HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.246718300001 (4)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(s)
Parcel ID: 2467- 18 -3 -00 -001 Application Date: 6/2/10 Case No: PO41 -10
Description: Town of Basalt South Side Tank Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
Planner: Mike Kraemer
# Copies: 1
Allocated Hours: 3
% Over Hours: 3.2
Project Address: 39W LUPINE DR, ASPEN, CO 81611
Property Owner: DOWNEY RICHARD E Address: 3835 S SANTA FE DR Owner Phone:
DENVER, CO 80110
Owner's REP: SHANNON ULLMANN (SGM) Address: 118W 6TH, STE #200 REP's Phone: (970) 945 -1004
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
REP's Email: shannonU @sgm- inc.com
Referrals: PLANNING ENGINEER REFERRAL Other Referrals:
Comments Due Date: 07109/2010
Meetings: 1st Meeting: 2nd Meeting:
Meeting Date:
Review Body: admin
Public Hearing? no
Notice Date:
Meeting Notes:
Approvals:
BOCC Resolution #: P &Z Determination #:
BOCC Ordinance #: HO Determination #:
Admin Determination #: 032 -2011 #580234
3rd Meeting:
Other Information:
VRApproval Date:
VR Expires Date:
Remarks: no vesting
Plat Recorded Date: 05/31/2011
Plat (Bk, PG): B97 P9 #580235
Application Type: Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
RECEPTION #: 580234, 05/31/2011 at
04:24:22 PM,
1 OF 3, R $0.00 Doc Code ADMIN
DECISION
Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING THE TOWN OF BASALT WATER
TANK MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
Administrative Decision No. ,5a- -2011
RECTI'ALS
The Town of Basalt (hereafter the "Applicant") has applied to the Pitkin County Community
Development Director ( "Director") for a minor amendment to a development permit to allow
development outside the previously approved activity envelope for construction of the Town of Basalt
water tank. The requested amendments include:
a. Adjusting the previously approved envelope for locating two waterline tie -in areas. The
adjustment includes access and maintenance agreements on the RE -1 School District
Property;
b. Adjustments to the road to correct surveying alignment errors;
c. Enlargement of the Activity Envelope in the V switchback for construction materials
storage and access;
d. Revised tank location 20' to the west;
e. A larger berm footprint;
f. Creation of a topsoil stockpile area next to the tank site;
g. Creation of a construction staging area in the already disturbed area of the property at the
toe of the slope. Excavation material will be wasted in the this area and regarded at the
finish of the project to existing topography; and
h. Alternative construction restriction dates. The requested start date is May 16.
2. The subject property is located just west of the Town of Basalt boundary off South Side drive. The
BLM land where the tank site is proposed is just west of the subject property. Both the subject lot and
the BLM land are zoned AR -10. The subject property is approximately 26 acres (Legal Descriptions —
Exhibit A).
3. The Town of Basalt received approval for an Activity Envelope, Site Plan, and Special Review for a
Major Public Utility for construction of a water tank that will service the citizens of Basalt pursuant to
BOCC Resolution No. 79 -2009 recorded at Reception No. 564644. The Activity Envelope and Site
Plans were recorded at BK 92 PG's 68 -72.
4. BOCC resolution No. 079 -2009 was amended pursuant to Administrative Resolution No. 102 -2009
(Reception No. 56478 1) to amend construction restriction dates for sensitive wildlife areas adjacent to
the proposed tank site.
5. Easements have been established for the RE -1 School District Property. The BLM has approved the
amended location of the water tank and stockpile location. Pitkin County and the Town of Basalt are
co-owners of the former "Downey Property" and have approved the amendment requests.
6. The CDOW has commented on the requested alternative construction dates and stated that the request
can be approved with the caveat that construction activity not start until 8:00 AM and halt at 6:OOPM.
Early mornings and evening are when deer graze in the area.
7. The Director finds that the Applicant has addressed Section 2- 20- 150(b) of the Code and has shown
compliance with these standards.
THE DIRECTOR DOES HEREBY APPROVE the Town of Basalt Water Tank Minor Amendment to a
Development Permit, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on
all successors in interest:
1. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made during the application process.
2. Prior to submission of any future earthmoving/access permit applications, the Applicant shall be
required to submit for approval by the County Attorney and Community Development an Activity
Envelope and Site Plan in accordance with Land Use Application Manual Section 2.1.12. The above
referenced approvals shall be a condition precedent to finalization and recordation.
3. All conditions of BOCC Resolution No. 079 -2009 and Administrative Decision No. 102 -2009 shall
remain in effect. Notwithstanding Administrative Decision No. 102 -2009, Condition #5 of BOCC
Resolution No. 079 -2009 shall be rescinded and replaced with the following condition:
a. Because of the close proximity to sensitive elk and mule deer habitat, dogs are prohibited
during construction. Construction shall be limited to dates from May 16 to October 15.
Construction shall be limited to 8:OOAM Mountain Daylight Time to 6:OOPM Mountain
Daylight Time from May 16 to June 1.
4. Failure to comply with the conditions of this approval may result in revocation of this approval, or
any subsequent permit(s) or approval(s) related to the Lot, or vested rights associated with the Lot.
APPROVED by the Director, this L 3tday of 2011.
Cmdy Houben, Community Development Director
PO41 -10
PID# 2467 - 183 -00 -001
Administrative Decision No. �_ -2011
Page 2
Legal Description for Pitkin County/Town of Basalt Parcel
ITract: 59 LAND IN TR 59 SEC 18 -8 -86 BK 609 PG 400 CONT 22 i
IAC MIL
(PLUS 3.5 AC M/L BK 668 PG 177 1
SOUTH SIDE TANK
PITKIN COUNTY 1041 PERMIT
(RESOLUTION N0. 079 -2009)
MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT
TOWN OF BASALT
MAY 2010
PREPARED BY:
SCHMUESER I GORDON I MEYER
1 18 W. 6"' STREET, SUrrE 200
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
. 0o -;001 0-1' Ny
SCHMUESE I GO I MEYE GLENWOoO SPRINGS
E N G I N E E R S I S U R V E Y O R S 5 I I a Weer 51a ST E!17. Suite 200
GLENNNODO SPRING!. CO 01 CO 1
Ma 25, 2010 970.945.1004
May 25,2010 Sw
Mr. Mike Kraemer, Planner
Pitkin County Community Development
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO, 81611
RE: Minor Amendment to a Development Permit.
Dear Mike:
The Town of Basalt (the Town) is requesting to modify the boundaries of the previously
approved activity envelope (AE) for the one million gallon water storage tank to be constructed
south of the Town of Basalt. This letter is submitted in conformance with the Pitkin County Pre -
Application Conference Summary for Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
(Attachment 1).
Summary of Requested Changes
This request to modify the AE comes about as a result of the formal design process for the water
storage tank and associated piping. Details associated with construction sequencing, tie -in, and
rigorous survey of existing conditions has revealed the necessity for such modifications.
Attachment 2 identifies the proposed new AE. A summary of the changes are presented as
follows:
1. Tie In — There are two water line tie -in locations outside of the approved activity envelope.
These are located on Roaring Fork RE-1 School District property. 25 -ft wide utility
maintenance and access agreements have been established. The proposed AE utilizes the
agreement boundaries and ends 10 -ft. beyond the surveyed gate valves that will be used
during tie -in activities.
2. Road Adjustment — This design makes use of an existing dirt road to access the tank and act
as a corridor for new pipe. Rigorous survey of the access road on private property revealed
alignment discrepancies to the originally proposed alignment at the lower section. The road
has been re- surveyed and the alignment that is used for this design incorporates that updated
survey.
3. Switchback Area — The Town will consider installation of High Density Polyethylene Pipe
(HDPE). The pipe is installed in long sections pulled from construction stations along the
alignment. The switchback on the existing road is a large, level, un- vegetated area that has
been identified for this purpose. As such, additional space outside of the 20 -ft corridor is
needed for use as a construction station.
4. Tank area — The AE in the vicinity of the Tank has changed based on the following.
a. Tank Location — Vegetation survey indicated a greater survival of existing vegetation
by moving the tank and road approximately 20 ft.
b. Larger Berm Footprint Area — The shape and size of the designed visual mitigation
berm changed because geotech investigation indicated that the estimated construction
slopes were found to be too steep, and the tank position changed affecting the
location where the proposed berm catches existing grade in the vicinity of the new
location.
�O ;J0.2.
i
�!SC HM UESERI GORDON IMEYER
E NAG IAN E E R S S U R V E Y O R S
r c Topsoil Stockpile Area Topsoil in the vicinity of the tank will be saved and
I i 1 replaced on the visual mitigation berm and surrounding revegetation area to assist in
-r - -- ; r- establishing new vegetation. To minimize excessive construction traffic along the
access road, a stockpile location near where it will be removed and replaced is
preferred) Additional area has been added to the AE in the vicinity of the tank to
accommodate topsoil stockpiles.
d'. Additional Space for Construction Activity - Proposed envelope boundaries in the
vicinity of the tank provide adequate space for berm construction.
Previous permit approvals are as follows:
o Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado,
- Approving the Town of Basalt Activity Envelope, Site Plan and Special Review for a
Major Public Utility Resolution No. 079 -2009 (Attachment 4)
o Administrative Decision of the Community Development Director of Pitkin County,
Colorado Approving the Town of Basalt Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
Administrative Decisions No. 102 -2009 (Attachment 5).
Activity Envelope and Site Plan
o 24' x 36" (Attachment 2)
o 11" x 17" (Attachment 3)
Proof of Ownership
BLM
The subject property /location chosen for the South Side water tank and a portion of the access
road is located on BLM property. The BLM Standard Format 299 (SF 299) application submitted
to the BLM requests permission to use the area depicted in the AE to access the tank and
construct the tank and water line. The BLM would retain ownership of the said property; BLM
has granted the Town this easement. An excerpt from the environmental assessment indicating
BLM approval is included as Attachment 6.
Private Property
Ownership of the access road to the tank on the Downey property will be retained by the current
property owner. The applicant has been granted legal right to immediate easement possession
(Attachment 7).
Parcel Description/Legal Description & Vicinity Map
Parcel Description, Legal Description and Vicinity Maps are provided in Attachment 8.
Review Fee
The check for the total review fee of $1,585 has been attached for your convenience.
Fee Agreement
The original signed fee agreement is provided in Attachment 9.
Owner Consent to Process Application & Authorizing Representative
The consent from the owner to process the application and authorizing a representative can be
found in Attachment 10.
Pre - application Form
The pre - application form can be found in Attachment 1.
-2-
I: \1990 \90040\BQ24 South Side Tank\Pemutting\Pitkin County Permitting \1041_Pitkin Comty\201004 Amendment\201005_1041 Ammendment
Letter.doc
�
OW
IWE
I
. U r 70, 0 3
An SCHMUESER I GORDON I MEYER
`, E N G I N E E R S I S U R V E Y O R S
Land Use Approvals
Per the Pre - Application Conference Summary (Attachment 1), the following land use codes
apply to this project. Each code is addressed in italics in the remaining sections of this letter. For
clarity, SGM has also included the sub -part headings or, where no heading is available, a concise,
descriptive summary of each sub -part.
