HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sr.700 E Main.50C(87)88
~
r'
J/
.r,
~
CASEIDAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
P~CEL ID AND ~E NO.
d7'31 ()11::rJ{f;;)- .5"0 (! (/1' Z )- $
STAFF MEMBER:
PROJECT NAME: 70()/, fiJJ.ltJ JrlJA-L ri"rr-
Project Address:
APPLICANT: 0uG ~C-o .
Applicant Address:' /f)~ (On-H'-v I ~) I/VU ffjU !:>!ff~,)......
REPRESENTATIVE: Lf/{ (J/fl 7i,11f1;
Representative Address/Phone:/:tt; r 0 tl.t 1 ty)a.n tv On, cu %tip; I b- dido
;A;~~=~;~--;~===;';~;~==7=z,=o~{r=;a===~================
1) TYPE OF APPLICATION:
DATE RECEIVED:
DATE COMPLETE:
LjJ2q Iff
1 STEP: ~
2 STEP:
-",,'""-:':3-
-t';'--"- .7 P&Zc
2) IF 1 STEP APPLICATION GOES TO:
PUBLIC HEARING
1./
CC
DATE:
YES VNO_
3)
VESTED. RIGHTS:'
PUBLIC HEARING IS BEFORE:
'1~{v!13 ", . /"
P&Z i V CC
DATE REFERRED: ,f;-s-rt
N/A
INITIAIS: ~
City Atty
REFERRALS:
0.~~ k- V City Attorney
J~~'>J.,.." \I City Engineer
~ Il Housing Dir.
Aspen water
d piAl-s Cit:y Electric
;jJJ/~ Envu. Hlth.
M . Aspen Consolo
~ S.D.
0'-) ,.t-h>
iN t,<'V-':;
,,-,v.1' FINAL ROUTING:
Other:
FILE STATUS AND IDCATION:
Mm. Be1l
Parks Dept.
Holy Cross
Fire Marshall
Fire Chief
Roaring Fork
Transit
School District
Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
State Hwy Dept(GW)
State Hwy Dept(GJ)
Bldg:Zon/Inspect
Roaring Fork
Energy Center
Other
INITIAL: ~
Bldg. Dept.
DATE ROUTED:~
city Engineer
~r%v
I
/
r--.
,~
LAW OFFICES
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
BOX 10001
315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, SUIIE 305
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
TELEPHONE
AREA CODE 303
925-8166
TELE:FAX 925-1090
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
MARTHA C. PICKETT
November 16, 1988
Ms. Cindy Houben, Planner
Mr. Fred Gannett, City Attorney
Aspen/pitkin County Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
HAND-DELIVERED
Re: Contents of Final Plat - 700 East Main Project
Dear Cindy and Fred:
This letter is to confirm our understanding of drawings which
will be required to be recorded as the 700 East Main/Victoria Final
Plat. In various meetings with Cindy and Michael Thompson, our
records show that the following drawings shall be required:
1. L.2 "Layout Plan Exterior Area";
2. L.4 "Surface Grading and Drainage Plan Exterior Area";
3. L.4 "Planting Plan";
4. C1 "site utility Plan";
5. C2 "On-Site and Off-site Water Improvements";
6. C3 "On-Site and Off-site Sanitary Sewer Improvements";
7. C4 "Storm Sewer System";
8. C5 "Storm Sewer System";
9. C6 "Sanitary Sewer System";
10. C7 "Sanitary Sewer System";
11. A5.1 "Exterior Elevations/Sections";
12. A5.2 "Exterior Elevations/Sections";
13. A5.3 "Exterior Elevations/Sections";
14. A5.4 "Exterior Elevations";
15. A5.5 "Exterior Elevations";
16. A5.6 "Exterior Elevations";
17. A5.9 "Exterior Elevations/Sections";
18. Cover Sheet; and
19. Improvements Survey/Stream Margin Review.
If your understanding of the items required to be recorded as
the 700 East Main/Victoria Final Plat is different from that set
forth above, please let me know as soon as possible. Thank you both
for your continuing cooperation.
MCP/bw
cc: Bob Kueppers
Sincerely,
LAW OFFICES 9F
:y~'
Ma ha;-
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN, P.C.,
Corporation
Pickett
1'-,
,~
LAW OFFICES
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
BOX 10001
315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, SUITE 305
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
TEL.EPHONE
AREA CODE 303
925-8166
TEL.EFAX 925-1090
GIDEON!. KAUFMAN
MARTHA C. PICKETT
November 10, 1988
HAND DELIVERED
Mr. Fred Gannett,
city of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado
City Attorney
IIJV it 0 \988
street
81611
Re: 700 East Main Proiect/Victoria Townhome Condominiums
Dear Fred,
The purpose of this letter is to put you and the City of
Aspen on notice of Fine Associates' position regarding the
various drawings, plats, elevations, surveys, plans, and sheets
(collectively the "Final Plat Documents") relating to the 700
East Main/Victoria Final Plat. All Final Plat Documents produced
by Fine Associates, its employees, contractors and consultants
are protected by copyright and various other laws and equitable
principles relating to proprietary property rights. Such items
may only be used by the owner thereof and no reproduction,
distribution, use, display, disclosure, or other exploitation of
such property may be made by any person who is not the owner
thereof. Included among the uses which may only be made by an
owner is the recording of these documents for platting or other
purposes.
In accordance with the foregoing, both any attempt to record
the Final Plat Documents by one not an owner thereof and the
city's acceptance, approval or recording of such Final Plat
Documents when presented by one not the owner thereof would be in
derogation of the rights of the owners of the Final Plat Docu-
ments and is therefore improper. Similarly, any attempt to use
or convert the Final Plat Documents by reference thereto to
effect a recordation of the 700 East Main/Victoria Final Plat is
improper.
Please let me know if you would like to discuss this matter
further.
Sincerely,
LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN,
Profes i nal Corporation
MCP/krl
cc: Cindy Houben
.
I"~
/-"",
Summary of the cc meeting of May 23,1988 regarding the final plat
and vested rights for the 700 East Main PUD.
refer to memo entitled 700 east main final.
The ordinance was passed (OR. 24) however the City Atny wants to
reword it in order to incorporate and cross reference the
Subdivision Improvements agreement.
Condition # 1. recieved new wording/ see matry
Condition # 3. The corner park is accepted as presented at final
Plat(not accessible to the public).
Condition # 4.E The applicants will provide a handrail.
Condition # 4. C. The applicants final plat design for the
parking along main street is acceptable. However the option of
more parking along main has not been ruloed out. We must talk w/
the state hwy. dept.
Grading issue along the main street R.O.W.: discussions may
continue until the second reading.
ch.700re.
~
.-.,
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Aspen city council
Robert S. Anderson, Jr., city Manager
cindy M. Houben, Planning Office ~
700 East Main/Final Plat and Request for Vested Rights
ff
TO:
THRU:
RE:
DATE:
June 13, 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Planning Office is recommending tabling of the
Final Plat for 700 East Main, condominiumization and approval of
the Second reading for an ordinance approving vesting the rights
of the project.
REQUEST: The applicants are requesting Final Plat approval for
the 700 East Main project, vesting the rights of the project and
condominiumization of.the project (see attached site plan).
The applicants are requesting that the development rights for the
project be vested pursuant to section 6-207 of the Aspen Land Use
Regulations. This is a new provision which requires that City
Council pass an ordinance vesting the right for the project.
Tonight is intended to be the 2nd reading of the vested rights
ordinance (see attached ordinance).
The staff is recommending tabling of the 2nd reading tonight.
At the First reading we requested your input on several final
plat issues. Tonight we intend to apprise you of the status of
those issues.
APPLICANTS: Fine Associates, a Minnesota General Partnership.
BACKGROUND: The city council approved
submission in January of this year.
approved preliminary submission with
1988.
this project's
The Planning
condi tions on
conceptual
Commission
April 19,
The application process for this project was initiated under the
old Code, however, we have given the applicants the ability to
apply aspects of the new Code which meet the needs of the project
and do not adversely affect the public (as permitted by Article 1
of the Code). The applicants have chosen to submit the final plat
documents pursuant to section 20-12 and 20-15 of the old Code.
The applicants have chosen to apply for condominiumization
(Section 7-1008) and vested rights under (Section 6-208) of the
new Code.
,-"
,--"
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
1) Engineering Department: All Engineering Department comments
are incorporated in the following staff comments section.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The preliminary plat was approved with the conditions as listed
below. The applicant I s response to these conditions are also
listed.
L
Condition: All representations
become conditions of approval,
these conditions.
of the applicants shall
unless herein modified by
Response: The applicants have requested that the language of
this condition be changed to read as follows:
All representations of the applicant agreed to by the city
and reduced to writing in the PUD Agreement and recorded
Final Plat, shall be conditions of approval unless
herein modified by the fOllowing conditions.
The city Attorney does not object to this language. The
proposed language is however a variation from the normal
Planning Office language which is represented in the
original condition of approval. The underlying concern of
the Planning Office is that both the applicants and the
Planning staff may have neglected to include an item in the
PUD Agreement that was committed to in the approval process.
2. Condition: The on-site unit shall be deed restricted as a
low income rental unit with priority given to an on-site
employee of the project who is not required to meet the low
income guidelines.
Response: In Exhibit "A", PUD/Subdivision agreement the
applicants state that "the unit shall be restricted to low
income rental or sale guidelines. The employee unit occupant
shall be selected by the owner, with priority given to
employees of the project. There shall be no income or asset
limitations placed upon the employee unit occupant if the
occupant is an employee of the project"
This language is generally acceptable to the Planning Office
if the intent is that if the unit sells that it must be sold
to an individual who meets the low income guidelines.
3. Condition: The corner park at Spring and Main is not
required to be accessible to the public and two benches
shall be provided in the public right-of-way as shown on the
preliminary plat.
2
_.
! .'.
,-.",
Response: The applicants agree to the condition imposed by
the Planning Commission at preliminary plat and have
depicted the two benches on the public right-of-way on the
landscape plan. At the First reading by City Council the
Council agreed with the Condition imposed by the Planning
commission and determined that the park would not be
required to be accessible to the public.
4. Condition: Prior to final plat approval, the Engineering
Department shall verify that the applicant has adequately
provided the following information:
A. The plat shall conform to all of the requirements set
forth in Section 20-21 of the Municipal Code.
Response: This has been accomplished, according to the
Engineering Department with the following exceptions:
a. The existing guardrail should be labeled on the
existing conditions report, and
b. It is suggested that the plat include a mortgage
certificate.
B. The proposed 5 foot wide sidewalk which is adjacent to
the curb along Spring and Main Streets shall be
redesigned so that there is a two foot space between
this sidewalk and the curb for the purpose of sign
placement.
Response: This has been accomplished by the applicants.
