HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.264326103001 (3)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 IOi 2643-261-03-001 DATE RCVD: 2/23/2000 # COPIES: r- CASE NO P19-00
CASE NAME: Ziff- LLCMinor Amend Dev Permit 'Planners ' ~ Lance Clarke
PROD ADOR: t020 Carroll Dr
OWN/APP: Carroll Drive, LLC c/ ADR 314 Carroll Drive GS/Zt Aspen CO 81617 PHN:~-
REP: Lennie Oates Go Oates Kne ADR: 533 East Hopkins C/SIZ: Aspen, CO 81611 PHN: 920-1700/1121
Email Addr: ALLOCATED HOURS:~-
FEES DUE: 460 FEES RCVD: 460 ;, ^/, OVERT I
REFERRALS Attorney, Zoning
REF: 2/24/2000 BY TKT :, DUE: 3/24/2000
MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED DATE OF FINAL ACTION: 3/3/2000
~~; Admin No ~-r BOCC Reso: r
,, ~ ~~ ':r- ' No ~- BOCC Ord:
REMARKS formerly 2643-621-02-001 - PZ:. ~-
HRGOFF:
.CLOSED: 3/7/2000 BY; TKT ;,, HO INDEX: ~-
- ~~ ' " ADMIN: 3-2000#441221
'. PLAT (BK,PG): ADMIN INDEX:
PLAT RECORDED~~~
VR APPROVAL`DATE.,~- '.VR EXPIRES;-'
CASE TYP: Minor Amend Dev Permit CASE TYPS:
CASE TYP2: CASETYP6:
- CASETYP3!'~ CASETYPT: :'.
',' ! „
CASE TYPO: Date Scanned: 10/5/09 'f
File Location:. Box 177 ~~
DETERMINATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL BY THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FOR THE ZIFF MINOR
AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
Determination No. Admin. x_2000
RECITALS
1. William Ziff (hereafter "Applicant") requests a minor amendment to BOCC
Resolution No. 97-64 and to a Development Agreement recorded on 9/16/97 as reception
no.408452, both related to Lot R-86A, Starwood, to reduce in scope the approved
development.
2. The applicant has stipulated that the proposed development will consist of a remodel
of the existing structure rather than construction of a new structure. The net result is that
the parcel will consist of the present structure of approximately 9,958 sq.ft. of FAR, the
existing guest quarter consisting of 2,300 sq.fr. of FAR plus anabove-grade addition of
approximately 200 square feet includable in FAR, together with subgrade space of
approximately 2,800 sq.fr. The total development on the parcel will not exceed 15,000
sq. fr. of FAR.
3. The proposed amendments require administrative approval by the Community
Development Director as provided in Land Use Code Section 3-200-80.
4. Staff has reviewed the proposed requested amendments subject to the standards of
Land Use Code Section 3-200.80 and has recommended approval of the requests based
on compliance with this Section.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DETERMINED by the Pitkin County Community
Development Director that BOCC Resolution No. 97-64 (Attachment A) relating to the
Ziff property at Lot R-86A, Starwood Subdivision is hereby amended as follows:
Condition No. 2 is replaced by a new condition stating, "The Applicant shall comply
with the applicable requirements of the Aspen/Pitkin County Energy Conservation
Code in effect at time of building permit submittal."
2. Conditions Nos. 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14 are deleted.
BE IT FURTHER DETERMINED that the Development Agreement (reception no.
408452) is hereby amended as follows:
Paragraphs 2.4, 4.1, 5.4, 5.5, 5.8 are deleted.
I IIIIII VIII IIIIII VIII VIII' III IIIIIII III VIII IIII IIII
441221 03/08/2000 03:27P DETERMIN DRVIS SILVI
3 of 2 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
Admin. Determination No. X2000
Page 2
2. Article 3 is deleted except for paragraph 3.2, which is rewritten to state, "In addition
to the residential dwelling currently on the property, which will be remodeled and
expanded, there is a four bedroom detached structure (the `detached bedroom
structure') that will not be demolished and will remain in place as a legally
constructed preexisting nonconforming use. The squaze footage of the detached
bedroom structure will be included in the total amount of square footage allowed to
be constructed on the property"
3. Pazagraph 5.1 will be replaced with a new paragraph stating, "The Applicant shall
comply with the applicable requirements of the Aspen/Pitkin County Energy
Conservation Code in effect at time of building permit submittal."
APPROVED ON THE 3rd OF MARCH, 2000.
d W (. (~
Cindy Houben
Community Development Director
zffmnad.doc
P19-00
2643-261-02-001
I I"III "III "III' I"I' III'I' I'I'III"I III "II' IIII I"I
2 of 2 R 0..00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
LOT R-86A, STARWOOD SUBDIVISION
I. PARTIES
1.1 ZIFF. William Ziff ("Ziff') is the owner of Lot R-86A of the Starwood Subdivision
according to the Exemption Plat thereof recorded January 24, 1978 in Plat Book 6 at Page
60, in the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder (the "Property").
1.2 COUNTY. Pitkin County (the "County") is the government of Pitkin County, Colorado.
II. RECITALS
2.1 THE RESOLUTION. On Apri19, 1997, the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin
County adopted Resolution No. 97-64 (the "Resolution"), which approved Ziff's
application for Special Review for a TDR Receiver Site and aSingle-Family Residence in
Excess of 15,000 square feet.
2.2 CODE. "Code" shall mean the Pitkin County Land Use Code in effect on the date of the
Resolution
2.3 THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. Condition 11 of the Resolution required Ziff
to prepare a Development Agreement and present it to the County's Community
Development Department and the Pitkin County Attorney for approval and recordation.
This Development Agreement is entered into by the parties hereto for the purpose of
complying with the requirements of the Resolution and to provide additional detail with
respect to certain aspects thereof.
