The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutpitkin.boa.92.29 PITRIN COIINTY BOARD OF ADJQBTMENT DATE ~ ~'~"(~ l ~~ ~`~! ~~ Ga p~ /' ~ ~ /~ ~ ~ ~" CASE ~ q APPLICANT CX-C~i(,.-~ 1.-~'L-C ciC~ PHONE / G ~ -- ~ ~CO ~ MAILING ADDRESS ~O l ~ C/L( Lt ~/ ~~-' /~-6'r^ r~ GI ~'`J-/ ~~`~ (~I~UZ/I. OWNER ~~ f-a=-~..? • C-U 8~ LPL 3 PHONE MAILING ADDRESS ~ ~`^^'"~ LOCATION OF PROPERTY sv~/vl S L-c.~~_ Any pertinent data must accom~iany this application, and will be made part of this Case. The Board may return this application if it does not contain all the facts in question. Applicant Signature ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ (TO be completed by the Zoninq Department) Provisions of the zoning resolution requiring the Zoning Official to forward this application to the Board of Adjustment, and reasons for not granting a building permit: Requesting: ~~ LoteSizetrict 2 ' Front Yard Setback Variance, where O ' is required. ' Rear Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required. ~v ' ~ Side Yard Setback Variance, where /~~ is required. ' Side Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required. Height Variance, where is required. Square Feet where a maximum of sq. ft. is allowed. Other: Zoning Official Application filed s'' ~~ ~ Parcel Date of Meeting ~ ~Pp~ -q 2~ Notices Mailed ~ ~0 ~~- Secret Refer Resolution to Building Department ; _~ Yes ;_ i No ODUUO~ ~ ZO D N p~ / - I -v~ _ ur i Y .~~~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING OR USE VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to Pitkin County Resolution of June 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Hearing will be held in City Council Chambers, City Hall, First Floor, Aspen, Colorado (or at such other place as the meeting may then be adjourned) to consider an application filed with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority for variance from the provisions of the County Zoning Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views by letter, particularly if you have objection to such variance, as the Board of Adjustment will give serious consideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. THE PARTICULARS OF THE HEARING AND OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE ARE AS FOLLOWS: Date and time of meeting: owner: Name and Address of Applicant: Property Location or Description: June 2, 1992 at 5:15 p.m. 1st Floor Council Chambers, City Hall Clark Cretti Clark Cretti 101 Firehouse Road Redstone, CO 81623 Redstone Subdivision, Lot 13 Requesting approval for a 2 foot front yard setback variance and a 6 foot north side yard setback variance, where 30 feet and 15 feet, respectively, are required in the R-30 zone district, for construction of a proposed attached garage. Approval of this variance would allow the garage to be 28 feet from the front yard property line and 9 feet from the north side yard property line. VARIANCES GREATER OR LESS THAN REQUESTED COULD HE GRANTED. Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent X THE ODUti~? istensen, ADJUSTMENT May 11, 1992 Ms. Joanna Schaffner Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: VARIANCE REQUEST Cretti Residence 101 Firehouse Road Lot 13, Redstone Subdivision Pitkin County, Colorado Dear Joanna: ~~ We are requesting a (north) side set-back variance for our property in order to build an attached garage. Our home is the old Firehouse, built around 1910. We desperately need a garage, as anyone living in the area can well understand. We have received preliminary approval of the plans from the HPC, subject only to minor changes. Unfortunately, the Firehouse was built on the upper corner of the lot, and although we have cut the width of the garage down to a minimum workable 20 feet, we will be into our 15 foot side setback by approximately 3 feet, plus an additional approximate 2 feet for the overhang. I note that because the dwelling is skewed slightly on the lot, the set back problem mainly affects the front corner of the addition, and diminishes toward the rear. It would be highly undesirable, if not impossible, for the addition to be built on the south side of our home (among other things, construction of the garage on the south side would severely restrict our already limited southern sun exposure). Further, due to topographic constraints, we have no area to