C. The sidewalks, curb, and gutter alignment along Main
street shall be designed parallel to the property line
for approximately 150 feet from the Spring Street curb,
then dogleg to the Original Curve curb. This is to
maximize the available on-street parking without
reducing the safety of Original Curve under slippery
condi tions. The design is subj ect to the approval of
the Engineering Department.
Response: At the last council meeting the council
agreed with the Engineering Department I s solution to
the parking situation rather than agreeing with the
Planning Commission's condition. The final plat
reflects this solution.
D. The easement for the transformer/utility pad shall be
at least 10 x 7 feet.
Response: The applicants have adequately addressed this
condition.
3
.~
,~
E. The applicants shall have a guardrail installed on the
North side along the area where the bank drops off to
the river:
Response: At the last city
applicants agreed to install the
guardrail. This was done at
Engineering Department.
F. The storm drainage of the site shall be designed by a
registered engineer to ensure that the historic water
table is maintained or that a modified system be
approved by the Engineering Department.
Council meeting the
handrail rather than a
the request of the
Response: The Engineering Department is satisfied that
the applicants have meet this commitment.
5. Condition: The total square footage of the project shall not
exceed 43,000 square feet.
Response: The applicants have agreed to this condition,
however, the application states that the applicants agree
not to exceed 43,000 square feet FAR. The appropriate
wording should eliminate the reference to FAR since 43,000
sq. ft. is an amount of floor area which is the maximum
allowed on site.
6. Condition: The hot tubs for the individual units shall be
located partially on the footprint of the patios as shown
on Exhibit "A" presented at the Planning commission meeting.
Foam covers shall be required for each hot tub on the site.
Response: This has been accomplished as shown on the final
plat drawings and the applicant agrees to supply foam covers
for all hot tubs on the site.
7. Condition: The pool area, recreation building, access ways,
and parking ramp may be heated for snowmelt purposes.
Response: The applicant is currently planning on snowmelting
the garage ramp and the area between the recreation building
and the swimming pool.
8 Condition: The applicants must receive encroachment permits
from the Engineering Department for the light posts and
walls on the ramp area within the public right-of-way. This
shall be obtained prior to final plat approval.
Response: The applicants have verified with the Engineering
Department that these permits shall not be required. Since
the last city council meeting, however the applicant has
been informed that if they desire to do grading within the
4
"...,
~
public right-of-way that they must apply for an encroachment
permit. This issue is discussed further below.
9. Condition: Public river over look shall include one bench
and boulders for public seating.
Response: This has been accomplished through its depiction
on the landscape plan.
10. Condition: Applicants shall receive all necessary permits
from the state Highway Department.
Response: The applicants have not obtained the permits from
the Highway Department but are continuing to work with that
agency along with the Engineering Department.
11.. Condition: Condominiumization: The 17 free market units
shall be condominiumized with the following conditions:
a) The applicant shall submit a statement of subdivision
exception which shall include the limitation that the
units shall be rented for periods of six months, with
no more than two shorter tenancies per year.
b) The applicants shall agree to join an improvements
district if one is formed for their area.
(c) The applicants shall be required to pay the affordable
housing fee based on the unit which is being
demolished (with an equivalent bedroom count) pursuant
to section 7-1008 of the Aspen Municipal Code.
Response: The applicants agree to this condition, however,
the application agrees to a payment which has since been
increased in the approved Code. The Planning Office
recommends that the applicants must be required to pay the
adopted fee rather than the amount which is stated in the
application.
In addition, the staff has determined that item (a) above
should be revised to read that the condominium conditions
shall be incorporated into the subdivision agreement rather
than as a separate subdivision exception document. The
applicants have accomplished this request since the last
City Council meeting.
Additional comments by the Engineering Department state that the
Engineering Department is able to supply some large boulders to
the applicants for help in rip rap along the bank on the property
and adjacent to the property boundaries. At preliminary
submission the applicants submitted soils engineering
information. The measures suggested by the soils engineer shall
be the responsibility of the applicants. The applicants do not
5
I""'-
-.
feel that they should be responsible for impacts that occur off
site along the river. They contend that this will cost
approximately $30,000. The Engineering Department still feels
that the applicant is responsible for the work since the problems
will be caused by the applicants commitment to put in a sidewalk
between the street and the river.
The Engineering Department has also noted that the .curb along
Original Curve shall be at least 8 inches high in order to
provide protection for pedestrians from the adjacent traffic. The
applicant has agreed to this and this must be represented in the
Subdivision Improvements Agreement:.
The final concern expressed by the Engineering Department was
that the applicants are creating a substantial grade change in
the public right-of-way along Main street in order to slope the
topography down towards the patio and hot tub areas of the front
building. The Engineering Department feels that the maximum
allowable grade change on the public right-of-way should be no
greater than one foot (see the attached site plan). At the last
Council meeting the Council instructed the applicant to work with
the Engineering Department to come up with an acceptable
solution. The applicants have met with the Engineering
Department and no solution was found to be totCilly acceptable.
Drawings will be available at the meeting which illustrate the
applicants preferred alternative. The Engineering Department has
informed the applicants that they must apply for an encroachment
permit for any grading in the public right-of-way. This means
that any approval tonight must be conditioned on the approval of
an encroachment permit which will come before you in
approximately one month.
In summary, the application for Final Plat approval is generally
acceptable to the Planning staff with the exception that there
are several condi tions on which the approval must be based.
These are listed below in the recommendation section.
RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the city Council follow
one of the fOllowing alternatives. The first alternative is
preferred by the Staff.
ALTERNATIVE 1. city council moves to table the request to approve
the final plat and Vested Rights ordinance until such time the
applicants have received an encroachment permit.
ALTERNATIVE 2. city Council moves to approve the Final Plat with
the following Conditions and table the Vested Rights Ordinance
until the following conditions have been met.
1. The applicants shall apply for and receive an encroachment
permit for the grading along Main Street or shall submit a
plat which does not include regrading of the public right-
6
-..
-..
of-way and does not otherwise significantly modify the site
plan.
2. That a final draft of the SUbdivisionjPUD agreement be
approved by the city Attorney and Planning staff.
3. That the final plat include a note that a variation is
approved which allows hot tubs in the front yard setback.
4. That the Engineering Department, Planning Office, and City
Attorney confirm that the financial commitments suggested by
the applicant are adequate.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
CH.fina1700
7
~.
,,.-.,.
FINAL PLAT
SHEET 1 OF 6 SHEETS
700 EAST MAIN SUBDIVISION
PRELIMINARY PUD/SUBDIVISION SUBMISSION
>!l!!.
-'. " .
~"~'--~">;'\"" .. ,'- . .
.... J0,' '\.... \' [ .
_, ....::-...--1l V0, , \\\ \. .
,,;o"c-1'\ 1"""\ \.-) i. ., i' I' .I
I=JR'CJE. '!SITE iI, J \~J '[ .' i; "'-.
I ! ,/ 1'\' '-l'<:~~
~ ';''''.
~'" ,),
NE.
MA
..,
MrN VA: II.V
Io&NOW UUNr..,V_ """"",
---~~T 'BUS q, y~~ 1.
~~":~:~r--:-'~
i , ..... ' ''->''''.i
[~~./ll : -"',
. <-:~."S~:;;;:~::- "l
.[.~~J'':~'L.~~b~-'l-;-!'~:-'- :,:-~,
-HOI
.... ~":_ ," i: "~,j <t"'
,..-- -
i""
~ ~.
~
I I
0 100 200
I
400
I
bOt!
I
HOO
feet
SCld.E: 1" ~ 20,0'
INDEX
I. ('( JUI.'I? (~np~"T' 1 I\~!(~"" ,~.. . ....
-.
,-,
',~'
()
:D
m
m
^
'-:t
:D
;,m
'm
f
->{
1
31
,I
~T
-J
;$1
ij
~
~n
, ~
/.'
,/!
"
,"'/
.""'"',
,-..
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Aspen city council
Robert S. Anderson, Jr., city Manager ~
Cindy M. Houben, Planning Office ~
TO:
THRU:
RE:
700 East Main/Final Plat and Request for Vested Rights
DATE:
May 23, 1988
================================================================
SUMMARY: The Planning Office and Planning commission are
recommending approval of the Final Plat for 700 Ea,st Main,
condominiumization and approval of the first reading for an
ordinance approving vesting the rights of the project.
REQUEST: The applicants are requesting Final Plat approval for
the 700 East Main project, vesting the rights of the project and
condominiumization of the project (see attached site plan).
The applicants are requesting that the development rights for the
project be vested pursuant to Section 6-207 of the Aspen Land Use
Regulations. This is a new provision which requires that city
council pass an ordinance vesting the right for the project.
Tonight is intended to be the 1st reading of the vested rights
ordinance (see attached ordinance). A public hearing will be set
for the 2nd reading at your first reading in June. Then the
ordinance will be published within 14 days of City Council
approval of 2nd reading. The vesting procedure is expected to
become a standard procedure for most projects at the final plat
stage.
The staff is recommending approval of the 1st reading tonight and
also recommending that the city council not take any final action
on final plat until the June public hearing in order to
incorporate more specific comments from the City Attorney's
office regarding the PUD agreement and to allow the applicant
more time to tighten confirmation of specific conditions. We
are, however, requesting your input on several final plat issues
tonight, so that the plat and agreement can be finalized by the
time of your next meeting.
APPLICANTS: Fine Associates, a Minnesota General partnership.
BACKGROUND: The City council approved
submission in January of this year.
approved preliminary submission with
1988.
this project's
The Planning
conditions on
conceptual
Commission
April 19,
The application process for this project was initiated under the
f""',
.".....,
old Code, however, we have given the applicants the ability to
apply aspects of the new Code which meet the needs of the project
and do not adversely affect the public (as permitted by Article 1
of the Code). The applicants have chosen to submit the final plat
documents pursuant to section 20-12 and 20-15 of the old Code.
The applicants have chosen to apply for condominiumization
(Section 7-1008) and vested rights under (Section 6-208) of the
new Code.
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
1) Engineering Department: All Engineering Department comments
are incorporated in the following staff comments section.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The preliminary plat was approved with the conditions as listed
below. The applicant's response to these conditions are also
listed.
1.
Condition: All representations
become conditions of approval,
these conditions.
of the applicants shall
unless herein modified by
Response: The applicants agree to this condition.
2. Condition: The on-site unit shall be deed restricted as a
low income rental unit with priority given to an on-site
employee of the project who is not required to meet the low
income guidelines.
Response: In Exhibit "A", PUD/Subdivision agreement the
applicants state that "the unit shall be restricted to low
income rental or sale guidelines. The employee unit occupant
shall be selected by the owner, with priority given to
employees of the project. There shall be no income or asset
limitations placed upon the employee unit occupant if the
occupant is an employee of the,project"
This language is generally acceptable to the Planning Office
if the intent is that if the unit sells that it must be sold
to an individual who meets the low income guidelines.
