HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.264316200002 (5)DOCUMENT LAYOUT
THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION
LISTED BELOW IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER
Summary Sheet
Resolution for the BOCC and/or P &Z
Ordinance for the BOCC and /or P &Z
Determination for the Hearing Officer
Administrative Determination
Staff Memo
Application
Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter
Site Plan
Miscellaneous
Plat copies (11x1')
CASE NAME: Ho Minor 1041 Hazard Review Planners
PROJ ADDR: 0100 Woody Crk Ln S -T -R 9 -9 -85
OWN /APP: Ho, Charles & Linda ADRF C /S /Z:F PHN:
REP: ADR: F CIS /Z: F— PHN:
Email Addr: ALLOCATED HOUR
FEES DUE: FEES RCVD:F— ! OVER:
P1
kt REF: BYF DUE:
MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED DATE OF FINAL ACTION: 1 0 /811 9 9 3
Administr No BpCC Reso:
F Fr N— No —
F— I o F � BOCC Ord:
REMARKS no vesting pZ
HRG OFF:
CLOSED: BY: HO INDEX:
ADMIN: Staff Approval
PLAT RECORDED 1 112 311 9 9 3 PLAT (BK,PG): B33 P31 #363773 ADMIN INDEX:
VR APPROVAL DATE VR EXPIRES:F—
CASE TYP: Minor 1041 Hazard Review CASE TYPS:
CASE TYP2: CASE TYPE:
_ CASE TYP3: CASE TYP7:
CASE TYP4:
Date Scanned: 1 /712012
Ile Location: IFF Box #212
1A
DATE ROUTED:
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
PITKIN COUNTY
DATE RECEIVED: 08/17/93
DATE COMPLETE:
STAFF MEMBER: TM
CASE # P113 -93
PARCEL ID# 2643- 162 -00 -002
PROJECT NAME: Ho Minor 1041 Hazard Review
Project Address: 0100 Clark Lane, Woody Creek
APPLICANT: Charles & Linda Ho
Applicant Address:
REPRESENTATIVE: Kevin MacLeod Charles Cunniffe Architects
Representative Address /Phone: 520 E. Hyman Ave., Suite 301
Aspen CO 81611 925 -5590
------------------------------------------------------------
FEES: PLANNING $ 207.00 # APPS RECEIVED 9
ENGINEER $ 55.00 # PLATS RECEIVED 8
HOUSING $
ENV. HEALTH $ 55.00
TOTAL $ 317.00
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
STAFF APPROVAL: X
1 STEP: 2 STEP:
DRC MEETING DATE
P &Z MEETING DATE
PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
BOCC MEETING DATE
PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
ESTIMATED TIME FOR BOCC:
REFERRALS:
Attorney
_Aspen Consol S.D.
_ School District
Engineer
_Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
_ USFS (Carbondale)
Housing
_Holy Cross
_ USFS (Aspen)
Aspen Water
_Aspen Fire
_ Div. of Wildlife
Envir.Hlth.
_Basalt Fire
_ BLM
Manager
_Carbondale Fire
_ Snowmass Village
Zoning
_Div. Water Res.
Caucus
Airport Mgr.
_State Forest Ser.
_ Caucus
Sheriff
CO Geo.Survey
_ Homeowners
City P & Z
_State Hwy Dept.
_ Open Space Bpard
Building Dept
_Clean Air Board
other:
DATE REFERRED:
INITIALS: S
DATE DUE: I
RESOLUTION #:
DATE:
PLAT OR SITE PLAN RECORDED AT BOOK
_County Engineer
Envir. Health
FINAL ROUTING:
County Attorney
Housing
Open Space Bd.
Other:
FILED:
PAGES)
INITIAL:
Zoning
Applicant
Revised 04/06/93
uuu 0 1 of u5
MEMORANDUM
N
TO: Suzanne Konchan, County Planning Director
FROM: Rick Magill, Planning Office
RE: Ho Minor 1041 Hazard Review
DATE: September 30, 1993
REQUEST: Pursuant to Section 5 -400 of the Land Use Code, the
Applicant is requesting approval of a Minor 1041 Hazard Review for
construction of a single - family residence. The property is
encumbered by floodplain and slopes in excess of 30 %.
APPLICANT: Charles and Linda Ho
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Kevin MacLeod, Charles Cunniffe,
Architects
LOCATION: At the confluence of Woody Creek and the Roaring Fork
River, 0100 Clark Lane Woody Creek
ZONING: AF -1 (ten acre minimum lot size)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subject property consists of 5+ acres of
land and contains an existing single - family residence of
approximately 3000 square feet of living space, which will be
removed to make way for construction of the new residence. The
proposed development will consist of approximately 7200 square feet
of livable area with a 800 square foot garage. The building
envelope is located at the top of a steep bank above the Roaring
Fork River. The project area contains slopes ranging from 15% -
29 %. The development is accessed by an existing gravel drive off
of River Road.
REFERRAL AGENCIES: Referral agency comments are attached for
reference.
1. County Attorney
2. County Engineer
3. Zoning Office
4. Floodplain Administrator
5. Environmental Health Department
6. Woody Creek Caucus
Cou Attorney The County Attorney has not commented on the
Applicant's request.
County Engineer Bud Eylar has indicated that the Applicant and /or
Contractor will be responsible for dust control during
U00002
.,
f
construction. The County Engineer is requiring that a drainage and
erosion control plan be submitted prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
Zoning Office Joanna Schaffner has reviewed this application and
has determined that the proposed building envelope lies within the
required 100' front yard setback. Development in this area will
require Board of Adjustment approval.
Floodplain Administrator Tom Newland has indicated that the
proposed project will not impact the floodplain, provided that all
development occur within the building envelope.
Environmental Health Department Chris Chiola has pointed out that
the project must be reviewed to determine if the existing
individual sewage disposal system is adequate for the new
residence. Any alteration or addition to the system will require
a permit from the Department.
Woody Creek Caucus : Jim Collins has indicated that the Caucus has
no outstanding concerns with this application.
STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The building envelope is located outside the 100 year
floodplain and, therefore, mitigation is by avoidance.
2. The "Future Caretaker Unit" depicted on the site plan needs
to be evaluated in a separate review process. The proposed
location for the unit is entirely within the proposed building
envelope and poses no additional 1041 hazard concerns.
3. The building envelope does not contain areas in which there
is more than a 30' change in elevation for every 100' measured
horizontally, therefore, the project does not encroach on
slopes in excess of 300.
4. As the direction of the primary access determines the location
of the front yard, Planning and Zoning Staff determined that
the proposed development does encroach on the 100' front yard
setback. The Applicant has agreed to move the location of the
garage, in order to conform to the setback.
ENABLING LEGISLATION: Pursuant to Section 5- 400.5(b) (2) as amended
by Ordinance #87 -34 the Planning Director may approve a Minor 1041
Hazard Review upon a finding that the proposed development is
outside a hazard area.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff is recommending the approval of
the Ho Minor 1041 Hazard Review subject to the following
conditions:
1. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations
made in the application.
uvC003
.,11
2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant
shall submit a revised site plan to the Planning Office, which
shows that the new location of the garage does not encroach
on the 100' front yard setback.
3. The Applicant shall prepare a 24 11 x36" mylar Minor 1041 Hazard
Review map for Planning Office approval and subsequent
recordation prior to the issuance of a building permit. The
Map shall include the conditions of approval, in addition to
the following disclaimer:
"The provisions of these regulations do not in any way
assure or imply that the areas outside of designated
hazard areas will be free from hazards, or that
approved mitigation measures will guarantee the
safety of any property."