2 -20 -150: Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
Pitkin County Land Use Code Review
2 -20 -150: AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS
(a) Applicability
(b) Minor Amendments Defined
A minor amendment to any development application or permit is one that meets the following criteria, as
determined by the Community Development Director:
(1) Is consistent with action(s) taken during previous development approvals for the property; and
(2) Does not change the use of the proposed development between residential, commercial and tourist
accommodation uses; and
(3) Does not change the basic character of the approved use of land on which the activity occurs,
including basic visual appearance and method of operation; and
(4) Does not constitute a new land development activity; and
(S) Does not increase off -site impacts in the surrounding neighborhood; and
(6) Does not endanger the public health, safety or welfare; and
(7) Does not violate any Land Use Code standard; and
(8) Does not substantially increase the need for on -site parking or utilities, or affect affordable housing
generation; and
(9) Does not increase the floor area of the use by more than five (5) percent or decrease the open space on
the site by more than five (5) percent.
The request is in conformance with the definition of Minor Amendment. The requested activity does not
differ from the original application but only deviates from the Resolved Activity Envelope.
(c) Major Amendment Defined
Not applicable.
(d) Amendments Prior to Issuance of Development Permit
Not applicable.
(e) After the Issuance of a Development Permit
(1) MINOR AMENDMENTS
A minor amendment to any development permit (except final subdivision plats or subdivision exemptions
for which a separate process is outlined in Secs. 2- 30 -30) including SKI -REC and PUB master plans and
special review approvals, intended to change an element or condition of a development permit may be
approved administratively pursuant to the standards and criteria in Sec. 2- 30 -20.
The requested amendment is for deviation from a condition set forth in the Resolution
-3- r,
I: \1990 \90040\B\324 South Side Tank\Pemtitting\Pi*in County Pemtitting \1041_Piddn County\201004 Amendmmt\201005_1041 Am dment
Letter.doc
pm
U
HE
U
-4-
1:\1990\9004 South Side Tank\Pemutting\Pitkin County Permitting \1041_Pitkin County\201004 Amendment\201005_1041 Ammendment
Letter.doc
ju' i0aJ
Attachment 1
Pitkin County Pre Application Conference Summary
30 ioo(i
PITKIN COUNTY PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
LOCATION: Downey property above the high school and BLM land PIDH 2467 - 183 -00 -001
OWNERS: Bureau of Land Management
APPLICANT: Town of Basalt
REPRESENTATIVE: Shannon Ullmann (SGM) PHONE and EMAIL: 945 -1004, ShannonU(aswn- inc.com
DATE: April 16 2010 PLANNER: Mike Kraemer, 920.5482, michaelk rr co.oitkin.co.us
Type of Application: Minor Amendment to a Development Permit.
Description of Project/Development: The Applicant has requested an amendment to the approved activity envelope for the
tank site, and a number of other related development activities associated with the site.
Land Use Code Sections to be addressed in letter of request (application):
Sec. 2 -20 -150: Minor Amendments to a Development Permit
Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: Planning Engineer.
Review by: Community Development Director
Public Hearing: No.
FEES: $1,585 (make check payable to " Pitkin County Treasurer ")
• Planning Office flat fee: $936 (non - refundable; based on 3 hours of staff time for review); if staff review time exceeds 3.2 hours,
the Applicant will be charged for additional time above 3 hours at a rate of $32 hour)
o Web Technology Fee: $25
o Planning Engineer: $624
To apply, submit 1 copy of the following information, unless noted otherwise:
1. Summary letter explaining the request, providing background on prior approvals and permits, and addressing
compliance with the Code sections listed above.
2. Previous Land Use Approvals (if applicable);
3. 24" by 36" and l I" by 17" Activity Envelope and Site Plan as designated in Section 2. 1.1 and 2.1.12of the Pitkin
County Land Use Application Manual;
4. Proof of ownership of subject property;
5. Parcel description, including legal description and vicinity map;
6. Total fee for review of the application;
7. Signed fee agreement (I copy);
8. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (1 copy)
9. Copies of this pre -app form
NOTES
➢ PLEASE SUBMIT ONE UNBOUND AND ONE -SIDED COPY OF YOUR COMPLETE APPLICATION. PLEASE
SUBMIT TWO -SIDED COPIES OF ALL REMAINING COPIES OF YOUR APPLICATION (IF POSSIBLE). THE
PARCEL IDs SHOULD BE INCLUDED ONALL DOCUMENTS INCLUDED IN YOUR APPLICATION.
➢ ALL MAPS SHALL BE FOLDED.
➢ This pre - application conference summary is advisory in nature and not binding on the County. The information
provided in this summary is based on current zoning standards and stalls interpretations based upon representations
of the applicant. Additional information may be required upon a complete review of the application.
➢ The Pitkin County Land Use Code and Application Manual is available on -line at
hap: //www. aspenpitk
30 %wu7
Attachment 2
Activity Envelope (24" x 36")
30 !038
Attachment 3
Activity Envelope (11" x 17 ")
Ju 1 ��.
11
L
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
CHANGE TANK
CONSTRUCTION SITE
INCREASE (0.6 ACRES)
APPROVED ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
AT TANK SITE (TO BE CHANGED)
1
PRELIMINARY
NOT
FOR
CONSTRUCTION
6
SCHMUESER I GORC
STOCKPILE AREA
SIDE TANK LOCATION
CONTOURS _ _ S 89 '46'4 7"W_
- D CONTOURS F — 973.45"
EXISTING ACCESS ROA�
APPROVED ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINE
i
2
ml�
ENVELOPE
GORDON MEYER
CGLORA00 (970) 923 - C727
o 5U . CO (9 701 349-535
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
ACTIVITY
N89'46'491
174.46'
O
kCTIVITY ENVELOPE CHANGE:
TIE -IN ADDITIONS
(0.3 ACRES)
so ��
o�
_j
PRIVATE PROPERTY N8_9 5 8 'W
- - - -- 1012.49 " - --
Town of Basalt
South Side Tank
N �
APPROVED ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
(TO BE CHANGED)
\ACTIVITY ENVELOPE CHANGE.
\ ROAD ADJUSTMENT (0.0 ACRES)
ROARING — - _ _
FORK RE -1 PROPERTY _ _ N89 30 "W
7382.71"
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE CHANGE.
SWITCH BACK AREA ADDITION (0.09 ACRES)
° ATTACHMENT 3
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
JU AiV1
Attachment 4
Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners Approval 1
JU J °U11
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY,
COLORADO, APPROVING THE TOWN OF BASALT ACTIVITY ENVELOPE, SITE PLAN,
AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR A MAJOR PUBLIC UTILITY
Resolution No. Off-2009
RECITALS
1. The Town of Basalt (hereafter the "Applicant') submitted an application to the Pitkin County Board
of County Commissioners (hereafter the "BOCC") to construct a I million gallon water tank on an
area of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land. This proposal includes the request to expand an
existing two track road leading up to the tank that traverses private property and burial of the water
line servicing the tank within the access road.
2. The subject property (Owned by Richard Downey) is located just west of the Town of Basalt boundary
off South Side drive. The BLM land where the lank site is proposed is just west of the subject property.
Both the subject lot and the BLM land are zoned AR -10. The subject property is approximately 26 acres
(Legal Descriptions — Exhibit A).
3. The Applicant has commenced condemnation proceedings to secure an easement across the subject
lot. The condemnation is currently under protest.
4. The BOCC finds that a major public utility is a special review use in the AR -10 zone district. Special
Review criteria have been reviewed and the BOCC finds that the proposal meets these criteria.
S. The BOCC further finds that the proposal meets the criteria for Activity Envelope and Site Plan Review.
Visual mitigation has been provided through a detailed report that, if implemented, will greatly reduce
the impact of the tank.
6. The BOCC reviewed the application at a duly noticed public hearing on September 23, 2009, at
which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners
that it does hereby approve the Town of Basalt Activity Envelope, Site Plan Review, and Special Review
for a Major Public Utility request for construction of a I million gallon water tank and access road,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made during the application process and
consider those conditions of approval.
2. Prior to recordation of the Activity Envelope and Site Plan, the Applicant shall provide proof of
approval from the BLM for the additional disturbance areas outside of 16' for the access road.
3. Prior to recordation of the Activity Envelope and Site Plan, the Applicant shall document the completion
of the condemnation for the access road to the Community Development Director.
4. Prior to submission of any future earthmoving permit applications, the Applicant shall be required to
submit for approval by the County Attorney and Community Development an Activity Envelope and
Site Plan in accordance with Land Use Application Manual Section 2.1.12. The above referenced
approvals shall be a condition precedent to finalization ara
RECEPTIONM: 564644,11119/2009 at
12:29:44 PM,
1 OF 29, R $0.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION
Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO I
BOCC Resolution No.07 2009
Page 2 of 3
5. Because of the close proximity to sensitive elk and mule deer habitat, dogs are prohibited during
construction. Construction shall be limited to dates from June 1 to October 15.
6. Prior to permit submittal, the Applicant shall document that $10,000 was allocated to the CDOW
habitat mitigation fund.
7. Any tree(s) 6" d.b.h. or greater that are removed shall be mitigated for pursuant to Section 7 -20 -10 of
the Code.
8. The January 2008 Visual Mitigation Plan that outlines techniques for lessening the impact of the tank
shall be strictly adhered to (Exhibit B).
9. The Applicant shall apply for and obtain an Access Permit for the access driveway to the tank. The
permit application shall include:
a. Compliance with all of the Basalt Fire Dept. requirements.
b. The road shall be reclaimed to a two track road upon project completion. Top soil shall be
spread on the road surface, filling in the spaces between the gravel and then a seed mix shall
be spread. The seed mix shall contain species found in the native areas adjacent to the site
and appropriate species selection shall be coordinated with a plant specialist.
c. The Applicant shall show that all drainage crossings have been adequately engineered.
10. A detailed revegetation plan shall be submitted at earthmoving permit submittal. Plan shall be
reviewed and approved by Pitkin County Community Development. The plan shall comply with the
practices outlined in the attached Basalt Water Tank Visual Mitigation Plan dated January 2008 and
be implemented at the completion of the project. Financial security may be required to insure
complete revegetation and compliance with all screening requirements for up to 5 years.
11. A detailed drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted with each development permit. If the
development disturbs one (1) acre or more a State Stotmwater Permit shall be applied for and
obtained. All historical drainage patterns shall be maintained.
12. The Applicant shall submit a detailed Construction Management Plan. The plan shall include the
following:
a. Proper access to the site, through school grounds.
b. All phases of construction. A temporary commercial use permit shall be obtained for
construction staging on neighboring properties.
13. All retaining walls and/or wall systems over four (4) feet in height shall be engineered.
14. Winter maintenance of the access road to the water tank shall be the minimum required to allow safe
access.
