Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.01.26. . LL Q M ~ B m RESOLUTION OF THE PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO 0 ; g BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ap ^ ~ o GRANTING A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE ~ ~ m FOR JAMES PUGH ~ a m Resolution No. 01-26 0 m rc WHEREAS, James Pugh, owner of 863 Hunter Creek Road, is requesting an 18 foot front yard setback variance, for the construction of a single story gazage; and, 0 WHEREAS, a 30 foot front yazd setback is required for this 30,310 square foot lot in the R-30 zone district, and, 0 z WHEREAS, the subject property is described as Lot 10, Block 1, Red Mountain Ranch Subdivision; and, a ~ /~ N +J Q C WHEREAS, the Boazd of Adjustment is vested with the power to grant or deny such variances by a ~ virtue of Title II, Section 7-10.30, Pitkin County Code (Land Use Code) and Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 30-28-118(2) (C); and, -~ .S v ~N v 9~ 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 hazdship or practical difficulty has been established. 3. Granting such relief will not cause substantial detriment to the public welfaze 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 an 18 foot front yard setback variance be granted for the construction of a single family garage as presented on Exhibits A and B due to a topographical hazdship. WARNING: Any violation of the terms of this resolution may result in rehearing and possible revocation. The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Boazd of Adjustment of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. DATED: ATTEST: December 4, 2001 ~~~~ a ~ , Conne Bazle ~, `-e-cretary ~ Pitkin County Board of Adjustment OOOOOi ~2~ The Board of Adjustment of Pitkin County, Colorado Mic Cooper, alrperson Pitkin County Board of Adjustment I IIIIII VIII II III IIII IIII I II I III I III IIII 016 9689 02 30F SILVIR DRVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 0.00 D 0.00 ~9- i~ 0 ~o a o~ 3e ~~ti ~~ ~\d` b~ Gpo~ / 1 ~Tt~ / / Y~ tp` ~•~~S /' ~ / / \y~ ~/ /// / I I ////.~ 1 e~ ~ 15. j ~~ '~, O~~ ~' L _ / / / / U 1 I ~jll III Ir ~ Ili ~l/, ~. y i ~~I ~~~ ~ ~ / ~~ / ~ o / ~ / p~ ~~ / fry ~ iil'~llL _ /~daY. ~ ~/0 / / ~~~ ~ // /// ~ / /// / / ~ c //, / / / w° //, / / i /// / / ,/' / / - _+ ~ / i ~~ h i ~ 5 /// ~~ < t`6 ~ P~ / r =o°GI o m~JO ~ w fuu.- c x 0 N ~ LL cl 1 ~ ~~ .a1 ~`'_ J ~ / ~~~ ~ ~ / M1' ~ 'n 1 L~//( 't 1111 11 1 Il //~/ /~ %% % r/ .r ~/~ / /// // ///~ ~ ~i ~` ~ r~ , 1 ' n / ~'i n / / ~1 i s1 ~ /// 1 nor / / „^. 0 J ~~~U~~ ~~/ 85i/ p/Y/ i /i Y' %, ~m~ N a ro m ry.No 0 °mo NNO .. ~ CD rn m d m m m ~~ ~~ ~'~- ~~; ~~ O ~- 2 ~~~ a ~~ ~ a ~~~ o a `> .~. N ~/ ~/. /\iay zr \ ~ //' s d & ~b ~/ /, / ~ /~4 ~~~~ ° per \ LL / / / / a~J/ / / 'b / I 11 /lii'/i~// ~/ y, ~/ , ~/ ,~ ,~ ~' // /L //// iii //// //// ~/ // ~/ , / c, // /J///%/// / /// / / ,~ / 8 / ~ I1/1 /~/~' //~/ / / / 1 1 I ~{1~2''~.~y{/' I/ / / / / // I 1~ A'I° 1 I ~ // / / ~c~ I ~F X / / / / ~ v I ~ //// ,~ , / ,,r / , / ,,,,,, , T . ~/ ~ ~~//lF/10 / ! / \ I ~\ /////////// / // ,, , ,~ / iii ~'////'~~/ / / / ,/,/ ~/' ~ ii ~~j~// / / / / ,/ / ,/ // o // //// ~ /~/ ////. /ii /'~ o /~r/ //// ,/// / / / . ~ / /!. / / - Y / /~ ~ ~ ~•/- ~ h / / / / / ~/~r~ <~/// r p~~ I. ' / cW / / /O' 4/ / /y'~Y/ /" ~~ u ~n w~ O /~ ~ ~~~~ . e RECORD OF PROCEEDLNGS 100 Leaves with the other buildings on the ranch. Shaffran stated that she managed some of the homes in the adjacent property area (Brush Creek 5/D) but had heard no objections. Klein pointed out that the Board had taken into consideration proposed building sites in the past when making a variance decision. Page 4 Board of Adjustment May 31 ,, 1983 1000003 Bobbit informed the Board that the Elay Corporation had requested that the structure be moved 250' from the road and that he had agreed. Klein suggested that that be made a condition of the approval. Krausch questioned if that would be a reasonable compromise to the E1ay Corp. Klein stated that he would recommend it as a fair compromise. St was determined that the structure would be set back 250' from the chip and seal of Brush Creek Rd. There was a discussion as to the Hardship. Lukes .moved to grant the height variance of 7' based on ~~ractical difficulties created by the Building Code, and the setback wo vld be 250' from the chip and seal of the Brush Creek Access. Mason called for a vote. Shaffran asked to abstain. Since Fox was abstaining, Shaffran was requested to vote. Fox stated that she was uncomfortable because the code