2.4 TDRs. Pursuant to Sections 3-210.10 and 3-200.90 of the Code, the Resolution allowed
"~ Ziff to utilize Transferrable Development Rights ("TDRs") in order to construct asingle-
~ family dwelling in excess of 15-,000 square feet. One purpose of this Development
Agreement is to detail how the TDRs will be allocated to allow for increases and decreases
in the size of the single-family dwelling to be constructed on the Property.
2.5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. Additionally, this Development Agreement sets forth
the conditions by which Ziff will by allowed to construct the single-family dwelling on the
Property and otherwise develop the Property.
I IIIIII IIIII IIIIII II'I' IIIIII Iil illllll III "III IIII IIII
408452 09/16/1997 10:478 iiGREEMEN DiiVIS SILVI
1 of 9 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKINCO COLORiiDO
DEVELOPbIENT AGREEMENT
LOT Aif6A, STARwOOD SL1SD[VISION
III. TDRs ~ ~,~
3.1 TDRs. Section 3.210.10 of the Code allows for the use of TDRs to increase square
footage of residential houses. The Code allows for [he construction of houses with a
maximum of 15,000 square feet of Floor Area as defined by the Code. The Code allows
for the construction of larger houses by the use of one TDR for each additional 5,000
square feet of floor area for the residential dwelling.
3.2 CURRENT BUILDING TO BE MAINTAINED. In addition to the residential dwelling
currently existing on the Property, which will be demolished to make way for the new
single-family residential dwelling to be constructed on the Property, there is a four
bedroom detached structure (the "Detached Bedroom Structure)" that will not be
demolished and will remaiti in place as a legally constructed preexisting nonconforming
1 use. The square footage of the Detached Bedroom Structure will be included in the total
amount of square footage allowed to be constructed on the Property.
3.3 TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE. The Resolution approved Ziff's application for
authorization to construct and maintain 36,170 square feet of residential floor area on the
property. This figure includes 32,870 square feet for the main residential structure to be
constructed by Ziff pursuant to this Development Agreement (the "Main Residence")
(14,560 square feet for the first floor, 9,370 square feet for the second floor, 3,650 square
feet for the mezzanine, and 5,290 square feet below grade, which excludes 4,000 square
feet of basement space and 750 square feet of garage space, both of which are exempt
under the Code from the calculation of allowable floor area.), 2,300 square feet for the
Detached Bedroom Structure, and an additional 1,000 square feet to accommodate potential
revisions to the design of the Main Residence.
3.4 USE OF 5 TDRs. The resolution authorizes Ziff to construct a residential structure
21,170 square feet above the normal 15,000 square foot maximum. This necessitates that
Ziff use 5 TDRs at 5000 square feet per TDR. Because the fifth TDR would only be used
to construct up to an additional 1,170 square feet, and because there is no procedure for
dealing with fractional TDRs, Ziff may apply in the future to develop floor area equal to
the unused portion of the fifth TDR. In such an event, Ziff will have to submit a new
Development Application to the Board of County Commissioners, but he will not have to
use a new TDR to the extent that he has additional floor area left over from the fifth TDR.
3.5 USE OF 4 OR LESS TDRs. In the event that Ziff's construction pursuant to this
Development Agreement results in a total residential floor area (excluding basements and
garages) of 35,000 or less square feet, Ziff will use less than 5 TDRs. By way of example,
but not limitation, if Ziff shall construct say 32,000 square feet of floor area, he will use
only 4 TDRs. Because the fourth TDR then would be used to construct less than 5,000
additional square feet, and because there is no procedure for dealing with fractional TDRs,
Ziff may apply in the future to develop square footage equal to the unused portion of the
Page 2
I I'IIII'llll IIIIII IIII' (II'll III'llllll III "II' II'I II'I
408452 09/16/1997 10:47ii iiGREEMEN DiiVIS SILYI
2 of 9 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKINCO COLORfiDO
CE`/ELOPME:VT AGREEhIENT
LOT R-S6A, STAR~VOOD SUBUIVISION
less than entirely used TDR, if any. In such an event, Ziff will have to submit a new
Development Application to the Board of County Commissioners, but he will not have to
use a new TDR to the extent that he has additional floor area left over from the fourth
TDR.
3.6 TDR PROCEDURE. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction pursuant
to this Development Agreement, Ziff shall obtain the number of Certificates of TDR
Rights from the Community Development Department necessary to accommodate the size
of the Main Residence, the Detached Bedroom Structure, and any other construction
pursuant to this Development Agreement. Ziff will execute whatever documents are
necessary in order to comply with any regulations or procedures of the Cotmunity
Development Department established, relating to the issuance and/or redemption of
Certificates of TDR Rights.
IV. BUILDING ENVELOPE
4.1 ; BUILDING ENVELOPE. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a diagram of a building
'' envelope for any building construction pursuant to this Development Agreement. All
~,,~ residential building construction pursuant to this Development Agreement shall occur
~ \c. within the building envelope. As long as all construction pursuant to this Agreement is
~~' ~r' within the building envelope, Ziff may make revisions to the actual footprint of the
residential structure without any further review by the County. This envelope is for the
~~ residential building only, and is not meant to confine the utilities, LS.D.S., sidewalks, or
grading. The County agrees that subject to applicable provisions of the Code, Ziff may
landscape the Property outside of the approved building envelope without further review
of approval.
V. BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT
CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS
S.li APPLICATION OF ENERGY AND BUILDING CODES. Ziff shall comply with the
~ -~'~ applicable requirements of the Aspen/Pitkin County Energy Conservation Code (APECC)
-~ ; ~'"^ in effect at the time of BOCC approval and up to 18 months after the BOCC approval
given on May 9, 1997. Should the building permit submittal be received by the Building
Department more than 18 months after the date of the BOCC approval, Ziff must comply
with the APECC in effect at that time.
5.2 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE. All construction pursuant to this Development
Agreement shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code in effect at the
time Ziff shall apply for a building permit for such construction.
Page 3
I Iilill VIII IIIIII VIII IIIIII III IIIIIII III VIII IIII III
408462 09/16/1997 10:47p RGREEMEN DiiVIS SILVI
3 of 9 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKINCO COLORitDO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
LOT R-86A, STARWOOD SUBDIVISION
5.3 LIGHTING. Ziff shall comply with the lighting standards of Section 3-110.110 of the
Land Use Code for any construction pursuant to this Development Agreement to assure
that any lighting impacts associated with any development pursuant to this Development
Agreement will be minimized.
5.4,1 SLOPES. For development on any slopes for any construction pursuant to this
~--= Development Agreement, Ziff shall adhere to the following standards:
i~`''.~ \0 A. Adequate mechanical support shall be provided for all slopes.
~'~~ ~' ' , B. Adding water which may decrease slope stability shall be avoided.
C. Adding weight to the top of the slope shall be avoided.
D. Disturbed slopes shall be contoured so that they can be revegetated.
E. Steepening of existing slopes shall be avoided to the extent reasonable.
F. Cuts, fills, grading, and excavation shall be confined to the minimum area
needed for construction.
G. It is acknowledged that the provision of the Code relating to 1041 review
does not apply because the Property is situated in a subdivision approved
by the County.
5.5 LANDSCAPING AND REVEGETATION PLAN. Ziff shall provide a detailed
landscaping and revegetation plan which generally includes, but is not limited to, the
.`~;.} ,
~, quantity, species and locations for all plant materials in the immediate vicinity of the
~~~.;,,+"° residence. The landscape plan shall also include information on the seed mixtures to be
utilized for revegetation. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Department and the County Land Management Department, prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
5.6 REVEGETATION OF AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION. All areas
disturbed by any construction pursuant to this Development Agreement shall be revegetated
within one growing season after the completion of construction.
5.7 SEPTIC PERMIT. Ziff shall obtain all required septic permits from the State of
Colorado and/or Pitkin County prior to the installation of any septic or sewage disposal
system pursuant to this Development Agreement. Prior to the issuance of a septic permit
for any construction pursuant to this Development Agreement, Ziff shall provide
documentation of an adequate domestic water supply for the proposed residence and the
Detached Bedroom Structure.
5.8 WILDFIRE MITIGATION. Ziff shall use the following Wildfire Mitigation for any
construction pursuant to this Development Agreement:
~,~ ~r
n
4
Page 4
I I"III "III "II'I II'I' III'I' III'I'I"I III "VI'I'I I"I
408452 09/16/1997 10:478 pGREEMEN Df1VI5 SILVI
4 of 9 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKINCO COLORiiDO
UE"ELOPMENT AGREEMENT
LOT R-A6A, STARWOOD SUEDIVISION
a. All vegetation shall be removed within 10 feet of proposed structures. This
"defensible space" area shall be maintained in mowed grass or non-flammable
material, such as decorative rock or gravel.
b. Brush shall be thinned and standing dead or dead down trees shall be removed from
a distance of 30 feet upslope and 30 feet downslope of any structures constructed
pursuant to this Development Agreement to break up the vertical and horizontal
continuity of wildfire fuel.
c. Spacing between clumps of brush and vegetation within the 30 foot perimeters shall
be a minimum of two times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the
clumps shall be two times the height of the fuel All measurements shall be from
the edges of the crown of the fuel.
d. All branches from trees and brush within the stated perimeter shall be pruned to a
height of 10 feet above the ground.
e. Tree crown separation within the perimeters will have a minimum of 10 feet
between the edges of the crowns.
f. All branches which extend over roof eves shall be trimmed and all branches within
15 feet of chimneys shall be removed.
g. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris.
h. Yards shall be kept clear of litter and flammable debris.
i. Firewood shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from
any structure.
j. At least one approved ABC class fire extinguisher shall be placed in a visible and
accessible location for each structure.
k. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris.
1. Wood fences shall not be connected to any structure constructed pursuant to this
Agreement.
m. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container.
n. Roof construction shall be Class A, non-combustible (no wood shakes or shingles)
material with no flat roofs.
Page ~
I I"III "III "I"I II'I' III'II III'I'II'I III "III'III I"I
408452 09/16/1997 10:47ii RGREEMEN DiiVIS SILVI
g ev 9 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKINCO COLORtiDO
DF,VELOPMENT AGREEMENT
LOT R-86A, STARWOOD SDRDIVISION
o. All vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh of one quarter inch
(1/4") maximum.
p. Addresses shall be clearly marked with minimum 2" letters.
q. Ziff shall maintain the Defensible Space by removing new plant growth at least
once a year.
5.9 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN. Prior to the issuance of any building
permits for any construction pursuant to this Development Agreement, Ziff shall submit
to the Community Development Department a Construction Management Plan which
includes the management of construction traffic, a fugitive dust control plan, the staging
of construction equipment and materials, and public notification for road closures or any
other public inconveniences during construction. The Construction Management Plan shall
include the monitoring of construction traffic for the duration of the residential
construction project.
5.10 INFORMATION AFTER CONSTRUCTION. Within 60 days after the receipt of a
Certificate of Occupancy, Ziff shall submit to the County information regarding the total
number of employees generated by all construction pursuant to this Development
Agreement. No mitigation is required for the Full Time Equivalent Employees (FTE's)
that may be generated by any development pursuant to this Agreement.
VL MISCELLANEOUS
6.1 GOVERNING LAW. This Development Agreement shall be governed by Colorado law
6.2 SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. This Development Agreement shall run with and
constitute a burden on the Property and shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit
of the parties hereto, and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and
assigns forever.
6.3 ENTIRE UNDERSTANDING. This Development Agreement together with any exhibits
hereto, the Resolution, and any plans submitted by Ziff and approved by the County's
agencies hereunder, contains the entire understanding between the parties hereto with
respect to the transactions contemplated hereunder and may be altered or amended from
time to time only by written instrument executed by each of the parties hereto.
6.4 ASSIGNMENT: This Development Agreement is freely assignable by Ziff to any grantee
in and to the Property provided such party shall take title to the Property and subject to,
and shall agree to abide by Ziff's obligations hereunder.
Page 6
I II'III'IIII'll'll IIII' III'I' III IIIIIII III IIIII'III I"I
408452 09/16/1997 10:478 RGREEMEN DRVIS SILVI
6 of 9 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKINCO COLORiiDO
llEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
LOT R-86A. STARWOOD SUBDIVISION
6.5 THE RESOLUTION. This Development Agreement is intended to amplify and carry out
the provisions of the Resolution. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this
Development Agreement and the Resolution, the provisions of this Development
Agreement, to the extent allowed by law, govern and control.
6.6 NOT CONSTRUED AGAINST. No provision of this Development Agreement shall be
construed against or interpreted to the disadvantage of any party by reason of such party
having or being deemed to have requested, drafted, required or structured such provision.
6.7 ERRORS. In the event any clerical, administrative or other errors are found in this
Development Agreement or any legal descriptions or other exhibits hereto or in the event
any exhibit shall be missing, the parties agree to promptly execute, acknowledge, initial
and/or deliver, as necessary, any documentation in order to correct the erroneous
document, description, exhibit or to provide any missing exhibit.
6.8 SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this Development Agreement shall be held invalid,
illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining portion
of this Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
6.9 COUNTERPARTS. This Development Agreement may be executed in multiple
counterparts, each of which, when so executed, shall be deemed an original, but all such
counterparts shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
6.10 ATTORNEYS FEES. In the event that any litigation or arbitration between the parties
hereto, or their successors, heirs, or assigns concerning this Development Agreement the
substantially prevailing Party or Parties shall be entitled to their reasonable attorneys fees,
except that in the event that any of the parties hereto, or their successors, heirs, or assigns
who is a party to said litigation makes an Offer of Settlement pursuant to C.R.S.
13-17-202 to another party hereto, or their successors, heirs, or assigns, the term "costs"
as applied in that section shall be deemed to include reasonable attorneys fees, and in the
event that a Party is thus awarded attorneys fees pursuant to the Offer of Settlement, the
Party upon whom such Offer of Settlement was made shall not be entitled to receive the
Party's attorneys fees, even is such party is the substantially prevailing party. In the event
of arbitration, any of the parties hereto, or their successors, heirs, or assigns may make
an Offer of Settlement pursuant to this section as if in litigation.
6.11 SECTION HEADINGS. The section headings herein are for convenience only, and have
no legal effect.
[Signatures and Acknowledgments on next two pages]
Page 7
I I"III "III'II"I II'I' III'I' III'III"I III "III II'I I"I
7 of 9 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKINCO COLORADO
DEVELOPlIENT AGREEMENT
L~1T R-86A, STARWOOD SUBDIVISION
~~
Executed as of the ~? day
of ~~ , 1997.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SIGNATURE
AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR WILLIAM ZIFF
WILLIAM ZIFF:
STATE OF ~Ci~~l~r"'~(i )
)ss.
COUNTY OF I~ i~~.t r~ )
~It
The foregoing Development Agreement was acknowledged before me this ~ day of
1997, by William Ziff.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
(SEAL) ~(' ~n -C~~
l• ~
h
~~~~'~ ;~~,.,~;~,rl('.
Nota y Public 6 '
Page 8
111111 IIIII 111111 IIIII 111111 III 1111111 III IIIII IIII IIII
406452 09/16/1997 10:478 riGREEMEN DRVIS SILVI
8 of 9 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKSNCO coLORaoo
DFVELOPADiNT AGREEMENT
I OT R-86A, STARwOOD SLBD[VLSION
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SIGNATURE
AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORy1D0-
By:
ATTEST:
its
n~,~//
VU'S
By: ~.~..v
,~~/~ ,County Clerk
STATE OF r )
)ss.
COUNTY OF' )
he oregoing Develop nt Agreement was acknowledged before e this // ~ day of
1997, by ~,f/.f' TGr;~c., , as of the
Pitki County Board of County Commissioners.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: /p-ao-y~'
(SEAL)
development ngreementnvpd Page 9
I IIIIII llill "I'll lllll Illlll III Iilllll III "III IIIi I'll
9 of 9 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKINCO COLORiiDO
ROCKY TSCHAPPAT
0314 Carroll Drive
Aspen, Colorado 81611
970-920-1227
970-920-1228 (Facsimile)
August 25, 2000
HAND DELIVERED
Suzanne Wolfe, Planner
Pitkin County Community Development Dept.
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Carroll Drive Properties R86A
Dear Suzanne:
On February 28, 2000, CDP had a valid vested land use approval fora 36,170 square foot
house. We worked with the County and agreed to build a house less than 15,000 square feet of
FAR with no special review and to relinquish our approval for the 36,170 square foot house. We
received a building permit to remodel the existing main house to a size of 12,640 square feet of
FAR, including a 2,300 square foot existing guest house, or 16,316 gross square feet including
the existing 2,300 square foot guest house. When we submitted the application for building
permit for the house in early 2000 after having reduced the house size by roughly 2/3rds, we
could have had 15,000 square feet of FAR with the guest house or roughly 19,750 gross.
Now that we have developed [he design, the house, including the guest house, is 14,018
square feet of FAR measured by the Code provision we submitted under, and 17,980 gross
square feet including the existing guest house. We have added 1,664 square feet and would like
to confirm with the County that we can go ahead with the design development revisions to our
plans under the Code provisions in effect at the time of our submittal. The 1,664 square feet will
be used mostly for attic storage, mechanical space and eaves of 7'3" to match the existing eaves
on the portions of the home to be retained.
Thank you for your time.
Very truly yours,
R sc ap nand Representative of
Carroll Drive Properties, LLC
0.1W.ue~ ~ ~wv uec~ e,_...elu.. "cl~.'' c`i~1w arex ~-elca,E~w~tw~ t+.~Q~,a~
~' j ~~~~~
_~41 ~~tr.l,
LEONARD M. GATES
RIC HARD A. KNEZEVICH
TEO O. GARDENS WARTZ
DAVID B. KELLY
OF COUNSEL.
MICHAEL FEIGEN BAUM
JOHN T. KELLY
DAVID B. MUELLER
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING
533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE
ASPEN, COLORADO BI6~1
TELEPHONE 19J01920-IJOO
FACSIMILE (9J01 920-~ 121
e-mail ohkg@rot.nBt
Mazch 3, 2000
Lance Clarke, Deputy Director VIA HAND DELIVERY
Pitkin County Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: William Ziff/Carroll Drive Properties, LLC
R-86A Starwood Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado
Modification to Implementation Plan
Dear Lance:
On February 4, 2000 I wrote a letter to your Director, Cynthia Houben. That letter was an
application for amendment ofResolution No. 97-64 ofthe Boazd of County Commissioners of Pitkin
County, Colorado. On Thursday, March 2, Rocky Tschappat and I have had a telephone
conversation with you and this letter is written to slightly modify the application for amendment.
Specifically, we wish to amend our request that Article III of the Development Agreement
be deleted to provide that the last sentence be retained because ZifF intends to retain the current
detached residential building as provided in Section 3.2.
This letter will be supplemented by letters of authorization from Carroll Drive Properties,
LLC, the present owner of Lot R-86A as well as an approval of the modified residence from the
Stanwood Homeowners Association.
Very truly yours,
LAW OFFICES OF
GATES, KNEZEVICH Sz GARDENSWARTZ, P.C.
GATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C.
By: ,~,~C 1~~ ~~/'/ G~~r2
Leonard M. Oates
LMO/jr
cc: Rocky Tschappat
VALmosUla~aVClients~ZlFF~lmrance C1arke.3.3.00.wpd
MAR- 2-00 THU 420 PM ZIEE/TSCHAPPAT OFFICE
Sant 8 ;William Lukas + AssooiL't~s• 970 B20 ti988;
T'o: R Tscheppat At: B20 128
1 February 2000
Cindy Houben
PitMn County Community pevelopment Department
130 South 081ena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
ro: L'NResidenee/StarwoptlR•iJ6A
EAX N0. 9709201228 P, 2
Feb•f-04 ~:21AM; Page 111
WILLIAM tueea • -ssoerasaa
Y R O 1[ G l AI A Y A C! N k N i
.A R f. 11 , T r G l ll R P
Cindy:
I understand that Rocky Tscheppat has scheduled a meeting with you to discuss revised plans for the
Ziff Residerxx: on lot R-86A. Meg Haynes, Chairman of the Starwood Homeowners Association Hoard
of Trustees, asked me to provide you with an update as to Starwood's review of this project for that
meetng.
The Sfarwood Architectural Committee reviewed new plans for s renovation and alight enlargement of
the existing residence at their regular ml?etlng on January 27, 2000 and voted unanimously to grant
conceptual approval to those plans. No parllculardesrgn lssueswere raised at that review artd iNe would
anticipate that furth@r plans will be submitted for the usual preliminary end final reviews dur'utg the ne%t
few mdnth5.
You may be aware that R-88A has been In the Stanwood approval process for quit a long time and that
Slarwood previously approved plans for a significanity larger home than is cuneMly proposed for this
property, aver conductlng several site Mupections and a neighbor notlficatlon, R-tt6A is a unique
property in terms of its size and secluded Mcation, and ~~ for the e by Isboth Ihp Arctiilectural
proposal waa thought to be w6A~iesignad and approp ~ o the much
Committee end the Stanwood community et large when it was reviewed several months a9
smaller proposal wrrsndy under review presented no problems at the concepual level discussed with
the Architectural Committee an January 27.
Please let either myself or Meg Haynes know i1 yw would Ake any additional informafron or ii vra can be
of arty assistance.
Cordially, ~ f A
l.~-'~/
illiam Lukes AIA
Architectural Atlvtsor to the Stanwood Architectural Committee
Ih,.l IL n.I Rur RaMv
copies: Meg Haynes
Julia Johnston
Rocky TschaDPat
.1TI'I'V I.VIUM11"1
n,,,.
la a. )'...~Y [Y „~ J:n.TV In
MAR- 7-00 TUE 10 48 AM ZIFF/TSCHAPPAT OFFICE FAQ N0. 9709201228 P, 2
03~07i00 TLIR 08:39 FAT 212'Y32 8611 ZIFR BRfYfF1RRS ,. Q1002
__ItAT~ ~~OO,FBI,,.~;~~ ~~__ZIFF1TSCR~PPAT OFF,iCE FAR N0. 9709?012?S P. ~
Currul[.~~~v~.~'rv~~rtiea~, LT,('
Much Z, 2000
Lanec Clevk, Aasistont Director
Pitkin CoMty Commwity llavobpment
130 South Galena 5trees
3ro door
AeFan~ (:oiotadn 1{Ih1l
Itc: 2equcat for Minor Amcndratnt to a
Deroloptncnt permit pwsa+ns to 3.300.80
of ilte Pitkin CowtY Land Use Code
1?car Lance:
With thts ktser I auilwtitt Rocky Tsthappat and ttonord M. Oattt to pcoccu en
application for Itcqucst for Minor P,mendmeot to a Developmcer permit Put3uant to 3-
~00.80 of tho Pitkin County Land Uso Colo,
Thank Y~•
incetelri
D iel Ziff,
Carroll Drive Propcrtic~, LLC Mamgct
0311 CanotlOrhe, llopen, Cobrodo 11611, (070J010.1PP7, (870~ta182a lex
John Ely, 02:29 PM 3/2/00 -0700, Re: Ziff
X-Sender: johne@commons.co.pitkin.co.us
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 14:29:13 -0700
To: Lance Clarke <lancec@ci.aspen.co.us>
From: John Ely <johne@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Re: Ziff
go ahead; the devel agreement was a result of the approval so if its modification fits with your
program
At 11:48 AM 3/2/00 -0700, you wrote:
We typically do minor amendments to BOCC resos administratively , I just don't think I've
ever amended a development agreement administratively, but that's certainly what Jennie
thinks is happening.
At 11:47 AM 3/2/00 -0700, you wrote:
god question, I haven't seen that thing in awhile even though it was sent over here within the
last couple of months; I guess I thought this was going to be an issue for the brd to decide
especially since the brd put the original conditions on the reso .
At 11:27 AM 3/2/00 -0700, you wrote:
The ziff caper involves changes to the development agreement as well as the reso. Do I
have authority to administratively make amendments to the development agreement?
John Ely
John Ely
Printed for Lance Clarke <lancec@ci.aspen.co.us> 1
`A LAW OFFICES OF
GATES, KNEZEVICH ~ GARDENSWARTZ, P.C.
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
THIRD FLOOR. ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING
533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
TELEPHONE (901920-1 ZOO
LEONARD M. GATES
RICHARD A. KNEZEVICH FACSIMILE f9]O) 920-I 121
TED D. GARDENSWARTZ
DAVID B. KELLY Z-T3 Ohkg®rOf.nE[
OF COUNSEL:
MICHAEL FEIGENBAUM
JOHN T. KELLY
DAVID B. MUELLER
February 16, 2000
Ms. Cynthia Houben, Director VIA HAND DELIVERY
Pitkin County Community Development Department
130 South Galena Avenue
Aspen, CO 81611
Deaz Cindy:
Re: 1~1[iam Ziff; Carroll Drive Properties, LLC ("Ziff')
Lot R86A Stanwood Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado
Request for Minor Amendment to a Development
Permit Pursuant to 3-200.80 of the Pitkin County
Land Use Code
This letter replaces my earlier correspondence of February 2, 2000 in connection with the
same subject matter as this letter. Subsequent to having sent you my February 2, 20001etter, Rocky
Tschappat, Sunny Vann and I met with County Attorney, John Ely who suggested that it would
be more appropriate for us to proceed pursuant to the provisions of 3-200.80 of the Pitkin County
Land Use Code which allows minor amendments to a development permit.
Minor amendments to a development permit as we understand it aze processed in a one-
step review as an administrative review per 4-20.20 of the Land Use Code. We do understand
that apre-application conference is required and presumably we can construe the meeting which
the three of us had with you and Lance Clazke at the end of Januazy to have constituted the pre-
application conference.
As explained to you, we discussed with John Ely the proposal by William Ziff and Cazroll
Drive Properties, LLC not to construct a home in excess of 37,000 squaze feet on Lot R-86A
5tazwood Subdivision, but instead to remodel the existing structure on that property with the net
result that the project will consist of the present structwe of approximately 9,958 square feet of
FAR, the existing guest quarter consisting of 2,300 square feet of FAR plus an above-grade
addition of approximately 200 square feet includable in FAR, together with subgrade space of
O ATES, KNEZEVICH Sz CxARDENS WA RTZ, BC.
Ms. Cynthia Houben, Director
February 16, 2000
Page 2
approximately 2,800 square feet. The total structure including the subgrade space will be
significantly less than 15,000 square feet of FAR, the maximum square footage permitted without
special review approval under the Land Use Code.
Ziff is able presently to proceed with development of a structure in excess of that permitted
under the present emergency Moratorium adopted as Ordinance No. 2000-002B on Februazy 10,
2000 by the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado ("BOC") because Ziff
is within the vesting period under Resolution No. 97-64 which permitted the construction of a
residence in excess of 15,000 square feet.
What is requested by this application for a minor amendment to a development permit is
that certain of the conditions of Resolution 97-64 and the Development Agreement entered into
as of the 8`~ day of August, 1997, be modified in the following respects bearing in mind that the
items which Ziff is requesting be modified or deleted as conditions to the Resolution and
Development Agreement relate to matters which would not be the subject of review in Stazwood
for a residence of less than 15,000 square feet, a subdivision approved by the BOCC.
The Resolution is requested to be modified as follows:
Under Paragraph 2, the Pitkin County Energy Conservation Code as presently
in effect shall apply.
Condition No. 4 be deleted.
Pazagraph 5 be deleted.
4. Pazagraph 7 be deleted because TDR's will no longer be necessazy.
5. Paragraph 10 be deleted.
6. Pazagraph 11 be deleted.
Paragraph 12 be deleted.
8. Pazagraph 14 be deleted.
Correspondingly, the Development Agreement is requested to be modified so that the
following provisions are removed:
a. Pazagraph 2.4 be deleted because TDR's will no longer be necessary.
O ATES, KNEZEVICH 8i GARDENS WA RTZ, P.C.
Ms. Cynthia Houben, Director
February 16, 2000
Page 3
b. Article 3 be deleted in its entirety.
c. Paragraph 4.1 be deleted.
d. Pazagraph 5.1 be clazified to provide that the current Pitkin County Energy
Conservation Code be applied to the remodel project.
e. Paragraph 5.4 be deleted.
f. Paragraph 5.5 be deleted.
g. Paragraph 5.8 be deleted.
The authority for the administrative review of the request herein contained is provided for
in Section 4-20.20 of the Land Use Code.
We believe that the submission contents required pursuant to an application made under
Section 3-200.80 of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 5-50 of the Code were met as a
part of the original application which resulted in Resolution No. 97-64 being adopted and the
Development Agreement having been entered into.
The amendment requested is not a plat amendment. Addressing the four lettered criteria of 3-
200.80 of the Land Use Code:
A. The Amendment must be a clarification or technical correction to a plat.
RESPONSE.
The Amendment does not involve a modification to a recorded plat.
B. The Amendment must not change the use of the proposed developments between
residential, commercial and tourist accommodation uses.
RESPONSE
The proposed amendment relates to a present residential use which will be
ongoing as a residential use only.
A. The Amendment must be consistent with action taken during the review of the
original development and does not constitute a new land use development activity.