15. No development shall occur outside the approved envelope. No structures shall be permitted outside
of the approved activity envelope. Applicant shall be required to obtain an Earthmoving Permit for
any work outside the approved envelope.
IN
16. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or other construction activity, the Applicant shall stake
the corners of the activity envelope and install construction fencing around the construction site
within the perimeter of the activity envelope. The fencing shall remain in place until the completion
of the project.
BOCC Resolution No. 0� 2009
Page 3 of 3
17. Failure to comply with these conditions of approval may result in revocation of this permit or any
subsequent permits related to this property or vested rights associated with this property.
18. Statutory vested rights for the approval contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitkin County
Land Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitkin County Land Use
Code, § 2 -20 -170 and C.R.S., § 24 -68 -105. The statutory vested rights granted herein shall expire on
September a 3 J= at
NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES
WEEKLY ON THE 23th DAY OF AUGUST, 2009.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on the 23 day of September, 2009.
PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE ASPEN
TIMES WEEKLY ON // ' f a I
ATTEST:
John Ely,
County.Attorney
PIDN 2467 - 183-04001 and Case P073 -09
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
Pan
Dan
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
Cindy Houben,
Community Development Director
ry �_C ,( h
Ju
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Attachment 5
Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners Approval 2
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING THE TOWN OF BASALT MINOR
AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
Administrative Decision No. (a-2009
The Town of Basalt (hereafter the "Applicant') has applied to the Pitkin County Community
Development Director ( "Director") for a minor amendment to a development permit to allow minor,
temporary construction activity during a time period that was prohibited due to the sensitivity of the
area for elk and deer. Temporary construction activity proposed includes a vegetation survey of trees in
the area and the use a drilling rig to drill three (3) bore holes of a 30' to 40' depth to evaluate soil types.
For the drill rig to access the tank site, the existing trail is proposed to be widened using a dozer.
2. The subject property (Owned by Richard Downey) is located just west of the Town of Basalt boundary
off South Side drive. The BLM land where the tank site is proposed is just west of the subject property.
Both the subject lot and the BLM land are zoned AR -10. The subject property is approximately 26
acres (Legal Descriptions — Exhibit A).
3. The Town of Basalt recently received approval for an Activity Envelope, Site Plan, and Special Review
for a Major Public Utility for construction of a water tank that will service the citizens of Basalt
pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 79 -2009 recorded at Reception No. 564644. The Activity Envelope
and Site Plan have yet to be recorded.
4. BOCC resolution No. 079 -2009 stipulated in condition #5 that construction activity shall take place
from June 1 to October 15. This condition was placed in the resolution because of the close proximity
to sensitive elk and mule deer habitat. The Colorado Division of Wildlife has commented on the
current proposal for temporary construction during this time period and states that the above
mentioned activity in Recital #1 above may occur but must be completed before December I, 2009.
5. The Applicant has successfully complied with conditions #2 and #3 of BOCC Resolution. The Town of
Basalt's possession of the easement for access to the tank site is subject to Pitkin County, CO District
Court Case # P09CV75 and Notice of Deposit with the Court Registry dated November 9, 2009 subject
to transaction #27735730. Use of Bureau of Land Management land is subject to Right of Way Grant
Serial Number C00070774.
6. The Director finds that the Applicant has addressed Section 2- 20- 150(b) of the Code and has shown
compliance with these standards.
THE DIRECTOR DOES HEREBY APPROVE the Town of Basah Minor Amendment to a
Development Permit, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on
all successors in interest:
1. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made during the application process.
2. All conditions of BOCC Resolution No. 079 -2009 shall remain in effect except for the following
change no condition #5:
RECEPTION #: 564761, 11/25/2009 at
07:59:36 AM,
1 OF 4, R $0.00 Doc Code ADMIN
DECISION
Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
Administrative Decision No. IDZ 2009
Page 2
a. Temporary construction activity in the form of a vegetation survey, widening of the
existing trail for a drill rig, and boring for soil types may occur prior to November 30, 2009.
Activity and equipment must halt and be removed from the area before December 1.
3. Failure to comply with the conditions of this approval may result in revocation of this approval, or
any subsequent permit(s) or approval(s) related to the Lot, or vested rights associated with the Lot.
APPROVED by the Director, this 19 day of Nd it , 2009.
M
Cindy Houben, Community Development Director
P122 -09
PID# 2467- 193 -00 -001
1
f •,:
H
, 3 u ;'j1?
Attachment 6
Bureau of Land Management Right of Way Grant
jg.,0is
Form 2800 -14 Issuing Office
(August 1985) Glenwood Springs Field Office
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
RIGHT -OF -WAY GRANT
SERIAL NUMBER C00070774
A right -of -way is hereby granted pursuant to Title V of the Federal land Policy and
Management Act of October 21, 1976 (90 Stat. 2776; 43 U.S.C. 1761).
2. Nature of Interest:
a. By this instrument, the holder:
Town of Basalt
101 Midland Ave
Basalt, CO 81621
receives a right to construct, operate, maintain, and terminate a municipal water tank and
related access road and pipeline on public lands described as follows:
6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County. Colorado
T. 8 S., R. 86 W.
Section 18; Lot 23
And as shown on the attached map in Exhibit A.
b. The right -of -way area granted herein is 20' X 852' for the access road and buried
pipeline, and 1 Million Gallon Water tank containing 1.31 acres, more or less.
C. This instrument shall terminate on December 31. 2038 , unless, prior thereto, it
is relinquished, abandoned, terminated, or modified pursuant to the terms and
conditions of this instrument or of any applicable Federal law or regulation.
d. This instrument may be renewed. If renewed, the right -of -way or permit shall be
subject to the regulations existing at the time of renewal and any other terms and
conditions that the authorized officer deems necessary to protect the public
interest.
Page 34 of 43
JU )14M
e. Notwithstanding the expiration of this instrument or any renewal thereof, early
relinquishment, abandonment, or termination, the provisions of this instrument, to
the extent applicable, shall continue in effect and shall be binding on the holder,
its successors, or assigns, until they have fully satisfied the obligations and/or
liabilities accruing herein before or on account of the expiration, or prior
termination, of the grant.
3. Rental: For and in consideration of the rights granted, the holder agrees to pay the
Bureau of Land Management fair market value rental as determined by the
authorized officer unless specifically exempted from such payment by regulation.
Provided, however, that the rental may be adjusted by the authorized officer,
whenever necessary, to reflect changes in the fair market rental value as
determined by the application of sound business management principles, and so
far as practicable and feasible, in accordance with comparable commercial
practices. Rental was determined by the DOI, Appraisal Services Directorate to
be $1824.00 annually, or $14,924.00 25 year advance payment
4. Terms and Conditions:
a. This grant is issued subject to the holder's compliance with all applicable
regulations contained in Title 43 Code of Federal Regulations part 2800, and all
other applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and standards.
b. Upon grant termination by the authorized officer, all improvements shall be
removed from the public lands within 90 days, or otherwise disposed of as
provided in paragraph (4)(d) or as directed by the authorized officer.
C. Each grant issued for a term of 20 years or more shall, at a minimum, be reviewed
by the authorized officer at the end of the 20th year and at regular intervals
thereafter not to exceed 10 years. Provided, however, that a right -of -way or
permit granted herein may be reviewed at any time deemed necessary by the
authorized officer.
d. The plans, maps, and designs set forth in the Application, the map in Exhibit A,
and Special Stipulations and Condition in Exhibit B, attached hereto, are
incorporated into and made a part of this grant instrument as fully and effectively
as if they were set forth herein in their entirety.
e. Failure of the holder to comply with applicable law or any provision of this right -
of -way grant or permit shall constitute grounds for suspension or termination
thereof.
f The holder shall perform all operations in a good and workmanlike manner so as
to ensure protection of the environment and the health and safety of the public.
Page 35 of 43
Attachment 7
Private Property Easement Grant
PrrKlN COUNTY, COLORADO :DISTRICT COURT
Court Address: Pitkin County Courthouse
506 East Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone Number: 970 -925 -7635
Plaintlff(s): TOWN OF BASALT
vs.
Defendant(s): RICHARD E. DOWNEY; RADINE
COOPERSMITH; GREENBERG, HERRINGER &
WARD, LLC; and BETTY DILLER, Trustee and
Treasurer of Archuleta County
Case Number: P09CV75
Div.: 3
This matter comes before the Court upon Plaintiff's motion for immediate possession and
Defendant Coopersmith's related motion to dismiss. The Court has considered the evidence and
argument presented at the hearing, the supplemental record authorized by the Court on
September 25, 2009, and the pertinent pleadings, and the Court is otherwise fully advised.
Therefore, the Cant finds, concludes and orders as follows:
1. This is a condemnation case. Defendants Richard Downey and Radine Coopersmith
(collectively Owners) own a 25 -acre parcel (the Property) adjacent to the west boundary of a
parcel occupied by Basalt High School and owned by Plaintiff the Town of Basalt. Basalt seeks
to condemn an easement across the Property. Basalt proposes to install a new water tank to
become part of Basalt's municipal water system. The proposed location for the tank is on
property owned by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. A proposed water pipeline will
connect the tank to existing Basalt water lines on the site of the Basalt High School. The parcel
owned by Downey and Coopersmith lies between the tank site and the high school site. The
easement proposed for condemnation will be for the water line, including its construction,
maintenance and repair and for access to the water tank, including for its construction,
maintenance and repair.
2. As part of the condemnation process, Basalt seeks immediate possession of the easement
area. To obtain immediate possession, the Basalt bears the burden of proof on five elements:
a. Basalt has the legal authority to condemn the property. See Board v.
Intermountain Rural Electric Ass''u, 655 P.2d 831 (Colo. App. 1982)..
b. Basalt seeks the Property for a proper public purpose. See Denver West Metro
Dist._ V. Guedner, 786 P.2d 434, 436 (Colo. App. 1989).
JU �j'�',12 Z
Town of Basalt v. Downey
Case No. P 09 CV 75
c. Basalt needs the Property immediately. See Swift v,., Smith 201 P.2d 609, 615
(Colo. 1948).
d. " Before filing this case, Basalt negotiated in good faith to acquire the Property.
See City v. Farmers Reservoir & Irrimtion Co. 575 P.2d 382, 391 -92 (Colo.
1978).
e. A sum to be deposited in the Court's registry is sufficient to pay the amount
which will likely be due after the compensation due Owners is determined. § 38-
1-105(6)(a), C.R.S.
3. With respect to the pipeline aspect of Basalt's condemnation request, Basalt must also
show the proposed easement falls within "the most direct route practicable" and if adjacent
utility rights -of -way exist, they have been considered. § 38- 1-.101.5, C.ILS. This standard.does
not apply to the access aspect of the easement Basalt seeks. Nor does it apply to Basalt's
selection of the site it desires for the water tank. In general terms, for condemnations other than
pipelines, if Basalt has a proper public purpose, the town has the authority to pursue
condemnation of any location where it decides to implement that public purpose.
4. Authority to condemn: Basalt is a town and has statutory authority to exercise the power
of eminent domain. § 38.1- 202(d), (e), C.R.S.
