Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.246335108004DOCUMENT 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 Ptat copies (llxl'n DETERMINATION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE BANE TRACT 4 1041 HAZARD REVIEW, CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION, AND GMQS INCENTIVE FOR LARGE LOTS Determination No.a3-2002 RECITALS 1. Thomas M. Turnbull ("Applicant") has applied to the Pitkin County Heazing Officer for 1041 Hazazd Review and Conceptual Submission to establish a building envelope for the constmction of a single family residence and accessory agricultural uses on Bane Tract 4. 2. The Bane Tracts are located in the Prince Creek Valley. The Bane Tracts are located at the top of Prince Creek Road where Prince Creek Road meets West Sopris Creek and Dinkle Lake Roads Bane Tract 4 is located on the west side of the Bane Tracts. This tract is bordered by the White River National Forest to the south, Tracts 2, 3 and BLM land to the east, the Jelinek property to the north, and BLM lands to the west. The property is more specifically described in Exhibit A. The property is zoned RS-30. The property contains approximately 509 acres and is conforming in size. 4. The property is a working ranch. The conditions of this Resolution shall not prohibit Typical operations or uses associated with the ranch. 5. One single-family dwelling unit up to 15,000 square feet of floor area shall be exempt from Growth Management on any parcel greater than 500 acres in size. 6. The Hearing Officer, at a duly noticed public hearing on May 28, 2002, reviewed this application, and at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application. 7. The Hearing Officer fmds that this application proposes development in the best possible location, given the hazards identified on the property. NOW TFIEREFORE BE TT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Heazing Officer that he does hereby grant approval to the Bane Tract 4 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, and GMQS Incentive, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all succ~sors in interest: 1. The Applicant shall adhere to al] material representations made in the application, dated February 5, 2002, and public meetings. 2. Prior to submittal of any building permit applications, the Applicant shall record a 24 x 36 inch mylar 1041 Hazazd Review Site Plan in accordance to Section 5-70-040 of the Land Use Code. The site plan shall also be submitted in a digital format for integration into the County Geographic Information System (GIS'). The site plan shall include the following: A. The slopes in excess of 30% on the west portion of the proposed building envelope shall be eliminated. IIIII~ IIIIIIIIIII IIIIII lollll III II IIII IIIIIIO a 69p 0908t:zsa oooooi. ~~ ~~ ~; Determination No. c~J-2002 Bane Tract 4 Page 2 3. Wildfire mitigation shall be as follows: A. Defensible Space: 1. The area around all structures shall incorporate landscaping with wildfire defensible space considerations as follows (NOTE: Actual vegetation manipulation to meet these conditions may not be necessary where the natural vegetation patterns have already fulfilled these conditions): a. For a distance of I S' aoound all structures, maintain vegetation at a height of 6" or less with mowed grass, low growing perennials or hazdscape. Woody vegetation shall not be planted with this perimeter. b. Beyond the 15 foot perimeter and up to 30 feet from the structure, grass shall be kept mowed to a height of 6 inches or less. c. Any future woody (i.e. evergreens) landscaping within 100 feet of structures shall be planted so that there will be a 10 to 15 foot spacing between tree crowns. The distance between crowns shall be measured from the outermost branches. Aspens shall be planted as single stem or in clumps. d. The lower limbs of all trees within in the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed up to 10 feet or half the total height of the tree whichever is least. Removing these lower limbs will take care of ladder fuels. e. The Applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space vegetation requirements. B. Structural Desisn and Construction Requirements: ]. Roofs shall have anon-combustible roof covering on a Class A assembly. Wood shake/shingle roof covering are prohibited in all wildfire hazard areas. Roofs with less than 3:12 pitch are not permitted in 1041 Wildfire Areas unless they comply with the following: a. All roof coverings shall be non-combustible materials as defined in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) 1997 Section 1504 and installed on a Class A roof assembly. b. All roof coverings shall have a surface that shall facilitate the natural process of clearing the roof. c. All roof design shall facilitate the natural process of clearing roof debris. Protrusions above the roofline, such as parapets, shall be prohibited d. Roofs shall be installed as required by UBC 1997 Chapter 15 and shall have a minimum slope of 1:48. e. All roof designs, coverings, or equivalent assemblies shall be specifically approved by the Fire Marshall prior to submittal of a building permit application. ~~~~~~ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII00 695 e9 at:zsa 0.00 Determination No. q~-2002 Bane Tract 4 Page 3 2. All vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh of one quarter inch maximum. C. Maintenance: 1. Roofs and gutters shall be kept cleaz of debris. 2. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable debris. 3. All flammable materials (including firewood/wood piles) shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from any structure. Firewood/wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from all structures. D. Miscellaneous: 1. Fences shall be kept clear of brash and debris. 2. Wood fences shall not be connected to the structure. 3. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container. 4. Each stmcture shall have a minimum of one 10 Ib. ABC fire extinguisher 5. Addresses shall be clearly marked and visible with minimum 2" noncombustible letters and shall be clearly visible at the primary point of access from the public or commm access road and installed on anon-combustible post. 6. Any outbuildings or additional buildings shall adhere to the same standards as structures. E. Utilities: 1. Utility lines shall be buried. 4. No development, including grading, excavating, fill placement, berming, decorative or ornamental entry gates, construction parking or staging shall occur outside of the approved building envelope unless otherwise specified in this document. Vegetation removal or disturbance shall not occur outside of the approved building envelope, except as necessary for ranch operations. Weed control, irrigation practices, control burns, and when necessary wildfire mitigation may be undertaken. Only one decorative or omamental entry gate shall be allowed along Homestead Alley (off of the Dink]e Lake Road spur) or Four Bar Spur (off of Prince Creek Road) for the subject property and the other four Bane Tracts. 5. Utility extension and maintenance shall occur within the approved building envelope and/or within the existing driveway alignment. Well and septic locations may occur outside of the building envelope in locations approved by the Community DevelopmenYand Environmental Health Departments. Landscaping may occur outside of the building envelope pursuant to a Landscaping Plan approved by the Community Development Department. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~II0069o 090u.zsa IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIII`D R 0 . 000003 SILVIP DRV15 Determination No. p~-2002 Bane Tract 4 Page 4 6. All areas disturbed by construction shall be revegetated with native shrubs and grasses to limit water consumption and additional runoff within one growing season of the project's completion. Landscaping and revegetation on the property shall utilize low water (xeriscaping) native plant materials and concepts. The Applicant shall comply with the following wildlife mitigation: A. Fencing outside of the building envelope not necessary for the control of livestock is discouraged. Livestock fencing shall be brought into compliance with County standards only when ranch operations ceases. B. Dogs shall be kenneled. Verification of a dog kennel, run, or other fenced area should be completed prior to the Certificate of Occupancy. Dogs belonging to construction workers shall not be allowed on the property except for working dogs. C. All waste storage shall comply with Wildlife Protection Ordinance No. 010-2001. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, compliance with the ordinance shall be verified. D. No riparian or wetland vegetation shall be damaged or removed E. Utility poles must be made raptor-friendly or raptor proof. F. Any vegetation altered for an access road, utility line or similar use must be replaced with vegetation equal in type and quantity to that being removed according to a mitigation plan approved by the County Wildlife Biologist pursuant to section 3-80-080(A)(4) of the Pitkin County Land use Code. G. Any areas outside of the building envelope disturbed during construction must be revegetated with native plants according to a Revegetation Plan submitted by the Applicant and approved by the County Division of Natural Resource prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The elements of the plan are outlined in the County Wildlife's Biologist letter dated April 25, 2002. H. Fruit-bearing trees and shrubs should be avoided in any landscaping due to the high level of black bear activity in the area. I. If horses are kept, hay shall be fenced at owner's expense with 8' mesh game proof fencing. J. Mountains sage habitat shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall obtain approval of a septic permit from the Environmental Health Department. The septic system shall comply with the setback requirements from surface and groundwater sources. A qualified professional engineer must design the system. The septic systems may be located outside of the building envelope, if approved by the Environmental Health and Community Development Departments. 9. Prior to submittal of a septic permit, the Applicant shall provide documentation of adequate quality and quantity of water to the Environmental Health Department. The well may be located outside of the building envelope, if approved by the Environmental Health and Community Development Departments. ~~OQ~4 SIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIII III III III IIII0469D 090it::zsa Determination No. ~-2002 Bane Tract 4 Page S 10. A fireplace/woodstove application must be filed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a building pemlit. 11. The Applicant shall comply with all codes and requirements of the Basalt and Rural Protection Fire District, which include and aze not limited to the following: A. Road/driveway widths should be at least 14 feet. In the places where the road cross the streams, culverts should be 16 feet wide. B. Dead end driveways shall have tumazounds for fire apparatus. C. Pullouts aze required every 400' to allow passage of fire apparatus. D. Al] residences shall have a fire sprinklers. E. Water storage tanks or ponds with dry hydrants located on the property shall be allowed to be used in fire suppression and be accessible year round. 12. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or construction activity, the Applicant shall stake the comers of the building envelope and install construction fencing around the perimeter of the building envelope. The fencing shall remain in place until issuance of certificate of occupancy. 13. The Applicant shall submit a Drainage and Erosion Control Plan for review and approval by the County Engineer prior to the submittal for any building or earthmoving permits. The plan shall address the management of runoff during construction and after construction is complete. The plan shall detail the types and locations of drainage and erosion control features and methods to maintain them during construction. Silt fencing along Prince Creek shall be installed during construction to prevent potential disturbance. 14. At the time of building permit application submittal, the Applicant shall submit, for review and approval by the County Engineer, a Construction Management Plan in accordance with the Asset Management Plan. The Construction Management Plan shall indicate that vehicles associated with construction (i.e. employee traffic, construction vehicles, staging and deliveries) shall not violate County Law, such as parking on County rights-of--way. 15. Prior to the submittal of any building permits, the Applicant shall obtain an Access/Driveway Development Permit approved by the County Engineer. A. The driveway shall comply with County standards in effect at the time of issuance of the permit. B. A plan and profile of the road shall be submitted with selected cross sectiols in areas of significant cuts or fills. The plan should show locations of proposed emergency vehicle pullouts. Pullouts shall be field verified before construction. C. Hydraulic calculations confirming the required sizes of culverts and other drainage features shall be submitted along with the permit. ~Qd~O~ 469529 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII VIII VIIIIIIIII VIII III VIIIIIIIIIII007905q 000011 :25n SILVIR DRVIS PITXIN Determination No. GY3-2002 Bane Tract 4 Page 6 D. Portions of Homestead Alley, proposed to be improved, encroach upon slopes in excess of 30% (i.e. Stations 72+00 to 76+00). The Applicant shall provide a slope analysis in these aeeas to illustrate possible avoidance of these slopes. E. Any encroachments into wetlands or riparian habitat areas due to construction of the drive or installation of the drainage features should be avoided. If disturbance of unidentified wetlands or ripazian habitat areas aze necessary, the Applicant shall consult with the County Divisionof Natural Resources. F. Winter access to the property shall be from West Sopris Creek Road to Upper Prince Creek Road to the intersection ofthe Dinkle Lake Road spur to the existing gate on Tract 1. The Applicant, owner, shall contract with the County in order to plow these County roads. Shall access to the Dinkle Lake Road spur be prohibitive; the Applicant shall be allowed to use Four Bar Spur off of Upper Prince Creek Road during winter months. 16. All lighting shall comply with the regulations of the Land Use Code 17. Commitment to serve letters from Holy Cross Electriq Qwest and any other commercial utility company shall be submitted at the time of building permit. 18. All development must comply with the provisions of the Pitkin County Noxious Weed Management Plan. The property contains areas of noxious weed infestation. Prior to the submittal of a building or earthmoving permits, the Applicant shall submit a weed management plan to be approved by the County Division of Natural Resources. 19. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 022-2000, the Applicant is subject to the Fair Share Requirements and shall pay a road impact fee as calculated at the time of building permit issuance. 20. Development of 30 inches above or below grade within the required property setbacks requires approval of a vaziance by the Boazd of Adjustment. 21. Statutory vested rights for the approval contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitkin County Land Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitkin County Land Use Code, § 4-140 and C.R.S., § 24-68-105. The statutory vested rights granted herein shall expire on May 28, 2005. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIlVIES ON THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2002. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 28TH DAY OF MAY, 2002. VESTED RIGHT NOTICE PUBLISHED ON THE ~ DAY OF ~wy , 2002. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 4695 0g at.zsA R 0.00 D 0.00 o0t ~~oU Determination No. o'YIJ -2002 Bane Tract 4 Page 7 ATTEST: Isabel Calderon, Administrative Assistant APPROVED AS TO FORM: r John Ely, County or'~ Case #P032-02 246334400007 HEARING OFFICER OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO es R. True, Hearing Officer Date: ~t2 ~~~ APPR~/OVE~yJA,S~TO CONTENT: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director 469529 i IIIIII VIII IIIIII VIII IIIiI IIIIII VIII III VIII IIII IIII 0 07905D2000081 25fi ~On~~ll .. ,.. ~7 -,~aat~a-~N~ .~Na..' ,~~a :~` • E7NIBIT °A° .. .. .. ~ ~ .. ~- DESCAIPTZON-TRACT 4 - TO BE KNOWN AS HANE TRACT 4 A erect of land actuate Sn Sections 35 end 36, Township 8 South, Rsnge 88 West, and Section 1, Township .9 South, Range 08 Neet all o! Chs~6th PrincSDal Meridian being more partieulerly described as lollow; Beginning at the SW corner o! Lot 2 0! acid Seetlon 1; thence, N DO°18'49• W, 1251.04 feet along the west ISne of aaid Lot 2 to the NW corner of Lot 2; thence, N 89°53'22• W, 784.95 £eet along the south line of said Seetioa 36 to the south 1/4 corner of Section 3fi; thence. N 89°53'22• W, 2659.27 feet along the Louth line of Saetion 36 to the SW corner of Section 76; thence, S 89°58'00• W, 2645.94 feet along the south line of aaid Section 35 to the south 1/4 corner of Section 35; [hence,. N 00°OQ'00• E, 5280.00 feet along the north south centerline of Section 35 tc the north 1/4 corner of Section 35; thence, N 89°58'00• E, 2645.94 feet along the north line o! Section 35 to the NE corner of Section 35; thence, S 00°00'00• W, 2640.00 feet along the teat lice of Section 35 to the east 1/4 corner of Section 35; thence, S 89°53'15• E, 1321.19 feet along the south lSne of the SW1/4 of the NW 1/4 of aaid Section 36 to the SE corner of aaid SW1/4 oL •the NW1/4;- thence, S 00°00'00• W, 1176.50 feet; thence, N 90°00'00• E, 2835.16 feet; thence, S 00°00'00•. N, 1745.30 feet; [hence, S 35°55'45• W, 1201.9d feet; to the point of beginning, containing 22,158,240 aq.ft. or 508.68 acres more or lees. 1 469529 {~ p IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII VIIIIIIIIIIIIII VIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII B 07905028 0011 25R O O ~,~ V H SILVIR DRVIS PITK POWER OF ATTORNEY COUNTYOOFCPIOKINO ) ss IIIIII IIQ II III IIII II IIIIII IIIIII II II I III 00 9 0D 0 00 3:10P KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That I, THOMAS M. TURNBULL, having an address of 3130 Road A'~, Grand Junction, CO 81503, reposing special trust and confidence in THOMAS R. TURNBULL of Garfield County, Colorado, have made, constituted, and appointed and by these presents do make, constitute, and appoint THOMAS R. TURNBULL my true and lawful attorney for me, and in my name, place and stead, for my sole use and benefit to represent me in the submission of land use applications ("Submit Land Use Applications"), recording of documents ("Record Documents"), and the sale of certain real property, situate in Pitkin County, Colorado, now owned or hereafter acquired by me, and more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (hereinafter referred to as the "Property".) For the purpose aforesaid, I authorize, empower, and direct my attorney-in-fact to negotiate and execute, acknowledge, record, and deliver on my behalf, any and all documents and instruments that may be required, necessary, or desirable to sell the Property, Submit Land Use Applications, and Record Documents. Said documents and instruments may include, but are expressly not limited to, the following: open listing agreements, sale contracts, exchange contracts, general warranty deeds, special warranty deeds, quit claim deeds, bills of sale, land use applications and related forms and documents, plats and tract maps, certificates of non-foreign status, escrow instructions, modifications, clarifications or amendments to any contracts, settlement statements, releases and consents. My attorney-in- fact is further authorized, empowered, and directed to accept for me, and in my name, place and stead, any promissory notes and deeds of trust payable to me and for my benefit at the closing of any contracts; and, to endorse for me, in my name, place, and stead, all checks or other instruments payable to me, to accept any monies payable to me at closing, and to execute, acknowledge and deliver any and all other instruments necessary to consummate the sale of the Property. The intent of this Power of Attorney is to grant my attorney-in-fact all power and authority to do any and all things which my attorney-in-fact shall deem proper for the sale of the - 1 - 000009 Proper~y alhich I could do on my behalf if personally hereby ratifying and confirming all things which my fact shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue presents. '~', ~`' , present, attorney-in- of these Third parties may rely on the representations of. my attorney-in-fact as to all matters relating to any power granted my attorney-in-fact hereunder, and no person who may act in reliance on the representations of my attorney-in-fact, or the authority granted my attorney-in-fact, shall incur any liability to me or my estate as the result of permitting my attorney-in- fact to exercise any power on my behalf. Thie Power of Attorney shall not be affected by my disability, and shall expire when the transaction contemplated by this Power of Attorney is completed. IN wITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereto set my hand and seal this ~~~ day of -1fk~~'~-f1-`~~ 2002. ~.