3. Condition: The corner park at Spring and Main is not
required to be accessible to the public and two benches
shall be provided in the public right-of-way as shown on the
preliminary plat.
This condition;was imposed by the Planning commission at
preliminary plat. At conceptual approval the City Council
required the following condition which was eliminated by the
Planning commission.
2
"""
"""
"The corner park at Spring and Main shall be accessible to
the public and shall include two benches."
The pUblic accessibility of the park was a representation at
conceptual stage that was approved by the City Council and
has since been waived by the Planning commission. The
Planning Office feels strongly that this representation lead
to the high points which were awarded the site design of the
project in the Growth Management process and that the
elimination of the accessibility of the park area to the
public is undesirable. The Planning Commission did not feel
that the accessibility of the area to the public was
significant and, therefore, allowed the benches to be placed
in the public right-of-way rather than on private property.
The Planning Office represented at conceptual that this area
would be pUblic and now is recommending that the council
uphold that position.
Response: The applicants agree to the condition imposed by
the Planning Commission at preliminary plat and have
depicted the two benches on the public right-of-way on the
landscape plan.
4. Condition: Prior to final plat approval, the Engineering
Department shall verify that the applicant has adequately
provided the following information:
A. The plat shall conform to all of the requirements set
forth in Section 20~21 of the Municipal Code.
Response: This has been accomplished, according to the
Engineering Department with the following exceptions:
a. The existing guardrail should be 1abled on the
existing conditions report, and
b. It is suggested that the plat include a mortgage
certificate.
B. The proposed 5 foot wide sidewalk which is adjacent to
the curb along Spring and Main Streets shall be
redesigned so that there is a two foot space between
this sidewalk and the curb for the purpose of sign
placement.
Response: This has been accomplished by the applicants.
C. The sidewalks, curb, and gutter alignment along Main
Street shall be designed parallel to the property line
for approximately 150 feet from the Spring Street curb,
then dogleg to the Original Curve curb. This is to
3
,....,..
--
maximize the available on-street parking without
reducing the safety of Original Curve under slippery
conditions. The design is sUbject to the approval of
the Engineering Department.
At conceptual approval the City council imposed a
condition that the applicants determine the number of
parking spaces which have been eliminated along the
streets due to the development of the project. The
applicants brought this information before the Planning
commission who then, after consideration determined
that the above condition was the best solution. In the
opinion of the Planning Office the above condition
speaks to a safety concern and not a parking concern
which was initially expressed by the City council.
There will be approximately 2-3 streets ide parking
spaces eliminated by this condition.
Response: The applicants are pursuing this design with
the Engineering Department and the state Highway Dept.
and have adequately addressed the above condition of
approval on the final plat:. The applicants wish to
continue to work on the issue in order to obtain the
most desirable solution with regard to providing the
maximum number of safe street side parking spaces.
D. The easement for the transformer/utility pad shall be
at least lOx 7 feet.
Response: The applicants have adequately addressed this
condition.
E. The applicants shall haVe a guardrail installed on the
North side along the area where the bank drops off to
the river:
Response: The applicants have adequately addressed
this condition, however, the Engineering Department is
requesting that there be an amendment to the condition
which states that the applicants shall provide a
handrail rather than a guardrail. The Engineering
Department: recommends that the handrail be constructed
with a horizontal rail, 42 inches in height, another 21
inches in height and vertical posts every 5 feet. The
location and length of the handrail should be
determined upon an agreement by the Colorado Department
of Highways to an alignment design for the sidewalk,
curb and gutter in that area.
The Planning Office recommends that the Engineering
Department recommendation be followed and become a
condition of approval prior to approval of the final
4
(""'\
---
plat.
F. The storm drainage of the site shall be designed by a
registered engineer to ensure that the historic water
table is maintained or that a modified system be
approved by the Engineering Department.
Response: This has been accomplished to the
satisfaction of the Engineering Department.
5. Condition: The total square footage of the project shall not
exceed 43,000 square feet.
Response: The applicants have agreed to
however, the application states that the
not to exceed 43,000 square feet FAR.
wording should eliminate the reference to
square feet is an amount of floor area and
ratio.
this condition,
applicants agree
The appropriate
FAR since 43,000
not a floor area
6. Condition: The hot tubs for the individual units shall be
located partially on the footprint of the patios as shown
on Exhibit "A" presented at the planning Commission meeting.
Foam covers shall be required for each hot tub on the site.
Response: This has been accomplished as shown on the final
plat drawings and the applicant agrees to supply foam covers
for all hot tubs on the site.
7. Condition: The pool area, recreation building, access ways,
and parking ramp may be heated for snowmelt purposes.
Response: The applicant is currently planning on snowmelting
the garage ramp and the area between the recreation building
and the swimming pool.
8 Condition: The applicants must receive encroachment permits
from the Engineering Department for the light posts and
walls on the ramp area within the public right-of-way. This
shall be obtained prior to final plat approval.
Response: The applicants have verified with the Engineering
Department that these permits shall not be required.
9. Condition: Public river over look shall include one bench
and boulders for public seating.
Response: This has been accomplished through its depiction
on the landscape plan.
10. Condition: Applicants shall receive all necessary permits
from the state Highway Department.
5
,..,.."
,..,.."
Response: The applicants have not obtained the permits from
the Highway Department but are continuing to work with that
agency along with the Engineering Department.
11. Condition: Condominiumization: The 17 free market units
shall be condominiumized with the following conditions:
a) The applicant shall submit a statement of subdivision
exception which shall include the limitation that the
units shall be rented for periods of six months, with
no more than two shorter tenancies per year.
b) The applicants shall agree to join an improvements
district if one is formed for their area.
(c) The applicants shall be required to pay the affordable
housing fee based on the unit which is being
demolished(wj an equivalent bedroom count) pursuant to
section 7-1008 of the Aspen Municipal Code.
Response: The applicants agree to this condition, however,
the application agrees to a payment which has since been
increased in the approved Code. The Planning Office
recommends that the applicants must be required to pay the
adopted fee rather than the amount which is stated in the
application.
In addition, the staff has determined that item (a) above
should be revised to read that the condominium conditions
shall be incorporated into the subdivision agreement rather
than as a separate subdivision exception document.
Additional comments by the Engineering Department state that the
Engineering Department is able to supply some large boulders to
the applicants for help in rip rap along the bank on the property
and adjacent to the property boundaries. At preliminary
submission the applicants submitted soils engineering
information. The measures suggested by the soils engineer shall
be the responsibility of the applicants. The Engineering Dept.
has also noted that the curb along original curve shall be at
least 8 inches high in order to provide protection for
pedestrians from the adjacent traffic. The final concern
expressed by the Engineering Dept. was that the applicants are
creating a substantial grade change in the public right-of-way
along Main Street in order to slope the topography down towards
the patio and hot tub areas of the front building. The
Engineering Department feels that the maximum allowable grade
change on the public right-of-way should be no greater than one
foot (see the attached site plan).
In summary, the application for Final Plat approval is generally
6
.1""'\
,-,
acceptable to the Planning staff with the exception that the
staff encourages that City Council to review the above conditions
#3, 4.C, and 4.e. In addition, there are several conditions
which are pending approval which hopefully will be resolved by
the Public hearing in June. The staff suggests that we leave
these minor issues for discussion at that time if discussion is
necessary.
RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the City council
discuss the issues of the Park at the corner of Spring and Main,
the issue of streets ide parking along the boundaries of the
property, the issue of requiring a handrail along the steep
portion of the sidewalk and the additional concerns raised by the
Engineering Department. We recommend that the Council not take
any action tonight with regard to the Final Plat or
condominiumization but that Council give the applicants direction
in order that final action can be taken at the June meeting. The
staff also recommends that the Council grant first reading
approval to the Ordinance regarding the vested rights provision.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
CH.final700
7
,
f""".
r-,
Chen & Associates
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers
5080 Aoad 154
Glenwood Springs. CO 81601
303/945.7458
,j",
Casper
COlorado Springs
Denver
Fl. Collins
Phoenix
Rock Sptings
SaH Lake C"y
San Antonio
JOB NO. q 1S9A 88
SLOPE REPAIR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EROSION AREAS
700 EAST MAIN PROJECT
MAIN AND SPRING STREETS
ASPEN, COLORADO
PREPARED fOR:
FINE ASSOCIATES, INC..
SUITE 1916, IDS TOWER
MINNEAPOLIS,. MINNESOTA 55042
. ATTENTION: 'MR. BOB KUEppERS
MAY 20, 1988
i"""".
i""""
.'
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONCLUSIONS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
SITE AND SURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS
River Conditions
700 East Main Property
Site Conditions
Surface Soils
City Property
Site Conditions
Surface Soils
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
EROSION CONTROL RECOMMENDATIONS
POST-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS
LIMITATIONS
FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EROSIONAL SCARPS
FIGURE 2 - CROSS-SECTION RIP RAP SLOPE PROTECTION. 700 MA1N PROJECT
FIGURE 3 - CROSS-SECTION EROSIONAL SCARP CITY. PROPERTY
FIGURE 4 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
7
7
Chen &Associatcs
!""'\
!""'\
-2-
SITE A~ID SURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS
Rivpr Conditions: The river at the time of the field reconnaissance appeared
to be at a relatively low flow condition, as the water surface was about
1 1/2 to 2 feet below a slight bench adjacent to the channel. Natural armor-
ing of the lower part of the river bank has occurred, exposing gravel, cobble
and occasional boulder size materials. Based on our observations, it appears
the average size of materials exposed in this zone is on the. order of 8 to
10 inches. Boulders in the area range up to about 3 to 4 feet in diameter,
but are fairly widely spaced. The bottom of the river channel appears to have
armored itself with small boulder size material with an approximate average
size on the order of 12 to 24 inches. All of the materials are fairly well
rounded.
700 East MainProoertv:
Site Conditions:.
The overall site conditions of the property were
described in the preliminary subsoil study performed by Chen &' Associates,
Inc. A description of the conditions at' the erosion area are presented,
herein.
The area 'of significant erosion of the river bank adjacent to the
700 East Main project is shown on Fig. 1. The generalized profile of the
slope conditions at this location is shown on Fig. 2. At this location, some
undercutting of the toe of the slope has been experienced and slope materials
have sloughed into the river. The ground surface slopes up from the river at
o '
an approximate 31 angle to an approximate 4-foot diameter boulder located at
the head of the erosion scarp. The boulder has resulted in an approximate
4-foot bigh verUcal slope on the boulder face. Above the boulder, the ground
surface slopes up to the west at an approximate 210 slope to the relatively
, flat ground surface of the remaining site.
