on the drive. The alignment also avoids all of the existing native vegetation. Once on the property of Lot 2, the intent is to let the drive move in and out of the existing mature vegetation so that no trees would have to be removed. 25 Lower Woodbridge Rd.' Suite 104-B. P.O. Box 6820. Snowmass Village, CO 81615. (970) 923-2644. FAX (970) 923-2599 r-"1 n Minor PUD Amendment, Lots I and 2, Maroon Creek Club PUD Page 2 As the drive crosses from Lot 2 to Lot I, we anticipate the loss of (I) one aspen tree on each lot. These would be easily mitigated through re-vegetation. We would like to offer a reduction in available FARon lot 2, since it is not the intent of the current owner to sell the property individually, Lot 2 currently has 10,000 square feet of above grade FAR available for use, as calculated by the Maroon Creek PUD. We are willing to restrict this site to 6,000 square feet of above grade FAR as calculated by the Maroon CreekPUD. This reduction in FAR will help to mitigate the size of homes the drive serves. It will also help reduce the overall sense of bulk and mass of the structures in the neighborhood. Weare also ready to provide a surveyed easement locating the drive across Lot 2 for the use by Lots I and 2, subject to the approval of this minor amendment. The agreement made with staff is to stake the exact location of the drive with members of staff, and to then survey this drive alignment and all of the existing vegetation to provide an accurate depiction of the drive easement. The enclosed photographs depict the existing site conditions, The locations and direction that each photograph was taken is indicated on the submitted site plan. Review will visually show how the proposed drive location will benefit each lot, and the feasibility in which this drive can be constructed with a minimum of disturbance to each lot. We feel that the request for this minor amendment is one where all parties concerned will benefit. The Maroon Creek Club community will be enhanced by fewer curb cuts off Tiehack Road, and will be provided with much more vegetation along the road. The proposed reduced building FAR will allow for more sensitive site planning and the preservation of existing vegetation even as it exists within the building envelope, The owners of Lots I and 2 will be provided with an access worthy of the estate and amount of property contiguously owned. If you should have any questions or concerns with the submitted information, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Kevin G. Morley, AlA Robert Trown and Associates, Inc. Encl. T-784 P,OOZ/OOZ F-150 "'-"ROB~ mOWN & ~OCJATES! me. ( , October 11, 2002 Mr, James Lindt Plam1er ASJilenlPitkin County P1amring Depaztnlent 130 South Galena Street Aspilltl., CO 81611 I I I Mr. Lindt: This letter of authorization would allow Robert TrOWll. &: Associates, Inc. to act as the a t for the David and r ermifer Stockman with mattm's pertaining to, but not limited to the proae of all items through. the County and any other committee necessary. The property is defined Lot 1 Maroon Creek Club PUD, 1470 TiehackRoad, Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 2 Maroon Creek Club PUD, _ Tiehaok Road, Aspen, CO 81611 Robert Trown &:Assoaiates, Inc. PO Box 1628 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Tel: (970) 923-2644 j I I I J I Please direot llllY COmlspondence to: ~ere1~,_ A~-\) '-,d - . . f~" -~ David Sto~lI", Owner Lot 1 1470 Tiehack RDad Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 2 Maroon Creek CIub Aspon CO 81611 2S LowerWooclbl'idjc Rd... Suite 104.B .P.O. Box 1$820. Snowmass Village, CO 8161$. (!1m) 923-2644. P: (970) !/23.2S!I!I II . ' i an, Owner I Lot 11470 il:iliackRoadAapen, C 81611 Lot 2 Maroon Cleek Club Aipen, 81611 j I j I I ('\ ~ ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION Location: \ I Indicate street address, lot & bloc .fie: APPLICANT: ]N=. Address: Phone #: ;~;E:~~\~e Co 6'~\S REPRESENTATIVE: IN=' Address: Phone #: PROJECT: ~~\~e\A 10 - q - rrj 0 Conditional Use 0 Conceptual PUD 0 Conceptual Historic Devt, 0 Special Review ~ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) 0 Final Historic Development 0 Design Review Appeal 0 Conceptual SPA 0 Minor Historic Devt. 0 GMQS Allotment 0 Final SP A(& SPA Amendment) 0 Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption 0 Subdivision 0 Historic Designation U ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream 0 Subdivision Exemption (includes 0 Small Lodge Conversion! Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane 0 Lot Split Temporary Use 0 Other: PROPOSAL: (descri tion of ro osed buildin s, uses, modifications, etc, Modify existing development enveiopes on Lots 1 and 2 to allow shared access from Lot 2. Abandon existing Lot 1 access. Trade envelope so no increased development envelope. Limit FAR on Lot 2 to 6,000 sq. ft above grade, measured per existing PUD requirements. Subgrade FAR not affected by this application. Have you attached the following? ~Pre-Application Conference S, ummary JCI, Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement o Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form 15? Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards All ''\ns that are larger than 8.5" x 11" mnst be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written te. Iicrosoft Word Format) must be submitted as part ofthe application. FEES DUE: $I~.oo OCT, 18.2002 12:10PM PITKIN COUNTY TITLE 1('") ! ! NO, 4869 P. 2 ~ CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP Pitkin County Title, Inf" a duly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the State of CJlorado hereby certifies that J, STOCKMAN AND Di STOCKMAN are the owner's in fee simple of the fol\o~ing described property: , LOT 1, MAROON CREEK CLUB, as shown on the Final Subdivision Plat & PU~ for Maroon Creek Club, recorded November 15, 1993 in Plat Book 33 at Page 4, i COUNTY OF PITKI~, STATE OF COLORADO , ENCUMBRANCES: Deed of Trust from: J. Stockman and D. Stockman to the Public Trustee of the County of PITKIN ror the use of : Affiliated Financial Services, Inc. 9riginal Amount : $5.160,000,00 Dated : December 5, 2000 Recorded : December 5, 2000 (fleception No. : 449432 I , The abolle Deed of Trust was assigned to Thornberg Mortgage, Inc. by instrument recorded June 25, 2001 as Reception No, 455786. ! , ',,' , Subject to easements, rights of way and recorded matters. I , , . I This certificate is not to/ be construed to be a guarantee of title and is furnished fejr informational purposes only. , E,INC. BY: authorized sign er 20, 2002 @ 8:00 A.M. 12: 10 PM PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, r') NO, 4869 P, 4 OCT,18,2002 , 11101 ,I, ...