~~.. THOMAS M. TURNBU L STATE OF COLORADO } ss. COUNTY OF ~L~`~ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Z-°/ day of -5~~ , 2002, by THOPiAS M. TURNBULL. WITNESS my Band and official sea,1, My Coami.ssion expires: Nota Public SIIIIIIIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII VIIIII II 010/ eD 0 0003 10P \ ~~YOY~ - L - 11fly (AfMnISS)On ~4/~ ~~nol~ ~' F.XHTRTT "A" DESCRIPTION-TRACT 4 -- TO BE KNOWN AS BANE TRACT 4 A tract of land situate in Sections 35 and 36, Township 8 South, Range 88 West, and Section 1, Township 9 South, Range 88 West all of the 6th Principal Meridian being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the SW corner of Lot 2 of said Section 1; thence, N 00°18'49" W, 1251.04 feet along the west line of said Lot 2 to the NW corner of Lot 2; thence, N 89°53'22" W, 784.95 feet along the south line of said Section 36 to the south 1/4 corner of Section 36; thence, N 89°53'22" W, 2659.27 feet along the south line of Section 36 to the SW corner of Section 36; thence, S 89°58'00" W, 2645.94 feet along the south line of said Section 35 to the south 1/4 corner of Section 35; thence, N 00°00'00" E, 5280.00 feet along the north south centerline of Section 35 to the north 1/4 corner of Section 35; thence, N 89°58'00" E, 2645.94 feet along the north line of Section 35 to the NE corner of Section 35; thence, 5 00°00'00" W, 2640.00 feet along the east line of Section 35 to the east 1/4 corner of Section 35; thence, S 89°53'15" E, 1321.19 .feet along the south line of the SW1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 36 to the SE corner of said SW1/4 of the NWl/4; thence, S 00°00'00" W, 1176.50 feet; thence, N 90°00'00" E, 2835.16 feet; thence, 5 00°00'00" W, 1745.30 feet; thence, S 35°55'45" W, 1201.94 feet; to the point of beginning, containing 22,158,240 sq.ft. or 508.68 acres more or less. I ~"IIIIIIIII'I'I'llll'llllll 473227 PI TKIN COU ~~II ~IIIIIIII'lll'lllll'll O9e. 3 of 3 R 16,00 /10/2002 O3:1OP ~ 0.00 000011 MEMORANDUM TO: Pitkin County Hearing OffiJce~r FROM: Tamara Pregl, Planner* "j/'~ RE: Bane Tracts 1, 3, 4, & 5 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission and GMQS Incentive for Lazge Lots DATE: May 28, 2002 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: • Tract 1: The Applicant is requesting 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission to establish an approximately 3 acre building envelope for the construction of a single family residence and accessory agricultural buildings. • Tract 3: The Applicant is requesting 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission to establish an approximately 4.6 acre building envelope for the construction of a single family residence and accessory agricultural buildings. • Tract 4: The Applicant is requesting 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission to establish an approximately 5.5 acre building envelope for the construction of a single family residence and accessory agricultural buildings. • Tract 5: The Applicant is requesting 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission to establish an approximately 3.5 acre building envelope and an approximately 14 acre agricultural & septic improvement envelope for the construction of a single family residence and accessory agricultural buildings. The Applicant has identified an access envelope of approximately 0.828 acres. (The Applicant has submitted a revised site plan for this parcel due to concerns raised by staff during the site visit regarding the visibility of the originally proposed building envelope.) APPLICANT: Timothy H. Turnball (Tract 1); Amy U. Tumball (Tract 3); Thomas M. Turnball (Tract 4); and Catherine T. Barron (Tract 5) REPRESENTATIVE: Glenn Horn of Davis Horn Inc. and Gideon Kaufman of Kaufman and Peterson LOCATION: The Bane Tracts are located in the Prince Creek Valley at the top of Prince Creek Road where Prince Creek Road meets West Sopris Creek and Dinkle Lake Roads. • Tract 1: This pazcel is located on the east side of the Bane Tracts. The tract is bordered by the White River National Forest to the south, Dinkle Lake Road and Bureau of Land Managemait (BLM) land to the east, BLM land to the north and Tract 5 of the Bane Tracts to the west. Prince Creek Road crosses the northeast corner of the Tract. ~~DOlr~. Bane Tracts 1, 3, 4 & 5 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, & GMQS Incentive May 28, 2002 Paee 2 Tract 3: This parcel is located in the center of the Bane Tracts. The tract is bordered by the White River National Forest to the south and east, Tract 5 to the east, the Jelinek property to the north, Tract 4 and White River National Forest to the west. Tract 4: This parcel is located on the west side of the Bane Tracts. This tract is bordered by the White River National Forest to the south, Tracts 2, 3, and BLM land to the east, the Jelinek property to the north, and BLM lands to the west. Tract 5: This parcel is located on the east side of the Bane Trails. Tract 5 is bordered by the White River National Forest to the south, Tract 1 to the east, BLM lands to the north andthe Jelinek property and Tract 3 to the west. ZONING/LOT SIZE: The Bane Tracts are zoned RS-30. Tract 1 contains approximately 506 acres; Tract 3 contains approximately 504 acres; Tract 4 contains approximately 509 acres; and Tract 5 contains approximately 517 acres. All the tracts are conforming in size. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Referral agency comments received are incorporated throughout this memorandum and are attached for reference. STAFF COMMENTS: - INCENTIVE FOR LARGE LOTS (RS-160 OR 500+ ACRE PARCELS (SECTION 9-110- 044) Pursuant to section 9-110-044, one single-family dwelling unit up to 15,000 square feet ofresidential floor area shall be exempt from Growth Management on any parcel greater than 500 acres in size. - 1041 IIAZnRn REV[Ew The Hearing Officer may grant approval of a 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission based on a finding of compliance with the standards of Section 360, 3-70, 3-80 and 3-110 of the Land Use Code. Specific hazards, resources and recommended mitigation measures are discussed below: Wildfire: Vince Urbina of the Colorado State Forest Service has reviewed the application and has rated the wildfire hazard within the proposed building envelopes as low based on the location of the proposed building envelopes on the parcels and the vegetation types. Mc Urbina has provided mitigation measures to be used for each development site which have been included as conditions of approval. Wildlife: The Applicant has provided a Wildlife Evaluation prepared by NatureTech Consultant Services Corp. and revised by Western Ecosystems for each parcel. The evaluations can be found in Attachment 6 of the applications. 000013 Bane Tracts 1, 3, 4 & 5 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, & GMQS Incentive May 28, 2002 Page 3 Jonathan Lowsky, County Wildlife Biologist, reviewed the applications and has indicated that the proposed building envelopes lie within an elk migration pattern, transition range and within a %z mile of field verified elk calving habitat on the White River National Forest to the south. Mr. Lowsky has noted that development within the proposed building envelopes is unlikely to have any significant ecological impacts. Mr. Lowsky has offered a number of wildlife habitat mitigation measures which have been incorporated as conditions of approval. Mr. Lowsky has noted that Tracts 2, 3 & 4 are clustered such that their likely zone of influence (approximately 280 meters or 918 feet) extending out into adjacent wildlife habitat will overlap This is similar to Tracts 1 and 5 with respect to clustering and zone of influence. Justin Martens of the Colorado Division of Wildlife provided comments which are attached to this memorandum. Mr. Martens has indicated that the Bane Tracts lie within elk and mule deertransitional range. To the north of the area is mule deer winter range, and to the south is an elk production area. Mr. Martens has offered certain general precautions for all of the parcels to be taken to most effectively minimize the impacts to wildl~'e and wildlife human conflicts which have been incorporated as conditions of approval. In addition, Mr. Martens has offered specific mitigation measures which have also been incorporated as conditions of approval. Ripazian Habitat and Wetland Areas: It is staff s understanding that the access roads or the proposed building envelopes do not encroach onto riparian habitat or wetlands and avoid stream corridors. Pursuant to section 3-80-080(G) of the Land Use Code, Development shall be prohibited within riparian, shoreland and wetland areas with the exception that bridges, roads, utilities cr~sings and other structures such as irrigation devices may be permitted upon a finding that there is no feasible alternative location and that any impacts will be adequately mitigated. If during the installation of the driveways disturbance of riparian or wetland disturbance is necessary, the Applicant shall contact theNatural Resource Department to inquire as to the appropriate mitigation Slopes: • Tract 1: The subject property contains slopes that range from less than I S% to greater than 30%. The proposed building envelope contains slopes less than 15%, however, there are fe~v minor areas within the proposed building envelope that contain slopes greater than 15%. Tract 3: This property also contains slopes that range from less than 15% to greater than 30%. The proposed building envelope contains slopes that are less than 15%. There is onesmall anomalous area of slopes greater than I S% on the southeast end of the property. • Tract 4: This property contains slopes that range from less than 15% to greater than 30% The majority of the building envelope contains slopes that are less than 15%. As noted by the Applicant, on the west end of the proposed building envelope there are slopes between 15% and 30% and isolated areas with slopes over 30%. The Applicant has represented that these slopes are azeasthat ~~~~1~ Bane Tracts 1, 3, 4 & 5 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, & GMQS Incentive May 28, 2002 Page 4 represent anomalies in slopes which are generally less than I S%. There are a few areas within the envelope that have slopes that are greater than I S% which should be allov`ed to remain, however, staff is of the opinion that with a 5.5 acre building envelope, there is no need to have slopes that are in excess of 30% and they should be removed from the proposed building envelope. Tract 5: The proposed amended building envelope and access envelope contain slopes in excess of 15% but less than 30%. Pursuant to section 3-80-050(C)(1) of the Land Use Code, Development is prohibited on slopes greater than fifteen percent (15%) unless a specific development proposal is found to result in a site design that creates less impact than if the development rers limited exclusively to slopes of less than f¢leen percent (15%). In the event that a development proposal utilises slopes in excess of IS% o% ifa development site is comprised exclusively ofslopes which exceed fifteen percent (1 S%), design and development shall be based on a detailed site analysis, including geologic and engineering studies to identifythe best development area based on the considerations outlined in section 3-80-050(C)(1)(a-t). The proposed building envelope is located around the existing homestead structures. There are three existing stmctures which the Applicant is proposing to renovate. The fourth stnicture will unlikely be retained. Staff is of the opinion that since the building envelope is located within an already disturbed area of the subject property, that disturbance of the 15% slopes and greater within the building envelopes shall be permitted. It appears that there are some sections of Homestead Alley which encroach onto slopes in excess of 30%. Pursuant to Section 3-80-050(C)(2), Development is prohibited on slopes greate• than 30%, except as permitted herein. a. Exception for Minor changes in Slope-Development may be permitted on lands that have a slope in excess of thirty percent (30%) when the slope is due to the presence of a minor natural or man- made change in the gradient of a continuous slope, provided the following conditions are met: I. Not Subject to Instability-The applicant demonstrates that the slope's ground surfaces are not prone to instability or failure and that the proposed development will not cause greater instability or increase the potential for slope failure. 2. Compliance with Other Regulations- The applicant demonstrates that development on slopes in excess of thirty percent (30%) does not increase visual, wildlife or wilditre impacts, or compromise or conflict with other policies or standards of the Land Use Code. As noted in Bud Eylar's comments, for the areas of improvement for Homestead Alley that require encroachment of 30% slopes, the Applicant shall provide a slope analysis to see if these areas can be avoided. Staff is of the opinion that if it is determined that is it necessary for road improvements to occur on slopes in excess of 30% to improve the road, these areas shall be eligible for the Code exemption noted above. 000015 Bane Tracts 1, 3, 4 & 5 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, & GMQS Incentive May 28, 2002 Page 5 CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION Water: The parcels will be served by a residential exempt private water well. In a report by Schmueser Gordon Meyer, it was noted that according to Shelton Drilling good quaity water of adequate quantity should be obtained by the wells. The wells should be drilled within the proposed building envelopes. The Applicant has indicated that if in the event a reliable water supplycannot be developed within the envelopes, an amendment to the development permit to develop a water supplyoutside of the envelopes will be pursued. Sewer: The parcels will be serviced by an individual wastewater disposal system (ISDS)to be located within the proposed building envelopes. A septic system permit is required by the Environmental Health Department prior to the issuance of any building permits. Drainage and Erosion: The Applicant has noted that historic on-site drainage will be maintained on the parcels. The Applicant has noted that the subject properties are well vegetated. Existing vegetation shall be preserved to preserve the character of the site and minimize erosion. The Applicant has asserted that standard erosion control measures shall be utilized during construction. An overall Drainage and Erosion Control plan for the subject properties shall be submitted for review and approval by the County Engineer. The Drainage and Erosion Control Plan shall address the means and methods of controlling runoff and erosion related to construction activities. The plan shall detail the types and location of drainage and erosion control features and methods to maintain them during construction. This plan shall be submitted prior the issuance of any building or earthmoving permits. Irrigated Areas • Tract 1: The Applicant has indicated that the subject site is nd irrigated for agricultural purposes. Areas irrigated for agricultural purposes will not be affected by the proposed development. Tracts 3.4 & 5: Portions of the subject site are irrigated. Approximately 1 acre of land will no longer be irrigated after site development. Irrigated Ditches: There are no irrigation ditches impacting the proposed building envelopes. The Applicant has noted that there will be positive drainagearound any structures to protect the structures from water damage resulting from irrigation. Utilities: According to the Schmueser Gordon Meyer report submitted with the application, only two commercial utilities are available. Both are on West Sopris Creek Road within a %z mile ofthe Bane Tracts. Holy Cross Electric and Qwest both have the ability to serve the properties. The utilities will be buried in the shoulder of the road to the property and in the shoulder of the driveway to the proposed building envelopes. The Applicant has indicated the commitment to serve letters shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit. ~~~~1~ Bane Tracts 1, 3, 4 & 5 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, & GMQS Incentive May 28, 2002 Access: All Five of the Bane Tracts will be accessed by Homestead Alley, which is accessed either off of Dinkle Lake Road from West Sopris Creek Road or off of Prince Creek Road from Highway 133. Access to the Bane Tracts will be primarily from West Sopris Creek. The Applicant has noted that Four Bar Spur is another existing ranch road which provides alternate access to Homestead Alley. It is staff's understanding that the main access to the Bane Tracts will be Homestead Alley off the intersection of Dinkle Lake Road and Prince Creek Road and that Four Bar Spur is an alternative access point, which will be used during the summer months. The Applicant has asserted that existing culverts are in place at draws and stream crossings. The existing ranch roads will be improved to meet Cotmty driveway standards. It is indicated in the Schmueser Gordon Meyer report (Attachment 5) submitted with the application, that the project will plow the last +/- 2000 feet of West Sopris Creek Road to the property entry at the Junction of West Sopris Creek Road, Prince Creek Road, Dinkle Lake Road, and Homestead Road. The upper sections Prince Creek Road and Dinkle Lake Road are not maintained during the winter months. The upper portion of Prince Creek Road is considered Low Service Area Roads according to the Pitkin County Assets Management Plan. Low service area roads are low priority. Plowing of snow may be completed by the County or by the property owners or contractors through an agreement with the I County. Dinkle Lake Road is considered a Limited Service Area Road according to the Assets Management Plan. Limited Service Area Roads are maintained primarily to accept non-vehicular traffic. The plowing of snow, by the County or others, shall not be undertaken within limited service areas and access to private properties shall be gained via other means, such a snow cat, snowmobile, cross country skiing, snowshoe, or foot. Procedures to amend the road classification or maintenance of a road are outlined in the Assets Management Plan under Section 3.06 [Amendment and Modification of Maintenance Classification]. • Tract 1: The building envelope for the subject property will be accessed off a Prince Creek Springs Road from Homestead Road. Prince Creek Springs Road is an existing ranch road requiring some improvements. This road does no[ encroach onto slopes in excess of I S%. The Schmueser Gordon Meyer report has noted that Prince Creek Springs Road has grades less than seven percent. Tract 3: The building envelope for this property will be accessed from a driveway off of Homestead Alley. The Schmueser Gordon Meyer report has noted that the driveway for this property is new construction. The report indicates that the driveway will follow an irrigation ditch through a stand of Aspen. According to the report, the irrigation ditch appears adequate for the driveway. Once in the hay field, the driveway will follow the edge of the aspen trees to the building envelope. The entire driveway will have a grade of less than 7%. • Tract 4: The building envelope for this parcel is an existing ranch road less than 7% in grade which is off of Homestead Alley. The driveway follows a trail used to maintain an irrigation itch. ~~~~17 Bane Tracts I, 3, 4 & 5 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, & GMQS Incentive May 28, 2002 • Tract 5: The building and agricultural envelopes abut Homestead Alley. Bud Eylar, County Engineer, has offered the following comments: 1. There is at least one, if not more areas where Homestead Alley encroaches on a 30% slope. This is in the area of Station 72+00 to 76+00. The Applicant shall provide a slope analysis in this area to see if the over than 30% slopes can be avoided. Z. The Applicant shall obtain an access permit before the issuance of any buildingpermits. A plan and profile of the road shall be submitted with selected cross sectiom in areas of significant cuts or fills. The plan should show locations of proposed emergency vehicle pullouts. Pullouts shall be field verified before construction. 3. Hydraulic calculations confirming the required sizes of culverts and other drainage features shal I be submitted along with the Access permit. 4. Any encroachments into wetlands or riparian areas due to construction of the drive or installation of the drainage features should be avoided. If not, any disturbance shall be mitigated. 5. Individual drives to the respective tracts have been submitted. If they are built at this time, they shall require individual access permits for eachtract. Fire: Vonda Williams from the Basalt and Rural Fire Protection District has provided comments which are attached to this memorandum. According to Ms. Williams, the following recommendations shall be observed: 1. Road width should be 14 feet. In the places where the road crosses the streams, culverts should be 16 feet wide. 2. Dead end driveways need to have turnarounds for fire apparatus. 3. Pullouts would be required every 400' to allow passage of fire apparatus. 4. All homes will need to have fire sprinklers. 5. Water storage tanks or ponds with dry hydrants shall be located on the property for use in fire suppression and accessible year round. - OTHER Comments were received from the Crystal River Caucus and are attached to this memorandum. The Caucus, at their monthly meeting, voted to approve the Bane Tract proposal. A copy of their minutes is also attached. Joanna Schaffner had indicated that the buiNing envelope for Tract 4 is located within the required setback. No development great than 30 inches in height will be permitBd within the setback. Tract 5 envelopes: As noted previously in this memorandum, there are four structures of the original homestead within the proposed building envelope for this tract. The Applicant has indicated that three of these structures will be renovated. The fourth structure is dilapidated to the point that restoration of the structtue is not being pursued. These structures are located within the proposed building envelope, 000018 Bane Tracts 1, 3, 4 & 5 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, &GMQS Incentive May 28, 2002 Page 8 however, they have not been delineated on the site plan. It is staff opinion that they should be delineated on the recorded site plan. The Applicant has requested that the proposed amended building envelope be enlarged by about 50' to the south of Homestead Alley. Staff is not opposed to this request. The proposed Agricultural and Septic Improvement Envelope is approximately 14.38 acres. Staff is uncertain as to the reason for such a large development envelope. Only one building envelope ranging between 3 acres to 6 acres for each of the tracts has been designated. Staff is of the opinion that an approximately 14 acres development envelope is not necessary. Staff recommends that this development envelope be reduced to approximately 5 acres. The proposed amendment to the building envelope for Tract 5 results in the disturbance of high quality mountain sagebrush habitat. The Applicant has agreed to mitigate, at the County's discretion, sagebrush on the south side of Homestead Alley on Tract 1. Jonathan Lowsky, County Wildlife Biologist, has indicated that the Applicant should mitigate the sagebrush habitat loss at a 2:1 ratio. This mitigation must be done according to a mitigation plan submitted to and approved by the County prior to the issuance of a building permit. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Hearing Officer approve the following: I. Bane Tract 1 1041 Hazazd Review, Conceptual Submission and GMQS Incentive, subject to the conditions in the attached Hearing Officer Determinationfor Bane Tract 1. 2. Bane Tract 3 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission and GMQS Incentive, subject to the conditions in the attached Hearing Officer Determination for Bane Tract 3. 3. Bane Tract 4 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission and GMQS Incentive, subject to the conditions in the attached Hearing Officer Determinationfor Bane Tract 4. 4. Bane Tract 5 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission and GMQS Incentive, subject to the conditions in the attached Hearing Officer Determination for Bane Tract 5. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Drafr Determinations (1, 3, 4, & 5) 2. Colorado State Forest Service 3. Wildlife Biologist 4. Colorado Division of Wildlife 5. County Engineer 6. Zoning 7. Basalt and Rural Fire Protection District 8. Crystal River Caucus Applications and site plans submitted separately. "M,. Prcgl lu nhkmera in UrAm Plrmmrrj; Jinn the Uniwrsiry ujWlxnoinMlwrrkxe. A1s Pxglhas peen vruting wirh Pirtin CrnnrNCrmrmmiry Deuelrpmernflepnmrem asu Piaruerfrw J ih Nxne 0,00.019 DETERMINATION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE BANE TRACT 4 1041 HAZARD REVIEW, CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION, AND GMQS INCENTIVE FOR LARGE LOTS Determination No. -2002 RECITALS 1. Thomas M. Turnbull ("Applicant") has applied to the Pitkin County Hearing Officer for 1041 Hazazd Review and Conceptual Submission to establish a building envelope for the construction of a single family residence and accessory agricultural uses on Bane Tract 4. 2. The Bane Tracts are located in the Prince Creek Valley. The Bane Tracts are located at the top of Prince Creek Road where Prince Creek Road meets West Sopris Creek and Dinkle Lake Roads Bane Tract 4 is located on the west side of the Bane Tracts. This tract is bordered by the White River National Forest to the south, Tracts 2, 3 and BLM land to the east, the Jelinek property to the north, and BLM lands to the west. The property is more specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. The property is zoned RS-30. The property contains approximately 509 acres and is conforming in size. 4. One single-family dwelling unit up to 15,000 square feet of floor area shall be exempt from Growth Management on any parcel greater than 500 acres in size. 5. The Hearing Officer, at a duly noticed public hearing on May 28, 2002, reviewed this application, and at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application. 6. The Hearing Officer finds that this application proposes development in the best possible location, given the hazards identified on the property. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Hearing Officer that he does hereby grant approval to the Bane Tract 4 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, and GMQS Incentive, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: 1. The Applicant shall adhere to al] material representations made in the application, dated February 5, 2002, and public meetings. 2. Prior to submittal of any building permit applications, the Applicant shall record a 24 s 36 inch mylar 1041 Hazard Review Site Plan in accordance to Section 5-70-040 of the Land Use Code. The site plan shall also be submitted in a digital format for integration into the County Geographic Information System (GIS). The site plan shall include the following: A. The slopes in excess of 30% on the west portion of the proposed building envelope shall be eliminated. Wildfire mitigation shall be as follows: A. Defensible Space: Determination No. _-2002 Page 2 1. The area around all structures shall incorporate landscaping with wildfire defensible space considerations as follows (NOTE: Actual vegetation manipulation to meet these conditions may not be necessary where the natural vegetation patterns have already fulfilled these conditions): a. For a distance of 15' around all structures, maintain vegetation at a height of 6" or less with mowed grass, low growing perennials or hardscape. Woody vegetation shall not be planted with this perimeter. b. Beyond the 15 foot perimeter and up to 30 feet from the structure, grass shall be kept mowed to a height of 6 inches or less. c. Any future woody (i.e. evergreens) landscaping within 100 feet of structures shall be planted so that there will be a 10 to I S foot spacing between tree crowns. The distance between crowns shall be measured from the outermost branches. Aspens shall be planted as single stem or in clumps. d. The lower limbs of all trees within in the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed up to 10 feet or half the total height of the tree whichever is least. Removing these lower limbs will take care of ladder fuels. e. The Applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space vegetation requirements. B. Structural Design and Construction Requirements: l . Roofs shall have anon-combustible roof covering on a Class A assembly. Wood shake/shingle roof covering are prohibited in all wildfire hazard areas. Roofs with less than 3:12 pitch are not permitted in 1041 Wildfire Areas unless they comply with the following: a. All roof coverings shall be non-combustible materials as defined in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) 1997 Section 1504 and installed on a Class A roof assembly. b. All roof coverings shall have a surface that shall facilitate the natural process of clearing the roof. c. All roof design shall facilitate the natural process of clearing roof debris. Protrusions above the roofline, such as parapets, shall be prohibited d. Roofs shall be installed as required by UBC 1997 Chapter 15 and shall have a minimum slope of 1:48. e. All roof designs, coverings, or equivalent assemblies shall be specifically approved by the Fire Marshall prior to submittal of a building permit application. 2. All vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh of one quarter inch maximum. C. Maintenance: QoU®~~ Detw•mination No. _-2002 Page 3 1. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris. 2. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable debris. 3. All flammable materials (including firewood/wood piles) shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from any structure. Firewood/wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from all structures. D. Miscellaneous: 1. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris. 2. Wood fences shall not be connected to the structure. 3. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approvedcontainer. 4. Each structure shall have a minimum of one 10 ]b. ABC fire extinguisher 5. Addresses shall be cleazly marked and visible with minimum 2" notrcombustible letters and shall be cleazly visible at the primary point of access from the public or commm access road and installed on anon-combustible post. 6. Any outbuildings or additional buildings shall adhere to the same standards as structures. E. Utilities: 1. Utility lines shall be buried. 4. No development, including grading, excavation, fill placement, berming, landscaping, entry or ranch gates, construction parking or staging and vegetation removal or disturbance shall occur outside of the approved building envelope unless otherwise specified in this document, such as weed control, irrigation practices, and necessary wildfire mitigation. Utility extension and maintenance shall occur within the approved building envelope and/or within the existing driveway alignment. Well and septic locations may occur outside of the building envelopes in locations approved by the Community Development and Environmental Health Departments. Landscaping may occur outside of the building and development envelopes pursuant to a Landscaping Plan approved by the Community Development Department. 5. All areas disturbed by construction shall be revegetated with native shrubs and grasses to limit water consumption and additional runoff within one growing season of the project's completion. Landscaping and revegetation on the property shall utilize low water (xeriscaping) native plant materials and concepts. 6. The Applicant shall comply with the following wildlife mitigation: A. Fencing outside of the building envelope not necessary for the control of livestock is discouraged. Livestock fencing shall be brought into compliance with County standards. B. Dogs shall be kenneled. Verification of a dog kennel, run, or other fenced area should be completed prior to the Certificate of Occupancy. Dogs belonging to construction workers shall not be allowed on the property. 000022 Determinndion No. _-2002 Pnge 4 C. All waste storage shall comply with Wildlife Protection Ordinance No. 010-2001. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, compliance with the ordinance shall be verified. D. No riparian or wetland vegetation shall be damaged or removed. E. Utility poles must be made raptor-friendly or raptor proof. F. Any vegetation altered for an access road, utility line or similar use must be replaced with vegetation equal in Type and quantity to that being removed according to a mitigation plan approved by the County Wildlife Biologist pursuant to section 3-80-080(A)(4) of the Pitkin County Land use Code. G. Any areas outside of the building envelope disturbed during construction must be revegetated with native plants according to a Revegetation Plan submitted by the Applicant and approved by the County Division of Natural Resource prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The elements of the plan are outlined in the County Wildlife's Biologist letter dated April 25, 2002. H. Fruit-bearing trees and shrubs should be avoided in any landscaping due to the high level of black bear activity in the area. I. If horses are kept, hay shall be fenced at owner's expense with 8' mesh game proof fencing. Only hay in compliance with the Pitkin County Weed Management Plan shall be allowed. J. Mountains sage habitat shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall obtain approval of a septic permit from the Environmental Health Deparhnent. The septic system shall comply with the setback requirements from surface and groundwater sources. A qualified professional engineer must design the system. Septic systems may be located outside of the building envelopes, if approved by the Environmental Health and Community Development Departments. 8. Prior to submittal of a septic permit, the Applicant shall provide documentation of adequate quality and quantity of water to the Environmental Health Department. Well may be located outside of the building envelopes, if approved by the Environmental Health and Community Development Deparhnents. 9. A fireplace/woodstove application must be filed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 10. The Applicant shall comply with all codes and requirements of the Basalt and Rural Protection Fire District, which include and are not limited to the following: A. Road/driveway widths should be at least 14 feet. In the places where the road cross the streams, culverts should be 16 feet wide. B. Dead end driveways shall have turnazounds for fire appazatus. C. Pullouts are required every 400' to allow passage of fire apparatus. D. All residences shall have a fire sprinklers. 000023 Determination No. _-200? Page 5 E. Water storage tanks or ponds with dry hydrants located on the property shall be allowed to be used in fire suppression and be accessible year round. 1 1. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or construction activity, the Applicant shall stake the corners of the building envelope and install construction fencing around the perimeter of the building envelope. The fencing shall remain in place until issuance of certificate of occupancy. 12. The Applicant shall submit a Drainage and Erosion Control Plan for review and approval by the County Engineer prior to the submittal for any building or earthmoving permits. The plan shall address the management of runoff during construction and after construction is complete. The plan shall detail the types and locations of drainage and erosion control features and methods to maintain them during construction. Silt fencing along Prince Creek shall be installed during construction to prevent potential disturbance. 13. At the time of building permit application submittal, the Applicant shall submit, for review and approval by the County Engineer, a Construction Management Plan in accordance with the Asset Management Plan. The Construction Management Plan shall indicate that vehicles associated with construction (i.e. employee traffic, construction vehicles, staging and deliveries) shall not violate County Law, such as parking on County rights-of--way. ] 4. Prior to the submittal of anybuilding permits, the Applicant shall obtain an Access/Driveway Development Permit approved by the County Engineer. A. The driveway shall comply with County standards in effect at the time of issuance of the permit. B. A plan and profile of the road shall be submitted with selected cross section; in areas of significant cuts or fills. The plan should show locations of proposed emergency vehicle pullouts. Pullouts shall be field verified before construction. C. Hydraulic calculations confirming the required sizes of culverts and other drainage features shall be submitted along with the permit. D. Portions of Homestead Alley, proposed to be improved, encroach upon slopes in excess of 30% (i.e. Stations 72+00 to 76+00). The Applicant shall provide a slope analysis in these areas to illustrate possible avoidance of these slopes. E. Any encroachments into wetlands or riparian habitat areas due to construction of the drive or installation of the drainage features should be avoided. If disturbance of unidentified wetlands or riparian habitat areas are necessary, the Applicant shall consult with the County Divisionof Natural Resources. F. The upper portions of Prince Creek Road and Dinkle Lake Road shall remain unplowed during winter months, unless the Applicant requests and the BOCC approves an amendment to the service and maintenance level of said roads. Procedures to amend the road classification or maintenance of a road are outlined in the Assets Management Plan under Section 3.06. I5. All lighting shall comply with the regulations of the Land Use Code. 16. Commitment to serve letters from Holy Cross Electriq Qwest and any other commercial utility company shall be submitted at the time of building permit. 00002~~ Determination No. -2002 Page 6 17. All development must comply with the provisions of the Pitkin County Noxious Weed Management Plan. The property contains areas of noxious weed infestation. Prior to the submittal of a building or earthmoving permits, the Applicant shall submit a weed management plan to be approved by the County Division of Natural Resources. ] 8. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 022-2000, the Applicant is subject to the Fair Share Requirements and shall pay a road impact fee as calculated at the time of building permit issuance. 19. Floor area shall be calculated based on the definition in effect at the time of building permit submittal. 20. Development of 30 inches above or below grade within the required property setbacks requires approval of a variance by the Board of Adjustment. 21. Statutory vested rights for the approval contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitkin County Land Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitkin County Land Use Code, § 4-140 and C.R.S., § 24-68-105. The statutory vested rights granted herein shall expire on May 28, 2005. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES ON THE 27T" DAY OF APRIL, 2002. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 28r" DAY OF MAY, 2002. VESTED RIGHT NOTICE PUBLISHED ON THE DAY OF , 2002. HEARING OFFICER ATTEST: OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Isabel Calderon, Administrative Assistant APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely, County Attorney James R. True, Hearing Officer Date: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director Case NP032-02 246334400007 000025 ~'.:~vaoC~:~^~~9T ~i April 29, 2002 . ~ ~(]~~~ R~PF~'9~..~~--~ Tamara Pregl APR 3 0 2002 s °vtcE AspenlPitkin Community Development Department A~Nt,,,,.;,~,,;, 130 SOUth Galena St. COMMUNITY DEVELOPM"tN'' State Services Building Aspen, CO 81611 222 S. 6th Stree[, Bonm a16 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Telephone: (Y70) 2A8.7325 Re: Bane Tracts 1041 Wildfire Hazard Review Tamara, I visited the site with an entourage of folks including the property owners on April 1St. Access to the five lots will be from existing roads or new driveway construction from the existing road. I observed no major problems with the existing or proposed access. 1 will address the existing hazard situation for each lot and then make general recommendations. Lot 1 has a north aspect with a slope in the 10% range. The vegetation in the envelope is primarily grass. There is a stand of aspen on the north end and some willow encroachment on the south end. The wildfire hazard is low. Lot 2 has mostly grass and rabbitbrush in the envelope. The envelope is bounded on three sides by stands of aspen. The wildfire hazard is low. Lot 3 has a south aspect with a slope of 5 - 10°/n. The envelope is situated in a grass meadow. An aspen stand borders the envelope on the north, east and west sides. The wildfire hazard is low. Lot 4 has a north aspect with a slope of 5 -10%. The envelope is primarily grass. There is aspen on the west and south sides of the envelope. The wildfire hazard is low. Lot 5 has a north aspect with a slope of 5 - 10%. The envelope sits in a small saddle. The vegetation is grass. The wildfire hazard is low. The owners and planning consultants have done a great job of selecting the building envelopes to avoid potential wildfire hazards. This makes my job of recommending mitigation practices an easier task. My recommendations io establish a defensible space for each envelope are as follows. 1. For a distance of 15 feet around all structures establish and maintain vegetation at 6 inches or less. This can be accomplished with mowed grass, low growing perennials or some type of hard scape (e.g., sidewalk, rock mulch). Woody vegetation should not be planted within this perimeter. In addition flammable material (e.g., firewood) should not be stored here. 2. Beyond the 15-foot perimeter and up to 30 feet from the structure keep grass mowed to a height of 6 inches or less. 3. Hnj/ i:itult: rJJi.tuy Idi`i:]3%aNil}~ ~Yiii lin '100 feet of :fi.rUCiUi c5 should be planted so That There will oe a 10 to 15 foot spacing between tree crowns. This recommendation only applies to evergreen trees. The distance between crowns is measured from the outermost branches. Aspens can be planted as single stems or in clumps. 4. The lower limbs of all trees within the 100-foot perimeter should be removed up to 10 feet or half the total height of the tree whichever is least. Removing these lower limbs will take care of ladder fuels, which could allow a fire to burn from ground level up into the branches and crowns of trees. Thank you for the opportunity to review this application. Feel free to call me with questions. S' cerely, Vince Urbina Assistant District Forester ODU026 PITKIN COUNTY NATURAL RESOURCES TO: Tamara Pregl, Community Development FROM: Jonathan Lowsky, Wildlife Biologist SUBJECT: Bane1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission DATE: 04/25/2002 TRACT 1 The proposed building envelope for Tract 1 is located in non-native hay fields/pastures at an elevation of approximately 8400 feet. The site is within 150 feet of Thomas Creek and its associated high qualiTy riparian area and wetlands. This site lies outside of mule deer, elk, and bighorn sheep winter ranges. It does, however, lie within an elk migration pattern, transition range, and within a %z mile of field verified elk calving habitat on the White River National Forest to the south. It is unlikely that development of this site will have any significant ecological impacts. All of the Recommendations To Minimize Wildlife Conflicts volunteered by the applicant in Attachment 6 of the proposal (excluding those that are in violation with the Land Use Code) should be included as conditions of approval. TRACT 2 The proposed building envelope of Tract 2 is located in non-native hay fields/pastures at an elevation of approximately 8000 feet. The site is within 200 feet of Thomas Creek and its associated high quality riparian area and wetlands. Surrounding native communities are dominated by mature aspen forest. Much of the northern part of the property is mapped as mule deer winter range but field evaluations reveal that this is not the case. Aerial reconnaissance of the site by the CDO W confirms that mule deer, elk, and bighorn do not Typically use this part of the property during the winter. The proposed envelope is, however, within an elk migration pattem, transition range, and within a %, mile of potential elk calving habitat on the White River National Forest to the south. It is unlikely that development of this site will have any significant ecological impacts. The building envelopes for Tracts 2, 3, and 4 are clustered such that their likely zones of influence (approximately 280 meters or 918 feet) extending out into adjacent wildlife habitat will overlap. All of the Recommendations To Minimize Wildlife Conflicts volunteered by the applicant in Attachment 6 of the proposal (excluding those that are in violation with the Land Use Code) should be included as conditions of approval. TRACT 3 The proposed building envelope of Tract 3 is located in non-native hay fields/pastures at an elevation of approximately 8385 feet. The site is over 1500 feet from Thomas Creek (to the west) and an unnamed ephemeral creek (to the east) their associated riparian areas and wetlands. 