5. Public Purpose: The mayor and the town engineer for Basalt testified. They confirmed
that Basalt needs the water tank to correct a deficiency in the town's water system and that
Basalt needs the access and pipeline easement across the Property to connect the tank to Basalt's
existing water system. This is a proper public purpose.
6. Immediate Need: Among Basalt's specific purposes is its desire to establish a water
supply on the south side of the Roaring Fork River and Highway 82. This new supply will be in
the form of a new water storage tank. At present, the entire water supply is on the north side
leaving the south side at some risk if the water connections across the river and the highway
were compromised. For the entire water system to function by gravity, as intended, the new tank
must be installed at the same elevation as Basalt's existing water tanks. This limits the locations
where the new tank practically can be placed. The tank site selected is an appropriate site.
7. Since the Property is located between the new tank site and the existing water system,
Basalt has shown a need for an access and pipeline easement across the Property.
8. The tank site is located on BLM property. The preponderance of the evidence indicated
the BLM will not grant the approval necessary for the water tank until and unless Basalt obtains
a connecting easement such as the one sought here. The exact time when construction might
begin is uncertain, but Basalt. must obtain governmental approvals and an easement before
construction can begin. Basalt desires to begin construction when weather permits. Basalt needs
access before construction can begin. The final design of the pipeline cannot be completed
without access for some geotechnical investigation. Basalt also needs access so that appropriate
VU.lt 23
2
3':'.
Town of Barak v. Downey
Can No. P 09 CV 75
contractors can prepare bids for Basalt to consider. Basalt has shown a sufficiently immediate
need to support its request for immediate possession.
9. Good faith negotiation: The condemnation statute authorizes the filing of a
condemnation case only if the proper compensation "cannot be agreed upon by the parties
interested." § 38 -1- 102(1), C.R.S. To meet this prerequisite, Basalt must show it negotiated in
good faith to acquire the Property.
10. In case law, good faith for condemnation purposes has a narrow definition. The burden is
met by showing the condemning authority made a "reasonable good faith offer" and allowed the
property owner a "sufficient" amount of time to respond City of Thornton v. Farmer Reservoir
& Irrigation Co.. 194 Colo. 526, 539, 575 P.2d 382, 392 (1978). In City of Thornton the
condemning authority made a written offer and asked for a response within 15 days. The
defendant irrigation company considered the offer at a shareholders' meeting about one month
after the original written offer. The company did not respond to the offer. The trial court found
the company did not intend to negotiate and concluded there had been a failure to agree. The
City of Thornton commenced the condemnation case 11 days after the shareholders meeting
(about six weeks after the original offer). The Supreme Court upheld this finding and
conclusion.
11. In the context of condemnation, good faith does not require lengthy negotiations. Good
faith does not require face -to -face negotiations. Sheridan Redevelopment Agency v.
Knightsbridge Land Co.. L.L.C.. 166 P.3d259, 266 (Colo. App. 2007).
12. The use of a professional appraiser to establish the amount of an offer is a factor in .
evaluating good faith. City of Holvoke v. Schlachter Farms, R1.L.P.. 22 P.3d 960,963-964
.(Colo. App. 2001).
13. The amount offered by a condemning authority is also a factor in evaluating good faith.
However, a low offer is not dispositive of that evaluation. Board of County Commissioners v.
Blosser. 844 P.2d 1237, 1240 (Colo. App. 1992). In Blosser. the trial court concluded the
condemning authority's appraisal and offer were flawed because they failed to take into account
certain costs and the effect of those costs on the remainder of the owner's property. Based on
this conclusion, the trial court found the condemning authority failed to negotiate in good faith;
the trial court dismissed the case. The Court of Appeals held the trial court erred. The
condemning authority made an offer which was not rejected, accepted or countered for the two
intervening months before the condemnation case was filed. The Court of Appeals found the
trial court's factual conclusions speculative.
14. Here, the Owners' Property is subject to an option to purchase held by an entity, Roaring
Fork River Development, LLC, whose principal at the relevant times was Fiore. With authority
under the option agreement, Fiore has pursued development approvals from Basalt for years.
Basalt's initial communications about the easement it now seeks were made with Fiore. Basalt.
assumed incorrectly that Fiore could act on behalf of Owners with respect to the easement.
Jul If �t
Town of Basalt Y. Downey
Case No. P 09 CV 75
15. As a consequence, Basalt had no direct communication with Owners for a long time after
Basalt became interested in extending its water system through the Property. Though
unintentional, this failure of communication aggravated the situation as it later developed.
16. Nevertheless, Basalt did convey its purchase offers to Owners. The first purchase offer
was dated September 23, 2008, Exhibit F. It was based on a March 2007 appraisal which valued
the easement at $40,500. This offer was mailed to both Downey and Coopersmith at Downey's
address. Downey and Coopersmith are former spouses, and the joint address was the last address
known to Basalt. Downey received the offer on September 30. In response to his receipt of the
offer, Downey advised Basalt that his address was not correct for Coopersmith. Downey's
counsel .provided to Basalt contact. information for Coopersmith. On October 30,2008, Basalt
forwarded the offer to Coopersmith at the new address provided. Exhibit J. The return receipt
indicates this.letter was received on November 10, 2008 by Ms. McCulloch, described on the
return receipt as an agent for Coopersmitlt
17. As noted by Coopersmith, delivery in fact to her did not occur on November 10, 2008.
However, she did have the offer at least by the time she discussed it by telephone with the town
engineer Thompson and manager Efting on December 8, 2008. In that conversation,
Coopersmith asked about the possibility of getting land use approvals in exchange for the
easement. She also advised Thompson she would like to engage in further discussion about the
location of the easement. She advised Thompson about the ownership dispute between
Coopersmith and Downey through Coopersmith's challenge of orders in the divorce court. .
Coopersmith did not accept the offer. She did not make a counteroffer.
18. Coopersmith talked with Basalt's mayor by telephone in early December 2008.
Coopersmith advised the mayor that she was concerned about the easement and the town's lack
of communication. Basalt referred her to the town manager leading to the conversation
described above.
19. Basalt obtained a second appraisal, Exhibit M. That led to a'second offer, Exhibit N, a
lower offer based upon the second appraisal which valued the easement at $25,000 as of January
13, 2009. The second . offer stated a condemnation action would be commenced if Basalt did not
receive a response within a "reasonable time. Basalt mailed the offer to both Coopersmith and
Downey at Basalt's then understanding of the parties' addresses. The evidence is.in conflict
whether Coopersmith actually received the second offer. One notation on Exhibit N' indicates
the letter was returned "unclaimed." However, the notation is on the letter, not the envelope
which would have been accessible to the postal service. A tracking report from the postal
service indicates the offer was delivered on February 10, 2009. Basalt received no responses to
the second offer. In the time after the second offer, if Coopersmith was not aware of it, she still
did not respond to the first offer which would have remained outstanding if the second offer was
not made. By a preponderance of the evidence, the Court finds both parties received the second
offer.
a
3U :u25
Town of Basalt Y. Downey
Case No.. P 09 CV 75
20. Like Coopersmith, Downey was concerned about the location selected for the easement.
Downey did not have a particular objection to the price offered if the easement were moved to a
different location. To the extent potential negotiation was complicated by the strained
relationship between Coopersmith and Downey, that is an issue between Coopersmith and
Downey and does not change materially Basalt's obligation of good faith since both offers were
ultimately delivered to both Owners.
21. The issue before the Court is not whether Basalt might have addressed its desire for an
easement in a manner which would have led to a better relationship,with Owners or led to
resolution by agreement. The issue is whether Basalt's approach was sufficient to constitute
good faith as that term is defined by case law applicable to this condemnation. By a
preponderance of the -evidence, the Court concludes Basalt did satisfy this standard. A first. offer
was made which both Owners received by not later than early December 2008. The offer was
equal to the value of the easement as determined by a 2007 appraisal. A second offer was made
in early February 2009. Although lower, the offer was equal to the value of the easement as
determined by a more recent appraisal. Basalt filed this condemnation action in early April
2009. In the intervening four months from receipt of the first offer, Owners did not accept the
first offer (or the second offer made in February 2009) and did not make a counteroffer. The
offers were based on appraisals and were reasonable. These circumstances are sufficient to
satisfy the requirement of good faith as defined by law.
22. Appraisal requirement: Section 38 -1 -121, C.R.S. required Basalt to notify Owners of its
desire to acquire the easement "as soon as a condemning . authority determines that it intends to
acquire an interest in property." As applicable here, the notice is required to include notice that
Basalt would pay for an appraisal obtained by the Owners within 90 days of the notice. Basalt
provided the notice about the appraisal by letter dated May 26, 2009, Exhibit R, a date after
Basalt had made its two offers and after this condemnation case had been filed. Basalt was tardy
in notifying Owners about their right to an independent appraisal at the Town's expense.
However, the required notice was given, and Owners obtained an appraisal pursuant to that right. .
23. Although Owners indicate they remain willing to discuss the easement Basalt desires,
through the final day of the hearing, Owners have never made a counteroffer as to either location
or the amount of compensation.
24. The Court concludes the late notice about Owners' right to an appraisal is not a defect
which defeats the Court's jurisdiction or defeats the Court's finding that Basalt met its obligation
of good faith.
25. Need for Ordinance or Resolution: The parties disagree whether Basalt was required to
authorize acquisition of the easement by a formal resolution or ordinance. Basalt adopted such a
resolution, Exhibit A, on August 25, 2009. Among other things, the resolution approved
retroactively the acquisition of the easement and the pursuit of this condemnation action. The
patties have offered no law which indicates such a resolution is a jurisdictional prerequisite to
v ) : 1L.
Town. of Basalt v. Downey
Case No. P 09 CV 75
the filing of a condemnation action. If an error occurred, it has been rectified, and the issue is
now moot.
26. Alternative routes: Basalt's mayor confirmed no existing public easements connect the
school site to the vicinity of the water tank. No such easement exists on the property offering the
shortest route, that is, the Owners' Property here. Nor does such an easement exist on the
Grange property located immediately to the north of the Property. Nor does such an easement
exist on BLM property located immediately to the south of the Property.
27. On the Owners' Property, the route selected by Basalt first travels north following an
existing unimproved road generally along the east boundary of the Property. Then, the route
turns west and generally goes along an existing track on a bench in the hillside.. Basalt picked
this route for several reasons: First, it follows an existing track, albeit one that drops from
unimproved road to a double vehicle track to a single path to a vague historic trail. Second, in
the opinion of Basalt, the route will have the. least visual impact from the Highway 82 area.
Third, the route requires less disturbance of slopes and vegetation and avoids the steep grades
which would be required in other locations.