Chen & Associates
1-.>.;
-
-
"
-3-
Surface Soils: The soils exposed in the erosional area consisted of a
mixture of sand. eravei and occasional cobbles. A gradation analysis of a
sample of the material exposed (nlinus 3-inch fraction) is presented on Fig. 4.
This test indicates 114$ gravel, 49$ sand and 7$ silt sized particles.
Citv PrODertv:
, Site Conditions: The City property erosional problem area is shown on
Fig. 1. The generalized profile of this area is shown on Fig. 3. At this
location, erosion has undercut the toe of the slope resulting in the present
conditions. The ground surface consists of a small bench next to the river.
From this bench, the ground surface slopes steeply up to the west at an
approximate angle, of 680. At a height of about seventeen feet above, the
river, the slope flattens to about 150 to 110 and continues to the ed~~ of
Main Stree\;..and a. metal guard rail.
Surface Soils: The SOoils exposed in the erosional area consisted of
man-placed fin. The fill appears to have been randomly dumped f'rom the
street arade. The fill material cOonsisted of a silty, gravelly sand. Some
debris, including, asphalt,. concrete and metal were noted. A gradation analy-
sis of a sample of the fill (minus 3-inch fraction) is presented on Fig. 4.
This test indicates 32% gravel, 43$ .sand and 25$ silt sized particles.
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS'
The characteristics of the Roaring Fork River within the corporate limits
of Aspen are discussed in "Flood Insurance Study", City of Aspen, Colorado,
dated December 4, 1985, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
The study indicates the following:
1) Mean velocity upgradient of the site is 15.3 feet per second (fps) and
mean velocity downstream of the site is 11.5 fps.' These velocities are
Chen & Associatcs
"".w"..,..'"".,:,:',.'"""....'.,,, .",..,,;.,
--
~
-4-
based on floodway widths of 30 and 52 feet, respectively. Slightly wider
channel widths occur along this reach of the river.
2) Flow depth during the 100-year flood is on the order of 6 and 7 feet.
The site plan prepared for the property by Alpine Surveys, Inc., shows
the 100-year flood plain for the 700 East Main property. The flood plain in
the area of the erosion scarp on City property was estimated based on the FEMA
study. These criteria were considered in development of the recommendations
contained herein.
','
EROSION CONTROL RECOMMENDATIONS
In order to reduce the potential for future erosion problems, and
~
subsequent slope degradation at these areas, it Will be necessary to implement
',- ..- .,,~
erosion control measures. It. is our under:;tandirlg that for ae:;thetic pur-
po:;e:;, a rock riprap remedial de:;ign if feasible i:; preferred. We have
evaluated the feasibility of using rock riprap as a means of controlling
erosion in this area. Due to the relative steepness of the existing slope,
rather large rip rap will be required. The Corps of Engineers design method
wa:; used to evaluate the riprap requirements. Other means of :;lope protection
such a:; retaining walls are considered fea:;ible, but are not addressed here.
Our recommendations for rock riprap are as follows:
1) The areas affected by ero:;ion should be protected by placement of a rock
riprap blanket. The riprap should extend a distance of at least 5 feet
on either side of the ero:;ional scarp and should be blended into the
adjacent ground surface such that an abrupt change in the ground surface
does not occur. The general slope erosion ar'eas requiring rock riprap
protection are shown on Fig. 1. To reduce the impacts on channel charac-
,.
Chen & Associates
r--.
r--.
-5-
teri~tics, the riprap layer should be constructed by partial excavation,
rather than surface placement to prevent encroachment on the flow path.
2) Rock riprap at the erosion scarp on the 700 East Nain project should be
placed as shown on the section presented on Fig. 2. The riprap should
meet the following criteria:
Maximum size of 48 inches
D50 of 30 to 36 inches
D15 of 14 to 18 inches
3) Rock riprap at the erosion scarp on City property should be placed as
shown on the section presented on Fig. 3. The riprap should meet the
following criteria:
Haximum size of 66 inches
DSO of 30 11.0.36 inches
D15 of 20 to 24 inches
4) A minimum 6-inch layer of bedding material should be placed beneath the
riprap. The bedding layer should consist of material meeting the follow-
Percentage By
Weillht Passinv.: .
II-inch
No. 4
No. 16
No. 50
No. 200
100
20-50
10-30
0-10
0-5
5) All bedding material should be placed in one layer and tamped to provide
a uniform surface on which the riprap can be placed. Due to the steep-
ness of the slope, staged placement of the bedding may be required;
6) Rock used for riprap shall be predominantly angular in shape and should
be a hard, durable material similar to granite or other igneous rock
indigenous to the area. The use of sedimentary rock or concrete debris
Chen &Associales
'-'.
,-.
-6-
will not be acceptable. Some rounded edges will be permissible, depend-
ing upon availability of material. The large rock stockpiled on City
property adjacent to Maroon Creek should be suitable for use. Splitting
of boulders to reduce their size may be required in some cases.
7) Not more than 25% of the rock shall have a length of more than 2.5 times
the breadth or thickness.
8) No rock shall have a length which exceeds 3 times its breadth or
thickness.
9) All rock shall be contained reasonably well within the riprap layer to
provide a relatively uniform surface. free of large irregularities.
10) Due to .thesteepness of the slope on which the riprap will be placed,
hand ,placement of individual rock will be required. Dumping of the roc~_
is not acceptable.,
11) Following placement of the riprap layer, . voids between the rocks should
be grouted,by inserting a grout tube to the baSe of the layer and pumping
grout under pressure. The grout should consist of a cement/sand mix
capable Of achieving an unconfined compressive strength of at least
2,500 psi.
12) Placement of the riprap and bedding material should be done during times
of low flow within the river, so that dewatering of the excavation can be
performed. If' placement below the water level is required, the recom-
mended bedding layer thickness should be doubled.
13) The slope repair areas above the riprap envelope on the 700 East Main
property may be filled with materials excavated during construction.
Chen & Associates
1""""\
1""""\.
-7-
POST-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS
Repair of the erosion scarps as recorrmended in this report should provide
protection of these areas to within the limits of the 100-year flood. Floods
of lower frequency or changes in the Roaring Fork River channel that affect
flow characteristics could result in future problems. Periodic inspection and
maintenance of these and other areas along the channel may be necessary.
Construction of the erosion protection as shown at the 700 East Main
property should return the slope to stable conditions within the parameters
discussed in our previous study. The slope conditions at the City property
are such that the erosion prQtection measures will only provide protection
from further undercutting. The slope grade above the riprap repair section is
presently over-steepened and continued sloughing of this part of the slope
should be expec~ed. The subsurface conditions ill the City property are
unknown, but considering the exposed man-placed fill, we expect a stable slope
could be 1 1/2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter. Additional study is
recommended to evaluate possible fill slope repair configurations.
LIMITATIONS
This report has been preparecJ in accordance with generally accepted
engineering practices in this area for use by ,the client for design purposes.
The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon
the data obtained from our field reconnaissance and published data. The
nature and extent of SUbsurface variations at the erosion areas may not become
evident until excavation is performed. If during construction, fill, soil,
rock or water conditions appear to be different from those described herein,
this office should be advised at once so reevaluation of the recommendations
Chen & Associates
-..
.-
-8-
may be made.
We recommend on-site observation of excavations and r iprap
placement by a representative of the soil engineer.
CHEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
By ;r{~/~ /. oJ tC',(/lE,;, ~/ 6' c.-
R er L. Barker
Reviewed By
~ ll?~h-
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
RLB/rrb
cc: Leonard Parker & Associates
Attn: Mr. Gary Mahaffey
Design \.orkshop, Inc. -----,
Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd.
Attn: Ms. Heidi Hortmann
Chen & Associatcs
~
~ ~f
-).d'1>
~~
NI
'^
N
.L\
, 'l; ....,
o
..::1 rJl
" ~
,y. c:5r~
? r
~ -))
0'..... ~\
~_~ ';9
.7s-- '
1'....-
,
i(.
\
/.
':/
00
~
~
t;
w
~
..
~
:!
~
.~
~
~
ro
~
-4 } ~,~ ;
~ ~ ~.7 ~
~ ~ --9-) ~ ~ is
\ ~ ~w
~ ~ ~ -M, ~~
~ .....v
0- ~
~
~
o
~
u
~
w
:!!
...
...
..
~
~t-.. 0
wro
~ro
~ ~ _^o(l
~. ~
~...;
OW
,. >
"'0
;e~
- ~
...
~"-
"-
"
~
~
.:
>~
ww
~>
g~
0"
~~
"-"
~~
""'
W%
~;;; I
0" I
00
-~
1
I
I
I
I
I
x
!
;-
^'-B.
;<;
c.. :=:
. ))r~
I
# ~
~_~-# s
"'
%
;;
..
w'
~,
~
;!
%
"
N
~
~.
r
o
::f
'" '. >#'7~
vS'l. .'
" J
~ "'~. f-;> ''7 .,.-~"
ivl~ ~ ~~
4-.l'l.-.~
.
"
'"
!l!~
~o U
"," t;
t~ ~a:~
2"': !::,ia
11)"" ....-
7: ~ 2';~
"'9 =:oas
lUll) UJ<'-'
~ w:t::
_~ . !(...z
:;f2 tu _~8
IQ.J ~ ~o
Q" :;: u>" Ii
=.i; <aD
_~. g' ..ot::
~~ ... "'gj
U>'" '" i:i .~
:..-.$cn :.0: %:$0
g,~w:~' v~g:
~99',..J ~..::
~"iit' :(m~;,
y.~ t; u..:..~
:. .. a ~'~~
~ --
N ..
.;;
"'
ti.
!!
..
)
cid
=
~
U
~
~
.,
~
~
~
fI"""'\
~
~
"" ""
'\. ~
'\. -"
\
\
"
N
.
1
. '
v
~
~
\
"
~
...
l>:
t
.............."
'.
~
~
~
.., ;~
"'li~
~~'
:a
~~
<W
\
\J)'/f
G('~, / P.....
,. ~.J'"
jf.> <<;,Oi'"
t r ~() ..
6~ . jJ "[I ',j
~JS"', ,~r;. - .\J,.. ~?' .~
\:,'" . .,)"'\J
~.l.1:
~.t.
"'h,
',,] \Jl
N' ....
i
~
~
u
~
~
"
i:i
v;
~
w
~
o
"
~
~
~ t5
...: S
.",,'-:'
r
:!l
-
..
]
<
olJ
c:
'"
"'"
u
~
~
.,
~
~
~
./""\ /""\
.H
wo'
> 0
wzw
...I;'C1
0-
OX:>'
O~O
o ~
~. ~
~~
~'"
~~<
<~~
W ~
>+
~
<
...
fj
W
~
O.