4. Except for driveway and utility improvements, all development,
including grading, shall be located within the building
envelope. There shall be no vegetation removal outside of the
building envelope.
5. The Applicant is encouraged to grant a fishing easement to
allow the use of a described portion of the property for
fishing by members of the public.
6. Should the existing septic system be altered or modified, the
Applicant shall be required to obtain a Permit from the
Environmental Health Department, prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant
shall submit a drainage and erosion control plan to the County
Engineer for approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. County Engineer comments
2. Zoning Office comments
3. Floodplain Administrator comments
4. Environmental Health Department
5. Woody Creek Caucus comments
6. site Map
approved by: 11A 6 6Y k'
Suz a Koncha ,
C ty Planning Director
date: iol 11 ,17
memo
OUC004
MEMORANDUM
TO: Rick Magill, County Planner
FROM: Joanna S. Schaffner, County Zoning
DATE: September 8, 1993
RE: Ho Minor 1041 Hazard Review
Parcel ID #2643- 162 -00 -002
I have reviewed the above referenced application, and offer the
following comments.
ZONE: AF -1, ten acre minimum lot size
SETBACKS: The proposed building envelope lies within the required
100 foot front yard setback. Approval from the Board of Adjustment
will be required prior to an issuance of a building permit for any
development to occur within the setbacks.
HEIGHT: The height of the proposed structure has not been
calculated. No reliance should be given based on the illustrations
presented in this application.
FLOOR AREA: Floor area calculations have not been made on the
proposed floor area. However, the structure appears to be well
below the 15,000 square foot maximum permitted pursuant to
Ordinance 92 -08.
OTHER: A pond is proposed outside the building envelope. This
pond should be approved or denied in this 1041 application. If
approved, an earthmoving permit is required if more than 50 cubic
yards of dirt are involved in the construction of the pond. Also,
how is access to the pond proposed?
CARETAKER UNIT: It does not appear that the applicant is
requesting caretaker unit approval at this time, although one
appears on the submitted plans. A building permit for this portion
of the residence will not be approved as represented on the
submitted plans without caretaker unit approval.
Development should be prohibited from the steep slopes down to the
river.
UU J05
0
TO: Rick Magill, Planning Office
SEP I 1 1993
FROM: Tom Newland, Floodplain Administrator
RE: Ho 1041 Hazard Review
DATE: September 16, 1993
I have reviewed the information submitted and would like to forward
the following comments to you:
Floodplain: The topographic information supplied within the site
plan shows the proposed building envelope to be at least 50 feet
above the Base Flood Elevation of the Roaring Fork River in this
location. Therefore, the building envelope should not
significantly impact the floodplain nor should the floodplain
impact the proposed development.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
UUG006
i
... ..r
�I
MEMORANDUM '
JAI
To: Rick Magill, Planning Office v 1
From: Chris Chiola, Environmental Health Department
Date: September 15, 1993
Re: Ho Minor 1041 Hazard Review
Parcel ID #2643- 162 -00 -002
The Aspen / Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the
above - mentioned land use submittal under authority of the Pitkin
County Code Title II, and has the following comments.
The project must be reviewed to determine if the existing
individual sewage disposal system is adequate for the new
residence. If not it must undergo this Department's permitting
process for any addition or alteration to the system.
The project must also conform to the County air pollution
regulations. Any fi eplace, or similar device, must be permitted
by this office.
With the exception
further concerns.
f these two points, this Department has no
6UGO07
T H E D I S T :Z I C T P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N
OF= THE WOODY CREEK CAUCUS
Post Office Box 369, Woody Creek, Co7orado, 81656
o
TO: Rick Magill, Aspen / Pitkin County Planning Office
Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission
Board of County Commissioners Pitkin County
FROM: The Woody Creek Caucus District Planning Commission
RE: Ho Application
Date: September 24, 1993
The Woody Creek Caucus Planning Committee was asked to review
the application for remodel and expansion of the residence of
Charles and Linda Ho at 0100 Clark Lane in Woody Creek.
The application appears to be straightforward and within
legal requirements.
The Woody Creek District Planning Commission found no
particular objections to this project. We recommend approval of
this application as presented.
ui1CJU8
T H E D I S T R I C T P L A N N I N G C OM M I S S I O N
OF THE W000Y CREEK CAUCUS
Post Office Box 369, Woody Creek, Colorado, 81656
TO: Rick Magill, Aspen / Pitkin County Planning Office
Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission
Board of County Commissioners Pitkin County
1 9
FROM: The Woody Creek Caucus District Planning Commission
RE: Ho Application
Date: September 24, 1993
The Woody Creek Caucus Planning Committee was asked to review
the application for remodel and expansion of the residence of
Charles and Linda Ho at 0100 Clark Lane in Woody Creek.
The application appears to be straightforward and within
legal requirements.
The Woody Creek District Planning Commission found no
particular objections to this project. We recommend approval of
this application as presented.
uUCUCV
En
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Rick Magill CC Bud
From: Bud Eylar
Postmark: Sep 30,93 12:00 PM
Status: Previously read
Subject: Ho Minor 1041
------------------ -------------- -- --- - - - - --
EM
Message:
Rick, I have reviewed the application and have the followinf
comments: Since the the applicant proposes to replace one single
family residence with another there will be no impact on traffic in
the area other than construction traffic. Since the entry road is not
paved applicant /contractor shall be responsible for keeping the road
watered or dust controled during construction. No access permit will
be required. A drainage and erosion control plan shall be required
before issuance of a building permit. Construction on slopes should
not be a problem. There is little or no encroachment on 30% slopes.Bud
UUC'JJ.0
1. .*of
I C I A
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING
INTERIORS
August 1, 1993
Tim Malay
Pitkin County Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Co. 81611
Dear Tim,
In accordance with the Pitkin County Land Use Code, I am writing you to requisite a Minor 1041
approval for the construction of a new single family residence, to be located at 0100 Clark Lane,
in Woody Creek, Colorado, 81656. The subject property consists of 5+ acres of land at the
confluence of the Roaring Fork River and Woody Creek, and contains an existing single family
residence of approximately 3,000 S.F. of living space, which will be removed to make way for
construction of the new residence.
The subject property lies in review mapping for slopes and floodplain. Although this project is not
in the mapping for scenic review, due to its large setback from River Road, and the existing
vegetation of spruce and cottonwood for screening from the Highway 82 corridor, the
development is unlikely to impact the scenic qualities of the area, if it will be seen at all.
The proposed development will consist of approximately 7200 S.F. of livable area with a 800 S.F.
garage. The new structure will be placed on the site in the some location as the existing
structure. The building envelope is located at the top of a steep bank above the Roaring Fork
River. The provided slope study indicates that the slopes change quickly from less then 15 to in
excess of 50%. The shaded areas indicate the development shall occur in a zone where the
slopes will range from 15% to 29 %, when these grades are averaged at 10' -0" intervals, these
areas are developed as lawn and terraces at the present time. There is also twol areas of
isolated slopes in excess of 30% in the building envelope. It is the opinion of the applicant that
these slopes were formed during the construction of the existing residence, the new
development is encroaching on these manmade slopes in a very limited way.
Chen - Northern has provided a geological study for the area of development, with
recommendations for acceptable foundation design. These recommendations are well within
standard construction practices and will be strictly followed during the construction phase of this
project.
jJ'jV �� l
CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS • 520 EAST HYMAN AVENUE • SUITE 301 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • 303/9255590 FAX 303/925 -5076
� �
This soils investigation also reveals the type of soils that provide for excellent drainage qualities.