76 SERVICE CENTER ROAD ASPEN, CO 81611 PHONE: 970.920.5395 FAX: 970.920.5374 Q~~®t~. I Surrounding native communities are dominated by mature aspen forest. Aerial reconnaissance of the site by the CDO W confirms that mule deer, elk, and bighorn do not typically use this part of the property during the winter. The proposed envelope is, however, within an elk migration pattern, transition range, and within a % mile of potential elk calving habitat on the White River National Forest to the south. It is unlikely that development of this site will have any significant ecological impacts. The building envelopes for Tracts 2, 3, and 4 are clustered such that their likely zones of influence (approximately 280 meters or 918 feet) extending out into adjacent wildlife habitat will overlap. All of the Recommendations To Minimize Wildlife Conflicts volunteered by the applicant in Attachment 6 of the proposal (excluding those that are in violation with the Land Use Code) should be included as conditions of approval. TRACT 4 The proposed building envelope of Tract 4 is located in non-native hay fields/pastures at an elevation of approximately 8300 feet. The site is adjacent to an unnamed ephemeral creek and its associated riparian azeas and wetlands (to the west). Surrounding native communities are dominated by mature aspen forest and willow riparian shrubland. Aerial reconnaissance of the site by the CDOW confirms that mule deer, elk, and bighom do not typically use this part of the property during the winter. The proposed envelope is, however, an elk migration pattern, transition range, and within a %z mile of potential elk calving habitat on the White River National Forest to the south. It is unlikely that development of this site will have any significant ecological impacts. The building envelopes for Tracts 2, 3, and 4 are clustered such that their likely zones of influence (approximately 280 meters or 918 feet) extending out into adjacent wildlife habitat will overlap. All of the Recommendations To Minimize Wildlife Conflicts volunteered by the applicant in Attachment 6 of the proposal (excluding those that are in violation with the Land Use Code) should be included as conditions of approval. TRACT 5 The proposed building envelope of Tract 5 is located in non-native hay fields/pastures at an elevation of approximately 8300 feet. The site is over 1500 feet from Prince Creek (to the east) and its associated riparian azeas and wetlands. Mountain sage and Gambel oak-serviceberry dominate surrounding native communities. Aerial reconnaissance of the site by the CDOW confirms that mule deer, elk, and bighom do not typically use this part of the property during the winter. The proposed envelope is, however, an elk migration pattern, transition range, and within a '/z mile of potential elk calving habitat. It is unlikely that development of this site will have any significant ecological impacts. The building envelopes for Tracts 1 and 5 are clustered such that their likely zones of influence (approximately 280 meters or 918 feet) extending out into adjacent wildlife habitat will overlap. All of the Recommendations To Minimize Wildlife Conflicts volunteered by the applicant in Attachment 6 of the proposal (excluding those that aze in violation with the Land Use Code) should be included as conditions of approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The following conditions of approval will reduce the impacts of the proposed development on wildlife and the ecological communities on and around the property: Bane Tracts 1041 Referral Memo Page 2 04/29/2002 000028 1. The applicant must comply with all of the General Standards as described in §3-80.80(A) of the Land Use Code. 2. The 2001 Wildlife Protection Ordinance (# 010 - 2001) requires installation and use of approved bear-proof trash containers. Verification of this condition should be required before issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 3. Fruit-bearing trees and shrubs should be avoided in any landscaping due to the high level of black bear activity in this area. 4. An orange safety fence must be required around all building sites to prevent any unnecessary vegetation disturbance during construction. 5. Fencing outside the building envelope not necessary for the control of livestock should be discouraged. Livestock fencing must be brought into compliance with County standards. 6. All building envelopes must be set back at least 100 feet from the riparian areas of Thomas and Prince Creeks and 50 feet from all unnamed perennial and ephemeral creeks. 7. Mountain sage habitat must be preserved to the tnaximum extent possible. 8. Dogs must be kenneled on all lots as per §3-80.80(D)(2) of the Land Use Code. Verification of a dog kennel, run, or other fenced area should be required prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 9. Utility poles must be made raptor-friendly or raptor proof. 10. The property contains areas of noxious weed infestation. A weed management must be submitted to and approved by the County Division of Natural Resources. A good source of information on how to create an integrated weed management plan can be found online at httu://narks.state.co.us/cnao/IWM handbook/IWM index htm. 11. Any areas disturbed outside the building envelope must be revegetated with native plants according to a revegetation plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the County prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. This plan must contain the following elements: a. The name of the project; b. The name, address and phone number of the person preparing the Revegetation Plan; c. The name, address and phone number of the person(s) responsible for executing the plan; d. If applicable, the availability of irrigation water and, if available, the amount of water, the name of the ditch company and the method of delivering water to the site; e. A brief narrative describing the planting and seeding methods; Bane Tracts 1041 Referral Memo Page 3 04/29/2002 000029 f A description by common and scientific name of the species of plants to be used, seed ratios and source, and container size or caliper measurement of plants to be installed; g. A drawing of the site with the location of plants to be installed shown clearly. Bane Tracts 1041 Referral Memo Page 4 04/29/2002 ~~nYJ~ll Jonathan Lowsky, 02:47 PM 5/23/02 ,Bane Tract 5 From: "Jonathan Lowsky" <jonathan@ci.aspen.co.us> To: "Tamara Pregl" <tamarap@co.pitkin.co.us> Subject: Bane Tract 5 Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 14:47:14 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean Page I of 1 The modification of the building envelope for Tract 5 will result in the destruction of high quality mountain sagebrush habitat. The applicant should be required to mitigate this habitat loss at a 2:1 ratio elsewhere on the Bane Tracts. This mitigation must be done according to a mitigation plan submitted to and approved by the County prior to issuance of a Building Permit. ~onatkax Gows(y Wildlife Biologist Pitkin County Natural Resources • 76 Service Center Road • Aspen, CO 81611 • 970.920.5395 000031 L:'rbuv~~1IC:,j'r 1 STATE OF COLORADO RR ~e_ Blll Owens, Governor GpW'~w~ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE ~ ~~ ~ AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Sf yqV Russell George, Director ~'~ OF 6060 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80216 ForWildlife- Telephone: (303) 297-1192 For People Apri122, 2002 Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Bane Tracts Conceptual Subdivision and 1041 Hazard Review Dear Tamara: I have reviewed the information and visited the site for Bane Tracts Conceptual Subdivision and 1041 Hazazd Review plan. These pazcels lie within elk and mule deer transitional range. To the north of the area is mule deer winter range, and to the south is an elk production azea. Traditionally elk have used the irrigated meadows frequently during the warmer months for the nutritional benefit of the sweet clover and hay. In addition, the unique mix of mountain shrub/aspen/conifer habitat provides ideal conditions for black beaz, as was appazent during the site visit. Prince Creek and some of the smaller springs that run through the area provide moderate riparian habitat but more importantly a good water source for wildlife in the area. Preserving over 95% of the total area and maintaining its traditional usage is of greater benefit to wildlife rather than a larger development with more houses. I recommend certain precautions be taken to most effectively minimize the impacts to wildlife and wildlife/human conflicts that can occur due to the development of this pazcel. They are: 1. Beaz/human conflicts have the potential to be a reoccurring problem in this area and it is paramount that certain measures be taken to minimize these conflicts: • All homeowner have and use an approved bear-proof container for storing all trash/gazbage. Trash compactors inside the house.can help eliminate bulk and odors, which will fitrtkter reduce potential problems; • Bird feeders can be used but do not mount humming bird feeders on windows or the siding of the house. Seed feeders should be strung up at least 10' from the ground with a seed catchment to discourage beaz and other wildlife foraging; • Pets should be fed indoors, and pet food or food containers should not be left outside; • Horse feed should also be stored in a beaz proof container and locked; a job box with a padlock can adequately prevent beazs from breaking into horse feed containers; • BBQs should also be securely housed in the gazage or cleaned with a bleach solution when not in use due to the fact that leftover food and grease aze an overwhelming beaz attractant; • Round door knobs on the outside of doors rather than lever-type can limit beaz access into houses. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Greg E. Walther, Executive Director W ILDLIFE COMMISSION, Rick Enstmm, Chair • Robert Shoemaker, Vice-Chair • Marianna Raftopoubs. Secretary Members, Bernard Black • Tom Burke • Philip James • Mark LeValley • Olive Valdez Ex-Oficio Members, Greg E. Walther and Don Ament 00003?. Installing a cooling system is better than leaving windows and doors open, as this is the main way bears access homes in the summer. Storm shutters that can be closed and locked when the house is not being used can also discourage bears from entering vacant houses; Under current state laws, the Division of Wildlife is not liable for damage to real or personal property by beazs. For homeowners keeping horses on their property, fencing haystacks with 8' mesh fence for wildlife proofing at the homeowners expense is recommended. Eliminating plantings of any berry, fruit, or nut producing plants or shrubs will also discourage bears and other wildlife from feeding on expensive landscaping. Homeowners need to be aware that the Division of Wildlife is not liable for any damage to landscaping by deer, elk, or bear. 4. Due to the fact that wildlife does travel through the area, fencing should held to an absolute minimum. If necessary, new fencing should follow the fencing code for wildlife friendly fencing. 5. Maintaining as much of the native mountain shrub communities inside the building envelopes is encouraged to continue to provide the highest value to existing wildlife. 6. During the construction process, large areas of disturbed soil will be inviting to noxious weeds. Weeds can out-compete native vegetation, thus degrading the quality of the habitat. Precautions should be taken so that heavy machinery does not spread noxious weeds within the area. After construction is complete, a weed management plan should be drafted to further ensure that weeds to not invade the native plant community habitat. 7. Homeowners need to be made awaze that the surrounding lands aze heavily hunted during big game seasons. It would advantageous to continue to encourage hunting on the parcels themselves to help minimize excessive use by deer and elk and so that the property does not become a refuge during hunting season. 8. Mountain lions may frequent the area and if one is seen in the area, small pets and children should not be left outside unattended during the eazly mornings and late evenings. Pets and any livestock should be kept in a kennel or enclosed azea during the night. 9. Homeowners can help maintain present wildlife use of the azea by restricting pets to kennels or small outdoor runs. Dogs should not be allowed to roam and homeowners should be advised that dogs chasing wildlife is illegal and can lead to legal action. A two-dog restriction with kennel construction before the certificate of occupancy is issued will help alleviate these problems. All working ranch dogs should be exempt from these provisions, as these animals are necessary for day to day operations. In addition, construction workers should not be allowed to bring dogs to the site to further minimize potential conflicts. Special concerns for Bane Tract l: 1. The placement of the building site in the clearing is the best option to reduce the amount of native habitat disturbance. Band-tailed pigeons traditionally have used some of the area to the south of the bundling envelope, and maintaining 2-5 aspen snags per acre can preserve some habitat for continued band-tailed pigeon, cavity nesters, and raptor perch usage. 2. The access to the building envelope traverses Prince Creek riparian azeas and care should be taken to minimize disturbances in this area. Silt fencing should be used when construction takes place near Prince Creek to minimize disturbance. 000033 For Bane Tract 2,3,and 4: 1. The building envelopes aze clustered to reduce impacts, which will allow for maximum undisturbed habitat. Again, caze should be taken to maintain as much native mountain habitat as possible and if trees are a safety concern, topping rather than complete removal can still provide habitat for cavity nesting birds that use the area. 2. The south end of Tract 3 approaches elk production areas and minimal or no use of this area from May 15 through June 21 is recommended to allow for the least amount of disturbance. During this time, it is imperative that dogs aze kept kenneled, indoors, or on leash to eliminate any possibilities of dog/wildlife conflicts. For Bane Tract 5: 1. The building envelope placement in the middle of the meadow is the most desirable position. 2. Minimizing disturbance of the sagebrush habitat on the north side of the pazcel will benefit deer and elk both, as this is an important food source during transitional periods. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. The Division of Wildlife has much information available to homeowners on how to solve problems with wildlife. We would be glad to provide copies of these materials to any interested residents. If you have any questions, please feel Free to give me a call. Sincerely, ~~l""~ Justin Martens District Wildlife Manager Carbondale 970-947-2933 000034 r. o.er;nr~'r MEMORANDUM To: Tamara Pregl From: Bud Eylar Date: 5/3/02 Re: Bane Tracts 1041 Tamara, I have reviewed the application and have the following comments. The main driveway, Homestead Alley, is approximately 2 miles in length. It traverses a number of steep hills and crosses a number of streams and irrigation ditches. The items of concern that need to be address are as follows. • There is at least one, if not more areas where the Homestead Alley encroaches on a 30% slope. This is in the area of Sta. 72+00 to 76+00. The applicant should provide a slope analysis in this area to see if the over 30% slopes can be avoided. • The applicant will need to obtain an access permit before the issuance of any building permits. A plan and profile of the road shall be submitted with selected cross sections in areas of significant cuts or fills. The plan should show locations of proposed emergency vehicle pull outs. Pull outs can be field verified before construction • Hydraulic calculations confirming the required sizes of culverts and other drainage features shall be submitted along with the Access permit. • Any encroachments into wetlands or riparian areas due to the construction of the drive or installation of the drainage features should be avoided. If not, any disturbance shall be mitigated. • Individual drives to the respective tracts have been submitted. If they are build at this time they shall require individual access permits for each tract. • An overall site Drainage and Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted of the development. 00003 Joanna Schaffner, 02:17 PM 3/29/02 ,Bane Tracts 1-5 1041 X-Sender: joannas@comdev X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:17:36 -0700 To: tamarap@co.pitkin.co.us From: Joanna Schaffner <joannas@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Bane Tracts 1-5 1041 Page I of 1 I have reviewed the above reference applications and offer the following comments 1. All driveways will require access permits prior to their construction or prior to the issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first. 2. Tract 4 building envelope is located within the required setback. No development greater than 30 inches in height will be permitted within the setback. 3. It appears from their comments that Nature tech anticipated a total development of 15,000 sq ft. However, with an agricultural exemption for floor area, unlimited square footage may be approved! 000036 Vonda Williams, 10:01 AM 4/30/02 ,Bane Tracts Page 1 of 1 Reply-To: <vwilliams@basaltfire.org> From: "Vonda Williams" <vwilliams@basalttire.org> To: <tamarap@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Bane Tracts , , ;,'.~;;__~~~T Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 09:01:27 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: <DBEPLODHIDFBEMOIFJHCIEPKCBAA.vwilliams@basalttire.org> X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean Tamara, Sorry that I am so late in getting back to you with my comments. First of all thank you for the great tour of the property. Going out and actually seeing the property helps. I would suggest the following: Road width would need to be 14' and in the places where the road crosses the streams the culverts would need to be 16' wide Dead end driveways would need to have turnarounds for fire apparatus. Pull outs would be required every 400' to allow passage of fire apparatus All homes will need to have fire sprinklers Water storage tanks or ponds with dry hydrants shall be located on the property for use in fire suppression, accessable year round If you have any questions, please contact me. Thanks again, Vonda winmail4.dat 000037 CRYSTAL RIVER CAUCUS Apri130, 2002 o-mon$RnroRS: Tamara Pregle on Sorter Community Development Pitkin County 970-963-1787 , 530 E. Main St. hock Downey Aspen, CO 81611 970-963-1389 Directors Re: Turnbull Property ee Beck, Treas. Dear Tamaza: arty Fiala, Secr. eff Bier Thanks for attending our general meeting on Apri123, 2002. As you recall, the oyce Fiche Caucus voted to approve the Turnbull 1041 as presented, with the additional proviso that it agreed with the change proposed by the Tumbulls to move the e° c°ss building envelope of Parcel 5 to the original homesite located there. ill Hanks andy Kaplan I'm sending this letter only electronically, with the minutes attached, should you need or want a copy. If you could let me know by email that you received this, I'd anell Munsell appreciate it. Thanks again for coming to the meeting. aureen Rogers mar Sultan Best RegazdS, Ron Sorter Ron Sorter Co-Moderator Crystal River Caucus Attachment: Minutes, Crystal River Caucus Meeting, Apri123, 2002 0520 Redstone Boulevard, Redstone, CO 8/613 970-963-1787 sorterscu rofnet b0~1(l3~ Minutes of the GENERAL MEETING Of the Crystal River Caucus Apri123, 2002, Flying Dog Ranch A general meeting of the Crystal River Caucus began at 6:30PM. In attendance were Co- Moderators and Directors: Ron Sorter, Chuck Downey, Bev Goss, Jeff Bier, Maureen Rogers, Darrell Munsell and Royce Fichte, as well as the community members listed on the attached sign-in sheets. Tamara Pregle (Pitco CommDev & Hearing Officer for the Turnbull 1041) and Dale Will (OSTB) attended, as did Gideon Kaufman and Glen Horn to present the Turnbull 1041 and Brook Levan to present the Sustainable Settings proposal. The meeting was called to order by Co-Moderator Ron Sorter who welcomed the membership and guests, summazized membership and voting rules, then outlined the evening's agenda. Secretary's Report: The minutes of the February 27, 2002 general meeting were approved. Treasurer's Report: Lee Beck presented the Treasurer's Report (attached), which shows a healthy infusion of membership dues from recent mailings. The current balance is $1483.44 Business: None New Business: The Turnbull 1041 comprises the division of approximately 2300 acres into 4 500+-acre parcels and one fathering, 230+-acre parcel. They're applying for vesting and 15,000sf houses on the four parcels under the county's incentive plan for conserving 500+ acres, and applying for vesting and a 13,750sf house (using 3 TDR's as a receiver site) on the smaller pazcel. Glen and Gideon presented the 1041, described the siting to hide the buildings (including their intent and current request to the county to move the building site of parcel 5 to the original homesite, to conceal it better). They described the county code which allows the use of TDR's from sending sites in Rural and Remote to be used at receiver sites elsewhere and the