28. An alternative discussed in the evidence was to cross the Property near its northern
boundary, a flat meadow area, and then turn to ascend the hillside to the tank site. Basalt rejects
this possibility because of the steepness of the slope, the dense vegetation on that slope and the
unobstructed visual impact
29. The town also rejected other sites for the water tank, sites which might place the.
connecting pipeline somewhere other than the Owners' Property. At the required elevation, the
BLM property directly south of the school does not have a site suitable for the water tank. The
property to the north or northwest drops toward the Roaring Fork and does not have a suitable
tank site. A possible tank site on the Owners' Property would have a greater visual impact on
Basalt and highway 82. Minimizing visual impact was a factor in Basalt's site selection. Basalt
also understands visual impact to be a factor in the approvals Basalt needs from Pitkin County
and from the BLM:
34. No adjacent utility easements exist. The preponderance of the evidence indicates Basalt
seeks to condemn the most direct route practicable.
31. Absence of BLM permit and Pitkin County approval: At the. time of the hearing, Basalt.
had not received the permit it needs from the BLM to install the water tank. The record
indicated the permit process is underway, and it is more likely than not that the permit will be
issued. Nor had Basalt obtained the land use approval it needs from Pitkin County. The
supplemental record authorized by the Court revealed that Pitkin County subsequently granted
the necessary land use approval. However, the approval is not final because one or both
Defendants indicate they are pursuing an appeal of the Pitkin County approval.
0 7
Town of Basalt v. Downey
Case No. P 09 CV 75
32. The absence. of these final government approvals is relevant to, but not dispositive of,
Basalt's request for immediate possession. If Basalt were unable to obtain required
governmental approvals, the water tank project might not go forward. If the project cannot go
forward, the public purpose upon which Basalt relies would disappear. Consequently, as noted
in Public Service Co. v. Shaklee 784 P.2d 314, 317 n.3 (Colo. 1989), the likelihood the permits
will be obtained is a factor in the evaluation of public purpose.
33. Here, it is more likely than not that the required governmental approvals will be obtained.
Basalt has met its burden of proof to show a public purpose. The absence of final governmental
approvals does not defeat Basalt's authority to proceed with the condemnation.
34. Deposit :. Ina condemnation action, the purpose of.the.required.degosit.is to protect the..
land owner's ability to collect the compensation ultimately awarded. The condemnation statute
does not require that the deposit be equal to the compensation ultimately awarded. Rather, the
condemnation statute requires that the deposit be "sufficient ... to pay the compensation ...
when ascertained." § 38- 1- 105(6xa), C.R.S. The sufficient sum is to be based upon competent
evidence of the market value of the property. Swift v. Smith 119 Colo. 126, 138, 201 P.2d 609,
615 (1949).
35. Where less than the entire property is taken, compensation must include any damages to
the residue of the property. § 38- 1- 114(2), C.R.S. Here, less than the entire property is being
taken.
36. The valuation difference in the appraisals is large. The Town's first appraisal established
a value for the easement of $40,500. The Town's second appraisal established a value of
$25,000.
37. The Town's first appraisal provided opinions about other values, including the fee simple
value of the hillside portion of the Property if subject to the easement, $500,000.
38. Owners' appraisal, Exhibit 8, states an opinion about the proper amount of compensation
in condemnation. The opinion addresses the value of the easement and damages to the
remainder of the Property. The valuation date is August 10, 2009. Owners' appraisal values the
easement area at $68,818 and the damages to the remainder at $540,770.
39. The key difference between the appraisals is the effect of the easement on the remainder
of the Property. The Town's appraisals did not evaluate the effect Therefore, it is given no
value. The Town's appraisals simply value the specific land to be encumbered by the easement.
40. Owners' appraisal values the impact of the easement on the value of the entire Property.
The bench to be traversed by the easement is a bench above the Roaring Fork valley floor. The
bench is large enough to construct home sites. The bench is the most valuable portion of the
Property for residential development, in light of the luxury homes most amenable to the
7
�U ins
Town ofBasalt v. Downey
Case No. P 09 CV 75
location, the existence of an easement, particularly the surface access aspect of the easement,
will reduce the value of the Bench for residential development.
41. The Court finds Owners' appraisal more accurately addresses the measure of
compensation Basalt may have to pay. Owners' appraisal is the most credible evidence of the
sum which will be sufficient to pay compensation when the amount is determined.
42. Since the condemnation includes a pipeline easement, Basalt's deposit must also include
double the estimated cost of restoring the easement area after the pipeline is installed. §38-1-
IG1.5, C.R.S. Town.engincer Thompson estimated the cost of restoration at $15,000. Therefore,
in addition to depositing an amount sufficient to pay compensation when it is determined, Basalt
must deposit an. additional $30,000. .. .
43. Coopersmith suggested even higher values. Coopersmith's argument is based on Fiore's
opinions about the potential retail sale values of luxury lots on the Bench. Fiore's opinions .
presumed an approved subdivision with the infrastructure which makes a luxury lot ready for
sale. Present fair market value of the interest condemned and the impact on the remainder in its
present state as a single, raw parcel will be the measure of compensation in this condemnation
action. Fiore's opinions are not directly relevant to the present issue,, the proper amount of a
deposit.
44. The possibility that Basalt has picked the most valuable portion of the Owners' Property
for the easement may affeet the future determination of the compensation due and the cost to
Basalt of the easement It does not defeat Basalt's decision to condemn the particular route .
Basalt seeks.
45. The Court fords the deposit sufficient to pay compensation is $610,000 and the deposit
sufficient to restore the easement area is $30,000. Therefore, the Court finds the deposit
necessary to grant immediate possession is $640,000.
46. Motion to Dismiss: In her motion to dismiss, Coopersmith alleges a number of defects in
the condemnation process pursued by Basalt. Of the defects alleged, the one which is a
prerequisite to the filing of a condemnation petition is the requirement that Basalt engage in good
faith negotiations to purchase the Property by agreement. The Court has concluded above that
Basalt fulfilled this requirement. Therefore, the motion to dismiss is denied.
H
a llv�9.
Town of Basalt v. Downey
Case No. P 09 CV 75
47. Immediate Possession: Plaintiff shall deposit into the registry of the Court the sum of
$640,000. Upon that deposit, Plaintiff shall be entitled to the immediate possession and use of
the easement area at issue in this case. The easement is fully described in Exhibit A attached to
this order and incorporated here as a finding and order of the Court.
Done on October 26, 2009.
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
9
13Y THE COURT:
Attachment 8
Legal Descriptions
• Basalt High School Property: Utility Easement Legal
Description and Exhibit Map
• Private Property: Access & Utility Easement Legal
Description and Exhibit Map
• Bureau of Land Management Property: Pitkin County
1041 Land Use Application Revised Activity Envelope
Legal Description and Exhibit Map
Jo if,'31
Exhibit Map
Basalt High School
Utility Easement
Pitkin County, Colorado
Grcvge Parcel
Fod. l land Mon.
General COnd ONitt
Bross Cop, 7 bio. pipe
Stomped API hoct 59
589'46''47
Fnd. Survel•
Aluminum COP, 5/8
Stamped LS 1
� n
w
O
J
0
o
0
m
m
0
0
BLM
pant
Begin
Lit
1
Point
Begin
25' Utility Easement
Point c
awn L6
Basalt High School Parcel
Book 756, Page 34
Pitkin County, Colorado
Saint ✓udes Company
LINE MBLE
LINE LENGTH W-i #Wv.
LI
1.114
517'f6 7 w
L2
174.94
N69
Li
276.40
1 '
LI
400.21
45
11363
$ 17j6w T
L6
68.0.7
54 ' '1 w
L7
14503
5 +2' '1 w
L8
51.4+
S422846V
L9
59.76
SI22846W
LIO
24.44
N4 29'41'W
Lit
51.J4
NJIYJ'
L12
41552
S4' '15W
L13
$8.67
N47J0'47W
L14
454.02
Nor ' W
L
1 20645
1 Nor 1
/ 0N M
1 I S 701945 ER GORDON MEYER, .' .. Exhibit
(,w I I B W. eiN $1NCCT, $ N 200
Gl[NwOOO $vnxl03. C0.0xw00 e 1 CO I 1/
100019x3 -IOOe 70 92 19201fl� }3940 ma
SCHMUE$ER MEYER (9
S' COt° . 07}9>z0 134;;
Cwc9*eo Bu*re. LO (9 00) 340-5355 , ne 9bp�7L1 Mr W9 G l,Soh nk
Not to
SCO/e
October 27, 2009
Basalt High School
Utility Easement
A strip of land entirely within Basalt High School Parcel as described in Book 756 at
Page 34; Section 18, Township 8 South, Range 86 West of the 6'" Principal Meridian all
in Pitkin County, Colorado and being more particularly described as follows:
Said strip of land being twenty -five feet (25') in width, extending twelve and one half
feet in width (12.5') on each side of the following described centerline, in such a manner
that the exterior boundary lines of said strip shall be lengthened or shortened as necessary
to form a continuous strip exactly twenty -five feet (25') in width as follows:
Easement 1 beginning at a point on the west line of said Basalt High School Parcel also
being a point on the easterly line of the Downey Parcel as recorded in Book 609 at Page
400 from whence the common north corner of said parcels bears N17 15"E a distance
of 13.14 feet with all bearings being relative to S89 °46'47 "W the line between found
monuments for the northeast comer of the Downey Parcel being a 5/8" rebar and
aluminum cap stamped LS 14060 and the northwest comer of said Downey Parcel a
1 "pipe with a General Land Office (GLO) brass cap stamped AP4, Tract 59; thence the
following two (2) courses along a line parallel to and exactly twelve and one half feet
(125) south of the northerly lines of said Basalt High School Parcel; N89 "E a
distance of 174.94 feet; thence S58 0 16'02 "E a distance of 278.41 feet to Point A; thence
S58 0 16'02 "E continuing along the line parallel to and twelve and one half feet south of
the northerly line of said Basalt High School Parcel a distance of 400.21 feet; thence
S17 °36'03 "E a distance of 113.65 feet; thence S42'50' 15"W a distance of 145.03 feet to
Point B; thence S42'50' 15"W a distance of 415.52 feet to Point C; thence N47 "W
a distance of 58.67 feet to Point D; thence N47 °30'47 "W a distance of 454.02 feet to
Point E; thence N47 °30'47 "W a distance of 206.45 feet to said west line of the Basalt
High School Parcel and easterly line of the Downey Parcel.
Together with the following easement spurs each being a strip of land twenty -five feet
(25') in width, extending twelve and one half feet in width (12.5') on each side of the
following described centerline, in such a manner that the exterior boundary lines of said
strip shall be lengthened or shortened as necessary to form a continuous strip exactly
twenty -five feet (25') in width as follows:
Spur A, beginning at Point A as described above, thence S31 °43'58 "W a distance of
51.34 feet;
Spur B, beginning at Point B as described above, thence N48 °29'4 1 "W a distance of
24.44 feet.
Spur C, beginning at Point C as described above, thence S42 0 50'15 "W a distance of
68.03 feet.
Spur D, beginning at Point D as described above, thence N42 a distance of
59.76 feet.
Spur E, beginning at Point E as described above, thence N42 °28'46 "E a distance of 51.44
feet.
Said easement contains 1.38 acres more or less a
encumbrances of record.
