Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.273536400062DOCUMENT LAYOUT. THIS FILE MAY OTt MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION LISTED BELOW IN THE F'OLLOF't'ING bRDER 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 Agplication Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter Site Plan Miscellaneous Plat copies (llxl'~ ~.. '.... „~:?~PARCEC ID: 2735-36400-062 ~ ~ "DATE ""ir`ASE NATAE: Matthews General Subm & 1041 ~" PkROJ pDDR: 4150 Midnight Mine Rd Lode Mii pWN7APP: Matthews, Joha %,~-AUR~ ,. ""REPi' Vann Sunny Vann Assoc Inc'=:ADR: 230 .. '"FEES DtJE: ' " FEES fi E,=`12EFERRAL5~} , . . ;;'; hRE'F:~ =." : M76; DATE, : ;""REY ~EtOD'l'' "PH .;; :°;, ' "REMARKSjwas attached to parcel#2911-( ^'°;§:: ..." a ....i .~. :' 64S^: :e~ef.~ . .` N"k~.Y'~~ .. .. ~...5 .. . . i~'.. r ,.: CASE 1YP3: "CA$E TYPd: c ~~•, a f~A'~r` ^,.~u:: M.: "j:" ~_~.y"~".'.ki n~~:. :::.''"':~ i4 J~:r avi 'L='."=:: fit..er v: a'e i"."kiwi. NAY. m' .. ... ti..". ~A.W.~:.. .","'y~cr ~: ".. 10/1991 ~" :"#'COI;IES: Y~CAS£NO P037-91 .. . ~. ~' z. 1 a'_": C/57t: PHN: 925-8636 ~~ ' ,.. - -- " x~. ';.'~'E7S/Z; ~pf{N 925-6958 _.;.„ i.a..' s;:.i''Alti;'C'~l`T'~CJ`Fii~l~Jl,°i"$:~?'; ~~. ' n `" ?~ a ~+ b/o OVER. ~ a,. a~ d1 #337094 ,~~~.: c.. it o = iebr':~5~'n O ~'J~ .d _ _~ ~ ~ CASELOAD SUPII+lARY sHSET ,~4, PITKIN CO <IINT`S~`~,ra 1 ~:%(J ~ 6 d'7.'~7 " ~~ ~f-~ -~6! PARVf iCEI, ID vim:--- - DATE RECEIVED: 4 10 91 DATE COMPLETED: 2 %' ?8~ '" ~H3y~~sP37 91 STAFF ~ 1+~t3ER ES I PROJECT NAME: Matthews General Submission & 1041 Review Aovln Project Address: proposed"'bldg env"`°elove s s.Eva BeYla~T~der,y£~ $} `^ ` ,., .~. w i APPLICANT:'John Matthews' _ ' Applicant Address,: P Oy' Box 2886, Aspen CO (925 86361 ,,, ,. _.. ._.r...... .... ~v d.. t....._r. ... AMOIIN'P PAID: 516 / u av~ • v, We will Bill for the addtona TYPE OF APPLICATION. _ ....1 Sri' P&Z MEETING DATE. ~/lO g ~ BOCC Meeting Date Staff bevel- 1041 REFERRALS: }C AttorneYi -~ Engineer Housing Aspen Water ~_ Envir-filth. Manager _~' Div.Wld~ife Caucus' ~_ Zoning ~; -?. Homeowners.. G;~C~~~;~~. ~~~,,_-, DATE REFERRED: FINAL ROOTING' County Housing •.vria.o aw.... ......_ ..... - m$264 due ,/~~a3 / ' p; ~,.~d. _ 2 STEP: PIIBLIC HEARING: ES NO _, PtJBLY~C uRAGUrNGe ~S J NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES/ NO ,,. :_, L. -Aspen Consol S.D. Mtn.Bell Holy Cross Aspen Fire -Basalt Fire -Carbondale Fire Div. Water Res,.,, StactelHwysDept as (Glwd) (GrJtn) Snowmass Vll IISFS (Carbondale) IISFS (Aspen) " _ BLI+I City P&Z Other: S/~ /9 County Engineer -~'Envir. Health FILE STATIIS AND LOCATION: L-~ Zoning ~I~I o `~ ^ q ~I #359610 08/i~3/9~ 09:56 Rec YL5• V~) BK 72U FG 127 ~ Silvia Davis, Fitki'ri Cnty G1erk, Doc 'b.~~i A G R E E DS E N_T_ , THIS AGREEMENT is made and e_»tered into ,this ~ day of 1993 by and between Mountain Valley Equity Venture, nc., a Colorado corporation ("Mountain Valley") and Pitkin County (the "County"). R E C I T A L S WHEREAS, the Pitkin County Planning and'Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. PZ-91-A1 granting 1041 Geologic Wildfire Hazard Review a»d General Submission Approval fo the Matthews i . Application on Auyust 6, 1991, '(the "Approval"). The Approval concerns the rnal property described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto i and incorported herein by this reference (.the "Property"). WHEREAS, at the time of granting of the approval, Matthews proposed to construct a single family structure to be used as a i part-time secondary residence with approximately 2,150 square feet of allowable floor area. I WHEREAS, Matthews subsequently obtained a building permit (the "Building Permit") authorizing Matthews to co»struct a structure with approximately 3,500 square feet of allowable floor area. ~ I WHEREAS, Mountain Valley purchased the property from Matthews !, on April 22, 1993 and is Matthew`s successor in interest to all right, title and interest Matthews had to any and all plans, permits, and approvals pertaining to the property. WHEREAS, the amount of square footage Matthews proposed to use ', in the Approval is inconsistent with the amount of allowable square footage subsequently permitted for the property under the Building '', Permit. The parties desire to enter into an ayreement in order to '~ clarify this inconsistency. W I T N E S E T H NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants ', contained herein and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: ', That the recital in the the approval wherein Matthews proposed to construct a single family structure with approximately 2,150 square feet of floor area depicted a full basement which would would bring the floor area to approximately 3,500 square feet. Mountain Valley shall therefore be permitted to submit for a modification of the building permit to construct a single family residence including a basement on the property of approximately 3,500 square feet of floor area. This shall constitute a clarification of the approval. ~~~~ 5 #k364288 08/^x/93 ~?9e39 Fec 230..50 Pk:: 721 FG 946 Silvia Davis, Fitl::in Cnty Cler4::, Doc: `~.<?~' ,~ GJ ~.: VL•1if'I'I bl"IfC~1GLU & C'1Ll.t'tl 1'. ly ~-'• I #359610 08/03/93 09:.x,6 Fee #^~,~~~ Hf. 720 p~ 128 ~ Silvia Davis, Fitk.in Cnty Glerk, Doc $.(1t=) Mountain Valley may exceed the 3,500 square foot allowable II floor area limit only if subsequent permission is obtained from appropriate authorities haying jurisdiction to make such determination in Pitkin Count THIS AGREEMENT shall be binding ugon the parties hereto, their heirs, successors, and assigns. THi3 AGREEMENT shall be construed in accordance with and ~' governed bg the laws of the 3tata of Colorado.` THSS AGREEMENT may be executed in several counterparts and after execution. and as executed shall constitute an agreement binding on all the parties notwithstanding that all the parties are not signatory to the original or same counterpart. THIS AGREEMENT can be accepted and/or executed by either party ~ by facsimiled transmission, which shall be binding upon the parties sa executing or accepting so long as the actual signature copy is transmitted to the other parties as soon as practical thereafter. ~~ TH2S AGREEMENT shall not be altered, modified, or otherwise changed except by a further written agreement between the paYtfes hereto. IN THE EVENT, any action for breach of, to enforce the provisions o£, or otherwise involving this agreement, the Court in such acticn shall award a reasonal;le sum as attorney's fees to the party who, fn light of the issues litigated and the Court's decision on these issues was the prevailing party in the action. If a party voluntarily dismisses an action, a reasonable sum as attorney's fees shall be awarded to the other party. _~~. Mountain Valley Equi y Ventura, Inc., a Colorado corporation by Richards. Nye as President Suzanne Konchan County Planning Director Approved by: John Ely >?itkin County Attorney ~U~~ '* #360:88 08/3/93 09:39 Rec $3i~,50 BY 721 F'G 947 Silvia Davis, F'itF.tin Cnty Clerl::, Doc ~'i _. _.. . , ;. _ __ _. -- ~ '#° i #3596111 08/03!93 09:56 Ric ~25.i~0 E+t; 720 FG 129 Silvia Davis, Fitkin Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.0~7 Mountain Valley may exceed the 3,500 square foot allowable floor area limit only if subsequent permission is obtained from appropriate authorities having jurisdiction to make such determination in Pitkin County. THIS AGREEMENT shall be binding upon the parties hereto, their heirs, successors, and assigns. THIS AGREEMENT shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Colorado. THIS AGREEMENT may be executed in several counterparts and after execution and as executed shall- constitute an agreement binding on all the parties notwithstanding that all the parties are not signatory to the original or same counterpart. THIS AGREEMENT can be accepted and/or executed by either party by facsimiled ~Y'an$TIIlS51011, which shall be binding upon the parties so executing or accepting so long as the actual signature copy is transmitted to the other parties as soon as practical thereafter. THIS AGREEMENT shall not be altered, modified, or otherwise changed except by a further written agreement between the parties hereto. IN THE EVENT, any action for breach of, to enforce the provisions of, or otherwise involving this agreement, the Court in such action shall award a reasonable sum as attorney's fees to the party who, in light of the issues litigated and the Court's decision on those issues was the .prevailing party in the action. If a party voluntarily dismisses an action, a reasonable sum as attorney's fees shall be awarded to the other party. Mountain Valley Equity Venture, Inc., a Colorado corparaticn by Richard B. Nye as President ''mQ ~_' Suza Konch n Coun Planni g Director Approved by: John Ely Pitkin Cou torney d~~~ d#360.^88 08/3/93 09:3? Rec '~3ti.5i: FI:: 721 FG 948 Silvia Davis, Fitk:in Cnty Clerk, Doc x.00 #354610 08/03/93 09:56 Rec X25. ii0 EiK 720 F6 130 Silvia Davis, Fitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc x.00 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Sworn and subscribed to before me this day of , 1993 by Richard B. Nye as President of Moutain Valley Equity Venture, Inc., a Colorado corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Sworn and subscribed to before me this day of , 1993 by John Ely, Pitkin County Attorney. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) ..>.,:. Sworn and subscribed to before me this 0~ day o`/; 1993 by•.Suzanne Konchan, County Planning Director. ~ Y~t1fE ~.., c.;~' ' &V~iTNESS my hand and official seal. =~~` j~~/-M}z commission expires: ~'~~7~~5 .. -~ =' Upl.IC ' fro:°~:~a, :. f<° Notary ublic .. ~`. ~, #k3f~UCSB 08/^3/93 i_~9: 39 F;ec X30. S0 HI'. 721 F'G 949 ~1~~® ~ Silvia Davis, F'it4;in Cnty C1er4^, Doc $.r?O ~ 17 'y3 :L0~58 BRKER IV1'E 7UL 16 '93 02~10PM 6RRFIELD &_HECHT P.C N.a P. cl #k35961C1 v8/<]3/93 V9: 56 Rec t~~.C~t~ B1 7Q0 PG 131 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc ~.0~> STATE O]' IjiEW YORK jss. COUNTY OF F~lIC32`~{ I:~EW YORK - swarri and subscribed to before ine this /~ day a£ `~1~ ••"'~~"~~.i•~93 by Richard S. Nye as Presidrant p£` Moutin Va11ay Equ ty '~~Ve'1'(~uYp, Inc., 8 Colorado corporation. • n, '~'':'~~ ' ~ ~ wxTNESS my hand and arPicial sea - c q `t_'. o . `. ~, ; My commission expires: ~ -~:: ~'{• . C . ~ -<•~' ~> ~.'~ (;FORGE BERNSTEIN . • ''•••••"•rt y Np?gry Public State of New York ~~~''~.. N ~{.. ?~~''~ No. 31.5297325 Nq cry P i •ryu..u..:•v a„dioed In Nees Januaiy 31t 1995 ~lgarnlasWn Exp' STATE OF COLOkADO • jss. ' COUNTY OF PIT~SSN ) S;aprn and subscribed tv befnrt3 ms this day of , 1993 by John Eiy, Pitkin Gaunty Attorney. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: Notary Pub1S.C STATE CIF COTrpTtADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) 5rrnrri and subscribed to b8E0x'~ mQ this _ dap bf , 5.993 by Suzanne lconchan, County Planning Director. VJxTNESS my hand and official seal. t~fy commission expires: Notary Public dk36C1~88 ii8/~3/93 19:39 Rec ~3i1.5i> 8f: 721 F'G ~~ • ~~~~ % Silvia Davis, Fitk:in Cnty Clerk, Doc Z.UiI - ##36i~f88 i.:p/^3/93 a~9:39 Fec ~3a?.SC: E#~. 721 F'G 951 • Silvia Davis, Pitl:in Cnty Clerk, Doc ~.~?~' : E}tliIBIT "'71" Legal llescription: PARCEL A: The EVA .=LLA Lode Mi,n(na Claim (United 5#ates I%iinera.f Survey No. 1808), as patented and described In United States Patent recorded August 14, 1883, in Book it at Page 9. ' TOGETHER Frith That certain easement for purposes of ingress and egress, and for 1'he installation, maintenance and use of underground utilities, as creai'ed, defined and established In that certain Easements hgreement beiween Castle Creek Investors, Inc., a Colorado corporation and 'John Mathews recorded March 1 1991 fn book 640 at Page 778, said easement.being more particularly described as follows: wnshipsl0 South, Range 85 Yfes-tn~oftthe Gfhep•i(4•SePtitkft3County, Colorada, located wihin the Mai-tle Belle (.ode (U.S.M.S. No. 4147) and the little Susie Lode (U. S.M.S. No. 6806), and being 30 feet in width lying 15 feel- on each side of 'the following-described centerline: 9 9 P U S,MnSn No. 1808,nwhencelCorner 3fofhsa(daE6aiea Lode, ella lode Iles North 09°05'00" Ezs-t, 29.44 feet; thence along the centerline of an existing road the following four courses: South 89°57'32" East, 60.93 feet; ifience South 81°5427" East, 46.06 feet; thence South 72°13'CZ" Ezst, 92.00 feet; thence South 85°41'37° East, 143.29 feei-, more or less, to the centerline of the hildnlght t•ilne Road, the point of ending. PARCEL E: The LITTLE OICIC Lode Mining Claim (United States hlineral_ Survey No. 1843), as patented and described in United Stags Paien recorded July 21, 1883, in Bool< 11 ai: hage 5. ~ ,. ADDENDUM TO BUILDING PERMIT APPI:ICATIOIV Memorandum to Ptkn County Applicant: Richard Nye Date: December 6, 1996 This memorandum is submitted in support of Richard Nye's Application for a building permit for a garage (Snowcat storage) on his property, which is being submitted contemporaneously with this Addendum. The Property Mr . Nye's property consists of the EvaBella and Little Dack Lode mining claims in Pitkin County, Colorado (the "County"). The former claim comprises 9.1729 acres and the latter 8.324 acres for a total of 18.0369 acres (the "Property") Prior Owner and History of 1041 Hazard Review7Approyals The Property had previously been owned by John Matthews ("Matthews"), and it was zoned AF-1 by the County when Matthews owned the Property, and when it was sold to Mr. Nye's entity, Mountain Valley Equity Venture, Inc. ("M:V.") in 1993. In 1991, Matthews applied for 1041 and General Submission approval from Pitkin County for a single family residence on the Property (the "Original Application"). Copies of all documents referenced in this Addendum can be made available upon request to Matthew C.Eer~+soxi-e€Garfield & Hecht, P.C., telephone number (970) 925-1936. The Original Application indicated in several places that a "partial basement and garage" would OO~i3 Memo to Pitkin County Re: Applicant -Richard Nye December 6, 1996 Page 2 be used to house the Applicant's snowcat. In addition, the Original Application stated that during the winter months, snowmobiles may also be used. (Original Application, pages 6 and 11). In the County Planning Staff Memorandum to the County Planning and Zoning Commission ("P & Z"), relating to the August 6, 1991, hearing of P & Z on the Original Application, the County Planner acknowledged, at page 7 of the Memorandum, that "[w]hile the general policy regarding development in remote areas is in place, a specific master plan for the Little Annie and Richmond Hill has not yet been developed. As a result, the Application must be reviewed based on compliance with the current policies and regulations and 1041 revelations." Further, the then Deputy County Attorney John Ely stated at the August 6, 1991, P & Z hearing, "[A]t this time, any person who owns a mining claim in fee, has the right to come in with an application to develop in any way they so choose." On August 6, 1991, P & Z approved the Original Application by Resolution 1'Z91-41. which resolution was recorded on October 7, 1991, in Book 658 of Page 258 (the "Resolution"). The Resolution constituted the final County approval for the Original Application, and it represented a vested right, Site Specific Development Plan, as that term is used in the Vested Rights Statute, §24-68-101, et esq., C.R.S. and in County Commissioners Resolution No. 88-95. A property right which has been vested remains ~UiJUit1 k ~-.~."^'I'f t Memo to Pitkin County Re: Applicant -Richard Nye December 6, 1996 Page 3 vested for a period of three years, unless extended by the County Commissioners or P & Z. The fact of vested rights status accorded to the Property was confirmed in the public notice published in The Ashen Times on October 31, 1991. Certain conditions were added to the approval of the Application, none of which directly relate to the garage. On May 5, 1992, Matthews applied fora buildin ermrt fo` g p `~' r the residence (Permit No. 2-185), and the building permit fora 3,456 square foot building was approved on September 21, 1992. The accompanying plans for the residence included a garage within the building. The required start of the work on the residence was extended to October 22, 1993. Mr. Nve's Approval and Building Permits Mr. Nye's concern, M.V., purchased the property from Matthews on Apri122, 1993. Matthews plans, permits and approval were assigned by Matthews to M.V. On June 15, 1993, the County Commissioners enacted Ordinance 93-11, imposing a 90-day moratorium on development in the Little Annie/Richmond Hill area. This ordinance stated that it was not to affect parcels which had vested site specific development plans (such as the Property). On July 20, 1993, M.V., and `the County entered into an Agreement (the "Agreement"), which permitted M.V. to submit a modification of the previously approved Matthews building permit to construct a single family residence, including a basement, on ~~Q~~1 Memo to Pitkin County Re: Applicant -Richard Nye December 6, 1996 Page 4 the Property of approximately 3,500 square feet of floor area. The plans for the approved modified residence, which accompanied the M.V. building permit application, and which were the basis of the Agreement, specifically, excluded any area within the residence for use as a garage, and the redesigned residence building permit (No. 3-309), which had been accepted by the County on June 4, 1993, was approved by the County, with all permit fees paid, in August of 1993. Applicable Land Use Regulations On July 27, 1993, the County adopted Resolution 93-117, directing its staff to decline accepting and processing any land use or building permits in the Little Annie/Richmond Hill azea; however, this resolution, like Ordinance 93-11, excluded vested rights parcels from the County directed prohibition. When M.V. bought the Property, and when Matthews owned the Property, the then in force County Land Use Code (the "Old Code") for property within the applicable AF-1 Zone District had a minimum lot area of ten acres per dwelling unit. In addition, a minimum of two off street spaces per dwelling unit, or 400 squaze feet ofnon-residential space was required. No floor area ratio ("FAR") was established for the AF-1 Zone District. (Old Code, §3-1.11, Chart 3-2). The use requirements applicable to the AF-1 Zone District (Old Code Chart 3-3) permit a single family dwelling unit with five or fewer bedrooms, and ®QQ~i~ Memo to Pitkin County Re: Applicant -Richard Nye December 6, 1996 Page 5 accessory buildings and uses, as uses allowed by right. The definition of "accessory buildings or uses" set forth in the Old Code at §20.1 is "a subordinate building or use customarily incident to the principle building and which is located on the same lot as the principle building...:" Building Permit for Garage Should be Approved i The approved Original Application included a garage and snowcat/snowmobile use. '~ Access to this Property in the winter without a snowcat o; snowmobile is impossible and shelter for such vehicles is essential,.,. Furthermore,. because all General Submissions, 1041 and vested rights approvals covering the Property occurred under the Old Code, the then applicable use entitlements and requirements. under the Old Code apply to all of Mr. Nye's residential and accessory uses, as well as approvals and requested approvals relating to the Property. Because a garage constitutes a subordinate building or use customarily incident to a single family residence, the proposed garage is a use by right. The Agreement clearly permit Mr. Nye to construct a single family residence on the Property of approximately 3,500 square feet of floor azea without a garage included in the residence structure. A garage is not a dwelling unit (residence), as defined under the Old Code, and because the proposed garage is not within the exterior walls. of the residence. In addition, pursuant to the Old Code, the area of the proposed garage cannot be included as part of the approved 3,500 square feet of ~~~~~~ Memo to Pitkin County Re: Applicant -Richard. Nye December 6, 1996 Page 6 floor area dedicated to the single family residence building. Finally, because the Old Code requires minimum off street parking spaces or non-residential. space per dwelling unit, a garage is required. Therefore, a building permit application for the use_by right garage cannot be denied.' Conclusion In sum, the Property was accorded vested right status, and because construction on the Property began within the three year vesting period, the three year time period requirement was tolled by said commencement of construction of the residence. Furthermore, because a gazage is an accessory building and use under the Old Code, which is an allowed use by right, and a minimum of two off street parking spaces is required under the Old Code, the Nyes aze not only entitled but are. required to receive a building permit for the garage on the Property. It should be noted thatMr. Nye's previous application for a building permit for the garage, filed on ~ November 24, 1993, was "rejected" on December 1, 1993, pursuant to Resolution 93-117 -- which directed County Staff to decline accepting and processing land use and building permits in the Little '', Annie/Richmond Hill area. That "rejection" was thus not based on the merits, and, moreover, was I invalid and a nullity, because Resolution 93-I 17 specifically states that it cannot affect those parcels within the described area which have vested "site specific development plans." Mr. Nye chose not ~, to pursue the garage buiiding permit application at thaftime because acceptance and processing of ~ the application was "rejected" in the middle of the winter of 1993; when no building could have been '', done, and he decided to focus ort obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the principal residence, which Certificate of Occupancy was issued by the County on January 4, 1996. o~~~~.