~.I () EXHIBIT A 1, , Right of w~y for ditl;~es or cilnalsconsttllcted by the authority of the united States as re~rved in United Slates F'arants reco"l'edSeptember 13. 1934 in Book 162 "I Pa9a 400, EasEln-tents. rights of way and all matters as dl~closed on Plat of SUbject property reCOrded November 15. 1993 in Plc:lt Bool< 3~ at Page 4 and Amended Sheet 2 recorded March 31,1994 in Plat Book 34 at page 23 and' ~signment ()f Plat to Maroon Creek Limited LiabUICy Company recorded February 17, 1994 in Sook 742 at Page 117 and 121. , 'Tnos~ terms. CClnditi~ns. provisions. obligatIons. easements, restrictions. assel'isments and aU matters as set forth JI"J Master DeclaratIon of Prot'@e!I've Covenants felr Maroon Creek Club recorded December 2.. 1993 ;n 600k 7:3:3 a. fage 598 and First Amendment therelo recorded February 17. 1994 in Book 742 at Page 83, Assignmen~and Oesigl"1atior'l Of Successor Declarant for Maroon Creek Club recorded May 11. 1994 ;n Sook 750 at Page 242, Second Amendment Ihereto recorded June e, '994 In Book ?52 at F'age 754 and Amended aii'd Restated Third Amendment thereto recorded July 26. 1994 in Book; 758 at Page " 597. FOlJrlh Amendment Ihereto recorded July 26. 1994 as Reception No. 396947. Bnd Assignment of Suc~ssor Declarant fOr Maroon Creek ClUb recorded May 11, 19941n Book 750 at Page 242. deleting therefrom any re5trictlons indicating preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion. sex, handicap, famlliid statlJs or national ortgin. 2. 3, 4. , " Terms. conditions, p~ovisions. obligatJons and aU matters as set forth '1"1 Subdi\lision Improvements Agreement reeorded November 12. 199:3 In Book 730 at Pag!!! 60S. I Terms. COf'1ditlons, p.iovisions. obligations and all matters as set forth 1r1 Final Plat ReSOlution of the Board of Counly Commissionors recorded August 13, 1993 In Book 721 at Page 245 as R.esolution No. 93-104. 1 ,Avigation Easement granted to ~itkin County recorded November 12, 1993 in Bool< 730 at Page 690. Terms. conditions, prpvi!i-ions and obligations of Water Service Agreement betweel"lThe City of Aspen and Pearce EqLJities Group II, f..lmited Liability Company. a Utah Limited L1ablJity Company, recorded November' 5. 1993 ip Book 730 at Page 797.. ASsignment and Assumption of Water Lease Agreement raccrded November 15, 1993 in Sook 730 atPiLge 865, Assignment and Assumption Agreement recorded January 7. 1994 in BG>ok 737 at Pa~Q 899 and Amended Assignment and Assumption Agreement recorded April 11. 1994 in BOOk 747 at Page 191 and First Arnendrnent thereto recorded Oetober 1'1, 1997 a's R:&ception No. 409559. , I Terms. conditions, Provisions and obligations as set forth 11"1 Trench, Conduit alld Vault Agreement With Holy Cr:oss E::let;trie A:s:soc~tion. Inc., recorded July 11. 1994 in Book 755 at Page 55. , I Tertrl:iio, conditions, j::)rovisions. obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners recor~ed Augus.t 2e, 199511"1 Book 791 at Page 821 as Resolution No. 9S~128. I Subject property was ~nnexed to the City of Aspen please ra'er to t"e ~olJowrn9 documents: I AnnexatiOI1 Plar, recorpedFebruary 6,1997 in Plat Sook 41 at Page 76. Ordinance, recQrded Febraury 21, '997 as Recepllon N'1. 401985, 5. 6. 7. 8, 9. 10, 11. 12. Terms, conditIons. pr~visiol"ls. obligatIons and all matters as set forth in Ordinance No. 40. Series of 1996 by Aspen City Coun"" recorded AprilS, 1997 as Reception No. 403224 and re--recarded May 15, 1997 as Reception No. 40442.~, regarl:llng rezoning Maroon Creek Club Sucdivision. , Terms. conditIons, p~isions and obligations as sef Forth in Amended and Res.tated easemt!!nt Agreement recorded July 13. 200~ as Reoeption No. 444995. 13. I ~11I1111II111II111111I1I1I11lI1I111111II111I111111111 448Ul 12/85/_e 16:elP PEe lID IlIIVJ5 stl.Vl 2 .f 2 R le.ee D,7e!l.ee N e.1e ~lTIUH COUNTY CO I ~ i<\ o r - ... r~ P. OC.T. 11, 2001l~~:p~t:M ~KAUFMA~~~~ PET,~;~ON N~) r,.:S73 ."-'" c\-\- c?,'-I~) NO. 737.9 OA1-e 'lEP ...~ ()7'IJo'~V~O ,.1 '1 (5)-[~'LF.1"~ l0'57~ ' Recorded at o'clock .M, Reeeptioni) Recorder RECORDING RBQUESTED BY; WHEN RECORDI!D RETURN TO; J_ Slacklne.n Ilnd D. Slockml1l1 clo Brooke A. IJetersOll, Esq. Kaufmftl\ &. Peterson, P .C. 31S East Hyma.n Avenue, Suite 305 A.pen, Colorodo 81611 SPECIAL W AlmANTY DEED TIllS DEED made this.J.L day 0; July, 2002, botwcell WILLIAM H, PLUMMER (hereinaRcr uGrantor"), and J. STOCKMAN and D. STOCKMAN', as joint tenants (hereinancr "Gnlll1tces"), whose iegl'll address is 105 Conyers farm Drive, Greenwich, COIlJ1eCLic.lIt 068j1. WIT!'lESSETH, thotlh. Grantor, ;orond in considOf1llion of the sum ofTen Dollars (510,00) and other goo~ and valuable considQntion, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged. has gr~ntcd;\6E1rgQined, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bflrgJin, sell, convey 8l,d confirm unto the OrBI,tees. as joint lenants and not as tenants in commonllheirheirs, su~ssor$ and assigns forever, all the r,~al propeny, together with improvemehts.lying; and being in IheCouQty of Pitkin , Slate of Colorado, d~scribe-d as follows: LOT 2, MAROON CREEK CLUB, " shown on the Finol Subdivision l'lal & PUD for Maroon Creek Club, ,eeorded November IS, 1993 in Pl,t Dook 33 at ,Page 4, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. TOGETliER. with all and singular the hereditQlnents and appurtenances thereto beJonsinG or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversiOlls, remainder and remainders. rents, issues and profits thereof. and aU tl1e es[a.(e, right. title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the Grantor, either in law or equity. of, in and 10 the abcwe bargained premises, wilh the hereditamcl,19 and appurtenanc.es; SUDJECTTO THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS: R.ol property ".es ror 2002, due and payable iri"2003. and those e~c:eptiQns listed on Exhibi~A attached hereto and inGorporatcd herein by this rcfercrtcd: An documents are recorded in the records of Pitkin County, Colorado. "I~" I1l ~ N;i ClI ~~.; N ozlC CI) - N ". 0') hN .^ v_ - ~, ~ ." ......