Surface drainage will be directed from the auto court area to the northeast of the site where the
slope to Woody Creek is the least severe. The area to the southwest of development will drain, as
it presently does, down the bank to the Roaring Fork River. At the present time the is no
evidence of erosion on this bank, and it is likely that there will be less area draining in that
direction. Subsurface drainage and storm drainage will be tied into a perimeter drainage system
and deposited into a drywell to be located to the north of the residence.
It is anticipated that the existing septic system will be abandoned, and a new system will be
designed by a registered engineer to conform with any requirements by the State of Colorado,
and Pitkin County. It is anticipated that the existing well will be reused. The electrical service will
be placed underground from the existing power pole to the new residence. Natural gas service
is in place and will remain in its present location, unless it is requested to be relocated by Rocky
Mountain Natural Gas.
We believe that this application meets the criteria for a Minor 1041 Review, with some
development located in some slopes between 15% and 29 %, as allowed by the Pitkin County
Land Use Code. If you may require any additional information for the review of this application,
or have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your assistance in this
development application.
Kevin W. MacLeod
G ' ae
- - - --
Project Manager
uuCJ12
August 1, 1993
Mr. Tim Maloy
Senior Planner
Pitkin County Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Co. 81611
Dear Tim:
MA
As the owners of the property at 0100 Clark Lane, Woody Creek, Co. I authorize Kevin
MacLeod, and Charles Cunniffe / Architects to Represent my interests in the Minor 1041
Review by the Pitkin County Planning Office. If there any question regarding this
authorization please don't hesitate to contact me at
Sincerely,
e ads nd ind o
UUCJ-L3
Ho Residence
0100 Clark Lane
Woody Creek, Colorado
81656
List of adjacent property owners:
Alendo, Fernando
P.O. Box 4232
Aspen, Colorado
81612
Radeke, Harold J. & Barbara A.
P.O. Box 2647
Aspen, Colorado
81612
Ward, James H. & Faylis
P.O. Box 949
Aspen, Colorado
81612
Teague, Harry & Anne
P.O. Box 147
Woody Creek, Colorado
81656
Bradley, Edward R. Jr.
524 W. 57th Street, 9th Floor
New York, New York
10019
Sears, Vera E.
14000 E. Linvale Place
Suite 601
Aurora, Colorado
80014
McDonough, Willard William Jr.
419 E. Cooper Avenue
Aspen, Colorado
81611
M
UUCJ14
Chen ONorthern, Inc.
oruWnng Engineers and Soenlists
2080 Road 154
, I e nw cod Springs, Colorado 81601
303 945 -7458
303 945 -2363 Facsimile
SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED HO RESIDENCE
0100 CLARK LANE
WOODY CREEK, COLORADO
JOB NO. 4 456 93
AUGUST 9, 1993
PREPARED FOR:
CHARLES CUNNIFFE AND ASSOCIATES
ATTN: MR. KEVIN MACLEOD
520 EAST HYMAN - # 301
ASPEN, CO 81611 -1988
uuGj15
Ch enONorthern, Inc. Coo su r ng Engineers and Scientists
5080 Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
August 12, 1993 303 945 7458
303 945 -2363 Facsimile
Charles Cunniffe and Associates
Attention: Mr. Kevin MacLeod
520 East Hyman - #301
Aspen, CO 81611 -1988
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Ho Residence, 0100 Clark Lane,
Woody Creek, Colorado
Job No. 4 456 93
Gentlemen:
As requested, we have conducted a subsoil study at the subject site, located at 0100 Clark Lane,
Woody Creek, Colorado.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled in the proposed building
areas consist of dense gravel. Groundwater was not encountered within depths penetrated by
the borings at the time of drilling.
The proposed residence and caretakers building can be founded on spread footings placed on the
natural gravel and designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 4,000 psf.
The report which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and presents our
recommendations. It is important that we provide consultation during design, and field services
during construction to review and monitor the implementation of the geotechnical
recommendations.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
CHEN NO HERN, INC.
CE�
Thomas L. Allen, P.E.
TLA /rh
Enclosure
uUCJiG
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ............................... 1
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .... ............................... 1
SITE CONDITIONS ........... ............................... 2
FIELD EXPLORATION ......... ............................... 2
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..... ............................... 3
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ... ............................... 3
FOUNDATIONS ......... ............................... 3
FLOORSLABS .......... ............................... 6
SITE GRADING ......... ............................... 7
SURFACE DRAINAGE .... ............................... 8
LIMITATIONS .............. ............................... 8
FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES
UUCJ 7
denONorthern, Inc.
[,e i5i 1 11 EnUinpp,5 and scicnl5l5
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed single family residence
located at 0100 Clark Lane, Woody Creek, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1.
The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design. The study
was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to
Charles Cunniffee and Associates, dated March 11, 1993.
A field exploration program consisting of drilling two exploratory borings was conducted
to obtain information on subsurface conditions. The results of the field exploration were
analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for
the proposed building foundation. The results of the field exploration are presented in the
report.
This report has been prepared to summarize the data obtained during this study and to
present our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed construction and the subsoil
conditions encountered. Design parameters and a discussion of geotechnical engineering
considerations related to construction of the proposed residence are included in the report.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The proposed residence will be a one and two level, combination log and wood frame
structure, with a walkout basement level. The plan view area covers about 3200 square feet,
not including an attached 3 car garage. The basement floor level is anticipated to be about 3 feet
below grade along the downhill side and about 8 feet below grade on the uphill side. We
assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction.
UUC,J18 ChenONorthern.Inc. =Wtng End ne and went515
L_ ./
WM
The caretaker's residence is anticipated to be wood frame construction with a slab on
grade floor. Ground floor elevation is expected to be within about one foot of the existing
grade.
If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described
above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations contained in this report.
SITE CONDITIONS
The site is located on an alluvial terrace near the confluence of Woody Creek and the
Roaring Fork River. It is situated at the edge of a gently to moderately sloping bench, about
50 feet above the elevation of the Roaring Fork River. Below the edge of the bench, slopes
range from about 20% to 50 %. An existing wood frame and stucco house, with a landscaped
yard occupies the central portion of the proposed residence site. Much of the adjacent area has
large cobbles and boulders exposed at the surface.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on June 23, 1993. Two exploratory
borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions.
The borings were advanced with 4 -inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a
truck- mounted Mobile B -80 drill rig.
The borings were logged by a representative of
Chen - Northern, Inc.
U U &J i''I ChenONorthern, Inc.
E,n ^w'I ^ E11 -1s aaf Scientists
- 3 -
Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 13/8 -inch I.D. spoon sampler. The sampler
was driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 -pound hammer falling
30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method
D -1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or
consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration
resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were
returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsoil conditions encountered at the site are shown graphically on Figure 2. The
subsoils consist of about one foot of topsoil overlying dense, gravel containing cobbles and
boulders. Drilling in the dense gravel with auger equipment was difficult due to the cobbles and
boulders and drilling refusal was encountered at shallow depths, requiring several attempts to
drill the borings down to depths of 7 to 8 feet.
No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were
slightly moist.
DESIGN RECOMMEENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature
of the proposed construction, we recommend the residence and caretaker's building be founded
with spread footings bearing on the natural gravels.
U u CJ 2 0 ChenONorthern. Inc. Cu 41l nnd Enn r, E and Sc e�nsts
! a ✓+
-4-
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread
footing foundation system. The construction criteria should be considered when preparing
project documents.
1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for an
allowable soil bearing pressure of 4,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect settlement
of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be less than 1 /2 inch
and will occur during construction. Footings should be located at least 3 feet back from
the face of the slope and such that an imaginary line drawn downward at 45 degrees from
the footing edge would not intersect the slope face.