GATES, KNEZEVICH Sz GARDENS WA RT Z, P.C.
Ms. Cynthia Houben, Director
February 16, 2000
Page 4
RESPONSE
The Amendment does not propose a new land use development activity and is consistent
with the action taken during the original review. In fact the proposal significantly abates and
mitigates a proposal to build a home in excess of 37,000 squaze feet, the impacts of which are of
concern to the BOCC and Community Development Department and replaces the same with a
development only an additional approximately 200 squaze feet of FAR for the
existing use.
B. The proposed activity does not:
1. Change the basic chazacter of the approved land use on which the activity
occurs including basic visual appeazance and method of operation.
RESPONSE
No change is proposed in the basic chazacter of the approved use of the land as a single
family residence, and if anything, the visual impact of the proposed remodeled residence will be
significantly less than that of that approved by the Resolution.
2. Increase offsite impacts in the surrounding neighborhood.
RESPONSE
To the contrary, the amendment will significantly decrease offsite impacts to the
surrounding neighborhood because of the faz more limited scope of the construction activity and
permanent impacts.
Endanger the public health, safety and welfaze.
RESPONSE
Nothing in the proposed amendment would inherently endanger the public health, safety,
and welfaze.
4. Violate any land use code standazd.
RESPONSE
The proposed amendment does not violate any land use code standazd applied to
residential development of homes 15,000 squaze feet or less in Starwood, an approved Pitkin
GATES, KNEZEVICH 8z GARDENS WA RTZ, P.C.
Ms. Cynthia Houben, Director
February 16, 2000
Page 5
County subdivision.
5. Substantially increase the need for on-site parking or utilities, or affect
affordable housing generation.
RESPONSE
The Amendment will not increase the need for on-site parking or utilities as the use will
remain substantially the same as exists today, i.e., single family residential use; and, indeed if
anything will reduce the need for employee housing by virtue of the generation or the impact
generation abated by virtue of the much smaller residence.
6. Increase the floor azea of the use by more than two (2) percent or decrease
the open space on the site by more than three (3) percent.
RESPONSE
The Amendment does not propose any increase in floor area. To the contrary, it proposes
a decrease. The smaller home footprint will, as a practical matter, increase the open space on the
site as opposed to decreasing the same.
Again to recap Ziff's position, we believe that the approval of the requested minor
amendment of a development permit is appropriate because the proposed development of a
residential structure less than 15,000 squaze feet by virtue of the remodel and slight enlazgement
of an existing structure is warranted because of the items that we aze requesting to be deleted and
are not matters reviewed in Starwood for homes less than 15,000 squaze feet under the Land Use
Code.
Please advise if there aze any fees associated with the request and we will remit promptly.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
GATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C.
By: ,.
Leonazd M. Oates
LMO/jr
C:\Data\Clients\ZIFFV.fr.Houben.2.16.00.wpd
LAW OFFICES OF
GATES, KNEZEVICH ~ GARDENSWARTZ, P.C.
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING
533 EAST HOP KINS AVENUE
ASPEN, COLORAD061611
LEONARD M. GATES
RICHPRD A. NN EZEVICH
TED D. GARDENS WARTZ
DAVID B. KELLV
February 4, 2000
DF COUNSEL.
MICHAEL FEIGENBAUM
JOHN T. KELLY
DAVID B. MUELLER
TELEPHONE [901920-1 X00
FACSIMILE [9]OI 920-I 121
e-mall oh kg~rof.net
Ms. Cynthia Houben, Director HAND DELIVERED
Pitkin County Community Development Dept.
130 South Galena Ave.
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: William Ziff /Lot R-86A Starwood Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado
Modification to Implementation of Development Plan
Dear Cindy:
As you know, we represent William Ziff and Carroll Drive Properties, LLC, a Colorado limited
liability company (collectively "Ziff'). William Ziff conveyed Lot R-86A ("R-86A") Starwood to Carroll
Drive Properties, LLC, a Ziff family owned limited liability company, in 1999 along with the land use
approvals which R-86A enjoys.
By its Resolution 97-64 ("Resolution"), the Board of County Commissioners, Pitkin County,
Colorado ("BOCC") granted a land use approval to Ziffto construct a home on R86A substantially in excess
of 15,000 squaze feet. The approval under the Resolution is still within its statutory vesting period.
Ziff has decided that it will be better served to build a home of significantly smaller size than that
approved under the Resolution and has concluded that a significant remodel of the existing residence on
R-86A (built in the mid-1960's and now becoming quite deteriorated) it what it wants to do. The total size
of the residence on R-86A after the remodel is proposed to be less than 15,000 square feet, the cap allowed
under the Land Use Code and current zoning.
Rocky Tschappat, Ziff s property manager, Sunny Vann and myselfinet on this matter with you and
Lance Clarke on February 2, 2000. Rocky has, as well, discussed Ziff's desires with certain of the BOCC
members as have I (with the consent of John Ely). The members of the BOCC with whom we have
discussed this matter have encouraged the reduction in the size of the residence from that approved under
the Resolution by the means we propose.
GATES, KNEZEVICH 8z GARDENS WA RTZ, P.C.
Ms. Cynthia Houben, Director
Pitkin County Community Development Dept.
February 3, 2000
Page 2
Confirming what we told you at our meeting, no portion ofR-86A is within a mapped ridgeline azea.
You told us that Community Development and the BOCC will have no land use code issues with
an application for a building permit for the remodel of the residence to a size less than 15,000 squaze feet
of floor area and that special review requirements would not be applied to such review. As you aze awaze,
Stanwood is an approved platted subdivision in which residences under 15,000 squaze feet of floor area do
not need to meet special review criteria and review processes.
From a timing standpoint, we would like not to have to apply for a building permit for the lazger
home approved by the Resolution because of the expense and waste of resources in review, then only to
amend the same to accommodate the remodel.
W e would respectfully request that the Pitkin County Community Development Department confirm
our understanding.