Ju . l 3 3 Q:\1990 \90040B- 324U»ghschool wl ease
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER
°i = i° " ^ - °
° "_'
°'° °E' 3 I'TE
200
..0. wx 219s
P.O. S was
E N 0 1 N E E R 3 S U R V E Y O R S
Ol4M2C0 SMIIMS. CO 31 O01
iSKx CA G 1612
CM31[O SVT[. CA 31221
8J09�5
9'1PD2 }OJLJ
OJO]19'5353
fF: 9JOD15 -5W0
i9: 070925-4I57
INt 9JOON3]53
October 27, 2009
Basalt High School
Utility Easement
A strip of land entirely within Basalt High School Parcel as described in Book 756 at
Page 34; Section 18, Township 8 South, Range 86 West of the 6'" Principal Meridian all
in Pitkin County, Colorado and being more particularly described as follows:
Said strip of land being twenty -five feet (25') in width, extending twelve and one half
feet in width (12.5') on each side of the following described centerline, in such a manner
that the exterior boundary lines of said strip shall be lengthened or shortened as necessary
to form a continuous strip exactly twenty -five feet (25') in width as follows:
Easement 1 beginning at a point on the west line of said Basalt High School Parcel also
being a point on the easterly line of the Downey Parcel as recorded in Book 609 at Page
400 from whence the common north corner of said parcels bears N17 15"E a distance
of 13.14 feet with all bearings being relative to S89 °46'47 "W the line between found
monuments for the northeast comer of the Downey Parcel being a 5/8" rebar and
aluminum cap stamped LS 14060 and the northwest comer of said Downey Parcel a
1 "pipe with a General Land Office (GLO) brass cap stamped AP4, Tract 59; thence the
following two (2) courses along a line parallel to and exactly twelve and one half feet
(125) south of the northerly lines of said Basalt High School Parcel; N89 "E a
distance of 174.94 feet; thence S58 0 16'02 "E a distance of 278.41 feet to Point A; thence
S58 0 16'02 "E continuing along the line parallel to and twelve and one half feet south of
the northerly line of said Basalt High School Parcel a distance of 400.21 feet; thence
S17 °36'03 "E a distance of 113.65 feet; thence S42'50' 15"W a distance of 145.03 feet to
Point B; thence S42'50' 15"W a distance of 415.52 feet to Point C; thence N47 "W
a distance of 58.67 feet to Point D; thence N47 °30'47 "W a distance of 454.02 feet to
Point E; thence N47 °30'47 "W a distance of 206.45 feet to said west line of the Basalt
High School Parcel and easterly line of the Downey Parcel.
Together with the following easement spurs each being a strip of land twenty -five feet
(25') in width, extending twelve and one half feet in width (12.5') on each side of the
following described centerline, in such a manner that the exterior boundary lines of said
strip shall be lengthened or shortened as necessary to form a continuous strip exactly
twenty -five feet (25') in width as follows:
Spur A, beginning at Point A as described above, thence S31 °43'58 "W a distance of
51.34 feet;
Spur B, beginning at Point B as described above, thence N48 °29'4 1 "W a distance of
24.44 feet.
Spur C, beginning at Point C as described above, thence S42 0 50'15 "W a distance of
68.03 feet.
Spur D, beginning at Point D as described above, thence N42 a distance of
59.76 feet.
Spur E, beginning at Point E as described above, thence N42 °28'46 "E a distance of 51.44
feet.
Said easement contains 1.38 acres more or less a
encumbrances of record.
Ju . l 3 3 Q:\1990 \90040B- 324U»ghschool wl ease
20' Access & Utility Easement
Tract 59, Section 18, T 8 S, R 86 W of the 6th PM
Pitkin County, Colorado
n
Found GLO I" Iron Pipe and Bross
Cop Mon. A.P- 4 Tract 59
973.45'
Basis of Bearings
Glowney Parcel
B 609, p 400 &
Rec. ,4 341119
0
N
a
20' Access & Point
Utility Easement
No. / \
za �
, a-
S89'09'54
1012.49
LINE TABLE
L20
LIVE
1£NGTN
BEARING
L1
65.J4
S43'J7'1 "
L2
1 06.27
5475746E
LJ
40.J7
53155'00E
L4
39, J5
523
L5
1758
560'OJ'77E
L6
61.04
N81'06OJE
L7
l3.43
58 1 *20 36 E
L8
86.70
565'52'1JE
L9
1 7J63
55736 45
L10
1 02.26
S733229E
C77
4217
56744'12 E'
L 12
76.25
548'19 52 E
L1J
95.41
553
L14
1 1JJ6
S537349E
L 15
1 2266
589'0938 E
L76
76.97
NJ3'1433'H'
L17
38.88
NIJ'12' 1Y
118
59.28
NJJ'2J'41 V
L19
1 70.22
15 W. 6 SPWV. 5une 200
EMw000 5'nitg5, C(1�o 51601
70) 945 -1004 F" (970) 945-55
�. Cttd (970) 925.6727
m Bu . CO (970) 349 -5355
Found f5 Rebor
and Aluminum Cap
L.S. 14060. \ N89'46'
4L 174.46'
to'
�l Basalt High
School
w
55.82'
20' Access &
— Utility Easement
No. 2
L25
L24
z
\a sCALE. 1'= 200'
Found /5 Rebar
and Yellow P/ashc
cap L.S. 1J166
L/N£ TABLE
L20
71.21
VO6'07'17'W
L21
101.45
N24 20 081Y
122
73.76
N1457'199Y
L2J
58.62
N41*02'0 1 1Y
L24
5J O2
S89'4333E
L25
J4.78
N75'1909E
L26
87.10
542' 4'1 W
Exhibit A
20' Access do Utility E asement
M xowarsa Pep J -4 -/0 Pew eX ra0 As rnM n+ t
S NOINEERS
SCHMUESER
!. CORDON I MEYER
t w. 0Y,, SQITE Zpp
F.c. 2 2155
no�2 c" ao""
E
b S U R V E Y O R S
a
"c"I ca "1!O
bKx co ! 1512
c—R. eun[ c0 G SSa
.7"9 I10p4
0709232721
fl)P3 <0.5J93
Flt: 97 452948
F 07P025 -4157
— 01P349'5255
20' Access and Utility Easement
Two strips of land located on a parcel of land described in Book 609 at page 400, Pitkin
County records, herein after referred to as the Downey Parcel, being located in Tract 59,
Section 18, '..ownship 8 South, Range 86 West of the 6`" P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado,
said strips bf:ing twenty (20) feet wide, ten (10) feet on each side of the following
described centerlines, with side lines being shortened or extended to meet parcel lines:
Access and Utility Easement No. 1
Beginning o t the westerly line of said Downey Parcel, from which a GLO brass cap
marking angle point 4 of Tract 59 bears N00'05'51 "W, 702.54 feet; thence along an
existing road or track the following 14 courses:
1) S43 °37'13'1, 65.34 feet
2) S47'57'46'E, 106.27 feet
3) S31 ° 55'00"E, 40.31 feet
4) S23 ° 18'36'1, 39.35 feet
5) S60 ° 03'17'E,17.58feet
6) N8 1'06'03"E, 61.04 feet
7) S81'20'36'T, 13.43 feet
8) S65 °52'13 "E, 86.70 feet
9) S57'36'45'T, 173.63 feet
10) S73 "32'29 "E, 102.26 feet
1 I) S67"44'1 2"E, 42.17 feet
12) S48 "19'52'7, 76.25 feet
13) S53 "23'40'7, 95.41 feet
14) S53 "13'49"E, 113.36 feet; thence departing said existing road or track
S89 0 09'58 "E" 122.66 feet, being 10 feet northerly and parallel to the southerly line of
said Downed Parcel, to a point on and thence continuing along the existing road or track
the followin,; eight (8) courses:
1) N33` 14'33 "W, 76.91 feet
2) N13` 12'32 "W, 38.88 feet
3) N33`23'41 "W, 59.28 feet
4) N19`02'02 "W, 170.22 feet
5) N06`07' 17 "W, 71.21 feet
6) N24`20'08 "W, 101.45 feet
7) N14` 57' 19 "W, 73.76 feet
8) N41`02'01"W, 58.62 feet to a Point A
thence departing said existing road or track N42'24' 18'T, 87.10 feet; thence
N17 3, 621.05 feet 10 feet westerly of and parallel to the northeasterly line of said
Downey Par=el to a point on the northerly line of said Downey Parcel, said point being
the Point of Terminus, said parcel containing 1.15 acres (50,285 sq. ft.), more or less.
Access and Utility Easement No. 2
Beginning al a point on the easterly line of said Downey Parcel from which the easterly
angle point of said Parcel bears N19'44' 14 "W, 55.82 feet; thence S75' 19'09 "W, 34.78
feet; thence :'489'43'33 "W, 53.02 feet to the aforementioned Point A, said point
being the Point of Terminus, said parcel containing 1399.59 square feet, more or less.
Bearings are based on the northerly line of said Downey Parcel between a brass cap GLO
monument marked AP 4, Tract 59, at the northwest comer and the northeast comer,
marked with a aluminum cap and #5 rebar marked LS 14060.
N89 "' - .
Q: \1990 \90040B- 324\road easement amended 3 -4- 2010.doc
3� J,
W
C:
Lot 21
Tract 62
932. 0
Found GLO 1" Iron Pipe and Brass EZ Map
Cap Mon. A.P. 4 Tract 59 SWUM 771 T 8 S. R W W the am w
S89'46'47 "W _ Paul 00mv. Colmude
973.45' Basis of Bearing ;! Found p5 \
' Rebor and \
\ Aluminum
Cap L.S.
\ 14060.
3!
\ Tract 59 '
;O
/� N N
Z Downey Property
p Book 609 Page 400
(A \
Oi , Found #5
f s Rebar and
O Aluminum
'g\ .. Cap L.S.
. 14060.
P.O.S. \ Basalt High School
Book 756 at Page
\ 34
ko
I N
\ 47.75
� •yam Found #5
� `•"y / 'L/� . \ P.O.s. Rebar and
'-A 1 1 Yellow Plastic
N89V9'58 "W \ 162.77{ Cap L.S.