amendment made at P s Z was not for this type of operation. Shaffran was concerned because she managed properties for some of the adjacent property owners and, even though they had not c ontacted her, she felt they wouldn't like looking down on the proposed structure taking into consideration the proposed size. Shaffran stated that she did not feel a conflict of interest. Ma son felt she should vote of she did not have a conflict of interest. Shaffran's objection was to the size of the building, not the height. Bobbit gave the size of the building as 16800 square foot. Mason called for a vote. The vote of three for and one against, with Fox abstaining. The request was denied. Peterson questioned if they could come before the Board at the next meeting for reconsideration. Mason agreed. 83-13 Frank Goldsmith, owner Richard Morton, Lot 10, Block 1, Red Mountain RA_ requesting a front and sideyard setback for an addition of a garage. Frank Goldsmith was there to represent himself. Mason had a letter from Evan Benning, to the Board, representing Riata Land & Livestock Company, stating that the owner of such gave full approval for the proposal of Mr. Goldsmith. Fox wanted to know if the Red Mountain Ranch Association had been notified. Goldsmith stated that the meeting would be the second week of June and they would handle the issue at that time. Goldsmith stated that there was very limited parking for the five bedroom house that now exists. He explained that he wanted to add the garage in the back of the house. He showed some photos of the property and the house. Shaffran questioned the amount o£ variance requested. It was determined as an 18' frbntyard setback variance. Goldsmith pointed out a steep embankment on the property where the driveway should be and pointed out how steep the drive was anyway. Goldsmith stated that the association had complained because people were parking on the road during th e. winter. Fox motioned to grant the variance for-the proposed garage of 18' frontyard setback variance due to the topography contigent upon the approval of the homeowners association. Shaffran secon d~the motion. vote was called for. All in favor. 1111111 1111111 III 1111111111 IIIII II 026 8802 03:45F ~, _ SILVIR DRVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 0.00 D 0.00 MINUTES Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Dated: December 4, 2001 Members Present: Michael Cooper, Chairman Deanna Olson Jim Rifkin Jack Hunt Rick Head Members Absent: Bob Throm Staff: Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Officer, acting recording secretary Cooper opened the meeting at 5:35pm and introduced the Board. Case #01-26 Pugh, .James - Lot 10, Block 1, Red Mountain Ranch Subdivision, aka 836 Hunter Creek Road Attorney, Rick Neiley, was present to represent the applicant, James Pugh. The applicant was requesting an 18 foot front yard setback variance where 30 feet is required for this 30,310 square foot lot in the R-30 zone district. Schaffner explained that the applicant wishes to redevelop his site; the existing residence will be removed and a new one constructed. In 1983 a variance was granted so that a garage could be constructed in the front yard setback. Resolution 83-13 granted an 18 foot front yard setback, however, it is clear in the minutes from the meeting that the intent was to approve an 18 foot front yard setback variance, which allows development 12 feet from the lot line. The Homeowner's Association has requested that the applicant come before the Board to clarify the variance. Neiley added that clearly a topographic hardship existed, and that a sewer easement across the property further limited the area to be developed. While the existing garage was built 9 feet from the lot line, the applicant will adhere to the 12 foot setback previously approved. Head asked if the new garage would be built within the existing footprint (except back three feet), and Neiley responded "yes" . Cooper asked if the Homeowners approved the proposed plans. Neiley responded that height poles have been put up for review, however approval has not yet been granted. ~~~Q~~d Rifkin asked Schaffner if any objections were received. Schaffner responded 'ono". Also, no members of the public were present. Head moved to approve the request as per the plans submitted due to topographical hardships. The motion was seconded by Hunt and approved unanimously. Case #01-25: Pitkin County - East of north end of runway at Pitkin County Airport Land use planner, Tim Malloy was present to represent the