~Y Memo to Pitkin County Re: Applicant - Richazd Nye December 6, 1996 Page 7 Finally, because of the unique and special circumstances relating to the Property, the recent rezoning of the Property to the Rural and Remote Zone District does not apply to Mr. Nye's application to build a gazage on the Property, and Nye's gazage building permit Application must be approved by the County. C:\PDM\NYEUv1EM O.APP oQ~®'.a~.:) r,. ... ._ i ., ,.~_ ~~ {~` ~ #337094 iii/0'x/41 09: 1 Rea x.00 Etb', 65B FG 258 i ' s'ilvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty ~'ierE:, Doc x.00 RESOLUTION OF THE PITRIN COIINTY PLANNING AND, ZONING COMMISSION GRANTING 1041 GEOLOGIC,. AND 1fILDFIRE HAZARD REVIEW '~ AND GENERAL SIIBMISSION APPROVAL TO THE MATTHEWS APPLICATION Resolution No. PZ-91-~ WHEREAS, John Matthews, hereinafter "Applicant", has applied to the Planning and Zoning Commission of Ptkn County, Colorado, ~! I hereinafter "Commission", for 1041 Geologic and Wildfire Hazard and ', General Submission approval for a single-family residence pursuant ~ to Sections 5-400 and 6-3 of the Land Use Code; and 'I WHEREAS, the Applicant's parcel is zoned AF-1 and contains I approximately 18 acres; and WHEREAS, said parcel, which is comprised of the Eva Bella and Little Dick Mining claims, is located off of Midnight Mine Road on the back side of Aspen Mountain, and is more specifically described in Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to construct an approximately 2,150 square foot single-family structure which shall be used as a part-time secondary residence by the applicant; and ~ WHEREAS, the building site shall be accessed from the Midnight I Mine Road and across intervening mining claims for which an access easement has been obtained; and WHEREAS, the applicant represents that he shall not participate in or encourage any groups ar actions which will promote an upgrading of the Midnight Mine Road until and unless government action is taken to change the status of the road.; and ', ..~ Q~d~~, ~ ~_ ~,~ „_..... ~ .~~ ~ nr k ~~'i~'+„t. _ ~,#33094 i~~/03/41 l'~9q iz f~` ~ e» EsK 658 FG 259 Silvia Davis; ~it4:iri`Cnt~ 'tilerk., Doc S.OQ ~ Resolution No. PZ-91-~ Page 2 WHEREAS, the Commission considered the Application at a duly noticed public hearing at their regularly scheduled meeting on August 6, 1991; and WHEREAS, the Commission determined that, the .applicant can adequately mitigate identified 1041 hazards; and at said application '~~ WHEREAS, the Commission has determined th ,_, .,' equirements of the Code. meets General Submission r NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RE8OLVED_by the Commission that it does hereby grant approval to the Matthews 1041 Geologic and Wildfire Hazard and General Submission Review subject to the following 'I conditions: 1041 HAZARD REVIEW 1. To mitigate wildfire hazards on the site the,_applicant shall comply with the following measures:. a. Adherence to the,,, guidelines listed in the„State Forest Service handout' Wildfire Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowners. Pertinent guidelines are as~f'ollows3"` I 1) Stack firewood uphill or on a contour away from buildings. Keep fire fuels away from stacked wood. 2) Place at least one 10-pound ABC-class fire ~ g each structure. A 50-foot. garden hose ', extin uisher in connected to the_`hot water, heater drain is useful in a l .~ .,.~. fire emergency inside the house. 3) Power and utility lines shall be installed ~~ underground. ~~ 4 Kee all roofs clear of debris., . ) P b. Prior to issuance of a building permit, proposed "ladder~'i fuel" clearing shall 'be approved in writing by the State's District Forester and ttiodif,ied or supplemented'i to meet the uni a re uiremen ro ert as ma here fired. is of the applicant'si P P Y y c. Installation of an interior sprinkler system; ~~ OU®0.~7 "^ #37(_794 ii,/t]~/91 C~9: 1^ F$. ~7C1 gE~ 65H PG ~,p `8i.lvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty{'Clerl~, Doc ~.0~~ Resolution No. PZ-91-~ Page 3 d. Installation of a standard yard hydrant; e. Installation of a 2,000 gallon underground water storage tank; f. Roof materials shall be of a non-combustible material such as metal, the or asphalt. g, pp a County driveway standardslfortsafea in resse and to ress only as to access g g of Midnight Mine Road. 2. To mitigate geologic hazards the following measures shall be ', complied with prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The applicant shall meet with the Mined Land Reclamation Board to develop a mitigation plan to close or fill any mine shafts which may be identified on site for safety purposes. b. Building Plans shall be approved by a professional engineer who shall verify that subsidence due to mining activity is not a hazard on site and/or that potential subsidence areas have been identified and will be mitigated prior to development of the property. c. No construction shall occur on slopes exceeding 30~. d. Where development encroaches on slopes exceeding 15~, building foundations and or driveway design shall be approved by a professional engineer. GENERAL SUBMISSION 1. In the event that mine waste, waste rock or mine dumps are encountered during construction, the applicant shall coordinate with the Environmental Health Department to develop a mitigation or disposal plan. 2. A sewage disposal system and water provision for the site shall be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Health ', Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. The applicant shall revegetate all areas disturbed by construction within one growing season of construction. 4. Outside illumination shall comply with Pitkin County Lighting regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.. #337094 it7/43/91 ~?9:12 Ref~*.00 Hh' 6S8 PG 261 ilvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty .. perk, Doc. s,nci Resolution No. PZ-91-~ Page 4 5. All development, with the exception of the access drive, and well improvements, shall be located within the building envelope as designated on the Site Plan.. ', 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall obtain an access permit from the County Engineer's Office. Prior to issuance of an access. permit, the applicant shall verify that the proposed driveway does not encroach on Forest Service property, or,` in the event that it does encroach, obtain permission from the Forest Service to cross their property. 7. The applicant shall execute a waiver/release of Pitkin County in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" that public safety services such as ambulance, fire and sheriff cannot reach the proposed residence due to the site's remote location and the condition of Midnight Mine Road. This waiver/release shall be executed by the applicant prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. The applicant acknowledges that he has no expectations that the current and historical condition, or summer and winter maintenance of Midnight Mine Road will be upgraded. 9. No utility extension is approved as a part of this application. 10. The applicant shall comply with Pitkin County air quality standards in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 11. The applicant shall record a 24 x 36 inch mylar 1041 Hazard site plan which meets the approval of the Planning Office and County Attorney prior to the issuance of any building permits for the property. 12. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and in the public hearing shall be adhered to. 13. The applicant acknowledges that he has been informed by Pitkin County of the existence.. of "1041 hazard areas" that might affect the property and any improvements, and the use and occupancy thereof. ®~~~:i _. _ #~3 C>44 iU/U'~/91 ~~9 1^ c ~. UU Fif: 658 F'G 26~ Silvis Davis, Fitkin Cn °Cler4c, Doc ~.0~~ i Resolution No. PZ-91-~ Page 5 APPROVED by the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission ~' at its regular meeting on August 6, 1991. PITRIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMI N By Ji eser, Chairman. ATTEST: ~C y~ZCl~,ft~/~ Deborah Skehan Administrative Assistant APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: • /~ Timot y itsitt, Amy Margerum, County A ~o ney Plan~.ng Di;ec r ELS RESO_MATTHEWS_1041GS ~UU~a:,~ -'-"-- ~-IWTTT7"-UY'u7Tuu"-EH~ST~_~~4_..f2E7 ~. __... _._-.___ #33x094 i0/h3i9i 09: i^ Rf° x.00 BI` 659 PG 263 ', Silvia Davis, Ptk:in Cnt} _ lark, Doc d;.r~o E%HIBIT "A" Submission Matthews 1041 Hazard Review and General,.. Leqal Description: PARCEL A: -The EVA ELLA Lode Mininc Claim (United States t%iineral Survey No. 1808), as patented and described in United States Patent recorded August 14, 1883, in Book 11 at Page 9. TOGETHER ,vith 1-hat certain easement for purposes of ingress and egress, and for the installation, maintenance and use of underground utilities, as created, defined and established in that certain Easements Agreement between Casfie Creek Investors, Inc., a Colorado corporation and'°.lohn Matthews, recorded hSorch i, 1991 in Book 640 at Page 778, said easement:being more particularly described as follows: • An easement situated in Section 36, Township.-10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P, id., Pitkin County, Colorado, located wihin the hlattie Belle Lode (U. S.M.S. No. 4147) and the Little Susie Lode (U.S.M.S. No. 6806). and being 30 feet in width lying 15 feet on each side of the following-described centerline: Beginning at a point on line 2-3 of the Eva Bella Lode, U. S.M.S. No. 1808, r:hence Corner 3 of said Eva Bella Lode lies North 09°05'CO^ East, 29.44 feet; thence along the centerline of ah existing road the following four courses: South 89°57~32iT East, 60.93 teat;. thence South 81°54'27TM East, 46.06 feet; thence South 72°13'02TM East, 92.00 feet; thence South 85°41~37n East, 143.29 feet, more or less, to the centerline of the Midnight nine Road, the point of ending. PARCEL E: The LITTLE DICK Lode Mining Claim (United States Mineral Survey No. 1843), as patented and described in United States Paten recorded July 21, 1883, in Book 11 at Page 5. THIS POLICY IS ISSUED IN LIEU OF A14D SUBSTITUTED FOR POLICY N0. D 715047 (ORDER N0. 400694) PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BY Tf;E CJMPANY, WHICH POLICY N0. D 715047, IS HEREBY CANCELLED. i ~ ~ ~ #:33'X594 1't~/~l3/''S'1 09: iL`~' _c Silvia Davis, Pitk.in Cnty ESHIBIT "B'~ WAIVER / RELEASE ~.0~~ BY 658 F'G 264 Clerk:, Doc ffi.~70 Applicant acknowledges that he has requested development of his property for a part-time use residence with full knowledge of the remote location and difficulty of access to said property. Applicant John Matthews, for himself and his successors and assigns, assumes all risk which may arise out of said inaccess- ability and waives and releases any claim which he may have at any time against Pitkn County, the County Sheriff or Fire District, arising out of any difficulty or delay encountered in emergency response to said property or out of the difficulty or impossibility of access to said property in adverse weather conditions. Q~~~~~ k; .:,,: PRION COUNTY PLANNING, & ZONING COMMISSION August 6, 1991 -Tuesday ReguiarMeeting CommissionersMeetingBoom County Courthouse Present and votinge Jim Reser, Chairperson, Bill Ayers, Kate McBride, David Guthrie, and Steve Whipple. Jack Kaufman was also present, but not a voting member at today's meeting. I. COMMENTS P Mme, bather than 9:00 A M P duerto C ~ ri ~ on meetings to 3800 ~~, interest of the public. p ons and in the Planning Staff - Staff noted that a special meeting has been ~' scheduled fo'r August 27, 1991. Public - None. II. MINIITES A. July 16, 1991- - Bill Ayres noted several letters which were noted for the record at this meeting which established the expeated access and use to the sites on the Maurin property. Two letters from Sandra Stuller were offered and the only utilities expected to be offered to the site were phone service. Windmills were to be used for power. A letter from Bob Child was offered to the record, which said that the agreement of the Commissioners to subdivide the parcel at the top of the valley, was based on the, Maurin access,, and he noted the comment by Child to Adelmen that they would have to "tough it out." He explained that the intent was for some type of rustic cabin rather than full service single-family homes. The Commission also noted a letter from Joe Edwards which backed up Bob Child's contentions that the Maurin access was intended as the only access to the parcels.. Kate McBride asked that the minutes be amended to reflect that she is a voting member of the Commission and that she was abstaining from voting on the McBride issue. She explained that Jim Moran's comments should be amended to indicate that he suggested that vacation of the road would discourage development in the area and make some reference to the County's obligation to upkeep the road. Kate McBride wants the minutes to reflect the length of time each person commenting on this issue has been in the valley. Kate explained that Tim McFlynn was recommdnding OQ®~~~ Pitlcin County Planning & Zoning Commission August 6, 7991 Page 2 to the commission to not make. public access to public lands the pioval point for the decision on vacation of the road. Kate McBride corrected the spelling of Baharay's name, Lathrop Strang's name, Ms. Vaulkhausen's name., and Gordon Maurin should be Gordon Lamoille. Kate pointed out that Jack's comments should be amended 'to' reflect thatLLhe supported vacating the road for"'wildlife, rather than "reserving" the-road for wildlife. Suzanne Konchan's name also needs to be corrected. Suzanne Konchan asked for clarification on Kate McBride's comments, as to whether she is acting as a member of the Planning Commission or a member of the public. Kate McBride questioned whether she need note the conflict. The spelling of Johnna Johnson's name needs to be corrected also. Bill~`Ayres moved to approve with the changes as proposed. Second by Steve Whipple. Jim Reser, Steve Whipple, Bill Ayres, and David Guthrie in favor, Kate McBride opposed. B. Minutes of July 30, 1991 - Kate McBride asked that the discussion regarding the fact thab competition may encourage development which is contrary to county policy should be included in the minutes. Cindy Houben's explanation noted that the competition process is reviewed periodically. Clarify Jack Kaufman's comments on the demonstration of height variances on the pictures. Kate McBride's comments should be clarified regarding her request about substantial versus insubstantial impacts in terms of air quality. Motion for approval subject to the changes by Kate McBride.. David Guthrie seconded. All in favor. III. PiJBLIC HEARINGS A. Matthews 1041 Geologic and Wildfire Hazard Review and General Submission - Ellen Sassano introduced this item to the Commissioners, Staff explained that the Castle/Maroon Creek Caucus has not responded on this issue. Bill Ayres asked about the likelihood of development on Richmond Hill. Funding has been established to develop specific policies for rural and Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission August 6, 1991 ~ Page 3 ', urban development, however, staff has no answers at this point in time and it is too soon to tell. Bill Ayres summarized his concern that there has been no comment from the Maroon/Castle Creek Caucus. Jack Kaufman questioned whether development of this area would require plowing of the road, which would impact the historic use of this road for snowcat and snowmobile hse. Jack continued that he is concerned about the attention which is drawn to this and similar requests which may result in larger cabins rather than small 500 or 600 s.f. cabins. The Commission discussed master planning which would result in analysis as to whether development should be discouraged or encouraged in this area. There are no mapped wildlife hazards on the site. Kate McBride asked what happens to the road if the applicant decides to expand the home. Staff does not believe that the County would be held responsible for upgrading of the road in the event of the expansion of the home. Staff has included a condition of waiver for public safety services standards. Discussion ensued regarding pressure to improve the road. Sunny Vann, representing the applicant, noted Sections 2- 19, 2-17 and 2-14 whch are eneY'al which address roads air g goals of the County, quality, and quality of services. .Sunny Vann noted that the Castle Creek Valley Ranch was approved, Feinsinger's was approved, Martina Navratilova's request was approved, all of which did not have to prove coiiipliance with. 2-19, 2-17 and 2-14. He contends that this particular application complies with the air quality requirements. Sunny explained that he believes these policies have been added to the recommendation to bolster the denial recommendation. He contends that, after disregarding these portions, the only remaining issue is whether they have adequately ' mitigated wildfire concerns. Sunny summarized the applicant's efforts to mitigate wildfire concerns. Sunny Vann contends that staff has acknowledged that the applicant is proposing a very conse'i~vatve fire protection plan. Art Daily, the applicant's attorney, noted that there are policy issues up in the air about this area. This area is presently zoned for residential development, and the applicant must be judged under and on the basis of 'the County`is present laws. Policy considerations are vitally important but, in this case and at this point in time, the County has not regulated against this type of development. Art contends that this application is in compliance with the Code and that all O~fJ0~4 Pftkin County Planning & Zoning Commission August 6, 1991 Page 4 of the traditional concerns of development have been taken care of, there is very clear legal access, geologic concerns- are resolved, water and wildlife are not concerns, and the fire protection concerns have been mitigated adequately. The only concern is the wildfire concern. Art Daily contends that denial would result in a "taking." Kate McBride asked about the driveway issue which Sunny Vann explained is handled 'within the staff's recommended conditions. Jim Reser opened the public hearing. Earl Schennum, member of the Maroon Creek Caucus discouraged any growth until a master plan for traffic and services is developed. Their main concern is the Highway 82 intersection. He urged that a moratorium on development be instituted until a master plan is developed. They did not vote on this particular project, but he noted that generally, they would be'opposed. Buzz Cooper was present and supports the applicant's request. He contends that this is a constitutional issue and that the applicant has a right to'build on their own property. He explained 'that the Planning Commission's and BOCC's hidden agenda is not to slow growth, but to stop growth. Buzz Cooper referenced a July 2, 1991 memorandum from Staff to the BOAC, which he contends was handled illegally and is dishonest. Jim Reser explained that the P&Z was unaware of the policy adopted by the BOCC in July. The staff clarified that all legal notification requirements were mkt with respect to the adoption of the materials on July 2, 1991 by the BOCC. Sunny Vann noted that there was no notification undertaken by the County, to any applicant currently in the process, that this recommendation was to be discussed by the BOCC. Sunny Vann explained that this is a policy issue which has enough scope in effect that it should not have been adopted based on a memo from staff to the BOCC, in a Work Session. Some discussion ensued. The applicant implied that they ekpect to use a solar system for the property. John Doyle commented that the Berins property has a conventional sprinkler system. Suzanne Konchan urged the Planning Commission to review this case based on the laws in effect today, and not to postpone for enactment of a master plan. "Takings" were C~~'~1 _,_~ Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission August 6, 1991 Page 5 discussed with the County Attorney. There may be other non-residential uses that may be appropriate up there. For the project submitted today, a primary single-family residence, staff does not believe that this proposal is consistent with. the Land Use Code, and there are life, health and safety issues at hand. The Attorneys office ', indicated that a denial was not a clear taking. Staff contends that there are a number of County policies and laws which. support the denial recommendation. Jim Reser pointed out that the Commission is not bound by II the policies of the Code. Policy without implementation ' is only a recommendation. Discussion ensued. Bill Ayres questioned if therF the policies of the code and ti explained that the argument policies of the code are simply you cannot use the policies to must base your decision on the were a conflict between ie regulations. Jim Reser has 'been made that the a recommendation and that deny an application. You regulations of the Code. Sunny Vann implied that the applicant would probably commit to maintain the road in its. current and historical condition and they are willing to discuss this or they would probably be willing to commit not to participate in or encotYra e" ` 'an t '""' 9 Y groups or`""''actions interested in hpgrading the road. Steve Whipple would like development discouraged in this area. However, he also noted that it will take quite a while to create the policy and regulations which will result in the limitation of growth in this area, noting the length of time for processin of the Redstone Master Plan. John El ~` g y explained that at th who owns ppminin claim in fepe,, hasy s~ time any person with an a lication to develo in'an way they so choosers tinny Williams suggested that if we have learned from past applications, denials., and approvals, that there may be a problem, then possibly, the determination should be postponed until a master plan has been accomplished. Jim Reser summarized options available to the Commission Bill moved to deny 1041 and recommend denial of general submission based on the recommendations of staff. Motion dies for lack of second. a~~~~ i_ .. , ._ _ ~ ,. .