build a detached garage. The adjoining property is part of an undeveloped 50+ acre parcel owned by Peter Martin (and a partner). While our property is zoned R-30 (30,000 sf minimum lot size), the adjoining property is zoned AF-1 (10 acre minimum). As you may know, Peter is intending to subdivide this property. Should he be successful, the adjoining lot would contain at least 10 acres, and the building envelope for this lot would be some distance from our property. Peter has expressed his full support to us for the issuance of this variance, as it would have no measurable impact of his property. Thank you for your consideration. As always, expediency is of the utmost importance. This is just one of the many hoops we have to jump through (HPC, 1041, building permit, etc.) and we would like to start construction as soon as possible. Sincerely, (~(Gti(~. (/wv'~4 Clark Cretti ODUUU~ Gary Gamm 231 South Pershing Wichita, Kansas 67218 Peter Martin 102 Firehouse Road Redstone, Colorado 81623 Venona Burton Box 345 Eureka, Kansas 67405 Mrs. Michael O'Connor 3 Arlie Drive Anapolis, Maryland 21401 Dick Webb 14325 Crabapple Road Golden, Colorado 80401 Mrs. Marilyn Wolfe (Northern) 1502 South Riegel Court Spokane, Washington 99212 OQUUQ4 °wq FPW~'< ~ ( 3 ~, ~~ ~11~( ~~ ~,p_."tsv' ~ ~ `~ REDSTONE .,JOT DRAWN TD SCALE ~ `o r> ~E>.tixs.. "gM5 4y:':.. (t~l C ~ l J V ~ f ~., 4' ;=.t << !'BEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE --° ' ~~~. 730 South Galena Sheet ~ ~ - -~ .- Aspen, Colorado 81611. ' ~ ~ - - - (303) 920-5090 .. _. - LAND USE APPLICATION FEES Ciry -00113 -63250-134 GMP/CONCEPNAL -63270-736 GMP/FINAL 33280-137 SUB/CONCEPTUAL -63300-139 ~SU&FINAL -63310.140 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS - -63320-141 _ ALL 1-STEP APPUCATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS REFERRAL FEES: 00125 33340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 63340-190 HOUSING 00115 33340-163 ENGINEERING SUBTOTAL County 00113 -63160-126 GMP/GENERAL 33170-127 GMP/DETAILED 33180-128 GMP/FINAL -63190-129 SUB/GENERAI 33200-130 SUB/DETAILED 33210-131 SUB/FINAL 33220-132 ALL 2-STEP APPUCATIONS 33230-133 ALl 1-STEP APPUCATIONS ~ ~ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS •" mil 33450-146 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT u -~- REFERRAL FEES: 00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 -63340-190 HOUSING 00113 -63360-143 ENGINEERING PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 33060-122 CITY/COUNTY CODE 33090-123 COMP PLAN 33140-124 COPY FEES 39000-745 OTHER ~' `~ /~ Name: !,/~~1~ U. ... ` i Address: UV ;~ /S lc~-a. // SUBTOTAL ~'T TOTALZZ Phone: ~d~ J Project: ~ /'' -:~ 7IZ,_ Z-Z~) Check # 0 Copies received: Date: 5 ~' ,,,n000U~~ , Couttty of'Pitkin State of Colorado The undersigned, follows: I, } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY } ss. POSTING OF A VARIANCE BEARING } BEFORE THE PITRIN COIINTY BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT being first duly sworn, deposes and says as ~~~i~ G.2 ~ ry-~ being or representing an Applicant before the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment, personally certify that the attached photograph fairly and accurately represents the sign posted as Notice of the variance hearing on this matter in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from thel day of ~ "~~ "~~G~ 19 ~~ to the _~C day of _ ~a-IU~~'K-- 19 / Z. (Must be posted for at least nine (9) full days before the hearing date). Applicant's Signature Subscribexl and sworn to before me this ~ day f , 19 , by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. My Commission expires: ~ -I3 .~~ ___~(~/ ~ ~/l _ ~~ ~V VV I . (il.~~ otary Public's Signature ~~ ~~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~, ~~~ C~rlrt~d~~~ ~? ~ Address b mS oaou~~ ski--~k i i ~ ~ ____--_ i~ '~:'. ~. "~ . , ^ ^ ° { ~i.7 .: r. _ ,. ~ Ar. ~- ky. ~ ~ }..y.. ~yy ~'~~' i ~•' ' .. i. Y1R,S~' J~ R • i ~~ • .n. ~ .~~ .. ~s .