applicant, Pitkin County. The applicant was requesting approval of a 35 foot Arterial Highway setback variance where 200 feet is required from the Highway 82 right-of-way, for the construction of an equipment building to house the new Approach Lighting System. Schaffner explained that this project has been approved by the BOCC. The proposed structure contains approximately 90 square feet. Rifkin asked what color was proposed for the structure. Malloy responded that it would be brown wood with a fiberglass exterior. The idea was to blend in with the existing background. Head stated that safety concerns indicate that approval be granted and made a motion to approve. The motion was seconded by Hunt. Schaffner stated that the parcel must have the hardship, not the use of the parcel. Cooper consulted section 7-10-030 of the Land Use Code for an appropriate hardship and suggested that the Board stick to language in the code. The Board reviewed the section. Head made a motion to approve the variance as presented due to practical difficulties and the FAA overlay. Cooper seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. MINUTES: Head made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 6, 2001 meeting as submitted. Hunt seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. NEW MEETING SCHEDULE: The Board reviewed the list of proposed meeting dates for 2002. Schaffner indicated some dates that the Board may wish to change due to their close proximity to holidays. The Board agreed to decide whether to change meeting dates once we got closer to the date. ~~Q®~~ NEW CHAIRPERSON: Cooper expressed his desire that everyone be able to serve as Chair if they chose. He thought that the next senior member should be given the Chair, and that it should rotate based on seniority. Rifkin thought the Board should have a Chair and an Acting Chair for when the Chair is absent. The Board agreed that all these ideas were good, and asked who was the next senior member. Schaffner did not know, but indicated she would check the record. Olson stated that she would be interested in being Chair. Meeting adjourned at 6:O5pm. Respectfully submitted, Approved as submitted, ,3~anna S. S haffn cting Recording Secretary acs/o a Da ae Chairman 6S e Date oQ~QQ6 NOV-19-O1 MON 09 40 AM Nei & Alder NOV°16-2001 FR! 03;35 PM~ FAX N0. 970+925+9396 P, 02 FAX N0, ~ P, Ol P~'~N COUNrY BOAkD OF AD,TUS1'MFIVT Application Form nATt; 11/19/U1 ~ (-~ 6 c~AS>~ # kl%pRF.SENTATTVF., Richard Y. Nellcy, ,lr, PHONL+ 925-9393 MATLINOAbbRTsS$ 201 N. t417t c._.,.... ,.__,. ___ 81 MA1T,1N(t AADR7:SS Carolina Ave „ Winter Yark, b'lerida 37789 LOCATrONON'PRQppRTy Lot 10, I~i.ling 1, Red Mountain Ranch Subdivisions 836 Hunter Crcek Rnsd, Aanen, Colorado ~~ Aqy PFrtinent data moat accomp;uty this ai npplicaHoniPitdogsnotconainallthathcly . ;} Ow>1or's or RePresentativu's Sigrtatm ~~ be made part ofthis Caza, 'plc F3oant mayrature thla (1'o be comp etld by tho 'Coning Department) Provisions of tho inning rosoluGon raluiring thr zoning Offidal t0 forward this appitration t0 th¢ 9oard of A4justmeni, aad reasons for net granting a btUWia6PMmit; I2equestiing: _.. i 8 ' rront Yard Setback Varianco, where 30 ' is requited. _~_' Rear Yard Setback Varianno, where ,' is rogttircd. ._ __.~',,,~ Side Yard Selbsck Variance, whtrc „~' is ttgttired. _-__' _, Sidc Yard Sotback Vtuience, when ~~~ ~ required. ..-___' ldeighl Varianrc, whero `' is allowed. _._~_ auquare Feet where a tnaxithunl of` sq. R, is allowed, RR-3---~ .^,Ztine Distriot 30 , 310 .,.r,ot 6iie Odinr: _ Rceol.uti~83_13_ori ina71 ranted the variance but is uncl and necds~tlariflcnelon. AppliCnliMlfiled~~~19/O~ pW~pl/pNo. 6 ireCcrfo ~~~~ 3y©~~ UatoafMeetln8 / ~t~~~~~~~'j'-- IJotices Matle~l -M~~~+L- zoning Official ~ --~~ Secretary PHONE 407~..gps5 0®0~~., ~ ~ APPLICATION BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE ApplicanUProperty Owner James H. Pugh, Jr. 359 Carolina Avenue Winter Park, Florida 32789 Real Property: Lot 10, Block 1, RED MOUNTAIN RANCH SUBDNISION, According to the Plat thereof filed for record in Plat Book 3 at Page 114, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado Representative: Richard Y. Neiley, Jr., No. 9878 Neiley & Alder 201 North Mill Street, Suite 102 Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970)925-9393 oQOt~Q~ C~ • APPLICATION BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE L APPLICATION FOR 18-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK In this Application, James H. Pugh, Jr. (the "Applicant"), seeks confirmation of a