2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet
for isolated pads.
3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate
soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations
at least 42 inches below the adjacent finished exterior grade is typically used in this area.
4) Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to a lateral earth
as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report.
5) All existing fill, topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the
footing bearing level extended down to relatively dense natural gravel.
6) A representative of the soil engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to
concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
tJUCSAL
Ch enONorthern, Inc. C" E,q n.prs and SII�Itists
M
-5-
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be
expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth
pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 45 pcf for backfill
consisting of the on -site granular soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate
from the residence and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth
pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an
equivalent fluid unit weight of 40 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils.
All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate surcharge
pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures
recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill
surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will increase
the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should
be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls.
Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill in pavement areas should
be compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density. Care should be taken
not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall since this could cause
excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some settlement of deep foundation wall backfill should
be expected even if the material is placed correctly and result in distress to facilities constructed
on the backfill.
The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of
the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure
UUJJ22ChenONorthern, Inc. , - ; Lun, F.i,ivars and Scientists
against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be
calculated based on a coefficient of friction of .60. Passive pressure against the sides of the
footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 400 pcf. The coefficient of
friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable
factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the
ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of
the footings to resist lateral loads should be a compacted to at least 95% of the maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly to moderately
loaded slab -on -grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor
slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow
unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due
to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be
established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A 4 -inch layer of
free - draining gravel can be placed beneath basement level slabs as a leveling course. This
material should consist of minus 2 -inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve
and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of
maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can
consist of the on -site gravels devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
, n i C U L 3 Chen @Northern, Inc. r�'S " t ng - ,,Iin"','nd Sorel,. s
OMA
-7-
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our
experience in mountainous areas that local perched groundwater may develop during times of
heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched
condition. We recommend below grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawl space and
basement areas be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain
system.
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill
surrounded above the invert level with free - draining granular material. The drain should be
placed at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a
suitable gravity outlet. Free - draining granular material used in the underdrain system should
contain less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have
a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 2 feet deep.
SITE GRADING
The risk of construction induced slope instability at the site appears low provided the
building is located above the steep slope as planned, the recommended footing set back is
observed and cut and fill depths are limited. We understand the cut depth for the basement level
will not exceed one level, about 8 feet. All fill and backfill should be compacted to at least 95 %
of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D698 near optimum moisture content. Prior
to fill placement, the subgrade should be prepared by removing all vegetation and topsoil. The
fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20% grade.
60CJ'L�
ChenONorthern.Inc. I"j „P,1, .... ,�-,so.,msis
Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at 2 horizontal to I vertical
or flatter. This office should review site grading plans prior to construction.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and
maintained at all times after construction:
1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during
construction.
2) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain
away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of
12 inches in the first 10 feet.
3) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill.
LIMITATIONS
This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no other warranty either
expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based
upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on
Figure 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our findings
include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory
borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is
U0
Ch en@Northern.Inc. C'� , s , I a e,, �Ee,sala 5c 'M=ts
M
M
performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear to be different from those
described in this report, we should be notified at once so re- evaluation of the recommendations
may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes.
We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our exploratory information
which has not been described or documented in this report. As the project evolves, we should
provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the
implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been
appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or
modifications of the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of
excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the
soil engineer.
Sincerely,
CHEEN- NORTHERN, INC.
"'& /,:
Johan M. Pool, P.E. "✓
Reviewed
IMP /rh
U U C'J b ChenONorthern, Inc.
_Wt� �q Ertp a , and SCienIi5t5
Zo o( / EXISTING 1
G / POND
i
0
i EXISTING
BORING 1
\ I
t oo
PROPOSED RESIDENCE I
( SOLID LINES) \
EXISTING \ .' qp
SHED
North PROPOSED
Approx, Scale 1" = 40' BORING 2 CARETAKER
BUILDING SETBACK LINE j3UILDING
/ I pp
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
Bench Mark: Ground
.� At Prop. Cor; Elev. = 100.0,
UrJ� J • C � / Assumed
4 456 93 Chen Northern Inc LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FI9• I
Iftw
BORING 1 BORING 2
ELEV. = 99.6' ELEV. = 96.0'
100 100
;o•
95 �' 43/10 95
p
e°
90 90
85 85
NOTE: Explanation of symbols presented on Fig. 3.
UUC,�L�
4 456 93 1 ChenoNo Logs of Exploratory Borings Fig. 2
LEGEND:
® Topsoil; organic, sandy clay
Gravel (GP); with silt, sand, cobbles and boulders; dense to very dense,
slightly moist, rounded.
Drive sample; standard penetration test (SPT), 1 3/8 -inch I.D. split spoon
sample, ASTM D -1586.
T Practical rig refusal. (Where shown above bottom of log, indicates multiple
attempts were made to advance the boring.)
NOTES:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on June 25, 1993 with a 4 -inch diameter
continuous flight power auger.
2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by taping from
features shown on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by instrument level and refer
to the Bench Mark on Fig. 1.
4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate
only to the degree implied by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the
approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling.
Fluctuations in water level may occur with time.
4 456 93 1 Chen *Northem,Inc I Legend and Notes Fig. 3
CLAMIFICATION OF SOILS FOR EVtINEERING PURPOSES
Chen- Northern, Inc. Designation: ASTM
.......,,,. a1a ,.,w,,....,.,.. 9 anon: D 2487 - 83
(Based on Unified Soil Classification System)
Soil Classification
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests' Group
Symbol Name'
Coarse- Grained Soils Gravels
Clean Gravels
Cut 2!4 and t<_CC<_3'
GW
Well graded gravel'
More than 50% retained on More than 50% coarse
Less than 5 % fines`
//
No. 200 sieve fraction retained on
Cu<4 and /or 1>Cc>3'
GP
Poorly graded gravel'
No. 4 sieve
Gravels with Fines
Fines classify as ML or MH
GM
Silty gravel'
More than 12% fines`
then PI = 0.73 (LL -20)
Fines classify as CL or CH
GC
Clayey gravel'
Sands
50% or more of coarse
fraction passes No.
4 sieve
Fine - Grained Soils
50% or more passes the
No. 200 sieve
Silts and Clays
Liquid limit less than 50
organic Liquid limit - oven dried <075 OL Organic clay
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt' L
Silts and Clays Inorganic
Liquid limit 50 or more
I'll lr.
organic
PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clay. L"
PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic silt' `"
Liquid limit - oven dried <0 75 OH Organic clay `
Liquid limit - not dried
Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark In color, and organic odor
Organic silt'
PT Peat
- based on the material passing the 3,h (75 -mm) sieve
in field sample Contained cobbles or boulders, or both.
add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name.
`Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols'
GW -GM well- graded gravel with silt
GW -GC well-graded gravel with clay
GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt
GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay
°Scalds with 5 to 12% lines require dual symbols:
SW -SM well - graded sand wdh silt
SW -SC well-greded no with day
SP -SM poorly graded sand with sill
SP -SC poorly graded send wjth clay
SIEVE ANALYSIS
SCREEN -IN I SIEVE NO
Clean Sands Cu?6 and 15Cc53` SW Well - graded sand'
Less than 5% fines'
Cu<6 and /or 1 >Cc>3` SP Poorly graded sand'
Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand °n'
More than 12% fines.
Fines classify as CL Or CH SC Clayey sand` "'
Inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above CL Lean clay'
"A" line'
PI<4 or plots below "A" ML Silt ""
line'
M
50
'Cu = Dso /D Cc =10w1°
D, • D.