county code which would allow five times the squaze footage if the 500-acre pazcels were developed with 5,750 sf houses. Chuck D. described his attendance with other review officials on a site visit and spoke in favor of their plans to protect wildlife, site the houses and continue ag operations. When there were no more questions from the assembly, RoVCe moved that we send a letter to the county supporting the 1041 as presented including the proposed moving of the parcel 5 homesite as described. It was seconded and passed 22-0. The next agenda item, Input for the County, was presented. It's the Caucus' plan to set aside sufficient time each general meeting to receive input, positive and negative, on any issue regarding any operations of the county, for the Co-Moderator to provide to Nan Sundeen the next day. There were no issues from the members this meeting. Dale Will then presented Open Space's purchase of the Mautz Ranch and its intent to find a conservation minded owner to whom they could, after placing conservation easements on it, sell some of the property (on the west side of the highway) and recoup funds to be used to buy other open space properties. He's fairly certain the intent of his board is to keep the property east of the road (the more valuable property)open forever. OOt]039 Brook, representing Sustainable Settings, the current potential buyer, was then introduced to explain their desire to buy the property and to present what their plans are for the property. He outlined their nonprofit, 501(c)3 status and listed their staff and a few of their eighteen directors. He explained their plans for clustering and sizing residential buildings, artist's studio, commons building and intern's quarters on the S W corner of the property, having interns apply for tenure and training, raising crops to build straw bale houses, using greenhouses (on sleds) to grow winter greens, living within their water limits, fencing issues for crops and wildlife, and their general idea for a diversified, natural farm, as opposed to a conventional cattle ranch. The 5,750 sf total of floor azea for all 14 was discussed. Royce F. questioned the location of two, S,000sf greenhouses (on the Scenic Byway) neaz the existing original houses near the highway and suggested moving them to a less conspicuous place. Lee B. wondered about the commercial/retail aspects of mazketing the products. Brook proposes to have a seasonal produce stand and perhaps market T-shirts and other related items on site but no firm, detailed plans have been developed. They will be marketing their greenhouse-produced greens within a 20-mile radius. Brook expects and hopes to close near December, 2002 or January, 2003, depending on their fundraising. As part of the lengthy discussion, it was explained that this is a conceptual review of their plans as they now exist, and that if the sale goes through a 1041 will eventually come to the Caucus for review. John Anderson moved that "there is some interest and the Caucus anxiously awaits future developments and more information as it becomes available." It was seconded and within that debate Chuck D. commented that the proposal is a substantial change from taxpayer-funded open space and his concern regazding retail, the number of buildings, effect on traffic, the experiment with the viewplane and the overall uncertainty. At the end of debate, the motion passed 12-6. Ron then presented the 1041 regarding Red Wine Point and the intent of the owner to sell 65+ acres of the 75+ acre parcel to Open Space in return for GMQS exemption to build a 5,750 sf house just north of the Crystal River Country Estates subdivision. He took responsibility for the confusion which resulted in the owner and representative not being present. Dale described Open Space's negotiations with the owner regazding the sale and the public access and trail it would furnish along the old railroad bed. He assured the group that Open Space takes no positions on land use issues. Glenn H. brought up the bridge-access issue (public access over a private bridge) and Dale described his negotiations with the CRCE homeowners association about that. Dale is sure the issue can be resolved, stating that the sale includes rights for bridge access for each lot owner and that their purchase of property totals about 65 lots. He described how a separate, pedestrian bridge could also be an answer. There was no further action taken on the issue. Ron presented the next agenda item regazding ADUs (Accessory Dwelling Units), sometimes called Caretaker Dwelling Units. Lee described the issue it raises, since the county now allows them and Master Plan Task Force has taken the position that they should be allowed except where prohibited by subdivision covenants. Her subdivision (Sewell Tracts and Seven Oaks) has such covenants and though the county has recently ruled that covenants should rule, a few residents there would like to have ADU's. 000040 Lee 8. moved that the Caucus send a letter to the BOCC reflecting their wish that the BOCC honor existing covenants and not approve any ADU CDU or other sort of additional housing units in established neighborhoods/subdivisions which have covenants prohibiting more than one single-family dwelling per building lot. It was seconded and in debate the issue was discussed pro and con. Glenn H. stated his conviction that the issue is a question of law, with a decision being one for a legal, not Caucus, forum. Ron mentioned that the Caucus, as a community group and not a municipality or governmental entity has historically allowed itself the freedom to take positions of any kind, in many cases where its recommendations aren't followed or even honored, on the premise that it's important to have the community express its majority will and to know what it is. ADUs as affordable housing and as ways to allow income needed to live here were discussed. After a full discussion the motion passed 13-2 Glenn H moved that the Caucus take the position that covenants be honored and be interpreted in accordance with law. The motion failed for a lack of a second Ron described the next agenda item and how the Caucus has historically, with Lee acting as the agent, receives 1041's and forwards them to homeowners associations and neighborhood groups where their more local input is counted upon to resolve any neighbor issues. The Caucus Board of Directors has the power (and only that power) to refer 1041's to the General Caucus if they feel the matter warrants it. The efficacy of that operation was discussed, and the cost of general meetings, how any Caucus member can place an item on the agenda where only a majority can remove it and how caucus actions may be interpreted. Ron described how the Caucus has historically felt it can take a positive position regarding a 1041, a negative position with recommendations or take a neutral stance when it wants to make no input on the issue. Sharon 8. moved that we send a letter to the BOCC stating that because the Caucus has no comment on an issue that doesn't necessarily mean it's a negative comment The motion was seconded and she accepted an amendment that no statement means that we're not taking a stand pro or con, but that we're neutral regarding an issue. The long term effects of this letter and the potential help of sending a letter with each 1041 stating exactly the stance taken was discussed. After a full debate. the motion passed 9-6, a quorum being 15. Chuck D. the described the Task Force's present work, how it's moving slowly, how it plans to soon take up the Ag issue and recommended everyone follow the process and minutes on pitkingov.com. He believes the easy part is now behind us and the hard part is coming up. There being no further business, Lee B. moved that we adjourn and the motion passed unanimously. Michelle Sorter Acting Secretary Attachments: A: Sign-In Sheets B. Treasurer's Report C. Turnbull 1041 s 000041 D. Sustainable Settings documents E. Frei 1041 0004? ' ~ ! ~ Davis Horn~- PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING February 5, 2002 Tamara Pregl Aspen Pitkin Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Bane Tracts: Tract 4 1041 Snvironmental Hazard Review Dear Tamara: Davis Horn Incorporated and Kaufman and Peterson represent Thomas M. Turnbull (hereinafter "applicant"), owner of Tract 4 of the Bane Tracts, a 509 +/- acre parcel located in the Prince Creek Valley. The applicant is seeking the following land use approvals: 1. 1041 Environmental Hazard Review for one single family dwelling unit and accessory agricultural buildings (Section 3-80); and 2. Vesting of Property Rights (Section 4-140). Attachment 1 is a vicinity map which depicts the location of the Bane Tracts. Attachment 2 is a copy of the Bane Tracts Plat which shows the location of the subject Tract. This letter describes the subject site, proposed development and demonstrates compliance with the relevant Pitkin County Land Use Code standards and policies. SITB DSSCRIPTION This section describes the subject site under the sub-headings: location, size and zoning, existing conditions & topography. Location Attachments 1 and 2, the vicinity map and Bane Tracts Plat, show Tract 4 of the Bane Tracts is located at the top of Prince Creek Road where Prince Creek Road meets West Sopris Creek and Dinkle Lake Roads. Attachment 2, the Bane Tracts Plat, shows Tract 4 is located on the west side of the Bane Tracts. Tract 4 is bordered by the White River National Forest to the south, Tracts 2 and 3 and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land to the east, the Jelinek property to the north, Bureau of Land Managment (BLM) lands 5 to the west. Size and Zoning Attachment 2 shows that the subject site contains approximately 509 acres. The entire property is zoned RS-30. ALICE DAVIS, AICP 1 GLENN HORN, AICP 215 SOUTH MONARCH SL SUITE 104 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • 970/925-6587 • FAX: 970!925-5180 000043 ! ~ Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 2 Existing Conditions & Topography The subject site is unimproved with the exception of Homestead Alley an existing ranch road which is used to access portions of the Four Bar Ranch. Attachment 3, Bane Tracts 1041 Hazard Review Map: Tract 4 shows all slopes between 0 and 15 percent, 15 to 30 percent and slopes over 30 percent. The south side of the property is gently sloping. Attachment 4, Bane Tracts 1041 Hazard Review Map: Tract 4 Building Envelope shows detailed topography of the building envelope. The north side of the property has relatively steeper slopes. There is a large meadow on the south side of the Tract. The meadow extends to the south beyond the southern boundary of the Tract. The portion of the meadow on public lands is leased to the Four Bar Ranch by the Forest Service. Vegetation varies from dryland vegetation to Aspen and conifer trees and open grassland pasture. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is seeking land use approvals for one single-family dwelling unit and accessory agricultural buildings. The house will contain 15,000 square feet of floor area. There is no limit on the floor area of the accessory agricultural buildings. Attachment 3, Bane Tracts 1041 Hazard Review Map: Tract 4, depicts the proposed building envelope in relation to the entire Tract. The building envelope includes approximately 5.5 acres +/-. Attachment 4 depicts the building envelope at a larger scale. The building envelope is located in a open meadow. Most of the building envelop contains slopes of less than 15 percent. There are some slopes between 15 and 30 percent and isolated areas with slopes over 30 percent. These areas represent anomalies in slopes which are generally less than 15 percent. The building envelope will be accessed from the junction of West Sopris Creek, Dinkle Lake, Prince Creek Roads and Homestead Alley. The first three Roads are County Roads. Homestead Alley is an existing ranch Road. Homestead Alley will provide access to the building envelope. Four Bar Spur is another existing ranch road which provides alternate access to Homestead Alley. All site development and site disturbance will be limited to the 2 000044 } • . Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 3 existing ranch roads and areas within the building envelope. LAND USE REVIEWS This section of the application demonstrates compliance with the Land Use Code standards identified in the applicant's pre- application conference which are listed below. * Section 3-60 Environmental & Aesthetic Standards; * Section 3-70 Water Resources; * Section 3-80-050 Geologic Hazards; * Section 3-80-070 Wildfire Hazard Areas; * Section 3-80-080 Wildlife Habitat Areas; * Section 3-110 Improvements and Services; * Article 2 Land Use Policies; and * Section 9-110-044 Rural Growth Managment Incentive for Large Lots (RS-160 Lots or 500+ Acre Parcels). Environmental & Aesthetic Standards (Section 3-60) This section of the application demonstrates compliance with the Environmental & Aesthetic standards. Section 3-60-020 Air Quality There will be insignificant impacts on air quality from the proposed development. The subject site is zoned for a maximum of 16 dwelling units. Development of the site with just one dwelling unit is well below the quantity of development anticipated by the County based upon zoning. The air quality impacts are significantly less than would occur if the site was developed as zoned. Section 3-60-030 Preservation of Natural Landscape The applicant will comply with the standards of this section. Site 3 000045 S ~ • • Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 4 disturbance will be limited to minor upgrades to the existing ranch road network which accesses the building envelope. The site will be revegetated during the first planting season after construction. Topsoil will be stockpiled and utilized for site revegetation. Section 3-60-040 Scenic Overlay The subject site is not within the Scenic Overlay zone. Section 3-60-050 Scenic Quality The proposed development will have limited, if any, visibility from County roads or adjoining private lands. Section 3-60-060 Solar Access The house will be designed to take advantage of passive solar energy and shall comply with the Piktin County Energy Codes. Section 3-60-070 Reduction in Density for Steep Slopes This section of the Code is not applicable to the subject site. Water Resource Standards (Section 3-70) Water Resource Standards are addressed in this section. Section 3-70-020 Encroachment or Channeling This Code standard is not applicable to the subject site. The access road and building envelope avoids stream corridors. Section 3-70-030 Drainage The applicant shall submit a drainage plan with the building permit application as required by Pitkin County. Historic on-site drainage will be maintained. Section 3-70-040 Erosion The subject site is well vegetated. Existing vegetation shall be maintained to preserve the character of the site and minimize erosion. Vegetation shall be removed as necessary to create 4 ooon4s i • . Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 5 defensible space for wildfire protection. Standard erosion control measures shall be utilized during construction. Section 3-70-050 Groundwater The proposed development shall not interfere with groundwater recharge areas. Section 3-070-060 Irrigated Areas Portions of the subject site are irrigated. Approximately one acre of land will no longer be irrigated after site development. Section 3-070-070 Irrigation Ditches There are not any irrigation ditches impacting the building envelope building. There will be positive drainage around any structures to protect the structures from water damage resulting from irrigation. Section 3-070-080 Sedimentation Standard construction practices shall be utilized to reduce sedimentation. The site shall be revegetated in the first growing season after the completion of construction. Section 3-070-090 Water Quality Water quality shall not be impacted by the proposed development. Section 3-070-090 Water Supply The subject site will be served by a residential exempt private water well. Dean Gordon of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., addresses water supply in his letter which appears as Attachment 5. Conversations with Wayne Shelton of Shelton Drilling Company indicate that water wells with good quality and quantity should be obtainable. The applicant intends to drill wells within the building envelope prior to the submission of a building permit application. In the event a reliable water supply can not be developed within the building envelope, the applicant shall obtain an amendment to the development permit to develop a water supply outside the building envelope. 5 oooo4a Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 6 Areas of Local and State Interest 1041 Environmental Hazard Areas Section 3-80 This section demonstrates compliance with Geologic Hazard, Wildfire and Wildlife standards. Section 3-80-050 Geologic Hazard Areas Slopes in Excess of 15 Percent As shown on Attachment 3, the subject site does contain slopes in excess of 30 percent. However, the applicant has carefully selected the building envelope to avoid steep slopes and areas of geologic hazards. Section 3-80-070 Wildfire Areas Wildfire hazards on the subject site vary. The building envelope appears to be located in an area with low to moderate wildfire danger. The applicant will follow the reasonable recommendations of the Colorado State Forest Service. Section 3-80-080 Wildlife Habitat Areas Attachment 6 is a Wildlife Evaluation of Bane Tract 4 prepared by Mike Villa, Wildlife Biologist with Naturetech Consultant Services Corp. Villa's work was completed in conjunction with Rick Thompson, Wildlife Biologist with Western Ecosystems. Villa and Thompson helped select the building envelope. Villa indicates in his report that Bane Tract 4 primarily contains deer and elk transitional range. The building envelope has been carefully located in afield to avoid impacting existing vegetation of importance to wildlife. More than 225 acres of land is preserved from development for the benefit of wildlife. The applicant will abide by the recommendations to minimize wildlife conflicts which are included in Attachments 6. IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES Section 3-110 This section of the land use application demonstrates compliance with the Improvements and Services standards of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. 000048 Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 7 Logical Extension of Utilities Section 3-110-020 Dean Gordon of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., addresses roads in his letter (see Attachment 5). The development will be accessed from West Sopris Creek Road. West Sopris Creek is maintained in the winter to the end of the pavement which is a little more than one quarter mile from Homestead Alley, the entry to the Bane Tracts. West -Sopris Creek and Prince Creek Roads are used by motorized vehicles year round. The applicant will maintain the top section of West Sopris Creek Road to Homestead Alley during the winter. The existing ranch roads which will be utilized for access vary in width between 10 and 15 feet. Existing culverts are in place at draws and stream crossings. The grade of the existing ranch roads is less than 12 percent for virtually the entire road network. The applicant proposes to improve the existing ranch roads to meet Pitkin County driveway standards. A driveway will be constructed from the end of Homestead Alley to the building envelope. The driveway follows a trail used to maintain an irrigation ditch. Water Distribution Systems Section 3-110-030 There will not be a water distribution system to serve site development. Individual water wells will be used. Water Supply Systems Section 3-110-040 As noted above, the proposed lots will be served by individual water wells (see Attachment 5). Sewage Treatment and Collection Section 3-110-050 As noted in Attachment 5, Thompson's letter, on-site improvements will be served by an individual sewage disposal system. The waste water disposal system will be located within the approved building envelope. Public Utilities Section 3-110-060 The applicant will obtain commitment to serve letters prior to the issuance of a building permit. Roads Section 3-110-070 Dean Gordon of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., addresses roads in his 7 000049 . ! • Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 8 letter (see Attachment 5). The development will be accessed from West Sopris Creek Road. West Sopris Creek is maintained in the winter to the end of the pavement which is a little more than one quarter mile from Homestead Alley, the entry to the Bane Tracts. West Sopris Creek and Prince Creek Roads are used by motorized vehicles year round. The applicant will maintain the top section of West Sopris Creek Road to Homestead Alley during the winter. The existing ranch roads which will be utilized for access vary in width between 10 and 15 feet. Existing culverts are in place at draws and stream crossings. The grade of the existing ranch roads is less than 12 percent for virtually the entire road network. The applicant proposes to improve the existing ranch roads to meet Pitkin County driveway standards if required. Parking Section 3-110-090 A minimum of two off-street parking spaces will be provided for each residence to comply with this section of the Code. Trails Section 3-110-100 Public trails are not proposed. Lighting Section 3-110-120 All lighting in the PUD will comply with the Pitkin County lighting standards. Signs Section 3-110-130 All signs in the PUD will comply with the Pitkin County sign standards. ARTICLS 2 POLICISS The following section demonstrates consistency of the proposed development with County Code policies. Policy 2-10 Community Balance The proposed development does not affect the Community Balance 8 ~~~~~~ M Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 9 policy. Policy 2-20 Comprehensive Plan This policy is not applicable. • Policy 2-30 Conformance with Comprehensive Plan There is no County adopted Comprehensive Plan which addresses the subject site. Policy 2-40 Growth Rate: Phasing of Public Services and Facilities; Section 3-140 Non-Metro Area Residential and Tourist Accommodations and Metro and Non-Metro Commercial Growth Management Quota System Allotments; and Section 3-150 Metro and Non-Metro Area Growth Management Quota System Exemptions. The proposed request will not have any impact on this policy. Policy 2-50 Development or Expansion of Ski Areas This policy is not applicable to the application. Policy 2-60 Compatibility with Existing Adjacent Neighborhoods The proposed use will be compatible with land uses in the site vicinity. Policy 2-70 Conformance with other Laws The proposed development will be in conformance with all applicable laws of the United States of America and the State of Colorado. Policy 2-80 Natural and Man-made Hazard and Resource Areas This policy was addressed as part of the preceding 1041 Environmental Hazard Review. Policy 2-90 Soil, Geologic Characteristics and Radiation This policy was addressed as part of the preceding 1041 Environmental Hazard Review. 9 ~~U~S~ Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 10 Policy 2-100 Drainage The applicant will submit drainage plans as required by Pitkin County in association with a building permit application. Policy 2-110 Erosion An erosion control plan will be submitted as part of the building permit application. Policy 2-120 Scenic Quality The subject site is not within the Scenic Overlay area. The site has limited visibility from public rights-of-way and private lands. Policy 2-130 Air Quality The proposed improvements will have minimal impacts on air quality. Policy 2-140 Water Resource Impacts It is not anticipated that there will be any impacts on water resources. Policy 2-150 Noise The activities proposed for the site will comply with Pitkin County noise standards. Policy 2-160 Wildlife Management Wildlife impacts were addressed in the preceding 1041 Environmental Hazard Review. Policy 2-170 Adequate Provision For Water Neede This policy was addressed in the standards section. Policy 2-180 Sewage Treatment Waste water disposal will comply with applicable local and state standards. Policy 2-190 Impacts on Road System Policy 2-200 Road Design and Construction Policy 2-230 Transportation 10 00005 Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 11 The proposed improvements will have little, if any, impact on the road system. A construction managment plan will be submitted as required. Road design and construction was addressed in the standards discussion. Policy 2-210 Logical Extension of Utilities This policy was addressed in the standards section Policy 2-220 Impacts on Taxea and Management of Necessary Services and Facilities There will be little, if any, impacts on taxes and services. Policy 2-240 Compatibility with Agricultural Lands and Operations The applicant plans to continue to use the land for agricultural uses. Policy 2-250 Compatibility with Historical and Archaeological Resources This policy is not applicable. Policy 2-260 Housing Affordable housing is not proposed. Policy 2-270 Energy Conservation The proposed improvements will incorporate energy conserving devices. Policy 2-280 Compatibility with Public Lands The proposed use will be compatible with nearby public lands. Policy 2-290 Access to Public Lands Access to public lands through the subject site is not proposed. Policy 2-300 Private Land Surrounded by Public Lands (Inholdings) This policy is not applicable to the site. 11 000053 Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 12 RURAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT INCENTIVE FOR LARGE LOTS (RS-160 OR LOTS 500+ ACRE PARCELS) Section 9-110-044 The subject site qualifies for a rural growth managment quota system exemption for one 15,000 square foot single family house. Pitkin County created this exemption as an incentive for property owners to create 500 + acre tracts. Attachment 2, the Bane Tracts Plat is a recorded plat that created Bane Tract 4. VESTING OF PROPERTY RIGHTS Section 4-140 The applicant requests approval of vested Property Rights pursuant to Section 4-140 of the Code. The Site Specific Development Plan for the property includes all of the standards of Section 3-40-110. SUMMARY This application requests 1041 Environmental Hazard Review approval for one 15,000 square foot single family residence and unlimited accessory agricultural structures and Vesting of Property Rights. This letter and the attachments have demonstrated compliance with the Land Use Code standards identified in the pre-application meeting with Tamara Pregl. The following attachments are included: 1. Vicinity Map; 2. Bane Tracts Plat 3. Bane Tracts 1041 Hazard Review Map: Tract 4 4. Bane Tracts 1041 Hazard Review Map: Tract 4 Building Envelope 5. Letter from Dean Gordon of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. 6. Wildlife Evaluation of Bane Tract 4 prepared by Mike Villa, Wildlife Biologist with Naturetech Consultant Services Corp. 12 0005 i~ ~ • • Tamara Pregl February 5, 2002 Page 13 7. Proof of Ownership; 8. Fee Agreement; 9. List of Adjacent Property Owners; and 10. Authorization to Submit Land Use Application. Please contact me if you would like additional information or would like clarifications. Sincerely, DAV S HORN INCORPORATED l GLENN HORN AICP Bane.4 13 000()55 GARFIELD COUNTY VICINITY MAP NTS A1TACfIMENT,_~ COUNTY 000056 -- - o __ -- - o c ~MYM°rvte°teVtume°II\twrEUl4wesr.NS lw he 05 OR N 11 t00S 60N {a[. (Plus vow Inlt Sels Xsrel wj ai~g$' • re414~t~ $~[~~~~ ~i~~~~3 ,.. M c 3 +~ y>q $ i$$ $$ N ~S'S .'S,N4 ~?°9°'5~3~ ~S b~~${FS°g L"'~ ~ So~3 ~ 3eS ti8.~~~ SYN9g N N N $VO " 53 E. ~ A H >. 3~T, z N 3~~ ~~°~T%Tf,, Nxx 3 ~~~ ~ ~„' ~~. ~~~r g ~g~~ag~~.~~~~~.~~9~g~~~~~~ ~~e~~~F ~~~ ~~~~ ~~ _ haw SA i,`d i,~°i .D, tZ ~.9f `, °~if iA •~° A d.~.t 2 A'° 2A Nb aJZK a' 8OQ ~>`JZ ..~~ ~R> fw'O }NO " }jQgQj}~{~{ 848V8 8°4y8^~8$ 8e8@E8a8 8ggzb~8 ~`$~`~E-.o85&ib ~~n`;$&8.t,s8#,~'~04~~N8°'£"k~08$y"°'°g"N ""~°8" ~"~"~ ya.~.~w b°$ i Y ~: d` 3 R 4 NE N N ~ .d~ a ~b~NUt°g 'A'~ d1°"a S8'Y ..8ag$ ''W ~~ ~A £ ~ k~88b8°&d~ff $~e,~"~a B~~ SGkg~~s• NN° •~g~dN ~EE3;pao$wEBNEO~Sm$;~.~°~'~~ ~~'8'dB~B$ ~gb ~ Yo ? t ~ s s~ $' a $ . N `~ _ ~&e`S; k;g`~C°88 8e8C§8 g~g~wo8~a8.s ~u~yg4 ASS 548 O°`.$9 fm8l~,~ ~"L3~~<` ~~~i Aeg k °i E g^q~~ ~s~ $ y d ~ " m_$iq q gEn,. ¢ ~^ 5$ >$ $$'yp~ is°x~'~ l5 ~_ 99 p w~ ~Eoi R`~^~ io ii>'P a~Ai ~ °~ ~EoE~' k ~~i' 'S .E yiy,, yyd 'd\tggY$ ~'~fif tx5. ~E°§~E .l yp~ ~ir d $ ~d 6~!`~ f1~ p ysa ~. N=44 ~ V t.v~~gN ON 4~~b~bS^°V_ _~„a~P^o•~bd>YTbi~~ a;NV 3~r~+~ ~a Yy~f3~~'{aR?fy b9fR tr. `qr ~ *V ~~J A? j. °' ~ ~~ R~ N ~ $ 8 Te N v ata ~" V ~i` N 5N~°b °3~ iC 30 i4 4pa ~~i 5S ~'$\'`gk s eg~ ~ ~9 ~ L~ ~ V i 9 ~ p y ri 2n~ ~ ~ (dd66 t3. $~ G ~~ _ Y & 5 k 88® $ ^ k $~5 $ ~o $.$$$% A $e~ "8$ ''„S$ NX~aX ~`3' rQ~ _ ~ ~^ T a ~ ~' ~ ~ a~$$N$ za $s~' 3 ~E~ ~~R ~,3ry,,.rv,~ t~$rce g ~,R ,;°^ E5; ,;°~ 6 ~ "s~..~~ASj !~ ® fl fl a ~q Er.~ ~n tl H~ g ~'~-~ a L~' gN 5e $° ~ `6e $°y. ~°# k°N=° eA e~ ~b ~~t~ \ 8'8°k k ~. ~ 4 ,8 9344 ° b o3 ~ 3`'° of u~~,$ $~ •u G. ~ ~Y 8 ~ . [, llf[ ~ b g ;N^3 r ~~p ;~i gg ~$ ~e ;a ~e ;4 >~ >p4~„~~~ ;8 y~$ a ~ ;E a p~` 9 ~ A"i "e~. 3A > 3e $ $ $ g~ ~ 6 6`iry8 gg,,$ &$ ~£ yrp s ~ $ 8 €°$ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ 8 .8^ a• $ $ g~' g 6- S" a ^~ d lk, 8 Via, k q g g y = !~ ,j5d~ ~ ~ ~ 'N € 4 4~ R °a.8 0 o S ~ ~ ~ osgg~ 8~ g~ $~ °~ ~~ ~~ a~ yy3~~g~ ~i ~i 3~ Yv ~~ y~y[Arr~' a xWpw~ygp o ° R 3 3 ` _ ~ o c ~ ~ oX. ~~3 w e ~~ ° ° *a a " ~ " igs ~~ X~3~ $ ~pQ O o N ~ ° ° R~ ° 0 8 b u Y g@` "~ °'~ ~_• ,~• 9,~ ~~ h $ A SS a ~SSYS ufJA m - 4v ° q ; €3 3S 1 yG ~V~a ~ 3 0 y 'C _ S & ~ ~ 3 S N 4 S 43 4 a a,g ~~r ~ ~ p ~ ~. 9~ us3~ ~ ~ ~4° ~ ~8 _~ g k y fl3 ~~~3 3~ ~ c 8 U ~ ~g8 ~,7 aQQR qaqA $~,~~~R ~~,~~$~~P ~~'$~¢a~ b~ s >~'$s 9' ~ ~~Nxx°x`b1N~N,:,x~N NNg 2~i2$'N :{x ~' s-° " ~ °' c ~A8 @ 8W$a$a$°$a§a$~8~8~`a6sR~~s~ : 9 a3 ~ ~. $~ a8 v`o"4~ffi ~6CSa5gvglk28 Y 8°~Y ~~31R A 8~$o~g '~~~; ~ a 48° ~~g a i €~ag~~S!"~~~~~ ~~s s g g o ,Po... q ~ 16,~e 1 ° , ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~`~ ~~~ 8' ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ a ` z ~g'S ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ 5 ~ $ 8 3 O a $ °°. ~. N s ggpp~~ • 0°Yp°j Q °~ f y[ M ~ a g°5~ a c ~gs~ H 9 e~s> g $~>. ~9n gg> N ~a Si$3~~ a sY ~~ ~ ~ j~~g k5 $~~ ~ 3 g~88 ~ e ,r~8~~ a '"~=3~ ~ ,r~~g ~ a :g~g.s r~~~~~~$s~~i ~q~ ~,1~~ls3ygz "~ }~ ~~`;~~ a~.~~ c B~s~~ r 9~3~~ c ,C tl~t ~ ~ gods tl~~'a~? e. 3 7 i C s- ~ 3e g°~~~ ~ r~~a$g a ~$g~~g ~ &~&~~~ ~ $~~g s ~g~t3~~~t°~.~~9~g~~ ~~'ag~3i~s~~~. a~ ~ o ~ ~ $gg~g r g~~ ~~ s9~ ~~ s6~ ~~ g3~~~~ ~~~t~g~}g~„4~~$plsi~ ~~ ~&~~~~~ 1 .® \ i'~ ~ m 8~7 > ~g~A ~~g~f s~p ~t+ s~g ^'} '3 °3 ~g $';3 ,ygg Y'$ i ~r'~ ~y> ~~~R p•p® y ti ~ ~g344~ aE 3'1 e3~ed3~ x.3$3 ~`a 3'33 £ :jR $: ~[~93^0~$g $ay<&p~R 3se '~7 ~ ~ "',3$b9 833... rB~sSpS °R~ 3p ^~~ ~kg ~3'~go'~yyb g~# i4yg~~Y o 3~g~N_ ~~ ! i ~ ai ~ +°$~t $ s gF H ~3'i' i~ w $3 ~Sa3 9 ~ s~~d;y$g3pg` ~S ag~~' sr y® b ~ ~, ~' ~ ~ s m ~ o t• y ~ ~ 0 c ,C~ l: \MEN\Prolxb\furMUll\tYridull-uppGr.Oq 1ue Fep M aH 51'. St tW2 SBN in[. IPI¢B Ya.N' 1Ntisle Here !V'• ~~\m1^~lewrlm.rw.,v~.++v sna w m rr sm e~v~. w',wm Ba m ti.w MLr. w.r W ~~{~€~~ B~~i~ a'i ~~~ ;~(~ti~ ~~i~~ii ~r~i}' ~ ~.a~~~g~~ ~ a t }~~ ~~ ego€` Nq~a. _aai s 4AY c;a~ ~~9^9~~ ~ - ~~~'~ es34 9 ~ k "~ Y g S P ~ a~ e ~ ~ ~~ ~ i. ~a ~ ~ ~q h . A !~ a Y N ~ I------~----~-~-- ~--- 7 I I I I ~ r~ r - r L I I 6 I ~ I ~o ~ k ~_ T9 S_R.88 ._ _~: ~ T.9 S, o I o o n iota $ I • I ~ n 5 ~ , ~• IIJ)JY I I I I ~_ - - I --- ~ I I I i R I __ I I x ; I •I • ~n 4~ ps ~: M= ya ';& y~i~ ,. r ' ~~~ a ~ °[~ --- ~~a ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~` I i _ ~ I I ~ I - I ~ I hp i i ~ - ~L~ . _. I I W - _ - ~~ a 1~ I I _J ~y re s. R.E7E - _ I ~ 1 I I I o I ~ I i I I I • ~ I ~ I @I 1 I I I 1 ~ a j I I I~{~Y I I I I jr ~ I 1i I I I- -, -~-~-' I ~ - -- - 4 I , I o l i o ~ ' ' I I ~ T I I ~ s' I I v I ___ _i ~ L_ ~___~ • d Y I ~ I g8! I ~ I • fF I o I ~ _ i I ; I = iS- c I - 3 I -// _-- I ~~~ sy I ti I o ~ ~~.fy,. ~L y I u~pN~ :: I I `Y\`~.~~i I I I I ,y1 B.f I I I I ~V I 0 0 0 (~\een\oro~eate\mmeu 11Morn-oarL Cy rye he 05 09 b'. R 2Wd SGN Inc IPlxe ywr IN [leb xere ~ nc1 w.1»M1x~nwwlri.n-M ra w.r wn a rr An ta. ~rao M u rw mr ear. r~ ~•~~aga,R y~y~ pY~~ AA9 ~'a 3333a i a~11~~~~ ~~~~~€ ~i~~~~ e; :~ ' rv , r 1 ~ <~ ;~ ~ I I~ `~, v, 3 ~~~ ylY ~~ y m ~ii~ ~.. 3 t v0. a.p ~~~i~~~~A ~iR~ R y $ 3 ~ ~ g D ~ ~ L~ ¢~N $N g2 Ng ±N'N 2ffi2yN 2iE 2'~ ~de `~~ f~ ~ '~g ~ ~ a ~ 3 ~0.~88628.8~iaCa~~@~8~8~$A ~'~[ ~~ 9 £e ~~° i0. ~ ~ ~ ~$88~~~~~$~8\~0.~~~~$~ ~~~ ~7 ~ 8 Yffiw`8ffie~g Y 80.Y f~0.8 Y~ r~ ~3 ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ t ~~~ ~ ~ t ~~ ~~~ ~ti~ '- ~ ~~ ~ ~ 9 ~ a ~ ~ ~~3 ~~ _- -. _ _- ~_.. l8 _a z 2 ~ Y ~ c 4 } O O O C 07 c ,,; ~;~_~g y _ ;= v ~ ~ Y 3~~^i•° ~ ~~~ 44 R~,~~ x'48 °k'~7~'~~~oSo 9~n ~ ~W 518000' ~ n~ H" {N ~~I iM N u . b`..' ~ ~ ~ , a 3 a -m RI .+..48 ~._1 gip, ~ n N ,c 1 ''// t { ~ _ III II a s 11 M g °82 d k 1888 ,: ! .. _ `~...~ ~" - `^888 Fo u8 ffi8~8 o8H ~ \ ` n A ld 4y e. _"_\~-_ GSti Sr ~, I. '~ D m- \..~. •8M sR m() m U1 889.:+, O888Y8.~,8$::8z~ a~ _ V ~~ A g moa me .Y a F. .~ ~- ~ ~2N$~rn mro ~=~ mOXO~BD E•'I i ia"i :' aHi `A omos~.'O _S.._S :: ~ i NGtl9000'W IJ1000 NM lJ10.00 -~ uruV S _ tl8: u.c~ n 48N 8R ~ auo~~Z 'a 'tiy' se~'u _ RAmmg u un~,a- rn3 t i NVUg ~ __ ~ u m .'0 _ _ E u~ ~ ~ T b W it SOOm0'00'W II%30' I 1~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ y~ z 1~, • 2 /`1 ' i ~ _ ~ I II I .~ g ~ _ 1 - ~I 8 ~ ~r ~.i ~ ~ ~ - - - ^'- - - - - n y ~ ~; ~ I/ro~cn 3.6gB<O05 _ ~ ~ 4 ~JSSS I S 9 a ~ 4 (III "' .~ a a /~ i ,ul r\ i %v TI -'SZ~r'T NOOpO00W l113.J0 ~ I p~E lk ~ ~ ~ RI 888 '72// I i~ \ ~ I '~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ , y ^~ ~ o c yy.. W ~ y n ! ~S`4~ I I y\ ~ r $ ~h ~ m Z a n X83 ~ M C N t o ' b ~ ~ a ~ m P ~ n s ~ ~ C .y ~ Y ~ ^a ~ ~~ ~eE3 °v.~ 30 3m 3S SaS 3333 }~S 34m > ~ R qq gc q a"3 4 ~ 4.4 4"~~3 ~~' Illy $ y03 "~ R~R.°~8~p~ ~~6Y R: >~4.'n;~~~~.~3~~'i ~R@Zi^;, ®~g~ ~' 4 ~ ti ° i4 ^ " ;~ !A NNi N~N'N~2~.23N'j2~2~2v Rd` p :ag ~`ai ca~ng ri§~t'n8$8oi°ei8 ~~8"~ ~ e 8' g o ~j °~ o~~to, R e ~ `N888`8~8°ffi ~4~°t731LJ" mi ~"}° a ' $Qn tn~,3'.~g~' yn ~'~.o .k tir868~(`^q g~8•8i $~N;N~rb~ 5~ Q oR^ ^ 3 9' S~F.Ff~Ey.i`~~E+AR Pi"E Eg i'in ~eo ~ m'F i Se 9a ..°'. ~` F4" oo~~~~.~~~w~..Nq N3,~ v 34s' 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ g ..Ruh .ds+~i~3 ~~eR, yo E~Xw ~ ~ `1`M, ~a~ $Egog,R7d g°~•\S me4 S~k"w'd ~e~$ ~gg:~~~:u Y^ ee? ~ U i ~O "~€H$ a$ ~O ~$$~'~'~~'u$ ~'33R $~Rq ~'R~q ~N ~F 9' Es ~ .1 7~~1 ~ $ ~ ~ 9gR 3°~° 8 5 4§, ~ G~ .^~n ~ 0~°~.3 n~7 ,~' qa9 §~ 4 ~ ~ -'4 ° n "~F to ~ ~ va° RS 3 c I °iB 3R°°~~~- 2 t$S ^' ~° ,'' ~$.''. ~ '' "$ pia ~ ~ o e i aY §ag~$ ~ ,e~wi x ag R g~4. ~.~ # ~§ R~~ wA 4 3 ~ 3 p o ~' B~<e'~p ~ °: ~ R SS ; n € 3 ° o g ~~a ` , y N O 4°n 4 ? n~ u w R a '4 TT~~ ~ ° ° m •V ~ 0 0 0 rn F4yy ~,~~'~^ ,,: ,3g . ss', s~ oRR3 08 n~~~~~._ ~i3'i ?~~>3~~ y,9a3k; ;ja ~~t ~~ r`^ ~ o y „'~ z ~1~• \ ;S~ ~ ~ ~~ , ~_ o v ~~ ~' +~a o 0. ~~~o" ~ m= mo mC u p~S~p pNalnm ~ ..___ _ ~ \.: ~O~CO~O i __ \ \ ~ 1 \~t .r omm68 ~ ~ ' I ~ ,I ' ~~. / / ( ( ~., ° of \ \~ \\ °\\ ~ No\\ Y a I ,68 (6l M,6v,8L0pNJ ~ ~ ~ 1 - ~ T ~~ - - ~ ~~~, ~~ ~~ \ ~ I ~ N ~ , ,~,,, o __ ,y q \\ \ \ tyr^ >~` ~~ ~ "1 0~ I ~ I °o \ \\ Sg4 t4 a~/ ~ \ \ ,v r3,i i ~~ ~ ~ \ o ~ 1 ~ bi y9 I~ / ~ / ~~ .©o~ 1 ~~~~~ ~ e~~~~ CGR~~ ~~~~ • y ~ //~~~ Y \ , ~y °~ ~'~ Ea ~ ~ N '~ ~ ~ • 'b x ti ,.~. ~] a _ e ~ ~ ~ d S ~ by~ ~o ti r Y I ~ ~ N T~` T T T - -- I I --- _ . SCFIIMUESFR ~ GORD I ~ DN ~IEYER o1.cNwooo spwNO3 ~h;N caE9Yro etmE ~ E R 9 R I l tl w. eTN~ sung 200 p. o. eoH 2 i 5, E NG~i N t SURVEYORS r.0 epx 3098 . - i GLENW000 3PXIN09. GO 91001 gEpEN. COB 1 OI t+ CPE6TEO eunE, p0 y ~ 2,;„ i I , B909a5-1 OOC B9D~925'69g9 090'OaB~5395 E%: B90BaS-3BS9 A: 096825-<157 rY: B]0~3a i 95359 ~ I I January 31, 2002 ~ Glenn Hdm A~ __W~ ~ Davis-Horn Consultants 215 South Monarch Street Suite 104 - Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Bane Tracts -1041 Review Dear Glenn, Bane Tracts are located at the base of Mount Sopris. The property is + 2,500 acres. The tracts area is accessed from West Sopris Creek Read and Prince Creek Road. A + 240 acre portion of the property called Bill Creek Tract is located off of Highway 133 and accessed through the BRB subdivision. There will be five Bane Tracts. Each tract will be +500 acres except Tract 2, the fathering parcel, which will be + 200 acres. Access The BiII Creek Tract will be accessed off of Highway 133, throrx3h the BRB subdivision. The five Bane Tracts will be accessed primarily from West Sopris Creek Roatl in the winter, and both West Sopris Creek Road and Prince Creek Roads in the summer. West Sopris Creek Road is a moderate service area roatl 5.2 miles in length. h is listed as having a traffic count capability of 250 to 750 VPD. Winter traffic counts in 2001 show traffic at 455 VPD and summer traffic mounts at 979 VPD for an average of 717 VPD. Lower Prince Creek Road is a moderate service area road, 1.6 miles to the end of the pavement and a low service area road, 3.4 miles in length. Lower Prince Creek Road is listed as having a traffic count Capability of 250 to 750 VPD. Upper Prince Creek Road is listed as having a traffic count capability of less than 250 VPD. 2001 traffic counts show lower Prince Creek Road with 498 VPD and upper Prince Creek Road with 143 VPD. This project will add 50 VPD. While both roads receive year-round motorizetl use, West Sopris Creek Road is maintained in the winter to the end of the pavement. The project wilt plow the last + 2000 feet of West Sopris Creek Road to the property entry at the junction of West Sopris Creek Road. Prince Creek Road, Dinkle Lake Road, and Homestead Alley. On-Site Access This proposal will utilize existing ranch roads for access to each tract. Ranch roads are typically ten to fifteen feet in width- Culverts appear to be in place at all draws or stream Crossings. Most ranch roads proposed for use appeared to be twelve percent or less in grade, the majority averaging less than seven percent. This project will bring all ranch roads up to County driveway standards and size all culverts at draws and stream crossings to drainage standards as required by the County. The main ranch roatl will be called Homestead Alley, and runs from the junction at Dinkle Lake Read to Tfaci 4. Four Bar Spur is the road that goes to Prince Creek Road ~~Q~6~ i ~~ . ... , ~ i SCFiMIJ!FSER ~ GORDON*MEYER I_ ~ ~1~1I1~~~~~JJJ i ~ i ~ ahd will be!used in the summer, The intersedion with Prince Creek Road will need to be reconstructed to make aninety- degree intersection Driveways Tract 1 This is an existing ranch road with grades less than seven percent. The driveway is tatted prince Creek Springs Road and winds through an aspen stand to the building envelope. Tract 2 This tract is the fatherin The driveway is an existing rcechnroad with grades Ness than oir. twelve percent and is piled St. John's Cirde. Tract 3 This driveway is new Construction. Initial) , ditch through a stand of aspen. The irrigaytion dittYbdea~ ggation appears adequate for the driveway. Once in fhe hay field, the driveway will follow the edge of the aspen trees to the building envelope. All of the driveway will be less than seven percent in grade. Tract 4 This driveway is an etds6ng ranch road less than seven grade and comes off of Homestead Alley, Percent in Tract 5 The building ernelope abuts Homestead Alley, the existing ranch road. Bill Creek Tract This driveway is existing off of Soutft Bitl Road. The existing road aPPears to be used to maintain the Mesa pitch, The grades are cell less than seven percent to the building envelope. A culvert is needed across Potato Bill Creek and will need to be sized to adequately handle floods, typical of Potato Bill Creek, which is almost always dry, Utilities Only two commercial utilities are available. Both are on West Sopris Creek Road within one-half mile of the property. Holy Cross Electric and Qwest both have the ability to serve this project (see attached letters), The uttlities would be buried in the shoulder of the road to the property and in the shoulder of the driveways to each building envelope. The BRB Subdivision also has the same two utilities, both of which are adjacent to the driveway access for the Bill Creek Tract. Water We have talketl with Shel[on Drilling and they an: co-dident that gootl quality water of adequate quantity pn be obtained in wells. Wells should be drilled in each building envelope prior to sighting the house and be proven to be good quality water with adequate quantity- Mancos shale is a consideration for wells and if the building envelope is on this formation, the well may have to be drilled outside the building envelope in a suitable location on the tract and piped to the homesite. Septic All homesites will be served by ISDS. Standard septic systems are anticipated at all homesites, as homesites were prefully located to avoid obvious geological hazards, oouus3 i -i - ---- --r-- - ~ ~ SCHMUEg~R ~I GORDON*MEYER ~ springs,'andwetlarids. _ ' Field work for this project including boundary surveying, sighting building envelopes, road surveys, and site visits ocxurred in January, 2002, with two to three feet of snow on the ground. Every attempt was made to accurately portray exact field conditions. Sincerely, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. DWG:dIr /980098 ~~U',~ o- A1TACii111ENT (o WILDLIFE EVALUATION BANE TRACT #5 PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared for: Davis Horn Inc. 215 S. Monarch Aspen, Colorado 81611 Prepared by: NatureTech Consultant Services Corp. 532 East Avenue Rifle, Colorado 81650 Reviewed by: Western Ecosystems 905 West Coach Road Boulder, CO 80302 January 2002 p0pt~6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Proposed Action 3.0 Methods 4.0 _ Study Area 5.0 Significant Wildlife Use of the Property 6.0 Recommendations to Minimize Wildlife Conflicts 7.0 Conclusions LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Location of Bane Tract #4 Property 2- Agricultural Dryland Field Probable Home Location ~o~~6F 1.0 INTRODUCTION The property is proposed to be developed into one single-family home on the Bane Pazcel #i4 located near the headwaters of Prince Creek. The Tract includes approximately 508 acres m the Prince Creek drainage on the northeast side of Mount Sopris southwest of St. Johns Reservoir and approximately 6 miles southeast of the town of Carbondale, Colorado. The proposed development of the property if not done sensitively has potential to effect existing wildlife use of the property. In particular, potential impacts to big game (elk and mule deer) and non-game species dependent on the riparian corridor and the habitat types that exist in Prince Creek Area. These habitat areas are of primary concern to the Planner, the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) and the Pi[kin County Planning Department (the "County"). NatureTech Consultant Services Corp and Western Ecosystems, Inc. were retained by the Planner to evaluate existing wildlife use of the property and develop mitigation measures to minimize impacts of development on the critical wildlife habitat values of the property. This report is the result of that effort. By incorporating the proposed mitigation measures into the development and operations of the single- family home, no significant adverse impacts [o wildlife use of the property is expected. 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION The proposed development is located on a mesa west of Prince Creek Road (T8S R88W Section 1). It is approximately 6 miles south east of the Carbondale, Colorado city limits (Figure I). Elevations range from 8200 feet to 8600 feet in elevation. Its exposure is described as northern, although, the tract is generally flat. The tract includes approximately 508 acres of land, of which approximately 5.4-acres will be included in the selected building envelope. Figure 1: Approximate location of [he Bane Tract #4 building envelope southeast of Carbondale, Colorado and southwest of St. Johns Reservoir. 00006'1 The proposed single-family residence envelope has been designed to avoid wetlands, active stream comdors, steep slopes and slopes supporting big game transitional range. Consideration was also given to minimize disturbance to existing woody vegetation, particularly within the riparian corridors that exist on the site. 3.0 METHODS The wildlife assessment presented herein was based on the following: a) A review of CDOW Wildlife Resource Information System (WRIS) maps to locate important seasonal ranges and use azeas for local deer and elk herds. b) January 17, 2002 field survey with the plainer and Rick Thompson (Wildlife Biologist, Western Ecosystems) of the single-family home parcel and adjacent properties. Primary objectives included: 1) field verification of habitats, habitat condition, and big game use relafive to CDOW WRIS maps; 2) locating the proposed building site and evaluating potential impacts to big game use patterns; 3) evaluating buffering characteristics of existing vegetation and topographic features relative to the proposed development and adjacent big game use, and 4) assessing the presence of non-game species higher value nongame habitats, and evaluating potential effects of development on those species/habitats. c) A review and evaluation of the proposed tract #4 homesite development from aerial photography and mapping relafive to individual effects of the site and other surrounding development. Rick Thomson reviewed and commented on a draft of this report. 4.0 STUDY AREA The Bane Tract #4 single-family home tract contains a diversity of habitat types in close juxtaposition due, in part, to historical agricultural management of the tract and approximately 600 feet of elevational gradient on the 508 acre tract. The lowest elevations occur along the canyons dropping into Potato Bill Creek on the west side of the property. Potato Bill Creek supports typical high-elevation riparian vegetation with mature naaowleaf cottonwoods, blue spmce, alder and some willow along the stream corridor. The higher north- facing slopes are primarily vegetated with aspen and pockets of spmce and fir in wetter azeas, while the south facing slopes are dominated by Gambel's Oak. The more gentle slopes on the property have been used as both irrigated pasture and for hay production. The existing ranch road inns through stands of decadent, but regenerating aspen that has higher values for cavity nesting wildlife. Regeneration is generally vigorous among the stands inspected. Most land immediately adjacent to the property is also private. However, this tract borders Forest Service lands to the east, south and west. Forest Service lands management prescriptions vary, with some emphasizing dispersed recreation and non-motorized use and other having wilderness attributes. 5.0 WILDLIFE USE OF THE PROPERTY Seasonal big game use of the property and surrounding lands is largely based on CDOW WRIS maps on file at the County Planning Department, habitats present, their condition and evidence of seasonal use, the location of the property in the local and valley-wide landscape, seasonal recreational and land use activities in the local area and field surveys, experience of the authors, and lifetime observations of the property owner. The January 2002 site visit verified much of this information, though seasonal fluctuations in animal numbers and use patterns were hazd to hard to quantify and verify. However, data available aze consistent with my evaluation of habitat conditions, physiography and evidence of big game presence on [he property. The WRIS maps supplied by CDOW indicate the Bane Tract #4 is primarily transitional range located above winter range and below calving grounds. No mapped habitat of any species, including elk, deer and bighorn sheep, overlaps Tract #4. All of the tract is well outside of mapped winter range areas as mapped on the W RIS maps. The edge of an elk production area begins south of the pazcel and extends onto higher, adjacent public lands. 00006 It was appazent from the site visit that relatively few elk and nearly no deer winter at this elevation, as indicated by aerial surveys conducted by CDOW. The elk appeaz to select southern-exposed pockets along the Crown at lower elevations within the Prince Creek drainage, well below the Bane Tract #4 for the bulk of then activity. The tract is principally used during spring and fall transitional periods and occasionally as a travel corridor between drainages. However, there aze no land use constraints on or adjacent to the property suggesting that any portion of the property is part of a big game migration corridor. In addition, because the tract has been managed historically as component of an agricultural system, wildlife use during the summer has been relatively low. Evidence of elk "barking" aspen trees (scars on the trunk where animals scrape off strips of bazk for consumption) and signs of elk browsing off new aspen suckers on the property were sparse. The S.4-acre building envelope is situated on top of a lazge, relatively flat irrigated meadow southwest of St. Johns Reservoir (see figure 1). Winter conditions indicate that exposure, low slope, lack of wind, and the fact that it is in an agricultural vegetation type allow deep accumulation of snow thus remains unsuitable for use as big game winter range. WRIS maps indicate that production occurs on the extreme south portion of the property with the majority taking place on Forest Service Lands. The site visits turned up no tracks in the snow or other evidence to suggest animals were currently using the area. However, the tract lies adjacent to probable wildlife habitat and substantial riparian vegetafion along the creek provides ample security cover for animal inter and infra property movements to take place. 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS TO MINIMIZE WILDLIFE CONFLICTS One of the chief concerns with a development in this location is the interruption of elk and deer transitional ranges and infra-property movement patterns, whether they are seasonal migration routes or daily intra- property movements. If interruptions are regulaz, continuous or significant random events, total displacement of wildlife from an azea can occur. Interruptions can result from a variety of building activities, physical obstmctions or post-construction human uses on the site. Oddly enough, the opposite can also occur with deer and elk habituating to human activities or even being attracted to developments, particularly if succulent ornamental plantings aze available or if the property supports highly nutritious, fertilized, irrigated, hay meadows. This can create significant conflicts between landowners and wildlife and create the need for control measures. Most of the anticipated impacts to wildlife will be significantly mitigated simply by removing the potential for 35 acre tract development from this parcel. In addition, significant care was taken to adequately place the single homesite on the SOS acre pazcel so that habitat values would not be compromised. a. Homesite placement. The location of the building envelope within the large agricultural field neaz the center of the property is a key conceptual element in avoiding and reducing impacts to big game herds. This site would virtually eliminate any impact to habitat that has high vertical and horizontal diversity, while only slightly impacting vegetation that has good nutritional quality albeit agricultural grasses.. The building envelope is placed within the field to exploit an azea in that is less attractive to wildlife rather than siting the home within higher value mature aspen, mountain shrub, and riparian habitats. In this situation woody habitat is not compromised which will maintain adequate thermal and security cover for a variety of wildlife species. The building envelope is placed away from Potato Bill Creek to avoid any potential impact to the ripazian corridor that runs through the tract and utilizes an area where wildlife values are not as great. Restricting the building envelope to 5.4-acres also minimizes impacts to wildlife use on the additional 502.6 acres within the tract boundary. That is, 98.9% of the property would occur outside of the building envelope where all habitats other than those associated with the existing driveway, would be preserved in perpetuity. b. Home design and caretaker units. Home design, and more importantly, human activities (timing, type of activity, frequency and duration) surrounding the home can have impacts to wildlife. Dwellings which are used only seasonally may have less impact than a yeaz-round residence. To minimize the zone of influence of the residence, constmction would minimize damage to existing woody vegetation for the driveway and home construction. The home would be restricted to 15,000 squaze fee[ including caretaker unit, gazages, and agricultural buildings. a Construction activites. Constmction workers should not be allowed to bring dogs to the construction site under any circumstances. 000069 d. Outdoor lightine. Outdoor lighting can have a significant zone of impact to wildlife use of an area. Outdoor lighting will be mitigated by complying with county standards. e. Driveways. Driveways impact wildlife in two ways. First, construction of driveways takes habitat out of production and reduces the amount of forage and/or cover available for wildlife use. Second, driveways initiate human activity in an area that may not have historically been intmded upon. Traftic can cause impacts to wildlife, either by duect mortality or by displacing animals from adjacent habitats. Given that this shall be asingle-family homesite on 508 acres of land using an existing ranch road as the driveway it is unlikely that sufficient traffic volumes and speeds will result in any wildlife mortality, that there would be appreciable loss of habitat associated with road upgrading to the driveway, or that driveway and home use would result in any significant long-term displacement of wildlife form adjacent habitats. Indeed, this is about the most benign type of residential development [hat could occur on this property f. Fencine. Fencing creates obstacles to wildlife movements, and can significantly alter movement corridors and use of an azea. It is important that Tract perimeter fencing should meet CDOW and Pitkin County Standazds. Internal fencing should be restricted to areas within the building envelope. An allowance of wildlife proof fencing within the building envelope (i.e., garden areas) should be made in order to avoid potential conflicts with big game and other wildlife (i.e., nuisance wildlife) species. g. DOES. Dogs should not be allowed to roam freely on the property. Physical harassment of wildlife by roving dogs will cause extreme stress on deer, elk and other wildlife and can result not only in immediate mortality of individual animals, but also in total abandonment of use in an area. Noise from bazking dogs, whether loose or controlled, can also cause wildlife to abandon or significantly modify use of an azea. Dogs should be kept indoors and certainly fed indoors to prevent conflicts with bears and raccoons. h. Landscapine/ve etg anon. Many ornamental plants are highly favored forage for deer, elk and other wildlife, and establishing such plantings will attract use. The homeowner should be informed about using native vegetation and/or unpalatable non-native plants to avoid potential wildlife conflicts. Existing vegetation outside the building envelope should be left intact. The dead-standing snags provide much-needed habitat for cavity-nesting birds, the dead woody debris provides flood protection as well as habitat for a number of small mammals. i. Bears. Beazs can be especially problematic due [o their intelligence and curiosity, and as such warrant special consideration. The vast majority of beaz/human conflicts arise due to improper disposal of trash and improper feeding of other wildlife species. To alleviate this potental problem, the homeowner should be required to utilize heavy-duty bear-proof trash containers. Under no circumstances should trash be left outside or in any storage unit sepazate from the residence. Trash cans should be set out for removal immediately prior to trash service, and not overnight under any circumstances. Any bird feeders should be mounted away from the house and if pets are kept, they should be fed inside [he home, not on decks or patios. With [he exception of bird feeders, the feeding, baiting, salting, or other means of attracting wildlife is illegal and prohibited. There shall be no dumps or underground disposal of refuse on the property. Buried garbage will attract bears. Residents should be discouraged from using a gazden compost pile, unless the compost pile is bear-proof, meeting North American Bear Society, CDOW, or U.S. National Park specifications. Household and garden waste contributions to the compost piles compose the materials [hat can attract bears and other nuisance wildlife (e.g. skunks) creating unnessary conflicts. Composted yard waste consisting of leaves, grass, small branches, etc. do not usually attract bear. Homeowners will be educated about bears and other local wildlife via [he CDOW's brochure entitle "Living with wildlife in bear country". One copy o fthe brochure should be provided to each landowner at closing. The beaz brochure is also available on the CDOW's website at: www.dnrstate. co. us/wildlife/educations/coexisting_wi[h_wildlife/htm. j. Horses. Horse feed shall be kept inclosed containers (e.g., plastic trash containers with tight fitting lids) within the enclose barn. The barn shall be contained within [he designated building envelope. OOOtJ70 i 7.0 CONCLUSIONS • The development proposal for the Bane tract #4 would utilize as existing ranch road as the driveway and locate asingle-family residence, caretaker unit, and agricultural buildings within a sensitively sited, building envelope. The envelope, located in lower value wildlife habitat, would be limited to 5.4-acres. The remaining 508 acres of the tract, representing 98.9% of the property, would be retained in its present undeveloped character for wildlife to continue using. The collective effects of extremely low residential development on Bane Tract #4 in conjunction with other similaz very low residential development that might occur on adjacent properties would likely achieve the same successful result as that achieved at Wildcat Ranch Subdivision. Where a low sensitively located residential homesite preserves the vast majority of wildlife habitat important on a county spatial scale. Furthermore, implementation of the proposed mitigation measures should ensure that no significant adverse impacts to deer, elk and other wildlife groups would occur with the development of the proposed single- family home on this site. No significant wildlife habitat will be impacted through the proposed development particulazly since it only contemplates one home on 508 acres thus preserving approximately 98.9% of the available habitat on the site. With proper constmction features as indicated above and adhering to a few thoughtfiil living practices, the potential human-wildlife conflicts should be easily avoided on this site. 000071 Fig. 2 View of Building Envelope 00007? _>;;~; - ;... SPECIAL W DEED ~ . , 1 7IIIS DEED, Made this 5'Fh dy of Febnury, 2002, between TURNBULL SOPRl3 LLLP, a Colorado limited liability limited paemerahip of the County of Garfield, State of Colorado, grantor, and THOMAS M. TURNBUI.L whose legal addreo is: do Thomu R TmnMill, P.O. Box 686, Carbondale, Ca 81623 of the Coumy of Oufield, sad Shm otColotado, goatee, WffNESSETH, That the gnaWr, fa mdm comideotim o[the sum of Tm Dollus (510.00) and no other vdnabk oonaia--N - DOLLARS, the tempt and saf5cieney of which is heteby ufaowledged, bee gonkd, bargaiad, sold and conveyed, a~ 6y ihse pteaeds does gent, bergafo, sell, convey. and eonfimr, uom the Bootee. hie (xhe and assign forevey all the real together with all impmvemeate, ftany, aibme, lying and befog in the Couary of Pltl®aod State of Comrdo, deacn'bed as follows: Legal description ut forth m Bxmbit "A" attached harem and made a part hereoG alw ~oww by street sod, number aa: N/A - Vaanl Land TOGETHER with ell and singular the bercditameafa and appurteneneea thvem belonging, or in anywiu appertaining, end the reveoion and rcvmiom, remainder and remsindeo, rams, isnw end pmfib thereof; a~ all the edstq right, title, imereat, eldmend demand wfisboeverofthe g<antm, eitherin 4worequiry, ot; insodmthe above bergamedprmisee,wily tlra hereditammts end appurtenenw; TO HAVE AND 7'O HOLD the addprcmisea above bargained and deunbed withthe appmmnancp, unto the gtwtee, his beio end earigna forcvet. The gnntm, far itself; ib usigm m sne«seon, loos covmmt end agree ihd it ehaR and will WARItAWf AND FOREVERDBFEND the above-bugeinadp>ems~ mt6a gofer eodpacphlet~ofPoe pmtee, hb heio and assigns, agaimt all and everypeooa or perrom claiming the whole m mypart Wereos; by, tinoogh murder the grantor. eueptgenent red estate taxa fm2002 andsubaequentyevs, applicable building endzoniogrcgdatlotp, andthose matter ofpublfc record afibeting the subject Property a of the date hercofon fBe in the offiro of~e Clalc end Reeorderof Pitldn County, Colmsdo. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. The goator luu executed this deed on the dam set forth above. T'URNBULL SOPRLS LLLP, a Colorado limited IiebiGty limited pattn tp ~7 ~ ~ ~ Thomas R Turnbull, General Partner STATB OF IroLOItADO ) y.t~ )~ County of P~ 11'~ ~ n ) The torcgoivg instnment wu ulmowledged before me this~day of ~ 2002, by Thomas R Tomball, as General Partner of Tl1RNBUIL SOP121S LLLP, a Colorado Iimiled1~'ty hm'ted patmetsmF. gpRYP Wimesa mYluurd and o(fiei s L ~!~ MY commiasim expires: '1 ""L~°" ~ c,.~t1~ O~ Notary Public 7~OF COLO~P Nwrc W Addnv of Peron (kuena NealyCmbd IeW Dnaipaon 438.351063, C.0.8.) N.. rs. ra.: 6-vr sexcw, w,aaavrrY atBO 463613 0 ~ ~ ~ 7 J IIII~II~IIIIII~Iu~lil118~1~~11~NR 11Aaaisapznez„et:aw A'iTACt~ME~VT L 1' i. ~ i .ry ,_ , F c - ~ '_ .. E•IT "A" DESCRIPTION-TRACT 4 - TO BE ENONN AB BANG TRACT 4 A tract of land actuate in Sections 35 end 36, TO1°nshiD 8 Soutb, Range BB Neet, end Section 1, TownehiD 9 South, Rmge BB Nest all of tha~6th PrinciDel Meridian being amore particularly described ae folloln0 Begiminq at the SW corner of Lot 2 of eaid Section it thence, N 00°18'd9• N, 1251.04 teat along the west line of eaid Lot Z to the NN corner of Lot 2; thence, N 89°53'22• W, 784.95 feet along the south line of said Section 36 to the south 1/4 corner of Section 36; thence, N 89°53'22• W, 2659.27 feet along the south lino of Section 36 to the SW corner of Section 36; thence, S 89°58'00• W, 2645.94 feet along the south line of eaid Section 35 to the south 1/4 corner of Section 35; thence,. N 00°04'00• B, 5280.00 feet along the north south centerline of Section 35 to the north 1/4 corner of Section 350 thence, N 89°58'00• B, 2645.94 feet along the north lihe of Sactioa 35 to the NB corner of Section 35; thence, S 00°00'00• N, 2640.00 feet along the eeat line of Section 35 to the seat 1/4 corner of Section 35; thence, S 89°53.15. 8, 1321.19 feet along the south line of tka SNS/4 of the NW 1/4 of eaid Section 36 to the SB corner of anid SW1/4 of ~tke NN1/d; thence, S 00°00'00• W, 1176.50 feet; thence, N 90°00'00. 8, 2835.16 feet; thence, S 00°00'00• W, 1745.30 feet; thence, S 35°55'45• W, 1201.94 feet; to the point of beginning, containing 22,158,240 aq.ft. or~5O8.68 acres amore or less. ,~ af~Wi~ . ~ 7t IIIII~IIII~~~I~~uIHY~~III~ W~N/G2N2 H:34P fIIVIR dW16 PITNIN caU11V W R la.N D s.N 1 DO~U7t~ -31-02 08:40A yusem• horn 970 ~5 5180 P.O1 ATTACHAIEI~IT 8 ASPENlPITKIN COMMUNITY D.EV~LOPIVIENT DEPARTMENT PITKIN CUUi`1'fY (hereinai'tcr COUN"fY) and THOMAS M. TURNBULL (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREL• AS FOLLOWS; 1. APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for 1041 Environmental Hazard Review Annrovnl (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Resolution No. 93-7 establishes a fee structure for Planning applicatiotls and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and COUNTY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties to all APPLICANT to make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the COUNTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. COUNTY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of'recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT's application. 4. COUNTY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for COCTIV'TY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to enable the Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to make legally required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 000075 ,.&an1-31-02 08:40A yusem • horn 970 •5 5180 p.O2 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the COUNTY'S waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount ofSl,llo.oo which is for hours of Planning staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to COUN'T'Y to reimburse the CO>;;T1TY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review, Suc11 periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for sltspension of processing. PITKIN COUNTY Cindy Houben Community Development Director APPLICANT THOMAS M. TURNBULL ~iy~ a e ~~ Signature THOMAS R. TuRArsuLL as atiorney- in-fact Date: January 31 2002 Mailing Address: c/0 Gideon Kaufman Kaufman & Peterson, P, C. 315 E. Hyman, Suite 305 Aspen, CO 81611 970-925-8166 g:~su ppo rt\fo rms\agrpayp4 doe 12/30/98 000076 ,~ FEB. 5.2002 4:29PM P(TK~COUNTY TITLE ~ N0. 