~I. Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission August 6, 1991 Page 6 The Chair moved to recommend approval of General Submission with conditions as offered by staff, as aYnended by Jack Kaufman regarding historic condition of x~cess summer°and winter, keeping access as"it currently exists and upkeeping it in its current status, and granting 1041 Hazard Review approval, subject to the Conditions offered by staff. Seconded by Steve Whipple. M~`otion carries with David Guthrie, Steve Whipple, Jim Reser and Kate McBride in favor, and Bill Ayres opposed. Sunny Vann asked for clarification regarding allowing them to follow the one step or two step procedures for approval of General Submission. It was determined that if the BOCC approves the Code change to General Submission for one step and also agrees to allow this applicant to go through the one step rather than two step process, eve5t though they were already in the process, the determination made at this meeting will be considered the final. Jack Kaufman departed the meeting. B. Aspen Highlands Resort LoBge GMQS Scoring - Mary Lackner reviewed this applicant's request and'the past reviews of this request. Mary described the changes since past reviews and she noted that the Castle/Maroon Creek Caucus have not yet responded but were contacted as a new referral agency on this particular case. Jim Reser noted that referral comments from the Fire Marshall indicated fire safety concerns. The applicant committed to fulfill -the requirements of the Uniform Building Code and noted that this is a detailed submission issue. The representation by the applicant is that they will comply with the IIBC requirements in effect at the time the building is constructed. Bill Ayres asked for clarification on the 20 unit allocation per year and staff clarified. Bill further discussed wood burning devices. The applicant explained that as a result of detailed submissicn they are required to amend their application with respect to wood burning devices and they will do so then. Kate McBride asked for clarification on the water system and services. The applicant responded that no changes are expected at this point in time. ~~®~~~ v.t w '. .. DENVER DENVER TECH CENTER COLORADO$PRINGS ASPEN BILLINGS BOISE CHEYENNE WASHWGTON, D.C. HOLLAND & HART ATTORNEYS AT LAV/ 600 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 August 9, 1991 Hand Delivered John Ely, Esq. Asst. Pitkin County Attorney 530 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear John: Re: Matthews Approval r~t~ TELEPHONE(303)925-3476 7ELECOPIER (303) 925-9367 ARTHUR C. DAILY a You were present last Tuesday when the County Planning and Zoning Commission approved John Matthews' 1041 Hazard Review and General Submission applications. P&Z decisions on 1041 issues have always been final. For the reasons set forth below, it seems clear that under ordinance 91-06, P&Z's action on the General Submission application was final as well. 1. Ordinance No. 91-06 was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on second reading on June 11, 1991. Under Code Section 2-8.1, formal resolutions take effect immediately upon final adoption unless otherwise stated in the resolution. It is not a discretionary matter. 2. The Ordinance originated in the Planning Office, with the intention of stream-lining the review process for single-family dwellings. No purpose would be served by requiring BOCC review. To the contrary, a BOCC hearing would involve additional time and expense on the part of both the applicant and the County. 3. At the time the Ordinance was adopted, Matthews had no vested rights in the land use laws applicable to his property. If stricter laws had been adopted prior to the P&Z decision, he would have been bound by them. Matthews is obviously entitled to the benefits of a simpler and cheaper review procedure adopted two months before his P&Z hearing. 4. It is well-settled in Colorado that statutory changes in procedural law are applicable to pending causes of action, O~fl0~~3 ~ biM lv •1 n Ca.wi l.. -L ~.•"... Y.... L L • L 4 • ~.• John Ely, Esq. August 9, 1991 Page 2 HOLLAND & HART ' ATfORNEY5 AT C.AW '~ unless a contrary intent is expressed in the statute itself. See, eg., Davis v. State Board 791 P.2d 1198 (Colo. A These cases would undoubtedly determine the effect of ordinance) changes on pending proceedings before administrative bodies. John Matthews has authorized Sunny Vann to prepare the 1041 Hazard Review site plan and otherwise to proceed to implement the P&Z approvals. If the County disagrees in any manner with the procedure we are following, please let me know right away. Thanks for your cooperation. Sincerel .. !i-y~~ ~ e .C/ Arthur C. DaZ'-Y/~y for Holland & Hart ACD/jg cc: Ellen Sassano, County Planner (Hand Delivery) John Matthews Sunny Vann ,, ~:_ .F. ..... ~.. .~. is ~.... _. ...: :.... :. ... .. ~.i.. K v J MEMORANDIIM TO: Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting - August 6, 1991 RE: Matthews 1041 Geologic and Wildfire hazard Review and' General Submission FROM: Ellen Sassano, Planner REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of 1041 Geologic ' and Wildfire Review and General Submission pursuant to Sections 5- 401, 18-2.2 and 6-3 of the Land Use Code: APPLICANT: John Matthews APPLICANT'S'REPRESENTATYVEd Suriny Vann, Vann Associates, Inc. ~ LOCATION: The property is located on the Eva Belle and Little Dick Mining Claims off of Midnight Mine Road on the back side of Aspen Mountain. ZONING: The Eva Belle (approximately 10 acres) and Little ~ Dick (approximately 8 acres) Lode Mining Claims ', consist of approximately 18 acres and are zoned AF- ' 1. ACCESS: Access is provided from Castle Creek Road via the Midnight Mine Road (County Road). Access from Midnight Mine Road to the Eva Belle Lode (site of proposed building envelope) is provided via an easement from Castle Creek Investors, Inc. who own intervening mining claims. SEWAGE: The applicant is proposing an individual sewage disposal system. WATER: The applicant proposes a well for the provision of water supply, with storage on-site. DESCRIPTION OF PROP08ALs The applicant is requesting approval of 1041 Geologic and Wildfire Review and General Submission. The applicant proposes to construct a single family structure which is to be used as a part-time secondary residence by the applicant and his family. The proposed residence will be approximately 2,150 square feet in size. The proposed building envelope will be accessed directly from the Midnight Mine Road via a driveway across the Little Susie and Mattie Belle Lodes. The driveway will follow an existing o~~~G.~i i 1 ~ _. ~.. unimproved road alignment and will be improved to meet County' driveway standards. According to the Land Use Code, "recreational" cabins are reviewed' under the same criteria as a single-family residence. Pertinent General Submission criteria are reviewed in the following section. REFERRAL COMMENT83 ~ 1. Environmental Health Department: Complete comments are' provided in Attachment 1. Specific comments regarding water provision, sewage disposal and air quality are incorporated' into the General Submission discussion of this memo. There are no unusual circumstances regarding these issues. 2. County Lang Use Engineer: Complete comments are provided in Attachment 2. Specific comments regarding access to the site, road design, impacts to County Roads, utilities and drainage of the site are incorporated into the General Submission discussion of this memo. Construction access and use of Midnight Mine Road by emergenoy vehicles are issues which have been raised by the County Engineer. These issues are further discussed in the General Submission Section of the memo. 3. Forest Service: Complete comments are provided in Attachment 3. Gretchen Merrill, District Ranger, recommends that any hazards associated with the abandoned mine shaft on the property be mitigated. Im addition, Ms. Merrill makes note of the fact that driveway construction may erYCroach on Forest Service property, although it is not likely. Further research is necessary to make a final determination. 4. County Attorney: In his memo of June 27, 1991, John Ely indicates that there are no issues relating to ownership. While there appear to be no legal access issues., Mr. Ely requests confirmation that there are no intervening property owners other than those from which an access easement has been obtained by the applicant. 5. Aspen Fire District: In his referral comment, Wayne Vandemark indicates that the applicant must comply with the Uniform Fire Code regarding water supply and access. These issues are more thoroughly discussed in the General Submission section of this memo. 6. Sheriff's Department: Complete comments are provided in Attachment 4. The Sheriff's concerns relate to cumulative development in the "backcountry" and potential impacts on existing services; and emergency vehicular access to the site via Midnight Mine Road. These issues are more thoroughly discussed in the General submission section of this memo. ~~~~~~ 7. Zoning Department: In her referral memo of June 7, 1991, Joanna Schaffner indicates that there are currently no zoning'' concerns associated with the proposal. PLANNING OFFICE COMMENTS: Section 6-3 General Submission Section 2-3 Natural and Man-Made Sazard and Resource Areas- In addition to geologic and wildfire hazards on site there has been previous mining and prospecting activity on the property. In his letter of October 17, 1990, (Attachment 5) consulting geologist Nicholas Lampiris recommended that any mines and prospects on site be researched by a soils engineer in conjunction with someone familiar with historic mining activity in the area. Any potential subsidence relating to tunnels should be identified and mitigated prior to issuance of a building permit. It is recommended that any safety hazards associated with former mining activity be mitigated per Mined Land Reclamation Board regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. Sections 2-4 and 5-100 Soil, Surficial Geological Characteristics and Radiation- In the event that mine tailings are encountered in excavation of the site, the Environmental Health Department discourages 'off-site disposal (due to the possibility of excessive heavy metals being present in the soil). In the event that mine waste, waste rock or mine dumps are encountered, they should be tested for contamination by a qualified lab and a mitigation or disposal plan should be prepared. Sections 2-5 and 5-501 Drainage- In his memo of February li, 1991, consulting engineer, Dean Gordon, indicates that outside of maintaining positive drainage away from the structure, there are no drainage considerations associated with the site. His memo is included as Attachment 6. Sections 2-6 and 5-205 Adequate Provision for Water Needs- Domestic water supply and fire flow are to be provided through development of a spring system on the property. The applicant has already received a well permit from the Division of Water Resources for development of the. spring. A two-pump system and a 2,000 gallon storage tank are also proposed to accommodate provision of domestic and fire flow. The Environmental Health Department makes the following recommendations regarding water provision: 1. Water supply should be among the first things developed on the site. Necessary chemical and bacteriological tests must be performed on samples to verify water quality. 2. If the potable water is to be stored at the same level or below the residential structure, the pump-yield to a hydro- pneumatic tank must be about l0 gallons per minute. UUt~aJi 3. In the event that spring development.. is impractical and a well', must be dug, care must be taken to ensure that the well does'', not intersect live water presently running through mine'. tunnels or other workings because of the potential ford, contamination to the system. 4. Water conservation is advisable due to the potentially limited' water supply. In addition to a ground storage tank, the applicant will :provide a standard yard hydrant to be used as an initial fire response when the residence is occupied. During those periods when the residence is vacant, an internal sprinkler system will be utilized to prevent a fire originating within the structure from spreading to surrounding properties. Sections 2-7 attd 5-200 Sewage Treatment and Collection- A standard individual septic system is proposed for the site. In the event that shallow bedrock conditions are encountered, an engineered system will be installed. System design and location shall be approved by the Environmental Health Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Sections 2-8 and 5-201 Impacts on Road System- The County Engineer indicates that the proposed development will not significantly impact Midnight Mine Road. This upper 5 mile section of the road is a primitive, Class V roadway which is minimally maintained. During the winter season, most of the road is not plowed. During periods when winter vehicular travel is difficult or impossible, the applicant proposes to utilize a private snowcat to access the ro ert from Castle Creek"Road. Snowmobiles ma also be necessary. Because of the minimal road maintenance and used if lack of winter plowing, construction access and use of the road by emergency vehicles may be impaired by road disrepair and/or rain or snow closures. Sections 2-9 and 5-202 Road Design and Construction- The driveway will follow an existing unimproved road alignment across the Little Susie and Mattie Belle Lodes which presently terminates near the proposed building envelope. This existing alignment will be extended to the building site. The applicant will be required to meet County Driveway standards if the use is approved as a single- family residential building site. The applicant's consulting engineer indicates that the driveway can be constructed to meet all County requirements with respect to driveway access. Grades will be less than 6$. An access permit must be obtained from the County Engineer's office prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to issuance of an access permit, a final determination must be made regarding a possible encroachment of the driveway on Forest Service property. UU~t~32 ,: Sections 2-10 and 5-203 Logical Extension of IItilities- No extension of utilities is requested by fhe applicant. It is the intent of the owner to generate on-site electrical power utilizing solar technology. It is the consulting engineer's understanding that sufficient electrical power can be generated on-site to provide the in-house needs of the residence, as well as to provide power for a domestic water pump. Section 2-14 Impacts on Taxes and Management of Necessary Services and Facilities- The Sheriff's Department expresses concern that approval of the proposed use may "set a precedent which could result in the proliferation of "backcountry houses" resulting in increased demand for wildfire responses. This could place an additional strain on existing services and thereby overwhelm the Sheriff Department's ability to meet the inevitable increased demand for services." Sections 2-16 and 5-105 Scenic Quality- The proposed homesite is not visible from Castle Creek or Midnight Mine Roads. The structure will be well screened by dense stands of mature vegetation on site. Physical disruption of the site will be limited to the building envelope. All site disruption will be revegetated to reduce erosion potential and any visual impact. outside illumination will comply with County Code standards. Sections 2-17 and 5-106 Air Quality- The applicant shall meet Environmental Health regulations regarding woodburning devices and dust control. The Environmental Health Department notes that the location of this site in an area so removed from other development creates greater air pollution impacts than would occur on a site closer to existing facilities. Air quality impacts will be generated from the addition of a new road, and the vehicle use associated with it, from woodburning and from use of the snowcat and/or snowmobiles. Section 2-21 Compatibility with Existing Neighborhoods- There are a number of residential uses on Little Annie Road including the Lime Creek Subdivision. Many of the cabins located past the Lime Creek Subdivision are illegal dwelling units built on mining claims. Midnight Mine Road is much less populated and the area in which the applicant proposes to build is generally undeveloped in terms of residential use. Section 2-25 Growth Rate; phasing Facilities- It is not anticipated that be upgraded to a higher road standard. aware that road improvements may neve Midnight Mine Road. 1041 Hazard Review: 5 of Public Services and the Midnight Mine Road will The applicant should be r be made by the County on U~~t~3;3 Section 5-401 Geologic 8asard Areas- Mapped geologic hazards on- site include slopes exceeding 30$, and a fault area. Slopes exceeding 30$ have been avoided in siting of the building and road extension. The building site is generally flat. However, where development encroaches on slopes exceeding 15~, building foundations shall be approved by a professional engineer. Any areas disturbed on site shall be revegetated within one growing season of construction. Dr. Lampirs, consulting geologist, indicates that the proposed building envelope is located well outside of the fault area and that there is no evidence of recent movement in the fault. He also indicates that the proposed building envelope is free of avalanche and other naturally occurring geologic hazards. Dr. Lampiris's letter is included as Attac`Tlment 5. There is evidence of previous mining activity on the property. Prior to issuance of a building permit, it is recommended that a soils engineer, and someone with a knowledge of mining activity in the area, study the property to determine whether subsidence is an issue. It is also recommended that the applican p g on plan to close ornfllamneeshaftslor BrosaectineVareas for safe t meet with the P p g ty purposes. Section 5-403 Wildfire Hasard Areas- The site is mapped within a severe wildfire hazard area due to the presence of trees on-site. To mitigate hazards the applicant proposes the following: 1. Installation of an interior sprinkler system; 2. Installation of a standard yard hydrant; 3. Installation of a 2,000 gallon underground water storage tank; 4. Adherence to the guidelines contained in the Colorado State Forest Service booklet "Wildfire Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowners." Prior to issuance of a building permit, proposed "ladder fuel" clearing shall be approved by the State's District Forester and modified or supplemented to meet the. unique requirements of the applicant's property as may be required. 5. Roof materials shall be of a non-combustible material such as metal, the or asphalt. 6. The applicant shall. adhere to the County driveway standards for safe ingress and egress. The Environmental Health Department indicates that the proposed utility plan will meet the daily potable water needs and the requirements of a fire protection system. It is recommended that 6 ~~~~:5 __ this be verified by the Environmental Health Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Regarding emergency access to the area, the Sheriff's Department and County Engineer express concern"relative to the inadequacy of Midnight Mine Road to support emergency vehicles in the event of a wildfire or other emergency. While the applicant has proposed what appears to be a conservative fire mitigation plan, the Sheriff indicates that, "given (County) resources and the remoteness of the proposed structure, one should anticipate a total lass of the structure and the increased potential for the structure fire initiating a wildfire.