- Q.Q; ! .. =--- -8 - -=> =- ~ !l!!!!!!!!!!!. =- ~ 0: -- -- ! -. ~- ........' -~ =~ TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the sliid premises above bargained alld described with' the appt1rt~nanceSt l1l1m the Grantces. lheil heirs, SllCCCSSOl'S and assigns forever. The Grantor, for hin1S~lf~ his helrs. ~lIecusors and BSsigns does covenant and agree that he shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFeND (he aboveMbargElined premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the Grantees, their l,eirs, successdrs Rnd assigns. agail'st aU and every person or persons claiming the whole or any part thereof, by. through or under the Grantor. his heirs, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grontor has e,.ouled this deed on the date STAmOF i o{(J,,,,I~ COUNTY OF P ,11"1",- ) )ss. ) ,,', ',:d~The foregolllg it'\:;tnun~nt wa.~ o.c1'r!nwledged before mE' lllis-1l_ day nfJnly. 2002 hy William It. Pltllnmer. " WITNESS my Mnd 'lid official Sial, t, My commission expires; III f 03 , I ",.lcll.,;\.I\IId..ww&n~'md"b ,.,-., iii Comm,Io..~,. .....j... i:<l 'IJOll~OO3 ... = 'lI!:l - ~ - !;; ffi ;::; U.I .... l!l! z: ~ - i cnsi Nco CIOffi cn~ lD~ ~l!! .... "~.. OCT. 11.2002 9: 12AM KAUFMAN & PETERSON ("', NO, 737 9 r-.. F.XHIBIT A 1 . Righi 01 the proprietor or a vein or Jade ro extract and remove his ore lheretrom, should the Seme be found 10 pone"ato or Intersaeltho promise. hersby grlll'1ted and right 01 way for dllches or canals conslruclad by the authority or the United States as reserved in United Slates Patents recorded Ma.rch 15, 1992 In Book SS at Page 21, Augusl26, 19111rl Book 65 at Pag.189, Augusl28, 1811 in Book 65 a' Page 191, ' Sepl.mber 13, 1934 In Book 162 al P.g. 400. Jun. 16, 1944 In Book 167.1 Pag. 562 and May 20,1963 In, Book 1 BO 01 Pag. 165. , 2. ea..ments, rights of way and all ma"e.. as disclos.d on Plat 01 sUbJect properly r.c:orded Novemb.r 15, 1993 in Plat Book 33 01 Page 4 and Am.nded She.t2 recorded March 31, 1994 In Pial Book 34 al Page 23 and Assignment 0' Plat 10 Maroon Creek Limited llebllity Compeny recorded February 17, 1994 In Book 742 01 Page 117 and 121, 3. Those terms, cor'ldllions, provrsions, obngations. easements..restrictions, a9sessmenls and all maners as set forth In Master Declaration 01 Protective Covenanls lor. Maroon Creek Club recorded December 2, 1993 In Book 733 al Pogo 59Sand First Am.ndmenlth.r.to record.d February 17, 1994 In Book 742 a' Page 831 AsslgnmenL and CesJgna.tlon of SuccEls'or Declar;,nl tor Maroon Creek C1ub recorded May 11, 1994 In Soak 750 at Page 242, Second Amendmenlth.relo recorded June 8, 1994 in Book 752 al Page 754 O/'d Amended and Restaled Third Amendment tIlereto recorded July 2S, 1994 In Book 758 al Page 597. ~ , Terms, conditions, provisions. obligations and all matte.. as sellonh In Subdivision Improvements Agreement recorded Novsmber 12, 1993 In Book 730 al Page S08 and amended th.relo In Inetrument rec9rded Merch 10, 2000 as Reception No.441279_ 'i::~ S. Terms, condlllons, provlslonsr obligations and aA matters as sellorth In Final Pial Resolution of lhe Board o',County Commissioners recorded August 13, 1993 in Book 721 al Pege 245 as Aesolullon No, 93.1o.l, 6, Migalion Easem.nt gran led to Pitkin County record.d NOVember 12, 1993 In Sook 730 at Page 690, , ' 7. Terms, condillons, proviSions and obligallons of Waler Sa",ico Agreamant bolwaan The City at Aspen and Pearca equities Group II, Limited Liability Company, a Ulah Liml.ad Uabnity Company, recorded November 15, 1993 in Book 730 at Page 797, Assl9nmentand Assumption olWate, leasa Agreemenl record.d Novemb.r 15, 1993 In Book 730 01 pege 8S5, Asslgnmanland Assumplion Agreamenl racordad January 7, 1994 in Book 737 at Page 599 and Am~nded Asslgnm.nt and Assumpllon Agreement recorded April 11 , 1994 in Book 747 at Page 191, 8. Terms, condlUons, provisions, obligations and all manOtt as set fonh In Resolution of lhe Pitkin County Board 01 County Commissioners recorded AugUSI29, 1995 In Book 791 al Page 921 as Resolullotl No. 95.126. 9. Easements, rights 01 way and all me"ers as disclosed on Pial of subject property recorded February 6, 1997 in Pial aook 41 at Pege 76_ 10. T.QJIs, condlllons, provisions, obligations and all mane.. as set forth in Ordinance No. 34, Seria. of 1996 by CitY Council 01 1110 City 01 Aspen rec:orded February 21, 1997 as R.coplion No, 401985. 11. Terms, condltlonsr provisIons, obligations and all matters as SElt forth in Ordinance No. 40, Series of 1996 by Aspan City Counclt recortlad April 8, 1997 as Re..pllon No, 403224 and re.racorded May 15, 1997 as Recepllon No. 404428. '~ 12, Easement and rIght otway for Private accass asset ronh rn Rule and Order recorded December', 1998 as; Recepllon No, 425224 and amended lhereto In Instrument recorded February 2Z, 1899 as Reception No. 4279,70, and Corrected In inslrument reeord.d May 10, 1 e89 as Raception No. 430672 . 13, Terms, conditions. provlslo03 and obligations as sel ronh In Agreement recorded September 22,1999 as R.c.pllon No. 435797. 14, Terms, conditions, provlGJons and obligations as sel forth il1 Coun's Order of Inclusloll recorded April 9, 2001 as Rec.ptlon No. 453237. ;\' ;{. 1111111111~ 111111111111111111111~11111111111111111111 ~~~~~~:~ ~~: 33. SIL.vlA C1j:l\lIS PITl'(!ft C;OUNT'I' eo R Ie.,. D 2..':5.08 >1 (. Return to: BI<OOKEPETel<SON MUFMAN l; PETERSON 31 ~ E, H'(MAN, SUITE 305 AS"EN, CO 81611 P 2 ,....." . " r') ATTACHMENT 4-CONT'D- SUBMITTAL KEY 1. Land Use Application with Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on~behalf of the applicant. 2. The street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur. 3. A disclosure. of ownership of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a cUITent certificate from a title insurance company, or atto~ey licensed to practice in the State of Colorado. listing the Dames of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 5. A site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registeied land surveyor, licensed in the State of Colorado. (This requirement. or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not to warrant a survey document.) 6. A site plan depicting the proposed layout and the project's physical relationship to the land and it's surroundings. 7. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. . 8. Plan with Elisting and",proposed grades at two-foot contours, with five-foot intervals for grades over ten (I 0) percent. 