'If soil contains 115S sand. add "with sand" to group
name
`If fines classify as CL -ML, use dual symbol GC -GM, or
SC -SM
"If fines are organic, add 'With organic fines" to group
name
'If soil contains 215S gravel. add - with gravel" to group
name
0 ao
I I I I'I I
50 10 5 10 as 010
PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
D. = 15 _ L ) _ ( 251'
Cu D, o.07s- CC 0075.15 - 56
a
X 40
w
0
Z
f 30
O
N
5 zo
a
10
7
4
0
0
'Ii Atterberg limns plot in hatched area. soil is CL -ML
silty clay
'If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or
"with gravel ", whichever is predominant.
'il soil contains a30% plus No 200, predominantly sand,
add -sandy" to group name.
-If soil contains a30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel,
add "gravelly" to group name.
'Pl>_4 and plots on or above "A" line.
° PIG of plots below "A" line
'PI Plots on or above "A" line
'PI plots below "A" line
For daWllatlrn of ane- gralmd acb and
ans'ns4wtl hacdon of cosdeyraMeO
//
aaM
/
Equation of W-Ime
flonzontal at Pl =4to LL =25.5.
then PI = 0.73 (LL -20)
.p
Equation of'Lr4im
vertical at LL =l6 to PI =7
// G
clan PI = 091LL -bl
MH a
OH
ML(
OL
10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
90 g0 100 110
BORING 1
ELEV. = 99.6'
100
14.7
M
FRI
;o
T 0 43/10
1:
.o
: b
NOTE: Explanation of symbols presented on fig. 3.
000031
BORING 2
ELEV. = 96.0'
100
kv
w
M
14 456 93 1 ChenONorthern,Inc. I Logs of Exploratory Borings I Fig. 2 1
LEGEND:
® Topsoil; organic, sandy clay
Gravel (GP); with silt, sand, cobbles and boulders; dense to very dense,
slightly moist, rounded.
Drive sample; standard penetration test (SPT), 1 3/8 -inch I.D. split spoon
sample, ASTM D -1586.
Practical rig refusal. (Where shown above bottom of log, indicates multiple
attempts were made to advance the boring.)
NOTES:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on June 25, 1993 with a 4 -inch diameter
continuous flight power auger.
2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by taping from
features shown on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by instrument level and refer
to the Bench Mark on Fig. 1.
4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate
only to the degree implied by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the
approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling.
Fluctuations in water level may occur with time.
a
uuCJ32
14 456 93 1 ChenONorthem, Inc I Legend and Notes I Fig. 3
Chen - Northern, Inc.
FICATION OF SOILS FOR 6,,,, PURPOSES
ASTM Designation: D 2487 - 83
(Based on Unified Soil Classification System)
Sod Classification
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests' Group
Symbol Name-
Coarse-Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu?4 and 1SCc53' GIN Well graded gravelf
More than 50% retained on More than 50% coarse Less than 5% fines'
No. 200 sieve fraction retained on Cu<4 and /or 1>CC >3' GP Poorly graded gravel'
No. 4 sieve
Gravels with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel'
More than 12% fines`
Clayey gravel` `"
Well-graded sand'
Poorly graded sand'
Fine - Grained Soils
50% or more passes the
No. 200 sieve
Sands
50% or more of coarse
traction passes No.
4 sieve
Silts and Clays
Liquid limit less than 50
Fines classify as CL or CH GC
Clean Sands Cu >6 and 1 <_Cc53' SW
Less than 5% fines*
Cu<6 and /or 1 >CC >3' SP
Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand
More than 12% fines
Fines classify as CL or CH Sc Clayey sand` "'
inorganic PI >7 and plots on or above C11 Lean clay'
"A" line'
PI<4 or plots below "A" ML Silt
line'
organic Liquid limit- oven dried <0.75 OL Organic clay" ""
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt "
Silts and Clays inorganic
Liquid limit 50 or more
PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clay'"
PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic silt''"
organic
Liquid limit- oven dried <0 OH Organic clay
Liquid limit - not dried
Organic silt` `" °
Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
'eased on the material passing the Sin (75-mm) sieve.
'tl field sample Contained cobbles or boulders, or both.
add' th cobbles or boulders, of both" to group name.
- Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols:
GW -GM wallyraded gravel in sit
GW-GC wall-graded gravel with clay
GP-GM poody graded gravel wah silt
GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay
'Sands with 5 to 12% lines require dual symbdc
SWSM well-graded sand with sift
SW -SC wellyraded sand with day
SP .SM poorly graded sand with silt
SP -SC Roody graded sand v1th day
SIEVE ANALYSIS
SCREEN -IN I SIEVE NO. I
321141 % is 4 10 20 W 80 1a 200
100 0
..111■
Nw,,kad fracaon ofownagrelned
%
-,
awn
/
■
■
■.,
■1
1,11..,
Equation of "A" -line
\2 �
florcrontal at Pl =4to LL =25.5
N
■1
"
don PI = 0.73 (LL -201
.P
Equation of Vain'
Vertical at LL =l6 to P1 =7
then PI = 0.9 (LLB
cr
MH
R OH
i
G
0
I I I I 'I I
50 10 5 10 0.5 0.10
uU 33 PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
Cu = O = 15 = 200 CC o Y 1251` _ 5.6
Da 0.075 c D., 0075.15
'Cu = O /D Cc = ( Da
'1f sod contains Z15% sand. add "with sand" to group
name
9f fines classify as CL -ML use dual symbol GC.G M. or
sC -s M.
"if fines are organic, add'wlth organic fines" to group
name.
'If soil contains 215 %gravel. add "vnth gravel" to group
fi0
50
a
X 40
W
O
Z
F 30
U
F
g 20
0.
10
7
4
0
0
'if Allerberq limits plot in hatched area. soil Is a CL -ML
siltycmy.
'If soil contains 1510 29% plus No. 200. add - vdth sand" or
- mth gravel", whichever is predominant
'If soil contains 2 _3094 plus No. 200. predominantly sand.
add - sandy to group name.
- If soil contains 230% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel,
add 'gravelly" to group name.
"P124 and plots on or above "A line. -
-PI<4 or plots below "A" line.
- PI plots on or above - A" line.
'PI plots below "A" line.
Tar dmMratlm of hrgralned awe and
Nw,,kad fracaon ofownagrelned
%
awn
/
Equation of "A" -line
\2 �
florcrontal at Pl =4to LL =25.5
N
don PI = 0.73 (LL -201
.P
Equation of Vain'
Vertical at LL =l6 to P1 =7
then PI = 0.9 (LLB
cr
MH
R OH
i
G
ML
OL
_
n
10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 90 too 110
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
1 � -
Vincent J. Higens
President
Noe
PITRIN COUNTY TITLE, INC.
601 E. HOPKINS, 3RD FLOOR
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
303 - 925 -1766 : 303 - 925 -6527 FAX
ADJACENT OWNER'S STATEMENT
Christina Davis
Vice President
.
Pitkin County Title, Inc., a duly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the
State of Colorado, hereby certifies the following list is a current list
of adjacent property owner's to the property owned by Charles T.R. Ho in
Sections 9 & 16, Township 9 South, Range 85 West, as obtained from the
most current Pitkin County Assessors Tax Rolls.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
---- --- ----- -- --- ------- ----- - - - ---
SEE ATTACHED
BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION
------- ---------------- ------
I
Ms
i rl✓
EDWARD R. BRADLEY, JR.