^ D~elsodifficemoteness of the site and inadequate emergency access ult to fully mitigate the wildfire hazard on site. SUMMARY: The Board of County Commissioners has recently ratified a Policy interpretation regarding development in Rural/Remote areas which ' have been identified in the County. The policy states: Given specific levels of service in the more rural and remote sections of the County, development shall not be relatinged...These areas all represent County issues g to extension of utilities., capacity of roads and the general health, safety and welfare of the individuals who use these areas. It is the goal of the Commissioners to study these areas relative to their unique circumstances and to develop plans and regulations which provide more specific guidance for the individuals who live and or own property in those areas. While the general policy regarding development in remote areas is in place, a specific master plan for the Little Annie and Richmond Hill area has not yet been developed. As a'result,'the application must be reviewed based on compliance with current County policies and regulations and 1041 regulations. The remoteness of the proposed building site makes it difficult for the applicant to thoroughly comply with all pertinent Code Criteria. General Submission issues which are a concern on this site are as follows: 1. Pursuant to Section 2-3 "it is the policy of the County to prevent the construction of any improvement which may: _ 7 d~i~4~~J .. ~~.~ _ Subject any person, including the occupants or users of ' any such improvement or use of their property to natural' or man-made hazards; Create or increase the danger of natural or man-made' hazards which will affect other improvements, activities and lands; ' Subject other persons or the County to dangers or expenses required to mitigate such hazardous conditions, respond to emergencies created by such conditions, or to rehabilitate the improvements, activities and lands;" The Midnight Mine Road is not currently improved to a standard which will allow year-round emergency vehicular access. Remoteness of the site and inadequacy of the road create an increased potential for a structure fire initiating a wildfire. Wildfire poses a hazard to occupants and surrounding lands and improvements, and may over-extend ' existing emergency services in the County. 2. Pursuant to section 2-14 of the Code, "it is the policy of the County to ensure that future development will not result in any reduction in the_ quality of services...provided to the general community or portions thereof." The Sheriff's department has expressed concerns about the ~' cumulative impacts of development in the "backcountry" and ' potential impacts on existing emergency services in the County. 3. Pursuant to Section 2-19, "it is the policy of the County to encourage in any new development or activity proposal measures which...discourage automobile sources of air pollution." Due to the remote location of the proposed residence, the applicant will be dependent upon an automobile, snowcat or snowmobile to access the site. 4. Pursuant to Section 2-17, "it is the policy of the County to permit only that development which will not contribute significantly to degradation of air quality in the County." Air quality impacts will be generated from woodburning, automobile, snowcat and snowmobile use associated with the residence. It is the opinion of the Environmental Health Department that the location of this site in an area so removed from other cTevelo went creates eat im acts than would occur on a site g clos r air pollution p 'er to existing development. 8 ~~~C~~u ~, . . 1041 issues which are a concern on this site are as follows: 1. The applicant has provided a wildfire mitigation plan. However, due to the remoteness of the site and inadequate emergency access, it is difficult to fully mitigate the wildfire hazard on-site. It is the opinion of the Sheriff's Department that the County should anticipate an increased potential for a structure fire initiating a wildfire on this site. Finally, the County is concerned about the logical extension of its services (Sheriff and other Safety services), as well as the logical extension of utilities, roadways and other infrastructure required by incremental levels of development. The primary concern on this site, in addition to the above- mentioned issues, is the provision for basic life, safety and health. considerations. The Midnight Mine Road is not improved to a standard which will consistantly allow access by emergency vehicles to this remote site. The road is minimally maintained by the County and is not plowed in the winter. While the applicant only intends to use the residence as a secondary home, approval of the building envelope will not preclude the sale of the lot and subsequent use of the building envelope as a primary residence. In fact, impacts of a full-time residence on infrastructure and services in this remote area may be even greater than those anticipated for the 'recreational" cabin. Through development of a master plan for the Little Annie/Richmond Hill area, the County may be able to recommend alternate (non- residential) uses for the site which are more appropriate, given it's remote location. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the 1041 hazard review request based on the finding that wildfire hazards on site cannot be fully mitigated due to inadequate emergency access: It is recommended that the Commission recommend denial of the General Submission to the Board based on the finding that the application does not comply with County Policy Sections 2-3, 2-14, 2-17 anc~ 2-19. In the event that approval is granted, it is recommended that approval be granted for a recreational cabin for which no utility extensions are approved. Approval of the building site for this application should not construe approval of any utility extensions. In the event that approval is granted, the following conditions are recommended: DGGO;i 7 1041 HAZARD REVIEW 1. To mitigate wildfire hazards on the site the applicant shall) comply with the following measures: ', a. Adherence to the guidelines listed in the State Forest' Service handout Wildfire Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowners. Prior to issuance oi"' a building permit, proposed "ladder fuel" clearing shall be approved in writing by the State's District Forester and modified or' supplemented to meet the unique requirements of the', applicant's property as may be required. b. Installation of an interior sprinkler system; c. Installation of a standard yard hydrant; d. Installation of a 2,000 gallon underground water storage tank; e. Roof materials shall be of a non-combustible material I~' such as metal, the or asphalt. f. The applicant shall adhere to the County driveway ~! standards for safe ingress and egress. 2. To mitigate geologic hazards the following measures shall be complied with prior to issuance of a building permit a. The applicant shall meet with the Mined Land Reclamation .... .. Board to develop a mitigation plan to close or fill the mine shaft for safety purposes. b. Building Plans shall be approved by a professional ', engineer who shall verify that subsidence due to mining activity is not a hazard on site and/or that potential ' subsidence areas have been identified and will be mitigated prior to development of the property. ' c. No construction shall occur on slopes exceeding 30$. d. Where development encroaches on slopes exceeding 15$, building foundations and or driveway design shall be ' approved by a professional engineer. GENERAL SUBMISSION 1. in the event that mine waste, waste rock or mine dumps are encountered Burin co g nstruction, the applicant shall coordinate with the Environmental-Health Department to develop a mitigation or disposal plan. 10 QQ®~~ 9 I .._ y .:.~:J '. 2. A sewage disposal system and water provision for the site shall be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Health Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. The applicant shall revegetate all areas disturbed by construction within one growing season of construction. 4. Outside illumination shall comply with Pitkn County Lighting regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 5. All development, with the exception of the access drive improvements, shall be located within the building envelope as designated on the Site Plan 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall obtain an access permit from the County Engineer's Office. Prior to issuance of an access permit, the applicant shall verify that the proposed driveway does not encroach on Forest Service property, or, in the event that it does encroach, obtain permission from the Forest Service to cross their property. 7. The applicant shall execute a waiver/release that public safety services such as ambulance, fire and sheriff cannot reach the proposed residence due to the site's remote location and the condition of Midnight Mine Road. This waiver/ release shall be approved by the County Attorney prior to issuance of a building permit. No utility extension is approved as a part of this application. 9. The applicant shall comply with Pitkin County air quality standards in effect at the time of building permit issuance. l0. The applicant shall record a 24 x 36 inch mylar site plan which meets the approval of the Planning Office and County Attorney prior to the issuance of any building permits for the property. 11. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and in meetings shall be adhered to. 12. The applicant acknowledges that he has been informed by Pitkin j County of the existence of "1041 hazard areas" that might effect the property and any improvements, and the use and occupancy thereof. 11 0~~5~~;~ F.. :.. .Exi,~~ting Con dlz"ons Map ~ J ~~HI~ 5~,~ Eva Belle Lode ~~ ~ ~a~,~ . n ibdp~pp R I • h&m/c (quM myWnpM m FviK I'\IY~',Il~~~y • hECafe ~~. Ms ai/ qe LS ]~JO. 9AMY Mm(aM1a~ ~ hwN eviwmfsw dsn. ~ i.. ' .'r Con toot Interval = 2' ~9 4 K. a ~u a / / ~ g ISY1'id E o dom. / /~ ~ i -- ~~~ // / / // // / / // a \~ , 1 ~ S/ ~ / / / // % ~. / / ~ ~ / /~ ~ ~._--- / // / j// O~GG/~7~/ _.% ~ /// / . ;/ % / / M,~_ ~---i - ~~ ~i _ a"„ ai 7n,F E~ ~ a ," '-' ~ ~ ~ ~~ sP~ ~ Fa' a $ a. R $$tttt333333~~ ~~ tg a $ s U ntla qq @~pp gg7 h 3 ~~gg1 $8 ~II~'a~R~ j~ a E L d xGa ~ ~~~ ~~~~4~~~~~ ~, ~~ ~~ i I ~,~g ;~~ ~ ~ I .w ,e~~ i ~~.~. I ~a~ ~ I g ^~ ~ i moe W~ 1 ~ f 1 ~ ~, ~ ~ ~.~~ 8 it ^ ~~~. ,y / "" a ~ ~ ~ ~ { 2 a ~, ~ ~ ~ _ ~~ Q, ~ ~ j k~ ~d ~~ 14 ,~ ~ ~ / ~ g~~~E ~~~+ ~ ~e ~' ~ ts~i; ~U ~ r~ .,. -..W ,~ ., -4 y- , - . _~m + ~ u. m:uvx~rr s,. r,,..~cA ax t .. nm,...,u:eaw,nn« mcarzmw.asaafw, cities ~ °'SP.~:9~A:1 I ;~ ! I ~~I a ~ SI~ ~I t INDE% TO ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 - Environmental Health Department Memo Attachment 2 - County Land Lase Engineer Memo Attachment 3 - Forest Service Letter Attachment 4 - Sheriff's Department Memo. Attachment 5 - Consulting Geologist's Letter Attachment 6 - Consulting Engineer's Letter Attachment 7 - Fire Marshall's Comments 12 U~~t~~:2 .rl ~ ~;, a I ~ l/lO /1~ r ` O. m ( ;, ~. (> r ,~ v ~ ~ r 11 ~t ,il~r / "' q'„ ' i ,. ; (~ i ~ a2an~' ' lI'i rill .,' ~ , ~ ~~., II \1 \~~~ 1 I~ %/~ ,~ ~~ l;ti,m If r1 , x r n / ,i ~/ I iii ~~~~ ~ ~> yy /oo / ' / 'r %~ r'ev' 11 .„~l/ili unn !r~ ~~~, / ~~I,~, IfI~I~l i,l~ `. ~ / ooxl~,b r~). ~~1L~~~~~--, ~j II , \ . ~ ~3 I ,(~ ` ip ,~ ~~~v~ ~ r II `~~~ ~ rJJ~ V ~ ~ A ~~ III If ~ ~rr I ~ 1 oLl;. ~ 11 ~ ~ , \~'~ \m 1 11, ~ y j o d ~ s ~~ i/ r o t/1% , !~ ~, / '~ -~/ ~//i ~~ Ar1'7~ f .. jC ~ I~il I~ ~/~ I \~ ~\~ ~ ! I llr ~~~'i ~ ~1~~ a ~1 l~ ~~~ I ( '~1 I ~ ~ l ' 1 ~ I \ , 4 i ~~ ~. ~ \~ ~ I(1 ~ o~l r P~ " 1. 1 ~~ ~~. , _. ! ~~ ~ ~ , ... - / ' ~l~,' ~ ~ r' J 0980 I \\ ~ = ~If~, ~ '1 1 ~Ic ~~\\,~~a~~~~~L. iii,l~i~~..~~:~~~=~\~\1~~`~I~~`~I„~~ ~:, rr~/ /~i~ 1i!~~ /C ~ 0 ', , a~! i I'~ Q i ~ ~. l~, l ~~ I (~il~ ~. ~\ ~~\, 1 ii,: , ~ \ (~ 111(, '`.{I,,I ~I!I ~I (~~i'i 1 (i ~~Il Ili n 'UI ~:.. ~i i/ ~J~//~ ~~ ~ i ~.I, r tL ~ ~1 ~~ 1 0 1111 iiP~' ``~~,~~i ~~~~~~~ ~~~~\~~ll:lll~~~~i;,,~~~~Cl~ r ~ ~ O i \ ~ ~ I i r 1 1\ ~ i 1 ~ ~~~ \ li, ~ XX `( I~ ~, fl~~~ ~~~~ r~~~, ~L:.I ~l r1 A ~U~ X~ r J III ~/I~,%~~ / /~ ~ ,' ~/r~ I ~~' r ~ ~ oo .~ I ti- • J \ tl~jq niE / I T lIVI i 11 I I it I ( l/' ~~~ nl(11 l ~~n ' '~ /I 1 /. r lI ir/l ~r'1 )~)1 11~ 1i ~~ l l( ~~r r I !ir l )r "r~\ ~ \\\ `\~ I 1~P 1~~(\v ~ ~v \~.~~~ 11 ~, II ` ~ ~ \ 1 , ~ `',\ ~~ ,. ,r 1 \ ,\ ; / ~J ~ ~ \ \\ , \ / ~` 1I D ~ ~ ~ \ 111 j; /(/ ; / a Y~ \ _ \ 1. \1 J\ N ` \ \; i\ \\~~\ '~ 1 \1I \ I ~ k ~; \`\\_~~ VA V y9 ~ ~ ~ A i~ \`~,,~r~/ %xf;, ~ \ ` ,_ ~ ~ III' . o ~~~ ,I I ~ ~ I !~ ~ 1 1 1 1 r~m \ I ~` ~\`ti 'r \ .. ~ '.O h~p~f '~I~ ~\ ~. ~ r , ~~ '~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ I ~, ~ /r_G~C ~:~ _ ASPEN*PITKW ~~ ATTACHMENT 1 ENVIF{bNMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT MEMORANDIIM To: Ellen Sassano, Planning Office From: Environmental Health Department Date: May 31, 1991 Re: Matthews General Submission & 1041 Hazard Review Parcel ID# 2911-121-00-019 The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the above-mentioned land use submittal under authority of the Pitkin County Code, Title II, and has the following comments. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Sections 2-7 and 5-200: ~~ The application indicates that sewage will be disposed of by means of septic systems. B The engineering and geologic reports of Dean Gordon and Nick Lampiris indicate that there is a possibility of designing satisfactory on-site sewage systems, in compliance with Pitkin County Regulations, for the proposed residence. There is no Soil Conservation Service soil mapping available for this area of the County. Therefore, we must rely on the written opinions of the consultants after they have performed their site investigations. In the February 11, 1991 letter from Dean Gordon of Schmeuser Gordon and Meyer, Inc. regarding the property, it is indicated that some sort of standard or conventional wastewater disposal system should be possible, although the limiting factor in the area is the potential for shallow bedrock, often as close as five feet below the surface. The building envelope is apparently on a relatively flat ridge, and there should be sufficient square footage available to accommodate the size requirements for an absorption field intended to handle the relatively simple, single-family residence design. Mr. Gordon also indicated that if shallow bedrd'ck is encountered, it is possible to construct a mound system to provide for adequate treatment capacity. We concur that if fractured bedrock is found, there are still some' possible solutions to accomplish wastewater disposal. Perhaps the best alternative would be the construction of an engineered sand mound, as propased. This solution would also comply with Pitkin County regulations. Nick Lampiris, in his letter of October 17, 1990, expressed a similar opinion that if a sufficiently thick mantle of soil is found on the site waste water treatment by means of a standard septic system should be possible in the vicinity of the building envelope. Upon investigation, it appeared to him that a good 0~(~~14 '130 South Galena Street Aspen, Coloratlo 8'16'M 303/920-5070 rttVC/etlPaPCr Matthews General Hazard Reviews May 31, 1991 Page 2 Submission and 1041 site for the soil absorption system exists just to the east of the building site"...along a fairly gentle hillside." There is little area available on the steep portions of each of the claims. Since a replacement system would be difficult to locate and construct, we would encourage initial septic system design features that will enhance the longevity of any absorption field eventually constructed. The applicant should consider incorporating a dosing siphon into the final septic system design to accomplish intermittent loading of the absorption area. We would also recommend that the following additional design features be incorporated into the septic system on each lot: 1) A separate grey water systems should be designed for the washing machine. 2) Water conservation should be as radical a design as functionally possible for all plumbing fixtures. 3) No garbage should be introduced into the sewage disposal system, and a garbage disposal eliminated from consideration and is considered an unnecessary and detrimental convenience. 4) All surface water drainage should be diverted away from the absorption areas o£ the wastewater disposal systems. ~F~ ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS• Sections 2-6 and 5-205• The first option for a drinking water supply is to develop a spring. This spring or infiltration gallery is indicated as being preferred in both of the consultants letters. The applicant has already applied for and received a permit from the supply. This de artment su ests that the water supply should be amongathe Dfirst things dev ~ oped on thetsit evelop such a water and that necessary chemical and bacteriological tests be performed on water samples to verify water quality. - The engineering utility plan makes it necessary to provide an adequate storage tank on the lot to accomplish storage and fire protection capability for the' pumped flow"to' the residence. The proposed plan will meet the daily potable 'water needs and the requirements of a fire protection system, indicated to be in- house sprinklers. It is important to note that if the potable water is to be stored at the same level or below the residential structure, the pump yield to a hydro-pneumatic tank must be about to gallons per minute. d~~~4;~? Matthews General Submission and 1041 Hazard Reviews May 31, 1991` Page 3 If the spring development proves impractical, Lampiris has indicated in the geology report that a drinking water supply ."should be available through the drilling'of a well to perhaps 300 to 400 feet to intersect the groundwater table at this elevation." This conclusion is apparently based on the,_geologic conditions and adjacent well logs in the general vicinity. Mr. Lampiris cautions that "...care must be taken to ensure that the well does not intersect live water presently running through mine tunnels or other workings because of the .potential for .contamination to the system." We have no reason'to question the opinion. The type, nature, and extent of the water conservation fixtures to be provided will greatly influence the total demand. With the limited water supply and the need for storage, water conservation is advisable in order to further limit the quantities of water used. The specifics of the water conservation fixtures should be developed in conjunction with final engineering designs of the septic system, if this proposal is approved. In any case, we feel that the applicant, at this stage in the submission process has adequately demonstrated that there should be a satisfactory water supply available to the building site. AIR QUALITY: Sections 2-17 and 5-106• /The air quality impacts of this proposed development would come 1,.. v from several sources: 1) addition of a new access road/driveway, and the auto use associated with it, 2) woodburhing, and 3) use of the snowcat (which is likely to produce more pollution than a car would) and snowmobiles for access. The location of the site in an area so removed from other development creates greater air pollution impacts than would occur with a site closer to existing facilities. If this application is approved, a fireplace/wooclstove permit will be needed from this office. //~~ NOISE: Section 2-23 ~,,` ~~Given the remote location of the parcel in question, it is not 'dUl1 anticipated that adverse noise impacts will exist beyond the construction phase of the homes. Residential noise levels are expected given the description of the land use in the submittal. Should noise complaints be received by this office, Title 25 Article 12 CRS 1973 = Noise Abatement, or subsequent County noise laws will be the document used in the investigation. O~'i1Cjl. Matthews General Submission and 1041 Hazard Reviews May 31, 1991 Page 4 CONTAMINATED SOILS: /~~ The applicant is advised to contact this office for comment '~I( _ , ... _, should mine waste, waste rock or mine dumps ~e encountered on the mining claims during the excavation. phase of the project. Disposal of such materials off-site is discouraged due to the possibility of excessive heavy metals'~eing present in the soil. This is not a requirement, but simply a request based on past experience in dealing with mine waste. and possible negative impacts to humans. Ul~~~k~~ HMENT 2 ~_ __.__ ,w_ -, } 3~ ATTAC v ~ ~~ ~ if ~Li`a - t MEMORANDUM 3U~ ~,_._....._ TO: ELLEN SASSANO, PLANNING OFFICE, **~^~----~° ~-°--LL-----" -•_._ ~/ FROM: TEMPLE L._GLASSIER, ENGINEERING OFFICE THRU: TOM NEWLAND, ASSISTANT TO THE. COUNTY MANAGE DATE: MAY 30, 1991 • ,;HAZARD REVIEW RE• MATTHEWS GFNFRAT. SUBMISSION & 104 „.. ,. .. ,. a_ .., ... .. I have reviewed the information submitted and would like to forward the following comments to you E' ' INTERNAL ROAD SYSTEM -The applicant should follow Dean Gordon's ccess permit must be recommendations for the access road. An a pp pp y efore issuance of a a lied for and a roved b this office b'~" ~~~' building permit. IMPACTS ON COUNTY ROADS: This development will not significantly impact Midnight Mine Road. During the winter season most of„this road is not ,plowed. In addition, this County road is only minimally maintained and is a primitive, Class V roadway. The applicant should be aware that. the County will not be providing the level o£ maintenance common for most residential access roads in the County. Because of the minimal road maintenance'and lack of winter plowing, the applicant should also be noticed .that construction access and use of the road by emergency vehicle's may be impaired at any time. • Gordon Meyer should DRAINAGE• The recommendations of Schmueser be followed. tlg:referral:matthews ~~~~~~ _,. i .~~~ ~ rz. .Y Ps m+ ,. si .. r_v ., A''3 _,. -k - ~v J :maN s~"~& United States F. , ast ~ Department of Service, Agriculture . _.. _. ,. .. _. -, i.. .,..anv_~-. h-s. ... tip;. a enn qv?b -...,3u. tidryy..ns ~ti vw.+4%.tif,K .A4 ~. rA.'4VS:-tier. Reply'To: 1580' Date• May 8, 1991 Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office Y'~ ~, ~„`-~ L~ i:1 ;=r ' ATTN. Ellen Sassano 506 East"Main Street ~ I ~ ~ ~~ Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Ms. Sassano: The following comments apply to the Matthews General Submission & 1041 Hazard„ Review. The proponent s application states that there is an abandoned mine shaft on the property. That shaft may or maq not present" a safety hazard. It'would be desirable to encourage property owners to eliminate any o1'd mining esa safety hazards that may be present on"property that is to be developed. It may be` that Pitkin County already has a requirement for this. Forest Service land status records illustrate a very small parcel (a patent remnant) of National Forest land which is ,contiguous to line 2-3 of the OVA BELLA (M.S. 1808). A narrow portion of that parcel appears to get very close to corner 4t3. Our records are not detailed enough to determine if there is a reasonable danger of encroachment onto National„Forest",land through driveway construction. Our expectation is that the driveway will be located totally on private land. Please contact Allan Grimshaw in this office (925-34451 if more information is ..... _ .,.m..,. _. .., . desired regarding these comments. Sincerely, Cam-- lP -~~ ~~ GRETCHEN MERRILL District Ranger C.a:+•,~ (1 ~'v t"a t'1 / t? Caring for the Lantl and Serving People FS-6200-28 p-82) MEMORANDUM ~ "ATTACHMENT 4 TO: Ellen Sassano, Planner FROM: Bob Braudis, Sheriff DATE: May 28, 1991 RE: Matthews 1041 As the fire warden for the county, I am responsible for wildfire suppression particularly if and when it exceeds the capabilities of the jurisdictional fire department. In order to fulfill that responsibility and since I have very limited initial attack wildfire resources in my department, I have a reciprocal mutual aid agreement with and rely heavily oh the Fire Protection Districts in Pitkin County to perform initial attack on wildfires at my request. Most of the Fire Protection Districts fulfill their. suppression responsibilities with an all volunteer fire department. It is important to note that this proposal does not lie within any fire protection district in Pitkin County. Although the statutes clearly give the Sheriff responsibility for prairie and grass fires there ages not appear to be any formal mandate for structure protection outside of fire protection districts. My wildfire concerns with the Matthews proposal, particularly in light of the documented severe wildfire hazard in the area would revolve around the increasing wildland/urban interface fire problem resulting in potential increase for a man-caused structure fire that spreads to a wildfire or vice versa. In order to fulfill my responsibilities as fire warden, my most immediate concern is access to the area by emergency response personnel via substandard midnight mine road in the summer, avalanche danger on Midnight Mine road in the winter and general access via midnight mine road in the winter. It is probably safe to say that given the resources at my disposal and the remoteness of the proposed structure one should anticipate a total loss of the structure and the increased. potential for the structure fire initiating a wildfire. In the reverse scenario, the same conclusion would hold true in terms of my inability to protect the structure from a wildfire. It is important to note that both of these scenarios operate under the assumption that any individuals in or around the structure would "self rescue" and not rely heavily on the Sheriff's Department's resources"for quick initial attack. With respect to water supply, I would have to defer to one of the fire protection districts for comment. I am also concerned that approval of this use may set a precedent which could result in the proliferation of "backcountry houses" resulting in increased demand for wildfire responses. This could place an additional strain on existing services and thereby overwhelm the Sheriff's Department's ability to meet the inevitable increased demand for services. In conclusion, I would ask at a minimum that a condition of approval would be adherence by the applicant to the Colorado State Forest Service Wildfire Safety Guidelines For Rural Homeowners and that the Midnight Mine road access issues be adequately addressed. An additional concern would be .that in an attempt to comply with the CSFS wildfire mitigation criteria the proponent does not conflict with any potential DOW recommendations. cc: AFPD CSFS MA1041.91 0~'~0~0 - •_.. ~ ~ i.. _ .... ~.x ... U±~~:. .r 4. ,. v'~.S A.rd .d.. /:EC ~J e.W 9. .:....+: •N%r-.~ V^YM`wvni,~SeYb'M f "': 3i.:nn,; tiarn~ Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. CONSULTING GEOLOGIST 0793 VALLEY ROAD CARBONOALE,COLORAUO"81623 (303196&3800 (24 HOURS) ,.•r, a .n 1LttinL.7 F', i .... E..' i''ir. V~-annc lave complct ti ::'. ~-,a.i:~, :n,fE :.;.u~ ~ _ n Ps. 7chmo n.l..;i.1' t ~ r7+ +r- tri.,c;71 I ~~ ,rnpert: , y ~ <r/ _ t..:.n (.:runty. ...a!,ar=,::-:o. - ... ...._.: "rte toao~rach•~ q: '!-},~, :=:;'t-, i:::or.siets f r-r..n;Ue~+ _ _ _ O(., ....h „F 1.1 :~! r, 1 _: ~? t:"r c.'u niy-.1 F .. S 'citi C^~.:.1".^• ~- e ti. C,, e ! n dO.L r. Tii ;'.~ r.~ld .:. ~_:': :75'.. ..nnc t:.r y ~. ~.+.:~..-z c. .. ,.. ~. 1~~.+, >ce.i_±,=red ~i17n+_a ...h- - ...y ..` _._ .. _.~_ ,_ -__ `. ,.,.•:,,... <~ ~e~ , 'l:he ~~i;., iri ;:•r r ~e:,~ g y 7 -td .gin e: a 1 v ',~tt t ~.. _ .._ . ,. ~. Inc=,ed ~c.nt.... + ~;. n::. ;.; h. ._ .. ~_i1 ~'i 7. t ut _r_ -ormat n =r~r^ .~ I+r o^~iinG wi thin j 5hnr ~!i _,n_~ i7F '.lr~ .. 7.tC {gee ,.. ~.. ..-(rn.. ^ ,".CQ.. G4 ^aP? - iF„' o ,~bse.nt 'on the r-~ +_~ ~}7L'Yr_? 1 r aLtlt m~ '.!~ VeNr3';/ ~+c,-.o- ~~- 3i f~~ ~ '..ale _.. _,+ n,.•Grri +-7e .,tie N71Ch FI c, ': =1t~ -y. ~ ~Cm .- :.: t'7P .or .^_ 4711. r ~'' ~ 9t ?: } + 1 ~ -a7 :>t ~:~°f ~~ - r 11 , 3+ f ~ ..~ "mac + ..,tt ear- ~vs t .,s ...-,r,1 az- _.ti~ h'._ ...~ ~. rd. t`. t.. ~: ~": .. '.F IJ t'._BL 4 __ .b.Z Lyo _:y';. } .o;.il'i '".t.-.n F.~ ':a U~~/~~~. AThCHMENT 5 "~'. _ - EXHIHI~3 - .._ ~.- ~- ;. t ~,•'n. ~' Bch ,. ,~ :.~ -... .. _ ->cia~ic ' _:-. - ?n a ,e n +a.c, r-7n ~nD;.l'. ~ :7 - `r o `r= a it site ~:; ,~n= ,e rc h~, r, D~7 ~n~r ~c n==_ ~ -these .7 PdS. z~l^ca _ ., .:1. ter ~,-"-'1n ~C1 ~? t~-:p'^ tom, n tn~ja,-; Dn :=an _t.^:;D tt ran :: i , :! ~:rc+- - ~. omra ~` ...51' • n~ n i ~, c~rr -,_-,mD~~a1 qP-=e. 1 ll,t :, i- ~v.y re ^.C:iC -t `-, mil Dt~fl. ,'J :-t'C'ar '~ •- al!]1.. ;-F7"-C'fta^ ~~-.E, y I hO° I-~mc ~, ~ be , ~U7~lFr ,_:h na j: a hra i-. )D .- ..- OC etj t_i'7 ~ i.l'Nn°Cj ..''f I^p 7 z,r `ter ,U-••''~ ~' '.'t'le »~!^-1CtJ.~ e ~'.i (.]i !:57.+'. i~c?,.,.p: GOi2 L"i i::i 'h ate 1 T I u ct '"~. -7<i"•! 'Jr :]f-ih.7 ', ~~ S.`di., myF.?r if_.3rr-. "lam _~y,...n _.7~ l' ~. i?r ~:3re tI ~ nt~ oe nt ect 7' c :•: =r ug, n I _ nr,:a.t c nth<. ,Ur ;-l.._,~ ~eC4:.LlbP_ r~s .,-.~, e, ~D.±~~r:t>al for rentumiinatian tD ~ ~+^--, t.~- - -~ +P'n yr ;,Erg -,~, ~~~ ;~c~ ~ n S±<;~r I,~ ,~ty- -~cn ~ s~ it -~~ ~-ic}: '~0 1 0 - it ~rq _; { 4~l I f"ih Te~+ ~ ~ n , t' D 7 r ,.. - . ... ~..,..3 7. ,j :S• .. r.n > ']rDPC +,,. ]~la- .. _ .. .: flt~r':''_`i ~ ti .it . ~ '! ]D do p ao+-'ih ., .- rF ...o r.Drn 7i r ,r,~y ~S chP r,~-::;- ::gin .. - ., r•Cr ._, n ,- . ~~~ UUUO.I"1G + t_ .,=~- - ~- ~~ '~ ~._~_ y/ ~' rl' r~ ~: O'er. ...: . ~.... _.. .. ~/ / ~i ~. ~ /- r /i • f:, ~ ~ ~ `}t .rte u. ~/ .,~ d~~<i :_ i' ~~_~1 ~•'•~ ~ Creak __ J! / \ '~'J,~ I '~ J J~ t o' jai.,:... ~!.. .on ~:~ ~ v ., 1 ~ ice~. ~ fS=P I {{ ' J - ` I Q / v ~ ~ o° ~ .~. ."'3` ~~) r ~ ~ ~~ ~ f/ y --- _ v ~ ~09a , ~ .. ~ -. ..~ t ' t- 1 \. ,J, ~....~ ~ 4 ;. _' y a-- ~iQ'// 0 l ~ ~. ' ~m "~ ~ ~" C i F~ ..~ ~ o ~ ° 1 n ~~ ~ a ~L is "~ .-,..,.. x 1, ~~ Y'b ~~ '~v ~ ' ' -,r~-c-1. .Jf~ ATr`HMENT 6 . ~ ~,~::; ,.. q'ti ~ .. : ,, scrrauESEn oonooN MErEp''tI~7C. "f001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2-E Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (303), 941004 (303) 9256727 aM"a February 1 1 , 1991 CONSULTING EXHIBIT 2 Mr. Sunny Vann Vann & Associates 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Matthews 1041 Application Dear Sunny: The purpose of this letter is to address 1041 concerns from an engineering perspective. Specifically, to address utilities, drainage and access. It is not the desire of the owner to have year-rouhd vehicular access to the site, nor is it his desire to maintain or construct conventional utility systems to the. property. The property is located on the backside of Aspen Mountain in the Castle Creek Valley drainage. From a utility and access perspective, the property is relatively isolated; however, the building site itself is located on a relatively level area that presents little difficulty from a construction standpoint. Access Access will be by the Midnight Mine Road from Castle Creek Valley Rgad. Based on a site evaluation, the driveway from Little Annie Road to the building site will cross terrain with a sidehill slope of less than 10%; the driveway itself will have grades less than 6%. Tlie driveway can be constructed to meet all County requirements with respect to driveway access. Drainage The proposed building envelope does not have any off-site drainage areas impacting it. The relatively small building envelope will have negligible impacts on overall historic drainage rates in the area and will have no impact on historic drainage patterns. 'Outside- of maintaining positive drainage away from the structure itself, there are no drainage considerations associated with this site. Utilities While electric and telephone utilities are located in the Castle Creek Valley area (natural gas and cable TV utilities are not available), it is not propgsed to make conventional extension of these utilities to the property. Rather, it is the intent of the owner to generate on-site electrical power utilizing solar technology. It is my understanding that it has been determined that sufficient electrical power can be generated on site to provide the in-house needs of the residence, as well as to provide to power for a domestic water pump. ~~~®J t ~"""*, February 11, 1991 Mr. Sunny Vann Page two Sanitary sewage treatment will be provided. by individual sewage disposal system (ISDS). Based pn an on-site evaluation, it would appear that a conventional system can be constructed. If there is a restraint on the site, the restraint would be shallow bedrock formations, In that event, it may be necessary to construct a mourd system in order to provide for adequate treatment capacity. In either event, it is our opinion that an ISDS meeting Pitkin County Code requirements can be constructed for this residence. Domestic water is available from a spring system located on the property. It is anticipated that the spring will be developed by constructing aconcrete-cased infiltration gallery. The gallery will consist of a four-foot diameter, perforated concrete casing placed so that water would be captured beneath the ground surface. Because the building si"te is higher than }he well location, a submersible pump wilt be placed within the concrete casing with well controls located within the residence itself. It is my understanding that a moderate wildfire hazard has been identified for the area. In order to provide a source of storage in the event of a potential wildfire, it would be my recommendation that a 2000-gallon ground storage tank be provided at the site. The well pump would pump directly into the water storage tank itself; from'the tank, a second pump would pump into the residence where a pressure tank would provide working pressures for the residence. Connected to the discharge side of the storage tank pump, I would recommend that a standard yard hydrant be provided as a source of water for use in the case of wildfire. The minimum capacity of the storage tank pump should be 8 to 10 gpm. Consideration might be also given to an in-house sprinkler system for the residence. The in- house sprinkler could either be a wet or dry system, although wet systems are normally constructed for individual residences. The system itself would be connected to the discharge side of the storage tank pump and would be pressurized from that source. I will remain available to provide further information as required with respect to any remaining 1041 concerns with this property. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. E. ®~®~J:) SCHMUESER GOROON'MEYER;"INC. ~~ DWG:Iec/90210 y • % ATTACHMENT 7 a. MEMORANDDM TO: County Attorney Assistant to the County Manager Environmental Health Department Division of Wildlife Zoning Little Annie Homeowners Assn. .Fire i~!"a"rs ia`~' . Pitkin County Sheriff U.S. Forest Service FROM: Ellen Sassano, Planning Office RE: Matthews General Submission & 1041 Hazard Review DATE: May 1, 1991 Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted Y Rev1 w a Mroval for ea s gle-family residencsion and 1041 Hazard PP e:,,.. Please return your comments to me no later than May 31, 1991. Thank you. 0~~05 recyc/edpaper No.'laoz tsiB~1 Owners Policy :ule A e~w°'.~ File No. 400694-0 Amount of Insurance 9 75, 000.00 Date of Policy August 3, 1990 at 2:33 P, hi. 1. Name of Insured: JOHN MATTHEVJS ~, SCHEDULE A Policy No. D 715820 Premium 5 470.00 a. m. p. m. 2. The estate or interest in the land which is covered by this policy is: FEE i; 3. Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in: JOHN h1ATTHEWS 4. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SE7 FORTH ON SHEET ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE INCORPORATED HEREIN AND b1ADE A PART HEREOF. ~'e O~GG:i7 .,.,s ... ...~..:N ~ ~~ ,, ~.: w... ,~, ~Mn ,: ,.:>a ~...M. ~-~.~. Y xe ~.~ :r~~ p,..,,• Forth No. 1056-4 All Polley Forms SCHEDULE C Colorado The land referred to in thisfp~i~y ~ situated in the State of County of PARCEL A: Grder No, 400694 Policy No, D 715820 and is described as follows: The EVA SELLA Lode Mining Claim (United States i%iineral Survey No, 1808), as patented and described in United States Patent recorded August 14, 1883, in Book i1 at Page 9. TOGETHER Nlth that certain easement for purposes of ingress and egress, and for the installation, maintenance and use of underground utilities, as created, defined and established in that certain Easements Agreement between Castle Creek Investors, Inc „ a Colorado corporation and John Matthews, recorded March i, 1991 in Book 640 at Page 778, said easement being more particularly described as follows: An easement situated in Section 36, Township 10 South, Range 85 41est of the 6th P, ivl., Pitkin County, Colorado, located wihin the hlattie Belle Lode (U. S.M,S. No, 4147) and the Little Susie Lode (U. S. M, S. No, 6806), and being 3G feet in width lying 15 feet on each side of the following-described centerline: Beginning at a poi`rt on line 2-3 of the Eva Bella Lode, U. S. M, S. No. 1808, v:hence Corner 3 of said Eva Bella Lode lies North 09°051COIr Eas-F, 29.44 feet; thence along the centerline of an existing road the following four courses: South 89°57~32r' East, 60.93 feet; thence South 81°54r27TM East, X6.06 feet; thence South 72°f3r02^"'"E'a'st, 92.00 feet; thence South 85°41r37rr East, 143,29 feet, more or less, to the centerline of the Midnight Kline Road, the point of ending, PARCEL E: The LITTLE DICK Lode Mining Claim (United States hiiner•al Survey No, 1843), as patented and described in United States Paten recorded July 21, 1883, in Book 17 ai- Page 5. THIS POLICY IS ISSUED IN LIEU OF AIJD SUBSTITUTED FOR POLICY N0, D 715047 (ORDER N0. 400694) PREVfOUSLY ISSUED BY ihE COMPANY, WHICH POLICY N0, D 715047, IS HEREBY CAIJCELLED. 0UGG~3 Form No..402-0 ALTA Standard Policy Western Region (Rev. 9/87) SCHEDULE B PARTI Order No. 400694-0 Policy No. D 715820 This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) which arise by reason of: Section One: 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. 2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained byan inspection of said land orby making inquiryof persons in posses- sion thereof. 3. Easements, claims of easement or encumbrances which are not shown by the public records. 4. Discrepancies, confiidts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroaghments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by public records. 5. Unpatented mining claims; reservations dr exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the ,,_~ issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water 6. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed bylaw and not shown by the public records. Section Two: 7, Right of the Proprietor of a Vein or Lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted, as reserved in United States Patents recorded July 21, 1883, in Book 11 at Page 5 and August 14, 1883, in Book 11 at Page 9, 8, Easements, conditions and limitation set forth in that certain Easements Agreement between Castle Creek Investors, Inc., a Colorado corporation and John Matthews recorded PAarch 1, 1991 in Book 640 at Page 778, Exception 1 is hereby amended and modified in its entirety to read as follows: 1, Taxes for the year 1989 pnd subsequent years (insofar as they relate to the Mattie Belle Lode), and taxes for the year 1990 and subsequent years (insofar ,^„ as they relate to the remainder of subject property); and any tax, special assessments, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service, or for any other special taxine district. OOGC~;,~ March 27, 1991 HAND DELIVERED ~ Ms. Ellen Sassano Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Permission to Represent Dear Ms. Sassano: Please consider this letter authorization for Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, Inc. to represent me in the processing of my application for general submission and 1041 hazard review for ,b+A*,, the development of my property which is located on the back of Aspen Mountain. Mr. Vann is hereby authorized to act on my behalf with respect to all matters reasonably pertaining to the aforementioned application. Should you have any questions, or if I cah be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, p CO 81612 (303j 925-8636 Jq n Matthews P. Box 2886 A en SV:cwv oUU®~~ ~~:~ . ~ rt: ~ ~...:, . .,._~ ~; _, APPENDIX B DO®Ob~ EXHIBIT 1 August 3, 1990 Board cf County Cc:~missionors Pttkin County Courthouse, 506 E. Main Street Aspen, Colorado 87617 RE: The E'!A BELLA Lodo Mining Claim (United States Mineral Survey No. 1808), as patented and described In United States Patent recorded Augusf 14, 1883, in Book 11 at Page 9. The LITTLE giCK Lode Diining Claim (United States Mineral. Survey No. ;843>, as patented and descrEtied fn United States Patent recorded July 21, 1883, in Bock it at Page 5. Based upon a search of the records !n the office of the Clerk and ~°'ecorder for Pttkin County, Colorado, Aspen T1tIe Corporation heroby certifies fiat at no time since January 1, i977 has title to any tract adjacent to the pro parr described above been held In the same name, or names as said described _._ property. EXCE!'T as follows: Aspen Skiing Corporation, a Colorado corpo~atlon, but only as to the property listed above, by Bargain and Sale Deed, frcm Robert Stevens recorded May 13, 7971, fn Book 255 at Page 299. This certification is neither an abstract, opinion nor guaranty of title and is intended specitically and exclusively for the use of the Board of County Commissioners of Pttkin County in determination of "merger of title" or lack thereof as said "merger" relates to the applicable statutes, ordinances and restrictions of jurisdiction. ft is understood and agreed that Aspen Title corporation neither assures, ror wilF be charged with any financial obligations or liability whatever on any certification conta,Lned here(n. Sincerely, cu Robert Reeves ~~~~~~ " 330691 ,,'` a J,. _ li 'r o~_via. t' rvt.=, c Jr 40 ='r 778 '' ~c' ~ ~ EXHIBIT 2 rnt 9Y I'„ „nr> EASEMENTS AGREEMENT THIS EASE ENTS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of ~~,a,?~-,! 1991, by and between CASTLE CREER INVESTORS; INC., a Colorado corporation ("CCI"),'and JOIiN MATTHEWS ("Matthews"), W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Matthews is the owner of two neighboring parcels of real property in Pitkin County, Colorado which are legally known and defined as (i) the Eva Bella Lode, U.S.M:S. No. 1808, as described in United States Patent recorded August 14,`1883 in Book 11 at page 9 of the Pitkin County records, and (ii) the Little Dick Lode, U.S.M:S. No. "1843; as described in Uhited States Patent recorded July 21, 1883 in Book ll at page 5 (said Lodes being sometimes hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Matthews Property") and WHEREAS., CCI is the owner of two contiguous parcels of real property in Pitkin County, Colorado which are legally known and defined as (i) the Mattie Belle Lode, U.S.M.S. N&. 414'I,`a§ described in United States Patent recorded April 8, 1901 in Book 136 at page 269, and (ii) the Little Susie Lode, U.S.M.S. No. 19708 insBookc359eat1page1876 andtMarchtl0t 198o0rded December 15, ,~ In Book 384 at page 706; and WHEREAS, the existing access road between the. Midnight Mine Road and the Eva Bella Lode crosses the Mattie Belle and Little Susie Lodes, and the existing access road between the Little Annie Road and the Midnight Mine Road crosses the Little Susie Lode, and Matthews desires to obtain from CCI an'access and utility easement over and along said existing access roads; and WHEREAS, CCI is also the owner of real property in Pitkin County, Colorado, including the 11 mining claims listed on reference (saidpcla~m,eoanEdxhbiteAabeing hereon, by this after referred to as the CCI Pro ert g Road andRthe CCIeProlertn crosses theaLittleeDiche Midnight Mine P Y k Lode in two locations, and CCI desires to obtain from Matthews an access and utility easement over and along said existing access road as it traverses the Little Dick Lode; and WHEREAS, Matthews and CCI are prepared to grant to each other the easements discussed above, and to enter into certain related agreements, on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. ~~ ©iJi,'~U,~ 73?4,.. c:'/tai ,?1 , 6:29 F.`eC °_53. .;: ~~ `640 or 779 . Silvia. Davit., F' +E .r. ~Znty r?~ kk:. `Doc $.xj ~, NOA, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained and for other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Grant of Easement to Matthews. CCI hereby grants, transfers and conveys unto Matthews and to his heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns forever in the ownership of all or any portion of the Eva Bella Lode, a perpetual, non-exclusive easement and right-of-way over, along and under the following-described strips of land, to wit: (a) An easement situated in Section 36, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, located within the Mattie Belle Lode (U.S.M.S. No. 4147) and the Little Susie Lode (U.S.M.S. No. 6806), and being 30 feet in width lying 15 feet on each side of the following-described centerline• Beginning at a point on line 2-3 of the Eva Bella Lode, U.S.NI.S. No. 1808, whence Corner 3 of said Eva Bella Lode lies N. 09°05'00" E. 29.44 feet; thence along the centerline of an existing road the following 4 courses: S. 89°57'32" E. 60.93 feet; thence S. 81°54'27" E. 46.06 feet; thence S. 72°13'02" E. 92.00 feet; thence S. 85°41'37" E. 143.29 feet, more or less, to the centerline of the Midnight Mine Road, the point of ending. and (b) An easement situated in Section 36, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M „ Pitkin County, Colorado, located within the Little Susie Lode (U.S.M.S. No. 6806), and and being 30 feet in width lying 15 feet on each side of the following-described centerline: Beginning at the point of ending of the easement described in Paragraph 1(a) above, thence continuing in an easterly and southerly direction along the centerline of an existing road which connects the Midnight Mine Road and the Little Annie Road, as said existing road traverses the Little Susie Lode, to the point of intersection of said existing road with the westerly boundary of the First Chance Lode (U.S.M.S. No. 73:84). -2- ~}~®~~~a S ~ ~ v Eh:: 640 F'G 7B0 ..I via Davis, F tki.n ~ntY rler~:, Dcc 2.:iry (hereinafter collectively the "Matthews Easement"). Except as provided in Paragraph 9 below, the Matthews Easement is granted and conveyed without warranties of title`of'any kind, but shall carry and benefit from any after-acquired title of CCI. 2. Ose and Maintenance of the Matthews Easement. The Matthews Easement is granted for purposes of ingress and egress and all forms of surface travel between the Eva`Bella Lode and the Little Annie Road and for the installation maintenance and use ofdundergroundRutilitydlineseeandhshaldnbehu Mine Road and sed and enjoyed by the owner or owners from time to time of the Eva Bella Lode or any part thereof and their heirs, personal representatives, successors, assigns, families, guests, invtees,`lessees, employees and agents. The Matthews Easement shall be for the benefit of and shall run with the title to the Eva Bella Lode, and shall constitute a perpetual burden on the titles to the Mattie Belle and Little Susie Lodes, respectively. CCI, for itself and its successors and assigns in the ownership of the Mattie Belle and Little Susie Lodes, forever reserves the right to use and enjoy the Matthews Easement and the land beneath and the air space above the same for all purposes and uses which do not unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment by Matthews of the easement rights granted to him herein. Once a residence is constructed on the Eva Bella Lode, the owner or owners of the Eva Bella Lode shall''be solely responsible for the improvement, maintenance and repair of the roadway within the Matthews Easement. If a residence on the Mattie Belle Lode and/or the Little Susie Lode is ever served by said roadway, such costs shall be shared equally amongst the owners of the residences served thereby. Matthews and his successors and assigns in the ownership of the Eva Be11a Lode or any part thereof shall have the right at any time and from time to time, at their sole cost and expense, to improve, widen, grade, regrade, surface, plow, maintain, repair or relocate all or any portion of the roadway within the Matthews Easement, and to install underground utilities therein. More specifically, the roadway within the Matthews Easement may be improved to applicable County road standards in effect from time to time, and any underground utility lines shall be installed as close to the outer edges of the Matthews Easement as is reasonably practical. All of the foregoing activities shall be conducted in such manner as not to cause a closure of access to the Mattie Belle Lode or the Little Susie Lode. 3. Grant of Easement to CCS. Matthews hereby grants, ransfers and conve s unto CCI Y and to its successors and assigns -3- ;t~=,_o~r ~3jiill2? ib ,.;~'nec 55.3. ,'S Etk' 640 F'G 7831 Silvia. Davis, F'i ~k:in Cnty C'_er k', Dec $.cjQ ' forever in the ownership of all or any portion of the CCI Property and the Matte Belle and Little Susie Lodes, a perpetual, non-exclusive easement and right-of-way over, along and under the following-described strips of land, to wit: An easement situated in Section 36, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, located within the Little Dick Lode (U.S.M.S. No. 1843), and being 30 feet in width lying 15 feet on each side of the following-described centerlines, to wit: (a) Beginning at a point on line 2-3 of said Little Dick Lode whence Corner 2 of said Little Dick Lode bears S. 14°29'00" E. 30.61 feet; thence along the centerline of an existing road the following 10 courses; (1) N. 52°00'21" (2) N. 64°57'32" (3) N. 76°42'51" (4) N. 62°23'36" (5) N. 21°53'01" (6) N. 10°20'55" (7) N. 03°32'35" (8) N. 18°35'55" (9) N. 09°46'54" W. W. W. W. W. W. E. E. E. 6.29 feet; thence` 86.16 feet; thence 72.2`4 feet; thence 50.20 feet; thence 36.46 feet; thence 53.24 feet; thence 26.44 feet; thence 89.20 feet; thence 255.54 feet; thence (10) N. 16°55'59" S. 19.88 feet more or less to a point on said line 2-3 of the Little Dick Lode, the point of ending, whence 'Corner 2 of said Little Dick Lode bears S. 14"29'00^ E. 596.73 feet. and (b) Beginning at a point on line 2-1 of said Little Dick Lode whence Corner 2 of said Little Dick Lode bears N. 06°40'00" W. '277.82 feet; thence along the. centerline of an existing road the following 5 courses: (1) S. 64°22'29" W. 13.53 feet; thence -4- 0000 .y-, _^-itE." ~ /.j1; S1 SbdD9 ^.ec °5.=. ~ S 640 ~'G 782 Silvia Davis, F'itVi...^. Cn~y Clerl:, D~~'. ~ ij'j~ (2) N. 64°05'42" W. 139.86 feet; thence (3) S. 88°37'31" W. 66.92 feet; thence (4) S. 59°42'43" W. 47.02 feet; thence (5) S. 37°44'21" W. 30.I9 feet more or less to a point on line 5-6 of said Little Dick Lode, the point of ending, whence said Corner No. 2 bears N. 40°39'04" E. 355.72 feet. (hereinafter collectively the "CCI Easement"). Except as provided in Paragraph 9 belcw, the CCI Easement is granted and conveyed without warranties of title of any kind, but shall carry and benefit from any after-acquired title of Matthews. 4. Use and Maintenance of the CCI Easement. The CCI Easement is granted for purposes of ingress and egress and all forms of surface travel between the CCI PopeYty'(and the Mattie Belle and Little Susie Lodes) and the Midnight Mine Road, and for the installation, maintenance and use of underground utility lines, and shall be used aiid enjoyed by the owner or owners from time to time of the CCI Property (and the Mattie Belle and Little Susie Lodes) or any part thereof and their heirs, personal representatives, successors, assigns, families, guests, invitees, lessees, employees and agents. The CCI'"Easement shall be`for the benefit of and shall run with the title to the CCT'Property`(and`` the Mattie Belle and Little Susie Lodes), and shall constitute a perpetual burden on the title to the Little Dick Lode. Matthews, for himself and his successors and assi ns in the ownership of the Little Dick Lode, forever reserves the right to use and enjoy the CCI Easement (and the land beneath and the air space above the same) for all purposes and uses which do not unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment by CCI of the easement rights granted to it herein. Once a residence or residences (other than the existing "Red Bill" cabin) are constructed on the CCI Property (or the Mattie Belle or Little Susie Lodes), the owner or owners of the CCI Property (and the Mattie Belle and Little Susie Lodes) shall be solely responsible for the improvement, maintenance and repair of the roadway within the CCI Easement. If a residence on the Little Dick Lode is ever served by said roadway, such costs shall be shared equally amongst the owners of the residences served tP-iereby. CPI aYd(and thecMatte BellesandnLittlehe ownership of the CCI Pro ert Susie Lodes) or -5- ®~1~(37 ZVr?~.gi'/bi.'y: lh:^9 Ric x53 ic•"""'•-: 640 F•!3 783 ° 1'via -avi5, P' .._ ,±~-in~t_'nty Glert , u~ :'.~jt~. any part thereof shall have the right at any time and from time '- to time, at their sole cost and expense, to improve, widen, grade, regrade, surface, plow, maintain, repair or relocate all or any portion of the roadway within the CCI Easement, and to install underground utilities therein. More specifically, the roadway within the CCI Easement may be improved to applicable County road standards in effect from time to time, and any underground utility lines shall be installed as close to the outer edges of the CCI Easement as is reasonably practical. All of the foregoing activities shall be conducted in such manner as not to cause a closure of access to the Little Dick Lode. 5. Midnicht Mine and Little Annie Road Easements. CCI and Matthews hereby respectively grant, transfer and convey each unto the other and to their heirs, personal representatives, successors, assigns, families, guests, invitees; lessees, employees and agents forever, without warranties of title but g quired title of the re P x'P g -way over and alonetthewentirexlensthsaandewidthsaof thehMidnspective grantor, g g ght Mine Road and the Little Annie Road, as and to the extent that such roads traverse property now or hereafter owned by CCI or Matthews, for purposes of ingress and egress and all forms of surface travel between Castle Creek Road and lands now or hereafter owned by Matthews and CCI, respectively. The easement rights created and granted hereby shall run with the title to all lands benefitted ~~ thereby (ie. to lands now or hereafter owned by Matthews or CCI, respectively), and shall constitute a perpetual burden on the properties now or hereafter owned by CCI or Matthews and traversed by the Midnight Mine Road or the Little Annie Road. 6. Construction. Prior to the commencement of road or driveway or utility construction work within the easements granted hereby, the party desiring to undertake'such`work shall obtain all permits or other governmental approvals that may be required in connection therewith. In addition, the party undertaking such construction shall take appropriate measures to mitigate the effects of any potential erosion associated therewith, and upon completion of the work shall revegetate and otherwise restore the land as closely as possible to the natural condition existing prior to the commencement of the work. All of the foregoing activities shall be conducted in such manner as not to cause a closure of the subject access road. Finally, each of the parties hereto agrees to and shall indemnify and hold harmless the other party from and against any mechanic's lien claims for unpaid costs associated with any such construction work undertaken by the indemnifying party. 7. Land Use Anolications. Matthews agrees that he will not object to any land use applications that may be filed from time to time by CCI or its successors or assigns with respect to ~, the CCI Property or any other lands owned by CCI in the Little -6- ~~~~1~5 -+--~-o-:-zr:vrv-a-rra rr-uc---r,v--rte=~ ~'-~-cc~"~vcrn~v=Q--~==-._-_~.'=~T'/--- anrl anv l iahi l itv nr rcnn~mra> }hcrea..Aer ~Y.~ll l.a '7 i..~-0}.~A }r. }Y.e ~3~96~ G3/f~1/9i i6:~9 Fiec X53. ;RF'. 64p Fr 7$4 Silvia Davis, Ptt:in Casty Clerk,' Doc ~.tj cj Annie, Basin, so long as the application does not violate any ' provision of this Agreement. Likewise, CCI agrees that it will not object to any land use applications that may be filed from time to time by Matthews or his successors o~ as'signs with respect to the Matthews Property or any other lands owned by Matthews in the Little Annie Basin, so long as the application does not violate any provision of this Agreement. a. Water Filings. Matthews agrees that he will not object to any well permit or spring rights applications or adjudications that may be filed by CCI in connection with the lands described on attached Exhibit A, or the Mattie Belle or Little Susie Lodes, provided that (i) the subject waters and water rights are used only on those lands, and (ii) the application or adjudication will not result in material physical injury to any water rights owned or claimed by Matthews. Likewise, CCI agrees that it will not object to any well permit or spring rights ,applications or adjudications that may be filed by Matthews in connection with the Eva Bella and/or Little Dick Lodes, provided that (i) the subject waters and water rights are used only on those Lodes, and (ii) the application,,. or adjudication will not result in material physical injury to any water rights owned or claimed by CCI. 9. Mutual Representations. Matthews represents to CCI with respect to the Little Dick Lode, and CCI represents to Matthews with respect to the Mattie Be11e Lode and the Little Susie Lode, that the title thereto is not encumbered by any matters that could impair the easements herein granted or cause said easements to be extinguished. 10. Mutual Indemnifications. Matthews, on behalf of himself and his succassors"""arid assigns in the ownership of the va Bella Lode or an art thereof hereb a g ,. y grees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless CCI and its successo and a ainst any and all claims causes of act YS and assigns from damages involvin ion, liabilities or g personal injury, loss of life or property damage arising out of the use of the Matthews ''Easement or the roadway thereon by Matthews or his family, guests, invitees, employees or agents. Likewise, CCI, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns in the ownership of the CCI Property (and the Mattie Belle and Little Susie Lodes) or any part thereof, hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Matthews and his successors and assigns from and against. any and all claims, causes of action, liabilities or damages involving personal injury, loss of life or property damage arising out of the use of the CCI Easement or the roadway thereon by CCI or its family, guests, invitees, employees or°agents. It is expressly understood that the foregoing indemnifications are non-recourse as to the indemnifying parties (ie. there shall be no personal liability associated therewith), ~ and any liability or recovery thereunder shall be limited to the 99~~ rr -7- ®U~t_C?: ,,. . v, ~ - -, ~a.~ u„ ,,..,, .. _... #3~Co91 'J3/ril9l i6:.^_9 Fiec ~5~ bF~ 640 F6 785 Silvia Davis, Fitl;in rn`y Cler4., Doc 5 c~~j ~-,, indemnifying party's (and its successors' and assigns') interest in the lands burdened and benefitted by the subject easements. il. Attornevs' Fees. In the event the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement or of any provision hereof becomes the subject of litigation between the parties hereto or their respective successors or assigns, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees incurred in connection therewith. 12. Rule Against Perpetuities. In the 'event that any provision of this Agreem'et is determined to be subject to the rule against perpetuities, then the effective term of that provision shall be limited to the lives of John Matthews and his now living children plus 20 years. 13. Further Assurances. Each party hereto shall from time to time execute and deliver such additional instruments or do such additional acts as the other party may reasonably request in order to effectuate and carry out the full intent of this Agreement. 14. Aaiver Not Continuing. Any waiver by either party hereto of any breach of any kind or character whatsoever by the other party, whether such be direct or implied, shall not be construed as a continuing waiver of or consent to any subsequent ~'"~ breach of this Agreement on the part of the other party. 15. Binding Effect Etc. This Agreement shall run with the land as set forth herein, grid shall be binding upon and inure to the benefitpof the arties hereto and their respective heirs, personal re resentatives successors and assigns. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Colorado. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof, and supercedes all prior agreements, writings, representations, and negotiations, whether written or oral, relating hereto. Finally, this Agreement may not be amended or modified except by an instrument in writing signed by all of the parties. -8- o~~~~~ _ Czlvia P3v~=, :6: y9 Rec Y°3.~J 5K F'it4; 640 ^r r. Cr,t>' Clsr•4::e Doc ~.Oc~^~ 786 ypartiyeara ~., .,,.,<. .., .,.. IN WITNESS WI~E~OF ~ the we hereunto set their hands and seals as of the da and first above written. CCI: ,,".. ,.~ ~S C' i•;•' , U •~ ~ . •GQ ~ 7i ~l ~ ~ STATE OF INDIANA COUNTY OF NAYNE )ss \ ILL/~~c ~ ~ 1 ~T"*-~' ^ ~ i L~ John Matthews - ~~~.~The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this -.~~~- day of~v _ , 1991 by John W. Miller as President of Castle Creek Investo~ , Inc., a Colorado corporation. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:- ~-~'a..~ ~oQ~.w ~ ~ -fie C~ ~..P~1 rvotary Public ~ ~~~~+a.~e..~ ~N STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF PITKIN ;ss rs~- The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1 '' day of ~'~~y,l~, {,~ 1991 by John Matthews. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: ~ c, C~ ~ •`~do~~~ +u ~_ _ °~~~~il8no;+ -~-o-o. N' a Public tL :~ ~.? '~O ~~ ~ •• ...• '' C r ..........a"• I~1 -g _ UVUU ~.1 CASTLE CREEK INVESTORS, I27C., Gqi ,..~~ ~ ~ ~. r .,. ~ r, ~ . . - " _~ :' 640 r'' ~ 787 _ vn~vis,. c f. i-~ r ~y ClcrE a e~-'~C .iltj ExJiZBIT ~~A'~ Robby Burns 2do. 2, Robby Burrs No. 3, Robby Burns 770. 4, P.obby 3urns ?70. S, Robby Burns No. 6, Santa Maria znd San Rafael bode Mining Claits, all being U.S.M.S. No. 7570A in Sections 35 and 36, Township 10 South, Range 85 west of the 6th Principal 1•_+eridian, Highland 2•:ining District, according to tl•.e Patent thereof recorded October 11, 1979 in Book 377 at•Page SS5 and according to Plat thereof recorded October 11, 1979 in Book 377 at Page 509. The Delaware Lode Mining Claim U,S.N..S. No. 62;5 in Sections 25 and 36, Township 10 South, Rance 85 west of the 6th Principal ?•Seridian, xighland 2•Sining District, according to the Patent thereof recorded in Book 372 at Page ;462. The r & M Lade Mining Claim U.S.M.S. ?10. 62;5 in Sections 25 and 36, Township to south, Range 85 west of the 6th ?rincipal *;eridian, Highland Mining District, according to the Patent thereof recorded in Book 372 at Page 462. The Robby Burns 2,ode U.s.M.S. 2JO. 7570A in Sections 35 and 36 Township 10 South, 2ange 85 West of the 6th brincpal Meridian; Y.ighland Mining District, according to the Patent thereon recorded October 12, 1979 in Book 377 at Page SE$ and according to the ?tat thereo_ recorded October 11, 1979 in Book 377 at Page 509. The Hone 3ule Lade U.S.M.S. i+o. 6"006, aighland Mining District, situate in Section 36, Township 10 South, Range s5 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, all according to the Patent thereof recorded March 10, 1980 in Boob: 384 at Page 706.` • OC~GG 1 n d._ a.e.?