~
w
0.... 1
O~-
-~
I
I
I
.,
I
!
I
~
f
I
!
w.
"
..
14.
~
~.
"
~
...
'" "
","ow
_ww
,....0
<~
<>~
w", '"
fl::U2;W
<'~~~
~ ~
-...10'''''
x<<<a..
1--""0.
~ ~
...IW:ll:W
-'f-O>
;:;:1::;S
> N
o
~ !
~
o
w
~
w
g
o
~
~
~
'"
~o
w _
>w
-<
~>
w
,,~
~w
o
~o
w
ow
::.~
~-
"'...
O~
~w
~
~
:
wt
~w
O~
~o
~~
~
~
<Yo
~-
'"
~::>:
~c
c
Zh
o
...Z
~~
~...
. "
~w
~...
00
~~
u~
~
'"
~
~
..
~ .
0<<11)
0:'-:':
""....0
~ -
~ ....
~=~
.."
tn. 0._
..~~
!<-~
~,' _....u
<5 ~9..;
th ~~~
g IO~~
..
f- ~i ..~
!? o~::
~ o-~
... .",
~ a:g;2
~ au w
lU ti,'~~:
Q a::lC:Ie
::;;:;-
..
..
-
j
~
c:
..
.c:
U
~
,-(~
~
.;y/'"
. >)7
A
..f A.... ~~
A../1 g~
// w..
d'l ~ J
.#il B~~' c.
_w
r tilt'
, ffi:f~
c;;
w
...
9.
~
~
..
~
~
.
,,,.....,
.-.,
"
CONCLUSIONS
The two isolated areas located along the Roaring Fork River
that have been undercut adjacent to the 700 East Main property can
be corrected by placing riprap as an erosion control measure.
Design and construction details associated with erosion protection
of these areas are included in the text of the report.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a field study for correcting slope
erosion probl~lIIs i:)eing; experienc~near the southeast and northeast corners of
the 700. East Main Project. Aspen. Colorado. The erosion scarp at the south-
east corner of the site is located on City property, whereas the Scarp at the
northeast corner is on the 100 East Main property. The study included a field
,
reconnaissance of the SUbject area; measurement of the existing slope condi-
tions and sampling the exposed soils. The project site and erosion prOblem
areas are shown on Fig. 1'. The study was conducted in accordance with our
proposal to Fine Associates, Inc., dated April 20, 1988. We previously con-
dueted a Preliminary Subsoil and Underground Mine Working Study for the
.-'
proposed development, reported under our Job No.. 4 401 87, dated October 30,
1987.
The results of the field reconnaissance and laboratory testing were
analyzed to develop recollUOendations for correcting the existing slope prob-
lems.
Design parameters and a disc'ussion of the geotechnical engineering
considerations related, to repair of the erosion areas are included in the
report.
Chen & Associates
Cl\-2-79 . .
.--..
.--..
chen and associates, inc.
HYDROMETEn ANAL Y51$
liME REAOINI.iS
SIE'VE ANAL YSIf;
U::; Sr,\NOAl'H) >eUIl:.S GLEAU $()UABe OPENINGS
.,.
24UA 7 HR
"
.00
80
MON ISMIN 1i0Mt~' 19MIN 4MlN , MIN 'M '100 '!i(l '40 ':10 .,. ,., '., " "'i' ,. 5"13' ,
1
..
---
S
--
.~." , ~"~.= __C".~"._= ~_:'.. ,-..,_,
..==t~--....... ....._._...'m....._.!....-.-t=:-.-..- I .--<-- ,-..-::/==.,. ...1-
I~""-i ..::-...1.... :;..__mr.":i~~;' .:;::.~C'~'~:~ -l.~t: r':-'.:=~:.';"--:h~:-;~~b,
-=t=:==::t=..:J_-_...--- . ~ ., ._..... ..__ ___.~~... .___~~._.,
, ):::: -:.-.;):~~3;:- ~:;_~~--=- .:_.~ _ :-:-.:'i~::-r.. ~_~~ ,~_"._. _ :l:::~ _ ""1-:~~;~~_.:~I;~ .
.1.:- '-."'~1.. ...l... ::;=i';-:;::.-. . .... ,::;::. .' :::G:lIIrc.;: "'-I-i~~.P...~~---~ . ... _ ,
.
'"
o
20
70
'"
'"
z80
in
~
~
"so
~
z
"'
~ 40
w
"
o
w
,",Z
"
~
w
0'"
~
Z
w
80"
'"
w
"
'"
,;
:t:
"
CLAY TO'SilT
.IJ, I.'.'" :.:.:10 J'J.. .~'.IO I.I!I 1 JtI. 4 'I,
. ,.2 2.0\
DIAMET~!\ OF PARTI(:LI; I~ MILlIMI;TERS
~.
Fil"-S: ~~~. L;'Q~$lE'
'J..." l'J.I J:i,i,
~R"
~~<:
HI.2Il. LW
152.
"
.
,All
~'\.I.
llU~' ~A"J ,: I',
<1t,<,~...
~11Qe CO:Af~Se
OOSDli.ES
GRAVEL
44 ...
SAND 49
..
....
SILT ANOCLAV
7 ""
"Ai
LIQUID UMt:T
SAMPLE OF 51 i ght Ill'
!lrCl1felly
s i I ty,
sand
PlASTICtTY JNOl::X
FROM Eros i on scarp
700 East Main
Property
!
HYDAO,METE,1l ANAL 'eSIS
TIME HEADINGS
$ll0ie', ANAl. 'eSI~
u.s. SfANDAROSERIES' CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS
.10
24 HR. 7 HR.
'"
z
in
~
"
~
z
w
"
'"
w
"
45 MIN'.15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN.. MIN. 1 MIN. '200 .'00 .so' ..0"30 ',16 '8 " ". "" m- 3" 5-6"
OIl .
'" 1
..
ro
co
.co:
'"
20,
10.
. .. .
.0Il' .t111~ .OOS .""" .019 .031 .01. .149 .291 . .590 1.19 .311 ../6 9.52 19,1 38.1 7.., 111 ' .)0'
o
20
'.
30
o
"'~
~
~
w
so'"
~
z
w
80"
or
w
"
ro
80
'"
OIl
CLAY TO SILT
.42 2,0
DIAMETER- OF PARTICLE IN MilLIMETERS
SAND
FINE MEDIUM :COARSE
152
lIaUID LIMIT
SAND 43
...
...
SILT AND CLAY
GRAVEL
fiNE COARSE
'25 %
...
CODDLES
GRAVEL 32 %
PLASTICITY INDEX
SAMPLE OF Fill:
silty gravelly
sand
FROM Erosion Scarp - City property
<I 1891\ 88
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Fig.
4
"
~'
~.
r-,
~.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Cindy Houben, Planning Office
FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department ~
DATE: May 17, 1988
RE: 700 E. Main Final Plat
===========================================
The Engineering Department has reviewed the above submitted plat
and has the following comments:
I. The contents of the submitted plat meet all of the Code
requirements with the exception of the following:
a. The existing guardrail should be labeled on the existing
conditions drawing.
b. It is suggestred, but not required, that the plat include a
Mortgage Certificate.
2. The other Engineering conditions required by the p&Z after the
preliminary submissiqn wH,1 be met in this proposal. However~, we
wOUld, lik,e torrecoll1mellcl that there be an amendmellt to Ul~
condition which pertains t,o the guardrail along the sidewalk on
the north ::;ide of Q:riginal,Curve. , A handrail instead, of ~
guardrail should be required here alld this, handr,ail should be
const!ructed~itb qrte horiz()~al rail 42 inches illhei9jht:, ~not~e~
21, i:ncn~s:l.1l Mig~t:" ~Ild aj Vertical P,ost eVer~ S>feet:.'l'~ej
10caUo'Jl and lelll.lit:I:l,oft.llil>' ~alldlZai]k,shc>Uld .be, det\ermflled Ui!f()l'1\(
tIle ag!r~ement:byUi$< C()l()rctEJo pepCi]!'tmenti of Highwa~st9'~n\
ali.9jllll1ent: de::;*gn,~o,,~ t:I:le l>idEl~~lk, curb and, gUtter in tnCit a~ea~
3. Otner Ehg,if1~erlrt9t, c:6ri4iH6n::;we would like to r:ec::€>mlRertd a<re as'
follows: '
a. ,In the preliminary submission, the applicant, indicated that ar
soils engineer's study would be presented to the City Engineer\.
concerning measures to mitigate potential erosion along the
riverbank adjacent to and on the property of the project. The
meaSUres recommended by this engineer should be the applicant I s
responsibility to meet. The City has agreed to provide some
large boulders for rip rap on the bank beneath original curve,
providing those boulders are acceptable to the soils engineer.
b. The applicant should not reduce the grade to create a slope
within the public right of way, particulary along Main Street in
the area in front of the proposed hot tubs. Instead, a retaining
wall should be constructed at the property line and no more than
one foot of grade reduction should take place within the right of
way.
,
"l!!
".
r-"',.
~
c. The proposed curb along Original Curve, in the area where the
existing guardrail will be removed, should be at least 8 inches
in height to provide protection for pedestrians from traffic.
jg/700MainS
cc: Jay Hammond
Marty Pickett
r"',
A~PEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 925-2020
5/FJI'Zl;
I I
r"',
Date:
let
JtJivl 3/~E: I?Jp.~,4-~...5",-,;/e-, 3oS-
y...../{2; .' _ ./-'1"__
RE: 7tJP e. m~ /~ j:/~
d /
Dear ~\('A(~ : .
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined
that your application IS NOT complete.
Additional items required include:
I/i!,~
\.../' A..
Disclosure of Ownership (one copy only needed)
Adjacent Property Owners List/Envelopes/Postage- (one copy)
Additional copies of entire application
Authorization by owner for representative to submit applica-
tion
Response to list of items (attaChed/belOW) demonstrating
compliance ",ith, the applicable policies and regulations of the
Code, or other specific materials
A check in, the ClIIlount of $
Your application i~nd we haVe sche€luled it for
review by the ',' ,'I , ' '.. .,'.' on M(lt'i;,;2, '5 . We will
call yo,u if We ne,ed , additional informati. n {>riOJi to that
date. Several da~S I;>doI'< to your hearing, we win call and
make available a collY of the memorandum., Please note that, it
IS ~ your responsibility to post your property with a
sign, whiCh we can provide you for a $3.00 fee.,
B., Your application is incomplete, we have not scheduled it
review at this time. When we receive the materials we have
requested, we will place you on the ne~t avai~l lEJa,genda.
, ,mAh~
If you have any questions, please call OPt
the planner assigned to your case.
