Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.273514204002 (2)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) PARCEL IDi 2735-142-04-002 DATE RCVD: ~ # COPIES CASE NO P176-93 CASE NAME: Wiltrout Lot Split Parcel B Exten of Vested Rights Planners PROD ADDR: 0132 Glen Dee Dr OWN/APP: Wiltrout, Boyce ADR~ C/S/Z:~ PHN:~- REP: ADR:~- CISIZ:~ PHNi~ Email Addr:' ALLOCATED HOURS:- FEES DUE:- FEES RCVD:~ % OVER: REE~~ BY~~ DUE: MTGDATEREV BODY ' PH NOTICED DATEOF FINAL ACTION:I No ~ I. BOCC Reso: 94-32 #368361 ', ';~. ~.. No ~ BOCC Ord: REMARKS PZ: 89-104 HRG OFF CLOSED: BY:~- HO INDEX: ADMIN: PLAT RECORDED~~ '. PLAT (BK,PG):~- ADMIN INDEX: VR APEROVAL DATE: ~- :. VR EXPIRES:` :'.: :CASE TYP:,; Exten of Vested Rights CASE TYPE: ' CASE TYP2:, CASE TYPB: ~ - 1CASE TYP3:~ CASETYPT:. `.. ~, CASE TYPO: Date Scanned: 9/15/09 File Location:'. Box 175 ~. DATE ROUTED: CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET PITKIN COUNTY DATE RECEIVED: 12/17/93 CASE # P176-93 DATE COMPLETE: PARCEL ID# 2735-142-~'@'Z'N STAFF MEMBER: -b~-DOS-' PROJECT NAME: Wiltrout Lot Split Parcel B Extension of Vested Rights Project Address: APPLICANT: Wiltrout Ltd Boyce Wiltrout Applicant Address: 201 Cypress Lane Colorado Springs CO 80906 719-635-8236 REPRESENTATIVE: Ed Zasacky Carol Ann Jacobsen Realty Representative Address/Phone: 606 E. Human Aspen CO 81611 925-2811 ------------------------------------------------------- FEES: PLANNING $ 942 # APPS RECEIVED 1 ENGINEER $ # PLATS RECEIVED HOUSING $ ENV. HEALTH $ TOTAL $ 942 TYPE OF APPLICATION: STAFF APPROVAL: 1 STEP: X 2 STEP: DRC MEETING DATE P&Z MEETING DATE PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO BOCC MEETING DATE ?>~ PUBLIC HEARING: NO ESTIMATED TIME FOR BOCC: REFERRALS: ~/ Attorney _Aspen Consol S.D. - School District Engineer -Rocky Mtn Nat Gas USFS (Carbondale) Housing Holy Cross USFS (Aspen) Aspen Water _Aspen Fire Div. of Wildlife Envir.Hlth. Basalt Fire BLM Manager -Carbondale Fire Snowmass Village Zoning -Div. Water Res. Caucus Airport Mgr. -State Forest Ser. Caucus Sheriff CO Geo.Survey Homeowners City P & Z -State Hwy Dept. Open Space Board Building Dept -Clean Air Board Other: / 2 ~' ~7w ATE DUE 2 ZS DATE REFERRED: INITIALS: : D --------------------- RESOLUTION #: ------------- DATE: PLAT OR SITE PLAN RECORDED AT BOOK FINAL ROUTING County Attorney Housing Open Space Bd. Other: FILED: County Engineer Envir. Health PAGE(S) INITIAL: ~ !~(J. Zoning Applicant Revised 04/06/93 X45 F'-ggt_~ U3/-COUhTY1CLERF~PP RECORDER 1 F~Ct„' DOC 36861 $-^ PITk:IN SILVIA DAMS RESOLIITION OF TEE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COIINTY COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL OF A THREE YEAR EXTENSION OF A VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT FOR THE WILTROIIT FAMILY SIIBDIVISION Resolution No. 94-~., RECITALS 1. Boyce W. Wiltrout, hereinafter "Applicant", has applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, hereinafter "Board", for approval of the extension of a vested property right pursuant to Resolution No. 88-95 of the Land Use Code. 2. Said parcel is located on Glen Dee Road, adjacent to the Aspen Highlands Ski Area, more specifically described in Exhibit A, attached. 3. The Board heard this application at a regularly scheduled meeting on March 15, 1994, at which time evidence and testimony was presented with respect to this application. 4. The Board determined that the proposed extension of a vested property right is consistent with the requirements of Resolution No. 88-95 of the Land Use Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board that it does hereby grant approval of the Extension of a Vested Property Riqht for the Wiltrout Family Subdivision for a period of three years subject to the following conditions: 1. Any development on the site shall be subject to the provisions of Ordinance 92-8. ,~~ 368361 B-745 P-881 03/9/94 11:1~JA PG 2 OF 3 Resolution No. 94-~ Page 2 2, Within 90 days, on or before June 20, 1994, the Applicant shall provide a cash-i as 1erepresentedf in2~ thefo1989p1GMQS 't housing mitigation, P ~~ ' competition. In the event the $52,500 payment is not received by the Housing Office within the 9o day period, the Applicant shall be required to provide housing mitigation for 1.75 ', employees at the payment-in-lieue~i~dsubmittalategory #1 in } effect at the time of building p ~/ 3. The Applicant shall retain the right to build a maximum 6,240 square foot floor area residence on Lot 2 of the Wiltrout Family Subdivision as represented in BOCC Resolution No. 90- 64. 4, The Applicant shall record the Protective Covenants for the Wiltrout Family Sub r r to Marchh31P11994. County Clerk and Recorder's Office, p 5 The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations in the application and the public meetings. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 1994. r~u~ ty C~erk and APPROVED AS TO FORM: °~_ i Timothy E. Whits' , County Attorney ~, . ~~ BOARD OF CODNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITRIN COUNTY, CO/L/ORADO v ~ B ' Ro ert W. hil , Chairman Date ~' ~ APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~~ ~~ 3uz a Ronc an, County Planning Director roo wilvaut_e#.~~ `~:.-, a Silva Davis, F'itb.:in Cnty Clerk, Doc 4. pit Exhibit A 3~~61 g-745 F'-88^ i~3/^9/94 11:1i~A F'6 3 OF A tract of land in the SW~ of the NWT oc Seccdes_14, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th °. M., more fully cribed as follows: Beginning at a point on the East right-of-way 11ne of the Maroon Creek Road whence the (lest ~-corner of said Sec- thence S. 55°12' E. 310.52 lion 14 bears S. 53°53' W. 1198.35 feet; feet; thence N. 47°44' E. 48.78 feet; thence N. 15°22' E. 102.21 feet; thence N. 5°56' E. 158.11 feet; thence N. 60°41' W. 237.12 feet to the east right-of-way line of the Maroon Creek Road; thence 5.29°19' W. 260.95 feet along the east right-of-way 11ne of the Maroon Creek Road to the point of beginning. Containing 1.89 acres mare or less. Together with an easement for ingress and egress over and along a road as now constructed and in use sixteen (16') feet wide extend- i.na nor..thPr7v `rom the above described proper;.y to the County Road. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO ACCEPTING RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM SCORE FOR THE 1988 AND 1989 PFZSTER RANCH/GOLF AND THE 1989 WILTROUT APPLICATIONS AS FORWARDED BY PITKIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Resolution No. 89- '~ WHEREAS, Maroon Creek Development Corporation submitted a residential Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) application for 16 townhouse dwelling units and 8 single-family dwelling units for a total of 24 units for the 1988 GMQS and 10 townhouse dwelling units and 7 single-family dwelling units for a total of 17 units for the 1989 GMQS for Pfister Ranch/Golf which is described within Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, Wiltrout Family Partnership submitted a 1989 residential Growth Management Quota System application for 1 single-family dwelling unit for the Wiltrout property which is described within Exhibit "B"; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners understands that the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Pfister Ranch's application for 1988 and 1989 and Wiltrout Family Partnership for 1989 Metro Area Residential GMQS applications and scored them as follows: Pfister Ranch 82.4 Wiltrout Family Partnership ~ 74.0 and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners recogni2ed that Pfister Ranch's applications for 1988 and 1989 were scored on one Resolution No. 89-_"~ Page 2 scoring sheet because they were the only application for 1988 and Pfister Ranch reduced their 1989 application from 18 units to 17 units so that one unit would be available for the only other application (Wiltrout Family Partnership) for the 1989 Residential allotment for the Metro Area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE ZT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners that the 1988 GMQS allotment of twenty four (24) and 1989 GMQS allotment of seventeen (17) units of the available eighteen (18) unit allotments will be awarded to Pfister Ranch and the remaining one (1) unit will be awarded to the Wiltrout Family Partnership for the Metro Area Residential GMQS Competition. APPROVED by the Board at its regular meeting on November 14, 1989. ATTEST: Gu° ~/.si ~1T~eanette Jones, ijDeputy County'Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Thomas F.' S ith, County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ,P(I~T~KIN COUNTY, {C~OI.oRADO Colette Penne, Chairmrrannn . , APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Amy Marge , Pla 'ng Dir for boccreso.metroscores 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page 9 of the proposed development and the standards of this Code, and considering the design of said spaces with respect to visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience and safety. Also, considering the ability of the parking area to be adequately plowed in the winter months without the loss of required parking spaces and/or safety. Maximum Score: 2 Score: 1 COMMENT: The_ applicant provides an acceptable desicxn for parking. providing more than the minimum number of spaces required in the code. Quality of Design and Neighborhood Compatibility - Minimum Threshold 30 - Subtotal 40 3. EMPLOYEE HOIISING - The Commission shall consider to what extent each development proposal will alleviate an identi- fied critical shortage of low-, moderate- or middle-income housing. Any applicant wishing to receive points under this section shall specify in the application the number of bedrooms within each unit within the proposed project, and the method (as identified in Section 5-300.4) by which the applicant will provide low-, moderate- or middle-income housing. Employee Dwelling Units as described and approved pursuant 3-8.13 shall not be considered to satisfy the provisions of this subsection. In order to establish criteria to determine which proposals constitute the type of units which will help alleviate the critical shortage of affordable housing, the Pitkin County Housing Authority shall, prior to April 1st of each year, advise the Board of County Commissioners as to the current type of housing needed and the Board shall, from this report, determine which type of units shall receive points within this section. An applicant may propose to specify types of units not identified by the Housing Authority as helping to alleviate the critical shortfall of affordable housing if such proposal is specifically targeted to a group of employees employed by the applicant. Any such determination is subject to the review of the Board of County Commis- sioners, whose action shall be final. Points shall be assigned according to the following sche- dule: (i) Low Income Housing Points 1 point for each 3$ of the project 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page 10 that is deed restricted housing up to 33% of the total project 11 1 point for each 6% of the project that is deed-restricted housing from 34% - 100% of the total project 11 (ii) Moderate-Income Housing 1 point for each 5% of the project that is deed-restricted housing up to 40% of the total project 8 1 point for each 10% of the project that is deed-restricted housing from 41% to 100% of the total project 6 (iii)Middle-Income Housing 1 point for each 8% of the project that is deed-restricted housing up to 40% of the total project 5 1 point for each 12% of the project that is deed-restricted housing from 41% to 100% of the total project 5 For the purposes of this section, the total project shall be based on the ratio of the number of residents to be housed in deed-restricted units as compared to the number of residents to be housed in the non-deed restricted units in the project. To determine the number of residents of the project, the following criteria shall be applied to both the restricted and non-restricted units: Studio: 1.25 residents One-bedroom: 1.75 residents Two-bedroom: 2.25 residents Three-bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents; Dormitory: 1.00 residents per 150 square feet of unit space. . All housing units (under resa proposed to be constructed Moderate Housing (PMH) zone pursuant to Section 5-510.2(d) points under this subsection conjunction with development Le or rental controls) within the Permanent category and exempt may be relied on for (D) if provided in for which a growth 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page 11 management quota is required. Points given pursuant to this paragraph shall be awarded only for the number of housing units which could have been built pursuant to the underlying zoning category (i.e., excluding any density increases approved by reason of the rezoning to PMH). Score: 11 COMMENTS: Pursuant to section 5-510.5(Dl of the code the applicant may only be awarded points for GMP scoring for the number of housing units which could have been built in the underlvinq zoning cateaorv. The R-30 zone district allows two units on a lot which is a minimum of 60.000 square feet in size. As the proposed lot is only 48,000 square feet in size, points may not be awarded for the provision of employee housing for the on site caretaker unit. The applicants have clarified. however, that the alternative is to provide cash-in-lieu for the employee generation commitment. Therefore, the requirement is to house 1.75 people at the low income level of 552.500. The applicants are meeting the requirement. 4. Bonus Points - The Commission may consider each application with respect to its additional support for furthering the goals and objectives of the Down Valley Plan, with regard to the preservation of valued agricultural and wildlife lands, through the use of programs listed below or through dedication of trails. Each development may receive bonus points according to the following formulas: (i) Open Space - Considering the extent to which the applicant purchases interests in land in order to preserve valuable undeveloped lands or creates conser- vation easements or dedicates land located in the 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page 12 designated sending areas of the Down Valley Plan Future Land Use Map. 0 -- The proposal does not help meet the goals of the County as identified in the Down Valley Compre- hensive Plan with regard to the preservation of open space, agricultural and wildlife lands. 1 -- The proposal supports the goals, objectives and future land use map of the Down Valley Comprehen- sive Plan with regard to the preservation of open space agricultural lands and wildlife lands located in the designated sending area of the Down Valley Future Land Use Map. The applicant must preserve no less than two (2) times the minimum lot size in the zone district where the develop- ment is proposed. This land must be in the Down Valley planning area and be used for agricultural or wildlife purposes or scenic open space. 2 -- The proposal is actively supportive of the goals, objectives and future land use map of the Down Valley Comprehensive Plan with regard to the preservation of open space, agricultural lands and wildlife lands located in the designated sending area of the Down Valley Future Land Use Map. The applicants must preserve no less than Three (3) times the minimum lot size in the zone district where the development is proposed. This land must be in the Down Valley planning area and be used for agricultural or wildlife purposes or scenic open space. (ii) Trails- Considering the dedication or acquisition of trail easements for the benefit of the community as a whole and as identified in the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Element. 0 -- The proposal does not offer any trails which benefit the community as a whole. 1 -- The proposal commits to providing trail easements, which benefit the community as a whole. 2 -- The proposal commits to providing trail easements and construction of trails which benefit the community as a whole. Bonus Points - Subtotal 0 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page 13 POINTS (with multiplier): 1. Availability of Public and Private Facilities and Services. Minimum Threshold (14) Score 17 2. Quality of Desiqn and Neighborhood Compatib ility. Minimum Threshold (30) Score 40 3: Employee Housing. Minimum Threshold (11) Score 11 ~--' TOTAL Minimum Threshold (55) Score 68 Name of Planning and Zoning Member: Asp en/Pitkin Planning Office wiltrout.ss .Z Z ~ ~ ~ r' ~ 2 6 U W - \ . _. ~„ ~ ti ~~ Z Z LL N Y' .. 1 ~ Op0 -. ~/ ~ O H -. Q to •_ • ~ \`--"~„-, z d _ ~ ~ ~ ~` _ U U U Opto ~ \ W Q G ~~@j r .. , ~ - ~ W i _ _ -- ._ o < Z _ ~ + ' ~ D r ,. U ..r ~ ~ ~ ~ w w ~ N ,~a~ x~~~, oo m g ~ . ~~ ~ ~ \~. .: _. o ~~ =:a Z ,. N F- ~ ~~ ~ a~w f LL Z .. _ ~0~~-- }Z~~ I° ~ \ I / D U / Y Al ~ F F ~ ., ~ > O m P~ a~~ rr.. .a :.. ~ ..'L ~. J W ~. .... ,,: ~.. '.. 4F. .. . t~ w ,x, 's ~W ~8 < ~ ~"" ... ~ , ~, '. ~ NNE N c r {. ~ ~ ~ ~ N_ r"~ j ...p Q W = ~ 3 + r ~ ~ v , Y ? t ~ p ' W Z 7 ~ ~ k-~ , ~i ., F -. pW~ g l..W pp F ~~- W I L~TROUT FAMILY . ~ ~~ , ` /~ by PARK EASEMENT ,TES HIGHLANDS VILLAS ~25 ~'N CONTOURS _- --- ^-- PO Bp, '.~ / - _T- 4/ . / 2 . ~-. ~10 TRAIL EASEMENT 4/~ >0,. ./ B>\ ~ I, , \ N / ~ /~/~ y GLEN DEi ~../ /~/ \ PRIV; M 'ti '$ I ~ ' ~- ~/~~BUILDINO I a ~ I ~ ~ ~ru / ` / /'~/ ENVELOPE I PONq' EASEMEM / BKfiL4_P01t1L *~ / ~~/~i~ ` 'I I I tIE - 5/ w ~ ~ ~,~,~;~~~ z ~ ~ ~/ ~' '.LOT 2 3D' = I -~~~Pa S /rr 3 ~:. h , / ~'+~ ~3~ ~`Ai s •ly,t. ' ~ //AREA 49.006 SO. FT.. i/- I . ~ m°' ' I Ae~` df$ ;~ 1A - ~r I W ~ ~ I b POND EASEMENT N 04010`54 E '200~~65 /t' ~ _ n 4 F .h.l A~yt~~~T~~ ~~// ~ h s*sa~ \ I Z t > l _ ~~ ~ ref i'~ ~ 1 11>> 1~ ; _ r ,~ f~ ~,! ?` ~ ' Sj . ON 14 T 10 S'~yy,cl r~~ r `l~~~rQi ~ ; Hi.~ /Y ,~ -~ ., ~I. ~,~ W.. OF THE Bt.h P M ~ iT ar~''~~a~~ '_ ~ I 'r B. L. M. ,.ALUMINUM CAP ,..~ ~ {'~~ `^ :S er~R ~x ° ~~LOT,~ ~ ` >, \~~ J~ ~. ~ .. ~~t~~r^~i AREA 32.1 f7 SO. FT •/- ~~ / x.~ R2 ~ ~ ~\t ~ 30 _Q 3/S ~ ~ 8 / . '~ ~ ENVELOPE / - 2 r ;\ /y / ~ ~~ ~~ - / ASPEN HIS ASPENHIOHIANDS 4. // SKIING Cc SKIING CORP., /~ ~ ~ 10 b0' ~M y ~ .. A I/ VICINITY MAP - - ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting - March 15, 1994 THRU: Reid Haughey, County Manager Suzanne Konchan, County Planning Director ~/ FROM: Rick Magill, Planning Office RE: Wiltrout Family Subdivision Extension of Vested Rights REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting the extension of a vested property right for period of 3 years. The Wiltrout Family Subdivision received Final Plat approval from the Board of County Commissioners on February 5, 1991. The original vesting period expired on February 5, 1994. The Applicant submitted a complete application for the extension of vested property rights to the Planning Office on January 25, 1994. APPLICANT: Boyce W. Wiltrout APPLICANTS REPRESENTATIVE: Ed Zasacky, Carol Ann Jacobsen Realty LOCATION: The Wiltrout property is located on Glen Dee Road, adjacent to the Aspen Highlands Ski Area. ZONING: R-30, 30,000 square foot minimum lot size SIZE: Parcel A - 34,328 sq.ft.; Parcel B - 48,000 sq. ft. BACKGROUND: Resolution No. 90-64 approved the subdivision of a 1.89 acre parcel into two separate parcels. The existing Wiltrout residence will remain on the 34,328 square foot lot (Parcel A) and a new, four bedroom, 6,240 square foot residence is proposed for the 48,000 square foot lot (Parcel B). STAFF COMMENTS: Employee Housing Mitigation- In the 1989 GMQS application the Applicant agreed to cash-in-lieu payment for mitigation of employee housing. The requirement is to house 1.75 people at the low income level of $52,500. The Housing Office confirmed that the Applicant has not yet complied with this requirement. Technically, the Board may require that the Applicant provide employee housing mitigation based on the current payment-in-lieu schedule (Category 1 = $69,000 x 1.75 = $120,750), pursuant to the extension of vested rights legislation (Resolution No. 88-95). Vesting of Property Rights- County policy has held that subdivisions approved by the Board of County Commissioners retain their development rights in perpetuity. However, this policy does not necessarily protect a development right from future legislative changes at the local, state or federal level. Changes in Legislation- Since the original subdivision approval, the County has adopted Ordinance 92-08, which limits all incorporated parcels within Pitkin County to 15,000 square feet of floor area. Additional square footage requires Special Review by the Board of County Commissioners. ENABLING LEGISLATION: Resolution No. 88-95 (codified from CRS 24- 68-101) authorizes the Board of County Commissioners to approve an extension of the vesting of real property rights based on a Site Specific Development Plan (Resolutions #89-104 & #90-64; Wiltrout Family Subdivision General Submission, Detailed Submission and Final Plat). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve an extension of vested real property rights for the Wiltrout Family Subdivision for a period of three years, subject to the conditions of the Site Specific Development Plan (Resolution #89-104 and Resolution #90-64) and the following additional conditions: 1. Any development on the site shall be subject to the provisions Ordinance No. 92-08. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall provide a cash-in-lieu payment of $52,500 for employee housing mitigation, as represented in the 1989 GMQS competition. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations in the application and the public meetings. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolutions No.90-64 & No.89-104 2. 1989 GMQS score sheet 2. Site Plan memo Wiltrout ext.vest , ~... - .-a.. .... _. - , } ~ r, syn.... v. ~: ... .: e~7 as exhibit a } F~~i~~t :;!`• ,., ~~~ . ~.. , ~, 'r'` 1 G ~ ~v 1h Y IN d ~~'Q _ _ ; aD ~i Z"" ,.r > k ~"s .~ -~~ ~ .,rs ~1,.,Cract,ofland,in the~yH} of, the 3dk o'_ ;eceLon 14 Townshi 10 5 th - a fL ~»L~,a'~i~.~ , p , au , Ranga 8$ tJest of c1o`6th P. M., more fully dea-- _ ctiEsd as Egllowas ?8eginningat a i o ~ , ",~ ~'~+y~ ' '~ ^a,•e~ ~ , po nt- n thi East right-of-way..' dint. o! Cb~.,}laroon'f:reak Road rhenen thsV F ~ J ~,~7~~"y, k„ ~~„ t•`°"'+P" e~kr esc _corner cd said Sec= y tiq,~+4 Mfrs S SS•57+' u, k' U.98. 73 (ncc~ thrn v S, 5$'1;' F. 710.$2 ~faar ~ [Fang K gy•t.4+ : ' r"t ar pi,z~ ~'L ; 1 , : t . 46.78 feet; thenec 15'22' C 102 b 21 ~ n ' ~ 7 ~ j y~ , . Pcec~, t,.t e ce N,,S„S~ yylSg,li.. fear, t;henee N.'-b0•..1~ u 277 1 ` , ' ~~ ' ~ , s `~ . , tha 2 feet [o + iaat tight oL=wad„land of chatiaroonGnek Road; thence 5 H:~260 29'19' 9S f ~ ~ -. . . ~~ . - eet along tha eaat right-ofway ?Lna of the Maroon Creak ~ Road Co bhe point of~baglnnin C ,r~~s , . ~ ~ + ` + ' g, ontaining 1.89 sores more or lasa ~- ~Tog~thar with an~asccent for Sngresa and egress over and alon a oad '~-e`~ ~~ ~";?'' ~ _ "~ g t as m,+ constructed and Sn uae sl:cteen (16' ) feet vld l ; ~ 3j ~ ~. _ __ a extend ,~ Nt,~ortbRrl.r..from the above Zes:rit~c property ro~the County~Roed `' ~~ ~t , ~ 1 y t-.. { v(.1 l.~ '` . 3 f ~ s .. . ;n 1 '` ~? ~ + ~: ~F K ~" F, 1 k , ~. • .. ', 1 DCC-13-1993 17:35 FROM °IPER JRFFRRY COLD SPGS TO 91303925918221 P.02 December 13, 1993 Aspen/Pitkin Co. Planning Office Mr. Tim Malloy 130 Galena Aspen, CO, 81611 Subject: .Vesting of Development Rights Attention: Mr. Tim Malloy This is a formal request for an extension of vesting of development. Rights of Parcel B, Wiltrout Lot Split, as approved by the Pitkin County BOCC. The resolution, #90-4, approving this lot was signed on August 14, 1990, and is recorded on pages 148-151 of Book 627. Request extention of vesting under ordinance 88-95, section 6-5.7(5). A copy; of resolution, R90-4, is attached. Please advise of anticipated time required, as our current vesting expizes on F~_bruary 5, 1994. / ~ J . ,j v.~~I Si ely, iG~ . B c W. Wiltrout en ral Partner wiltrout,Limited 201 Cypress Lane Colorado Springs, CO 80906 {719) 635-8236 ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 FAX# (303) 920-5197 January 25, 1994 Ed Zasacky Cazol Ann Jacobsen Realty 606 E. Hyman Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Wiltrout Lot Split Parcel B Extension of Vested Rights Case ~iP176-93 Deaz Ed, The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is complete. We have scheduled this application for review at a public hearing by the Board of County Commissioners on Tuesday, March 15, 1994 at a meetrng to begin at 5:00 P.M. Should this date be inconvenient for you, please contact me within 3 working days of the date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and changes to the schedule or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at the Planning Office. Please note that it is your responsibility to post the subject property with a sign within 15 days of the public hearing and to remove it from the property within one week following the hearing. Please submit a photo of the posted sign as proof of compliance with the Code prior to the hearing. If you have any questions, please call Tim Malloy, the planner assigned to your case, at 920- 5095. Sincerely, ~~- Suzanne Wolff Administrative Assistant bocaph ASPEN/PITHIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone 920-5090 FAX 920-5197 MEMORANDUM TO: County Attorney Zoning FROM: Tim Malloy, Planning Office RE: Wiltrout Lot Split Parcel B Extension of Vested Rights Parcel ID lf2735-142-04-002 DATE: January 25, 1994 Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by Wiltrout, Ltd. Please return your comments to me no later than February 25. Thank you. . .. , STATE OF CO~RADO COUNTY OF PITKZN FiIL'TROUT tAi:ZLY PARTNERSHIP SUBDIVISION DECT.I+RA'?'_TO:"i OF oROT~'CTSVE C~VFNAtiTS ~T F,~~A~fsi:c.~ vD_ =.?.Eie_APPLICATTON 2;OTi~^s '"O "a.:~ i~:?R'.~'~' 7.S HE`ZEBY C~Z'JiC~J, THa'r: WHEREAS, T`~ ^ec'ararit, DOROTHY 8. WILTROUT, is a GENw~PL F.~^~J-S= ^~i' t~"L~'~OU'"~ Z,TD., which is t}_e awi7er of all the fallo:oi^g des~~:~_hE:c4 property sirua~ed in Y.ha wounty of Pit:cin and 6tate of Colcrado to-wit: Lots .' ,3..d ~ ir. Wiltrout rami.iy Partnership Subdivision; and, WH~'REA~, ~-" '-_= =}o`ired by the sai.~? 7eclarant to mai~.tair, ^a id -~~c•: ~ des~ziaed propa_ty as .a high-Ciass res~3e^`...~1 sc,_-'.. ..^,~., r;:3 d~~~~mac4 pr<<~er anti ::t=yAssary fcr the mutua ~oM r•r: ~ .:d L>e~.Qiit ci sai3 prcperty and for t::E v^~:?~Er.s ~° :s~i~ I~~c~~-,rt an<~ a~.l fu`ure o»rers of the traCt5 ::t 53.4 .-~:i:i?:+'~.?i~5iDT2~$nd pJ.li ~7er,3~i]6 :`.1;3.',.2P.i:'2~j( by, through, or undFr them: NC'd, THEREFIP., DOROTHY 8. WZLTRCt.T, as Genaral Partner of Wiltrout Ltd., OWNS? of the aforesaid real property, does her:~b deci:x>e e:h~it: as:i ri~~ilt, titla a d interest in and_to all of the prop~~rt above described ehall be subject to the cov2nar.'.:s dnd C%_r~i::t»%;x~s h?reiraftar sec for;.h. 8~ 4 Sy?D'c*t."''~_ `-„ ^r. E21%S;i^'S ~ y-;ts ~ _ ,_:_-. _~ r^'~ to arp..y to ? and :~ ~`:a r~:c,>rdad pl=t ::f Wiltrout Family Par*_narship . ~~ Subdivision. ~Z^~'"`y:,~o'~ ;.. ^'ner? s'~a?'. b~ r_ampliance wit': that res:.lution of ~~b'~',~ :'ne =r,a_a J ~:,:. r~ 1`-S:iiDn~rS ~]~ Pi'.:<~"~ ~~ijt'yt'y'. ~~~ ~~:Cl.., `^..~C, '"... ai.`, -e-t ~'1„` Cf thr '~i }. :; CJiw~ 7;~;ii~~ '~+ ?artnersh~a .,:.:~~.'a.y,:.zre r..~.ch res.o~_ut:ion is ;~;:ow,. as \'~ Resclution :1a. _` 2. ?1.- ~.u-r; '.c-_ .^te~.r:.~s or so-Called sat~el:.ite dishas '' will be pannitted_ 3. Ne rsnimals, livr_stoe':, or pot:ltry at sny kind may re `.c^pt, ra ise<? *a.:;int`a fined, _ bred uron any lot far d).y/ pUX'SiO5Ei ~:rV"'id~~-:i~ i':ti~ir 8?i$r, C~G_~.rn x3t lC hC+%d`39i107 .i ~",e"~3 (dagS CY. CBtQ'' nat QYC@9?i_x` th:9B in trital mdy be kept on any lit, but none for co;aaer::ial purpnszs. 4 • Arty corv•..;~,_+- io:^ to '~? :3<;ne open competed or: tt:. !i _ ~ .. _;itt'.4 efter the ~:2ite the tuildir:g per~.~w-. f:,~ t?:al construction. t:~ lc,c shall be o•P the _ssuance of 5. Shake st`.ingle rcofs shall be regt;ired cn all sloped roofs. ' 6, Recreational vehicles, motor homes, ::an;pers, and trailers which are^.•~t kept within an ar,ciose3 garage may not be parked cr, n,: 1'~'t fcr more than a 24 hour period. 7. NC high intensity outdoor lighting (~aercury vapor, sodium vapor cr h*.?:~*~e::j st*_ali be pe•_-mirted and all outdoor ligtat.inq shall re :~~ th>_ low voltage type, as nravided by the Pit;~ir. CUUr:*_,~ Landscape Guidelines. 8•. Landscape materials shall be natural, or as reauire~? by the Pi'.kir. County Landscape Guidelines. 9. There shall. be ro construction on slopes which exceed 30 percent, wi_cut first obtaining 1041 Environmental Fiazsr<. Re-riaw and approval. ~ lo. No sicrnJof any kind shall be d' plsycd -o public vie~~ ex.cep' o::~, ~ ,,;, ~: Heel mere than ~ s advertisin the ~:,eL'*__~ i ~j1_e ft.et g _ ~r s_la o: ra_„~, or ,.sea by a D'lixder t6 d~~L'!~:;' '.. ;c 1:' ii; .a :, ~' °- P- per y duri;.l tae cors~ruction and origins;. sale period. 11. No noxicus Cr offensive actiLity or condition shall be carried or, or upot: any lot, nor shall anything be done thereon ~dhic:' a:ay 'ca an annoyance cr nuis«nce to the owner or owners of tans other property, C. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. These covenants shall be deer,:ed to run with the lard and s.*.all bs bi::dinq upon the heirs, executors administrators znd assigns of all parties and persons claiming under them. They may be modified, amended, or rescs_nded, onl _ :e t: r=, Y >> " na....~ous veto c ail property owners within CnE Kiltrvt,t ^a:R;,y Bartnarship 5u'odivisior,. Enforcement :t•re::`_' ,,cial' be by action oz procee:9iny, either at law or in equ~r_y, any? such action :>r proceeding may be brought by any person s.nir,q real property witk;in *_he Wiltrout Famxi•~ . ac :?Yrsh.io 5.~bd ivision whether or not he be directly :iff2ctera by any violation hereof. The invalidation aP ,any portion hereof by judgment or decree of any acurt of competent jurisdictidn shall not invalidate the remainder cf these <_ovsnants, and tre re•:bainder shall tonenforce31a1u11 fora a; ' e~fect. xf it becc;~ees i:ecessary y prc~is:ion of „here cov9nanta` by action or proceeding, either a~ law or in equity, and in the event any `9 J C(?~_1rr Cif rEGC r~:i a;?'-`r. y~.,,. ~.?r: `_~ t^. ~1~ 3n1 ~;'.~ON~Y~y ~JW:?c?r tldS wi11Pu'.ly viola*_ed a~;y of the provisions of taes2 covenants, then Cil°_ per3c.*1 _ ~^y i?^g such ac*_ion sha'_1 bs entitled to recover., in addition tc any damages suffered, the costs of the action, including reasonable attorney's fees, as set by the court, against the violating property owner. 2. These covenants shall remain in force for a period of 15 years from rile Sate hereef, and sha12 ba automatically extended fer successive periods of 10 years, unless terminated or rescind+ad cy the unanimous vote of the owners of bot:? o£ the lc~fis ~.xthir. Lhe Wiltrcat Famiy Partnership Subdl.vision. . In witnes3 whereef, the Declarant has caused its partnership name ro be subscribed by its general partner this day cf 1990. WILTROUT LTD. By: Dorothy B. W ltrout STATE OF COLOkA0O ) s5 COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The above and foregoing instrument was acknowledged and ~ ~~~f a .->>- ,signed before =.me by Dorothy B. Wiltrout;-°`as 'General "Partner ~ of Wiltrout :.td. , this day of ac°:_: , -.:~:1990. ;:::.'. i ~,•,,.....,;, ;. ,. _... ._. ' .. "I Notary Public "~~''' My Commission Expires: ... My Address: ' ~ 4 ~ K.°~~..: ~_.,,~. ,~ <,\ MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting - March 15, 1994 THRU: Reid Haughey, County Manager ~,// Suzanne Konchan, County Planning Director FROM: Rick Magill, Planning Office RE: Wiltrout Family Subdivision Extension of Vested Rights REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting the extension of a vested property right for period of 3 years. The Wiltrout Family Subdivision received Final Plat approval from the Board of County Commissioners on February 5, 1991. The original vesting period expired on February 5, 1994. The Applicant submitted a complete application for the extension of vested property rights to the Planning Office on January 25, 1994. APPLICANT: Boyce W. Wiltrout APPLICANTS REPRESENTATIVE: Ed Zasacky, Carol Ann Jacobsen Realty LOCATION: The Wiltrout property is located on Glen Dee Road, adjacent to the Aspen Highlands Ski Area. ZONING: R-30, 30,000 square foot minimum lot size SIZE: Parcel A - 34,328 sq.ft.; Parcel B - 48,000 sq. ft. BACKGROUND: Resolution No. 90-64 approved the subdivision of a 1.89 acre parcel into two separate parcels. The existing Wiltrout residence will remain on the 34,328 square foot lot (Parcel A) and a new, four bedroom, 6,240 square foot residence is proposed for the 48,000 square foot lot (Parcel B). STAFF COMMENTS: Employee Housing Mitigation- In the 1989 GMQS application the Applicant agreed to cash-in-lieu payment for mitigation of employee housing. The requirement is to house 1.75 people at the low income level of $52,500. The Housing Office confirmed that the Applicant has not yet complied with this requirement. Technically, the Board may require that the Applicant provide employee housing mitigation based on the current payment-in-lieu schedule (Category 1 = $69,000 x 1.75 = $120,750), pursuant to the extension of vested rights legislation (Resolution No. 88-95). Vesting of Property Rights- County policy has held that subdivisions approved by the Board of County Commissioners retain their development rights in perpetuity. However, this policy does not necessarily protect a development right from future legislative changes at the local, state or federal level. Changes in Legislation- Since the original subdivision approval, the County has adopted Ordinance 92-08, which limits all incorporated parcels within Pitkin County to 15,000 square feet of floor area. Additional square footage requires Special Review by the Board of County Commissioners. ENABLING LEGISLATION: Resolution No. 88-95 (codified from CRS 24- 68-101) authorizes the Board of County Commissioners to approve an extension of the vesting of real property rights based on a Site Specific Development Plan (Resolutions #89-104 & #90-64; Wiltrout Family Subdivision General Submission, Detailed Submission and Final Plat). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve an extension of vested real property rights for the Wiltrout Family Subdivision for a period of three years, subject to the conditions of the Site Specific Development Plan (Resolution #89-104 and Resolution #90-64) and the following additional conditions: 1. Any development on the site shall be subject to the provisions Ordinance No. 92-08. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall provide a cash-in-lieu payment of $52,500 for employee housing mitigation, as represented in the 1989 GMQS competition. 3. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations in the application and the public meetings. ATTACFIMENTS 1. Resolutions No.90-64 & No.89-104 2. 1989 GMQS score sheet 2. Site Plan memo Wiltrout ext.vest Sit vi-a'~iavis, F'i tl-tin Cnty Cler4~. Doc 3.t?6 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PZTRIN COUNTY, COLORADO GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE WILTROUT FAMILY PARTNERSHIP SUBDIVISION DETAILED SUBMISSION AND FINAL PLAT Resolution No. 90- WHEREAS, on June 26, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners considered the Detailed Submission and Final Plat for the Wiltrout Family Partnership Subdivision at a regularly scheduled meeting; and WI~REAS, the Wiltrout parcel is located on Glen Dee Road, adjacent to the Aspen Highlands Ski Area, more specifically described in Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, said parcel is 1.89 acres in size and located in the R-30 zone District; and WHEREAS, the Wiltrouts propose a subdivision of two lots, one containing 34,328 square feet, and the other containing 48,000 square feet; and WI~REAS, the existing Wiltrout residence will remain and will be sited on the lot containing 34,328 square feet; and WHEREAS, a new, four bedroom, 6,240 square foot residence is proposed for the 48,000 square foot lot; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners granted General Submission approval on November 14, 1989 at a regularly scheduled public meeting; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Detailed Submission and Final Plat application at a duly noticed Si 1. via Davis, F'i. thin Cn'ty CLerb;, Doc 4~. OU Resolution No. 90-~ Page 2 public meeting and determined the application to be in compliance with Sections 6-4 and 6-5 of the Code; and WFD;RF.A.S, the Commission recommended approval of the Detailed Submission and Final Plat. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners that it hereby grants approval of the Wiltrout Family Partnership Subdivision Detailed Submission and Final Plat subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant shall amend the Final Plat to include all easements. The Public Easements to be included are as follows: a) A park easement to Pitkin County for use of the area immediately north of the existing pond on site. b) An easement to Pitkin County which permits skier access along the Wiltrout Subdivision driveway, in the event that existing access to the Highlands Ski Area is removed. Said Plat and all easements shall meet the approval of the Planning Office and County Attorney prior to recording. 2) The applicant shall provide and record Protective Covenants which meet the approval of the Planning Office and the County Attorney prior to recording of the Final Plat. Said Covenants shall address among other things, outdoor lighting, building materials, landscaping and prohibition of satellite dishes as represented by the applicant in the public hearing process. 3) Prior to recording of the Final Plat, the Building Envelope on Lot 2 shall be reconfigured to eliminate slopes exceeding 30~. 4) All material representations made by the applicant in the application and at the public meetings shall be adhered to unless otherwise amended by other conditions and reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners. S~lvi'a Davis, F'it4::in Cnty Clerk, Doc $.UO Resolution No. 90-~ Page 3 APPROVED by the Board at its regular meeting on June 26, 1990. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO By r~l~~. ~~ Herschel Ross, Chairman ATTEST: ., , Deputy Co ty Clerk APPROVED A TO ORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~ _ Thomas F. Smith, Amy rgerum County Attorney Pla ng Di for ELS RESO_WILTROUT_DSFP RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO ACCEPTING RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM SCORE FOR THE 1988 AND 1989 PFISTER RANCH/GOLF AND THE 1989 WILTROUT APPLICATIONS AS FORWARDED BY PITKIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Resolution No. 89- '~ WHEREAS, Maroon Creek Development Corporation submitted a residential Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) application for 16 townhouse dwelling units and 8 single-family dwelling units for a total of 24 units for the 1988 GMQS and 10 townhouse dwelling units and 7 single-family dwelling units for a total of 17 units for the 1989 GMQS for Pfister Ranch/Golf which is described within Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, Wiltrout Family Partnership submitted a 1989 residential Growth Management Quota System application for 1 single-family dwelling unit for the Wiltrout property which is described within Exhibit "B"; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners understands that the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Pfister Ranch's application for 1988 and 1989 and Wiltrout Family Partnership for 1989 Metro Area Residential GMQS applications and scored them as follows: Pfister Ranch 82.4 Wiltrout Family Partnership 74.0 and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners recognized that Pfister Ranch's applications for 1988 and 1989 were scored on one Resolution No. 89-_'~7 Page 2 scoring sheet because they were the only application for 1988 and Pfister Ranch reduced their 1989 application from 18 units to 17 units so that one unit would be available for the only other application (Wiltrout Family Partnership) for the 1989 Residential allotment for the Metro Area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners that the 1988 GMQS allotment of twenty four (24) and 1989 GMQS allotment of seventeen (17) units of the available eighteen (18) unit allotments will be awarded to Pfister Ranch and the remaining one (1) unit will be awarded to the Wiltrout Family Partnership for the Metro Area Residential GMQS Competition. APPROVED by the Board at its regular meeting on November 14, 1989. ATTEST: Gfir'' ~,4/ ,lt~eanette Jones Deputy County Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Thomas F., S ith, County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ,P~ITIKIN COUNTY, {C~OIARADO Colette Penne, Chairm~a~nnn II I C_.C~.~ APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Amy Marger , Pla 'ng Dir for boccreso.metroscores 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page 9 of the proposed development and the standards of this Code, and considering the design of said spaces with respect to visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience and safety. Also, considering the ability of the parking area to be adequately plowed in the winter months without the loss of required parking spaces and/or safety. Maximum Score: 2 Score: 1 COMMENT: The applicant Drovides an acceptable design for Darkina, nrovidina more than the minimum number of spaces required in the code. Quality of Design and Neighborhood Compatibility - Minimum Threshold 30 - Subtotal 40 3. EMPLOYEE HOIISING - The Commission shall consider to what extent each development proposal will alleviate an identi- fied critical shortage of low-, moderate- or middle-income housing. Any applicant wishing to receive points under this section shall specify in the application the number of bedrooms within each unit within the proposed project, and the method (as identified in Section 5-300.4) by which the applicant will provide low-, moderate- or middle-income housing. Employee Dwelling Units as described and approved pursuant 3-8.13 shall not be considered to satisfy the provisions of this subsection. In order to establish criteria to determine which proposals constitute the type of units which will help alleviate the critical shortage of affordable housing, the Pitkin County Housing Authority shall, prior to April 1st of each year, advise the Board of County Commissioners as to the current type of housing needed and the Board shall, from this report, determine which type of units shall receive points within this section. An applicant may propose to specify types of units not identified by the Housing Authority as helping to alleviate the critical shortfall of affordable housing if such proposal is specifically targeted to a group of employees employed by the applicant. Any such determination is subject to the review of the Board of County Commis- sioners, whose action shall be final. Points shall be assigned according to the following sche- dule: (i) Low Income Housing Points 1 point for each 3~ of the project 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page l0 that is deed restricted housing up to 33% of the total project 11 1 point for each 6% of the project that is deed-restricted housing from 34% - 100% of the total project 11 (ii) Moderate-Income Housing 1 point for each 5% of the project that is deed-restricted housing up to 40% of the total project 8 1 point for each 10% of the project that is deed-restricted housing from 41% to 100% of the total project 6 (iii)Middle-Income Housing 1 point for each 8% of the project that is deed-restricted housing up to 40% of the total project 5 1 point for each 12% of the project that is deed-restricted housing from 41% to 100% of the total project 5 For the purposes of this section, the total project shall be based on the ratio of the number of residents to be housed in deed-restricted units as compared to the number of residents to be housed in the non-deed restricted units in the project. To determine the number of residents of the project, the following criteria shall be applied to both the restricted and non-restricted units: Studio: 1.25 residents One-bedroom: 1.75 residents Two-bedroom: 2.25 residents Three-bedroom or larger: 3.00 residents; Dormitory: 1.00 residents per 150 square feet of unit space. All housing units (under resa proposed to be constructed Moderate Housing (PMH) zone pursuant to Section 5-510.2(d) points under this subsection conjunction with development Le or rental controls) within the Permanent category and exempt may be relied on for (D) if provided in for which a growth 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page 11 management quota is required. Points given pursuant to this paragraph shall be awarded only for the number of housing units which could have been built pursuant to the underlying zoning category (i.e., excluding any density increases approved by reason of the rezoning to PMH). Score: it COMMENTS: Pursuant to section 5-510.5(D1 of the code the applicant may only be awarded points for GMP scoring for the number of housing units which could have been built in the underlying zoning cateaorv. The R-30 zone district allows two units on a lot which is a minimum of 60,000 square feet in size. As the proposed lot is only 48,000 square feet in size, points may not be awarded for the provision of employee housing for the on site caretaker unit. The applicants have clarified, however, that the alternative is to provide cash-in-lieu for the employee generation commitment. Therefore, the requirement is to house 1.75 people at the low income level of S52,500. The applicants are meeting the requirement. 4. Bonus Points - The Commission may consider each application with respect to its additional support for furthering the goals and objectives of the Down Valley Plan, with regard to the preservation of valued agricultural and wildlife lands, through the use of programs listed below or through dedication of trails. Each development may receive bonus points according to the following formulas: (i) Open Space - Considering the extent to which the applicant purchases interests in land in order to preserve valuable undeveloped lands or creates conser- vation easements or dedicates land located in the 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page 12 designated sending areas of the Down Valley Plan Future Land Use Map. 0 -- The proposal does not help meet the goals of the County as identified in the Down Valley Compre- hensive Plan with regard to the preservation of open space, agricultural and wildlife lands. 1 -- The proposal supports the goals, objectives and future land use map of the Down Valley Comprehen- sive Plan with regard to the preservation of open space agricultural lands and wildlife lands located in the designated sending area of the Down Valley Future Land Use Map. The applicant must preserve no less than two (2) times the minimum lot size in the zone district where the develop- ment is proposed. This land must be in the Down Valley planning area and be used for agricultural or wildlife purposes or scenic open space. 2 -- The proposal is actively supportive of the goals, objectives and future land use map of the Down Valley Comprehensive Plan with regard to the preservation of open space, agricultural lands and wildlife lands located in the designated sending area of the Down Valley Future Land Use Map. The applicants must preserve no less than Three (3) times the minimum lot size in the zone district where the development is proposed. This land must be in the Down Valley planning area and be used for agricultural or wildlife purposes or scenic open space. (ii) Trails- Considering the dedication or acquisition of trail easements for the benefit of the community as a whole and as identified in the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Element. 0 -- The proposal does not offer any trails which benefit the community as a whole. 1 -- The proposal commits to providing trail easements, which benefit the community as a whole. 