--m+t. a4d ~; ~ .:4u.: . ~"°; /`\~i-G~~1/~ O~CG /,, h1Hr' = 1 "?1 11 ~ I ~ H' ~LLHI I HHRT H=;F'E! I. 9GM ,~' X301-; 'SJYT s3' Y . rlvV~n~ ru c nnn ~ :_. i -~ i ~. C ~ ~ ~ EXHIBI' ~'~ ~ ^ . ,' • ~ . tOARD G7 EYAMlN fRS O7 WATER Wfll fpniSTRUGTiON AND -UM•• INSTAi:ATION GONTRAMORS DIVISION Of WATfR aE5Ot: flCf3 t St 1 5>t~rnt~n Ser~,t•Roem i18 D~~r, Cnfer~ee !0107 ;!3071 fib 171 February 26, 1991 F.` n_ t f t u3: R f3 _ s«reun '1 John Matthews P.O. Box 2886 Aspen, Colorado 81612 i RE: Construction regulations variance request No. 91-009, gallery well located in the NM1/4 of Lhe SE1/4 of Section 31 Township 10 South, Range 85 west of tha 6th Principal. Meridan, in Pitkin County, Receipt No. 321430. Oear Mr. Hatthews: Your January 28 1991 submittal for the construction of the above-referenced weir has been reviewed for th8 Board' of Examiners of Wfter well Construction and Pump Insta~ilatton Contractors with respect tb variances ' to their Voter Well Construction and Pump Installation Rulos. Pursuant to Rute 10.4.8 and the authortty granted by the Board to the staff, the construction plans Ira approved as presented, and the necessary variances granted subsect to the following conditions: 1. The top of the well casing must be at least one foot above the normal ground surface. 2. The upper five feet o.f the backfill around the well shou]d be compacted io a greater density thah the. surrounding and undisturbed ground. i 3. The rfe11 cap awat 5a an approved water-tight cover. If you have any questions about this matter; please contact this office. ',~Sin~cerely, $ruce E. OeBrine eater ResourC6s Engineer Ground Water Section BED/mFc cr. pivision 5 Well file ~~®® ~,t 59521 KIH 1IpINn. Cn~llmAn. lOnjwrenr; Iiul 6rr(IunG, CO~m'~r, CCrdµ• Mpev.rNpr. MCMy Yeti: JnJ Gl~ne A ~Otlnu, UMver ~_ h1HR '='1 '91 11 ~ 14J HULLH ~ HAFT H3PEti _,,, < 'tJT, cr: nu~iNrvu t nwrti ~:, i-may > ~ .tiM '~:'°'~ ~cl-+ Form No. OFFICE OF THt~STAT~ EN4IN~ER ~`~'~ GWS-25 COLORApO DIVISION OF WATFFI RESO(JRCES t"''~ e+~e c«~w~~ eke... ,o,b •n~w~ tc. C.rnw. cay„.aa ac2o APaucANT JOHN Ml-TTHEW3 P O BOX 2886 ASPEN, t:0 81612 PEA(NTf TO F °, 5 l•_i i ~ 6~a'. c DN. g_ CNTY. 49 Wp 38 DES. 8A91N . MO _. WELL PFAMtT NUAAfja:R 159459 APPROVED W~~ ~ i ncenn COUNTY P12'XIN / t/4 S pW t 4 Ra 8 W ~~ Dlt3TANCL3 FpOAA tl_C't'ION IJNES i 1650' Ft. from lout Setxiarf ~~ 1750. Fs. from net 9aalon iJne A 13SUANCE'OF 1NIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A~WaT'ER Ri~f.rr ~10[TiQNS t7F-~~.=. TMs weu shalt >se used In su,h a way as to Cause"no mattirtel Infury to oxtsting water rights, The isauartc®a the petma does not assure the epplkant that no injury wNl occur to another vested water right or IxaGude anther owner a a viiup water d6-u {fpm arrekinq rellet In a c;vU court action. ApProvad purauan[ to CRS 37.92.802(3}(p)(tn(A ea the only welt on a resideMlal sae of 9.7t2~ acres described ~ the Eva tjalla Lade, Pklttn County. Ttfe use a grouncs water from this welt le gmRed t0 ordinary housaholtl purposes inside a single famly dwelling and the watering of the user's noncamrttercial tlome5tlc animals. The ground water shell not C9"usBd fof i other pwposas. rr~iga;ioh or The return flow from the use of the w81t must be through en inciividvsl watte water disraosaf system of the non-eveporativi type where the water 19 retumeU to the same Stre8ltl syatsrr"f"in wtikh the welt i3 located. The maximum pumping rota shell not exceed 15 GPM. This well ahau !k constn~ctetl not rttore than 200 feet from the locstton specined on this pem,a. Tha well shall be conatnuted in accordance with the variance prarxed by tho State Board of Examiners of Water WeU Construetiert rind Pump Installation Contractors Cn February 28, t 992. The well ccxaraetor must subrnh ~a well completion report detailing final coristnxi;on. ~7.rs7.z-24-9~ . OOOi; 6 ~) t8Al3 (~( .y,~ Receipt No. 0321430 • ~' fE8 2 7 199t "" orn 2 DATE ISSUED" EXpiRATION baTa I~~F cl 'al 11~1~ H~iLLHII~ HHFT H~FEtI -p3-.,a~g_o_-: .SENT ~$1 . ~ ~,..._...... .. 1..~ _..-s o fioAtA o -+ #.:k John Matthews Poet 6flice flox '2886 Aspen, Colorado. 81612 January 28, 1941 State Engineer's office Colorado Division of WaLar Rp9ou2;Cea 81a Centennial Bldq. 1313 Sharman Street Beaver, co 80201 Attn: Hr. Mal Malley Re: Welt Permit Application of John Matthews Reoeipt HO. 321430 Bear Hr. Halley: F.7 :~ zn connection with the above-referenced wall parfait application, a copy oi' which is attached hereto., I am requesting a variance of the construction regulations normally applicable to drilled water wells. ThlB variance if3 squesfad bscmuse the ~ structure vhich is the subject at"the n£tsched application is actually an intilEra~°ion'~gallery whfoh will collect cater for aofaestic use. z have been advised by my water resource consultants that an infiltration. gallery 18 Arsterabls to a ~ drilled vatcr well on m y property to provide a domestic water supply. Because the minimum kell construction standards specified in Rule l0 of the State Engineer's Nater Well' construction ana Pump Installation Regulations; do not address tl~}e construction of infiltration galleries, a variance from chose II construction standards is zeq~sstsd pursuant to 12u1o 17 of the same regulations. The enclosed canstrttction drawing shows thq proposed construction of ths~gallary, including size, casing and sealing, and other teatuYSs that ors designed to grotect tho well from contamination. zf you should have any gµastions concerning this variance request or the enclosed construction dr+suinq, please contact either Anne Castle at Holland & HA=t (295-8229.) or Dean Cordon st schmeuser, Gordon, Meyer (sae-iooa`). Thank you for your prompts action on this request. I sincerely, ~'t~,~~~' `mod-~11~,..C.G(~ I dohrv Hatthews Enclosure , OD©b"iu i x ~. ~ ;~~ w ~ rrr;i. ~, ., ~, :ENT, E`(~~HF `1 ~~ I 11 ,1 _' H! ~LL,;i MHf?T ri'_~F'Et I, ~., y ~. >..~ rani ; J/B' PUIF 7H/CXN£55 W/ 3" RE7iJRN ALUd/INUN G9P (FXPOSEd~• PRONSlONS f qR LOCk7NC t .~ I ~ ~ f ..f,.. .I '~ P/TLESS uNir I ALUA!lNUM I STEPS d I I !s. c^~ ~ .~ I l f~ `I i ~-F~ ~ ! ,~ WE'LL PUA/P I WfAti' ORpP PIPE .L .... ~.. J ~ '~'~ J" .l!/N. f t Ili) / I+.~ i ~ rt i~ .~.... =~~C825S" <, rta? , ~--.~ P.B 8 r.:tTT u::# 7 t-!/r cuRe -t STOP W/ £X7EN5/dN -I-1/?'' PoGYE7NfLfXF i4/P£ td0 LBa^ PRESSURE Ra1~E'D NG11FR LINE ff. uNF Fx~~andN f»rN j ~.urR.~ rtoN. ~!u wlrt~ JO' OF J/f' tY.15HED CR{VEZ --~-~- 4' l,d. CdNCRETEt TOP B' TD BE SOLlD; Qb77dtI 1?• ' rr~ f3E PERfaRtTEO 3/~' WASHETJ CR4YtZ i NarE. . coNTROCS To eE GOG47£D /N RFSyDENI'E ~ TH~S ;.; .. .. ~ i /~ ~~_. i~ AN APPLICATION FOR GENERAL SUBMI682ON APPROVl1L AND 1041 HAZARD RRVIB'~I Submitted by ~~ ~ John Matfhews' P.O. Box 2886 '"` Aspen, Colorado (303) 925-8636 Prepared by VAliN ASSOCIATES, INC Planning Consultants 230 East Hopkins Avenue "" Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-6958 V~~~99 ~+ f-- 1 ;l.l..a.~. TABLE OF CONTENTS Section page ~~ .,. .A,. I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. PROJECT SITE 3 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPI~SENT 4 IV. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS ~ A. General Submission ~ B. 1041 Hazard Review 12 APPENDIB A. Exhibit 1, Pre-Application Conference Summary Exhibit 2, Title Insurance Policy Exhibit 3, Permission to Represent Exhibit 4, Adjacent Property Owners B. Exhibit i, Letter from Aspen Title Corporation Exhibit 2, Easements Agreement C. Exhibit 1, Well Permit Exhibit 2, Letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. Exhibit 3, Letter from Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. ~~~~ i.3 F^o 2. INTRODIICTION The following application requests general submission approval and 1041 hazard review for the construction of a single-family residence on an approximately eighteen (18) acre parcel of land located on the back side of Aspen Mountain in the vicinity of the so-called "Little Annie" area of unincor- porated Pitkin County (see Pre-Application Conference Summary, Exhibit 1, Appendix A). The application is submitted pursuant to Sections 18-2.2 and 5-400 of the Land Use Code by John Matthews, the owner of the property (see Title Insurance Policy, Exhibit 2, Appendix A). The Applicant's representative is Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, Inc., Planning Consultants (see Permission to Represent, Exhibit 3, Appendix A). A list of adjacent property owners and their mailing addresses is provided in Exhibit 4, Appendix A. The application has been divided into three (3) parts. The first part, or Section II. of the application, describes the project site, while Section III.. describes the Applicant's proposed development. The third part, or Section IV., addresses the proposed development's compliance with the applicable review requirements of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. For the reviewer's convenience, all pertinent support- ing documents relating to the project (e.g., geologic report, etc.) are provided in the appendices to the application. 1 D~~~~ti~ ~ F ....yam..,.' ~,,,,,n While the Applicant has attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Land Use Code, and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the applica- tion, questions may arise. which result in the staff's request for further information and/or clarification. The Applicant would be pleased to provide such additional information as may be requested in the course of the application's review. II. PROJECT BYTE The project site consists of two (2) contiguous patented mining claims, the Eva Bella Lode (U.S.M.S. No.1808) and the Little Dick Lode (U.S.M.S. No. 1843), which were acquired by the Applicant in August of 1990. As the claims are not located within an approved subdivision, they are subject to the merger provisions of Section 20-1 of the Code. No merger, however, has in fact occurred, as the various owners of the property have at no time held an interest in any contiguous parcel (see Aspen Title Corporation Letter, Exhibit 1, Appendix B). As shown on the accompanying survey, access to the immediate site area is provided from Castle Creek Road via the Midnight Mine Road. Access from the Midnight Mine Road to the Eva Bella Lode, the site of the proposed building envelope, is provided via an easement from Castle Creek Investors, Inc. across the adjacent Little Susie (U.S.M.S. 6806) and Mattie a Belle Lodes (U.S.M.S. No. 4147) (see Easements Agreement, 3 Exhibit 2, Appendix B). The easement is thirty (30) feet in width and follows an existing road alignment which has historically provided access to the project site. The access easement is expressly covered in the attached title policy. The two claims contain approximately ten (10) and eight (8) acres, respectively, and are zoned AF-1, Agricultural and Forestry District. The topography of the property consists almost entirely of moderate to steeply sloping hillsides with the exception of a small, relatively flat area located roughly in the center of the Eva Bella Lode. This area forms a small ridge between the Castle Creek and Midnight'Mine Road drain- ages. Existing vegetation consists primarily of moderately dense stands of spruce and fir which are located on the steeper hillsides, and field grasses which cover the flatter portions of the property. Man-made improvements to the project site are limited to an existing road which traverses the Little Dick Lode. An abandoned mine shaft and several surface prospects are also evident on the property, but are located well outside of the proposed building envelope. No public or private utilities are presently available in the immediate site area. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT As shown on the accompanying Existing Conditions Map, the Applicant proposes to designate a building envelope on the 4 F'? 6"'~. flat center portion of the. Eva Be11a.Lode, and to construct within the envelope a small single-family structure to be used as a part-time secondary residence by the Applicant and his family. The proposed building envelope will be accessed directly from the Midnight Mine Road via a driveway across the Little Susie and Mattie Belle Lodes. As discussed previously, an easement has been obtained from the owners of these two properties for access purposes. The driveway will follow an existing unimproved road alignment and will be constructed in compliance with applicable County standards. The proposed building envelope has been designed in compliance with the area and bulk requirements of the AF-1 zone district. As Table 1 below illustrates, the property exceeds the zone district's minimum lot area and minimum lof area per dwelling unit requirements, and all setbacks exceed applicable standards. The building envelope is invisible from the Castle Creek Road, the Midnight Mine Road, and the neighboring Little Annie area. Table 1 DEVELOPMEE?'f` DPTA 1. Existing Zoning AF-1 2. Total Site Area (Acres) 18.03 Eva Bella Lode 9.71 Little Dick Lode 8.32 3. Minimum Required Lot Area (Acres) 10 4. Minimum Required Lot Area/Dwelling 10 Unit (Acres) 5 ®UUtu 7 rte.,.. 5. Minimum Required Open Space 6. Minimum Setback Requirements (Feet) Front Yard Side Yards Rear Yard 7. Proposed Building Setbacks (Feet) Front Yard North Side Yard South Side Yard Rear Yard 8. Maximum Allowable Floor Area None 100 30 30 180 530 800 55 None 9. Minimum Required Parking Spaces 2 10. Maximum Allowable Height (Feet) 28 ~ Measured to the erimeter of the p proposed building envelope. As the accompanying site plan and schematic architectural drawings illustrate, the proposed two story residence will contain three (3) bedrooms, two (2) baths and a full kitchen. A partial basement and garage will be used to house the Applicant's snowcat. The total floor area of the residence will be approximately two thousand one hundred and fifty (2,150) square feet. Building materials will consist of log walls, a metal roof, and a masonry foundation. As utilities are unavailable in the immediate site area, water service will be provided by a well to be drilled on the lower portion of the Eva Bella Lode near an existing spring. A twelve (12) volt, photo voltaic system will be used to provide electricity 6 OGG~~$ ~ ~. for lights, hot water and the. well pumps. Sewage treatment and disposal will be provided by an on-site, individual sewage disposal system. Site grading and excavation will be relatively minimal and will be confined to the building envelope and access driveway. Existing vegetation will generally be left undis- turbed. Some mature trees, however, will be removed to accommodate the residence and to address potential wildfire concerns. The structure's foundation will be engineered as necessary and all disturbed areas will be replanted with appropriate vegetation to prevent erosion and reduce visual impacts. IV. REVIEW REQUITtEMEN'I'8 The proposed residence is exempt from the County's growth management regulations pursuant to the. provisions of Section 5-510.2(c) of the Land Use Code. The residence, however, is subject to both general submission and 1041 hazard review. A. General Submission Pursuant to Section 18-2.2 of the Code, general submission review is required to develop a parcel of land which is not a platted lot located within an approved subdivi- sion. While the construction of a single-family residence may be exempted from this requirement, an exemption cannot be approved if the parcel in question lies within an area of 1041 _7 _ _._ O~DUCr' .: n~ ~: __ . _ concern. The proposed development's compliance with the applicable policies. and general regulations of the Code which have been identified by the Planning Office is summarized below. i. Water Water service to the new residence will be provided via a well to be drilled on th2 Applicant's property. An exempt well permit (#159489} was issued for the property by the Colorado Division of Water Resources in February of 1991 (see Well Permit, Exhibit 1, Appendix C). As the property contains less than thirty-five (35) acres, the well will be limited to domestic, in-house use. No outside irrigation will be allowed. The source of the water will be an existing spring system located on the lower portion of the Eva Bella Lode. A twa (2) pump system will be used to transport water from the well to a two thousand (2,000) gallon storage tank to be located adjacent to the residence. This tank will provide a suitable supply of water for both domestic and fire protection purposes (see Letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Exhibit 2, Appendix C). The Applicant will develop the proposed water supply and confirm its suitability with the Environmental Health Department prior to the issuance of a building permit for the 8 ®~~~2~~ ~'"' proposed residence. As an adequate water supply can reason- ably be expected to be available to serve the residence, the proposed development complies with the requirements of Section 5-205 of the Land Use Code. 2. Sewage Treatment As noted previously, sewage treatment and disposal will be provided via an on-site individual sewage disposal system. It is anticipated that a conventional system will be utilized. An engineered system, however, can be installed in the event shallow bedrock conditions are encountered (see Letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Exhibit 2, Appendix C)., As the system will comply with the Pitkin County Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulations, the proposed development is consistent with the requirements of Section 5-200 of the Code. 3. Logical Estansioa of Utilities Section 5-203 of the Code provides guidelines for the evaluation of proposed utility extensions. As no exten- sion of utilities is either required or requested by the Applicant to serve the proposed residence, Section 5-203 does not appear to apply to this application. In those cases where a proposed development is determined to be accessible to a public water supply or sanitary sewer system, the Code requires that connection occur. In the absence of accessibil- 9 of 0~~~~`~ ~,., ity, the Code provides for the installation -of individual x systems, subject to demonstrated compliance; with applicable standards. To the best.. of my knowledge, there is no code requirement that all development must be accessible to other utilities such as electric and telephone service. 4. Drainage As Schmueser Gordon Meyer's letter indicates, no significant changes in the property's historical flow patterns and runoff amounts are anticipated. No historic drainage courses will be adversely affected. Appropriate measures will be employed during the construction of the residence to prevent erosion and to ensure that drainage is directed away from the building's foundation. As noted previously, develop- ment will be limited primarily to the building envelope and all disturbed areas will be revegetated upon completion of construction. Based on the above, the proposed development complies with the provisions of Section 5-101 of the Code. 5. Road Design and Construction Access to the property will be provided via a driveway from the. Midnight Mine Road. The driveway will follow an existing unimproved road alignment across the Little Susie and Mattie Belle Lodes which presently terminates near the proposed building envelope. The existing alignment is essentially flat, and the driveway can be constructed in 10 compliance with all applicable requirements of the Pitkin County Road Standards and Specifications (see Letter from schmueser Gordon Meyer, Exhibit 1, Appendix C). Based on the above, the proposed development complies with the provisions of Section 5-202 of the Code. 6. impacts on Road System The Midnight Mine Road (#15A) is a Class V County road. The lower first one-half (1/2) mile of the road presently meets the County's so-called "Country Access" standards while the approximately five (5) mile upper section is designated "Primitive". Traffic volumes to be generated by the proposed development should have no significant impact upon the carrying capacity of the Midnight Mine Road or the surrounding County road system. The proposed development therefore complies with the provisions of Section 5-201. of the Code. with respect to accessibility, it should be noted that the Midnight Mine road receives little if any winter maintenance. As such, it is periodically closed to normal vehicular traffic. During those periods when winter vehicular travel is difficult or impossible, the Applicant will utilize a private snowcat to access the property from Castle Creek Road. The snowcat will be housed in the proposed residence's garage. Snowmobiles may also be used as may be required. 11 UG®03~ .` 7. Scenic Quality As noted previously, the proposed residence will be invisible from the Castle Creek and Midnight Mine Roads. The building envelope is shielded from. public view by dense stands of mature vegetation. Physical disruption of the project site will be minimal and limited to the building envelope. No significant alteration of the existing topography will be required to accommodate either the proposed residence or its access driveway. All site disruption will be revegetated to reduce erosion and potential visual impacts. Outside illumi- nation will be kept to a minimum and comply with applicable County standards. Based on the above, the proposed develop- ment is consistent with the provisions of Section 5-105 of the Code. S. !