,
Sincerely,
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICe
(]~ I~
,~
~,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
City Attorney
City Engineer
Cindy M. Houben, Planning Office
FROM:
RE:
700 E. Main Final Plat
Parcel ID# 2737-073-27-002
DATE:
May 5, 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted
by Marty Pickett on behalf of her client, Fine Assoc., requesting
Final Plat approval for the 700 E. Main PUD/Subdivision
application.
This item has been scheduled for review by the City Council for
May 23rd, therefore, we will need your comments no later than May
16, 1988 so the Planner will have adequate time to prepare for
its presentation.
Thank you for your quick attention to this matter.
,1""\
LAW OFFICES
APR 29
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
BOX 10001
315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE. SUITE 305
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
AREA CODE 303
925-8166
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
MARTHA C, PICKETT
April 29, 1988
HAND-DELIVERED
Ms. Cindy Houben
Aspen/pitkin County Planning Office
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Final Plat for 700 East Main
Dear Cindy:
Pursuant to Code requirements, four (4) copies of the
following items are hereby submitted to you on behalf of Fine
Associates, Applicant, for Final Plat approval of the
PUD/Subdivision at 700 East Main.
1. Application.
2. Final Plat drawings:
(a) Cover sheet, language and Vicinity Map;
(b) Improvement Survey/Stream Margin Review Plat;
(c) site Plan;
(d) Landscape Plan;
(e) Parking Level Plan; and
(f) Elevations.
Also provided is a check in the amount of $1,020.00 for
Final Plat approval fees.
Thank you for your continuing cooperation and efforts in
working with the Applicant on this project. I will look
forward to hearing from you next week regarding the
completeness of this application.
sincerely,
LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN, P.C.,
a Professiona Corporation
",'.."-,
Pickett
By
MCP/bw
Enclosures
cc: Bob Kueppers
~
1"""-.
~,
EXHIBIT "e"
LAW OFFICES
GIDEON I, KAUFMAN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORA nON
BO)( 10001
315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE. SUITE 305
ASPEN. COLORADO 81450
TELEPHONE
AREA CODE 303
925'8t66
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
"'ARTHA C. PICKETT
April 29, 1988
Mr. Jay Hammond
Mr. Jim Gibbard
Aspen/pitkin Engineering Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: 700 East Main
Gentlemen:
This letter is to confirm my understanding of my telephone
conversations with you this morning regarding the following
items related to the 700 East Main project:
I. Encroachment Permit.
~.
The Landscape Plan shows four (4) ballards, or posts,
in the public right-of-way to define the driveway entrance for
the site. Jay explained that because these posts do not need a
building permit, there is no requirement for an encroachment
permit. Jay explained further that there will be no difference
whether or not the ballards are lighted.
II. Main street Parkinq.
In a conversation with Jim this morning, we discussed the
continuing saga of the parking "elephant ear" on Main Street.
The applicant's preliminary PUD/Subdivision plans showed the
proposed elephant ear as drawn by Jim Gibbard. At the P&Z
hearing, Roger Hunt indicated that he was more concerned with
traffic safety than the loss of parking spaces, and suggested
decreasing the length of the elephant ear. However, subsequent
to the P&Z hearing, Roger has met with Jim Gibbard and
discussed his desire to maximize parking. Also, Roger has
indicated that he would like to see Main street become a
four-lane road on the East side of Spring Street, which was his
reasoning for having the elephant ear parallel to the property
line.
Applicdnt's final pldt ;~llbmi:..:.:s_io!l ::;ho'....r:..; th(~ clcplldnt '..'c1t"
150' from the Spring Street curb, along the Main Street curve,
This was an attempt to provide what consultants believed was
the most desirable design from various discussions with Roger
Hunt and the Engineering Department, as well as maintaining the
character of the open space along Main street which has hecn
critical in the design process of the project, Jim indicated
. ,,-,,,_.,...::.:.:.,;.;
>~1~:
".:':..",',;.<:.
~"e\;:":~t",;
..,<"-.. '
"e:~~~~~~t:t:.~::'
.
.
;=1=::"
0;:
.,Ii
.-
f"',.
f"',
Mr. Jay Hammond
Mr. Jim Gibbard
April 29, 1988
Page 2
that perhaps a compromise is desirable, whereby the elephant
ear would be parallel to the property to approximately the
existing driveway site and then continue parking to allow for
several more cars along the curve. The applicant will continue
to work with the Engineering Department on this parking design
in an attempt to reach a mutually satisfactory design prior to
the May 23 City Council meeting.
Sincerely,
By
P.C. ,
LAW OFFICES OF
'a Professional
MCP/bw
cc: Bob Kueppers
cc: Mark Hershberger
cc: Michael Thompson
;,;;;:>'\"
....
/
/
), io.
.
:.+
~
. .j-L--":"'-
-. I. ,,,,,,.._-.)( _
r , ( .~"\ ..CiA., .... ,...J r ']--
'r\ :t/" .....\ ~ "tJ'i,?"
\ n I 0' fbJl1, /,./\9,"'-<" M'C \ Ie
,',\~O .}J.,)./" \. C,
,~
/
APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 20-14. 20-15. 24-8.11 AND 24-8.12.
ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE
THIS APPLICATION, submitted on behalf of FINE ASSOCIATES,
a Minnesota general partnership, requests approval of the Final
Plat for the P.U.D./Subdivision located at 700 East Main,
Aspen, Colorado.
I. FINAL PLAT CONTENTS.
i
Section 20-15 of the Aspen Municipal Code sets forth the
requirements for the contents of the Final Plat. These
requirements include all information submitted on the
Preliminary Plat, except information required by ~20-12(f),
(i), (k), (I), (m), (0), (p) and (q). Therefore, the following
information has been provided in the Final Plat:
A. A Plat drawn at a scale of one inch (1") equals one
hundred feet (100') or larger, on a sheet size twenty-four by
thirty-six inches (24" x 36"). The cover sheet contains an
index of all drawings and vicinity map showing the Subdivision
as it relates to the rest of the community and street system.
(Section 20-12[a)).
B. Proposed name of the SUbdivision is currently 700
East Main, however, the Applicant may select a different name
in the future, prior to recordation of the condominium
documents. (Section 20-12[bJ).
C The name, address and telephone number of the
proposed owner and subdivider, designers of the subdivision and
the licensed surveyor have been provided. (Section 20-12[c]).
D. Date of preparation, scale, and north sign have been
provided on the plat. (Section 20-12[e]).
E. Location and dimensions of all existing streets,
easements, utilities, and .other significant features within or
adjacent to the tract have been provided. (Section 20-12[g]).
F. Location and dimensions of the proposed easement for
the utility transformer pads, dedicated for public use, have
been provided. (Section 20-12 [h]) .
G. Zones constituting natural hazard areas including the
one hundred year flood plain, flood weight and high water line
have been designated. (Section 20-l2[j]).
H. The location of all proposed dwelling structures,
parking areas, structures and areas for common use, including
principal landscape features, has been provided. (Section
20-12 [n]) .
- 1 -
~
.1"",
1
L
provided.
Names of any adjoining subdivisions have been
(Section 20-15[d)).
J. A written survey description of the area including
the total acreage to the nearest one thousandth (0.001) of an
acre has been provided. (Section 20-15[f]).
K. The Plat has been certified by a registered land
surveyor certifying that the survey was performed in accordance
with Colorado Revised statutes. (Section 20-15[i]).
L. A title commitment is provided showing the title of
the property in the current owners, Albert W. Bevin, Jr.;
Ardith Louise Ware; Alice Juanita Gallegos; and Dorothy Marie
Mikkelsen. Prior to recordation of the Final Plat, a copy of a
title policy showing the title vested ,in Fine/Aspen Limited
Partnership will be provided to the City. The Applicant
acknowledges that dedication of property and recordation of the
Final Plat cannot occur until such conveyance of the property.
M. The Plat contains certificates of approval by the
city Engineer, supervisor of Parks and Recreation Department,
and Planning commission. (Section-15[k)).
N. A certificate showing approval of the Final Plat and
acceptance of dedication of the easement by the City Council is
provided with a signature block for the Mayor and attestation
by the City Clerk. (Section 20-15[1]).
ir..j.,.'"
O. A certificate of filing for the Pitkin County Clerk
and Recorder is provided. (Section 20-15[m]).
P. Complete engineering plans and specifications for the
following improvements have been provided (s20-15[n)[1)):
1. Water and sewer utilities.
2. Sidewalk, curb and gutter along the East side of
Spring Street between Creektree Condominium private driveway
and Main Street; sidewalk, curb and gutter along the North side
of Main Street from Spring Street to Neal Street; and sidewalk,
curb and gutter on the South side of Neal Street from Main
Street to the No Problem bridge.
3. The new fire hydrant to be provided is shown on
the landscape plan on the southeast corner of the site.
4.
right-of-way
plan.
The "pocket park" located in the City
along Original Curve is shown on the landscape
5. The two (2) benches to be provided in the city
right-of-way at Spring and Main Street are also shown on the
landscape plan.
- 2 -
"""
!""'\
,-..
,
6. The relocated utility transformers are shown on
a 22'4" x 6'9" easement on the Northwest side of Unit 18, shown
on the landscape plan.
Q. A landscape plan is provided showing the location,
size and type of proposed landscape features (~20-15[n][2]).
R. A proposed P.U.D./Subdivision Agreement has been
provided to the City Attorney for his review. (Section
20-15[n] [5]) (See Exhibit "A".)
II. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
Conditions placed upon the preliminary P.U.D./Subdivision
Approval by the Planning and Zoning commission are described
below with an explanation of how these conditions have been met
in the Final Plat submission:
A. Condition: The on-site employee housing unit shall
be deed restricted as a low-income unit with priority to be
given to an on-site employee of the project who is not required
to meet the low income guidelines.
The Applicant has provided a proposed "dedication of
real property to employee housing restrictions and guidelines
for Unit 18, Subdivision at 700 East Main" to the City Attorney
for his review. The Applicant agrees that such dedication may
be recorded upon execution of the document by the Applicant as
owner. (See Exhibit "B".)
B. Condition: Two (2) park benches shall be placed in
the public right-of-way, adjacent to the open space at the
corner of spring and Main.
The Applicant agrees to this condition and have shown
the benches on the landscape plan.
C. Enqineerinq Conditions:
1. The Engineering Department must verify that the
Final Plat adequately meets the Code requireme~ts.
The Final Plat contains all requirements set forth in
the Municipal Code as described above.
2. The proposed five foot (5') wide sidewalk whiCh
is adjacent to the curb along Main and Spring Streets shall be
designed so that there is a two foot (2') space between this
sidewalk and the curb for the purpose of sign placement.
Applicant has redesigned the sidewalk as requested,
as shown on the Landscape Plan.
- 3 -
.
f""".
'-'.