9. Proposed elevations of the development 10. A description of proposed construction techniques to be used. 11. A Plan with the IOO-yeartloodplain line and the high water line. 12. Accurate elevations (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor, including basement, of all new or substantially improved structw'es; a verification and recordation of the aCtual elevation in relation to mean sea level to which any structure is constructed; a demonstration that all new construction or substantial improvements will be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of any structure to be constructed or improved; a demonstration that the structure will have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to at least two (2) feet above the base flood elevation, all as certified by a registered professional engineer or architect. 13. A landscape plan that includes native vegetative screening of no less than fifty (50) percent of the development as viewed from the rear (slope) of the parcel. All vegetative screening shall be maintained in perpetuity and shall be replaced with the same or comparable material should it die. ]4. Site sections drawn by a registered architect, landscape architect, or engineer shall be submitted showing all existing and proposed site elements, the top of slope, and pertinent elevati.ons above sea level. 15. Proposed elevations of the development, including any rooftop equipment and how it will be screened. 16. Proposed elevations of the development, including any rooftop equipment and how it will be screened. 17. A sketch plan of the site showing existing and proposed features which are relevant to the review. 18, One (l) inch equals four hundred (400) feet scale city '!lap showing the locatioD of the prpposed subdivision, all adjacent lands owned by or under option to the applicant. commonly known landmarks, and the zone district in which the proposed subdivision and adjacent properties are located. 19. A plat which reflects the layout of the lots, blocks and structures in the proposed subdivision. The plat shall be drawn at a scale of one (1) equals one hundred (100) feet or larger. ArchitectoraJ scales are not acceptable. Sheet size shall , ?e tWenty~four (24) inches by thirty~six (36) inches. If it is necessary to place the plat on more than a one (I) sheet, an index shall be included on the first sheet A vicinity map shall also appear on the first sheet showing the subdivision as it relates to the rest of the city and the street system in the area of the proposed subdivision. The contents of the plat shall be of sufficient detail to determine whether the proposed subdivision will meet the design standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480,060(3).20. Subdivision GIS Data. 21. A landscape plan showing location. size, and type of proposed landscape features. 22. A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this title indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapler 26.470, 23. The precise wording of any proposed amendment. 24. Site Plan or plans drawn to a scale of one (1 :') inch equals ten (10') feet or one (1") inch equals twenty (20') fee~ including before and <<after" photOgraphs (simulations) specifYing the location of antennas, support structures, transmission buildings and/or other accessory uses, access, parking, fences, signs, lighting, landscaped areas and all adjacent land uses within one-hundred fifty (150') feet. Such plans and drawings should demonstrate compliance with the RevieW Standards of this Section. 25. FAA and FCC Coordination. Statements regardil.'lg the regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). 26. Structural Integrity Report from a professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado. 27. Evidence that an effort was made U; locate on an existing wireless telecommunication services facility site inCluding coverage! interference analysis and capacity analysis and a brief statement as to other reasons for success or no success. 28. Neighborhood block plan at 1"==50' (available from City Engineering Department) Graphically show the front portions of all existing buildings on both sides of the block and their setback from the street in feet. Identify parking and front entry for each building and locate any accessory dwelling units along the alley. (Continued on next page.) fJ Indicate whether any portions of the houses immediately adjacent to the subject parcel are one story (only one living level). 29. Roof Plan. 30. Photographic panorama. Show elevations of all buildings on both sides of the block, including present condition of the subject property. Label photos and mount on a presentation board 31. A condominium subdivision exemption plat drawn with permanent ink on reproducible mylar. Sheet size shall be tweo1y-four (24) inches by thirty..ix (36) inches with an unencumbered margin of one and one-balf(t 1/2) inches on lhe left band side of the sheet and a one.balf(ll2) inch margin around the other three (3) sides of the sheet pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480,090. 32. A description and site plan oftbe proposed development including a statement of the objectives to be achieved by the POO and a description oftbe proposed land uses, densities, natural features, traffic and pedestrian circulation, off-street parking, open space areas, infrastructure improvements, and site drainage. 33. An architectural character plan generally indicating the use, massing, scale. and orientation of the proposed buildings. 34. A written description of the variance being requested. (1 35. Exterior Lighting Plan. Show the location. height:. type and luminous intensity of each above grade fixture. Estimate the site illumination as measured in foot candles and include minimum, maximum, and average illumination. Additionally, . provide comparable examples already in the community that demonstrate technique, specification. and! or light level if they exist. I JUL. 24. 2002 10: 35AM-ClTY OF ASPEN r'\ PLANNER: PROJECT: REPRESENTATIVE: OWNER: 1YPE OF APPLICATION: DESCRIPTION: NO.5008_P 1 ''I CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLrCA TION CONFERENCE SUMMARY 1ames Lindt, 920.5095 DATE; 7/24/02 Lots 1 & 2 MCC PUD Amendment for Development Envelope Adjustment Kevin Morely Stockmans PUD Amendment PUD Amendment to amend the development envelopes on lots I & 2 of the Maroon Creek Club PUD. The development envelope 3lljustment is for the purpose of connecting the aforementioned properties with a landscaped golf cart trail. Land Use Code Section(s) 26.445.100(B) Amendment of PUD development order. Review by: Stafffor complete application, referral agencies (Development Review Committee) for technical considerations, review by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a Public Hearing, Public Hearing: Yes, Planning and Zoning Commission Referral Agencies: Parks Department, Engineering Planning Fees: Planning Deposit SI205 Referral Fees: Engineering $ I 80 Total Deposit: $1385 To apply, submit the foJ/owing information: 1, Total Deposit for review of application. 2, Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Signed fee agreement. 4. Pre-application Conference Summary. 5. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen, 6, A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 7. Improvement Survey with topography(two foot contours) and existing vegetation, 8, Proposed site plan. 9. Proposed landscaping plan. Indicate all trees to be removed. 10. 12 Copies of the complete application packet (items 1-9) Process: Apply. Planner checks application for completeness, Staff reviews application against PUD amendment standards and fonnulates staff recommendation. Application is then taken to DRC for City Department referral comments. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviews the proposed PUD amendment at noticed public hearing. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the Ciry, The summary is based On current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that mayor may not be accurate. The SUmmary does not create a legal or vested right. ... o .... 0\ ~ - " " 00-'" '" " 0.'" :::: 0. 0"'" ,..,2 " '" -",= " 0 ..:::: " - :::: .s:; cn~E f- :::.t:: Z 8. 8 w~~ :E I:: '" w8] e::: '" '" - ii II) ::l..o'al 0'80. ~ @ ~ ... " " Z ~ II) ot5~ - '" I- ,= <( :::: 8 U 8 '" -..E~ ...J o.t:: D.Q2; c.""'''' <( g 8 w as S en "',- ::::-;0 :J ,- " 0);':: C':<98: Z,,'" <C..... - ...Ie:;;: " LL.o ' o 8 g =,- ><:::~ ii:1Je 1--0 <c.E~ ~ """.- .c::~B . " '" oq- """.S I- ~"-a Z " = WS"C ..,,,0 ..:: ... :::: :I: ';3 0 U 0<"", <( ~ VJ" I- :::: il= ......9 .~ <(tti> .~ ~ -a~ 0.0. ~ ''::: 15"'3 .... 8 '" '" " " o ....~N l'. "l .~ " - .. ~<=- ~:::: " .- "':::: ""0 f-< ,- :1 .5 " .... " " o '" .... " !l-<~ ;; t: 's ..Q = '" ... " .= = '" " " e: 's o :9 ~rI':I ........ .c ~ 01 e~ ;... :: I:: Q ~ Z ~..... r't N -g '" ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ -=:,... ;=; '" -< '" :> 0: :> E:~ r:: -< - -< 0: i!:: 0: ,...:;;: ,... CIlQ ~ Z <" i!:: i 0: -E! :;: ~ ~ ~ ~ ",'"' ... ii :l " " 5 " .= " '" ,,~ P:", g ~ ':~ln~= ..... -~ ... 5gO'O'o ..Q.: ~ ~ ~ = cj: I I ... tI'J.:::s=QOQIOQC d.. ~ 1:'--'"' r-: t---'" c. Q,l I I I -<~........ .... '" " '" " P: .... o " '" ,.., f-< Z ~ 9 ~ '" f-< !:l 5= ~ > '" :;: '" -=:s:J;=; '" r.l Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ::;.;S ",z"" 0: '" :;: " 1>2 :;;: o " '" .... 0 0: 0.... ,... ""0'" "" r", , , N ~ !l-< .... oS "" .... NN olJ olJ !l-< !l-< .... .... ..s ..s "" "" .... .... == .5 's 5 ... ... -< -< .... .... CQcScS N....... M M N o 0 Q Q N ...... ..... ""'" ..... "" "" '" .... NNNN ~~~~ =-=-=-=- .... o z ;:> o '"' u 0 >- ~ !:: 0 Uu ~ >- ~ ~ N" U ~ =- ~ U= es. :> ~NN ~=O~~ '" U U :>zr-:=-=- 1= S ;:; 0: 0:: -<UUoo 0:: ~ i i ~ t~ ~ i ~UN"~~ "" ~, -< =- .,., M ...:0" ..... ." 5 ~ ,,- .g; = .~ an g-Cl: ('f") =: ~ II') lt1 r-: lf1 ;: -s: ('I") ('f") N M =~,...;~. vS r-f "S-;NN M 1"""'l...antn -g]O'o lr)'" ,..... f""l f""l ~l'I.lN N M ,..... ..; 'C... ! ~ a-,... 0'\'" '<t::f'''' <0,..... 1"""11:"'- ~.::~,..... f"') N '1""1 ... ... ""'" :; <:I ...... N... QC"'~~o-.."'~~~~~~~~ r.-'" r-: r;-: r: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-:~'" r-: r.- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ 9 '" ,... :> ~ ~ liI:;"l -< ~ iC :;: -=: '"'.r!i ~ "''"'=-~'" ;< '"' :>. '"' - r.l ::> ... -< :> i!::~~z~ ~ t:rJ z 9 ..J < ~ - t: -< ~j~~O :;: :;: ::> 0 s: -< -< 0 U '" "'........ 0: '"' "" ,... "" "'i:l:: ~ , i!:: "" .... U ~ A 0: o N ~ =- o "" 01" .... <to .... "" r-.:' , .... z ,... o ~ z ~ ~ o :> '" ~ ::: ;:J .. - ..., :> == Q Q~-< ~ t ~ '" :;: - "'..- ;< ,... r.l3 '" :is:;'' i2 oJ< !!: 0.... -< z !::~~~~~tl~ ,:z"10""""z:O '" '" Eo< == "1"'_-< '" :;: '" '" :;: z ;< !5-<~iS:$S2~r.l "-~r.;l~A~:>~ 00:::; A ~ U:>", <Ii " ",::: '" "l -=: l'. .... ..:i "" '" N" ~ !l-< .... oS "" .... ~ '" " _os: .- " Sp: ~@ ~l'. u_ U ~ -g~ '" .... NoS olJ.?;> " l'.<;; .... .... cE~ "" " = ~ ~ CI.::I N .5 u SU ...... -< " .... '" oSN ",OlJ U~ U U... U f5~ e1j ...... z ~ ~ e 0 -2: """ U <1=,...N~U N""'~~N~ .~ i!j 1;; =- .'" -< ~ II< - I ~ '" =-r.li!::,",=-N :>:z:023I~ ~~~ t:;J=- z'" '" z i~ lE~ "" ia 0 -..(Q U ." . - c. o . ,,- , ~ =-. ~ i .0: .E . :..s: E " .., E . - en " -'" . - . - 0'" :.... .- 0 " - ." - "".;: " . l"- . , . ....0 .,., "" ",," "" ..... ...."" ""r-.:' " , .... .... .,., "" ~ , .... ~ 1= ~ i ~~ s;: o "" z o U s =- z o ~ :> 0: '" '" '" 0: =- '" " "" o ..- r; ,,~ U I' .. U - ..:: "" "g Q - " :; .... .s ., Q ;t '~ N ' U " .g::? ";;: 0<1 i!!-~ 0<1 .0 " Ilo< U~ ~ U ~ ... .. .. " ~ u g ..:: ..:: .:: - Qi "".- Q Q '" ... ..', "r-. .... .... .1; ~) ., .. ~ =0 N":: - .; '= 'S u 0<I.E:> 's 's 'S """" " "" "" "" ~- -< " '" -<: -<: -<: .. ., .. .. ..:: '" .. .. .. ~N Co ..:: ..:: ..:: ....0<1 Q " Q ....'" .... .... .... .... '" Uo;;U '" r=::;:: U"'U Uo z '" "'~QUU", o~;: !;: Q,"~UQ~ s::l-;;;Q~ '" ~~N"~~2Jf::~~~~$tl~ - ~ ~ -< N iZ ~ 6'::; e::t iHl e ;:J NZIlo<N~Z;;;UzN;;;-<~a ~'" 1~Ilo<"Qu9~..:iQ -< ~~..:i~"'oo~",,"~~~NS 8z~..Ic;~~C:~"'i2lii~S ,ot:;!2':Q i!::"oo ~:;: Z Q '" - ;;; '" ~ ~ '" 0 -"'u"'A'" Q ",,'" ~~z <o;g -< A'" ~ ~68 <::> <i5 l'- , .... on '" ,..:' l'- , , .... .... l'- , .... '" ,..:' , .... '" ~ :it ~ ~ @ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q CI.l '" 0 Z '" ~<'" ..:i ~ Z ~!"!::~ ;.. Q ..:i Z ..:i '" ;:!: :it ~ -< ... CI.l ,... ~ " Z ::l ..:i Oil :;:: " ;.. '" o '" '" Oil U U -< Oil ~ ;.. '" -< '" o ... :it Oil E-< ~ '" l'-,..:' , . .... .... '" '" Z ~ '" e:l " ;:J '" i!:: 0' U Z '" Z o ~;:!: N ..:i '" Oil-<-< ~ ~ >- ~ Z Oil :it is n o - o '" o '" 6 '" '" - ., u " en '" " il:, d .9 1ij u ,~ ]: " en " -0 " .-"1 6- '" 00 '" 'B ] " en o - 15 "& -0 " U .g '" o u " ..0 0;-0 -a- " g <1..0 " en .t:= [) g. @ . ~ '" -il: '" - '" '~...c: dS S.-:: g -g " ~ ~Qt2 _ u '" " '" 0 2 e 0 ~ rB .:::: as 8.9 2 0 ~ Ctl ::: ._ il:.9 -a Ctl 10 g.. A.$:a b .~ --a l.., """"" ..... ~ ta ;;e..2 en ,,"" 5<13 U * ..0 * .. ~ r') r1 ATTACHMENT 5 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE 1. Attend pre-application conference. During this one-on-one meeting, staff will detennine the review process which applies to your development proposal and will identify the materials necessary to review your application. 