1. Ziff may proceed with application for a building permit for a remodel of the existing home on
R-86A for a total of less than 15,000 squaze feet of floor area, free of the terms of the present
emergency moratorium because Ziff is within the period of statutory vested rights under the
Resolution.
2. Ziff intends to be prepazed to apply for a building permit prior to the time that statutory vested
rights expire under the Resolution. The fact that the building permit has been filed for, but may not
be issued prior to the expiration of the statutory vested right period under the Resolution will not
affectZiffs righttoobtainthepermiteventhoughitmaybeissuedafterthestatutoryvestingperiod
under the Resolution has expired.
3. If Ziff does not submit for a building permit prior to the expiration of the statutory vested rights
period under the Resolution, but has filed an application for an extension of vested rights under the
Resolution with Community Development before they shall expire, such application for extension
will stay the expiration of statutory vested rights under the Resolution, and allow Ziff to apply for
and obtain a building permit during the period such application for extension of our statutory rights
is pending or the period which such right may be extended. Ziff understands that extension of its
vested rights under any such application is within the sound discretion of the Boazd of County
Commissioners.
4. Upon issuance of a building permit for the remodel, Ziff agrees that the Resolution thereafter
shall be null, void and of no further force and effect.
5. Nothing contained in this letter shall be construed to be a waiver of any common law vested
rights to which Ziff R-86A may have under law or Ziff s regret to assert the same.
We welcome any discussion as to further issues which you might see. It would be fine to go ahead
and confirm our understanding and agreement as being correct on the copy of this letter. We understand that
you intend to pass it by John Ely to obtain his confirming approval.
GATES, KNEZEVICH 8i GARDENSWARTZ, P.C.
Ms. Cynthia Houben, Director
Pitkin County Community Development Dept.
February 3, 2000
Page 3
Sincerely,
GATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C.
Leonazd M. Oates
Confirmed by Pitkin County Community Development Department by Cynthia Houben, Director.
LMO/elh/Enc. Cynthia Houben, Director
cc: Sunny Vann
Rocky Tschappat
ASPEN/PITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Agreement for Payment of Pitkin County Development Application Fees
PITKIN COiJNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and
(hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for
(hereinafter, THE PROJECT).
2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Ordinances
No. 98-7 and 99-37 establish a fee structure for Planning applications and the
payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of
application completeness.
3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or
scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full
extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and
COUNTY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties to a11APPLICANT to
make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be
billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees he will be
benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments
upon notification by the COUNTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred.
COUNTY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its
full costs to process APPLICANT's application.
4. COUNTY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for
COUNTY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the
Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to enable the
Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to make legally
required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior
to decision.
~,:,
6. The Community Development Department Director shall establish appropriate guidelines for the
collection of Additional Billings as required.
7. This fee structure shall be reviewed annually as part of the County budget hearing process and should
any adjustments be necessary, they shall be changed to become effective on January 1.
8. The Community Development Department shall identify, prior to or at the time of submission of a land
use application, whether an application is to be referred to the Engineering, Environmental Health,
Wildlife Officer, or Housing Departments or whether a County Clerk Administrative Fee is required.
The Community Development Department shall also identify whether an application constitutes a
minor or a major referral, based on the number of hours which will be required to review the
application, and charge the applicant for each referral accordingly. Additional Billings and Refunds
shall not apply to the computation of referral fees.
In the event that staff determines that special expertise is required to assist the Community Development
Department in the review of a permit application such costs will be borne by the applicant.
Revised 11/2/99
5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the
COiJNTY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of
application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount
of $ which is for hours of Planning staff time, and if actual recorded
costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings
to COUNTY to reimburse the COUNTY for the processing of the application
mentioned above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be
made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to
pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing.
PITKIN COUNTY
Cindy Houben
Community Development Director
APPLICANT
~~ ~ ~ s~~4~--
Print +Name
Sign
-~ ~ 2 Z - Z.3av
Date: L
Mailing Address:
~~,,, ~ g I ~ ! i
g: \su p port\fa rms\agrpaypt.d oc
11/2/99
ASPEN/PITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone (970) 920-5090 FAX (970) 920-5439
MEMORANDUM
TO: Attorney
Zoning
FROM : Lance Clarke, Community Development Department
RE: Ziff- Carroll Drive, LLC Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
PID# 2643-261-02-001
P19-00
Flat Fee
DATE: February 24, 2000
Attached for your review and comments are materials for an application by Carroll Drive, LLC.
This application will be reviewed by the Pitkin County Community Development Director.
Please return your comments to me no later than March 24, 2000.
PLEASE RETURN APPLICATION MATERIALS TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
IF YOU HAVE NO FURTHER NEED OF THEM.
Thank you.
5 9 42 ~~'r"/~
Cp1yIMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920-5090
Pitkin County
Laced Use:
172 Board of Adjustment
159 County Land Use Code _~..a...~- ~-
173 Deposit ~ ~ ~
174 Flat Fee
162 Zoning and Sign
169 Public Notice
160 Planning Enforcement
Referral Fees:
RB115 Access Permit
179 County Clerk
193 County Engineer
194 Environmental Health
lgg Housing
190 Land Management
196 Wildlife Officer
Building Fees:
170 Board of Appeals
135 Building Code Sales
105 Building Permit
100 Contractor License
120 Electrical Permit
195 Energy Code Review
115 Mechanical Permit
150 Plan Check
110 Plumbing Permit
130 Reinspec[ion
151 Aspen Sanitation
152 AVFD Fire Marshal
Other Fees:
155 Use Tax
165 Copy
Performance Deposit
185 Park Dedication
186 Parking Cash in Lieu
166 GIS Maps
IS GIS Requirements
RB116 Road Impact Fees
TOTAL ~ O
ADDRESS/PROJECT:
CASE/PERMI #: ~~ \ 1 _ ~ v # OFCOPIES:
I ~1
DATE: ~ °~ ~ 0 ~ INITIAL:'