• r• ,`' , ., r #347379 ~18~ '92 t~9: 46 Rec ~. ~~t~ BY.. 6B~ 376 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc #.UV RESOLIITION OF THE PITRIN COIINTY~ COLORADO EOARD OF ADJIISTMENT GRANTING SETBACK RELIEF FOR CLARK CRETTZ RESOLIITION NO. 92-29 WHEREAS, Clark Cretti, owner of Lot 13, Redstone Subdivision, requests a 2 foot front yard setback variance, and a 6 foot north side yard setback variance, where 30 feet and 15 feet, respectively, are required in the R-30 zone district, for construction of a proposed attached garage; and WHEREAS, the subject property is within the unincorporated area of Pitkin County, Colorado (as described in Exhibit "A", attached); and, WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment is vested with the power to grant or deny such variances by virtue of Title II, Section 16-1.3, Pitkin County Code (Land Use Code) and Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 30-28-118(2) (C); and, WHEREAS, based on the evidence presented, the Board of Adjustment makes the following findings: 1. Proper notice procedures, including the notification of all adjoining property owners, has been shown by the applicant. 2. The required hardship or practical difficulty has been established. 3. Granting such relief will not cause substan- tial detriment to the public welfare and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Resolutions and the zoning maps. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment, that a 2 foot front yard setback variance, and a 6 foot north side yard setback variance, be granted due to topographical hardship, pursuant to the plans submitted (Exhibit "B"). WARNING: Any violation of the terms of this resolution may result in rehearing and possible revocation. OOOO?J a #347379 UB/t~4/92 • 46 Rec ~, qr~ bF: 685 PG 37 Silvia Davis, Pitk. Cnty Clerk, Doc ~.t7U Resolution No. 92-~ Page 2 The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Board of Adjustment of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. DATED: June 2, 1992 The Board of Adjustment of Pitkin County, Colorado ATTEST: -- --~ Acting Cha 1r, 00001 ~. #347379 08/04/92 U~ Fec x.00 Hk 685 FG 378. ~ ~~ Silvia Davis, Pitkin ~,nty Cler6:, Doc 5.00 ' -. ~iC h s ~~-~ 1~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 13, Redstone Subdivision, and an additional parcel of land .adjacent to and connecting with said Lot 13, described as follows: A tract of land situated in the NWGNE~ and in the NE'tiNE% of Section 20, Township 10 South, Range 88 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado, also being a portion of Lot 13, Redstone Subdivision (es per plat revised October 26, 1936), and being more particularly des- cribed as follows: Beginning at a point whence a brass cap found in place and properly marked for the N'/. Corner of said Section 20 bears N 51°17'23" W 1666.91 feet; thence S 75°45'24" E 212.03 feet; thence S 16°59'27" W 189.62 feet to a point on a fe^ce as built and in place; thence N 69°41'18" W 233.72 feet along said renceline; thence N 24°23'18" E 167.31 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.91 acre more or less. I hereby certify that on Apri] 29, 1992 a survey was performed by me on the parcel of land described hereon. 711i easements, en- croachments and rights-of-way in evidence or known to me are shown This survey is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and the contour lines shown herecr, are true and correct to the best of my know]edge and belief. By: __ _ Sydney Lincicome P.L.S. 14111 OODU1? ~,, V' , i #347319 OB/04/9 9:4b Rec 5.00 Hk: 685 FG I Silvia Davis, ~in Cnty Clerk, Doc 5.00 N r m~ ;' ~~ ~~ N~ 0 c 0 v o N V °~~ si 2 ~T ~-~~_ N ..'" ~~ `~ kv V~ ~ 's ~~ roi roi _~ / °' / i 3 t `Oro 8 ~ h N \^ryA ~ \ ~._~ _-- m P a t5 \ sF N a\ U V\ O'O Q ~, NCO l' 0~ ~O y, ~ ~ U \ ° v V).v, ~g F -~ ~ •t +~ ~ c i ~., •. o`~ ~ c 4' ~+ N ~U R e ~~, `~ ~ ~4 L V 9 a r ODUU1~ ~~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PITICIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to Pitkin County 7Aning Resolution of June 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Hearing will be held in the District Courtroom, Pitkin County Court House, Aspen, Colorado, (or at such other place as the meeting may then be adjourned) to consider an application filed with the said Boazd of Adjustment requesting authonty for variance from the provisions of the County zoning Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear and state their views, protests, or objections. If you cannot appeaz personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views by letter, pazticulazly if you have objection to such variance, as the Board of Adjustment will give serious consideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. A VARIANCE GREATER THAN OR LESS THAN THAT REQUESTED COULD BE GRANTED. DATE AND TIME OF MEETING: Tuesday, June 2, 1992; 5:15 P.M. 1st Floor Council Chambers, City Hall Aspen Village/Kerr, Cathy: requesting approval fora 15' front yazd setback variance and a 7' reaz yard setback variance where 30' and 10', respectively, aze required in the SR zone district for placement of a mobile home; and a 6' reaz yazd setback variance and an 8' side yard setback variance where 10' and 10', respectively, aze required in the SR zone district for construction of a shed. Property Location: Aspen Village, Lot #131. Boyd, Constance (Heatherbed Lodge): requesting approval fora 30' front yazd setback variance, where 75 feet is required in the AR-1 zone district, for construction of a barn; and a 15' front yard setback variance, where 75 feet is required in the AR-1 zone district for construction of an employee dwelling unit. Property Location: 1679 Maroon Creek Road. Lackey, Mary Ellen: requesting a 12' height variance, where 12' is required per the Pitkin County Land Use Code, for an existing ranch gate. Property Location: White Staz Ranch, Lot #5. Cretti, Clark: requesting a 2' front yazd setback variance and a 6' north side yazd setback variance, where 30' and 15', respectively, aze required in the R-30 zone district, for construction of an attached garage. Property Locafion: Redstone Subdivision, Lot #13. Calaway, Connie & Jim: requesting a 70' front yazd setback variance, a 10' rear yard setback variance, and a 15' west side yard setback variance, where 100', 30' and 30', respectively, aze required in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of asingle-family residence. Property Location: Crystal River Park Subdivision, Lots 9A and 10A. Glick Family Trust; requesting approval fora 150 square foot increase in floor azea where a maximum of 3,118 square feet is permitted for this lot in the R-30 zone district, to cover an entry. Approval of this variance would allow the existing structure to exceed allowable floor azea by 150 square fee[. Property Location: Lot 8, Block 2, Filing 1, Meadowood Subdivision (75 Bluebonnet Trail). Submitted to the Aspen Times on May 19, 1992. To Be Published in the Aspen Times May 22, 1992. County PO # ~~luu' z ., Minutes Pitkin'County Board of Adjustment June 2, 1992 Members Present: Ted Guy, Acting Chair Evan Gull John Wheeler Rod Dyer Mike Cooper Members Absent: Rick Neiley Stan Mathis Staff: Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Enforcement Guy opened the meeting at 5:20 p.m. and introduced the Board to those present. Guy read a letter into the record from Cindy L. Merrill, Secretary to Andrew V. Hecht, who is representing the Glick Family, requesting that this case be tabled to the July 7, 1992 meeting. Dyer moved to table Case #92-31 to July 7, 1992, Wheeler seconded the motion, and all were in favor. Case #92-23, Aspen Village {Kern Aspen Village Lot No 131 Jama Parker was present, representing Cathy Kerr, to request a 15 foot front yard setback variance and a 7 foot rear yard setback variance, where 30 feet and 10 feet, respectively are required for placement of a mobile home; and a 6 foot rear yard setback variance and an 8 foot side yard setback variance, where l0 feet and 10 feet, respectively, are required for construction of a proposed shed. Guy read into the record the letter from Patrician Dickerson, Manager of Aspen Village, that they are aware of the request being made and approve of this request. Guy asked Schaffner if this met the standards as far as the Code for mobile home parks, and the request does meet these standards. It was mentioned that this is a double-wide lot. There was no public comment. Wheeler asked why the shed had to be so close to the property line and asked if it could be moved closer to the mobile home. After further discussion, it was agreed that a 5 foot variance would be more acceptable than 8 feet, which would leave 7 feet between the shed and the trailer (instead of 11 feet). 