524 W. 57TH STREET
9TH FLOOR
NEW YORK NY
10019
FERNANDO ALLENDE
P.O. BOX 4232
ASPEN CO
81612
HAROLD J. RADEKE
BARBARA A. RADEKE
P.O. BOX 2647
ASPEN CO
81612
HARRY TEAGUE
ANNE TEAGUE
P.O. BOX 147
WOODY CREEK CO
81656
JAMES H. WARD
FAYLIS WARD
P.O. BOX 949
ASPEN CO
81612
VERA E. SEARS
1400 E. LINVALE PLACE
SUITE 601
AURORA CO
80014
WILLARD WILLIAM MCDONOUGH,
JR.
419 EAST COOPER AVENUE
ASPEN CO
81611
METES - BOUNDS 16 -9 -85
METES - BOUNDS 9 -9 -85
METES - BOUNDS 16 -9 -85
METES - BOUNDS 16 -9 -85
METES - BOUNDS 16 -9 -85
METES - BOUNDS 9 -9 -85
METES - BOUNDS 9 -9 -85 AND
16 -9 -85
uuCJ;35
CERTIFICATE OF ONNERST:JIP V101
Pitkin County Title, Inc., a duly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the
State of Colorado hereby certifies that CHARLES T.K. HO AND LINDA HO are the
owners in fee simple of the following described property:
A Tract of Land situated in Lot 15, Section 9, and Lots 2, 3 and 4,
Section 16, Township 9 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal
Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado, described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the Westerly line of a County Road whence the
Quarter Corner common to said Sections 9 and 16 bears N 06 0 36' W 530.32
feet;
thence S 89 °50' W 744.25 feet to the center of the Roaring Fork River;
thence N 24 0 24' W 53.54 feet along the center of the Roaring Fork
River;
thence N 42 0 27' W 220.24 feet along the center of the Roaring Fork
River;
thence N 49 °43' W 247.44 feet along the
river to the confluence of Woody Creek;
thence N 62 E 67.09 feet along the
thence N 45 °06' E 188.40 feet along th e
thence N 16 °46' E 74.15 feet along the
thence N 36 "09' E 56.10 feet along the
thence N 43 °21' E 34.16 feet along the
thence N 54 °56' E 28.11 feet along the
thence N 58 "11' E 76.47 feet along the
thence S 59 °15' E 128.54 feet along the
thence S 45 °10' E 77.26 feet along the
thence S 41 °45' E 114.55 feet along the
thence S 72 °02" E 75.97 feet along the
thence N 82 °11' E 65.23 feet along the
thence N 65 °32' E 129.86 feet along the
Westerly line of said County Road;
thence S 23 0 47' E 615.83 feet along the
Road to the point of beginnin.
COUNTY OF PITKIN,
STATE OF COLORADO.
center of the Roaring Fork
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek;
center of Woody Creek to the
Westerly line of said County
Subject to easements and rights of way and encumbrances of record.
This certificate is not to be construed to be a guarantee of title and
is furnished for informational purposes only.
PITKI COUNTY
BY:
authoriz s
CERTIFIED TO:
, INC.
1, 1993 @ 8:30 A.M.
uuCuj6
`•✓,
NON - MERGER CERTIFICATE
PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., A DULY LICENSED TITLE INSURANCE AGENT IN
THE STATE OF COLORADO HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT THE ATTACHED CHAINS OF
TITLE ARE TRUE AND CORRECT COPIES OF DOCUMENTS DULY RECORbED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
BY EXAMINATION OF THE ATTACHED CHAINS OF TITLE IT CAN BE DETERMINED
THAT NO MERGER OF TITLE HAS TAKEN PLACE BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES.
PITKINJCOUNTY E, INC.
BY:
AU H RIZED F ICER
DATED: AUGUST 6 1 93
JOB NO.: 93 -854
uuCJJ7
0 y,6 ��
Nei a 010
4,0 RC 2
9
Y I
4O c? 382.22 �° 011 O
�S O g 0 140.53 /0 25 AC 6`^
O Z p bg 3 ON0
S s 44! ` 24 4 ° 1 3eso 023gg
4
9\ 0 /40 1 10 0 3.3 RC i.OAC. -
3.9 F
42 @@ 62 ti0 g0 � I
�i R0 4p gy p' 9 �
3 0
RC p 01 4 0 23 0
210 RCS 2.3 62.32 O
o- 017 gN 020
2.0 RC 0I9 P
@ 1 68.93
018
N 2 8 AC. _ r 6
//9 �. 2.9 RCS ^Q tX3 .9
2 9 4 co m^ I 5 :42.1a
9 Ov ` a1 2a S N 1 ' 9 6
pe 9
TO C/L M 6 4
o, o o ��� C; Lq 021
010 � i�S Ln �. WOODY � a2.0 RC
2.0 RC 'CREEK
4 I 6 ti t 0{ �_ N59�63�✓9gC�K
tp� N ��Oy CFGE
I 6 �
�6 s 1"4 �\ / TO C/L
�o I >° � S � 001 �
00 \ 1 1.0 RC. p 5,1 RC.
%/. 00 0 0 2.0 RC.
12.2 RC. / � °p 2 �q�' LOT 3
I
O j2� N � a 0 O \ \� p —
0 0O s\ �
351.64 7
/ N � 4 315.69
g s
N I 2.3 RC. ° / I
col N
r N
\ u� I i ��• � h 4.1 RC. N
/ � 00 /� 4C 2 .18
2.0 AC. 0 1 1
^�
2.0 Vic. /„, �I z.e Rc.:
N � w
t..� -wo
TITLE CHAIN ON SUBJECT PARCEL
ROBERT DAVID HENRY AND SYLVIA WOLCOTT HENRY
WILLIAM E. CLARK AND LOIS P. CLARK
WARRANTY DEED 3/3/60
BOOK 190 AT PAGE 151
CHARLES T.R. HO AND LINDA HO
WARRANTY DEED 12/18/92
BOOK 698 AT PAGE 104
uuCJ39
_ ..+ ... ,.. _ %t':x^.,H1ix *if.'u�:,; Y,: i • y .. r :mo ;,
' Pd68Y 8'CobTo f
RDM
Orrrr.
R..vgm to 109371
Train( our lAwd.
:
one }haueard nine buvdred and SIXTY bat . . .
ROBERT DAVID HENRY and SYLVI:A MLCOTT HENRY
PUKIN and state of Colorado, of that first part, and
of the County of
WILL :r M E. CLARK and IRIS P. CLARK
and State of Colondn, of the second part;
Of the County of PIIK7N
Witnmmth, That the mid part ieS of the fiat pert, for and in consideration of the au= of - _ _ _
TEN DOLLARS and other Valuable conside s the pert, the reeipt whereof V hereby run.
to the said psrtie a of the first pert I. bred paid bye eels > conveyed and by these Pwomma do grant, bargain, sell,
ka¢d and s.knnwhdged he Ve grante bargained, not in leruney in common but In ioint tennnry, the eurv.vor of
convey and confirm, unto the cud psrum of the second part,
them, their eesigns and the beire and sssigm of such eurvlvor forever, all the following demribed lot nr parcel of land
PITKIN and State of Colorado, to-wit:
situate, lying and beinK in the Comity of
A tract of land situated in lot 15, Section 9 and Lots 2, 3 an
4, Section 16, Township 9 South, Range 85 West Of the
erly l .M.,
cribed as follows: Beginning at a Po on of
County Road whence the k Corner co=lon to said Sections 9 and 16
bears N. 6 ° 36' W. 5 ' N 30.32 feet; thence S. 89 °50' W. 744.25 feet to th
center of the Roaring Fork River; thence . 24 ° 24' W. 53.54 feet
along center of the Roaring Fork River; thence e 42 ° 27' We 220.24
°
feet along center center the Roaring Fork River;
thence N. 49 43 W.