1531 P.3 PPI'KIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS AVENUE, 3R0 FLOOR ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 ATfAGHMENT 303-925-]766/303-925-6527 FAX ADJACENT OWNER' STATEMENT Pltkin County Tide,lnc., aduly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the State of Colorado, hereby certifies the following list is a current list of adjacen[ property owner's as obtained from the most current Pitkin County Assessors Tax Rolls. NAMES AND ADDRESSES BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION SUBJECT PROPERTY; BANE TRACTS ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER'S NAh~E AND ADDRESS RPS FAMILX LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 6333 HIGHWAY 133 , CARBONDALE, CO. 81623 SBS FAMH.Y LIMITEb PARTNERSHIP 6333 HIGHWAY 133 CARBONDALE, CO, 81623 MARK K. DODDS AND NANCY C. DODDS 296 S BILL CREEK RD. CARBONDALE, CO.81621 MICHAEL J, & ELIZABETH L, THELE 1296 SEVEN OAKS RD. CARBONDALE, CO.81623 BERT 8[ J, MOiRA G. MEYERS P.O, BOX 536 CARBONDALE, CO.81623 GLENN MARTIN RAND & SALLY EVA RAND 670 HAGADORN RD. MASON, MI.47754 SEVEN OAKS COMMONS CO. 0501 SEVEN OAKS RD. CARBONDALE, CO. 81623 THOMAS & ROSAMOND TURNBULL P,O, BOX 13 CARBONDALE, CO.81623 BRAD A. & CANDACE J. RESNICK 5353 W- SOPRIS CK. RD. CARBONDALE, CO. 81623 ROSAMOND TURNBULL P.O. BOX 13 CARBONDALE, CO, 81623 PARCEL NUMBER OR BRIEF DESCRIPTION 2463-343-02-030,2463-343-02-028 2463-343-02-031 2463-343-02-029 2463-344-OZ-037 2463-342-02-038 2463-341.00-002 2463-341.01-013 2465-293-00.003 2465-313-O1-001,2465-313-01-002 2465-313-00-004 00~~~7~ PEB. 5.2002 4:29PM PITK~COUNTY TITLE N0. 1531 P. I DEBBIE F. JELINEK 2463-z54-00.015 ~'RqC~~ 1 P.O. BOX 1375 -~-~~ ASPEN, CO. BI612 DEBBIE JEX.INEK LLC 2463-254-00-016 P.O. BOX 1375 ' ASPEN, CO.81612 RICHARD JELINEK 2463-251-00-002 P.O. BOX 1375 , ASPEN. CO, 81612 PITKIN COUNTY IT E. INC. BYo ~ DATED: FEBR A 5, 002 ~~n~7g THOMAS R. TURNBULL P.O. BOX 686 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 (970) 963-2888 January 31, 2002 Ms. Tamara Pregl Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Authorization to Submit Land Use Application Dear Ms. Pregl: ATT'ACtiM~IT / O As the attorney-in-fact for Thomas M. Turnbull, the record owner of Bane Tract 4 (as described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto), I hereby authorize Davis Horn, Inc. and Kaufman & Peterson, P.C. to submit a land use application, and any related documents or applications, for the property on the owner's behalf. Yours truly, ~~.~ ~~ Thomas R. Turnbull 000079 PITHIN COUNTY PRE-APPLICATION~NFERENCE SUMMARY PROJECT: Bane Tract 4 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission LOCATION: Tract 4, Bane Tracts (PID# 2463-344-00-007) APPLICANT: Thomas M. Turnbull REPRESENTATIVE: Glenn Horn PHONE/FAX: 925-6587/925-5180 DATE: February 8, 2002 PLANNER: Tamara Pregl, 920-5103 Type of Application: 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission Description of Project/Development: The Applicant is requesting approval to establish a building envelope for the cons[mc[ion of asingle-family residence up to 15,000 square feet and accessory agricultural buildings. Areas in which the Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested: Land Use Code Sections to be addressed in letter of request (application)• Section 3-60: Environmental & Aesthetic Standards Section 3-70: Water Resources Section 3-80-050: Geologic (slopes) Section 3-80-070: Wildfire Hazard (mapped low) Section 3-80-080: Wildlife Habitat (mapped Bighorn Sheep Summer Range) Section 3-110: Improvements and Services Section 9-110-044: Incentive for Lots (RS-160 Lots or 500+ Acre Parcels) Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: County Attorney, Zoning, Colorado Stale Forest Service, County Engineer, Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Crystal River Caucus, and Wildlife Biologist Review by: Hearing Officer. Public Hearing? Yes. A public notice sign shall be posted on the property a[ least 15 days prior to the hearing pursuant to Section 4-90 of the Land Use Code. The Applicant shall mail notices to all adjacent property owners at least 30 days prior to the hearing with the return address of the Community Development Department (a copy of notice shall be obtained from the Community Development Department). The names and addresses shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60 days prior to the date of the public hearing. The Applicant shall submit a copy of the adjacent property owners with the complete applications. What fee is the applicant requested to submit: Total Deposit: $1,110 (make check otet to "PitMk Coun0~ Treasurer ") Planning Office (deposit) $1,1 10 (additional hrs are billed at a rate of $185/hry; Fees for the County Engineer will be billed on the final bill at a rate of $65/hour. Hearing OfTicer fee: $135/hour which will be billed on the final bill. Note: The Colorado State Forest Service bills separately, contact them at 9'0-248-'325. Please submit: A list of adjacent property owners and 2 copies of the 'Agreement To Pay' form do no[ include with each packet copy) Number of copies of the application and maps to be submitted: ]0 For a complete application, please include the following in each packet: 1. Summary letter explaining [he request and addressing all Land Use Code standards listed above. 2. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (if applicable). 3 Parcel description, including legal description. 4. Proof of ownership (from a title company or attomey licensed in the Stale of Colorado). 5. See attached "1041 Hazard Review Si[e Plan" requirements. 6. Copy of this pre-app form. 7. Prior [o approval, the Applicant shall certify either through sworn affidavit or by an attorney licensed [o practice law in the State of Colorado that notice has been made to any mineral estate owners as required by C.R.S. section 24-65.5-103. NOTES. PLEASE SUBMIT TWO-SIDED COPIES OFALL APPLICAT/ON MATER/ALS (/FPOSSIBLE). This pre-application conference summary is advisory in nature and not binding on the County. The information provided in [his summary is based ar current zoning standards and staff's interpretations based upon representations of the appltcant. Additional information may be required upon a complete review of the application. OO"' 7O ASPEN/PITI~COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT D~ARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-5090 FAX# (970) 920-5439 Febmary 17, 2002 Glenn Hom 215 South Monarch St., Ste. 104 Aspen, CO 81611 Re: P-031-02 Bane Tract 5 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission PID#2463-344-00-007) ane Tract 4 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission (PID#2463-344-00-007) P-033-02 Bane Tract 3 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission (PID#2463-344-00-007) P-034-02 Bane Tract 2 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, Special Review of TDR Receive Site & GMQS Incentive for Development Utilizing TDRS (PID#2463-344-00-007) P-035-02 Bane Tract 1 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission (PID#2463-344-00-007) Dear Glenn, The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is complete. After a more detailed review of the submittal information, additional information specific to the application may be requested in order to adequately review and process the application. The planner in charge of the review will request the information from you directly. We have scheduled this application for review at a public hearing by the Pitkin County Hearing Officer on Tuesday, May 28, 2002, at a meeting to begin at 3:00 p.m. in the Sister Cities Room in Aspen City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado. Should this date be inconvenient for you please contact me within 3 working days of the date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and changes to the schedule or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at the Planning Office. Please note that it is your responsibility to post a public notice sign on the property at least fifteen days prior to the hearing (and remove it within one week after) and to mail notice to all adjacent property owners at least 30 days prior to the heazing with the return address of the Community Development Department (copy of notice to be obtained from the Community Development Department). The names and addresses shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeazed no more than 60 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Prior to Hearing Officer approval the applicant shall certify, either through sworn affidavit or by an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado that notice has been made to any municipal estate owners as required by C.R.S. Section 24-65.5-103. Please submit the enclosed Affidavit of Notice by Posting & Mailing as proof of compliance with the Code at the hearing. 000081 If you have any questions, pleas~l Tamara Pregl, the planner assigned tour case, at 920-5103. Sincerely, Isabel Calderon Administrative Assistant Enclosure 000082 ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone (970) 920-5090 FAX (970) 920-5439 MEMORANDUM TO: Attorney Zoning CSFS Engineer Cazbondale Rural Fire Protection District CDOW Crystal River Caucus Wildlife Biologist FROM: Tamaza Pregl, Community Development Department RE: P-031-02 Bane Tract 5 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission (PID#2463-344-00-007) P-032-02 Bane Tract 4 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission (PID#2463-344-00-007) P-033-02 Bane Tract 3 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission (PID#2463-344-00-007) P-034-02 Bane Tract 2 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, Special Review of TDR Receive Site & GMQS Incentive for Development Utilizing TDRS (PID#2463-344-00-007) P-035-02 Bane Tract 1 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission (PID#2463-344-00-007) DATE: February 17, 2002 Attached for your review and comments are materials for applications submitted by Catherine T. Barron, Thomas M. Turnbull, Amy U. Turnbull, Rosamond P. Turnbull, & Timothy H. Turnbull. The Pitkin County Heazing Officer will review the application on Tuesday, May 28, 2002. Please return your comments to me by Friday, March 22, 2002. PLEASE RETURN APPLICATION MATERIALS TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IF YOU HAVE NO FURTHER NEED OF THEM. Thank you. 000083 State of Colorado ) ss County of Pitlcin ) AFFIDAVIT OF GLENN HORN I, GLENN HORN, Affiant, being of lawful age and duly sworn upon my oath, do depose and state as follows: I placed a true and correct copy of the Public Notice for the Bane Tract 4 1041 Hazazd Review, Conceptual Submission, and GMQS Incentive (P032-02) to the owners of adjacent property to the subject property on Apri124, 2002, US First Class Postage Prepaid. A copy ofthe list of owners notified is attached along with a copy of the notice placed in the US Mail. FURTHER, AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Z. l.~/U Z len rn Date The foregoing instrument was acknowledged and signed before me on Apri124, 2002 by Glenn Horn. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 10/6/2004 (SEAL) i N ARY PUB IC et Lynn Raczak 000084 PUIII,iC NOTICE RE: 1iANE TRACT 4 1041 HA"LARD REVIEW, CONCEPTUAT. SUBMISSTON Rc GMQS INCENTIVE (P032-02) NOTICE IS HEREBY GiVI.N that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 2R, 20U2, to begin at 3:OOpnt, or as soon thereafter as the conduct of business allows, at the Sister Cities Meeting Room located in the basement of City Hall, ]30 South Galena, Aspen, before the Pitkin Cotmty FTearing Officer to cotuider an application submitted by Thomas Turnbull requesting 1041 IIazard Review, Conceptual Submission azid GMQS Incentive approval to establish a building envelope for the construction of asingle-family residence up to 15,000 square feet on a parcel of land greater than 500 acres and accessory agriculttual buildings. The property is refemd to as Tract 4 of the Bane Tracts and is described as a tract of lazed situated in Section 35 and 3G, Township 8 South, Range 88 West, and Section 1, Township 9 South, Rmtge 88 West alt of the G"' Y.M. For further information contact Tamara Prcgl at the Pitkin Community Development llcpartment, (970) 92U-5103. slJames Tnw Pitkin County Hearing Officer Published in The aspen Times on Apri127, 2002 Pitkin County Account No 002.02 Public Private X ~A~Lp ~ ~~t.c~~N ~{OP-ts NI83~Od TO qa5-5t8J~c" 000085 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 ,. 303.925-]766/303-923-6527 FAX ~JACENT OWNER' STATEMENT • pltkin County Title, Inc., a duty licensed Title Insurance Agent in the State of Colorado, hereby certifies the following list fs a current fist of adjacent property owner's a: obtained from the most current Pitkin County Aaaeasora Tax Rolls. NAMES AND ADDRESSES BRIEF LEGAL DESCR1PT10N SUHJECTPROPERTY: BANE TRACTS ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER'S eN( NAME AND ADDRESS RPS FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D2 6333 HIGHWAY 133 CARHONDALE, CO. 81623 SBS FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 6333 HIGHWAY 133 CARBONDALE. CO. 81623 MARK K. DODDS AND NANCY C. DODDS 296 S. BILL CREEK RD. CARBONDALE, CO.81621 MICHAEL J. & ELIZABETH L. THELE 1296 SEVEN OAKS RD. CARBONDALE, CO. 81613 BERT & J. MOIRA G. MEYERS P.O. BOX 536 CARBONDALE, CO.81623 GLENN MARTIN RAND & SALLY EVA RAND 670 HAGADORN RD. MASON, MI. 47754 SEVEN OAKS COMMONS CO. 0501 SEVEN OAKS RD. CARHONDALE, CO.81623 THOMAS & ROSAMOND TURNBULL P.O. BOX 13 CARBONDALE. CO.81623 BRAD A. & CANDACE J. RESNICK 5353 W. SOPRIS CK. RD. CARHONDALE, CO.81623 ROSAMOND TURhBULL P.O. BOX 13 CARBONDALE. CO. 81623 Bureau of Land Management 50629 Highway 6 & 24 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 PARCEL NUMBER OR BRIEF DESCRIPTION 24633d3-02-030,2463-343-02-028 2463-343-02.031 2d63-343-02-029 2463-344-02-037 2463-342-02-038 2463.341-00-002 2463-341-01.013 2465-293-00-003 2465-313-OL-0OI, 2465-313-01-002 2465-313.00.004 ,.., ~ UU11~~t- J~ttN>;ic • 2463-ZS4.00-015 • X 1375 CO.B1612 D~BIE JELiNEK LLC P,O. BOX 1375 ASPEN, CO.51612 2463-254.00-016 4ICIIARD JELiNEK '.O. HOX 1375 ASPEN. CO.81612 'ITKIN COUNTY E, INC. iY: )ATED: FEBR A 5, 2002 2463-251-00-002 00008 ~~ :~_ .~ ~- ~R ~, { t~ `~. ~ ~ r ~ ~~` ~ ald ~ r il, ~i y` { ~~ ;~~,., .J p„'` J 31.E _ :-~ . ,, ~~r' f: 3 P ~~ .. ~ ;~'~ •.r: .~ wr • +i . ~ ~ ~ ooo~~~ County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE & } ss. MAILING PURSUANT TO State of Colorado } PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE CODE SECTION 4-90 I, ~ `Z-n 11 ~ J~~1 ,being or representing an Applicant to the Pitkin County Development Permit, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 4-90 of the Pitkin County Land Use Regulations in the following manner: 1. By mai ' g of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by fi t-class, postage prepaid U.S. Mail a east 30 days prior to the blic hearing to all owne of property adjacent to the subject pro erty, as indicated on the ached list, on the _ of 200_ (which is _ day~,prior to the public hearlRg date of _~. The tames and addresses of the adjacent pt~eperty owners shall be a o.. the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60 days prior to a public hearing. 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that said sign was posted and visible continuously from the ~ day of ~, 200~the2~ day of ~, 200 Must be posted for at least fifreen (15) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. A pli nt's name Signa ure (attach photograph here) Signed before me this ~$ day of, 200Lby WITNESS MY HAND AND OF ICI L SEAL My commission expires: 3 z.(~ o t ~,RY a,. Notary Public USA ~ ' ~ KLONpe~-~ Notary Public's S nature `rte ~ , 000089 ASPEN/PITHIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-5090 FAX # (970) 920-5439 June 11, 2002 Glenn Horn Davis Horn, Inc. 215 South Monarch Street Suite #104 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Bane Tracts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 Appeal of Condition (PID 2463-344-00-007 CASE # P031-02, P032-02, P033-02, P034-02 and P035-02) Dear Glenn: The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is complete. After a more detailed review of the submittal information, additional information specific to the application may be requested in order to adequately review and process the application. The planner in charge of the review will request the information from you directly. We have scheduled this application for review at a public hearing by the Board of County Commissioners on Wednesday, August 14, 2002 at a meeting to begin at 3:00 P.M. in the Plaza One Meeting Room at 530 East Main St, Aspen. Should this date be inconvenient for you, please contact me within 3 working days of the date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and changes to the schedule or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at the Planning Office. Please note that it is your responsibility to post a public notice sign on the property at least fifteen days prior to the hearing (and remove it within one week after) and to mail notice to all adjacent property owners at least 30 days prior to the hearing with the return address of the Community Development Department (copy of notice to be obtained from the Community Development Department). The names and addresses shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Please submit the enclosed Affidavit of Notice by Posting & Mailing as proof of compliance with the Code at the hearing. If you have any questions, please call Tamara Pregl, the planner assigned to your case, at 920-5103. Sincerely, ' ~~~~~ ; Sabel Calderon Administrative Assistant 000090 Davis Horn~- PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING June 5, 2002 Tamara Pregl p~,~,, , Aspen Pitkin Community Development Department n s 130 South Galena Street i;,-i - ~ ,__,1 Aspen, Colorado 81611 ~:i r Re: Appeal of Condition on Bane Tracts 1,2,3,4 and 5 Dear Tamara: On May 28, 2002 the Pitkin County Hearing Officer granted 1041 Environmental Hazard approval for the Bane Tracts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Bane Tracts 1,3,4 and 5 exceed 500 acres in size and qualify for a residential Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Incentive. Bane Tract 2 which contains 230 acres qualifies for a residential GMQS exemption because it is the fathering parcel and already contains a dwelling unit. The applicants requested the Hearing Officer to grant the Bane Tracts a 20 year term of Vested Property Rights. The Crystal River Caucus was supportive of extended vested property rights for these properties. While supportive of an extended term of vested property rights, the Pitkin County Hearing Officer denied the request because he did not believe he was empowered to grant extended vested property rights periods. The term of vested property rights is a discretionary decision which may be determined by the Board of County Commissioners, not the Hearing Officer. Section 4-160 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code establishes procedures for an "Appeal of Development Order." This letter appeals the Pitkin County Hearing Officer denial of the applicants request for extended vested property rights. Please let us know when the Board of County Commissioners will consider this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, DAVI HORN INCORPORATED GLENN HORN AICP ALICE DAVIS, AICP f GLENN HORN, AICP 215 SOUTH MONARCH SL SUITE 104 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970/925-6587 • FAX: 970/925-5180 000091 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: BANE TRACTS 1, 2, 3, 4, AND 5 APPEAL OF HEARING OFFICER DETERMINATION (P031-02, P032-02, P033-02, P034-02 & P035-OZ) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, July 24, 2002, at a regular meeting to begin at 3:00 PM or as soon thereafter as the conduct of business allows, before the Boazd of County Commissioners, Plaza One Conference Room, 530 E. Main St., Aspen to consider an application submitted by Glenn Horn, appealing a condition of a Hearing Officer Determination and asking for a grant to the Bane Tracts of a 20 year term of Vested Property Rights. The properties are referred to as Bane Tracts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 and is described as a tract of land situated in Sections 29, 30, 31 and 32, Township 8 South, Range 87 West of the 6`" P.M. The application resolution aze available for public inspection in the Community Development Department, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen CO 81611. For fiirther information, contact Tamaza Pregl at (970) 920-5103. Jeanette Jones, Deputy County Clerk Board of County Commissioners Published in the Aspen Times on June 22, 2002 Pitkin County Account 002.02 Public Private X -{-,~xEn ~ Gt~NU H~ 1><r L~rlolfla5-Stgo ooJ ~I l~~oa`QC 000092 NITY DEVELppMENT DEPART~NT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-5pg0 Pitkin County Land Use: 172 Board of Adjustment 159 County Land Use Cude 173 Deposit 174 Flal. Fee 162 Zoning and Sign 169 Public Notice 160 Planning Enforeentent _ Referral Fees: RB115 Access Permit LUCO1 County Clerk 193 County Engineer 194 Environmental Health 198 _ Housing 190 Land Management 196 _ Wildlife Officer Building Fees: 170 Board of Appeals 135 Building Code Sal 105 es Building Permit 100 Contractor License 120 Electrical Permit 195 Energy Code Review 115 Mechanical Permit 150 Plan Check 110 Plumbing Permit 130 Reinspection 151 Aspen Sanitation 152 AVFD Fire Marshal Other Fees: 155 Use Tax 165 Copy Performance Deposit 185 Park Dedication 186 Parking Cash in Li 166 eu GIS Maps IS GIS Requirements RB116 Road Impact Fees BI202 Road Impact Fee B1203 School Impact Fee TOTAL ~ ~ ~ ~ NAME: ~' l ; t ~ ~ 1 ~----~ ADDRESS/PROJECT.I_v ! ..,...wr,: r ~ .. ~_ CASE/PERMITq;` ~'_._"°",--'-'-y='-1 DATE: ..~ ~ t ttOFC0PIE5. ~ =~__ INITIAL. j{,' ~ _ ~_ 0 0 0 vt „~,, "z~~~~~~ 3„ " 3 ~PRAu"oY z~Y£~ s;3++i4 .Rc"32d ~~s$a ~2yd". ~ddoo I~\ CCIn z m n N n m a 31 ~O =8 w~ n y glo ~~~ ~~ ,y ~ q 4l j k ~ r~ I~ i Ki ,~,~ ~~ k $ ~;{..~ ~ '1 R 'tee v _ I "' 3 ~, o ~3 3't -, - s ~ "3 ~.e ~i ~t ~ ~ ~~ a °'e F ~~ g w~ m ~ .y I' ~ Y z 4 ~~ @~ ,7 '~ ~ ~'P ) ~ ail ~ F F T~ e ~' ~ ~ ~~ to - a ~~~?~~ ~ ~~ I~1 ~~ u 3 6 O h ,~ ~ A _ " ~~~ N WQ a s '~ ~ B ~ ~~~ v y ~i~ a ~~o ~ ~ wow y ~ ~~~ ~~q o~ h ~~~ j~. ~r a~ a m U VI U a ~3 ~a~ 0 <i"~, ~ . ~~ i~'~ I \\\ ~ Nh"].Y ~4y W' t91 P~g ~~ PJJe r 1\ .\ W v Q \ ~ N ~ k0'fiT` .• 53~/y~ ~__ , ~1~ ,~ ~~ -~ ~ m ~~ / / / g28o/ I o ti lye I ~~ ~JJ~ / / i 1 ~r~ I ~~~~ ~~~. ~~~~g Cr ~a ~tl8~ ~, irr a ~.x ~"a° £ m a_ 6.". x ~. ~~ ~1: _~. ~A x ~w ~~ q ~ry Cl ~~ ~nI V~ ~: ;'~~%e: Syo;gg 2 t. '~Ft p5~~; y @: Rk;?: a~a e:s r'p P °Ed~~F /"Y!.~(.~P "~. t~~~H S!{YF O~ Q O Q LARGE PLAT(S) AVAILABLE TO VIEW AT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AVAILABLE TO BUY AT CLERK & RECORDER