2, Submit Development Application. Based on your pre-application meeting, you should respond to the application package and submit the requested number of copies of the complete application and the appropriate processing fee to the Community Development Department 3, Determination of Completeness. Within five working days of the date of your submission, staff will review the application, and will notify you in writing whether the application is complete or if additional materials are required. Please be aware that the purpose of the completeness review is to detennine whether or not the information you have submitted is adequate to review the request, and not whether the information is sufficient to obtain approval, 4, Staff Review of Development Application, Once your application is detennined to be complete, it will be reviewed by the staff for compliance with the applicable standards of the Code, During the staff review stage, the application will be referred to other agencies for comments, The Planner assigned to your case or the agency may contact you if- additional information is needed or if problems are identified, A memo will be written by the staff member for signature by the Community Development Director. The memo will explain whether your application complies with the Code and will list any conditions which should apply if the application is to be approved, Final approval of any Development Application which amends a recorded document, such as a plat, agreement or deed restriction, will require the applicant to prepare an amended version of that document for review and approval by staff. Staff will provide the applicant with the applicable contents for the revised plat, while the City Attorney is normally in charge of the form for recorded agreements and deed restrictions, We suggest that yoil not go to the trouble or expense of preparing these documents until the staff has determined that your application is eligible for the requested amendment or exemption, 5, Board Review of Application. If a public hearing is required for the land use action that you are requesting, then the Planning Staff will schedule a hearing date for the application upon determination that the Application is complete, The hearing(s) will be scheduled before the appropriate reviewing board(s), The Applicant will be required to mail notice (one copy provided by the Community Development Department) to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property and post notice (sign available at the Community Development Department) of the public hearing on the site at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date (please see Attachment 6 for instructions), The t""', n Planning Staff will publish notice of the hearing in the paper for land use requests that require publication. The Planning Staff will then formulate a recommendation on the land use request and draft a memo to the re\jewing board(s). Staffwill supply th.e Applicant with a copy of the Planuing Staffs memo approximately 5 days prior to the hearing. The public hearing(s) will take place before the appropriate review boards. Public Hearings include a presentation by the Planuing Staff, a presentation by the Applicant (optional), consideration of public comment, and the reviewing board's questions and decision. 6. Issuance of Development Order. If the land use review is approved, then the Planning Staff will issue a Development Order which allows the Applicant to proceed into Building Permit Application. 7. Receipt of Building Permit. Once you have received a copy of the signed staff approval, you may proceed to building permit review. During this time, your project will be examined for its compliance with the Uniform Building Code. It will also be checked for compliance with applicable provisions of the Land Use Regulations which were not reviewed in detail during the one step review (this might include a check of floor area ratios, setbacks, parking, open spaceand the like). Fees for water, sewer, parks and employee housing will be collected if due. Any document required to be recorded, such as a plat, deed restri.ction or agreement, will need to be reviewed and recorded before a Building Permit is submitted. ~. F) ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: ,200_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certifY that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner; Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official - paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (IS) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. _ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofletters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and wlis continuously visible from the _ day of ,200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. _ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prio~ to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the - development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) n i1 Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or Qtherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map ha~ been available for public inspection in the planuing agency during all business hours for fifteen (IS) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this _ day of , 200_, by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF mE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL ~ t} Proj ect: Applicant: LoCation: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Lot- \ ~YQ:V'\ C.~"'--c.\vb ?\1\:::::. ~V\~ o.V\J .JMV\i~ ~ ,^"""V\ \L41r:. T\e\tio.ck.. QN7<:::\ ~. CD 9:>\\0\ \ (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slo es. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Ex' 'ng: Number of residential units:~ \...: Number of bedrooms: D Proposed: Proposed: Proposed: Proposed % of d on (Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: Allowable: Principal bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: Access. bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: On-Site parking: Existing: Required: % Site coverage: Existing: Required: % Open Space: , Existing: Front Setback: Existing: quired: Rear Setback: Existing: Required: Combined FIR: Existin Required: Side Setback: Ex' Lng: Required: Existing: Required: Existing: Required: Proposed: Proposed: Proposed: Proposed: Proposed: Proposed: Proposed: Proposed: Proposed: Existing non-conformities Dr encroachments: Variations requested: Proj ect: Applicant: Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: ^' ('l ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Lo-\- 2 MO\y-COV\ ~~Lc.\~,= \>\I'D \V.Vid o.V\cl ~V\\hr <;;\-r-...--kW"l.0.V\ (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slo es. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Proposed: Proposed: Proposed: Proposed % of d DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Principal bldg. height: Access. bldg. height: On-Site parking: % Site coverage: % Open Space: Front Setback: Rear Setback: Combined FIR: Side Setback: on (Historic properties only): Existing: Allowable: Proposed: Existing: Allowable: Propos Existing: Allowable: PI> 'Posed: Existing: Required: Proposed: Existing: Required: Proposed: Existing~ Proposed: Existing: quired: Proposed: Existing: Required: Proposed: Required: Proposed: E' zng: Required: Proposed: Existing: Required: Proposed: Existing: Required: Proposed: Existing non-conforII).i.ties or encroachments: Variations requested: f', Ci CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A!!Teement for Pavment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and t>""vid 17IV'c\ J\yw\\"~.liY ~V\ (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICAJ:\'T has submitted ~ an ap~cation for A "N\\VIoI<:.. P~D O\\M .~ (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY furiher agree that it is in the inter~t of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. . CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver ofits right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of$ 12lh. 00 which is for _~ hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the'CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $205.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. - CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT (0 -I ~-G.2.- By: Julie Ann Woods Community Development Director By: Date: Mailing Address: ~ t:-lo~T""'^""'1A~. f'o\eot,>< ~2-t::J ~S<=-'V\\\O-9l'" CD Blto\S g: Isupport\formslagrpayas.doc 1/10/01 III u Ii f" 1;i ~--~--~-..--k~... .. _._____.____-.j" ~\-.1_ M~:OOA ~\c_~1d2 ....._.____') fu\5{\'6j'("~tt'2'Wit:-b~~~\: ..-.....--------.-~---...-..--------..--..---... ..- ----, .---------111 \ ,~~_2(,: 5~b.~20 ~--L-. ~~}~\\~-i1J~~~Ld'SW}iC. ~~_n .-------------------- -'. 11:;;:. c.A cL~s S~\\ (\ot-~ <-{tJOl -.--------.--- HI ,.. .. ----..___--------------~-----.,-------'-~-------~-~':.7"'---....--.-------------, _ ~__~____.. ". Iii 5, S.t. l~_ ~ &J ,ce;. A:.l,?_,?ld (:~1SW- \l'L44Ce?---------_,---..-__---.--__-____..~----.- __.___,~ rtl --l~~\lfQ~-@,--~LUl.~.. t ei-\oJ_v~s________,---___-_---_--,-: .._.____ III ]<1fe~ SyW:c. ~(\0t..t~-~1,(.k.a::c-,dGybe~t Dt~v-4\~~z.- ...._- ~~===_ .1111~;~~t~~.L;~\:;~~~=~~-;;~-=i ~_~_____~ ~~~~(II}fo[~/'I:~.1:'"L\-I"\6,'"o.l~l.----~l,*''1S::i ~ctt~ ~'G.~.. ...-.--- ~~.___ ___ !lj5....._1Ul~t>V\tobj\t_v/~yr~-~0d~1 \ (\el_~~l{_.(i..G~h~~~"'.~- '4m-tvL.____ __...____ I.I! . ~bicl.lli\'2:~~l1"j"y~~ih.-~~ .. ... .---------------------- ____ ----~l 1 ......... '... ,,' . ... ,- ===~.A~~~=-~?~:~~~=~,,~j-4~~i-. ...........___~'=- Z JQ}s~kO~_\ e1~(]OW\_\2\;L\~xz}abtt <<l.~_~kj~brL ~_C&=_~_........_ _.__" . .~.\V~-Ui~l~~~}~"Yt ..~. g3ek~c~rM6~~~------..-7.------.--..-7---..--- _.__._~__.__ '~~\}J\~~(AL~'\~~-~Jlfoh~1.~..0:---rQt ~M--~':tt.':.1k-~ti'Cf~-'-2~~Wi\~~--- ..---------- I ~"bf-~7t.O\..f11:t~.B:tCL~.t.':C<<%~~~~lt~~liw.rur~.l-~'~~~1~t------- ._____.__ ~~V ~~~~~:h...~\l..~~~~----=-------......------~---~---.......---- __._..________ '.... ,:M1:~~~ c;cck6k-~~t:~~r;' - a ~\:J___----.-------.--....,-------.---.-----__-- ...______. /.~tc~,6(\~~Q~I~~M~-~ \0\~ c~~=L~~m .------------------------ " 1 J .';:!. f"'"", i1 130 S. Galena SI. Aspen CO 81611 (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Aspen Community Development Department Fax To: Kevin Morley From: Scott Woodford, (970) 920-5102 Fax: 970-923-2599 Pages: 3 Phone: Date: 12/6/02 Re: Lots 1 & 2 Maroon Creek Club CC: o Urgent x For Review o Please Comment 0 Please Reply o Please Recycle . Comments: Kevin, attached is the comments from the DRC Meeting as well as some comments from Community Development based on the revised plans. I have been trying to get in touch with Ed VanWalraven of the Fire Department to see if he has any comments on the revised plan. Have you been coordinating with him? If not, I forwarded a copy of the first revised plan to him, but not the second revised pian. I only got one copy from you-{jid you drop off a copy to him? As you will note on the attached letter, our Department does not support the proposal in its current form. The reasons for not supporting it are detailed in the letter. If you would like to discuss our comments, please give me a call. As it stands, though, the project is still scheduled for Planning and Zoning Commission on January 7, 2003_ , n i1 MEMORANDUM To: Development Review Committee From: John Niewoehner, Community Development Engineer, DRC Case load Coordinator Date: October 30, 2002 Re: Maroon Creek Club - Lot 1 and 2 Attendees: Scott Woodford, Community Development Department Ed VanWalraven, Fire Department Brian Flynn, Parks Department John Niewoehner, Community Development Department Kevin Morley, Applicant's Representative At the October 30, 2002 meeting, the Development Review Committee reviewed the following project: Maroon Creek Club Lots 1&2: A minor PUD amendment to modify the existing development on lots 1 and 2 to allow for a common driveway. DRC COMMENTS I. Enl!ineerinl! Department: No comments at this time. 2. Communitv Development Enl!ineer: . Since vehicles will access Lot I by driving across Lot 2, an access easement is needed across Lot 2. 3. Zonio2: No comments at this time. 4. Housinl! Department: No comments at this time. 5. Fire Protection District: . Since the driveway is more than 150 feet long, the driveway must be 16 feet wide. . All dwellings must have sprinklers. . The driveway must be designed to accommodate the necessary movements of a fire truck (including turning around). In addition, at the mid point of the driveway there needs to be a wide pull out spot in the driveway to allow two vehicles to pass. In order to limit the area of pavement, this area should be incorporated into the driveway area serving exclusively Lot 2. . The turn off of Tiehack Road needs to be 'softened' to provide access for a large fire truck. . Some ofthe driveway requirements for fire access may not be necessary if the existing driveway serving Lot I remains. If the Lot I driveway is replaced with grass-crete pavers, the pavers would have to be designed to DOT standards to support a fire truck. The grass-crete driveway would also have to be maintained year round (i.e. plowed). 