previously granted 18-foot front yard setback vaziance for the construction of asingle-story garage. The property is located at 863 Hunter Creek Road, Aspen, Colorado. There is an existing garage constructed on the property within the 30-foot front yard setback, which was approved pursuant to Resolution No. 83-13 of the Boazd of Adjustment. The original variance was granted on May 31, 1983, and was for "an 18-foot front yard setback variance." However, when the Resolution granting the variance was prepazed and recorded in the real estate records, it referenced only a "18-foot front yard setback." The word "variance" was omitted, although the minutes of the meeting on May 31, 1983 indicate that the approval was for an 18-foot front yard setback variance The Applicant desires to remodel and reconstruct the residence on the property. The property is steep, sloping down and away from Hunter Creek Road. Access to the property is off Hunter Creek Road. The property slopes steeply from the road down to the existing building site and then slopes steeply again away from the building site to the southwest boundary of the property. The building site is impacted on the downhill side by an existing sewer line easement. A survey ofthe propertyprepared byAspen Survey Engineers in July of2000 depicts the topography on the lot and the existing improvements. That survey is appended to this Application. A Preliminary Site Plan depicting the proposed reconstructed building footprint is also appended hereto. The reconstructed residence will continue to be located on the bench between the steep slopes on the lot. The structure will not encroach further into the front yard setback. Section 7-10-030 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code authorizes the Boazd of Adjustment to grant a variance from the land use regulations applicable to this property where such regulations would result in practical difficulties or undue hardship upon the property owner. Subsection C.2. of that Code section expressly recognizes that topographical conditions may constitute a hardship warranting a variance. The variance maybe granted so long as it will not result in substantial detriment to the public good or impair the intent and purpose of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Code. In the instant case, the topography ofthe property as depicted on the surveywill result in hardship if the Applicant is not allowed to utilize the area within the front yazd setback presently occupied by the gazage. Because development on this lot is subject to the oversight of the homeowners association azchitectural committee, the specific design and design elements of the proposed construction will be reviewed so as to insure no detriment to interested property owners. The Applicant's proposed development site utilizes the only logical building azea on the property. ®~Q~~ 1 Finally, the Applicant has been informed by the Pitkin County Community Development Department that development on the property is subject to scenic overlay review. This, coupled with homeowners association azchitectural committee review, will insure that the utilization of the 18-foot azea within the front yazd setback will be consistent with the public good, the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Use Code. The Applicant will present elevations for the proposed development within the setback and photographs depicting the site and the improvements thereon at the public hearing held in connection with this Application. The Applicant respectfully requests that the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment confirm the prior grant of an 18-foot front yard setback variance, permitting the construction of a single story gazage within the footprint of the building presently located on the property. II. SCHEDULE OF APPENDICES A. Proof of Ownership; B. Consent of the James H. Pugh, Jr.; C. Board of Adjustment Resolution No. 83-13; D. Preliminary Site Plan; E. Survey; F. Minutes of May 31, 1983 Board of Adjustment meeting. ~Q~Q1_o 2 Richard Y. Neiley, Jr., P.C. Eugene M. Alder, P.C. Mr. Wayne Stryker Stryker Brown Architects 119 South Spring Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Red Mountain Ranch Homeowners Association Deaz Wayne: FAX Number (970) 925.9396 HAND DELIVERY This letter is a follow-up to our telephone conference of yesterday regarding the variance on the property owned by my client, James H. Pugh, Jr., Lot 10, Block 1, Red Mountain Ranch Subdivision. As we discussed, I have procured a set of the minutes from