-ir Quality As the project site is located outside of the so- called "Aspen Metro Area", wood burning devices are limited to one (1) conventional fireplace and one (1) certified stove per structure. As the proposed residence will comply with this requirement, the development is consistent with the provisions of Section 5-106 of the Code. B. 1041 Hazard Review Pursuant to Section 5-400.2 of the Code, "any use which is allowed by right in the underlying zone district 12 ODDfl~~j naturally occurring geologic hazards.. In, the interest, of ~°"°1 safety, all visible areas of previous mining activity located on the property will be filled or otherwise covered as recommended. 2. Wildfire Hazard Areas The Colorado State University "Wildfire Hazard Area Map" depicts the property as located within a designated area of severe wildfire hazard due to the presence of trees. In order to mitigate this hazard, the Applicant will adhere to the guidelines. contained, in the Colorado State Forest Service booklet entitled "Wildfire Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowners". More specifically, all hazardous vegetation will be completely removed within fifteen (15) feet of the proposed structure. Existing trees within a radius of thirty (30) feet will be thinned as recommended, and branches. removed to a height of ten (10) feet to eliminate so-call,ed_"ladder fuels" from the immediate site area. These proposed mitigation techniques will be reviewed with the State°s District Forester and modified and/or supplemented to meet the unique require- ments of the Applicant's property as may be required. To further enhance fire protection, a two thousand (2,000) gallon water storage tank will be installed as recommended in $chmueser Gordon Meyer's letter. In addition to meeting domestic needs, the tank will supply a standard yard hydrant which will provide an initial fire response when 14 ~~~U~G -.. __.. _. <. ..M1n..~M.A . r, .._... ... .. a, nA_ .. .r i..w.~ m ..+... .m. rt~.u:.2a ¢v,. .. urr us31r41k ~°'"~ the residence is occupied. During those periods when the. residence is vacant, an internal sprinkler system will be utilized to prevent a fire originating within the structure from spreading to surrounding properties. While accessibility for fire protection vehicles will be lmited,_durng the winter months, the likelihood of wildfire hazard is also, greatly diminished. 15 ~~~~~~ APPENDIX A o~~~a<< ~~°; PITKIN COUNTY YatE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE S.,''~--~R' Y EXHIBIT 1 DATE: 10/30/90 PLANNER: E.S. F PROJECT: Matthews 1041/General Submission - Eva Belle and Little Dick Lodes' APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann REPRESENTATIVE'S PRONE: 925-6958 OWNER'S NAME: Matthews SUMMARY 1. Type of Application: 1041 Special Review and General Submission 2. Describe action/type of development being requested:_ 3. Areas in which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested: 4. Review i~ before: (P&Z only) (BOCC only) (P&Z & BOCC) 5. Public Hearing: (Yes) (No) At: (P&Z) (BOCC) (LOTII P&Z & POCC` 6. The applicant needs to post a sign for each public hearing pursuant to Section G-3.~! of the Code. YES (NO) 7. Did you tell applicant to submit list of ADJACENT PROPERTI' O:4NERS? YES (NO) Disclosure of Owhership: YE> (NO) S. number offaftf??copies of the application to be submitted: 10 Policy Area/ Referral Anent Comments ~-~ 9. What fee was applicant requested to subm~c 51.670.00 10. Anticipated date of submission: Form Na 1402.87 (4.6.90) ALTA Owners Policy EXHIBIT 2 POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE ,., _ - , ,.,: ~„_~ '3G IS~CEU li}' First American Title .insurance Company SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE_CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE B AND THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS,`~IRST Ah+l`ERICAN 71TlE1NSURANCE`C"OMpANY, a California corporation, herein called the Company, insures, as of Date of Policy shown ri Scfiedule'A, against loss or damage, not exceeding the Amount of Insurance stated in Schedule A, sustainetl oi`'incurted by the insured by reason of: 1. Title to the estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested other than as stated therein; 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the title; 3. Unmarketability of the title; 4. Lack of a right of access to and from the land. The Company will also pay the costs, attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in defense of the title, as insured but only to the extent provided in the Conditions and Stipulatiohs: First American Title Insurance Company BY ~~~ PRESIDENT 7 L J S~ U ATTEST ~~ G ~Z~~ /. SECRETAR}, H J ~1. OGO~~? ~,: ... .. ~: ,, ~..~ r~oRAxnuM TO: County Attorney Assistant to the County Manager Environmental xealth Department Division. of. Wildlife Zoning Little Annie Homeowners Assn. Fire Marshal Pitkin County Sheriff ` U, S. Forest Service FROM: Ellen Sassano, Planning Office RE: Matthews General Submission & 1041r,Hazard Review _ .r..,.~~.,. ._, .... ,:.. . ~... . DATE: May 1, 1991 Attached for your review and comments.„is an,.application,submitted by John Matthews requesting General submission and 1041 Hazard.. Review approval for a single-family residence. o later than May 31, 1991. Please return your comments to _ me nrR a ,._ . ,~, Thank you. recycledpaper ®~~~~ __.~___ .. ~ ,~, ASPEN/PITRIN PLANNING:., OFFICE 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 FAX# (303) 920-5197 May 1, 1991 Sunny Vann Vann & Associates 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Matthews General Submission and 10,41 Hazard Review Dear Sunny, This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is complete. Ellen has asked that you provide a map which shows the building envelope, access drive and Midnight Mine Road as they relate to each other. We have scheduled this application for review at a public hearing by the Pitkin Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, August 6, 1991 at a meeting to begin at 9:00 AM. 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 the subject property with a sign for the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call Ellen Sassano, the planner assigned to your case. Sincerely, Debbie Skehan, Office Manager -- '`~,~ A~~ ~ ~ FORES SERVICE State Services Building August 19 , 1992 222 s. brn street, room aie Grand Junction, Cobrado R150t Telephone (303) 245-7325 Joanna Schaffner Aspen/Pitkin Co. Planning Dept. 130 S. galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Mathews Property 1041 Wildfire Hazard Review Dear Ms. Schaffner, On August 13, 1992 1 visited the Mathews property with Steve Crockett of the Pitkin Co. Sheriff's Dept. and Wayne Poulsen's representative, Hermine Hessen. Since this proposed cabin site is outside of any fire protection district boundary, wildland fire suppression responsibility would fall under the jurisdiction of the Pitkin Co. Sheriff. It would be an unrealistic expectation that the response time of any fire suppression equipment could save a structure in this area. Anyone living in this area should anticipate only self-rescue for any kind of emergency. Wildfire hazards on the building site could be significantly mitigated by clearing and maintaining a defensible space according to CSFS standards (given to Ms. Hessen 8/13/92). Of particular concern is the proximity of the spruce, fir and lodgepole pine trees on the east side of the building envelope and also along what will be the road access to the site from the southeast. -All branches on trees within 60 feet of the edge of the building envelope or the edge of the road leading to the building envelope should be removed to a height of at least 10 feet from the ground. -The forest stand within 60 feet of the road or building envelope should be thinned to remove enough trees so that no tree crowns touch. Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. Sincerely, \C~^--'~~ G- --~ls~------- John W. Denison District Forester cc: Steve Crockett Wayne Poulsen OG€~x~(i i~34HBB'3 r, :3/92 14q 4 sec ~. «c~ RF'. b8 G 3?6': Silvia Davis, t'itkin Cnty Clerk, Doc ffi.c~r~ WAIVER AND RELEASE RNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT the undersigned JOHN MATTHEWS, being the record owner of the Eva Bella Lode (U.S.M.S. No. 1808) and the adjoining Little Dick Lode (U.S.M.S. No. 1843) in Pitkin County, Colorado (together the "Subject Property"), having requested and received development approval for a part-time use residence on the Subject Property (pursuant to Resolution No. PZ-91-41 dated August 6, 1991) with full knowledge of the remote location and difficulty of access to the Subject Property, hereby assumes for himself and his successors and assigns in the ownership of the Subject Property, all risk which may arise out of said inaccessibility and 'waives and releases any claim which he may have at any time against Pitkin County, the County Sheriff or Fire District, arising out of any difficulty or delay encountered in emergency response to the Subject Property or out of the difficulty or impossibility of access to the Subject Property in adverse weather conditions. ~f~ Executed this day of September, 1992. JohY1 Matthews v'' STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Th 'foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this p ~h day of yt,,C~r` ~ 1992 by John Matthews. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: ~~, ~ 'lV~ ~~ 7 ~ c 3 N C' `~ iozoz. ®~'~.L~. :,., .. CERTIFICATE OF MAILING RE: Matthews I hereby certify that on this 3rd day of July, 1991, a true and correct copy of the attached Notice of Bublic Hearing was ss osta a re a de osjted i pthp U ~ted States mail, firpspt-cla P g p p ist to the adjacent property owners as indicated o kin ofpad'acent ro ert owners which was su lied to theaAspen~pitid, Planning Office.. by the applicant in regard to the case named on the Public Notice. By: Debbie Skehan Office Manager frm.mailing OGO~U y ~ a ~; ,. ~ ,,.e ,,_ _. ~ ~ a, PUBLIC NOTICE RE: MATTHEWS 1041 HAZARD REVZEiP AND GENERAL SUBMISSION ' NOTICE I,S HEREBY GIVEN that a continued. public hearing will be held on Tuesday, August 6, 1991 at a meeting to begin at 9:00 A.M. before the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission, Commissioner's Meeting Room, 806 East Main Street, Aspen, to consider an application submitted by John Matthews requesting 1041 Hazard Review and General Submission approval for a single-family residence to be located off of Midnight Mine Road in the Little Annie area of Aspen 2+Iountain on two contiguous patented mining claims, the Eva Bella Lode and the Little Dick Lode. For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 South Galena St., Aspen, CO (303) 920-5090. s/Jim Reser, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Published in The Aspen Times on June 27, 1991. Pitkin County Purchase Order No. ~~~? St~3 ~, ,--: Order No. 401011 ADJACENT OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE ASPEN TITLE CORPORATION, a corporation orgahized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Colorado, fIEREBY CERTIFIES That it has made a careful and diligent search of the records in the office of the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County, Colorado, and has determined that those persons, firms or entities set forth on the Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein and made a part hereof, reflect the apparent owners of lots, tracts, parcels and condominium units lying adjacent to the following described real property situate, lying and being in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, to wit: Set forth on the Exhibit "B" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein This Certificate has been prepared for the use and benefit of the above Warned applicant and the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. THE LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY HEREUNDER TS EXPRESSLY LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT OF TFIE FEE PAID FOR THIS CERTIFICATE PLUS $250.00. DATE: April 10, 1991 ASPEN TITLE CORPORATION, a Colorado cor/p°ra~,io By: /Zit`/°~'%C,~, ~~ ~. ~. ;- EXHIBIT "A" Q I) Castle Creek Investors, Tnc., a Colorado corporation c/o John W. Miller, President Miller Corporation Box 267 Cambridge City, Indiana 47327 2) William E. Clark and Lois P. Clark _ P.O. Boz 362 Aspen, CO 3) David B. Garth P.O. Box 2464 Park City, Utah 4) John I. Boslough and James G. Boslough No address given in recorded document 5) United States of America jT r.:44 ._ 4v^---'- printedonrecYCledPaPer -~ ~..~~~. ~.""~°` PUBLIC NOTICE RE: MATTHEWS VESTED RIGHTS "" ' NOTICE IS HEREBY`GIVEN-"TO SHE" GENERAL PUBLIC that qn August 6, 1991, the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission approved the site specific development plan for the 1~Tatthews'-1041 Hazard Review & General Submission. The property shall be vested for a period of three years from the da~e'of approval. For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, 920-5094: ' s/Jim Reser. Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Published in The Aspen Times on October 3, 1991. Pitkin County Purchase Order No. tl ^~~ z, :~ t; : s ~,-~,- -....'.-~u. .e.._...,.sfw m .- .,~ri~u~YU,..~ :..~:Kmn-gn~amw,m ~ ,m. a3 -__ MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Ellen Sassano From: John Ely Postmark: Jun 27,91 3:37 PM Subject: Mathews Message: This application look question with regards not show the easements are the only ones that DOOIW s OK as far as ownership and access. My only to access is that the application I have does and therefore I dont know if the two easements are necessary ----------=====X=====___-°- HOLLAND & HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW DENVER DENVER TECH CENTER COLORADO SPRINGS ASPEN BILLINGS BOISE CHEYENNE WASHINGTON, D.C. 600 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO Blbt 1 September 8, 1992 Hand Delivered Joanna Schaffner Pitkin County Zoning Enforcement Officer 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 a a r'°t ~~~~~. I ~ S"EP 9 ~t TE (303)925-3476 ~ Jgyj TE1~~303)926.A36Z_ I+_,./ ART}3UR C. DAILY Re: John Matthews 1041 Approval-Eva Bella Lode Dear Joanna: As you requested of Wayne Poulsen, I am enclosing for your file the signed and acknowledged original of John Matthews' Waiver and Consent with respect to the inaccessibility of the Eva "?, Bella Lode. Please let me know if I ACD/jg Enclosure cc: John Matthews (w/copy) 00®111 can be of further assistance. Si.ncerel~, ,,. .. ®" ~'~+^ J ~ Arthur C. Dl aily ;for Holland & Hart .. _.....,:, ., ~_u..,.. ~,.;~ ~ .~.n,., „~~,. ~.~k »~r d~_ EXHIBIT "[3" AARCf-I. A° The EVA Br1LA Lode Mining patented and described in Book 11 at Page 9, Claim (United States Mineral Survey No, 1808>, as United States Patent recorded Rpgust 14, 1883, in TOGETHER WI'iH that certain easement for purposes of ingress and egress, and for the installation, maintenance and use of underground utilities, as created, defined and established in that certain Easements Agreenent between Castle Creek Investors, Inc., a Colorado corporation, and John Matthews recorded March 1, 1991, !n Book 540 at Page 778, said easement being mare partlc„!arty describeG as follows: An easement situated in Section 36, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P. M., PitkTn County, Q~lorado, located within the Mattie Sei le Lode (U. S. M. S. No. 4147) and the Little Susie Lode (U. S. M. S. No. 6806), and being 30 feet In width lying 15 feet on each side of the fol lowing described centerlihe: Beginning at a point on I ine 2-3 of the Eva Bet la lode, U. S. M. S. No. 1808, whence Corner 3 of said Eva Bella Lode lies North 09°05'00" East, 29.44 feet; thence along the center) the of ah existing road the fol lowing four courses: South 89°5732" East, 60.93 feet; thence South 81°5427" East, 46.06 feet; thence South .72°13'02" East, 92.00 feet; thence South 85 °4137" East, 143.29 feet, more,or less, to the centerline of the Midnight Ml he Road, the point of ending. The LITTLE DICK Lode Mining Claim (United States Mineral Survey No. 1843), as patented and describad In United States Patent'recorde~ Ju!y 21, 1883, In Bcaok it at Page 5. County of Pttkin, State of Colorado. oan~~a an a of electrtCal utilities to your i=es'Idencel $e further adviseoners in order to emend Y Grp cl that any extension into this area wif~iout sucfi~ approval will be"dee~edto be~unauthorizec't development activity and subject to all sanctions contained iti t"fie Firkin County i.and'LTse Code and Cotora9o State Statutes. - If you hade`an`y questions, please contact this office. V ry truly yours, im th E. Whitsitt itkin my Attorney - TEWrch cc: BOCC Reid Haughey Cindy Houben Suzanne Konchan ~ ~ tl ~ r ~r 112 Administrafion 530 E.Main, 3rtl Ftoor County Commissioners SuRe B County Attorney Personnel and Finance rr'anspoitabon Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 920-5200 506 E. Main Street Aspen CO 81811 Sute 1 530E Main Street As 'e'n Cb 3i"8i'f. P Suite F 530 E. Main "Stiteet Facilities 76 Sernce Center Road FAX 920-5198 (303) 920'-5f5D -..., _.., , .. ... (303)320=51'90~~' _ Aspen, CO 8161 f- (303)920-5'20 Aspen, CO 8161 f (303)920-5390' printed on receded oaoer M E M O R A N D U M TO: Ellen Sassano, County Planning FROM: Joanna Schaffner, County Zoning.. DATE: June 7, 1991 RE: Matthews General Submission & 1041 Hazard Review -------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I have reviewed the above application and have no zoning concerns at this time. On~i~a~ .i ~.....~.r-.rw ~ `N'. ~p w. xv.. As enuColoaler vtr` - Mr. -..~w - p' rado 8'1'6'11„~.: _.. .. .. ,a e. (303) 92;0-5090. , LANtl USE APPLICATION FEES N` a ,~, •. ~z~. ,~,~, f.~.~< ,.~ . F,, .,.,, ~~ ,: ~~:-~,,. .. City - ~D0113 -63250."134 GMP/CONCEPTUAL rr, a ,~,,~r„ -63270`1"6 a-. ,G`~1~11~/~ r ._,. ~~ ~ _ -63280-137 ~ `. SUBS/~OOf~,L'"~PTUA,L ............. a, .. .. ~~_ ~aM,~~,rsr~ " "' 63300-139 SUB/FINAL -63310-140 ALL 2 STEP APPLICATIONS waY a , s, I,o a ry-.,n ~. rci~ r -;~,. ,.,, -63320-141 ALL i-ST~P /SPPLICAONS/ - _ y ~,~,~ ,., ; ,, ._" ~, C'tlNS'ENT"IC~ENbA1TEMS ,~.. R'EF'E'FRAL FEES" . 00125 63340-2h05 '- ~ ~1(f~IEN~ra~H~EA~„LTH 00123' 63340-190 `--'~'~~''NO -~~~' ~ - ' 63380-163 ENGINEERING - It _.~ 00115-.. ~.. ... .>. ". .,~,,:~~w:~., N,; ,., ..: - SUBTOTAL. ... _ .:._.,.. s::: ~. c -. •: 'County. _. ...::. ,. ... .. 00118 GMP/GENERAL ,, ,,, ~._ _. .. ,AILED-.. _ _ GMP/DES(, GMP/FINAL ` ~ ~~ ~.. .,.. ~a„_ SlY6/DETAILED SUBIFI NAL ' bLL 2'STEP APPLICATIONS --_a~~~+ ALL f=5'fEP d.PPLICAT(`Ot5"S! ' ~" "` ° ` '" "' " ` r.: ' ~ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS M .w .,. -.~ ~n~~e~. -"=- ~- -63450 146 BOARD, OP ADJUSTN~ENT ~' ~~'~~ REFERRAL FEES: '~ 00125 -63340205, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH" ,SSrO~a ~; • ~ 00123 ~ 63340 190 "HOUSING r 0 `;l 00113 -63"36`d 143'" ENGINEERING ~/ .,_ ~,. ~w , ,.,. ,;. .. e.. .. '~ PCA"NNING OFFICE SALES -- `._ 00113 G30801~22w",. ,~ .CITY/COUNTY`CODE ", *,., s. -5309~0-123... CoTv1P:'~YAN _ .:.. ..' ~~. . , ".. -69000 145 "...... OTHEREES"`. :. ~- _~ n ^ .. i ~~q9 rryy SU OTAL QQ~it4 TOTAL ~,. :,. ~ _... Check #" ~~ Additional bilimg _ .. ~. wN ~~~ ~~ ~N ""~ ,4Sf~E1"r'~~ 130'South Galei._ .. .. _,; „,~,,e~,, ,Asp~n Coloratlgl . (303) 02tl=5U9 LAND U'SE APPCfCd'flt9TJ'~EE'S' ciiy ` _ 00113 -6325b-733 "GMP/COf~'~~`PT ~' ~ 63270-13fi' GMP/Fl(5AL" `"~ -6328b 737 SG6yCORCEp7l .., 83300=1$9 . - '~ 5~'~B/~'~/'1'~"'":". -633T0-740 ' 'ALC 2"37EP"Y~~PF - ~ ~ - 63320,T4T ALL 7 ST~'P~A'P') " ~ ~ CONSEtJTAGEt ~•~ REFERRAL: FEES " ~' ~b0'725` fii33d020'S' ~" ~~~ ENV~I~S6F1'MEIJ'1i 00123 -~_~ -6334b T96" Y~fOf7$1~1~ ""°'""" < 00175 b38d`o=183"-' ENGIT~E~FiTF~G ~~ ~. r ,. r„ _ 7roonry ..._ _ - ~" '00113 -6'316`6'i26' ~~" GrvIP7GET)ERA"C° ' -6'3170`727 ~ GI41b%b~`fb~l7.°E'D'~ ~; ; 63180 iQ8'ti G~I'P%~FINAL ~~"~' ~:~; ^~ ~ ~ 63f90'i''~{{"~ ~ SUB'/GEI~ERAC~ ~ 63260-730~~ S~BIDE`fATCEO~" 63210-531 5073~15TA'C"""""' ~ ~ ° ~ ~-63220 732"' ALL 2-STEP FiPP 6323'0 533' ~~ AL'L 1 STEP'A"PYs " ~ .~..63450`1d6~~.: 8('S71RD'°OF°`A~1C t .A'YT~~v1S~ _n _. __. - Topography Sr~rve, y Map Building `Slue Eva Bella Lode, M.S. No. 1817.8 Garfield Land District .~. ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~. ,w ~,\ \ \ ~\ \. .Section 36, T.10,5'., R.85W., 6th P.M. Pi thin County, Colorado ~~ ~~~ \~~~~1 \ ~ (jai ~. ~r.>- ~t. 1" 5 ~.t ODU11~ /wad. r m...` an sw n.r ee.sv a,~.........~ e., a~.. ~;~ ~ ~,;, ~w~Aw dnea~ r°'. ~~\\~ yv \ ~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~;~~~~\~ ~ ~ ~\\\` , ~, t ~` .~ ~~ SYIRYBYpRS ~: AWG/NCBRS !/B' .Y.' 6th SJrae{ .Suite 200 ClenuroaJ sp++rtgs Lblvnm Blb'Ol ~ Aspv ~ 9Calorado ~9 ~f 9P5967P9~ (q//af MOe YwI ~ /YIY - ~ ~1t - ~ ~.• Yl~b l~ - Jhw-tsYi.~Y~Rw M-~rrY~+a ~ ir~ld/iW . {{ pia L /iR~ Ny • IgY~~I t~f i~4s • ?ie 1rr/ Orak •..~ w~ i! Y 4.I .Y~/ -.pie ~ /P~!'wlii ~ N ~I ~re'.- ~ ,.~ • ~ .~ ~/ 1~ --.~--w®ae+xur so+ R!'tlB11V fmM1 _•;~"~~M~~~w•M ~I _ -.am ar ur w mwr. - "---.-x main ®m.u o a.szv w~wu LIfiC LfaOtA -~-.wrvnrarur a . vomit jy -•-~ ur _ w o _.wwK~ ww+ ~ ~ ~ . flb ^11y.y. 4p .1111Y s.l MIi~I Yr J~irr 7Yr'~yy /sue. M. MwMi •. -.- nwvarue --+-none virvr o .,~„~,~ .~~ ~. - _ •~ YYYb ~Ii (A'L ret~'Ws/ hNt d00' LNG. ~ ~/ w/ Orsl b YW M dS ms nmus ® ~na.a i ^ y -awnaYwa wimarer - ~ / P~ .. '.~F.r QiI4aY. d../b A~f - AMiYr /M~ a~f A'tiw ~IrN eI.R - ~ ~ ~ M.Y qN ~IM~6MYY- - ~ .~ .ewer wz d NYC PROPERTY ~§''Yfl BsfL~9 LOlJ~' .ors ~>aoa u