2 -- The proposal commits to providing trail easements and construction of trails which benefit the community as a whole. Bonus Points - Subtotal 0 1989 Score Sheet Metro Residential GMP Page 13 POINTS (with multiplier): i. Availability of Public and Private Facilities and Services. Minimum Threshold (14) Score 17 2. Quality of Design and Neighborhood Compatibility. Minimum Threshold (30) Score 40 3: Employee Housing. Minimum Threshold (11) Score 11 ~---, TOTAL Minimum Threshold (55) Score 68 Name of Planning and Zoning Member: Asp en/Pitkin Planning Office wiltrout.ss / ~:, ,f.. ,.. .~ S-. r '. i z'i ;::~ ~" , - .a , U i y ~ o ' .. S z ,, . J E Y ~ L I ~ { .. _ U :;. ~1 ' ~ ~ 1 .-~ W Z ~_~ (A Y . r Q ~. ~ ~ f ~ f ` Z /' i~ L ~. Pk i~ „ C i et.; . i r > ~~x ,. .. aw ~, x ~w, ,a' E g v Y F ];t Y:- i~ Ldp im Rsh ~~, %~ ~' k C ~ Sw ! ~ ,~ qJ S4xt' ~ ~ ~ ~ xK_ x n 1 _r r d~ h H ~)t `~' A '..`K Y ~ . ~ S ~ M 1'1%i ~ 'i ~ i +~~ ~ ~ x cr ~ vyg y a at :.:y •,. • -^ ~`. r t ~ S 4 j .~ k~ 1 f ~ ~ ~ +: 14~ . t . ~~ 41 ~ ' y ~ ~ x ` ~ r. \ ~ ~ 4 w p y ~ ~ ~ n _ rF~ ~~~ ~ \ N N N C1 2 H m LL ? o ~ z ` U U U f LL R W `~ ~~$ W ~ ~ c f W W 1- . m ~, a~~ N ' a ~ Ja U ZY 6 W W W ~ F J = © ~ O ~ ~, ~ N ~~ ~ \ ~ f/. ~ N p8 a~.~ say .$.`~ '~~. ~' o ~ °, °r o m t 6 W ~..b ,`Q~ d:: m x .:.,:d ~ G Y + ! iS Me b ', ~-y~y S U_~ r„~,:. ,. .. o z ~ , ~ ~ e" ~ 'f j S0• i WiL~TROUT FAMILY r; i ~~ ~. ,_, ~ / ~h~PARK EASEMENT .TES /'. ,; - ! HI OHLANDS VILLAS T-~c~3 ~Y o- ': CONTOURS ~ /' ~ -^^ "" -OO 6p, ,, r ~ 4j ' -/ 2q! IO' TRAIL EASEMENT ~0, 1 l s\ \ a. r ~ f ~ I. ~~~ />~~~ y GLEN DEI r~ r = s • ~ V PRIM ~,, / /ti/~ ~ 1 c 4 t'3xr 6 ht ~/,2 BUILDING.. ~ - PONq' EASEM6M'r•1++~ e g~/ ENVELOPE I BKfi11~..P07n11, ~'R S~f~ ~ ~~ ~>~~~` E ~, i'I '/ /y~ ~~ fi a "~. t~s Lil J/ T t I ~, '4 / } ,,, ~ y ~jti• yF~' ~~~ AREA 44.0®6'SO FT., +/-. ':I. '~.y~l f t'~k~d~n tAf k p r _ r .~~. 7x,3 v i f ° ~ ~ _ _ I w ~ ..f POND EASEMEM 84010'54~E r 2`e"a'" „`, ~ '~ ~"~ ~ I ui N ~ ~ .~~ ~~ ; s ~' o q ti x~h a \ i q ~. .p2~ Iii !i ~w A7 ,~a ~ ~ x ~s~ ~ r;Fa' ~e ~+ ~~' ' ~O b x, ` O e ty,~ k ~. ar`` ~" iM K~ Irra/po ~ '`\ i4pS I6~ I /4 Lt ~,~sNN ~ ~i ~I .~ , ~, ,,~r a i ~ r ,.. * ~ , W. . OF THE 8}.h P M~ ~' !~-.V msr~ , 'P 1,x, kl~~+i ~r ~ 5Y'~', \ '. B. L. M. ,,ALUMINUM CAP'S "i~~r ` ~ ~ a , , ~• ~ ~.~ °~ ~ / r A 01 4^n ~~ =AREA X92. I t7 S0. FT •/ /.' / ~" CI x ~ ry ;~:F s~,;r~ S'}~,r~, ,'~ 4 ~ R fi't` { soy z+ ,~ ~ w '1g, ~ M l { x i y \ auILOINO ~ ~ / • +' ~ ENVELOPE ~ 2 • y . \;r ~ >~ _ ~ ~ / ASPEN Hli ASPEN~HIOHLANDS' '.E J SKIING Ci 0 SK{INO iCORP f +: ~~. aeoaa~/ . r a~ ',• VICINITY MAP ~ ~/ ~r CERTIFICATE OF MAILING RE: WILTROIIT LOT SPLIT PARCEL B REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS I hereby certify that on this 10 day of February, 1994, a true and correct copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was deposited in the United States mail, first-class postage prepaid, to the adjacent property owners as indicated on the attached list of adjacent property owners which was supplied to the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office by the applicant in regard to the case named on the Public Notice. By: Debbie DuBord Office Manager frm.mailing •. r '. M373711 ... a 677" IeB ... .^fAT'IOf: LY ':'!IF K~AFU ul' CC'UN'1't ~'~~NNISG lONL]RF OF piTK1N tt~U V': Y, CUL~M[>V GRAHTLNG APl`ROV AI. OP 17[L .WILIROUT PAMILY PARTliEPSNIP 6UBDIVISION p-. - a - ~~ a DStAILLD SUBMI68ION AND PI AL PI.AS F'+ t '• __.. °a~ ~'` Rceolution No, 90- . ~' . -,. , ~the, Board oL County Commissioners ~ µ~ .11IfCRtA5/ otlr ~uno, 26,, 1990, ,K ~ . ~ 4 M t ~ .. '. I `^~~'~ot/aldwred the" Detailed 8ubmlaslon end Flnel F]et for the I... r:,: `y` - WSltrout FemiljT'Pe rtnwreh ip Subd lv LeSon wt w renulsrty ochcAulad •t +i w ;"bet Smq) •nd Y V . ~ - 1 ~ ` 1 f t . u .. ,: -- .. . . .r:... ii ~ ) . ..i _ nr n ''•'. WNGRLA.4~~ thm Ni ltrout pareel i~~loceted on Glen l1Q• Road„. .. ~'~l - ' ` ~~edl ecent to Ch~ Aep+.n Righlend• Skl Aree,. more epeclflcally .: -` ry,~ f, ? , de'crlbed 1 ! F1thlbit eA"f end `,^ _t ~ ~ +~ ~ iBQREASn said parcel 1~ i B~ sczea in ^!re and located ia. ' - ~ ;' ~ ~ +,,,~ ~ R-iO LonR OS~tYictr. and ". _;; r ~°:' i ^,. .- ~~n~ ~ "' ~ ` // gHr.RP.1~4r the tr'ICrou[e propose a, subdivision of Lwo ,lots %~~~6k~aY „-~:~olle•'~contalnl nQ ~.~{ I78 aquare'~ feet end the otLar containing ' 73"Tf„~~•cyr a ~~4B, OJO equera Lset: and ~ ~~'~~:~ x ~ P. WlieRaAS,. th• •xistinq wiltrout reeidene. viii remain and •~1 G- vt _ ..,.p .. .. - ~~~'-. ~ ~.`vlll bs sited on the lot containing 71,)28 square feet[, and - S ~!~ ~ - %' MII:P.CJS, a nou, Iuvr Maroon, G,:4C square foot roeldence le -'~, ~ ' i ,~~ 7 •~} r proposed for th• 1e, 000 nquarc foot lot; end ~ v,.; `~yk "''',~ i~i~' W/iLRtAS, the Boe rd of Coun[y Commieelonwre granted General ~., ~s=%,, ~F ;~Bubmlesion approval on Novnm, r`i•r lA, 1989 et a regularly scheduled ~ L3 ~ _~ ,` public meeting[ end WHF.RF.P.^, the Fi nr -~•.'. ~-'% :rcinq ^nrrii. .ion revi eyed thw ~ '.:.. ~ Dc ::~. ~.,... ,_. .~.• s;' :.:~„• -. .. .luc: cad ';j :;Hatm r~Yyk ': `c. ~...~ ' , y s;;+1' Ip S i. r:. ~;~.,: _ . . ;l . n 1 4 :.. •::. - `Z • ~ ., _. 6I7 Y. le• _ r . F.eseluL Y:n ::P. ^~~ r Fags 2 ~' publ SCmeat inq and deterwlned the~app2lutlon to be in compliance ~' v1tn eeetlona s-• end 6-S of Ue ~Codat and ~:: ~,.~.~; "'',, Mt67tLJ{$ ~~the Coamiseion ~. „ ^.~ ~ .. ,~ • racoeaended spprovsl o[ the, Dotal Ld' Subml asion and~Flnal Plat ) M. i,~ 5%,.h''" Tn y~y, ';`NW ltlCRLfORB BS IT RZSOLVSD b ~ t '. ^. ~j~yc ;Y.~ } -_ r Y Lne Pitkln County Board o[ 'ObUn tbojuloner~ - ~~ -r '''e ~vr. ~ ~._•. ~: :' ',~,~ rt _.« S that, it Aareb~µ•gients approva~ Yot tM .. 11 r r w1~OtI=~ ~~~ uL i-. r' a` a' a,•rj q, yp~ v-0H~.:k fa .. t~ : ,' } a 1 ~'t r K: ,7' . ~,_~ ~k ~^L PaCtnorsAlp BubdiY,.~e 1o~ Deta(led,;SUbmL.sion en4 ~~'~ +"6i"':»`• r, r C iLneL:~P at` tub set to~- the •: ~ rri, r ~ •~9r j. tollow~ngaordLEione.'~~* :~`4 f3J ,_ ,~ ~'"•}T X~. *^^'ti" 1)+a.. the applicant mhall arnd tM final Plat<to include all r X easeeents ills R+DI1di~Casemenb to be Inc;udad are se --~~~ 5{r^-{r r followai ..; fY ». ..~:.. ~', ~' ~ ~ a) ~~ A park ~assmant to Pf tkln'County for wa of the f 1~ f ~~~~``+u w i ~ _srae lmmadlataly-,north of the exist inq pond on 1 y"^ D) '><n easement t6 PLtkln County vh ich pac>A1is ^kler ..,. ,. `; g~ ~ ° Z~r ,`, access along the wlltrout 6ubdivielon drlvevay in vR r~ 'l~:~r ~ ~, the event ~ that existing access to the filghlends ~ " ~& yy ;~;, ~ ,.~ ,,,ak1 Aree Ss removed - ~ - :Y,~ ~2~Jx per n r ;,..- ., .4:; r...:_ ...... _, Said Flat end all eeaemente shell meet ihe'6pproval of k. 5svv "' .'. , the'' pl ennln ~ OCf ice .nod ~'~~; County Attcrre s. ~~ ~ recording. q - Y Frior to dJ. -' __ ' Z)i R'ha.,-'~epplicant shell .provide end record protecttvo ~~~~- COVenenta vhich acct the approval oY the Plenning ,, ri !- r:. Oftice and he County Attorney prior to recording of 4-•_ the Z'1 ns fiat. •a.d r~ -•- .ohafl :rddrara among f} other 2h~ tree 7r-z ghtin3, buf ldinq materials, lan7sc-pit P .r~,; ;~r n•.:r:[ian oC antN.l ito dishes ar. r'~_• rcpronent.d b/ [ho nppllcanC In Lhn public hoednq ..,_ proccas. f . 1) _ Yrior to rocordl nq of the Final Ylat,~ the Bul ld log Envelope on Ict 2 snail he recontJqured to ellml note slopoe tree H:n-f '.^{, .. All ma'rr •~i the dfr i, r S ! u . _. .loner:-. thr eppl leant 1-. -• `.'Ile i Lil 1 be ~r con:!ition:; ..mirrq Cenr ice ion f,_ .. ` I,~ f 4r. 1 11 ,Y ~~ I ~~ w' t: _., ~rif~w•:ii°R lM~u~ . 1~.3 •. I.. :: APP»OVyU Dy tha »oetd gat its rragul at- eectn nq ea J , ' `` 1990. une a. 'n' Tom:' .. .~ :.I.I2~ryiY...~M `g` ~~ W ~~~ ,. ~ ttOA»D or rou :^rr COtOilssinwr:»s ~ ~•• OP .PITKIN COON TY, v: n._ -. . -.. - ~ ~. t r r ~' r ~• : ~ r wr Lhl Homr, t•h trr' ninnnn-.- - . ..y ~ f U a i eenette Jo ew, . Deputy Ca ty Clark }} 1S ~ . " r r '~" API »OVF.7 r TO .PoI N: , ' +- ri .. -.~~~~ ' A7 PHONED A.^. T'O CONTENT; ~ ~~ ,f' J ~ l ~ ~ . _ _. t -~~___ is (f.-t i , L___-____ ~~ Ccunt}' nt torney ~~i M:~t9c:-u v,, ~-~- ~ r r;p)nri nt YV •Ot or Is'.. ' F:_ zsa:•, F:_._rovr e«r ~.. _ l_.~.~~..~1. 1 .. ~ ~~ i '-~' ,Yep+~ ~ ~ i r ~~ +.r %!1%l /~C~JIC~ S/iY!/~Ft 1 _- -- i ~._ / _ A e _ ___ _ _ - - _ __- _ -- ~irir_~urP_ cx/r,~/ is ~ s~ _. /.U~ ~ _, . oY w - _ -- ~l~r l_.~~r_ c 7 ___ ~_ »,,.. ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone 920-5090 FAX 920-5197 MEMORANDUM TO: County Attorney FROM: Tim Malloy, Planning Office RE: Wiltrout Lot Split Parcel B Extension of Vested Rights Parcel ID #12735-142-04-002 DATE: January 25, 1994 Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by Wiltrout, Ltd. Please return your comments to me no later than February 25. Thank you. i hW~e re~l~ie.a:,re_d ~~~~5 Q~~,h:?~~;ov~ a~~ Iw.~72. rG ~~w~1~~s ~c c~,~cecnS ~ec~~1~1C~ t.o ~o,11v~q, .J ,x-~~~. DEC-13-1993 17 35 FROM 'ER JRFFRRY COLD SPGS TO 91303925918221 P.02 ~~ 2 ~Fi t-G~F (~~'~ ., December 13, 1993 Aspen/Pitkin Co. Mr. Tim Malloy 130 Galena Aspen, CO, 81611 Planning Office Subject: .Vesting of Development Rights Attention: Mr. Tim Malloy This is a formal request for an extension of vesting of development. Rights of Parcel B, Wiltrout Lot Split, as approve3 by the Pitkin County BOCC. The resolution, #90-4, approving this lot was signed on August 14, 1990, and is recorded on pages 148-151 of Book 627. Request extention of vesting under ordinance 88-95, section 6-5.7(5). A copy of resolution, X90-4, is attached. Please advise of anticipated time required, as our current vesting expires on F~=_bruary 5, 1994. Si ely, /~ l ~G% E c w. Wiltrout en ral Partner wiltrout,Limited 201 Cypress Lane Colorado Springs, CO 80906 {719) 635-8236 .ASPEN • PITKIS Pi,~uwa~c & Zo~isc Deraanie`r 1/3/96 Ed Zasacky Carol Ann Jacobson Realty, Inc. 606 E. Hyman Ave. Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Ed, Based on review of the Wiltrout planning file, I believe the following answers to your attached letter to be accurate. 1. As there were no specific height limitations set forth in the application or in the conditions of approval, the height for structures on Lot 2 will be subject to height regulations in the Land Use Code at the time of building permit application. The applicants made representations that the residence, as viewed'from the Glen Dee Road, or Aspen Highlands side (front elevation) would be one story in height. Graphic depictions submitted with the application show the residence stepping down the slope as the slope falls away on the Castle Creek Road side of the lot (rear elevation). The height on this side is depicted as approximately 1 1/2 stories. The design of the residence should comply with specific conditions of approval and graphic depictions submitted with the application (attached for reference.) 2. The lot area within man-made ponds is not deducted from overall lot area in determining allowable floor area. 3. An interior sprinkler system was offered by the applicant as "additional protection" from structure fire, to exceed Land Use Code requirements. The offer was made to increase scoring under the "fire protection" section of the Growth Management scoring criteria. At the time, the Aspen Fire Protection District was recommending sprinklering for homes exceeding 5,000 square feet in size, though the Fire Code did not require this improvement. The Fire Code and Building Code have since been revised to require sprinklering for homes containing more than 5,000 square feet of floor area. If the Wiltrouts wish to amend their development permit to specify that sprinklering will only be required in the event that the home on Lot 2 contains more than 5,000 square feet of floor area, I suggest that they process a "Minor Amendment 130 SUl :H G~n:~a Snieer .4,rt ~, Cni.~nmo 81611 Pnoze 303.9205090 Faa 303.970.5197 i,.,~,,...., ~..,~,a r.,.~ Uev v. ': F~~ L'~.~e 311 i•~_05~39 to a Development Permit." I've enclosed a copy of the pertinent Land Use Code Section for your review. If the Wiltrouts wish to pursue an amendment, give a call and I'll run through submittal requirements for this administrative procedure. Hope this helps! Sincerely, .~ _ Ellen ~Sassano Planner •r ..r y..:~... ~~~ 21 ~q95 ...:..~" * ~yt~T ~r CAROL ANN JACOBSON REALTY, IN~~- ~--=~- MEMORANDUM TO: ELLEN SASSANO/PITKIN COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMEI FROM: ED ZASACRY/ON BEHALF OF THE WILTROUT FAMILY DATE: DECEMBER 20, 1995 RE: LOT 2 WILTROUT FAMILY PARTNERSHIP SUBDIVISION Per your request, this memo shall memorialize our request for a determination of the effect on this lot of the following items: 1. Height limit and resolution of "one story on 3 of 4 sides" i.e. which sides, still applicable, can it ~ ~""' ` be 1 1/2 where hill falls away? ~' "'` ` ' 2. F.A.R. calculation: Is man-made pond deducted from area allowed to calculate F.A.R. from? 3. Sprinkler system in house: Does a house under 5000 square feet require sprinklers? Over 5000 square feet? If these require a BOCC hearing to clear up, what must we do to proceed? Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter CC: Wiltrouts 606 E. HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 81611 PD. BOX 1168 ASPEN, CO 81612 970/925-281 I FACSIMILE 970/925-9182 i ~ ~ ~~ i ~ ~- ~ I h ~~ r. ~ ~ ~~~ .~~ // 3, / h ~ ~ ._,"_ 1HI1 IN 1~l0~~~ % ,~ /~ ~ ~/ / `_ ~. 6 ~ _ ,_-__~_----- __`- N -~ - _~~ _ ~ _ ~ - `, ._ ~_ ~ lam. .. ~.__.._~~_,.__.. - ~. ~ .` _..~ ~$,~ ~~ ~, 2 ~, { _ '~ _ _ \ ~-- ° ~ ' w 2/vo. °~°5' _._ _...~ .,~ MAt200 ~~ - i ~~ ~lT~ 4~.AN ~~A~ ,~~~~~_,- o -w ~, I~ f ~n1~ I• 9 _ f w I ~-~ I ~i~ I ~ ~ t '. i 'Vi'i ii~. `F i~~~i ~i 'I~~~ it .._ A ~ I.I~ ~~ S I '. I''~~III . Iii ~ j ~~ ~ ~~I~ i~l- Ma ~ i III ~ _P 9i ICI' III ~I ~.I'l ll,~~I!I~.I ~~ t "ri l~.I~ Iji I~{I~;1~1 ~1@~ III III~I`~NI~ ~ ! j -~~ ~~. ``\ 1 0~ Q~ nl 1 ~~ L `v_ _ t -"l c :-r~r ~-~ 3-200.60 standards in this section. Refer to Section 4-30 for procedures and Section 5-50 submission contents. A. The applicant executes a guarantee in a form acceptable to the County Attorney insuring the demolition of the existing strucrure prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the replacement suucrure. B. In the case of existing residences, an applicant shall agree not to request approval to maintain the residence as a caretaker dwelling unit or an employee dwelling unit unless the site and existing unit meets the standards in Sections 3-150.120 or :-150.130 (Growth Management Quota System Exemption for Employee Dwelling Unit or Caretaker Dwelling Unit). C. Approval under this section shall be available for only one single family dwelling unit on a paroel of land. even if the parcel contains more than one single family dwelling unit. (Ord. 95-3 (part), 1995: prior code § 3-1906) 3-200.70 Street and Easement Vacations A. General: The County may vacate a road or easement az the request of a privaze landowner(s) or az insistence of the County subject to compliance with the standards in this section. Refer to Section 4-60 for procedures and Section 5-200 for submission contents. B. Applicability: As used herein the terms "street" and "easement" shall be deemed to include any and all parcels upon which there has been legally sufficient dedication to the public use and a legally sufficient acceptance of said dedication by the public or authorized agents, representatives or officials thereof. C. Standards: 1. Vacation shall be approved if it is demonstrated that upon vacation there shall remain suitable access to public and private land presently accessed by the street or easement proposed for vacation. 2. In the event of vacation, rights-of-way or easements may be reserved for the continued use of existing sewer, gas, wazer, or similar pipelines and appurtenance, for ditches, canals and appurtenances, and for electric, telephone, and similar lines and appurtenances. Equestrian, pedestrian, vehicular or other trails may also be reserved by the Board of County Commissioners. 3. Any written instrument of vacation or a resubdivision plat approved by the Board of County Commissioners purporting to vacate or relocaze roadways or portions thereof which remains of record in the counties where the roadways affected are situated for a period of seven (7) years shall be prima facie evidence of an effective vacation of such former roadways. (Ord. 95-3 (part), 1995: prior code ~ 3-1907) 3-200.30 Minor Amendments to a Development Permit A minor amendment to any development permit (except minor and major amendmenu to fmal plats). including AF-SKI and PUB Master Plans and Special Review approvals. intended to change an element or condition of a development permit may be approved subject ro compliance with the standards in this section. Refer to Section 440 for procedures and Section 5-50 for submission contents. All plat amendments shall be reviewed pursuant to the standards in Sections 3-190.80. 214 3-?00.80 A. The amendment must be a clarification or a technical correction to a plaz. B. The amendmen[ must not change the use of the proposed developmen[ between residential. commercial and tourist accommodarion uses. C. The amendment must be consistent with action taken during the review of the original development and does not constitute a new land development activity. D. The proposed activity does not: 1. Change the basic character of the approved use of land on which the activity occurs including basic visual appearance and method of operazion; 2. Increase off-site impacts in the surrounding neighborhood: 3. Endanger the public health. safety or welfare; 4. Violaze any Land Use Code Standard: 5. Substantially increase the need for on-site parking or utilities, or affect affordable housing generation; and 6. Increase the floor area of the use by more than two (2) percent or decrease the open space on the site by more than three (~) percent (Ord. 95-3 (pan), 1995: prior code § 3-1908) 3-200.90 Residential Development with more than 15,000 Square Feet of Residential Floor Area All parcels of land less than twenty (20) acres in size shall include the square footage of all structures on the property, for the calculation of House Size Special Review. All parcels of land twenty (20) acres and larger shall include ordy the residential square footage on the property for the calculation of House Size Special Review. A. The following Criteria are to be used in conjunction with the Special Review Criteria established in Section 3-210 of the Land Use Code in order to allow residential and accessory structures to exceed 15,000 square feet of total floor area. The Board may grant a development permit for a residence to exceed 15,000 square feet of floor area on a lot based upon a finding thaz the following criteria are satisfied in a reasonable manner. The Board takes final action on floor area special review requests as a one-step review. Special Review shall be the mechanism to assure that any increase in floor area beyond ihaz allowed by right will not have unreasonable negative impacts in accordance with the following provisions as set forth below. To apply for an increase in floor area the following criteria shall be addressed by the applicant: 1. Energy Consumption a. Has the residence been designed with concentrazion on limiting the use of energy resources and consumptive use? 215 a-l0clo~ ~ ~ _ ,, C. Exemption from Commercial Growth Management Quota System for Developments with a Negligible Growth Impact (refer to Section 5-50 for submission contenu and Section 3-150.150 for review standards); D. Growth Management Quota System Exemption for a Change in Use (refer