1 ~~~Vl~ .. Dyer made a motion to grant a 15 foot front yard setback variance and a 7 foot rear yard setback variance, for placement of a mobile home; and a 6 foot rear yard setback variance and an 5 foot side yard setback variance, for construction of a proposed shed, due to downzoning. Wheeler seconded the motion and all were in favor. Case #92 26 Bovd Constance (Heatherbed Lodael 1679 Maroon Creek Road Guy stated for the record that he has done work previously at Heatherbed Lodge, but is not currently doing work on this property and believes that there is no conflict. Jim Curtis was present to represent Constance Boyd. Boyd is requesting a 30 foot front yard setback variance, where 75 feet is required in the AR-1 zone district, for construction of a barn; and a 15 foot front yard setback variance, where 75 feet is required for construction of an employee dwelling.unit. . Curtis briefed the Board on the history of the lodge and the layout of the land. Heatherbed Lodge has already received approval from the Board of County Commissioners for an employee/manager/owner dwelling unit and an accessory barn. Curtis stated that there is an existing structure where the dwelling unit is proposed to be built. The new structure will be incorporating some of this existing structure. The intent of the setback variance is essentially to allow both structures to be up against the hillside, further away from the floodplain, and minimize the visibility from Maroon Creek Road. There was no public comment. After further discussion, Gull made a motion to grant a 30 foot front yard setback variance for construction of a proposed barn, and a 15 foot front yard setback variance for construction of an employee dwelling unit, due to topographical hardship and pursuant to the plans submitted. Dyer seconded the motion and all were in favor. Case #92-27 Lackey Marv Ellen Lot 5 White Star Ranch Guy turned the Chair over to Dyer as he was the architect of the remodel on the Lackey property, and stepped down from this case. Mary Ellen Lackey and Gary Combs were present to request a 5 foot height variance, where 12 feet is the maximum permitted for accessory structures per the Pitkin County Land Use Code, for an existing ranch gate. Schaffner stated that at the time of posting, Lackey was requesting a 12 foot height variance for an addition of a pagoda to the top of the existing ranch gate. The applicant has dropped the pagoda from the plans and is only asking for a variance for the existing ranch gate (which is presently 17 feet high). 2 00010 The ranch gate has been in existence for over one year and does conform to the setback requirements. Dyer asked what the Planning Office's view was on ranch gates. Schaffner stated that the Board of County Commissioners are not willing to support a change in regulation or policy to allow for ranch gates in the County. Zoning believes that if they are kept out of the setback, they need a height variance because the accessory height limit of 12 feet conflicts with the Fire Department requirement of 14 to 15 feet for their emergency vehicles. Combs stated that the gate was indicated on the approved building plans. There is a•letter from White Star Ranch Homeowners' Association. giving their approval for the existing gate only. Gull stated that he finds it difficult to oppose what are clearly privileges that have existed and have been granted, especially since this existing ranch gate is outside the setbacks. Wheeler stated that if this had come before the Board before being built, that he would have denied the request. Guy stated that since he is not voting on this case, to get an approval, it would have to be unanimous. Guy asked Lackey if she wanted to table this request to the July 7 meeting and she stated she would. Gull moved to table Case 92-27 to July 7. Zt was seconded and all were in favor. Case #92-29 Cretti Clark Lot 13 Redstone Subdivision Clark Cretti was present to request a 2 foot front yard setback variance, and a 6 foot north side yard setback variance, where 30 feet and 15 feet, respectively, are required in the R-30 zone district for construction of an attached garage. Cretti stated that the Redstone Historical Society granted approval for this request. On their recommendation, Cretti moved the proposed structure back two feet. Schaffner stated that the applicant is going through a minor 1041 hazard review and that the Planning Office sees no problem with the variance request. Cretti stated that the proposed garage will be back into the hillside where there has already been some excavation. This is to be a two-story structure. There was no public comment. 