247.44 feet along center of the Roaring Fork River to the confluence
n 1 of Woody Creek; thence N. 62 ° 05' E. 67.09 feet along center of Woodyl
Creek; thence N. 45 6 06' E. 188.40 feet along center of Woody Creek;
thence N. 16 °46 E. 74.15 feet along center of Woody Creek;
? thence N. 36 E. 56.10 feet along center of Woody Creek;
thence N. 43 21 E. 34.16 feet along center of Woody Creek;
thence N. 54 ° 56' E. 28.11 feet along center of Woody Creek;
�I thence N. 58 ° 11
S ' E. 76.47 feet along center of Woody Creek;
n thence . 59 ° 15' E. 128.54 feet along center of Woody Creek;
thence S. 45 0 10' E. 77.26 feet along center of Woody Creek;
thence S. 41 ° 45' Be 114.55 -feet along center of Woody Creek;
thence S. 72 0 02' E. 75.97 feet along center of Woody Creek; p OVER
Together with .11 end singular the hemiit°ments and tppidenances thereunto belonging, or in Ale a nP right , t itle
,
and the levcmiou and reversions, remainder and m
rcalnd rents, , nts, issues end prelim lhrreuh, and ell the.rate, W l, title.
claim and demand whaue,ver of the mid parties of the tint part, either in lea or equity, of, in and to e above
i claim the hereditaments and appurtenances.
hargainal prcmisen, wi th unto the snit psrtiaw of
To Have and W Hold the mid pmmiw slave bargained and d with the eppurtcruneee,
the selmol Part, the survivor of them, their assigns and the heir^ end awign of such survivor foresee And the m id Pad R e a
of the first part, for CheIDerl yes their heirs, exrruton, and nd o ra4m, do
of the and agree r sad with the mill parties o f tile amonJ food tln• nm•irnr of than, their s +viKn + well wlisrv of + Wr Dmni v
of such survivor. that at the time of the I nbw aL in Ir n
above ible r iolo,,itathe s
to 8 I. f simpb, and b ve
conveyttl, -.1 of gnWl, eons, to g
prrfcrq Int
good right, full Imam and Inrvfnl autbmit% rnnt,har giants, tell and mnry the mine in m lvoe,n rata .ni ineumhmnnv
the mme a,, free and clear from :dl names mW utter grant +, bargain +• s:Jm , beam, ab
whatever kind or ..to, —,`cr, e 60 payable in 1961;
excepting taxes for 19
ntul the share h.rg.m,d prrmisor in the quiet and proermde poss,•adnn of the mid partieeof the. eerund t o a st, the survivor o'
1 and or rmn+ • hilly s urv ivo o
them, their assigns and llm heirs end s+signt of such survivor, gai stall p p e will 1VARICt$T dSU FOIt6V1':R
lu shim the whole m any part thereof, the said part iee
)rFI: \D.
II p ve their Band g u..!
In Witness Whereof. Tbr said part iii got the first art La hrrrunto set
.I tile Jay and year srst above wntlen.
II $,gneJ, 9c.ltsl and Delivered m the Prrsrnre of - / / , L �, \� 4-•V2L (t _(SIiA7J
ter \I )
STATE OF COLORADO. — —�_ - --
Couatrof ........PZTKIN C .. Theforegoing intrument wall .oeknowledeed
'i . ..3rd .._say March... -. ....19.60..
before me this . . .
,•','. "�,�•. by'-..ROBERT DAVID HENRY and.SYLVIA U;OLcOTT HENR
'•' Witnem my band and official xnl.
� C ' "r D - hly commim;oo expimt_ . Fabrtl8ry' 1 1,...
L s d.l,. MP P nP<ib .ad la wam
o.ism
.
I' • n 'O hfY • , + � t ' f, �l.<tl.[Iq.,TdJ of witPraytire eusoV. Wnt
JV
ivram' WARRANTY DEED TO JOI NT TENAATlrTM C.i.No,.td BbaY costs aIJtM. Co.0..•w. Cols
Fl _ r -- - - --
190 - 1st
.DBSQtIYTEON CONTIDil1831:'"%y�,,;ci
thence N. 83'11 E:' 65'.23 -feet along cm
thence N. 65 E. 129.86. % ;em
westerly line of said County Road; +,.;
thence s.-23 E: 615:83 feet along we
Road to the point of begixm3n8•',,C?rta
er'of= `body ;
; Creek. to the
erly. \ line.:of said County
in8 more or less.
� gg
Q 9 �
0
T
'd q • .5
6ti
!1
N
z
i;u41
er'of= `body ;
; Creek. to the
erly. \ line.:of said County
in8 more or less.
� gg
Q 9 �
0
T
'd q • .5
; k
1
`I
\j
i
r
iLL9nA0YPSLc'1W >Y:j✓' ^'" n.•... .. ........ ,
'' �' _. .., •q . dt]'.....�RS:' i ... u T.n ^,M�^?A!ferd
#352004 12/18/92 11:40 Rec sio.00 RK 698 FS 104
Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc 91 8.36
WARRANTY DEE
WILLIAM E. CLARK AND LOIS P. CLARK, for TEN AND N01100 DOLLARS
($10.00) in hand paid, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby sell and convey to CHARLES T.K. HO
AND LINDA I1O, AS JOINT TENANTS, whose address is 2831 Ringling Boulevard, #118,
Sarasota, Florida 34237, the follov ing real property in the County of Pitkin, State of
Colorado, to wit:
u:.. U 142
�s
n �
" o
N A
n
a
"n
a
r
:o
a n
m
n
a.
I
A TRACT OF ,3N A O 1 5, SECTION 9,
AND LOTS 2,3AND 4, SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 9
85 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL
SOUTH, RANGE
MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON TILE WESTERLY LINE OF
A COUNTY ROAD WHENCE 711E QUARTER CORNER
°36'
COMMON TO SAID SECTIONS 9 AND 16 BEARS N 6
W 530.32 FEET; THENCE S 89'50'W 744.25 FEET TO THE
CENTER OF THE ROARING FORK RIVER; THENCE N
24 °24' W 53.54 FEET ALONG THE CENTER OF THE
ROARING FORK RIVER; THENCE N 42 °27' W 220.24
FEE ALONG THE CENTER OF THE ROARING FORK
RIVER; THENCE N 49 °43' W 247.44 FEET ALONG THE
CENTER OF THE ROARING FORK RIVER TO THE
CONFLUENCE OF WOODY CREEK; THENCE N 62°05' E
67.09 FEET ALONG THE CENTER OF WOODY CREEK;
THENCE N 45 °06' E 188.40 FEET ALONG THE CENTER
OF WOODY CREEK; THENCE N 16 °46' E 74.15 FEET
THE CENTER OF WOODY CREEK; THENCE N
ALONG
5 6.10 FEET THE CENTE OF WOODY
CREEK;T14E N 327 R E 34.16 FEET ALONG THE
CENTER OF WOODY CREEK: THENCE N 54 28.11
FEET ALON THE CENTER OF WOODY CREEK;
N 58 *1 V E 76.47 FEET ALONG THE CENTER OF
TI IENCE
WOODY CREEK; THENCE S 59 °15' E 128.54 FEET
CENTER OF WOODY CREEK; THENCE S
ALONG THE
45 °10' E 77.26 FEET ALONG THE CENTER OF WOODY
CREEK; THENCE S 41 °45' E 114.55 FEET ALONG THE
CENTER OF WOODY CREEK; THENCE S 72 °02' E 75.97
o
FEET ALGtiG THE CENTER OF WOODY CREEK;
°11'E 65.23 FEET ALONG THE CENTER OF
r
TI IENCEN 82
WOODY CREEK; THENCE N 65 °32' E 129.86 FEET
ALONG THE CENTER OF WOODY CREEK TO THE
WESTERLY LINE OF SAID COUNTY ROAD; THENCE S
23'47'E 615.83 FEET ALONG THE, WESTERLY LINE OF
SAID COUNTY ROAD TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID PROPERTY AS SET
FORTH IN DEED FROM WILLIAM F. CLARK AND LOTS
P. CLARK TO GAVFRNE G. MEAD RECORDED
OCTOBER 31, 1961 IN BOOK 195 AT PAGE 547.