6. Parks Deoartment: After site visit on 11/18, Parks has the following comments: ("'\ f"'\ :; 1) Mitigation for the trees forremoval on site will be $13,250.88- this is a total of9 trees identified as per code and in need of mitigation. A tree permit will be required before final approval of this driveway alignment. Mitigation can be on site with landscaping of the native restoration area. 2) The entire area west of the proposed Y-turn around which currently serves as the driveway, will need to be re-vegetated in native plantings only. The area in front of the house and to the South of the y-turn can be landscaped for screening or per the residence. 7. Buildin!! DeDartment: No comments at this time. 8. Citv Water DeDartment: No comments at this time. 9. ASDen Consolidated Sanitation District: No comments at this time. 10. Environmental Health: No comments at this time. 11. Citv Communitv DeveloDment - Plannin!!: The Community Development staff has reviewed the application proposal and revised site plan at a recent staff meeting and the Department has concerns with the proposal. Our primary concem is with the need for the driveway. We feel that a long, winding driveway immediately paralleling a public street is a duplication of a public facility (the cul- de-sac), which the Land Use Code discourages (Section 26.480.050.B.b Spatial pattern efficient). Both lots already have relatively easy access directly from a public street. Because of this, we don't see a compelling reason why we should make access to the lots more difficult. Secondarily, staff feels that the driveway unnecessarily creates more impermeable surface and disrupts natural vegetation. Although the driveway may be ultimately designed to be accessible by a fire truck, it is not the optimum driveway layout and it will likely require a constant effort to keep it clear of snow and parked cars in order to meet the minimum fire department requirements. This seems to us, to be creating an unnecessarily dangerous situation. The Code (Section 26.480.050 Land Suitability) requires that subdivisions be laid out in order to not create a condition that may be harmful to the health, welfare and safety of its residents. Additionally, even though the two lots are jointly owned now, allowing the common access to function more smoothly, we are concerned about what happens when one lot is sold separately. There is currently nothing in place that would guarantee that this would not happen. If they ever were to be sold separately, we could easily have a situation where a new owner petitions the city to have the common driveway undone and the separate driveway access arrangement reinstated. This would create additional impacts to at least one of the sites. 12. Citv Electric DeDartment: No comments at this time. 13. Holv Cross Electric: No comments at this time. 14. Citv Attornev: No comments at this time. 15. Streets DeDartment: No comments at this time. 16. Historic Preservation Officer: No comments at this time. 17. Pitkin Countv Plannin!!: No comments at this time. 18. Countv and Citv Disaster Coordinator: No comments at this time. 19. TrausDortation: No comments at this time. 20. Parkin!!: No comments at this time. , **************************************************************************************************** ~ " !""""\ TRANSACT! ON REPORT t""\ P. 0 1 ~ * DEC-OB-2002 FRI 11: 27 AM * * * * RECEIVE * * * * DATE START SENDER RX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE M~ DP * * * * DEC-OB 11 :24 AM 4143524134 48" 1 RECEIVE oK * * * **************************************************************************************************** n i1 ROBERT fROWN & ASSOCIATES. INC. DD Aspen/Pitkin Community Development 130 south Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Tel: (970) 920-5090 Fax: (970) 920-5439 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 12/4/02 PROJECT: Maroon Creek Lots 1 and 2 ATTENTION: Scott Woodford / SENT VIA HAND DESCRIPTION: Scott : Enclosed please fiud the revised driveway and fire turn-about, for your review and comment. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Kevin. COPY TO: File SIGNED: Kp.vin ~ MnrlpYJ AlA. 25 LOWER WOODBRIDGE ROAD - SUITE 104-B - P.O. BOX 6820 - SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO - 81615 TEL. (970) 923-6131 FAX (970) 923-2599 . " ( r'1 n ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE n j!I!{ CG ! 4- S ).q \;tell 2- ,Aspen, CO SCHEDuLEDPL'BLICHEARINGDATE: \)ct ill, 7, "ZDO'<s, .200_ I ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, '-~{ fA/! ((2. S ) --r \A+ (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certifY that Ihave complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: K Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. _ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofletters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of ,200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. _ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (IS) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, SGhool, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) .( (~ i'. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. . :J<"i The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged qefo~~ day of ~-1-/' , 200~ by O~ J-..) 20u~. t::ll'lOO) "~':~'~"';lt..;;:--...,-.:-",~ .', _,_..,,_._._~uBqc}k5trd""''':''-'"' RE';' l.OTS,IAND2,'MAR6dfit'CREEK"'-.-""'" ,,' : Z~~I~~T.s..DH.~.i". R~..~~.....'..~~~hU~)::,~}ct.~NDJ~MB:!;~,; wdJ ~e~eJdon Tu day, January 7, 2003, at a ' ?m~etl~g to begin at 4:30 p.m. before Hie Aspen Janmngand Zool C !' -'- , ',. R""-''''-'''''''' ommsslon',Slst~r Cities, o~m. ,r~O S,,-,gaJ,ena $treet, to' consIder an appli. cahon_s~bmitted, b~ ~ayjd, <lI1? }ennlfl~r' StoC!l;c ,man, 'requ~stlng, approval 'of : il. Planned Unit. pi;' velopment cPUD)Amendment to'aniend the plat. ted development envelopes of Lots I and 2' of i:h ~Ma~oofl- Cr~ek, nClub,' purSUant "to" SecHo~ _ ~6.445.~OO of the Land U~e,Code. 'The applkallt ~s, se~kmg toalTlend the (feVelop~ent ef!velope's 'bn Ohrde~ to construct a common drIveway acrosi ot lots. ' , , , -For furtherjnf(l,rlTIatj?n"70(l~act S~~tf W66df ""(i at the <::fty of Aspen Cl' 'munity DeveJopmerii ~e- partment, 130"S.(}al~n St,Aspen,CO(970/920: ATTACHMENTS: 5102, scottw@CLaspen. .us. ' _ ",: ,s/JasmlneTygre;Chair P"bf;;h"''%P;~ pI,"" ga,d Zoo',gcomm";'o'OPY OF THE PUBLICATION 2002.(9855):': Aspen Tfmes onDe<:ember 21, WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commissi ~ '''.~,.....~~~"'''"''', """'i~j" "~,." '"'~'t3'~ "~-c"'" .... PH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) ~ LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL