HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.273512305001 (1982)DOCUMENT LAYOUT
THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION
LISTED BELOW IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER
Summary Sheet
Resolution for the BOCC and/or P&Z
Ordinance for the BOCC and/or P&Z
Determination for the Hearing Officer
Administrative Determination
Staff Memo
Application
Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter
Site Plan
Miscellaneous
Plat copies (11x17)
PARCEL1D: 2735-123-OS-001 DATE RCVD: ~ #COPIESir- CASE NO 1982
CASE NAME: VoughVHefner Road Vacation Planners
PROJ ADDR:
OWN/APP:'. Vought, Peter and H ADR~ GS2i~- PHN:~
REP: ADR:~ ClS2i~~~PHN:~
Email Addr: '.
FEES DUE:~-
FEES RCVD:-
ALLOCATED HOURS:~-
%OVER:
REF: BY~, ,. DUE:.-
MTG.DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED DATE OF FINAL ACTION:.:-
. ~~ r- No ~J gOCC Reso: 82-29 #240145
NO ~'
~. No ~ BOCC Ord:..
REMARKS. FILE RETURNED FROM ELY 7/14/05 - ON SHELF PZ:
HRG OFF:
CLOSED:- BY:.~ HO INDEX:.-
ADMIN: ~-
PLA7 RECORDED- PLAT (BK,PG): B77 P71 B15 P24 ~ ADMIN INDEX:
VR APPROVAL DATE: ~- ' VR EXPIRES:,
CASE TYP:, RoadVacation CASE TYPS[
CASETYP2: CASETYPB:
CASE TYP3: . CASE TYP7•..
CASE TYP4: ~ Date Scanned: 8/3/09
File Location; Boz 171
• R^sS0?~C'~IOIQ OI' TiIF AOARi~ OP COUNTY ,yi~t~~~ r~~~ ~L7
COPIMZSSIONGRS OF PITY.IN COUNTY, COLOI2ADU lV~
', VACATING CERTAIN ROAD RTGIiTS-OF-v~AY
Resolution No. 82- 29
IQHEREAS, Keith Iicfner and Peter Vought did by deed of record
at Book 413 Page 3 of the records of the PitY.in County Cler}: and
Recorder quitclaim to the Board of County Commissioners all of their
right and interest in certain private roadway easements lying over
and across a parcel of land described on Exhibit A (attached hereto and
incorporated by this reference), and
[4fiER°AS, said grant further provided that "in the event any portion
of the property conveyed hereby is vacated by•grantees, their heirs,
successors and assigns no longer deemed a public road or right-of-way,
all interest granted herein shall revert to Grantors, their heirs,
successors and assigns", and
S•7HEREAS, the Board has initiated proceedings to vacate the roadway
described in Exhibit A pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, Section, 43-2-301 et seq.
and Title II Section 4-4 of the Pitkin County Code (Land Use Code), and
~dHEREAS, the Board has found, with respect to said proceedings,
that:
1. Vacation of the right-of-way will leave no land adjoining
the roadway without an established public road connecting
said land with another es±ablished public road inasmuch as
the roadway to be vacated does not connect with any established
public road or roadway networY.. .
2. There is adequate reasons for the vacation, namely:
(a) The easements were accepted for dedication under the
misunderstanding that they were contiguous to a dedicated
road and was merely an extension of the public road
system. This has been found not to be true.
(b) There has been raised questions as to (i) the oornership
interest of Vought and Iier`ner in the casements conveyed
and. (ii) their a5ili.ty to dedicate nriv~ztc roadway
easements to the public.
- 1 -
i
(e) ^he road ~~dication was made in con~'~,.ction with.
a subdivision application which has been denied. It
' would be inequitable (under the circumstances) to
retain these rights of way.
Alf as further described the Board of County Commissioners' Resolution
81-123.
NOSY, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners
of Pitkin County, Colorado, that it does hereby vacate those roadway
easements over and across that parcel of land described in Exhibit
"A" attached hereto and incorporated by this reference acquired by
deed of record at Book 413 Page 3~of the records of the Pitkin County
Clerk and Recorder.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that nothing herein shall be construed as
a determination by the Board that the dedication made by said deed
constituted a legally sufficient dedication to the public use and
that the Board has made a legally sufficient acceptance of the same.
BE IT FURTHER R°SOLVED that all interests vacated hereby shall
revert to Peter Vought and Keith Hefner all as provided in said deed.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that this resolution shall be filed in
the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, all as provided
by Title II Section 4-4.4(a) of the Pitkin County Code (Land Use Code).
Approved by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting held this 22 day of MARCII
~•..•' ,' BOARD OF
A ` , ,-~- , P L O
~. ,
~,ewY~s Scanlan 3e
Ts~eput~_~ CJ.erk and Recorder Chai
•~ -~
APPFnOVETJ AS TO FORP2:
/~ ,/-/~~
andra M. Stuller
County Attorney
1982.
COPflP4IS S TONERS
n P~arider
...
..
:_
~ ~ ~ ~'1
~ ~ ~7~ ~7r'i,
;.
.~
_•
• .~
A PARCEL OF I,FL*ID SITUATED IN'LOT 13 OF SECTION 12,
'['O6i15HI? 10 SOUTH, ?~.NG ES YIEST OF THE 6TEi P. •14.,
GAP^~ IELD COUP:TY, CGLOt2=u7O, BEI`TG 2•SORE' FULLY DESCP.IP.;'.D
A.S FCLLG,+S
_ T -- _.-. POINT ~•'.°\C E THE :•:ITNLSS CO_^-~:E3 FOR
THE SGUTEI 1/-"- C`J?2+ER OF Si:ID SECTI0:1 12 BE Ai2S
N 84°55`31" E 213.27 FEE,; .
THENCE CJ 70°12'CO" .•7 25.95 FEET TO A POIN^1 ON THE
[~7iSTEr~S.Y LINE OF THE RIGHT OF L•7AY RESERVED Itd DOCU:~LNT
RECORDED IN 3O0K 30'S AT PAGE 760, PITI:IN COUNTY RECORDS;
THE"i.F ~ 44°56'00" ~ 36.78 .FEET ALONG SAID ?'TESTERLY LINE
' THENC.. iI L
TO A POINT C21 TE:E i•:ESTERLY EDGE OF A T°~VELED RC~i~AY;
THENCE CI 39°05'52" E 14.90 F?ET AL07G SAID FiESTERLY
•EDGE;
THENCL.N 44°34`14" E 51.59 FEET ALONG SAT_D S~'ESTERLY
EDGE;
THENCE N 49°07"59" E 32.29 FELT ALONG SAID itiTESTEP,Y
EDGE; "
" THENCE N 50'°16' 32" E 3.66 FEET ALOD:G StaID;',':ESTE".~.Y
EDGE TO A POINT 0.7 TY.E *:ORT_iEASTE:RLy LINE OF TEI.'.' "
PROPERTY DESCRIED IN 3001: 334 A^t Pi~GE 523, P?'=i:IN
COUNTY RE CC?JS;
THENCE S 56°SE'00" E 19-37 FEET ALOCdG TEiE *:ORTrE?-STEsLLY
LINE OF SAID PRO?ESTY DESCRISLD" ICI BOCK 334 AT °+GE 523
AND TEE SOUT~II.7ESTEP.LY LINE OF THAT FROPERTY DESC.°.IBED
IN EXHIBIT "E" OF CIVIL ACTION 4E62;
THENCE N 55°55'00" E 91.66 FEET ALONG TN.E SOUTEIEASTEP.LY
DINE OF SAID EXHIBIT "E" A.'VD THE NORTEi+IESTERLY LI.:E OF
THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DOCUi•1ENT RECORDED AT
RECEPTION NO. 105468, PITFIN COUNTY RECORDS;
'1•K
.
L
' ,
`
{
t
.
•r
' •
4
• ,
a ~
' - . •, .:
t
1
i ~ ,.
. ,. .
., ~ .
.....
._
.
l' ~ r.r. .~ __. ..
~ -e .. - ~. .-.-.~...r • • • ..-
- q}IENCE 15.84 FEET, MO RE OR LESS ON ANON-TANGENT CL'R'JE
O
~
TO THE LEFT HAVIIIG A RADIUS OF 572.9T
F
~EPOINT 0 rII
"
OF 4THICH CU2VE BEARS O
E,
S 78°04'25
THE ROAI?t?AY EASE'-LENT ?F'SERVED IN
SOUTFIEASTEF.LY LT_NE OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 105968;
DOCUidENT _°F.CORDED AT
°55'00" W 118.72 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY
' THENCE S 55
LINE; ~ 44°56'00" tQ
THENCE 126:64 FEET ALOI•iG SAID
S 31°48'00" W 77. 80 'FEET ALONG SAID
THENCE
' SOUTHEASTE_P%Y LINE FSID THE SOUI'i"S='`%`~LY EXTENSION
TFIEREOF TO THE POINT OF' BEGICiNING.
•
•
~-~ ' ....
.
' .. ~
' ..
!
' -
• ;i
e
t
..
_. ._ _ _.
_.
9i1OK ~~~ 47drE U~ .
' •
,. ; 3 B 04D
_
D
= V ~ - E
19
a5
f . \ R57`~ `
\~ ~~
S ....
~
' ~qS 9\ee
(y '' ' ~
c6
~Ot i~~ i~
/' "
~~
yh
i ~ 'til j'~ . /y / ~' S
ZASACKY +`' ~'`~i/
0 0 '
•' ;~,
~ BOOK 331 ?~ ~rv ~ Fy i
'
'
1 ~ PAGE 523 ~
/ ~ GOUYD: v L:W VLASCAP L S 23ie
'
'
;
/
/ /
/ •
`/
"r/
3 /
,~((N i
/
/
~`;~
_
_
A
/ _
.~ i ~ F~
w ~"i F
G~ // ~e
j ip G'y.
,o c. ~
/ a
3
S ~ ' .ti .~
~
/
~
.
b ~
RINKER
GS
-,O
REC. ~ 105468
vL~S. CAV L.5 27i6
, CANTRUP
,Sn^,i
9 ~ '
~.
/
iOUND: a
YLL4GN RAS
,/__M1T __
/ h ~ ~
i
,. ~~_ _
'
, ~ `'
.
-~ i ~
b
~
.
'I /
M
f1~f: raER
Iicrordcd ul _._... _.____-.o'clock ___hl., _. _.__.-_-._____. ~ _.__-.__________
Reception No.. __+ ...___.__. _____ _..___.__._____..___.___.._+, ____Iirrordcr.
R;/CORDER'S STAMP
TIIISDF.EU, Mrulcthin dnyof March ,10 $2,
between Pitkin County Board of County Commissiont~rs
of the County of Pl.tkln and state of
Colorado, of the fi rst part, and Keith Hefner and
Peter Vouqht
whose Icgal udd ress is P • O. BOY. 215$, Aspen, COlOradO, $1612 &
Rt. 7, Box 53V, Santa P'e, New Plexico 87501 respectively.
ofthe county of Pitkin and stateot Colorado
Colorado, of the second part,
W ITNESSE'pll, That the said party of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of One
DOllar ($1.09) ----------------------------------------------°-------- DOLLARS,
to the said party of the first part in hand paid by the said partleg of the second part, the receipt whereof i
is hereby confessed and acknowledged, has remised, released, sold, conveyed and QUIT CLAIMED, and by these '~,
presents does remise, release, sell, convey and QUIT CLAM unto the said parLLeS of the second part,thelr heirs,
successors and assigns, forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand which the said party of the first part I
hag in and to the following described lot or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the County
of Pitkin and State o}' Colorado, to wit:
A parcel of land situated in lot 13 of section 12, taanship 10 south, range 85
west of the 6th P.M., Garfield County, Colorado, being more fully described as
follows:
Beginning at a point whence the witness corner for the south 1/4 corner of said
section 12 bears N 84055'31" E 813.27 feet;
Thence N 70012'00" iq 25.95 feet to a point on the westerly line of the right of
way reserved ir. doctunent recorded in Book 365 at Page 760, Pitkin County Rewrds;',,
Thence DI 31048'00" E 91.27 feet along said westerly line; thence N 44056'00" E ~~
36.78 feet along said westerly line to a point on the westerly edge of a
traveled roadway; Thence N 39005'52." E 14.90 feet along said westerly edge;
Thence N 4403.'11" E 51.59 feet along said westerly edge; Thence N 49007'59" E
32.29 feet along said westerly edge; Thence N 56016'32" E 3.66 feet along said
westerly edge *_o a 1roint on the rortl:easterly line of that property described in '
Book 334 at Page 523, Pitkin County Records; Thence S 58048'00" E 19.37 feet
along the northeasterly line of said property described in book 334 at page 523
and the southwesterly line of that property described in Exhibit "E" of Civil
Action 4862; Thence N 55055'00" E 91.66 feet along the soutl-,easterly line of said:,
Exhibit "E" and dthe ~}orthwesterly line of that property (see other side) !j
also known as street an num er j ~
TO IIAVE AND TO HOLD the same, together with all and singular the appurtenances and privileges thereunto
belonging or in anywise thereunto appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest and claim whatsoever, of the
said party of the first part, either in law or equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said parties of
the second part, elrheirs and assigns forever.
IN WITNESS R'HEREOF, The said party of the first part ha S hereunto set 1tS hand
and seal the day and year first above written.
Signed, Sealed and Delivered in the Presence of
file en Kali-'n~ZlanHerucl; Qiairwot~anALi
Board of County Commissioners tSEALI
Pifkrn~un~Co oral
SEAL]
Lewis Scanlan
f ~SEAI.]
STATE OF COLORADO,
~ ss.
County of
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
is 836y' Helen Ka1in Klanderud, Chairwoman, Pitkin County Board of County
Commissioners and Lewis Scanlan, Deputy Clerk and Recorder.
My commission expires ,19 .Witness my hand and official seal.
VO. 933. QOIT CLAIM UF. F. D. Ili uJ1,,,J PuhliJUny, ?xa W, nib Av,., LakeamA. CU Xn`la-pnq+u.euoa_:,xa
N
N
Ti j~ ._ '1
i N ~ ~ Y
/ 1 r N
O O ~
a ~
~ i ~ n
n ~ y
~ n
Y i •O
1 L
N .~
d
j' N 7 ~
~~
U ~r
~ r
,y n
n
N
ti
..
n °o ~
U ~
a
A C
~ ~ `~
F
N y
a
H
H
r
0
a
d
O
A
H
0
k7
IH
r
`--~
N
d
c
described in doctinnent recorded at Reception No. 105463, Pitkin County Records;
Thence 13.84 feet, irore or less on anon-tangent curve to the left having a
radius of 572.96 feet, the chord of which curve bears S 78004'25" E, to a point
on the southeasterly line of the roadway easement reserved in docim~nt recorded at
said Reception No. 105468; 'thence S 55055'00" S^] 11.872 feet along eaid southeasterly
line; Thence S 44056'0" t4 126.64 feet along said southeasterly line; Thence
S 31°48'00" W 77.80 feet along said southeasterly line and the southeasterly
extension thereof to the point of beginning.
MEMORANDUM
T0: Board of County Commissioners
FROP1: Richard Grice, Planning Office
RE: Vacation of Vought/Hefner Road Dedication
DATE: March 1, 1982
This is a public hearing to consider a vacation at the insistence of the County
Commissioners of land (road and trail) dedicated to the public by Peter Vought
and Keith Hefner by agreement dated August 10, 1981. The road to be vacated
is described as "Exhibit C" to the attached agreement.
The reasons for the vacation are as follows:
a. The land was accepted for dedication under the misunderstanding that it
was contiguous to a dedicated road and was merely an extension of the
public road system. This has been found not to be true.
b. There has been raised questions as to (i) the ownership interest of
Vought and Hefner in the easements conveyed and (ii) their ability to
dedicate private road easements to the public.
c. The road and trail dedications were made in conjunction with a subdivision
application which has 4een denied. It would be inequitable (under the
circumstances) to retain these rights-of-way.
The only parties whose ingress and egress may be affected by the vacation are:
(a) Keith Hefner
P. O. Box 2150
Aspen, CO 81672
(b) Peter Vought
Route 7, Box 53V
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Planning Office Comments
The road which was dedicated to the public by the attached agreement dated
August 10, 1981, did not result in a continuation of the public road system
meeting Pitkin County`s minimum design standards. Thirty feet is the minimum
right-of-way width. Furthermore, .the Planning Office feels that it is not in
the County or the consumer's best interest for the County to accept the dedica-
tion of right-of-ways which are not contiguous to the public road system. Since
this dedication did not result in a continuation of the public road system
meeting the minimum right-of-way width, we recommend that you vacate the subject
easement.
Planning and Zoning Commision Recommendation
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application at their regular
meetings on January 5, 1982 and or February 2, 1982 and after extensive discussion
dedided to pass the matter on to the Board without a recommendation or a comment.
They simply preferred to defer the issue to tfie Board of County Commissioners.
~~
,, ~ AGItLEMENT
• CA 65(81)
WITNESSETFI this Agreement entered into this lOTlr day
of AUCUST ~ 1981, by and between Keith Flcfnor, hereinafter
referred to as "Hefner," Peter Vought, hereinafter referred
to as "Vought," collectively,lIefner and Vought shall be
referred to as "Grantors" and the Board of County Commissioners
of Pitkin County, Colorado, hereinafter referred to as
"Grantee;"
WHEREAS, Grantors
real property located
property is more fully
incorporated herein by
are the owners. individually of certain
in Pitkin County, Colorado. Hefner's
described at Exhibit A hereto anc'
this reference and Vought's property
is more particularly described at Exhibit B hereto and
incorporated .herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, said properties lie at the end of what has
been commonly known as South Seventh Street, located in the
County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, said street having been
a county road, but a portion thereof abutting Grantors'
properties having been previously vacated'by Grantee; and
WHEREAS, Grantee is willing to accept for dedication as
a public road a part of the previc~~sly vacated portior. of
• South Seventh Street, according to the following terms and
conditions set forth in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration and
the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the
parties agree as follows:
1. Acceptance for Dedication. Grantee, by motion
adopted at a public meeting on June 22, 1981, accepted for
dedication as a public road the portion of South Seventh
Street and certain easements and rights-of-way owned by
Grantors lyiny~~within the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, _
more fully described at Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference. Said acceptance for dedication is
without any responsibility, obligation or liability on the •
part of Grantee of any nature whatsoever including, without
limitation, snowplowing, maintenance, repair or general
iniprovcment of said roadway.
2. Conveyance a. Santee. Grantors, shal separate
instruments quitclaim to Grantee all rights and interest
that Grantors may have in and to South Seventh Street, as it
presently exists as a road in place, and all private rigtrts-
of-waY and easements of Grantors which lie adjacent to or
abutting said road in :place; said conveyance is more fully
described at Exhibit C attached hereto. Said instruments of
conveyance shall provide that all rights conveyed by Grantors
thereunder shall revert back to Grantors in the event Grantee
Y
shall vacate the portion of the roadway and easements and
rights-of-way accepted for dedication hereby and described
as Exh:.bit C attached hereto.
3. Trail Easement. Vought agrees to convey to Grantee
'a non-exclusive easement over a portion of Vought's property
described on Exhibit B hereto, along and within an alignment
described at Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference for purposes of a public pedestrian,
equestrian, bicycle and cross country skiing trail. .Said
conveyance shall be accomplished by separate instrument
which shall provide, among other things, the following:
A. No motorized vehicle shall be permitted along said
trail easement except for vehicles necessary for the maintenance
and repair of improvements to said trail;
B. The alignment of said trail shall not exceed
twenty (20) feet in width;
C. Grantee shall maintain the trail in good order and
repair and in a clean and safe condition at all times;
D. Grantee shall assume all liability for and shall
indemnify and hold harmless Vought from any and all claims,
demands, costs, actions or judgments arising from the use of
said trail by any person at any time;
4. Road Maintenance Agreement. FSefner and Vought
hereby agree to equally share the cost of maintenance,
repair and snowplocaing to the portion of the existing road in
place described at Exhibit C attached hereto. Said road
r.~aintenance and repair responsibilities sYiall be as necessary
to maintain the road .in its present condition as a gravel
surfaced road. IIcfner and Vought agree to maintain the road
-2-
..• .. 3 f
fn a passable condition for themselves, th~:ir guests-and
invitees and to members of the public. In determining
whether or not said road is maintained in a passable condition,
consideration shall be given to weather conditions and heavy
snowfall conditions cortimon in mountainous areas with the
provision that snowplowing shall be undertaken within a
reasonable time after significant accumulations of snow on
said road. It is understood and agreed that during heavy
snow>`alls, the road may experience periods of impassability
before and/or between reasonable snowplowing. The parities
hereto shall have no liability for damages occasioned by
reason of the impassability of ::aid road due to heavy snowfall
provided Hefner and Vought can demonstrate that they have
made reasonable arrangements for the plowing of said road on
an "as necessary" basis.
In the event either Hefner or Vought determines that
the existiAg roadway described at Exhibit C hereto is in
need of maintenance or repair, they shall notify each other
of the need for such maintenance and repair and shall agree
upon the extent of said repairs and select a contractor to
undertake said repairs. In the event the parties cannot
agree upon a contractor to undertake said repairs, bidding
shall take place with the lowest reputable bidder receiving
the contract for the repairs and/or maintenance. .The parties
shall reimburse each other for their share of then'costs of
said maintenance and/or repairs as such costs 'a re billed.
In the event either party does not contribute their share of
said costs within thirty (30) days after notification of the
billing of said costs, the other party may pay such sums on
behalf of the non-paying party and shall have the right to
place a lien upon the property of the non-paying party as
described at Exhibit A or B hereto respectively, to recover
the costs for all such maintenance and repairs in addition
to all other remedies that said party may have. As used in
this. agreement;,, maintenance. shall.includq snowplol~ing in
addition to..other routine. road maintenance actj.yities.,..
5. Indomnification of Grantee. llefncr and Vought
hereby jointly and severally agree to indemnify, defend and
-3-
hold harmless Grantcc from'and against any and alr ~~aims,
demands, actions, causes of actions, costs and/or expenses
which Grantee may be subjected to, which arise from the use
of the road, described at Exhibit C hereto. Grantee agrees
that it shall not settle or compromise any claim or demand
for which this indemnity is given without first notifying
Hefner and Vought of said claim or demand and obtaining the
written consent of Hefner and Vought to such settlement or
compromise. For any claims not within the scope of this
_.
indemnity,-such consent shall not be required. Grantee
shall give prompt notice, in writing, to Hefner and Vought
of any claim or demand for which this indemnity is given.
6. Notice. All notices required under the. terms of
this agreement shall be deemed given by mailing the same,
postage prepaid, in the United States mail, addressed to the
parties as follows:
Keith -Hefner
P.O. Box 2150
Aspen, Colorado 81612
Peter Vought '
Rt. 7 Box 53V
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
Board of County Commissioners
of Pitkin County
506 East Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Attention: County Attorney
or to any other address designated in writing by any of the
parties hereto.
7. Binding Effect and Covenant. The rights, duties
and obligations of Hefner and Vought respectively, contained
in this agreement shall be binding upon the respective
record owner(s) of the property described at Exhibit A and B
hereto, as they exist from time to time, and inure to the
benefit of the heirs, successors, and assigns of said record
owners and shall be deemed covenants running with the. land
described at Exhibit A and Exhibit B hereto. Hefner and
Vought, each individually shall be relieved of all liability
hereunder upon the conveyance of said party's respective '
=r,t~rest in the property ciascribed at. Exhibit 11 and/or .
Exhibit B hereto.
+ -4-
N y
8. Enforceability by Grantee. Grantee shall have the
right to enforce the terms of this Agreement and obligations
of maintenance, repair and snowplowing aG set forth herein
by suit for injunctive relief or damages; provided Grantee
"first gives 30 days notice in writing to the then record
owners of the property described at Exhibits A and B of the
claimed default in the terms of this Agreement. This right
of action to enforce the terms of this Agreement shall not
be assigned by Grantee and shall not create any rights in
third parties not parties to this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto set their hands
13TH
and seals this
day of AUGUST 1981.
// `.
STATE OF C9L4RABD ) ss.
COUNTY OF P-I~-KZN )
The foregoing Agreement was acknowledged before me this
day of 1981 by Keith Hefner
WITNESS my hand and official. seal.
My commission expires: ~~~5~. z~f, /S 8'3
NEW MEXICO
STATE OF COHOR~teB )
COUNTY OF PIT~.`fN )
SANTA FE
55.
_ The foregoing Agreement was acknowledged before me this
20th day of August , 1981 by Peter Vought.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
` ~ Mycommission expires: '~ ~Maich'16; ~1953~ ""~ ~"
ary Public •; '= /~ ~;
SICIIAI URf ~~r~--~=u-{---
BARU6RA S. PAUIIIA
NOTARY YVIILIC - NSW ~+~~-RICO
' NOT AFT IONl1 HIFD Wi111 SLCRCf ANY O~ SY 13
MY Commhslon Czplrst _~:f !`_ _ - _~
' _ r„
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
STATE Ot•' COLORI~DO ) ss.
COUNTY OI' PITKIN )
24TIIThe foregR~~,.IAgreement was acknowledged before me this
day of '' , 1981 by the Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission exp;res: /`•~'~~
i~~
• Notary Public
Read ~nd approved by the County Attorney
~~~~
_ ,:- __ . .
e}i:f l•: t :~: ~... .ia: k.M.: L~a_. . ~_:. ....::Jn.l .: a.:'-... .,. .. _..... _ ~.. .. ..-. ~....
_6_
I
•
~''
•
•°•
' ~
'
:.
, , . --
-
-
•
ted in
it
d -' Section •12, To~.mship 10 South, Range •85
Lot 13, ~ West
•~
•° ~j•~-:•
_°;
' A tract of ua
s
lan
and being more fully described as follows:
al Meridian
h Princi Se- . „
;
•+'
of [he Six p
t ,
1954 "unappzoved' brass cap (set forth the witn
'
° ess
" ~'
ginning at a point whence a 10
er of said Section 12 which bears N. 78 30
point for the south quarter -corn
orner) bears N. 85°23' E. 827.56
n feet; { ~
•78.57 f
:; eet from original ess c
rock wit • ,
.
.
thence N.
70°12! W. 339.46 ,..
feet;, - -
•
•• ;
'~,~.
thence S. 16°44' W. 139.78 feet; - ,• :,i_p~
i '• . "
•
•hence S. 02°43'. E. '_'2=•~3 feet; _
"
~'
' :•
1
thence 5. 42°30' E. 329.09 feet;
.
;. __
thence S. 19°12' W. 117.32 feet;. ';
thence Eas t 94.32 feet; ~•~
thence N. 02°~8' W. 110.96 feet; _ - ~~
thence N. 02°50' E. 117.00 feet; - ~ _ ~.
thence N. 08°21'30" W. 127. 13 feet; -~ -" - =•~
[hence best 10.00 feet;''.. _ :'`:'
thence N. O1°37' E. 75.76 f eet; -
~
chence N. 31°48' E. 193.19 point of beginning
feet to the ~
- _•_.
• - •i
.. - _ .
-
~ •~
. .. k
' ~ - - ~ •.
i
. ~. ~
_ ••
_ _ .~
c
,
:~ a
- _ i `
•
_ ~
..
- -
- ~ i
~;
, ..
~+
I
' - fir':
' •~•
•
• f
• ' • • t
~~..
. .
1
,.
•. .
EXFIIBIT C
..
• ..
~i4~
!~%v ~ H.-Ls-
rl ~L 2'-
~J~y/ 9N
A PARCEL OF LAND SITU.'1TED IN LOT 13 OF SECTION 12,
TOS~TNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6TH P.•M.,
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A. POINT L~7I-IENCE THE WITNESS CORNER FOR
THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12 BEARS
N 84°55'31" E 813.27 FEET;
THENCE N 70°12'00" W 25.95 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
WESTERLY LINE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY RESERVED Itd DOCUMENT
RECORDED IN BOOK 365 AT PAGE 760, PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS;
THENCE N 31°48' GO" E 91.27 FEET ALOi:G SAID L:;?STE?.LY LT_."]E;
THENCE N 44°56'00" E 36.78 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE
TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY EDGE OF A TRAVELED P.OP~LdAY;
THENCE N 39°05'52" E 14.90 FEET ALONG SAID L•7ESTERLY
EDGE;
THENCE N 44°34'14" E 51.59 FEET ALONG SAID 4ESTERLY
EDGE;
THENCE N 49°07'59" E 32.29 FEET ALONG SAID hTESTERLY
EDGE;
THENCE N 56°16'32" E 3.66 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY
EDGE TO A POINT ON THE NORTIEASTERLY LINE OF THAT
PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN BOOK 334 AT PAGE 523, P.ITF;IN
COUNTY RECORDS;
THENCE S 58°48'00" E 19.37 FEET ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY
LINE OF SAID PROPERTY DESCRIBED~IN BOOK 334 AT PAGE 523
AND THE SOUTHL4ESTERS,Y LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED
IN EXHIBIT "E" OF CIVIL ACTION 4862;
THENCE N 55°55'00" E 91.66 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY
LINE OF SAID EXFIIBIT "E" AND TFIE NORTHi•7ESTERLY Z,INE OF
THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT RECORDED AT
RECEPTION NO. 105468, PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS;
,:
•, '~
• ~ ,.. .~
.'
... ..
~
;
-'P}iENCE 13.84 FEET, MORE OR LESS ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE
TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 572.96 FEET, THE CHORD
OF WHICH CURVE BEARS S 78°04'25" E, TO A POINT ON THE
SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE ROADWAY EASEMENT P,ESERVED IN
DOCUMENT RECORDED AT SAID RECEPTION NO. 105468;
THENCE S 55°.55'00" W 118.72 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY
LINE;
THENCE S 44°56'00" W 126.64 FEET ALONG SAID
SOUTHEASTERLY LINE;
THENCE S 31°48'00" W 77.80 FEET ALONG SAID
SOUTHEASTERLY LINE AND THE SOUTk"IJESTERLY EXTENSION
THEREOF TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
~~~
~ '
• .1 ~ 7
EX2IIIIIT D _, ,
• ,
• ~ .~ ~ ~ .
., ~ •:
' .. i
~ •; ..!
••
•
A TRAIL EASEMENT SITUATED IN LOT 13 OF SECTION 12,
TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RP.".GE 85 WEST OF THE 6TH P. M.,
' PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND
LYING 5 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOt9ING DESCRIBED _
CENTE~ZLINE
BEGISVI?~G AT A POINT FTHENCE THE WITNESS CORNER FOR
THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12 BEARS
N 85°23' E 927.56 FEET;
THENCE. S 19°48' E 5.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE N 70°12' W 236.00 FEET;
THENCE t1 86°10' W 31.00 FEET;
THENCE S 55°OZ' W 71.00 FEET;
THENCE S 43°33' W 52.00 FEET; -
THENCE S 22°34' W 35.51 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
WESTERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIED IN - -
BOOK 186 AT PAGE 93, PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS.
,~
. ,.._ ~ ..
_ .. _.
GERBAZ
~.
' /' CHORD
S 7a3 B4 5 E
R57:%
+~ ,
'~ `' n
/ ~qS q`.e
/ - ,~ i1
e ~. - ey5
tit ~~ 93/. ~ 5
BOOK 331 ?W^~.~r,~ti .„,.~i '
PAGE 523 ~~ ~~ FOUND: LOW PLAS CAP LS 1476 .
i ~
.~vj~ +~
/ /
?v`O~hH v~6o0 i
~~ F ~~ /
'PU y/
i 0
~i ~
MH 8-
w ~~wi~ PP j i~ ~
5 / ` q`°
.~~/ ~ i/
e / / q~
•1 1~ 3 /
^~'a~/ RINKER
65 j i~ REC. # 105468
'00 i ,
! ~
/ .FOUND: ELLOW PLAS. CAP L.7. 2376
I , CANTRUP
Oy ~
i p ~ ~ ~~~
i SON / e >~i'~ oq -
S , /
~ N ,tl / 3
i / ~/ 00
_ FOUND: ~ /
YELLON Ilb. ~~ ~~~ jA.Po.W -
CAP L5~247e T _~
h
. / /
~ / ^
/ ~
_' ~ / /
b 22 % /
N)0 q)g j
n oD-w
- ~
NEFNER /% ``
- ~ ._/
• •,: r
>;r .., -~v ,`fir , - _ W~ .- x... ._f- - r.-.- ,_:.~-. _. .
l~e.~vw S+,.buaw/.o„: CAI a~
QK l1 P~~ l l
~ 449 x.649
DISTRICT' COURT, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO _
Civil Action Nob. 82CVI, 82CV L`,2 ar.d FZCV216 %
STIPUhATSON AND ORDL'P. '~
PETER VOUGtIT, Plaintiff,
G
. :. ,
THE COUNTY OF PITKIN; TIIE BOARD OF COl'KTY CO; LMISSI027E RS OF PITKIN
( CUUNTY, ROBERT CHILDS, I-0ICH:+EL KINSLEY, HELEN KLANDERUD, THO[+IAS
\ BLAKE and GEORGE 1fADSEN, COF'.'•fISSIONERS ACTItJG INDefcndaotsICIAL
~ CAPACITY, and EDP7A RD ZASACKY and CINDY ZASACKY,
V
FETER NOUGHT and KEITH IICFt:F.R, Plaint iifs,
,~
~j~ v .
t ^ THE BOARD OF COUNTY CO>:°~1 SS10t+i:RS OF ?'I +'KIN COUNTY, F09ERT
CHILDS, MICHAEL F:INSLEY, IFF.Lf.I: KLI.N OEF'Uq, THO!~AS RLAk:E and GEORGE .
' - MJ+DSEN, COPIMISSIONERS TI!EHk:OF ACTING IW :HEIR Ok't'IC'AL CAPACITY,
Defendants.
~ KEITH HEFt+ER, Plaintiff,
v.
THE COUNTY OF PITKIN; THE BOA-J OF COUNTY COk"_MISSIONERS OTNOIN.S IN
COUNTY, ROBERT CHILDS, t17 CHA` KINSLEY, HELEN KLANDERUD,
` BLAKE and GEORGE tNaDSEN, CONMISSI OIJERS ACTING IN THEIR OFFICIAL
p L'APACITY, Defendants.
,~~yV
` CO;dES NOW the above-named Plaintiffs, PeteKlVeon4`t5eigleeith
Hefner, by and through their attorneys, Sachs,
Professional Corporation, by Herbert 5. Klein, F.sq., and
Defendant Pitkin County and the Eoa rd of County Con~mnd F.dwardland
and through their attorney, hcslcy A. Li9htulate 'and agree as
Cindy 7.a sacky (hereinafter ". 'sackys") _P
follows:
I, Plaintiff Peter Vouqht (heT^reafull do cribed Jtinll be
entitled to subdivide his Property Y
Nought's Complaint in Civil Action No• P`loca tcd inhthctCOUnty of
thereto (hereinafter "~'O°9hso asptotpermit the separate parceling
Fitkin, State ofColorado, roxi-
and sale of one additienal parcel of ]and ccr.sisting of aPP
mately 1.7 acres. The precise boundaries of the parcel so
created are shown on the site provalareferredatorat paragraph 2
Application for subdivision app
of Nought's Complaint in Civil Action No. 82CV3.
ti:
~Ft„
irk`.
?a~ *i
,
~..
eoal 449 Psi-65()
2. Plaintiff Keith Hefner (hereinafter referred to as
"Hefner") shall be entitled to subdivide his property more
particularly described at paragraph 1 of Hefner's Complaint in
the
i
t
Civil Action No. 82CV216 and exhibits thereto to perm
dditional parcel of land of
separate parceling and sale of one a
appcoxina tely 45,000 square feet. The precise boundaries of the
in
g
parcel so created are set forth in the site plan map accor..pany
ed io in paragraph
f
r
l
"
e
r
re
the Application for subdivision approva
62CV216
N `
.
o.
2 of Iiefne is Cor..plaint in Civil Action .
The subdivision of the property of the Plaintiffs
3
.
respectively ns set forth cbove shall be conditioned upon
compliance with the following requirements: ,.