the May 31, 198 Board of Adjustment meeting, at which time an 18-foot front yard setback variance was approved. The Resolution approving the variance which was recorded in the real estate records of Pitkin County erroneously refers to a "18 foot front yard setback" but omits the word "variance." As you can see from the enclosed minutes, the approval was in fact for an 18-foot front yard setback variance which results in a 12-foot front yard setback. The plans previously submitted to the Homeowners Association on a preliminary review basis depict a 12-foot front yazd setback. Similarly, the variance application I submitted to the Homeowners Association on September 25, 2001 is fora 12-foot front yard setback. In confemng with Joanna Schaffner, the zoning officer for Pitkin County, I have confirmed that the variance does not need to be reapproved for the new construction so long as we retain the same footprint as the existing structure and do not exceed the existing height. However, because of the error in the Resolution reflecting the variance, I will be submitting a request to the Boazd ofAdjustment for clarification and for confirmation ofthe 18-foot front yazd setback variance. The Board of Adjustment next meets on December 4, 2001, at which lime we will present our request. I will copy you in on our application. In the meantime, if you need any additional information, please feel free to call. yours, & ALDER RYN/agk Enclosures cc: James H. Pugh, Jr. Rick Halevy Brooke A. Peterson, Esquire Joanna Schaffner NEILEY & ALDER ATTORNEYS 201 North Mill Street, Suite 102 Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970)925.9393 November 6, 2001 Y. Neiley, Jr. oQ~®1~: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ RECORQ OF PROCEEDINGS: ~ 100 Leaves Y C. s. MOLCR LL L. L. R L. L6 ~ ~ ' Page 4 Board of Adjustment May 31, 1983 with the other buildings on the ranch. Shaffran stated that she managed some of the homes in the adjacent property area (Brush Creek S/D) but had-heard no objections. Klein pointed out that the Board had taken into consideration proposed building sites in the past when making a variance decision. Bobbit informed the Board that the Elay Corporation had requested that the structure be moved 250' from the road and that he had agreed. Klein suggested that that be made a condition of the approval. Krausch questioned if that would be.a reasonable compromise to the Elay Corp. Klein stated that he would recommend it as a fair compromise. It was determined that the structure would be set back 250' from the chip and seal of Brush Creek Rd. There was a discussion as to the Hardship. Lukes moved to grant the height variance of 7' based on practical difficulties created by the Building Code, and the setback would be 250' from the chip and seal of the Brush Creek Access. Mason called for a vote. Shaffran asked to abstain. Since Fox was abstaining, Shaffran was requested to vote. Fox stated that .she was uncomfortable because the code amendment made at P & Z was not for this type of operation. Shaffran was concerned because she managed properties for some of the adjacent property owners and, even though they had not contacted her, she felt they wouldn't like looking down on the proposed structure taking into consideration the proposed size. Shaffran stated that she did not feel a conflict of interest. Mason felt she should vote of she did not have a conflict of interest. Shaffran's objection was to the size of the building, not the height. Bobbit gave the size of the building as 16800 square foot. Mason called for a vote. The vote of three for and one against, with Fox abstaining. The request was denied. Peterson questioned if they could come before the Board at the next meeting for reconsideration. Mason agreed. 83-1.3 Frank Goldsmith, owner Richard Morton, Lot 10, Block 1, Red Mountain Rd. requesting a front and sideyard setback for an addition of a garage. Frank Goldsmith was there to represent himself. Mason had a letter from Evan Benning, to the Board, representing Riata Land & Livestock Company, stating that the owner of such gave full approval for the proposal of Mr. Goldsmith. Fox wanted to know if the Red Mountain Ranch Association had been notified. Goldsmith stated that the meeting would be the second week of June and they would handle the issue at that time. Goldsmith stated that there was very limited parking for the five bedroom house that now exists. He explained that he wanted to add the garage in the back of the house. He showed some photos of the property and the house. Shaffran questioned the amount of variance requested. It was determined as an 18' frbntyard setback variance. Goldsmith pointed out a steep embankment on the property where the driveway should be and pointed out how steep the drive was anyway. Goldsmith stated that the association had complained because people were parking on the road during the winter. Fox motioned to grant the variance for the proposed garage of 18' frontyard setback variance due to the topography contigent upon the approval of the homeowners association. Shaffran second-the motion. Vote was called for. All in favor. OOOC12 a, , ~ ~ ~~ ~~-° WARRANTY DEED ~`°`E ~;r~: _., .