....,
^,,'.<
'~~':'
3. The sidewalk, curb and gutter alignment along
Main Street shall be designed parallel to the property line for
approximately one hundred fifty feet (150') from the Spring
street curb, then dog leg to the Original Curve curb. This is
to maximize the available on-street parking without reducing
the safety of the Original Curve under slippery conditions.
The design is subject to the approval of the Engineering
Department.
The Applicant is pursuing a sidewalk design to be
approved by the City Engineering Department. (See Exhibit
"C".) The Applicant is working with the Engineering Department
and the Colorado Department of Highways regarding standards for
the sidewalk along Highway 82.
4. The 22'11" x 6'9" easement for the
transformer/utility pad has been approved by the city
Engineering Department.
5. The sidewalk on the north side of Original Curve
shall have a guard rail installed along the north side along
the area where the bank drops off to the river.
The Applicant is working with the Engineering
Department and the Colorado Department of Highways regarding
the placement of this guard rail. The landscape plan shows a
proposed placement of the guard rail, pursuant to discussions
with the City and the state.
f'
6. The storm drainage for the site shall be
designed by a registered engineer to insure that the historic
water table level is maintained or the design shall be modified
as necessary, and approved by the city Engineer.
The Applicant has retained an engineer to work with
the city to provide a storm drainage design for the site. (See
the letter from Kevin O'Connell, Rea, Cassins & Associates,
Inc., Exhibit "0".)
D. The total FAR of the project shall
three thousand square feet (43, 000 sq. it. ) .
committed to not exceed forty-three thousand
(43,000 sq. ft.) FAR.
not exceed forty
Applicant has
square feet
E. The hot tubs for the individual units shall be
located partially on the footprint of the patios as shown on an
exhibit presented at the Planning commission meeting by the
Applicant. Foam covers shall be required for each hot tub on
the site.
The placement of the hot tubs is shown on the landscape
plan, consistent with the drawing presented to the Planning
.
- 4 -
,,"
<
"
S';,:':, .
.". ,;;.;:.i'';'';.):';:;, .'. ,.
c.,.,
t
-
""",'.,..'
t""'\
,-,
Commission. The Applicant agrees to provide foam covers for
each hot tub.
F. All accessways on the site may be heated for snowmelt
purposes. The Applicant is investigating the necessity of
snowmelting all accessways. currently, the Applicant is
proposing to snowmelt the garage ramp and the area between the
recreation building and the swimming pool.
G. The Applicant must receive encroachment permits for
the light post and walls on the ramp area within the public
right-of-way.
The garage ramp area has been redesigned so that retaining
walls no longer encroach upon the public right-of-way. The
Engineering Department'has confirmed that Applicant is not
required to obtain an encroachment permit for the ballards in
the right-of-way. (See Exhibit "e".)
H. condition: The public river overlook shall include
one bench and boulders for public seating.
The Applicant agrees to include one (1) bench along
with the seating boulders in the public right-of-way "pocket
park." This area is depicted on the landscape plan.
I. Condition: Required State Highway approval will be
obtained by the Applicant. The Applicant has been in contact
with the state Highway Department regarding its approval
process for improvements along Highway 82.
J. Condition: The seventeen (17) free market units
shall be condominiumized with the following conditions:
1. The Applicant shall submit a statement of
Subdivision Exception which shall include the limitation that
the units shall be restricted to six (6) month minimum leases,
with no more than two (2) shorter tenancies per year.
2. The Applicant shall agree to join an
improvements district it, one is formed for the subject area.
3. The Applicant shall be required to pay an
affordable housing fee for the one-bedroom unit being
demolished.
A proposed statement of Subdivision Exception is
included with this Application (Exhibit "E"). The Applicant
further agrees to join an improvements district if one is
formed in this area and to pay an affordable housing fee of
three thousand seven hundred twenty-five dollars ($3,725.00)
for the one-bedroom unit being demolished. This fee will
become due and payable at the time the condominium plat is
filed.
.
- 5 -
~;';:;;f,:': v
"";):;,;.>'
:'.';'"
,
-
-
II
1\
)
_I
.
III. VESTED RIGHTS.
The Applicant wishes to establish vested property rights
in the subject property as set forth in ~6-207 of the new
Municipal Code. Applicant acknowledges and understands that
the procedures for establishing such vested rights require that
a notice be published in a newspaper by the City of a public
hearing before the Aspen city Council. Applicant understands
that this public hearing shall occur on May 23, 1988. At such ' ~1
hearing, Applicant's Final Plat, i.e., a site specific ?:\yk~:'
development plan, will be considered for approval. If , '0}~~
approved, such approval shall be by ordinance, with the first ~~t~
reading on May 23, 1988 and the second reading on June 20, _____ ~'
1988. Applicant understands that the site specific development l),0
plan would be deemed approved on the effective date of the ~r
approving ordinance. ' '
- 2--~
Furthermore, the Applicant understands that the site
specific plan approval shall be conditioned upon ownership of
the subject property by FINE/ASPEN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP.
Therefore, Applicant acknowledges that the rights granted under
the site specific development plan approval shall vest upon the
recordation of the Final Plat by the Applicant and shall remain
vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of
recordation.
R~
\land\fine.app 4/29/88
- 6 -
.
~
~
Exhibit "D"
.. REA, CASSENS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Apri 1 27, 1988
Mr. Mark Hershberger
Design Workshop Inc.
710 E. Durant
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Mr. Hershberger:
Transmitted herewith are the Peak Flow and Stormwater Detention Volume
Calculations prepared for the 700 E. Main Project. These calculations
must be included with the Final Plat submission.
All calculations were prepared in accordance with the criteria called
for in the City of Aspen Urban Run-off Management Plan. A detention
volume of 1500 cubic feet has been provided, and represents an
approximate 25 per cent overdesign to account for changes during the
design development process. Final calculations will be prepared prior
to construction.
:i:::l
In order to conform with the City of Aspen Code which requires that
historic ground water recharge rates be maintained, a dry well will be
constructed on the southwest corner of the site. The dry well will be
sized to accommodate the historic rate of ground water recharge and the
flow from the foundation drains. Calculations are currently being
prepared to quantify the historic ground water recharge rate, These
calculations will be submitted to the City Engineering Department upon
completion.
If further information is required, please advise.
Sincerely yours,
Rea, Cassens and Associates, Inc.
~~'I
Kevin O'Connell, Project Engineer
KOC/mbf
Enclosures
clc Martha Pickett, ltr only
Michael Thompson, ltr only
Consulting Engineers
2902 State Highway No, 74, Suite 101 . Evergreen, Colorado 80439. (303) 670-1406
.
REA, CASSENS and AnC.. INC.
Consulting Engineers
Joe C/lL.le;lI'-JA('\:.V(b/E
I
CALCULATED BY ~O .
\. t1i:s.
SHEET NO.
OF
II ilbJ'bl
.
DATE
CHECK EO BY
DATE
"'"
1l28--\t<1If'IAfJt1 ~,
, I : :1 II Ij.1 ' ii,. '. . .
'..::+.i~zIofif,i&i~t,~'?!?L~I~AlYl1:tf Ph' cNG....Br-xSi~;,
. . . , , ;, 1''-'0
., ILiA .==j ?pAr::,. :;Z'
.. .'~JiliQ~~J~i~~~~~~cq"4~+k>.4"i?,;~,~
'aL.6' L" · : '
-'-r!-~"~J<~ ; ...
i ,'_ mr=!I.~{I,\I-?b)JL.
..,._.;..:;~J:_~...,. .i. . ].... ; .;t...I._,r~- .......~.... .
. I ! I i I I I I I I I I '/':v' r;::;--r\
.. ;.- ;-'.+.--i-"''''''-i-t-..t---''''+-'1.t'lt7the t4 f~)- ... ... -, ...... ,
. I . . . I . I I __ .~,fJ....N1., I ,
..........j.:j:.t.ll--:::::;.~:~:: -'!'[j':~~ffi,.~:. .,. ....... ........ _ .....'.:.._
..~..<.... . '" ..L.-~..,L'H~.J...~........t .....H...t'.. ". ...+...........+.........t'". "...'t....-." .l.....! ! ":.::....". ..j .. _m. -; .........,. ..".....
. . i . . . ....:'1' i '. '. '"
..... .:.. ....L....,......L.............!.,.. .... ~..-l...J...~,,~~...ri; , .' '. ~I
, : ! .....H...... ~ ..'....r.Z...r~"-r..c't;.~J".l.J~.~ II.~
. . , , _ '"-'.. _ ...,1f..._l,1;3'~!~J ...
..;____'.m.. .. .... ....;:'1....... . : I
'h,' .~,."..."..L .....~..i..._.. "",." ..' ......_.,.. ......:.... i .... . ",Ln.,. .,...,~..,u ,m ;..,..... :....u. .,.. ,."". .,..... _ ."..
....l....:T~~:~j~.--~-;.. ....;.:.~:::::..:i.--I..... J~I~I,~~t~:~ttd4:
t
_:I=[!=-~[..J.--.J.....i~h+~M~~:~.2f:.41.~...........i.. .............
.......:m:..... ........,._..;m:l~~:t:ijUi~y;,~j-=
;
:QQ:=o,3~(:z.. 71.1 ,/~i)1
;.._L';~40;,~VL%J:
,Q.,.,:G::>).......... .
SCALE
. . .
. ................. ..............,,,....
...:.......t
,.. .........:..,.........-1
. . .
. . .
. . .
. - . .
.. ... ...........~..'...m..r..".
..;..
h'+'U' i
. , ,
... ....... ...........h.....
...h;..........,.........,.........'...
....~..;.....~... ", ..'..hh..'~.............,..
...~._..:.
" ..'......:......;
,'2':7 c.r....;;;
, b> \4t-.ct
\.'O~
......,.......
..i.. ,_..,
l-"'R..J.... ...:...<<
, I
\ I
ftlAM...., ~__~'GMeaa........Gt...lItI
. ,. t~.......
t
j
1
j
"
,1"""\.
REA, CASSENS and AS~uC., INC.
Consulting Engineers
JOB
,..-,
/' 1-' 'Ie
0,,-,, . "I, ;7
'2
1""0
OF
, 1
\1/11) ~1_
SHeeT NO.
CALCULATED BY
DATE
CHECKEO BY
DATE
- '8-11'1. CA
""
SCALE
,
,
..~..
....i,...... ...,.......,.....]
'. 'IEJ.. J~~e,;;:-D ptJ;y.J.c?:,
,.... : ; : . ih"" L?'2P,!.\(? . : . . . . .. .
. . ........ "l6J:r:q1 e;:?=.?t)~tr~...=~2'.{'?r:":~~,~2 ./d<o~:3P.., ...