TOGETHER WITH ANY WATER AND DITCH RIGHTS
APPURTENANT TO OR USED IN CONNECTION WITH
SAID PTOPERTY (BUT GRANTORS EXCEPT'PHE SAME
THIS DEED
FROM THE WARRANTIES CONTAINED IN
AND MAKE NO WARRANTIES WHATSOEVER
CONCERNING WATER AND DITCH RIGHTS);
TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT OF EASEMENT
BY GRANTORS IN DEED RECORDED IN
RESERVED
BOOK 195 AT PAGE 547 FOR PRIVATE ROAD
u:.. U 142
�s
n �
" o
N A
n
a
"n
a
r
:o
a n
m
n
a.
I
#352004 12/10/92 11:40 Rec $10.00 BY. 698 PG 105
Silvia Davic, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc s158.36
PURPOSES FROM THE COUNTY ROAD TO THE
PROPERTY HEREIN CONVEYED;
THIS CONVEYANCE IS MADE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE
FOLLOWING MATTERS AND GRANTORS MAKE NO WARRANTIES REGARDING
THE SAME:
_ 1 Real property taxes for the year 1992 payable in 1993.
-'i-
2. United Stales patents recorded in Book 55 at Page 12 and in Book SS at Page
170.
= �'-_ },,'' 3, Easement and right- of- way granted to Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company,
Inc., by instrument recorded October 19, 1961 in Book 195 at Page 457 and as shown on
1 . Map recorded in Ditch Book 2A at Page 273.
,...�:V
� q., Agreementregardingmaintenance of roadway as set forth in Deed to averne
G. Mead recorded October 31, 1961 in Book 195 at Page 547.
5. Building and zoning regulations.
ALL REFERENCES ARE TO T1IE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS OF PITKIN
COLORADO.
Dated COUNTY, ,
Dated this day of December, 1992-
'. ilium E. Clark
Lois P. Clark
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Ip
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _A— day of December,
1992 by William E. Clark and Lois P. Clark.
Witness my hand "nd official seal.
My commission expires: 5
(1,,,_ aqI
Nnt�l�
�;ti`` I He.- ,wavy.,. - .... -•,: .
2 .....
lil,iu
t
..
1.
r �-
ASPEN /PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
1 30 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611 `
(303) 920 -5090 Y
LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
CITY:
3 10P3 -9'3
- 63250 -134
- 63270 -136
GMP /Conceptual
- 63280 -137
GMP /Final
SUB /Conceptual
- 63300 -139
63310 -140
SUB /Final
All -2 Step P Applications
- 63330 -150
All 1 Step Applications
Slat aff Approval
- 63432 -157
Zoning Plan Check
- 00100- 00000 -31070
Sign Permit
Use Tax for Sign Permits
HISTORIC PRESERVATION:
- 63335 -151
Exemption
- 63336 -152
Minor
- 63337 -153
- 63338 -154
Major Devel.
- 63339 -155
Signif. Devel.
Demolition
COUNTY:
- 63160 -126
- 63170 -127
- 63180 -128
- 63190 -129
- 63200 -130
- 63210 -131
- 63220 -132
- 63230 -133
- 63240 -149
- 63450 -146
- 63235 -148
REFERRAL FEES:
- 63360 -143
00115 - 63340 -163
00123 - 63340 -190
00125 - 63340 -205
GMP /General
GMP /Detailed
GMP /Final
SUB /General
SUB /Detailed
SUB /Final
All 2 Step Applications
All i Step Applications
Staff Approval
Board of Adjustment
Zoning Plan Check
Engineering - County
Engineering - City
Housing
Environmental Health
PLANNING OFFICE SALES:
- 63080 -122 County Code
U li U J 4 9000 -145 Other (Copy Fees)
//��
Name:� TOTAL r/"_ /
_ Phone
.
Address:
-- Project:
Check: Date:
No of Copies: ��
i.
t
M
'iw\ •�» aa.es
-ice y�1J'�e)
7T2 fV.�
/
Aa'
CONDITIONS OF AP OVAL a `c
.MIl .��- . mte! .i[. y:u tc Ns ryimtq CF[aq.
' m sir raat� .`�+.. �.ie. -�• ."e e..= e • t
.'� l fYe t� a y- ppxrve6 LLilq.tiep \
L
1. IS Pss �..N. ¢e nef ll�Y - roteew[., LLl Q
W. ct �i -up u +1q.
f �Slm• .b_ M [qu � grz.e yvn 1.:or
HO IMINOR 1041 HAZARD REVIEW MAP& -
sw<.mr wMnii.
cwrte
Ys pp
„• ' I IIV -•— yl a
ratty s+
' � ' / / "�]�Q p � — ^ want" •�. �.�sancP 8 S}�,
i t ' 1 �M�rL � �Yr LIMY Jy� V_
I I I II L
ti
S G. LS
ol
3K 33 93 31 O BU oLbtN � ELOPE PLAN
000045
4")
k m% q
"%WIV
PIMRY
17m.
1 4 4
Lj
Lllllo,'�
QI
IN
1,
ANN O
.. . .. .......
](m
�0
I
ry
16
y m
.. . .. .......
](m
wd,
14
« 2;§ ?
LU
� \ ?�
� - W I N
... .....
CCAS P -q3
z \
lau
/
».
Q
\\ \
\� 9 2��
� \ }
.
� \ ?�
� - W I N
... .....
CCAS P -q3
"'W" In, ne . 1,Pi 1 1 M",
a
tt
I
j lei
o r
is
OP
Awl
Ii �il
, Oluk"I'l
TPrz
, h
rt
8" A
4
W97=Flq
SCALE
hll
pr
UPPER-1-LEVELI.
I.
uj
0
(0
C)
z
LU
w
z
<
0
0
j
o
0
0
Ir
6
pytal
0
0
..... .... .
0
4
W97=Flq
SCALE
hll
pr
UPPER-1-LEVELI.
I.
uj
0
(0
C)
z
LU
w
z
<
0
0
j
o
0
0
Ir
0
pytal
0
0
0
DRAWIM;
LDA I I
pf L) ?-(A)LI S - 16 ?-- 00- Ocy-
Case,- p I I 3 - T3
I I 1 1 1 [1( i I I � I VO j , [ � . �i , II W 1 1 , 1 , I,
m«
|
. .
w...
\J
» : J
\0
^ \u }
0 :\ \
/\ }
\
,0
PI C) &ag3 db2 - �
cow plr3 -qf
m ; w
. � �. �.. ��....� ........................ .
SIP)
T SB
YN
I)RAWIN(I
p, D "2 0 07-,
Oo
I)AH
sl 111 1 M ).
MMW
d 111 1 ( A
1 )I I 4k I I I I r I , O , . , " I
f'
z
W
nn
0
I)RAWIN(I
p, D "2 0 07-,
Oo
I)AH
sl 111 1 M ).
MMW
d 111 1 ( A
1 )I I 4k I I I I r I , O , . , " I