~T'r, - """'t RFA THIS DEED, made May 1, 2001, ~ ~ - - Between KENNETH E. ISRAEL and RHODA V'JILDSTEIN ISRAEL ?ITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. of the County of ,State of FL, GRANTOR, BY L"1,( Q:n ~~ ~ ~„ AND JAMES H. PUGH JR., GRANTEE whose legal address is :359 CAROLINA AVENUE, WIN ~ ER PARK, FL, 32789 of the County of State of FL WITNESSETH, That for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which +; hereby acknowledged, the grantor has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey and confirm unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together with improvements, if any, situate and lying and being in the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, described as follows: LOT 10, BLOCK 1, RED MOUNTAIN RANCH SUBDIVISION, according to tl'~e Plat thereof filed for record in Plat Book 3 at Page 114. a ~ ., 1~ TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise ~ appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor either in law or equity, of, in and to the above ~ bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever. And the Grantor, for himself, his heirs and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, his heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of the presents, he is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except those matters as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and in:orporated herein by reference. The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, his heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNES W REOF the gr for as ex cuted this deed. n n 0 KEN ETH E. ISRAEL r.~~2 ~~~~~~L~'~i f~HODA WILDSTEIN ISRAEL STATE OF r: ss COUNTY OF ~ The foregoing Instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ~ I , 2001, by KENNETH E. ISRAEL and RHODA WILDSTEIN ISRAEL. WITNESS my hand and official seal ~~ my commission expires: Notary Public +~+~ Roca A oe Artnaa * *My COmmasion CCa20298 ~h„r~. Expires April 12, 2009 000013 . _~ EXHIBIT "A" 1. Taxes for the year 2001 not yet due or payable- 2. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted and right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States as reserved in United States Patent recorded April 24, 1922 in Book 55 at Page 263. 3. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth In the Articles of Incorporation of Red Mountain Ranch Homeowners Association recorded in Book 224 at Page 329 and Amendment thereto recorded June 13, 1969 in Book 594 at Page 753. 4. Those terms, conditions, provislons, obligations, easements, restrictions, assessments and all matters as set forth in Protective Covenants for Red Mountain Ranch recorded December 15, 1966 in Book 224 at Page 347, deleting therefrom any restrictions Indicating any preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or nat(onal origin. 5. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Grant of Easements and Agreemnet recorded March 5, 1973 in Book 273 at Page 246. 6. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of subject property recorded December 18, 1966 in Plat Book 3 at Page 114. 7. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Easement Agreement recorded November 10, 1981 in Book 417 at Page 224. 8. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Board of Adjustment recorded December 7, 1984 in Book 477 at Page 842 as Resolution No. 83-13. 9. Encroachment of Driveway onto adjoining property as disclosed by Survey of Aspen Survey Engineers dated March 8, 2001 as Job No. 15295. 