13166
United States
Government
Bureau of Land
Management
Lot 23
Not to Scale
20' Access Easement No. 1
Lot 22
United States
Government
Bureau of Land
Management
20' Access Easement No. 2
Exhiba Map
20' Access Easement 8 Aclivi Envel a
Job A 800408 -3
118 w. 6n+ STREET, sLme 200
SCHMUESER (CORDON MEYER GLEN WOOD SPRINGS. CCLORADO B 16Ol
(970) 945 -) 004 FAX (970) 945-5948
ENGINEER 5 SURVEYORS AsPEN, COLORADO (970) 925-6727
CRESTED BU F, CO (970) 349
wn
Ora" b t
Basalt Tank Site Pitldn County, CO
Dew 05/21/
Revision:
File: nme to Sw AM
20' Access Easement No. 2
SCHMUESER I GORDON I MEYER
E N G I N E E R S I S U R V E Y O R S
Job# 9004OB -324
May 21, 2010
Basalt Tank Site
Activity Envelope
711.1.1001] 5PRHG5
I 18 WEST SIXTH STREET, SUITE 2O0
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
970.945. 1004
970.945.5948 Fnx
A Parcel of land located within Government Lots 21 and 23 owned by the US Government
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), being located in Section 18, Township 8 South, Range 86
West of the 6'" P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado
Beginning at a point fron which a found brass cap Government Land Office (GLO) monument
marked AP 4, Tract 59 at the Northwest corner of a Parcel of land described in Book 609 at
Page 400, Pitkin Counhl records, herein after referred to as the Downey Parcel bears
N59 "E a distance of 612.13 feet, with all bearings being based on a bearing of
N89 "E as found along the Northerly line of said Downey Parcel between a brass cap GLO
monument marked AP 4, Tract 59, at the Northwest corner and the Northeast corner, marked
with a aluminum cap and #5 rebar marked LS 14060; thence N29 "E a distance of 59.57
feet; thence N60 4"W a distance of 280.82 feet; thence N60 "W a distance of
280.082; thence S29 "W a distance of 75.69 feet to a point whence said brass cap GLO
monument marked AP 4, Tract 59 bears N77 1'22"E a distance of 932.64 feet; thence
S60 4"E a distance of 110.12 feet; thence N09 5"E a distance of 27.32 feet; thence
S37 "E a distance of 76.37 feet; thence N60 4'W a distance of 29.88 feet to the point
of beginning. Said Parcel contains 57,910 square feet or 1.329 acres more or less and is
subject to easements and encumbrances of record.
`^�
Q: \1990 \90040B - 324 \BI -M Access- Activity Env Esmt.doc of ft�r
/1SPEV
C ... T"U Hun'
GRnND J"."'.. MFFXFR
101 FOUNDERS PUCE, UNIT 102
407 FOURTH STREET
573 WEST CRETE CIRCLE 320 THIRD STREET
PO BOX 2155
PO BOX 3088
BUILDING 1, SUITE 205 MEENER. CO 81641
ASPEN, CO 81611
CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81224
GRMO JUNCTION, CO 81505 970.878.5180
970.925.6727
970.349.5355
970.245.2571 970.878.4181 Fm
970.925.4157 F•X
970.349.5358 Fix
970.245.2871 FAA
`^�
SCHMUESER I GORDON I MEYER
E N G I N E E R 5 1 S U R V E Y O R S
Job# 900406 -324
May 21, 2010
Basalt Tank Site
20' Access Easement No.
GLEN'N..D. SPHiNGS
118 WEST S.%. STREET, SUITE 200
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
970.945. 1004
970.945.5948 Fxx
A strip of land located within Government Lot 22 owned by the US Government Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), also being located in Section 18, Township 8 South, Range 86 West of the
O P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, said strip being twenty (20) feet wide, ten (10) feet on each
side of the following described centerlines, with side lines being shortened or extended to meet
parcel lines:
Beginning on the Northerly boundary line of said Government Lot 22, also being the Southerly
boundary line of a parcel of land described in Book 609 at Page 400, Pitkin County records,
herein after referred to as the Downey Parcel, whence the Southeast corner of said Downey
Parcel bears S89 0 09'58 "E a distance of 47.13 feet, with all bearings being based on a bearing
of N89 as found along the Northerly line of said Downey Parcel between a brass cap
Government Land Office (GLO) monument marked AP 4, Tract 59, at the Northwest corner and
the Northeast corner, marked with a aluminum cap and #5 rebar marked LS 14060; thence
along an existing road or track the following four (4) courses: S33'1 4'33"E a distance of 9.07
feet; thence 65.38 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 25.00 feet, a
central angle of 149 0 50'27" and subtending a chord bearing of S41 °40'41 "W a distance of 48.28
feet; thence N63 a distance of 94.13 feet; thence N53 a distance of 5.32 feet
to the point of terminus, said point being on the Northerly boundary line of said Government Lot
22, whence a found brass cap Government Land Office (GLO) monument marked AP 4, Tract
59, at the Northwest corner of said Downey Parcel bears N34 0 14'05' W a distance of 1514.08
feet. Said strip contains 3468 square feet or 0.08 acres more or less and is subject to
easements and encumbrances of record.
Q: \1990 \900406 - 324 \BLM Access - Activity Env Esmt.doc
l�sl=r n CRESTED 131111, GDANO JVNC110N
101 FOUNOERS PLACE. UNIT 102 407 FOURTH STREET 573 WEST CRETE CIRCLE
PO Box 2155
ASPEN. CO 8161 1
970.925.6727
970.925.4157 FM
PO Box 3088 BUILDING 1. SUITE 205
CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81224 GRAND JUNCTION. CO 81505
970.349.5355 970.245.2571
970.349.5358 FAx 970.245.2871 FM
MF f:xER
320 THIRD STREET
MEENER. CO 81641
970.878.5180
970.878.4181 Fm
0.4
SCHMUESER I GORDON I MEYER
E N 0 1 N E E R S I S U R V E Y O R 5
Job# 9004OB -324
May 21, 2010
Basalt Tank Site
20' Access Easement No. 2
GLEN'NVOO SIRIN.5
118 VEST SIXTH STREET. SUITE 200
GLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO R 1601
970.945. 1004
970.945.5948 Fu
A strip of land located within Government Lot 23 owned by the US Government Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), also being located in Section 18, Township 8 South, Range 86 West of the
6`" P. M., Pitkin County, Colorado, said strip being twenty (20) feet wide, ten (10) feet on each
side of the following described centerlines, with side lines being shortened or extended to meet
parcel lines:
Beginning on the Westerly boundary line of said Government Lot 23, also being the Easterly
boundary line of a parcel of land described in Book 609 at Page 400, Pitkin County records,
herein after referred to as the Downey Parcel, whence a found brass cap Government Land
Office (GLO) monument marked AP 4, Tract 59 at the Northwest corner of said Downey Parcel,
bears N00 "W a distance of 702.54 feet, with all bearings being based on a bearing of
N89 "E as found along the Northerly line of said Downey Parcel between a brass cap GLO
monument marked AP 4, Tract 59, at the Northwest corner and the Northeast corner, marked
with a aluminum cap and #5 rebar marked LS 14060; thence along an existing road or track the
following eighteen (18) courses: N48 "W a distance of 101.67 feet; thence N41 a
distance of 37.35 feet; thence N58 "W a distance of 56.89 feet; thence N73 "W a
distance of 38.10 feet; thence S75 "W a distance of 82.54 feet; thence S74 "W a
distance of 76.21 feet; thence N82 "W a distance of 7.20 feet; thence 50.63 feet along the
arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 90.00 feet, a central angle of 32 and
subtending a chord bearing of N66 1'30"W a distance of 49.97 feet; thence N50 a
distance of 1.04 feet; thence 50.84 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of
35.00 feet, a central angle of 83 and subtending a chord bearing of N08 "W a
distance of 46.49 feet; thence N33 "E a distance of 28.35 feet; thence N42 "E a
distance of 23.58 feet; thence 99.09 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of
50.00 feet, a central angle of 113 and subtending a chord bearing of N1 4 a
distance of 83.65 feet; thence N70 0 58'04 "W a distance of 53.28 feet; thence 77.25 feet along
the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 150.00 feet, a central angle of 29 and
subtending a chord bearing of N56 a distance of 76.40 feet; thence N41 "W a
distance of 12.10 feet; thence N36 "W a distance of 31.61 feet; thence 172.23 feet along
the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 225.00 feet, a central angle of 43 and
subtending a chord bearing of N58 a distance of 168.06 feet to the point of terminus,
whence said found GLO Brass cap marked AP4, Tract 59 bears N70 "E a distance of
713.01 feet. Said strip contains 19,932 square feet or 0.458 acres more aubject to
easements and encumbrances of record.
ev W
Q: \1990 \90040B - 324 \BLM Access - Activity Env Esmt.doc s�d 1 ,F�' S 'N"
A51'EN
CRESTED BUTTE_
GRAND JIINGTION
l ANA NjEENER
101 POUNDERS PL E. UNR 102
407 FOURTH STREET
573 WEST CRETE CIRCLE
320 THIRD STREET
PO Box 2155
PO BOX 3088
BUILDING 1. SUITE 205
MEEKER. CO 81641
ASPEN, CO 8 161 1
CRESTED BUTTE. CO 61224
GRAND JUNCTION. CO 81505
970.878.5180
970.925.6727
970.349.5355
970.245.2571
970.878.4181 E.
970.925.4157 Far
970.349.5358 Fm
970.245,2871 Fm
ju ,.,3 J
0.4
Attachment 9
Fee Agreement
36 JOIAO
PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and Town of Basalt
(hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for Minor Amendme t o a Development
Permit (Southside Water Storage Tank) (hereinafter, THE PROJECT).
2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Ordinance No. 030 -2009 establishes a
fee structure for land use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a
determination of application completeness. The fee structure is based on the County's policy that development
shall pay, in full, the cost of development review in Pitkin County. Fees have been set to be consistent and fair
to the public and to reflect the expense incurred in providing such services to the public.
3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed
project, it may not be possible at the time of application to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in
processing the application.
4. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that fees charged for the processing of land use applications
shall accumulate if an application includes more than one type of land use review.
5. 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. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the COUNTY's waiver of its right to
collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay a base fee in the
amount of $ 1,585 which is based on 3 hours of staff time, and if actual time spent by staff to process the
application exceeds the average number of hours by more than 20 %, then the COUNTY will bill the
APPLICANT quarterly for the additional time spent. 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 APPLICANT
Cindy Houben
Community Development Director
., Mective 01/26/2010
G:county\admin \fortes \agreement to pay
Larry Thompson, Town Engineer
Prinj Name
acu,w Signatur
Date: 5/25/10
Mailing Address: To,,., of Racal t
101 Midland Avenue
Basalt, CO 81621
j®'J!u :�
Attachment 10
Letter of Consent
Jul :r
Vu )v X2
C
Rut IVCWED
MAY 2 7 2810
S"GM
May 25, 2010
Mr. Mike Kraemer, Planner
Pitkin County Community Development
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Basalt South Side Tank Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
Dear Mr. Kraemer:
As part of the Minor Amendment to a Development Permit for the Town of Basalt's (the
Town) approved South Side Tank, the Town is providing you with this letter as consent
to process this amendment. Furthermore, the Town authorizes Schmueser Gordon
Meyer, Inc. to act as its representative throughout the application process.
Sincerely,
Yat y rJ. - RE- -
Larry Thompson, P.E.
Town Engineer.
C
101 MIDLAND Ave. • BASALT, CO 81621 •970- 927 -4701 • FAx 970 - 927 -4703 • www.basait.net
PrintForm
SCHMUESER,GORDON MEYER
!I+ V� E N G I N E E R S 5 U R V E Y O R S
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
HI 1 18 W 6TH ST., SUITE ZOO, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81 501
❑ 101 FOUNDERS PLACE, UNIT 102. ASPEN, CO 8 1 51 1
❑ 103 W TOMICHI Ave. SUITE A. GUNNISON, CO 8 1 230 ❑ 320 THIRD ST., MEEKER, CO 81 541
❑ 573 W. CRETE CIRCLE, BLDG 1, SUITE 205, GRAND JUNCTION, CO 8 1 505
To: Pitkin County Community Development DATE: 5/27/2010
..
-- ............................................................................................................................
130 South Galena Street ATTN: Michael Kraemer, Planner
................................................°--°---........----------...........------------............--------..........---°-
Aspen, CO 81611 PROJECT: Town of Basalt - South Side Tank
..................°........................-----°----...........-------°..........-----------...... ......---------.........------..
RE: Minor Amendment to a Development Permit PROJECT NO: 90040B-324
...........................°---------................----------..........--------.............------ °--- °.........-----............
WE ARE SENDING YOU: ❑ ATTACHED ❑ UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA ....................... THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
Xt SUBMITTALS ❑ DRAWINGS ❑ LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ COPY OF LETTER
❑ CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ❑ ...................................................................... ............ ... ............ ....
RFC /V
COPIES: 1 DAT
....... E: 5/25/2010 ... ... ............ No ..- .......... DEsempnow
............. . .' - -- ..........' -' •-- '-------- ......... - --
Amendment Application P A� 8
.......................° ------...........---------- ------........----------- -------------........ ----a iry - &; ` -- - - --..
.....------° ...................°-----°------............----°............-------- -........----- °---- ............ .
• .......................•--------------•----...........----------.........---------..... ..- '- '--- --- -..........'- -- - - -- ....d
These ARE TRANSMfTrED As cHFcKEO eeLow:
J❑ FOR APPROVAL
❑ APPROVED AS SUBMITTED
❑ RESUBMIT ( I COPIES FOR YOUR APPROVAL
❑ FOR YOUR USE
❑ APPROVED AS NOTED
❑ SUBMIT ( ) COPIES FOR DISTRIBUTION
❑ AS REQUESTED
❑ RETURN FOR CORRECTION
❑ RETURN ( ) CORRECT PRINTS
❑ FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT
❑ FOR 5I05 DUE:
❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
Re" IARK9 Please feel free to call with any questions as you review.
..................... ... '----.......---......... - -.. ............ ......--- ---...................
Thanks,
Shannon Ullmann, 970 -384 -9060
-
'-' ................................................................................................... ...............................
GLENWOOD SPRINGS 970.945. 1004 970.945.5948 FAx ASPEN 970.925.6727 970.925.4157 FAx
GUNNISON 970.541 .5355 970.64 1 .5358 FAX MEEKER 970.878.5180 970.878.41 81 FAX
GRAND JUNCTION 970.245.2571 970.245.2871 FAx
JU
PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5526 FAX# (970) 920 -5439
June 9, 2010
Shannon Ullmann
118 West 0 Street, Suite #200
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
shannonu @sgm- inc.com
Re: Town of Basalt South Side Tank Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
(CASE PO41 -10; PID 2467 - 183 -00 -001)
Dear Ms. Ullmann:
The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined
that this application is complete. After a more detailed review of the submittal information, additional
information specific to the application may be requested in order to adequately review and process the
application. The planner in charge of the review will request the information from you directly.
If you have any questions, please call Mike Kraemer, the planner assigned to your case, at 920 -5482.
Sincerely,
Bonnie Waechtler
Administrative Assistant
PITKIN COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5526 FAX# (970) 920 -5439
MEMORANDUM
To: Pitkin County Engineer
FROM: Mike Kraemer, Community Development Department
Michael.kraemerL&co.vitkin.co.us
Re: Town of Basalt South Side Tank Minor Amendment to a
Development Permit
(PID 2467 - 183 -00 -001; Case PO41 -10)
DATE: June 9, 2010
Attached for your review and comments are materials for an application submitted by
Town of Basalt. The Pitkin County Community Development Director will review the
application.
Please return your comments to me by Tuesday, July 9, 2010.
http• / /www aspenpitkin com/ Portals /0 /docs /county /Com %2ODey /Planning/Land Use AR
plications /PO41 10 app.pdf
If you require a paper copy of this application contact Bonnie Waechtler at
bonnie .waechtlergco.pitkin.co.us or 920 -5109.
Thank you.
Michael Kraemer
From: Chris Lehrman [ChrisL @sgm- inc.comj
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 20112:27 PM
To: Michael Kraemer
Cc: Larry Thompson; Shannon Ullmann
Subject: FW: Vegetation. removal
Attachments: pic18277.gif
Mike,
Here is additional confirmation from BLM regarding the amendment to the
1041 permit.
Thanks,
Chris L. Lehrman, P.E.
Project Manager
Direct: (970) 384 -9043
Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. Engineers and Surveyors
- -- Original Message---- -
From: chuey@blm.gov [mailto:chuey@blm.gov]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 2:25 PM
To: Chris Lehrman
Subject: RE: Vegetation removal
We have reviewed the amendment plans and have no issue or concern.
Also, it is OK to remove the vegetation for the tank site as well.
Carole Huey
Realty Specialist, BLM
Colorado River Valley Field Office
2300 River Frontage Road
Silt CO 81652
970.876.9023 FAX: 970.876.9090
"Chris Lehrman"
ire.
<ChrisL @sgm -inc.c
om>
< chueypblm.eov >
1
04/28/2011 10:27
cc
AM "Larry Thompson"
Subject
Carole,
Thanks for the response.
< lthompson (abasalt.net "Shannon
Ullmann" < ShannonUOssm - inc.com
RE: Vegetation removal
Two items we need clarification on:
1. The attached letter was sent to Pitkin County to amend
our
initial 1041 permit with them. All of the amendments are shown in the
current construction drawings that you have seen. I believe BLM is OK
with all of them. Can you please respond in an e-mail that BLM has
reviewed the current construction plans that includes the mentioned
1041 amendments and approve them?
2. Vegetation removal: One of the very first tasks of the
contractor will be is to clear and grub all of the existing
vegetation and topsoil in the area of the tank. That is planned to
happen within the first week of construction. What should we do about
this? Do we need to consult with DOW regarding this issue?
I will get you the drawings as soon as I have an indication from the contractor exactly what
they are planning.
Thanks for the help.
Thanks,
Chris L. Lehrman, P.E.
Project Manager
E
Direct: (970) 384 -9043
(Embedded image moved to file: pic18277.gif) - - - -- Original Message---- -
From: chuey @blm.gov [mailto:chuey @blm.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 4:09 PM
To: Chris Lehrman
Cc: Larry Thompson
Subject: Vegetation removal
Stipulation 19. Wildlife: "TO Minimize impacts to migratory birds, removal of vegetation
shall not occur during the period of may 1 to July 1."
has
to the flexibility for the BLM to consider scale, type & duration.
Because you are basically trimming, removing small amounts of vegetation along an existing
two- track, this is considered small scaled and short in duration. So no problem. If you
plan on removing the vegetation where the tank is going, please check with us first.
Thanks, and see you all again on the 11th.
Will we see the new plans soon for the area of the road you want to level out?
Carole Huey
Realty Specialist, BLM
Colorado River Valley Field Office
2300 River Frontage Road
Silt CO 81652
970.876.9023 FAX: 970.876.9090
[attachment "201005_1041 Ammendment Letter.pdf" deleted by Carole Huey /GSFO /CO /BLM /DOI]
Email secured by Check Point
3
3
Michael Kraemer
From: Wright, Kevin [Kevin.Wdght @state.co.us]
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 8:53 AM
To: Michael Kraemer
Subject: RE: Basalt - South Side Tank - DOW Construction Schedule
10-4, no problem. They asked if they could start earlier as they did not think they could get the project done in time and
by the time the cold temps start, etc. The last phase is painting the tank and they most likely could not do that with the
cold temps in October. I held them off for the 1' 2 weeks and with the timing restrictions of 8 — 6 it will still allow the
deer to feed early a.m. and evening when I have been seeing them active in that location
From: Michael Kraemer [mailto:Michael .Kraemer @co.pitldn.co.us]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 20114:42 PM
To: Wright, Kevin; Lehrman, Chris
Cc: Larry Thompson; Bentley Henderson; Tim Laudick; Ryan Hill; Carole — Huey @blm.gov; Shannon Ullmann; Will, Perry
Subject: RE: Basalt - South Side Tank - DOW Construction Schedule
BOCC Resolution No. 79 -2009 stipulates that construction activity can't start until June 1. Looks like we'll have to amend
the resolution.
Kevin, I'll use this email as your referral comments for the amendment request.
From: Wright, Kevin [ mailto:Kevin.Wright @state.co.us)
Sent: Monday, May 09, 20114:30 PM
To: Chris Lehrman
Cc: Larry Thompson; Bentley Henderson; Tim Laudick; Ryan Hill; Carole— Huey @bim.gov; Michael Kraemer; Shannon
Ullmann; Will, Perry
Subject: RE: Basalt - South Side Tank - DOW Construction Schedule
Your synopsis is accurate and 1 believe it will be OK to begin construction May 16, 2011 with construction hours of 8 a.m.
— 6 p.m. Any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
From: Chris Lehrman [mailto:ChrisL @sgm- inc.com]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 20113:38 PM
To: Wright, Kevin
Cc: tarry Thompson; Bentley Henderson; Tim Laudick; Ryan Hill; Carole_Huey @bim.gov; Michael Kraemer; Shannon
Ullmann
Subject: Basalt - South Side Tank - DOW Construction Schedule
Kevin,
Thanks again for taking the time to evaluate the wildlife movement in the South Side tank area of Basalt known as Light
Hill.
The purpose of this e-mail is to re-capsulate the phone conversation we just had:
You have observed wildlife in this area recently and have seen animal movement around 6 AM in the morning. You are
OK to allowing construction if construction activity was limited from 8 AM to 6 PM starting on May 16 and that it would not
drastically affect the wildlife.
Please reply to all to this e-mail with an approval of the conditions that have been mentioned.
Once that has occurred, I would like Pitkin County and BLM to also reply with approval or concerns.
Thanks,
Chris L. Lehrman, P.E.
Project Manager
Direct: (970) 384 -9043
SCHMUESER GORDON iMEYER
Clio I N CCIts I lURVCTOIls
1 18 WEST 6TM STREET, SUrrE 200
GLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO B 1601
970-845- 1004 /FAX: 970-945 -5948
WW W. SGM -INC. COM
Email secured by Check Point
E
PITKIN QLINTY COMMUNITY DEVELC�dXENT
Permit Receipt
RECEIPT NUMBER 00029337
Name: Town Of Basalt Date:6 /2/2010
Project Address: NO ADDRESS ASSIGNED
Type: check # 25214
Permit Number Fee Description
0041.2010.PLAN PP- Flat Fee
0041.2010.PLAN PP- Clerk Tech Fee
0041.2010.PLAN PP- Planning Eng Referral Fee
Total:
Amount
936.00
25.00
624.00
1,585.00