3 ODUU~7 After further discussion, Wheeler moved to grant a 2 foot front yard setback variance, and a 6 foot north side yard setback variance, due to topographical hardship and pursuant to the plans submitted. Gull seconded the motion and all were in favor. Case #92-30, Calawav, Connie & Jim, Lots 9A & 10A, Crustal River Park Subdivision Connie Calaway was present to request a 70 foot front yard setback variance, a 10 foot rear yard setback variance and a 15 foot west side yard setback variance, where 100 feet, 30 feet and 30 feet, respectively, are -required in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of a proposed single-family residence. Calaway stated that there is a change in the request. The adjoining neighbors, the Bostrons, at Lot 8A, asked Calaway if she would move the proposed residence to 40 feet from the lot line. The Bostrons have agreed to honor the same agreement from their side of the adjacent lot line. Therefore, a west side yard setback variance is no longer being requested. , Wheeler stated that this is a clear case of downzoning. There was no public comment on this case. After further discussion, Gull moved to grant a 70 foot front yard setback variance, and a 10 foot rear yard setback variance, due to downzoning, as shown on the revised plans submitted. Cooper seconded the motion and all were in favor. Case #92-07, Van Sant/Smart, Lot 5, Block 2, Filing 1, Gateway to Snowmass Mesa Subdivision Steve Smart was present to request approval for a 45 foot rear yard setback variance, where 50 feet is required in the RS-30 zone district, for construction of a proposed single-family residence. Smart stated that a 40 foot rear yard setback variance was already approved on February 4, 1992, but that the footprint of the house has been changed. The elevations and the footing of the building have been changed due to cost. Guy read the February 4 minutes into the record. Wheeler stated that with the reconfiguration of the house, he felt this was too close to the property line. Whereas a corner of the house was close to the property line in the first request, the whole facade of the house would be 5 feet from the property line per the present request. Smart stated that the owner of Lot 4, who would be most affected, has walked the site with Smart and suggested the change. Moving the proposed residence back further, a tree might have to be removed. 4 00001$ ... After further discussion, IDost members had difficulty supporting a 45 foot rear yard setback variance, but would support a 40 foot rear yard setback variance. Gull moved to grant a 40 foot rear yard setback variance, where 50 feet is required, due to downzoning and topographical hardship. Cooper seconded the motion and all were in favor with Wheeler voting no. Motion passed. ******************************************************************* The May 5 minutes were approved as written. The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~ (~~~. Cindy Chri tensen, Secretary ed Guy, Acting Chai 5 oouu~~ ~EN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 730 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81511 (303)920-5090 LAND USE APPLICATION FEE city S 00113 -63250-734 GMP/CONCEPTUAL -63270-136 GMP/FINAL ? -63280-137 SUB/CONCEPTUAL ~y ~ -63300-139 SUB/FINAL t~ -63310-140 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63320-141 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ' REFERRAL FEES: 00125 00123 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00115 -63340-190 HOUSING -63340-163 ENGINEERING SUBTOTAL County 00113 {3160-126 GMP/GENERAL -63170-127 GMP/DETAILED -63180-128 GMP/FINAL -63190-129 SUB/GENERAL 63200-130 SUB/DETAILED -63210-131 SUB/FINAL -63220-132 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63230-133 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS -63450-146 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REFERRAL FEES: 00125 00123 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00113 -63340-190 HOUSING -63360-143 ENGINEERING PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 -63080-122 CITY/COUNTY CODE -63090-123 COMP. PLAN - -63140-124 COPY FEES - -69000-145 OTHER - Name: "' rh~ ~ _-s-- Address: (_1~~~~J/ ~:~,'~ -~ J v Check p i ~ ~ . Copies received: ____~ f~ fl f~~a.~ ~ __ ~_ _-~~_' SUBTOTAL ~"~---'- TOTAL -~~~ Phone: ~ f ~!' ...t -- ~ „~' ~ Project: ~!)f~ ~ ,-<-.. ? ~C z-Z Date: 3 -' ~ - i