000014 08/08/01 11:54 $64498.45 EPOCH PROPERTIES 1~ , . -\ r EPOCH®PROPERTIES INCORPORATED June 8, 2001 Pitkin County Boazd of Adjustment 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Attcl: Joanna S. Schaffner Re: Lot 10, Block 1, Red Mountain Ranch Subdivision, according to the plat thereof filed for record in Plat Book 3 at Page 114, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado Dear Ms. Schaffner. I am the owner of the above-described real property located in Pitkin County, Colorado. Please accept this letter as my authorization for Richard Y. Neiley, Jr. and Neiley & Alder Attorneys to process an application before the Board of Adjustment seeking a front yard set-back variance for a second story over the existing garage on the property. Very truly urs, ~~ James H. Pugh, Jr. 1}IP/emdASpen-NP/NcOeydtA]der Auth Into Pi[Inn Cn.dac 159 Cnroli~~.a As•enuc • W imer Purk, florid. 327H9 (407)644-9055 ~ Fs (q W) 644.9845 002 000015 0 c~ n n '~ }} U N 7'~ tz ~F~~Hc tc. ~ p ~t 1 Y A T~ ~ c AO God wiog'~^;.• SEC. pt ~- 15~.8~5 ~p -' ~~ r• ~ . ~U5 _ - boo ~3US(YN6~ f~US1= 1NALL 3o~Sr:T'$1cK ~ X00 -~_ ~~ ~ ~f 1~ J ~ poi ~~: '; ~ qo ~ - 9~ $5/ 0 o s ~ .;. • o ~w.. o gp ~ dark ~ ~ o/ ~. r ` W $ o ~ ~ de~c ~ ~ NON ~¢ek ~Z $ h ~ r --1 x 73 o d~ .:. o ~`\ ~ t ~ `~ ~ 75 ~ 7s: / ~~ ~o mLLx 65 .• 6S~' co ti . r~'--lu - - _ _. _ _ _.. .~Qi`_l__rc -~-._ __. S S'F~ B w. ,._ M.::. ~' Dottie Fox ~54E moved 'that the following be adopted+ p S.%' BEFORE THE HOARD OF AD.7USTrffiNT 900N X477 PAGi~42 OF THE COUNTY OF PITKIN STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 83_13 Frank Goldsmith, owner Richard Morton Lot 1C, Block 1, Red:biountain Rd. F7HEREA5, '..h@'~subject property iA within the unincorporated area of Pitkin County,, Colorada;~dnd, WFiEREA5, _the~, Board of Adjustment. s~vested with the power to grant or deny •such vartiances`by;virtue of;pTitle II, Section 16-1.3, Pitkin County Code (Land Use Codes and Colorado ReYisedb.statutes, 1973; 30.-28-118(2) (C)t and. s,,,fo}lbw3.n~ sahdin~jsthe evid'eribe ,presented, the."-Boazd•o£AdjuSaineht. makes the .:off e1-1~:x3;j,~~rr~hq DATED: May 31,1983 Atte St: Sec etary .1 r ff, s r~xs~t'' foY'.~. .+ o 'o' c n ~ft~ .o a ~ ~~* ~sA ~' fi T ~ r Y t ,tbh e D 54 @~O ]it~, r c a r ~-. ~ ~ rl4r.,t~1'$i'`¢'~~'r~dr~st~ear~ng..'. J t o ~ y "~ :Y ado oa.b ~ ~ r:.,b ~, .._ re' o ltesd ftit~dac'. ~HN ?xo1T ;:! ~ ~~~ ~, Y: a+ rr 1' ~- ffxLuke =..ryes .. ~~ y r ~t~. ~~ r; ;;:~ t;gr.;:.. ~ ~~ ~ o ~ ~- ' ~ S h+ o~p m n -^~ L ~ Y'~'?to't6-o£"the Board of Adjustment of the County The--Paardo£ Adjustment of Pitkin [busty, Colorado Chairman ~. ~,, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS. 100 Leaves a r .ucan e. c Page 4 Board of Adjustment Ma 31 19.83 Y with the other buildings on the ranch. Shaffran stated that she managed some of the homes in the adjacent property area (Brush Creek 5/D) but had heard no objections. Klein pointed out that the Board had taken into consideration proposed building sites in the past when making a variance decision. Bobbit informed the Board that the Elay Corporation had requested that the structure be moved 250' from the road and that he had agreed. Klein suggested that that be made a condition of the approval. Krausch questioned if that would be a reasonable compromise to the Elay Corp. Klein stated that he would recommend it as a fair compromise. r.t was determined that the structure would be set back 250' from the ship and seal of Brush Creek Rd. There was a discussion as to the iardship. Lukes.moved to grant the height variance of 7' based on practical difficulties created by the Building Code, and the setback would be 250' from the chip and seal of the Brush Creek Access. Mason called for a vote. Shaffran asked to abstain. Since Fox was abstaining, Shaffran was requested to vote. Fox stated that she was uncomfortable because the code amendment made at P & Z was not for this type of operation. Shaffran was concerned because she managed properties for some of the adjacent property owners and, even though they had not contacted her, she felt they wouldn't like looking down on the proposed structure taking into consideration the proposed size. Shaffran stated that she did not feel a conflict of interest. Mason felt she should vote of she did not have a conflict of interest. Shaffran's objection was to the size of the building, not the height. Bobbit gave the size of the building as 16600 square foot. Mason called for a vote. The vote of three for ar,d one against, with Fox abstaining. The request was denied. Peterson questioned if they could come before the Board at the next meeting for reconsideration. Mason agreed. 83-13 Frank Goldsmith, owner Richard Morton, Lot 10, Block 1, Red Mountain Rd. requesting a front and sideyard setback for an addition of a garage. Frank Goldsmith was there to represent himself. Mason had a letter from Evan Benning, to the Board, representing Riata Land & Livestock Company, stating that the owner of such gave full approval for the proposal of Mr. Goldsmith. Fox wanted to know if the Red Mountain Ranch Association had been notified. Goldsmith stated that the meeting would be the second week of June and they would handle the issue at that time. Goldsmith stated that there was very limited parking for the five bedroom house that now exists. He explained that he wanted to add the garage in the back of the house. He showed some photos of the property and the house. Shaffran questioned the amount of variance requested. It was determined as an 18' frbntyard setback variance. Goldsmith pointed out a steep embankment on the property where the driveway should be and pointed out how steep the drive was anyway. Goldsmith stated that the association had complained because people were parking on the road during the. winter. Fox motioned to grant the variance for the proposed garage of 18' frontyard setback variance due to the topography contigent upon the approval of the homeowners association. Shaffran second the motion. Vote was called for. All in favor. ~O.~Q~~ ,. , a. ~ , ~ 7 ~'~ Z 7.; j' ~ -- -~ County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY POSTING } ss. OF A VARIANCE HEARING BEFORE State of Colorado } THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as follows: h ~ ~ ~~ (1 ~ ~'Q l ~~ ,being or representing an Applicant before the Pitkin County Boazd 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 day of ._ ~.zu~ 4~. , 20 a ~ be posted for at least nine (9) full days Applicant's Signature y, ~r WITNESS N1Y HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. My Commission Notary Public's Address 201 N~r;TH ~l~;l_L ST., SUITE 1Q2 ASPEN, COLORADO 8f Q11 conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that n ~ ~, the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the r~"~day of ~~{',1~t~1 ~Q.,r , 20~, 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: Pursuantto Pitkin County Resolution of June 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Hearing will be held to consider an application filed with the said Boazd of Adjustment requesting authority for variance from the provisions of the County Zoning Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed vaziance are invited to appear and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appeaz personally at such meeting, then you aze urged to state your views by letter, particularly if you have objection to such vaziance, 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: Tuesday, December 4, 2001; 5:30 P.M. Location of Meeting: Commissioners Meeting Room Pitkin County Courthouse 506 East Main St., Aspen, CO Owuer: James Pugh Owner's Address: 359 Carolina Avenue, Winter Park, Florida 32789 Property Location: Lot 10, Block 1 Red Mountain Ranch Subdivision Pugh, James H.: requesting an 18 foot front yard setback variance where 30 feet is required for this 30,310 square foot lot in the R-30 zone district. Property Description: Lot 10, Block 1, Red Mountain Ranch Subdivision aka: 863 Hunter Creek Road, Aspen. VARIANCES GREATER OR LESS THAN REQUESTED COULD BE GRANTED. Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent X For inquires please contact Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Officer, Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen (970) 920-5105. 0000?0 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PITHIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to Pitkin County Zoning Resolution of June 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Hearing will be held 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. A VARIANCE GREATER THAN OR LESS THAN THAT REQUESTED COULD BE GRANTED. DATE AND TIME OF MEETING: LOCATION OF MEETING: Tuesday, December 4, 2001; 5:30 P.M. Commissioner's Meeting Room Pitkin County Courthouse 506 East Main St., Aspen, CO Pugh, James H.: requesting an 18 foot front yard setback variance where 30 feet is required for this 30,310 square foot lot in the R-30 zone district. Property Description: Lot 10, Block 1, Red Mountain Ranch Subdivision aka: 863 Hunter Creek Road, Aspen. Pitldn County: requesting a 35 foot Arterial Highway setback variance where 200 feet is required from the Highway 82 right-of--way, for the construction of the Approach Lighting System equipment building. Property Description: Aspen/Pitkin County Airport, 0233 East Airport Road, Aspen Submitted to the Aspen Times on November 19, 2001 To Be Published in the Aspen Times on November 24, 2001 000021