(a) Plaintiffs shall each prepare and cause to be filed
'
a plat map indicating the bcundaries of their respective
bdivided ~
,;
Properties and the boundaries of each parcel to be su
(1) the location of all
h ^"?f.
ows
therefrom. Each plat map shall s
s and utility easements necessary to serve the parcels to be ~_t;
acces
subdivided from the Propertiesi (2) designated building envelopes
i
n
on each parcel consistent with the building envelopes shown
d
~'
the Hefner subdivision application referred to above an
nated as "Potential Building Area'
si
d ,~
g
e
consistent with the area
ed to on the geologic map accompanying the Vought
f „?
err
re
Application for subdivision referred to above; (3) a well
e
l
~y~
Hefner plat
hall be shown on the
n[
t
e ~i
s
alignme
ment
driveway eas
map.
(b) The above-described plat maps shall bear a legend
each respectively
i
ner
evidencing the agreement of Vought and He
f the Property Shall ever be
i
on o
that no further subdivis
ll be deemed a covenant running with
h ¢?.
a
permitted. Said legend s ("
:
the land.
.
1;
(c) Soils engineering studies shall be undertaken prior
b
t i
e
o
to the issuance of any building permit foe any dwelling
rred to above.
f
e
located within the building envelopes re ','
(d)
y BTfd shYi°'Y"'~e "'a~irV!"2"by~sMJ83)6 faIIlrc3aar svaucm"•.n. ~.._
`~Hef ner Property wh~ch comply with the PitPin Coustems nnlessa, let
Sewage Disposal Re ulations for onsite se tie y .:
the time of the construction of a dwelling within the building
envelope referred to above, the Aspen htetropolit an Sanity
District has Placed a sewer line within 900 fee[ of Re"1$ "u ~"~
d7 in such event, then said dwelling shall utilize
said public sc war lines and shall enter into a main or service
line agree m.ent with the D:etropolitan Sanitation District
therefore. „
-2-
T
i
i.:,'i
„oil 449 Pyi_W1
lei "th!^"`'~'17rt9.3~in5v}ztai'~hvconstrua....
+ the Vought Property referred ttl'ebove shall ~be
provided water from she !:.-tilt we71 pursuant to the terms of a
well and easement '.y reemen~ recorded a! Book 409, Page 313 of the
records of Pitkir -..nunt•, provided, however, that if sold
dwelling [ogcthe•: w:t7. any dwelling presently or hereafter
located on Lot 1 of the Vought subdivision as set forth on the
application for said subdivision a?proval previou sly referred to
in pa: agraph ] of this Stipulatio-. anc Order is over served with
water :tom the City of Aspen 4Sa ter Department public water
supply, then all riyhts in and :o the l:arolt well shall be
conveyei to Pitkin County w.'.Lh no additional consideration.
Sewage disposal end service for the dwelling to be constructed
within th:e building envelope located on the Vought Property
referred to above shall be according to the same terms and
conditions as for the Hefner Property set forth in the preceding
subparagraph except that the Individual Sewage Disposal
effectteanofntheidateeofothis Stipulationeand Order,be those in
4. Vo+sght and Hefner stipular.. and agree ea to the validity
of the road vacation complained of by Vought and Hefner Ly their
Complaint in Civil Action No. 82CV352 and further agree that the
dedication of said roadway referred to at Exhibits D and E to the
Complaint of Peter Vought in Civil Action No. 62CV3 is null and
void and of no effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Hefner and
Vought agree to comply with the oDllgationa set forth at
paragraph 4 entitles Road Haintenence Agreement of Exhibit D to
Nought's Complaint rn Civil Action No. B2CV3, recorded at
Book. 412, Page 936 0.`. the record6 of Pitkin. County Colorado. In
light of the foregoing, Yought and Hefner and Defendant altkin
County, agree that the roadtoey portion described at Exhibit C to
' the aforesaid Agreement ehRll.xemain a private road." Vought and
-. Hefner agree to Plecessigaalongsaid portion"of roadway
described at Exhibit C ro the above-described Agreement which
aign'shsll indicate that suchzoad. is a private toed and shell
specify a10 mile per hourspeed limit thereon. Said sign shell
be placed at a site agroad upon by Fitkin County and any
lend owner adjacent to the purl+on of roadway upgn which said
sign is pieced. t7either Vought nor fie f*ter ehall undertake any
thei rvrespectivea?roperties nozzshal3yVOUght or Hefnerjecent to
intentiotally remove or disturb any bushes or trees lying along
any area of said roadway which is net adjacent to either of their
respective Properties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, routine
maintenance and repairs to the roadway to maintain its condition
as of August 30, 1961, shall be permitted. The rights, duties
and obligations of Hefner and Nought respectively, contained in
thin paragraph 4 with respect to road maintenance and repairs,
shell be binding upon the respective record owner!e) of the
time toatSme~uoHefnerpandiVoughtpeeecheindividuallyex shallrbe
-3-
31
~~1
{
^.
BOOR 449 vu~652
relieved of all liability hereunder upon t~~e conveyance of said
party's interest in their respective Properties. Upon the
conveyance of the percale crented,pursuant :o this Stipulation
and Order, the owneza thereof sha.l be liable for the obligations
act fcrth herein on a lro-rata basis ss to the number of parcels
to which these obligations pertain. Likewise, upon any
subsequent ::ale by said gianiees of Hef nhereun ler andgsaidsaid
grantees shall be relic-ved of liability
liability shall be the obligation of the reeorc owner(s) of said
parse is as they exist from time to time.
5. Nothing herein shall exempt Vought er Heefner fron any.
obligation to pay any park dedicstion fes to^Stkin County as
provided by law.
` to Pi.tkie Countyauponothetfirst salsa oS one,~otmthe parce1s00 euh
permitted to. be subdivided pursuant to the-tcrmr of paragraphs 1
and 2 hereinabove. Said aurae (510,000.00) shall ba utilized by
Pitkin County only for improve.aenta, landscaping end/or
moditicetions to the South 7th Street right-of-wtcvidedlsaidma
will be expended upon Rnsulution of the Board, p
expenditures are (a) desired by a majority cf landowneza whose
--property ie adjacent to tho area pro lied For said improvements.
> ste:, and {b) in the genezal public ~ntezest. Nothing herein
shall be deemed to require that Hefner and Voug~htifies.tionat~ to
paintain any improvements, landscaping endLpr7 rd h 6.
constructed accorring to the tezma of thit~pa g, P
,: "~f ,
7, No ira:l eaecments shall bs required to bs dedicated by
Hefner and Vought, norahsll Pitkin Countyy take anyaction to
~' condemn any !sell or easement tlwretor¢ a1 o~xithin ttis
property of either AefnsrY oz Vdn~AY ',
L M ' Lo
r S, ~. uncle;cig~ed ettorl~lyi versant, and represent that.
~ ~ they havd:authOrity trots their :eapactive olienta to enter into
this Stipulation: and do hareby?zequest tha~iths.;Court isane an
L
•~ F `=~orderincorporating the terms of this StippaattSaticn so that the
~~$ -.agreement of..th~`partias may be"givaa fulllegal effect.
g, Vought. Hefner and fasackys do hereby agree that upon
issuance. of an order o! this Court carrying out [he purposes,
intents, terms and conditions of this Stipulation, that all
claims, actions and causes of action set forth in Civil Action
~S
ti'~
ti
J
yq i-
k~ - •
C l .:,~
~ ' ~ e {.
k
p l
c.:
~~j :_
i,
T
t
_q_
6
.s
t _.
it ''
1
Y
1 _ ~4 L~
}•_ - s~ ~ 449 X6$3
~..'`• No 82 Civil Action No 82CV15] nd Civil Action No ~ aTCVTl 4a
ehnl be thereby diamisaed w dice. ,
SACfiS, LLEIN i SEICLE ~ }~
Professional Corporation ~;
'~~ Bv: ~~~ ~. l' _. ~
u Her rt S. K e n ee ey A g t 1L0201==
''~ Attorney for Peter Vought Attorney for Pitkin County 2
"* and Keich Hefner '- Hoard of Count~.Coestiasloner#,
'4
201 North Mill Sezeet ' et al. ~- ,~ ~, ~Z-
`'~ ~ Aspen, Colorado 81611 _ - '~ '^:;f•
(303) 925-3700n ~ ~~ €~
' f,
uw~w-- ~
~_ ~ R c ar Cumm n ~~
Attorneyfor~lSdwardan Cindy Lasacky
' - 611 K. Main Stzeet~ _~:
r~ Aspen, Colorado 81611 "
£;*„
v~ -~.
rx~ r"-' s- ORDER :r. ~• ~ :.WSJ., x
J 2a 1. [ ~T~~ ,
Tha Court. having ryiewed the ple~ingi in this muttot agt~l~ ~,~..
L -the foregoing.. Stipulationolthe Pla ntifte and Defendant gounl~F ~'
~ ~~, of Yltkin~ Board. of County Commissionerl._.:et al , and Edward ans1., 1.;
'~ Cindy. Sasacky~ in~CiviltAhcajt~,~ion Noa.,,8TCY1,~-82CV152„sttd LTC1!4I6 . ~„~'
~~;: doea hereby find that th~"~ of~aaid Stipul,ationi are ~~ •~_= ~ ~ ~ _ ,
`~ ° ' zeasonable ar batueen.. fi~~ iaa;And do dot v'ioI6t+~ any pwbli ~ arc;
:. policy or the intgYeita any" other pskrty` a ah~uld, n tM ~} ~.~
ineerast o! jnstlc+s •~~ ity, be given ~e~~ife `~,?~ ;'y a ''~~'~. -.
cs >. .- - - ..sn'^~s~~ 4YR.5 _;;np„ .~ .Pa (}.y!~W„ ~i, z x~?ra' ._- -"
~r}e~~~; Stipulation bscwe.n IP,latifti!ls-fetes Vought ana;~3Ceara rertmr .....
,~, ~. Dafendanta,000nty o!'PS~tltini.The Board?o! County Camisslonera
µ ~of'Pitklrt County,~et`al`Edrard Lasacky and Cindy Lasacky shell
1 M given effect according'. to all terms and conditions stated
' ' therala as if fully incorporated herein by ihia reference as the
s,.,. ,,.>'~":. order ot'this COUre. `.
e ~+ Oons this T.B day of ~-+-~--~~ _ , 1983, at Aspen, 1 ~_ ,
Colorado. - ^~z
pI COURT JUDGEt
r
_ ~{
HOOOTa • J. E. De s ~. [ ~-
~: _ -.
_g_,~-
& ;;... e
}:.
$";
}~
$a
i
s
S
2
n .
r. ~ '.
W
~o
'k
e
gnu
31R
~,~? 3b~ ~ `y~7~,r1,
MEA401iANDUM
TO: ]olm Ely, Pitkin County Attorney
FROM: Gabe Preston, Planner
RE: Hefner Court Ordered Subdivision 1041 Hazard Mitigation
DATE: December 21, 1999
BACKGROUND: The County Attorney found that the Stipulation and Order dated lone 28,
1983 in Civil Actions 82CV3, 82CV 152, and S2CV216 and the Hefner Subdivision plat recorded
in Book 17 Pagc I 1 in April 1985 constitute tltc right to develop a single family residence and
accessory uses within the building envelope depicted on the Plat. Staff has the ability to apply
1041 hazard mitigation conditions to this property. The Attorney will ask the BOCC whether
they want to attach these conditions to an amendment to the Court Order or to a BOCC
resolution. This memo consists of a brief review of the 1041 hazard concerns on the property
and the associated mitigation conditions.
OWNERS: Keith Hefner
REPRESENTATIVE: Herb Klein
LOCATION: the property is located on Toby Way.
ZONING: The zoning is R-15 and the preperq~ is 1.03 acres.
STAFF C011T1ENTS:
Wildfire: Vince Urbina of the Colorado State Forest Service visited the site and rates it as
medium wildfire hazard (See Attachment :1). He recommends the following defensible space
conditions to mitigate the wildfire hazard:
1. Fora distance of ]0 fi. around all structures establish and maintain vegetation at 6" or less.
Woody vegetation should not be planted here.
2. ' For a distance of 40 feet around all struc W res, thin existing conifers so that the outside edges
of tree crowns are no closer than ] 0 fee; :o one another and to structures.
3. The lorj'er limbs of all conifers should be removed up to a height of 10 feet or half the total
height of the tree, whichever is less, to eliminate ladder fueis.
4. A11 deadfall should be removed within 100 feet of the structure.
Staff will add standard defensible space and structural wildfire mitigation conditions.
Wildlife Pitkin County \Vildlife Biologist Jonathan Lowsky found that although the site is
mapped as critical elk habitat and severe wiener range, it is actually winter range. He'stated that
the greatest concern in this area is with the high level of predator activity in this area (Bears,
Pine Martens, Bobcats, Mountain Lions). Ile recommends the following conditions:
• Dogs shall be kenneled.
• Fencing outside of the building envelope must comply with current Pi[kirr CountyFerreing
Guidelines.
• The Applicant shall install an approved bear-proof trash container and all trash shall be kept
in it.
• In order to avoid attracting bears, there should be no fruit bearing trees or shrubs. .
• Native vegetation shall be maintained ouside of the building envelope.
Geologic:
Slopes: Staff does not have contour information on this site, but Staff estimates from a site visit
III~IIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIII~IIIIII~II'a~'~IIIII~IIIIIIIII~'I0060 og 0e z&~xc ~ ~1T
~ILVIP OLWrS oITK1N COUNTY :5?!V'Y.:P'^: "4~' "'
r~,'?RS
''~-~
~~~ ,j,;L
V,J,L`.RACO
DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COIDl3~O
Case No. 82-CV-216
STIPULATION AND ORDER
KEITH HEFNER
Plaintiff,
v.
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
Defendants.
COMES NOW the Parties by and through their undersigned
attorneys and hereby submits this Stipulation to the Court and
requests that the Court enter an Order in the form provided hereon
approving the terms of this Stipulation.
Now therefore, the Parties Stipulate as follows:
1. A previous Stipulation and Order (the "Previous
Stipulation and Order") was entered in this action at the time it
was consolidated with certain other actions. The Previous
Stipulation and Order was dated June 28, 1983 in Civil Actions
82CV3, 82CV152 and 82CV216 and recorded in Book 449, Page 649 of
the records of Pitkin County, Colorado on August 3, 1983. A copy of
the Previous Stipulation and Order is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
2. The parties wish to clarify the intent of the Previous
Stipulation and Order and to impose certain requirements nn the
development of the affected property in order to ensure its
development in a manner consistent with certain regulations of
Pitkin County.
3. The parties agree that the Previous Stipulation and Order
was intended to and did in fact grant a development right for the
development of a single family residence and accessory uses and
structures, to Lot 1, Hefner Subdivision according to the Plat map
thereof recorded in Book 17 at Page 11, recorded April 15, 1985
("Lot 1"), including the right to obtain a building permit without
the necessity of obtaining a development allotment or any other
development orders or approvals under the Pitkin County Land Use
Code, subject to compliance with the conditions described in
IIIIII II IIIIIIII IIII I IIIIIIIIII IIIIIII VIII IIII IIII 460 z9 z z:aoP
SILV If7 DtiV 15 PITKIN COUNTY CO R 90.00 D 0.00
paragraph 4 below. This is based upon the finding that the land use
application which the Previous Stipulation and Order approved was
a lot split in the R-15 PUD zone which was an exemption from the
Pitkin County Growth Management 4uota System.
4. The parties agree that the development of Lot 1 shall
require only the mitigation of the 1041 hazards as required by the
memorandum and attachments thereto, from the Pitkin County
Community Development Office, dated December 21, 1999, a copy of
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference
at Exhibit A. Nothing herein shall prevent the parties from
mutually agreeing to site specific modifications to the
requirements set forth on Exhibit A and the Courts involvement in
such changes shall not be required. The requirements of Exhibit A
reflect the current conditions for development of Lot 1 and the
development of Lot 1 will be immune from any changes or amendments
to the Pitkin County Land Uae Code for a period of three (3) years
(the "Vesting Period") from the date of execution of the order
carrying out the terms of this Stipulation. The owner of Lot 1 may
apply to Pitkin County for an extension of the Vesting Period,
according to the procedures for an extension of vested rights as
contained in the Pitkin County Land Use Code.
5. Paragraph 31d) of the Previous Stipulation and Order is
amended to allow water service to be provided either by connection
to the City of Aspen public water supply or by a private well.
6. All other terms of the Previous Stipulation and Order
shall remain in effect.
7. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter to
deal with any disputes which may arise in the future concerning the
terms of this Stipulation.
Respectfully submitted this ~~day of July, 2000.
ATTORNEY FOR KEITH HEFNER:
KLEIN-ZIMET PROFESS~IJNAL CORPORATION
~~'
By: ~~
Herbert Klein, Esq. (#5803)
201 N. Mill Street, Suite 203
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Tel: (970) 925-8700.
Fax: (970) 925-3977
IIIIIIVIII IIIIII IIII IIIIIII VIIIVIII III VIII IIII IIII a 0 640 9 ~0Z : 3eP
ATTORNEY FOR PITKIN COUNTY
By:
John Ely 67)
530 E in Street
As n, Colorado
Tel: (970) 920-5190
Fax: (970) 920-5198
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II II~IIIIII 464 Z9Z 0Z:30F
SILVIP Di7V I5 PITKIN COUNTY CO R 90.00 D 0.00
ORDER
THE COURT BEING FULLY ADVISED AS TO THE PREMISES, does hereby
ORDER that the terms of the above Stipulation of the parties be
given effect.
Dated: ~ V~~- 2000
~BI C ~ Z'O By the Court
~lr--~N~
_ __---L._-- ----
V• ~Dis ict Court Judge
~~ec~
r, ~ ,
c~ca~o~~~a
g ~¢y that s o~p Rx`
Fcneegoiaxg ~srcc rsfxile~ t:~ E?3
Ps~?°kio-s&IC.cou~:l of key:,:-->e
'Phi>~~Y u
~~ ~
Ccrt_d to it x true and eonPiete coPY
of aciFY~al or. file in the District Conn
of PMHn Coups Gokicdo._ JC%~ /-~=\',~ /,
~nM ~~17
.~.;~
hefner\aCip
4
,'~" ~ .
464797
IIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIlII093907D 0.0002.30P
T-.~
.~,x`
-'M
,L
',, il:
r~
:..~
A 4,`~.~+
7
If 18
12 02:30F
.N
~~m
97
i of 38
2002 02:30F
0.00
that there are slopes steeper than I S% on she and will apply standard conditions to mitigate
hazards associated with potentially uratable slopes on this site.
Rockfall and Avalanche: As part of the original review process for this subdivision, Mr.
Lampiris conducted a geologic investigation of this property. He made the following
observations:
• CSU maps indicate that the building envelope is located in roekfall and avalanche hazard
areas.
• In severe conditions, roekfall and avalanches could reach the building envelope.
• The topography and the vegetation on site will ensure that were rocks or avalanche
materials to move through the building envelope they would do so with "low energy."
Bruce Collins in a recent report recommended and one of the following conditions:
• Reinforce foundations and eliminate of doors and windows on the east-southeast side of
the residence for an adequate height.
• Construct a 6 foot tall wall to the east-southeast side of the residence able to withstand
600 pounds per square foot:
• Construct a rock and earth berm to the east-southeast side of the residence;
• The Applicant may need to combine the wall or the berm with structural reinforcement
of the residence in order to mitigate the hazards.
Note: Staff notes that the Code prohibits devcicpment within roekfall hazard areas. However,
the legal circumstances surrounding tLis prope~,y do not allow the denial of development.
GENERAL SUBMISSION (3-110):
Utilities: The :applicant should have no problems obtaining utilities.
Water and Sewer: The applicant will need to either get [he proper state permits and drill a well
or obtain a water tap from Aspen Water. 9'he property is located outside of the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District, and so tLcy will either need to obtain a tap from the ACSD or
construct a septic system approved by Environmental Health.
RECOMI4II{NI).ATIOti: Staff recc;nmends that the following conditions be attached to
development on Lo[ 1, Hefner Subdivision:
1. ' Prior to submission of any building pcnnits, the Applicant shall:
A. Obtain an access permit from the County Engineer.
B. Provide a trip generation and construction trip generation study for any free market
residential structure of S,U00 sq. 7t. or greater for review and approval by the County
ingineer.
2. Prior to issuance of any building pern:~+ the applicant shall obtain approval of an ISDS
permit from the Environmental Health Department or obtain a tap from Aspen Consolidated
Sanitation District. The septic system must comply with all minimum horizontal setback
requirements behveen its components and physical features. A qualified professional
engineer must design the system. The septic system shall be located within the building
envelope.
3. If the Applicant drills a well, prior to tl:e issuance of septic or building permits the
Applicant must document to the Environmental Health Department that the well meets
setback requirements and that quantity ::nd quality of the well water are adequate.
4. The Applicant shall comply with the foaowing standards for development in geologic
hazard areas:
evc;;~pment on 15% or Grater ~Ie;~;
A. ~.dequate mechanical supper[ shall be provided for cut slopes.
B. Adding water which r.:ay decrease slope stability shall be avoided. ,
C. :\dding weight to the top of the slope shall be avoided.
D. llisturbed slopes must be conroured so that they can be re-vegetated.
E. Steepening of existine slopes shall be avoided.
F. Cuts, fills, grading and excav:~tion shall be confined to the minimum area needed
fo r conch u ct i o n.
fiIIII I/IIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII)IIIIIII00 640 9 00 zaae~
G. "fire Applicant shall submit a d ainage and erosion control plan to the County
E:~gineer for review and appro~ a!, prior to submittal of any building permit
applications.
H. the house shall be designed to preclude the accumulation of radon gas.
I. The foundation for the residence shall be designed by a Colorado registered
professional engineer and apprc:ved by the County Engineer.
evelopment in Rockfall and Avalanche Hazard Areas•
The Applicant shall adhere to the following:
l . Construct a 6 foot tall wall or berm to [he east-southeast side of the residence
able to withstand 600 pounds per square foot that is deemed adequate by a
Certified Professional Geologtst to protect the structure from rockfall and
avalanches;
_. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall
submit a letter from a Cr, titled Professional Geologist to a planner or zoning
official in the Community Development Department that states that the design
and location of the wall or berm is adequate to protect the structure from
rockfal I and avalanche hay ;:rds. The Applicant may need to build a reinforced
foundation and eliminate c l'doors and windows on the east-southeast side of
the residence for a height deemed adequate by a Certified Professional
Geologist to protect the st:,icture from rockfall and avalanches if the wall or
berm design is inadequate
5. The fo;lo •+ing wildfire mitigation cond',:ions shall be applicable to all structures on the
propem
efernble act.
iVOTL: Actual vegetation mar,ipul,a;on to meet these conditions may not be necessary
where the natural vegetation patterns I:ave already fulfilled these conditions. The owner
of the property is responsible for creating and maintaining the defensible space as
required below.
A. '.bush, debris, and non-ornamcmat vegetation shall be removed within a minimum
of a 10 foot perimeter around sii structures. Vegetation in this area shall be at 6"
cr less (i.c. mowed Brass, lo.+-growing perennials, and ornamental vegetation that
is non-wocdy).
B. \Vithin 40 feet ofthc structures on site the outside of tree crowns shall be spaced
least 10 feet apart.
C. All branches from trees within 40 feet of the structures on site shall be pruned to a
!;eight of 10 feet above the grsund or half the height of the tree, whichever is less.
D. All branches which extend over the roof eaves shall be trimmed and all branches
within 15 feet of the chimne~~; shall be removed.
E. \ll deadfall within the 100 fux perimeter shall be removed.
E fhe Applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible
=pace vegetation reyuiroment.
tnict,tra esinn and Constn.ictio_t_!<,~uirements:
A. I:nof constnrction shall be Class A, non-combustible material (no wood
shake/sl,ineies) with no tla! ; oofs (minimum pitch = 3:12).
B. P.'I vents shall be screened wily corrosive resistant wire mesh of one quarter inch
maximum.
C. Projections at the roof line (+aJ~i h include but are not limited to eaves, cornices,
soffits rind roofs over open Jocks) shall be sheathed with materials approved for
464797
i~l~llllVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~3g07/~200~ 2 30F
1 hour fire-resistive construction.
D. Windows and Glass: Glazed openings shall be provided with closable, solid, exterior
non-flammable shutters or shall be tempered glass.
E. Exte; for Wahs and Siding: Siding ~,.d exterior wall construction shall have a
minimum 1 hour fire-resistive rating ground level to roof line. Exterior doors
shall be noncombustible er ] !4" solid wood.
F. Foundations: Foundations, skiving and crawl space openings shall be fully enclosed
and constructed with n:~;crial> approved for ]hour fire-resistive construction on
the exterior side of the wills and shall extend from the top of grade to the
underside of the floor deckinE~ or walls.
Maintenance:
A. Roofs and gutters shall be kelst clear of debris.
B. Yards shall be kept clear of ail litter, slash, and flammable debris.
C. All flammable materials steal I be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of IS'
from any structures.
3. \Veeds and grasses within the ] 0' perimeter shall be maintained to a height no
more than 6 inches.
isce;Izneous:
A. Firewood shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 fee[ away from
any structure.
B. Propane tanks shall he installed according to NFPA 48 standards and on a
contour zway from the strucurre with standard defensible space vegetation
mitigation around any above-ground tank. Any wood enclosures around the
tank shall be constructed witi, materials approved for 2 hour fire-resistive
construction on the exterior silo ofthe walls.
C. Fences shall he kept clear o crush and debris.
D. AVood fences shall not be cornccted to the structure.
E. Fuel tanks shall be installed r;~derground with an approved container.
F. Each stricture shall have x minimum of one 10 Ib. ABC fire extinguisher.
G. Addresses shall be clearly msrked and visible with minimum 2" non-
combustible letters and shah be clearly visible at the primary point of access
from the public or common r.ccess road and installed on anon-combustible post.
H. Any outbuildings or additional buildings shall adhere to the same standards as
structures.
cce« end Utilities'
A. Utility lines shall be bur.~d.
6. The Applicant shall comply with the iitllowing wildlife impact mitigation conditions:
A. There shall Le only one kemxied dog on this property.
B. Fencing ontside of the buildings envelope must comply with current Firkin Cowrry
Fencing Guidelines.
C. the Applicant shall install an approved bear-proof trash container and all trash
shall be kept in it.
D. Native vegetation shall be maintained outside of the building envelope.
E. la order to avoid attracth:g hear, there shall be no fruit bearing trees or shrubs.
7. No development, including grading, landscaping, vegetation removal of disturbance, and
septic system shall occur outside of cite approved building envelope except as may be
necessary to implement the wildfire mitigation measures required elsewhere in this
51~~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ 0a ~0 C ~.09 Z830F
approval.
8. All terms and conditions of the Aspen Fir Protection District shall be complied with.
9. Prior to submitting aay building permits, the Applicant shall obtain approval for a scenic
overlay review.
ATTACHML-PJTS
A. Colorado State Fores; Service memo
B. Geologic Deport
~~ VIII IIIIII IIII Iilllll VIII VIII III IIIIII III IIII 03G/07 2,0~02{02830P
SILVIq DRVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 98.00 D 0.00
ATTACfII~4ECv'I' A
September 8, 1999
Herb Klein
Klein-Zimet
201 N. Mill St., Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
SAP ~ 9 7999
Re: Lot 1, Hefner Subdivision 1041 Wildfire Hazard Review
Dear Herb,
l.C)Y( ~'Cal~
FOREST
SERVICE
Stale Services BuildinC
2?? S. 6th Street. Room 41G
Grand Junction. Colorado 81501
Telephone: (970) 248-7J?5
Please submit this letter with any application to Pitkin County. When the county makes
the referral to me for my comments I will defer to this letter.
visited the site with Herb Klein the owner's agent on August 24th. Access to Lot 1 is
via an existing road into the subdivision. This road is in good repair with not prohibitive
grades. The lot has a nor;h aspect and is slightly sloping in the building envelope.
There are scattered large Douglas-fr ors Bile with scattered aspen in between. The
aspen appears to be dying out in favor of the conifers. There are many young Douglas-
fir coming up in the lot. There is also scattered chokecherry, serviceberry and Gambel
oak. The density of all the woody fuels is such that I would rate the wildfire hazard as
medium.
There is a need to mitigate the existine wildfire hazard and create a defensible space
around future structures. To acccrnplish t,.at I have the following recommendations.
1) For a distance of 10 feet around all structures establish and maintain vegetation at 6
inches or less. This can be accomplished wish a mowed lawn, low growing
perennials or hardscape (e.g., rock mulch, pavers, sidewalk). Woody vegetation
should not be planted here. In addition, flammable material (e.g., firewood) should
not be stored here.
2) Thin existing mature conifers so that the outside edges of tree crowns are no closer
than 10 fee;. This should be done for a distance of 40 feet around all structures.
3) The lower limbs of all conifers should be removed up to height of 10 feet or half the
iota) height whichever is least to eliminate ladder fuels.
4) All deadfall should be removed within 100 feet of all structures.
Feel free to call me with any questions.
Sincerely,
A. Vince Urbina
Assistant District Forest..r
i IIIIIIVIII IIIIII IIII IIIIIII IIfI)VIII III IIIIII III IIII o 460 20 00 2830E
~~r~
:. ~vvv i:~~ :i.,:,
AITACT-NENP B
uv, ~IJS +. .; 1
COLLItJS la ASSOCIATES
E;OLO6SUL AND NAT~C.A~ PESOUMF raNwtTANfS
P.O. BOX 23 1116 MINEOTA DRIVE
SuT, CaaRapo 81652
PHONE/F.+x (970) 876-54Q0
bacol'~trof.rxt
March 27, 2000
Glenn Hom
Davis Hom Inc.
215 5. Monarch Suite 104
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Alexander Furlotti
Quorum Properties
1875 Century Park East Suite 1185
Los Mgeles, California 400fi7
}:E: E'1JR10TT1 PROJECT, fAT 1, HEPNER Sl18DMS10N,
SltAOOw MOUNTAIN, PrraN CouNtT
Gentlemen:
In referenceto the question regarding rockfali protettion for the conceptual structure proposed
on the captioned site, I ha~•e reviewed the folloµ~ng, with pertinent excerpts quoted:
1. Letterfrom NichotasLorn;~iris, Ph.D.. Con~ultingGeologist, toHer6Kiein, Esq., datedMny9, 1980.
"Both the Colorado S;aee University hazard maps and the various hazard maps by Bruce
Bryant of the Aspen yuadrangle~'~ indicate that snow slides and rock falls ...will not
reach the one to two acres proposed fog development:'
b..
..m
^. .
/T~ ONO
v! b ~ 6)
n~No
~ •- r
1D a ~
cta°mm
0
~m
m
~~
hill ~'
l
u
~r
..
~$
~~~
-Y
_F
d
o~
a
~°
a
-J
N
"In the most severe .ase, falling rocks ...could possibly reach the east side of this tract,
but they would have to cross the gendc Swale which trends to the northwest:'
"The rear wall of ar} suueture should ... be constructed of reinforced concrete to a
minimum height of four feet aoove grade . , .. Windows should also be omitted on this
east-facin>; side of the house." ]Empha:ds added,]
"As an added precaution, arty landscaping done ]on the slope-facing side] of the house
should be designed so as to deileR or otherwise impede minor slides or rock falls , .. ,
This could be in the fvrm of a berm or r Eck garden, for example, to a height ofsix feet:'
2. Letter from Jefjmy L. Hynrs, Engineering Geologist, Colorado Geologiwl5urvey, to Richard Grice,
Aspen/Pitkin Planning O;~ce, dated July ] 1, 1980:
' Bryant, p.,, 1972, Ma;, ,howittg areas of xfra~d potential geolopc hazards in the Aspen quadrangle, Pitkn
Courttr, Colorado: U.S. Geol. Sun : y Map 4785,x; pt3p showing avalanche areas in theA~Jxn Quadrangle, P'itldn Crunty,
Colorado; U.S. Ccol. Survey Ma, I-785 G.
Page 2
"We have rcryiewed the d ata submitted ...and the general and engineering geo]ogy in
thevicinity of [he tray and there appear to be no geologic hazards or constraints which
would preclude the development plan."
"If... the recommendations ofLincoln-DeVore and Nick lampiris are followed, we have
no objection to the approval of this application."
3. Letter from Jeffrey L. Hynes, Engineering Gealae st, Colorado Geo(ogica! Survey, to Rithon~ Griee,
hspen/Pitkin PianningOJJice, dated July ]4, 1980:
"We are in agreement w;th the f ridings ar~d recommendations of Nick Lampiris' report
on the property and ;f his recommendations are followed, we have no objection to the
approval of this application."
4. Letter from Jefjrty L. Ny'ncs, Engineering Geologist, Colorodo Geological Survey, to Richard Gate,
Aspen/Pitkin Plopping OJJi ce, dated December 1 S, 1980, written of (er two field examinations of the
Property:
"On the basis oFthes: field observations and discussions ... it is my opinion that the
building sate shown or, the Hefner Flan is not impacted by a significant roekfall hazard.
The hazard is not zcr o but the ve;ecation, location, and topography of the site and
vicinity all tend to mr:x the risk assoeiat:d with it very low."
"With respect to the mitigation measures presented in the lampiris letter (item 1 above),
my feeling is that either a deFlection 'germ or structural reinforcement should be
adequate, and I see uu significant advantage in using both" }Emphasis added}
In my report dated May 23, 1999, 1 pored that the property is included in a snow
avalanchejrockfallhctzard zone on the geologic maps prepared by Oleander, et al. (1974. These
are very generalized maps, are not as site•specific as those referred to in the lampiris letter, and
g were used to establish'tivorstcase" crireriafor the site. In addition, none ofthe correspondence
N quoted above was available for my prior analysis. Even so, 1 described the rockfall hazard as
r omm "minimal," in agreement v.ith site-specific studies by both Dr. lampiris and Mr. Hynes. 1
O1 "N° recommended:
r-'.o
~ &m
~ a o ° 'Although the hazard to rile building envelope iuelf is thus thought to be minimal, mitigation
m in the formofabermorprotectivewallalongrheeast•southeastsideisrecommended.ltwoutd
°
° appear that asix-foot b:°; m of rock and cor;,pacted earth could be worked into the existing
~ topography with little di nculty:' [emphasis added)
1 further advised drat:
o '
U
"An alternat;ve to a berm ~.-Quid be a rock, ; einforeed concrete, or other wall at least six feet
~~ high and able ro withsar.d an impact load of at feast 600 pound per square loot. [f the
~:
Y
F
d
~~~ ~0lnnder.li.;..temm.N.P.,and no(gdsr,6A,197A, soaring rotkand(iystalYalleys,anarvirontnenuland enyJneaing gedogv
c :[udy. FagJe, Gafield, Gunnison, end f•;:~k:a Cnunticc, Ccl o:adn_' .~lorado Geol. Survey Fs~vonmrnul Ecology Nu. E,'C`: ;~.
a
J
N
uV, LILY
, .. .. ,.'! v ~ ~ '~
Page 3
adin is not ade~. additional rotection
ro oseddesiF;nofthestructureandlandscap~~ g --~-
wallseztendin abovefinalgrbed sdirble'°aABanspecfic
inthefotm of reinforced foundation o close to grade level tn.~ ~-
windows, and ocher signiLcant openinn
recommenda:ions coani o'''µ'ould suffue, so ne ide- ao=rOposed deslgnbutlshould ad tat
an(; duvlication, such as cons[ruRion of a berm
~o~e of these p ;s not necessa .Emphasis added}
proteRmg a reinforced f°ulidation,
est drat tl,rre are three alternatives to ma iSX ~ pL `oCk or
The intent here clearly was o sugg reinforced foundations and
rockfall hazard ro whiaete 1l`~ e on thesftnallpeop ck-and-earth berm; (2
osed design.
concrete wall; or (3} p ? g
elimination of doors and v~.dows extending some distance above grade on the east-sour ea
• t t o de end on as peer and extent of other mitigation measures, if any.
relocation
side of the buildin;, bets P
Combinations of these measuredwerenotconsiderednecessaryunlessactua stru
artial roteccion by a single method. This is dearly in hne tv~th the
and design resulted in only p P
conclusion reached by Mr. Hynes (item 4). tired into and
The conceptual d ~ awing eoi',veyed tp1i1e ind icraes a reinforced concretewall integr
protecting the entire soutl~~: Est side ot~the st; .~ctvre, as well as extending past the building an
,dig, far enough acTOSS the Swale to encowest of the p oposed wall'
thenturningwes; and extei ~ g .r,, , , f°tec$on zone north
' assesalargerareathan
facade in the ro~kfalt prora.on z°°`' oR of May 9.198. and my report
indudingthatpo,tionincot; orated intotlrebr„ldmgfoundation,en<omp lace, and the
suggested in ske~ches included ~tl ern°~hmal c ature1of the hazarduotedabove so long as this
of May 28, 1999. Considering esasq
previous reconunendat;ons oC both Dr. i,amp~ns and Mr, Hyn act load of
foundationlwaii 'Is Constructed ~ydtm wchca ~m ~ ne as to be able to wisthstand an~mP phill side
; s an anon. Speciftcally,
with no significn~u opening. osedwall, or for
600 pound per square foot or more I can se~_ nu need for additional mivg
based on all the Available d a~ a, 1 so no reason or a berm in addition to the prop
eliminatingwin~ °'•`5 ordon,s f`o an'd to citi~~t drainage away from the strucivreaand in the
and final grading should t; c s , estthatonceactualdesignisfunher
process further ,educetllf 1[1el'ho~d°~a",;~rwouldsugg sma~lsam'~rdan narebeutgmet
Sincethelayout~onveyed .>
along 1 be contacted dublic cion andtexp~ens~e~tions of the propose
without unnecessary P do not hesitate to call.
If you have any questions o
rcyuile any it~rher infvrmauon, please ,~
~,
Sincerely,
;/
1!
. Bruce A.
I{ II1 1 ly~~~~~~~~`i~,,lI~I~~~I~I~~~~s~. ~647097~~,s
1~111~I111111111~111111INpeNrY Gx~4 l~ R 9~~ Ut 3/07/2U02 02 3Jt
SILVIP DfWIS P
SACHS, KLEIN 8z SEIGLE
JEFFREY H. SACHS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TELEPHONE
HERBERT 5. KLEIN 201 NORTH MILL STREET 13031 925-8]00
JON DAVID SEIGLE
ASPE N, COLORADO 81611
JAMES H. DELMAN
B. JOSEPH KRABACHER
January 21, 1982
Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission
c/o Richard Grice, Pitkin County Planning Office
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Vacation of Vought/Hefner Dedications
Dear Members of the~Planning & Zoning Commission,
At your February 2, 1982 meeting, a petition for the
vacation of the Vought/Hefner road and trail dedications will be
brought to your attention by the Pitkin County Planning Office at
the request of the Board of County Commissioners. This lava firm
represents both Mr. Vought and Mr. Hefner with respect to this
matter and wishes to object to the vacation for the following
reasons:
1. The vacation is in contravention of applicable State
statutes.
1973 C.R.S 43-2-303(2) states as follows:
No roadway or part thereof shall be vacated so as to leave
any land adjoining said roadway without an established
public road connecting said land with another established
public road.
The present road vacation connects the Vought and Hefner
properties with a public road segment and the effect of the
proposed vacation would be leave these properties without
contiguity to a public road in violation of the foregoing
statute.
2. The petition and procedures followed in this instance do
not comply with Section 4-4.1 et seq of the Pitkin County Land
U_se Code which appl to street plat and easement vacations for
the following reasons:
a. The petition must contain adequate reasons for the
vacation.
The petition sets forth three reasons for the vacation. The
first refers to a misunderstanding concerning the contiguity of
the road accepted for dedication to other existing dedicated
Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission
Page Two
January 21, 1982
public roads. Mr. Hefner and Mr. Nought deny that there was any
misunderstanding in this respect. The dedication was accepted by
the Board of County Commissioners in order to facilitate bir.
Nought's and Mr. Hefner's subdivision application so that they
would be in compliance with the requirements of Section 6-3.2(b)
with respect to access to a public road.
The second reason for the vacation refers to the existence
of "questions" concerning the ownership in the easements conveyed
and the ability to make such conveyances. We believe that the
mere raising of questions is not sufficient grounds for the
vacation. This firm has rendered an opinion that there is
capacity to lawfully convey said interests to the County for the
purposes described in the dedication agreement.
The third reason set forth in the petition concerns the
equity involved in retaining said easements in the face of a
denial of Mr. Nought's subdivision application. Mr. Nought has
filed a lawsuit challenging said denial in which the equities
involved in all aspects of the County's actions with respect to
his subdivision and these road dedications are raised. Under
these circumstances, a road vacation at this time could prejudice
the ability of a court to render a fair judgment in this matter
and is therefore not a sufficient reason to support the vacation.
In the event the vacation is approved, Mr. Nought would most
likely apply to the court to enjoin said vacation pending a
determination of the issues raised by this lawsuit.
b. Adequate notice has not been provided accordin to the
uirements of the Pitkin County Land Use Code.
The Land Use Code at Section 4-4.2(d) requires that notice
be mailed to interested and affected landowners setting forth the
date, time and place of the vacation hearing. Due to the
incorrect original scheduling of this matter prior to the thirty
day requirement set forth at subsection (c) of the above-
described code provision, the hearing was rescheduled for
February 2, 1982, without notice of this rescheduled hearing
being provided. Therefore, no proper notice has been given to
the affected landowners in a manner which complies with the
requirements of the Pitkin County Land Use Code that said notice
set forth the date, time and place of the Planning & Zoning
Commission hearing.
c. The petition requires that all abutting or adjacent
andowners or other landowners whose interests therein mi ht be
dversely affected by, or who may be interested in, such vacation
e notified of said hearin and that a ma adequately showin
he parcels sought to be vacated as well as the Drooerty of ali
Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission
Page Three
January 21, 1982
andowners to whom notice should be given be
provided with the
Only Keith Hefner and Peter Vought have been notified of
this proceeding and the map accompanying the petition does not
show their property. In addition, according to the map
accompanying the petition it would appear that there are other
landowners whose interests may be affected by this vacation such
as Zasacky, Rinker, Gerbaz and Cantrup. Therefore, we believe
that proper notice has not been given and that the petition is
inadequate due to this failure and the failure to show all
affected property on the map accompanying the petition.
For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request that you
deny the requested vacation. Other reasons may be submitted
orally at your meeting on this matter.
Very truly yours,
SACFIS, KLEIN & SEIGLE
,~
By ~ f ,, /
Herbert S. Klein
HSK/ap
i.
_.
~~lr3Y: ---
506 E. MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81677
P
T April 16, 1979
K
I
N Mr. Peter Vought
Box 568
Aspen, CO 81611
C
o Dear Peter:
U This is to verify our phone conversation today at 9:00
N a.m. in v;hich I wanted you to know that o n May 14, 1979,
T the Board of County Commissioners will be
a
ro
o
d
d considering
p
p
se
amen
ment to the definition of subdivision
which would affect the developability of your three
contiguous lots.
I understand that you are currently applying for an
exemption from the definition of subdivision for your
lots and are awaiting certain title work from Clint
Stewart of the Aspen Title Company and Dave McBride
of Survey Engineers. I would suggest that you get your
application for subdivision exemption filed with
Richard Grice in the P.spen/Pitkin Planning Office in
time for it to be considered by the Commissioners at
their May 7th meeting. Mr. Grice will need to tell
you exactly what his deadlines are to make it on the
May 7th agenda.
I will be meeting with Dave P-1cBride
on your land to discussthe.alignment
through your property.
Sincerely yours,
i
C~ C c7
Brian J. tafford
Assistant. County Manager
BJS:km
tomorrow at 10 a.m.
of the County trail
cc: Dave McBride, Survey Engineers
Sandra Stuller
Richard Grice,;`
Pat Dobie, Engineer
Clint Stewart, Aspen Title Co.
Attachment: Notice of Public Hearing
. _ NoTlcl. or• Pu11Llc ulcnRlrrc
NUT1Cls IS II EIU:UY GIVhN that the Ltoaz'd of County Comrtii s:;ioners of
PitY.in County, Colorado, will conduct a public hearing on Monday,
May ].9, 1979, at.~0:00 a.m. in the Commissioners' Room, Pi.tY.in
County Court'nouse, 506 East Main Street, Aspen, to consider sev-
eral amendments to the PitY.in County Land Use Code, namely:
1.,'An amendment to the definition of subdivision which reads:
/.
In the event that two or more contiguous parcels of land,
previously separately conveyed (or described) shall come
under single ownership, the division of such land unto
two (2) or. more lots, tracts, sites, parcels, separate
interests, interests in com-non, or other division, even
if divided along the line of a previously described or
conveyed parcel, shall constitute a subdivision of land.
Nothing herein shall be deemed to apply to a lot"shown on
any recorded subdivision plat, unless such subdivision
_,~, _ ~'
plat shall not ~Save,_received those approvals~reguired
by state or local law. - --'
2. An amendment to Section 7.21 (separation of contiguous &
adjacent substandard lots) that reads:
For the purposes of this section, lots or parcels shall not
be deemed adjacent or contiguous if separated by a public
or private roadway in place at the date f the adoption
of this amendment (and meeting county specifications)
over which access may be gained to each such lot or parcel.
3. Two amendments to the use chart, namely
a) establishing a new use entitled "fractional fee or
time sharing" and maki~,g it a prohibited use in all
zone districts except the "T" tourist zone, where it
shall be a special review use with an additional review
criteria, namely the effects on the supply of short term
tourist units;
b) making churches uses by special review (rather than a use
by right) in the R-G, R-15, and R-30 zone districts.
4. An amendment to Section 5.90.04 a.2.iii (housing element-
GPSP quota allocation system) awarding 10 additional points
for applicants who will themselves construct units for
which an award is given (3 points awarded if 1/3 of the units
arc constructed; G points if 2/3 arc constructed; and 10
pc;~nts l.f a7.1 arc ccur.;truct~crl by t' •~ applicant),
• Rc7ditionaxrinfonnation is nvailablc in the 1'itY,in County Plauni.ng
Office, 130 South Calena, Aspen, 925-2020, duriny regular
business hours.
TILE IIOAI2D OP COUf417 CO;dP1I: SIONEF;S
OP PITY.IN COUNTY, COLOILIUO
/S/ Joseph E. Edwards, Jr.
Chairman
Published in the Aspen Times on k4arch 29, 1979,
c
E,
... ,
i
dp
l
6j9
I
N
C
0
U
v
L
50~E. MAIN STREET
February 8, 1979
tdr. Peter Vought
Box 568
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Peter:'
ASPEN, CO ORADO 81611
As you know, the Pitkin County Board of Commissioners
made their number one trail priority in 1979 acquisition
of easements along the proposed Castle Creek Trail
alignment between South Seventh Street and the Music
School.
We are interested in working out a final alignment through
your property as soon as possible, using one of the two
alternatives which we have discussed with you. These
include (1) following the lower property boundaries
(north and west) down to the river along the old road
to your well where two bridges would be constructed
to connect caith the Si Johnson ditch and (2) following
the old South Seventh Street alignment and doing
special engineering and design work on the steep, slope
(east boundary) to mitigate the impact on your residence.
As you know, the County is most interested in following
the second alternative alignment.
After our December 12, 1978 meeting with you, you asked
that the Pitkin County Attorney, Sandra Stuller, look
into the development potential of your land with respect
to County land use and subdivision regulations. The
following is a summary of her analysis and recommendation
given your input at that meeting:
(1) The deeds to your land referred to on the bike path
plat each have a metes and bounds description and concern
conveyances from Michael Marolt to three different
grantees in 1957 and 1958. This means that (1) the land
was never previously "subdivided" by the formal platting
and recordation of a subdivision plat and (2) the
conveyances were made prior to the time of adoption of
County subdivision regulations requiring platting and
recordation prior to conveyance (adopted in 1966).
(2) The Land Use Code does not address this question and
the County has never considered the matter and consequently
has set no precedent with respect to such situations. The
P&7, will be considering a code amendment in the near future
to require full subdivision in these cases.
K~'~
ifr. Peter Vought ~
February 8, 1979
Page Two
(3) in order to maintain the County's position that such
conveyances are not automatically exempt from subdivision
review and yet to preserve your reasonable expectation as a
land owner that each lot should have separate developability,
it is recommended by Stuller that you should apply for an
exemption from the definition of subdivision through Karen
Smith in the Planning Office.
(4) The process is simple, requiring that you have a plat
prepared according to the survey descriptions in the earlier
deed and process the application to the Board of County
Commissioners for ust one review without the necessity of a
public hearing or a Planning and Zoning Commission hearing
and recommendation.
(5) During the application approval process, you would be
required to dedicate a trail easement along one of the alterna-
tive alignments to the County for the purpose of constructing this
biY.e path.
If you have further questions, feel free to call Sandra Stuller
(925-5232), Karen Smith (925-2020) or myself (925-3863).
I look forward to discussing this matter with you further in
the near future.
Very sincerely yours,
~~ 4Lw~ c v'~'~
.~
Brian J. Sta ford
Assistant County Manager
BJS:km
cc: Sandra Stuller
Karen Smith
SACHS, KLEIN ceL SEIGLE
JEFFREY H. SACHS ATTORNEYS AT LAW
HERBERT S. KLEIN 201 NORTH MILL STREET
JON DAVID SEIGLE
ASPEN. COLORADO B16f1
JAMES H. DELMAN
B. JOSEPH KRABACHER
January 22, 1982
Mr. Richard Grice
Pitkin County Planning Office
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
~.,
TELEPHONE
(3031 925-800
~'~~~
~~ Ir J.i.:_ ~ ~
6 1,.
. j, I
j~ld Jtii'd 2$198? l~
n:.. ,-
~~,~r'~PJ i Pi'~KIN C<~.
Re: Vacation of Vought-Hefner
Dedications and re: Keith
Hefner Lot Split
Dear Richard:
Enclosed are two letters which I have prepared for the
February 2, 1982 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Would you
kindly enclose these letters in the Planning office packet to the
Planning & Zoning Commission members so that they will have an
opportunity to review them prior to the meeting.
One of the enclosed letters sets forth our objections to the
road vacation proceedings as they affect Mr. Vought and Mr.
Hefner. The other letter sets forth Mr. Hefner's position with
respect to the quality of access to his property for purposes of
the hearing on his lot split application.
Thank you very much for your assistance in presenting these
letters to the Commission members.
Very truly yours,
SACHS, KLEIN &~FII~GLE
B ', ~%tii_
Y tii'
Herk}e"rt S. Klein
K/fs
enclosures
MEMORANDUM
T0: Planning Office
FROM: Sandra M. Stuller
DATE: December 10, 1981
RE: Vacation of Vought/Hefner Dedications
Sunny,
The BOCC, at their November 9th meeting requested that we initiate
proceedings to vacate land (road and trail) dedicated to the public
by Peter Vought and Keith Hefner by agreement dated August 10, 1981.
Procedures for vacation are contained in Section 4-4 of the Land Use
Code and C.R.S. 1973, Section 43-2-301 et se .
The Code requires that you and Pat Dobie present a petition to the
P&Z containing the information required by Section 4-4.2(a). For
purposes of this petition:
(1) The road to be vacated is described as Exhibit C to the
attached Agreement.
(2) The reasons for vacation are specified in the BOCC
resolution to be adopted on December 14. They are:
(a) The land was accepted for dedication under
the misunderstanding that it was contiguous
to a dedicated road and was merely an extension
of the public road system. This has been found
not to be true.
(b) There has been raised questions as to (i) the
ownership interest of Vought and Hefner in
the easements conveyed and (ii) their ability
to dedicate private roadway easements to the
public.
(c) The road and trail dedications were made in
conjunction with a subdivision application
which has been denied. It would be inequitable
(under the circumstances) to retain these rights
of way.
(3) The only parties whose ingress and egress may be affected
by the vacation are:
(a) Keith Hefner
P. O. BOX 2150
Aspen, CO 81612
(b) Peter Vought
Rt. 7, Box 53V
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
(4) You may want to use the map prepared by Vought in conjunction
with his subdivision application to satisfy the map
requirements of the Code.
Would you please take the matter to the P&Z in compliance with the
requirements of Section 4-4.2.
SMS:cjs
Attachment
cc: Pat Dobie
MEMORANDUM
v
T0: Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office
RE: Vacation of Vought/Hefner Dedications
DATE: December 29, 1981
The County Engineer and the Planning Office have been requested by
the Board of County Commissioners to initiate vacation of land (road
and trail) dedicated to the public 6y Peter Vought and Keith Hefner
by agreement dated August 10, 1981.
The road to be vacated is described as "Exhibit C" to the attached
agreement.
The reasons for vacation are as follows:
(a) The land was accepted for dedication under the mis-
understanding that it was contiguous to a dedicated road
and was merely an extension of the public road system.
This has been found not to be true.
(b) There has been raised questions as to (i) the ownership
interest of Vought and Hefner in the easements conveyed
and (ii) their ability to dedicate private roadway ease-
ments to the public.
(c) The road and trail dedications were made in conjunction
with a subdivision application which has been denied. It
would be inequitable (.under the circumstances) to retain
these rights-of-way.
The only parties whose ingress and egress may be affected by the
vacation are:
(a) Keith Hefner
P.O. Box 2150
Aspen, Colorado 81612
(b) Peter Vought
Route 7, Box 53V
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
Both the County Engineer and the Planning Office are in agreement
with the above described reasons for vacation and therefore, we
recommend that the Planning Commission forward its recommendation
to the Board of County Commissioners for the vacation of the land
described.
~„
NOTICE
A petition to vacate the portion of South Seventh Street described
as "Exhibit C" on the attached agreement has been submitted to the
Pitkin County Panning Commission.
The reasons for the proposed vacation are as follows:
(a) The land was accepted for dedication under the mis-
understanding that it was contiguous to a dedicated road
and was merely an extension off the public road system.
This has been found not to be true.
(b) There have been raised questions as to (i) the ownership
interest of Vought and Hefner in the easements conveyed
and (ii) their ability to dedicate p rivate roadway ease-
ments to the public.
(c) The road and trai] dedications were made in conjunction
with a subdivision application which has been denied. It
would be inequitable (under the circ umstances) to retain
these rights-of-way.
The Planning Commission will consider this proposed vacation on
January 5, 1982 at 9:00 a.m. in the Commissioners Meeting Room
which is located in the Pitkin County Courthouse, Pitkin County,
Colorado.
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Kimelise Bracher
y.
SACHS, KLEIN 8z SEIGLE
JEFFREY H. SACHS ATTORNEYS AT LAW
HERBERT 5. KLEIN TELEPHONE
JON DAVID SEIGLE 201 NORTH MILL STREET f303~ 925800
JAMES H. DELMAN ASPE N, COLORADO 81611
B. JOSEPH KRABACHER
January 21, 1982
Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission
506 East Plain Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Keith Hefner Lot Split Hearing Record
February 2, 1982
Dear Members of the Commission,
The purpose of this letter is to set forth Mr. Keith
Hefner's position with respect to certain issues raised
concerning the status of the public road abutting Pir. Hefner's
property. These issues have been raised by the Pitkin County
Planning Office in their memorandum dated December 29, 1981
concerning the above-described lot split before you today for
consideration.
The Planning Office comments that the submission require-
ments set forth at Section 6-3 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code
have not been met with respect to this property. The
requirements set forth in Section 6-3.2(b) of the Land Use Code
state as follows:
The applicant must provide a certificate from a licensed
title insurance company or attorney which certificate
shall reflect that there is an established easement at
least thirty feet in width for ingress and egress and
utilities to the property from a public road. (emphasis
added)
The Planning Office states that their interpretation of this
section adds the requirement that "the property connect to the
public road system." The Planning Office further states that
this is for purposes of consumer protection.
At the present time, Mr. Hefner's property connects to a
public road. On August 10, 1981 pursuant to an agreement between
Mr. Keith Hefner and his neighbor, Mr. Peter Vought, and the
Board of County Commissioners, Mr. Vought and Mr. Hefner conveyed
certain roadway easements, fee interests, and a trail easement to
the Board of County Commissioners. This agreement was recorded
at Book 412, Pages 938 thru 948 of the records of Pitkin County
and the deed conveying said interests pursuant to the agreement
w,,
Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission
Page Two
January 21, 1982
was recorded at Book 413, Pages 03-05. The Board of County
Commissioners accepted the foregoing conveyances pursuant to the
terms of the agreement and the deed as a dedicated public road.
This action was unanimously approved by the Board at its meeting
on June 22, 1981. At that time it was understood by the Board
that the dedication of these rights-of-way and their acceptance
by the Board as a public road was necessary to facilitate the
development applications of Dlr. Hefner and 29r. Vought.
Under the present state of facts existing since the
execution of that agreement, there exists a public road adjoining
tdr. Hefner's property which provides access for ingress, egress
and utilities. There is a certificate from this office as part
of the submission contents in Dlr. Hefner's lot split application
in accordance with Section 6-3.2(b) of the Code certifying to
these facts. Therefore, under the specific language of the
Pitkin County Land Use Code, P4r. Hefner's application fully
complies with this provision.
Fde have too objections to the Planning Office's deviations
from the strict language of the Code. The first objection is
that the Code says very clearly what requirements an applicant
must satisfy with respect to access. There is nothing in the
Code which requires that the public road adjacent to a particular
property be connected continuously by public road to the
remaining portion of the public road system. Dlr. Hefner has
access via private easements to the rest of the public road
system as forth below. The Code states only that the property
have access to a public road. Zn this respect, the application
complies. Our second objection is that if the rationale stated
by the Planning Office for this interpretation is correct, i.e.
consumer protection, then there can be no objection to the
application before you. Assuming that consumer protection means
that a parcel of property will not be created through the
subdivision process which does not have access, Mr. Hefner can
demonstrate access rights to his property all along South Seventh
Street. t•1r. Hefner has obtained rights-of-way along the road in
place (South Seventh Street) by virtue of deeds recorded at Book
183, Page 290, Book 183, Page 516 and Book 186, Page 93. These
easements state as follows:
Together with a right-of-way along the road as now con-
structed and in use for the use and benefit of the second
party, his heirs and assigns, extending from said above-
described land (the Hefner property) northerly to Hopkins
Street along the course of the road described in the
reservation below.
Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission
Page Three
January 21, 1982
~.
Reserving unto first party, his heirs and assigns, a right-
of-way ten feet in width over the road as now constructed
and in use extending south from Hopkins Street as shown
on the LVillits Map southerly through the land of the first
party and the easterly side of the above-described land to
the land of the first party adjoining the above-described
land to the south thereof.
From the above description it is clear that Dir. Hefner has a
valid deeded easement along South Seventh Street for access to
his property. This is a deeded easement from the owner of the
fee land consisting of South Seventh Street and, therefore, is
not prescriptive or limited in any manner and is capable of
conveyance to a subsequent purchaser of Mr. Hefner's property.
Therefore, from a consumer protection point of view, Dlr. Hefner
can and will provide access from his property to the public road
system. Consumer protection concerns are fully satisfied by this
application.
The Planning Office also objects to Dir. Hefner's lot split
application due to its failure to contain the submission
requirements required by Sections 5-201 and 5-202 of the Land Use
Code. First, it should be pointed out that Section 5-202
pertains only to new roadways and in some respects to the
improvement or reconstruction of existing roadways. Mr. Hefner's
lot split proposes to utilize the existing road in place along
South Seventh Street for access. Therefore, Section 5-202 is not
applicable to this application. Secondly, the allegation that
Section 5-201 submission requirements are not supplied by Mr.
Hefner as a basis of recommending denial of this application
appears to be a unique proposition. The Hefner application is
for a lot split creating one additional dwelling unit. The
submission contents of Section 5-201 require traffic engineering
analysis and evaluation of the impact of the proposal on the
county road system, an evaluation of the impacts on other users
of the road system, trip generation figures, trip distribution
figures, and modal split determinations. I am unaware of any lot
split application ever processed by Pitkin County requiring these
submission contents. In all instances which I am aware of from
personal knowledge or otherwise, this requirement is waived for
lot split applications. In any event, we submit that if the
Planning and Zoning Commission requests that this information be
provided, we shall be happy to do so. However, it would be
inequitable to deny this application for this reason without
first obtaining the ruling of the Planning and Zoning Commission
with respect to the necessity of these studies for this low
`~, w,
Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Commission
Page Four
January 21, 1982
impact lot split and giving the applicant an opportunity to
provide this information. If the Commission wishes such
information, we request that the application be tabled so that we
may provide the information rather than be denied.
I will be providing other information to you for your
consideration at your hearing which will also become part of the
record.
Thank you very much for your consideration of this matter.
Very truly yours,
SACHS, KLEIN & SEIGI~,E
/'
B ~
Y
Herbert S. Klein
HSK/ap