. .. U<I'-II~f'6 ,f\ -:oj ,&Yl AO : c;>, 10 ,e &0=1.40 ' . , · i
........' .... .... ....,.. .. ... ..i-<........... ...,... ...,......... . ; . .;2 "I ... . ",.. ." ..
'&',4,0 'iui' 'y'AW~"
,.~." ;"..
"'1"
...;
,
.........;,.
..~~......i,.
'.-,.
. .
. . .
:.1' :'.~~ I:=';~.I:I~~. t., A,' ,40, ,~;,: C: ~~l~, ,~o'
..t .... ~..., i : : ~.l ,p , :',
....H...~.t..~._.m.+~.._..+...........t........".t.."..... i h ~ M - -r - i ~.. i H t H .. ! - j .: .n..' .........+....
_'r-L+.t.,,[--:;t "i. 4::;i"') .. ~ (f om I 'iT.:I;,";",'
::r,lp. ::~:::-r""j!...T.+...+......+........t'.....'.1,.::'T:;,!.. 'i. ,i. ' ..,: ........,.. .,,' ..,...,,; ..,
....j , o!?)=t:[~I.rl!}Drl'II~. '~~ (91b)f;' , ii", ..... ....., ..
i iT,' i 'I (:b'b "I .......,.....,.. .-...'..I.'r.?J,.J.. .,.... ,'.,
......~....~_......h....i~.~H_..... ...f....M... .:-..........1.~,:._..........t...., ,..+.. .....,,-t.,.... ~ ~-l.f' ;... .. 0..',,,,
j . ! j
. . .
..............'..........".". ,.....
...l ................. ~.j
i. ;
..........;
........t.
.....~.
. . ,
i : ; ....,L......~;. :.. ......i
....~.....1,.i...~........~.i;.....".....~,:..... . . .......t......~.,.....f........-".;..
, . i.. '._ 1.
;=j
\ \ ~ L ........1....~......,."' ......J.~_"....L...........~ .. '--j i''''; ...
:::l:.';:':r..li.j.;..L..+..;.l.+li
, I ' , 'h~~ t: 8 j::l? MJr-J' . 1 ..,
=t=:r:t=1:~rJ::'T~r'1:'ri1..."r-'1~1~'t~!~J""'".....,. .
:=i=:t:tj:::r3t=t:.-+..-! .::t~I::t.;j,;:,. .........,.........,:~ ...,
i ! J ! i ' , ! )
j . , !... ~..... .....!.
,
......f.
..:......
; !
....h..... .....-i..
, . :q.1
'........\
,
"'ih~'''''''--
h.;..i"'.",,,
"';"
..'iQ;Ei~...l...........l'......\...........L.................
. .. "'; ..~.:,se;74islL)~;\(1
...'q"'T";" ',q L'....,n i) ..
b~J' q
........;........
i i ! ]
..~~.....L.._......~..._~,~.L.~~".~~.~
, .
.~~~_.t_.J_.~..J ~....~.,..~.__
1 !!
,
. . . , . . . .
; ! : ii ; , , '
,.:r:.I.~L:~:4itt2f5r....,..
..........;
...........)..,..
....;..". ...;.-...
.
Project
O. C;, T 1-\,
r-"
c
-;
tH::::Uf\I~'"'{
Detention Facility
r-., I '/'V/ '(J I IV.
Design Return Period \WYrs.
Designer_r,O.
Release Rate Return Period
lev
yrs.
Watershed Area _l,~ acres
Time of Concentration (undeveloped watershed)
Rainfall Intensity (iu)
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (CU)
Undeveloped Runoff Rate (0 = Cuiu~)
Developed Runoff Coefficient (CD)
2.1
3,1,;,
oAo
Lv
,.08
minutes
inches/hr
cfs
~
Storm Rainfall Inflow Outflow Storage Required
Duration Intensity Rate Rate Rate Storage
td id I(td) 0 I
(Coid~) (Cuiu~) I(td)-O [I(td)-O]:~
(hrs) (inches/hr) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (acre-ft)
0.17 46- :?7.&O \, 'B L ZJ<D 112B
0.33 ~.4- 2./"2- . ct "2- 1104-
0.50 21 2,1& .?b t,40
0.67 ;2,2- \. -, '" -
0.83 1,<4 1.0/2
1.0 Ll l,~b - <--- - ~
1.5
2.0
-
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
-
lComputc~ion Sheet for Detention Storage
.
Calculations Using the Rational Method
~---,
.
7
I"'"
r-,
.
TiMS- ~IT/ ~
~f'EN/vO
TID~1 1< e>S vi
'/~
b 1Cl:::' '1 f?-
0l?
~
~
-
'--
... ~4
-
~ ;;
R s
2-
2.
o
o
10-', ZO 2'0 40
TIME (MIN~ .
::;0
c;o
>?::~:;::
~
C."",.
-.....
EXHIBIT "D"
LAW O""lcce
""OEON I. KAU"MAN
GIDEON l. KAUFMAN
A ""O"~...ONAl CO""O"AT10W
eo):: 10001
3US EAST HVMAN AVENUE, SUITE 301:5
ASPEN. COLORAOO 8U'1l
April 12. 1988
TELEPHONE
AREA coot: 303
Qo2!>-eHse
MS, Cindy Houben
Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office
130 South Galena street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: 700 East Main Subdivision - FAR Calculations
Dear cindy:
The following calculations represent the required Park
Dedication Fee for the 700 East Main Subdivision approval.
Purchase Price
($2,205,000)
)(.0\ =2.2"'g, = 1,297 x net new population (32.5) $42.154.00
Number of
proposed units
(17)
~
Please note that we are requesting exemption of the employee
unit from the Park Dedication Fee requirements. I will appreciate
your review of the above calculation and verification of the fee
owed.
Sincerely,
LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN, P.C.,
a Professional Corporation
By
.~
MCP/bw
cc: Bob Kueppers
I""'"
EXHIBIT "A"
~
Alpine Surveys, Inc.
414 North Mill Street
Post Office Box 1730
Aspen. Colorado 81612
303 925 2688
October 27, 1987
87-140
iEGAL DESCRIPTION
""
A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE S. E. 1/4 S. W. 1/4
OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE
SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, EAST ASPEN ADDITIONAL TOWNSITE,
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
~
BEGINNING AT THE N. W. CORNER OF BLOCK 21, EAST
ASPEN ADDITIONAL TOWNSITE;
THENCE S 7500.9'11" E 150.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE
OF SAID BLOCK 21;
THENCE DEPARTING SAID LINE S 59018'00" E 56.37 FEET;
THENCE S 50014'11" E 118.32 FEET;
THENCE S 52057'39" W 47.02 FEET;
THENCE S 49058' 47" W 21. 71 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
EAST LINE OF SAID BLOCK 21;
THENCE S 14 050' 49" W 100.00 FEET ALONG THE EAS'l' LINE
OF SAID BLOCK 21 TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 21;
THENCE N 75009'11" W 2.31 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE
OF SAID BLOCK 21;
THENCE 62.88 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING
A RADIUS OF 868.51 FEET (THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S 10018'25" E 62.87 FEET);
THENCE 145.72 FEET ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING
A RADIUS OF 176.18 FEET (THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
N 5P27'27" W 141.60 FEET);
THENCE N 75009'11" W 164.75 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE
OF SAID BLOCK 21 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 21;
THENCE N 14050'49" E 220,00 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF SAID BLOCK 21 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING
60.016 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS,
".
..
,
r-., ~
'" "
\ ~,
\ ~ '
\ ~ a
\ II ) ,/ I
\) j~ ./ ;/;// /' ~
,",~fIi.~ /" 5
/ "/ I
/ . ....
( (~ /
. f (/ . I Ii!
~ / ~/I I d:'
1: ( ~ I
"--.,." ~ I i I : ~
/;; ~ \ ~;\ \ I ::\
:z a: )<\01 . \ ~ .
\i\~. i
\ \\\ . \
\ '~...~\
::----..... .. ~
" f
;;8
;;
II
w
/
~
\
"0,, .LIIlIHX:il
~
-
;
o
N
.
.
.
u
~
I
I
old
~
::
:<<' .
.
-
.
~.
,~
SITE IMPROVEMENT ClJSTS
Project: 700 E. ~~in
Location: Spring St. & Hain St., Aspen, CD
Prepared for: Fine and Associates
Date: 1;/8/88
Landscape costs and Neal St. handrail/wall costs prepared by Desisn Workshop, Inc.
All other costs preFared by Associated Construction Consultants, Inc.
Note: This Frobable cost budset shall act as a guide only to recite the then I:nomn best
estimate of cost; however, actual Ct.sts will be unknown until costed or bid by
actual contractor Fursuant to construction drawinss and nothing within the Frobable cost
bud.et shall be deemed to bind or oblisate DWI or ACC to a sFecific sum or reFresentation
of adual costs.
HEM , UNIT , QUANTITY : COST PER UNIT: TOTAL COST
> , ----------------------------------f--------:------------f-~-----------1----------------1
>
,
A. Fire Hydrants ea. -. , $1,500.00 $3,000.00
, ,
. ,
. ,
B. Concrete sidewalk s. f. > 3825 : $1. 74 $6,655.50
.,
,
,
C. Concrete curb/gutter l.F. > 1100 : $8.75 $9.625.00 I
,
.
,
D. Wall-Neal St. c.Y. . 32 I $310.00 $10,240.00 :
,
, ,
, .
E. Handrail-Neal St. I. f. 75 : $50.00 I $3,750.00 :
,
,
F. Transformer Relocation LoS. . $5,000.00 :
>
>
,
O. Water I ine extensions I. f. b75 : $22.00 I $14.850.00 :
H. San. Sewer Sleeve 1. f. 300 : $36.85 : $!l,055.00 I
I. LandscaFing ImFrOvements
(includes OFen SFace Flantings):
a. Cottonwoods (3" tal.) ea. S $300.00 $2.400.00 I
b. Evergreens (10-/2') ea. 35: $450.00 : $15.750.00 :
c. Ornillllental tre.es (2"ca1.) ea. 116 : $200.00 : $23,200.00 :
d. Shrubs (5 gal.) ea. 359 : $25.00. : $8,975.00 :
e. Natural groundcover ea. 11427 : $2.75 : $31,424.25 I
(4.5" Fot Q 10" C.C.) ea.
f. Perennial!; ea. 592 l $6.00 : $3,552.00 :
.. Wildflower sod s,f. 1156 1 $1,50 I $1,734.00 :
h. Sod s. f. 13755 : $0,50 I $6,377.50 :
i. Relocate 4 SFruce ea. 4 : $500.00 I $2.000.00 :
J. OFen SFace Seating
a. Benches (8') ea. 3 : $795.00 : $2,385.00 :
b. Boulders ea. S I $250.00 $1,250.00 :
----------------
TOTAL $163,723.25