to Section 5-50 for submission contents and Section 3-150.150 for review standards); E. One Satellite Reception Device (refer to Section 5-50 for submission contents and Section 3-30050 for review standards); F. Highway Vendors (refer to Section 5-~0 for submission contents and Section 3-200.40 for review standazds); G. Demolition Extensions (refer to Section 5-50 for submission contents and Section 3-200.60 for review standazds); H. Minor Amendment to a Development Permit (refer to Section ~-50 for submission contenu and 3-200.80 for review standazds); I. Signs (refer to Section 5-240 for submission contenu and Section 3-110.130 for review standazds); 7. Caretaker Dwelling Unit (Beier to Section 3-150.130 for review standards and Section 5SO for submission contents); and K. Review of Development within the Scenic Overlay (refer to Section 3-60.40 for review standards and Section 5-90 for submission contents). (Prior code § 4LLt01) 4-4010 Administrative Review Procedure Administrarive reviews shall be conducted pursuant to the land use review process described below. A. Pre-Application Conference: Prior to the formal submission of an application, it is required that an applicant confer with the Planning Office staff in apre-application conference to obtain information and guidance. During the pre-application conference, the applicant or his or her representative shall describe the proposed development project. The Planning Office staff shall identify the procedural review requirements, applicable standards of the Code, vested rights procedures and referral agencies to be involved in the review process. The staff shall identify, pursuant to the Code, the submission contents for the type of development application required to be submitted, the number of copies and application fees. Widritr seven (7) working days of the conference, an applicant will be presented with a written summary of the meeting on apre-application summary sheet The applicant shall be required [o submit the pre-application summary sheet with the application. B. Submission of Application and Fees:.4 development application shall be submitted in the standazd form as specified by the staff and shall contain the submission contents identified by the staff in the pre- application conference pursuant to Article ~ of the Code. The development application shall be accompanied by a fee, as established by the Board. 258 a-~o.20 C. Determination of Application Completeness by the Planning Office Staff: Within seven (7) working d:: vs of the submission of a development application. the Planning Director shall complete a preliminary review of the application to determine whether or not the applicanon is complete. If the Planning Drector determines that the application is incomplete. a written notice shall be sen[ to the applicant or applicant's representative specifying the deficiencies. No futttter action will be taken on the application until the application's deficiencies are remedied by the applicant. D. Planning Office Review and Decision by Planning Director: 1. The Planning Office shall review the application for compliance with the standards of the Code which are applicable to the development proposal, including but not limited to those standards identified in Figure 43. 2. After completion of the Planning Office review the Planning Director shall: a. Issue a development permit. or b. Issue a development permit subject to conditions based upon the standards of the Code. or c. Issue a written denial of the application, or d. Schedule a public meeting before the Board of County Commissioners to consider the appiication. 3. The Planning Director, a[ his or her discretion, may refer any Administrative Review application to the Board of County Commissioners for consideration. Typically, the Planning Director shall refer such applications to the Commission in the event of a disagreement with an applicant retarding a condition of approval. E. Appeal of Planning Director's Decision: Att applicant or ocher affected and aggrieved person(s1 may appeal the Planning Director's decision by preparing a letter addressed to the Plantilng Director requesting an appeal pursuant to the procedures in Sections 4150 or 4160. F. Receipt of Development Permit: Applications which receive approvals or conditional approvals qualify for a development permit. A resolution of approval signed by the chairperson of the decision-making body and recorded with the County Clerk and Recorder shall consdmte the development permit. In the case of administrative reviews, the Planning Director shall prepare and sign a development permit. G. Vested Property Rights: Following receipt of a development permit. rights shall vest pursuant to Section 4130. H. Submission of Building Permit Application: Following receipt of a development permit. an applicant may submit a building permit application to the Building Deparmrent unless specified otherwise in the development permit. I. Receipt of Building Permit: Following review of the building permit application, the Building Department shall issue a building permi[ to applicanu whose applications comply with the development permit and the Uniform Building Code. (Prior code § 4-402) 259 A~ ~ • PIIBLIC NOTICE RE: WILTROQT LOT SPLIT PARCEL B REQIIEST FOR EBTENSION OF VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 15 1994 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Board of County Commissioners, District Courtroom, 506 East Main Street, Aspen, CO to consider an application submitted by Wiltrout, Ltd. requesting extension of Vested Property Rights for an additional three years for Parcel B of the Wiltrout Lot Split. The site specific development plan was approved by the Board of County Commissioners on 6/26/90 by Resolution 90-64. The property is located on Glen Dee Road adjacent to the Aspen Highlands Ski Area. For further information contact Rick Magill at the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, 920- 5100. s/Robert W. Child, Chairman Board of County Commissioners Published in The Aspen Times on February 11, 1994. Pitkin County Account 00113. I ~, - EXHIBIT ,~12 ~ _Gir/i,l.2yli(1~ LIST OF ADJACEPIT PROPERTY OWNERS ' ~1. Highlands Villas Homeowners Association P.0. Sox 9294 ~~ Aspen, Colorado 81612 Richard R ph ~ ~ _ ~~~~"`~~~~ ~~~~ , l P.0 . x 1089 :k~~~~ ,~/~~ ~~r~ "~ A en, Colorado 81 612 ~ ~ ~ ~ 7aGf8' ,D,e~~~~ c68 oa.3~ i3• Arthur Pa tel P.0. Bo 7955 Aspen}/, Co orado 81612 ~4• Aspen Highl s° Skiing Corporation P.0. T en, Colorado 81612 r } r,, (,: , ~ f J, v ,,r~ ,,~y" ~ , ,~~y~~ ;, ~ ~" ;'~a~~~ ~~`~ ~ /~ ``~ ~ ~~ fry ~'~ - , L J J,tv~~. MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Rick Magill From: Tom Baker Postmark: Mar 18,94 Subject: Wiltrout 3:39 PM Message: Rick, Thanks for all your work I find that our preferrence is decision is consistent with the on this. After talking to Ed Zasacky for accepting the cash-in-lieu. This original BOCC decision. ------X=====---------- k1 ~U'r 3 ~ S '9 ~ z~a~!! i Lvv~~toN Sv~lvlS~ ~ lti 1ti I9~ -fly Pow J4"PPl~l3u~ l~t~= o~ ~ t , g ~ ~.~ P~.~ ~Nra n~r~ .. 3 , ~WLP l~ U St t~~ i`{lTl6~~ n„ i - f `~`~' `~ 6M 4 S --F- ~1~J'f~ttiJh ~ '~U~DcUISIa~ - `sT ~-lr.~€ ~~- ~~~~.~ ~ CAGE ~Z-o£~ lS~ c ~uP~~~~ ~~ ~s uv~e 1v1~ ~-~' ~~°? P.•'~ 1"~1~ 1?°t?t~v' z~~ 1 .~ ~ ~~-?~2~D t3~ p-~i~dt,~~6 . (7~t~o~2. m 5 L~WAfi~l2~~ 4~ 'C-~Nf~~- ~c.~T ~_ ~ ~ r _ _ - 7 ~_, '' ~ ! ` , + t i ~ r ' ~ ~t, lJ~`7 c ,, 1 ~~;,d i/f,~~l1L~`- i ~ ,~ U ~~ i,~ ', C iv } ~' G'i1~G{~ ;~ r: ~ , ._ ~ .. J~-/-c -C ~Vti. ~ '" _ - r I ~ ~ /~ 17 /~~'~O~l` ~%. ` 1 'l.\ ./~.~ Cy r~~~M ~ /V~iJ~ J"C4 ~lL ~ /p ,r y ~r '/ ~ G~a~ CD~~G7~ ~D day f p~.d (~~ c~~~ ~~ w~ ~~~~ ~ ~- u UN~r ~~u~ t~cov~e~ ~~ ~~~ 3l ~~- 4 s~~~ ~~ c 23 ~ ~~~~U~ U"i ~av ~ ~~~ ~~~ w ,i.rl<usy: YI~~> 4 ~~~ ~ r J~~ ~ ~c B G~ ~~- ~- ~ ~~~ ~a~s 3I lY~' ~ 9v~ Z o~{t~ ~71~ ~~~ ~~ ~.. --• ~,,, ~.~. CAROL ANN JACOBSON REALTY, INC. MEMORANDUM June 21, 1993 T0: WHOM IT MAY CONCERN FROM: TIM MALLOY RE: VESTING OF RIGHTS, WILTROUT FAMILY SUBDIVISION, LOT 2 My signature below shall confirm our conversation today that the three years of vested rights shall accrue from February 5, 1991, the date which the Chairman of th Board of the County Commissioners signed the Plat reced in Plat Book 25, page 87, and expires February 5, 1994, unle renewed prior to that date. Office by"fim Malloy 606 E. HYMAN AVE. ASPEN, CO 51611 P.O. BOX 1168 ASPEN, CO 816]2 303/925-2811 nr..Y~ - .. ,..- h vY ~~ (3oa) 9zasogo J~J ~(o'~ 3 .LAND USE APPLICATION FEES CITY: GMP/Conceptual ~- -63250.134 GMP/Final -~- -63270-136 _____~- -63280-137 SUB/ConcePtual -63300.139 SUS/Final ~- -s331o-1ao al-2stea/~pPr~catior~s ------- -s332o-1a1 nn 1 stepawPt~iona_ ------ `: -63330-150 staff Approval ----- -63432-157 Zoning Plan Check ----~ . " -63432-15T Sgn Permk -00100-00000-31070 .Use Tax for Sign PemM~ ------^---' HISTORIC PRESERVATION: ~_ -63335-151 Exemption X3336-152 Minor -~^ -63337-153 Mapr Devel. ^--"'`"-" ' -63338-154 Sign'rf. Devel. -^--"~' -63339-155 DemoliCan ----"-"'-- "' COUNTY: GMP/Generel -~-'--'~'~-!'' -63160-126 J_ ,', -63170.127 GMP/Detailed X3180-128 GMP/Final ----'"-'"'-- s -63190.129 SUB/General SUB/Detailed ----~"J"-`- ` -63200-130 SUB/Final -63210-131 AO 2 Step Applications -63220-132 All 1 Step Applicetbns ' -63230-133 Staff Approval -63zaa1a9 ~ ~ ~j~~ -63a5o-1 a6 ~_ X3235-148 Zoning Plan Check REFERRAL FEES: En toasting - County ---"~- ~3360-143 9 ^~_ 00115 -6334o-163 Engineering -City Housing -"--~~ 001Zg -63340-190 EnvironmeMalHeafth ------- 00125 -63340-205 PLANNING OFFICE SALES: County Code --~-- -63080-122 Other (Copy Fees) -69000-145 / TOTAL ~--~- Name: .~J! /~ ~' Phone: Address: ~ ~` ~ ~ .T t, ' , f v t- / • ~ ~ ~ 4 „ 1