Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.264316200018DOCUMENT LAYOUT THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION LISTED BELOW IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER Summary Sheet Resolution for the BOCC and/or P &Z Ordinance for the BOCC and/or P &Z Determination for the Hearing Officer Administrative Determination Staff Memo Application Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter Site Plan Miscellaneous Plat copies (11x17) PARCEL ID: 2643- 162 -00 -018 DATE RCVD: 7/10 /2000 #I:OPI�S: 16 CASE NO IP091 -00 CASE NAMEd Karp 1041 Hazard Review Planners Brian McNelli, PROJ ADDR: 0181 Liberty Ln S -T -R 16 -9 -85 Woody Creek Lots 9 & 12 .am OWN /APP: Robert Karp ADR 401 E. Ontario, #501 CIS /Z: Chicago IL 60611 PHN:I REP: Mitch Haas ADR: 201 N. Mill St., #108 C /S /Z: Aspen, CO 81611 PHN: 92 5 - 7 81 917 3 9 5 Email Addr: I ALLOCATED HOURS: —J � FEES DUE: 460 FEES RCVD; 460 REFERRALS (Attorney, Floodplain Administrator, W REF: 7/12/2000 MTG DATE REV BODY PH r Admin No 10117/2000 HO No r 7 F— No F % OVER: ildlife Biologist. CSFS, Woody Creek Caucus _ Y I BY TKT DUE: 8/13/2000 NOTICED DATE OF FINAL ACTION: 10/1712000 9/16/2000 CLOSED: 107812000 BY: TKT BOCC Reso: VR APPROVAL DATE: F 10/17/2000 BOCC Ord: CASE TYP: 1041 Hazard Review PZ: F— HRG OFF: 33 -2( HO INDEX: 2000 ADMIN: F PLAT RECORDED 1111 /00 PLAT (BK,PG): F54 P74 #448432 ADMIN INDEX: VR APPROVAL DATE: F 10/17/2000 VR EXPIRES: F 10/17/2003 CASE TYP: 1041 Hazard Review CASE TYPS: CASE TYP2: CASE TYP6: CASE TYP3: CASE TYP7: CASE TYP4:1 Date Scanned: 1/7/2011 File Location: IFF Box April 24, 2017 Pitkin County Community Development 130 S. Galena St Aspen CO, 81611 RE: 181 Liberty Lane Dear Bonnie, Please feel free to share any plan or document information on file with Pitkin County with either Alison Agley (architect) and/or Bart Johnson (attny) for our property 181 Liberty Lane, Aspen CO. We're working to make certain we understand how much FAR the home has before we move forward with making any remodeling plans. Thank you. Regar s, i f` J Estela & David Cockrell Thunder River Properties LLC 13111 Norhwest Frwy #125 Houston, TX 77040 PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street 3` Floor Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920 -5526 FAX # (970) 920 -5439 April 2, 2009 John A Buck II Trust C/o Cass Foley 181 Liberty Ln Woody Creek, CO RE: Land Use Exemption (PID # 2643- 162 -00 -018, 181 Liberty Ln, M/B Woody Creek) After checking for site specific issues, including scenic review and reviewing your plans for the proposed addition in the proposed location as demonstrated in the drawings reviewed in the Community Development office on April 1, 2009 for the above mentioned address, it has been determined the work shall not encroach into any constrained areas identified in Chapter 7 of the 2006 Land Use Code. The Lot is however, subject to standards for development in a scenic view protection area. These standards pursuant to section 7-20 - 120(d) can be seen as an attachment to this letter. (See pages 46 -50). This proposal has been reviewed by the Planning Director and it has been determined your project can be exempted from formal scenic review pursuant to section 7- 20- 120(c) (5) (b) of the Code. Compliance with the following conditions is strongly encouraged based on the location within a scenic view area: Conditions 1. The exterior of all development should utilize only earth toned materials and colors. 2. All roofs shall utilize non - reflective colors and materials. 3. The windows shall be the least non - reflective available. 4. All construction parking should be limited to on -site. No parking shall occur on the Road. 5. All areas disturbed by construction should be re- vegetated with native vegetation as listed in the Pitkin County Revegetation Guideline within one growing season of the project's completion. 6. No structural development, with the exception of fencing, in excess of 30" shall occur within the setbacks of the Lot. Landscaping in the form of berms shall not exceed four feet from the most restrictive grade. Any external development located within setbacks mandated by County zoning regulations shall require a variance from the Board of Adjustment. Approval of a landscape envelope within such setbacks does not assure approval of a variance. 7. Outdoor lighting should be minimal for health and safety purposes. Be advised that all other zoning and building codes and regulations are applicable. This exemption is not vested and may not be applicable at the time of permit submittal. Provide a copy of this letter as proof of your Land Use approval to obtain your Building /Zoning Permit. You are responsible for requesting and obtaining all additional permits as needed. Additionally, if you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to call me at 970- 920 -5092. Sincerely, Cari Anne Holcomb Planner Community Development Pitkin County 970.920.5092 (Phone) 970.920.5439 (Fax) cariannehCa Attachment: Scenic View Protection 2006 Pitkin County Land Use Code, Section 7 -20 -120 '10000 - 1 o;Ss,� PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street 3' Floor Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920 -5526 FAX # (970) 920 -5439 February 18, 2009 John A Buck II Trust c/o Anna Boeschenstein 181 Liberty Ln Woody Creek, CO RE: Land Use Exemption (PID # 2643 - 162 -00 -018, 181 Liberty Ln, M/B Woody Creek) After checking for site specific issues, including scenic review and reviewing your plans for the proposed hardscape including a wood burning pizza oven, swim spa and hot tub as well as new landscape in the proposed location as demonstrated in the drawings received for the above mentioned address, it has been determined the work shall not encroach into any constrained areas identified in Chapter 7 of the 2006 Land Use Code. The Lot is however, subject to standards for development in a scenic view protection area. These standards pursuant to section 7- 20- 120(d) can be seen as an attachment to this letter (See pages 46- 50). This proposal has been reviewed by the Planning Director and it has been determined your project can be exempted from formal scenic review pursuant to section 7- 20- 120(c) (4) (b) of the Code. Compliance with the following conditions is strongly encouraged based on the location within a scenic view area: Conditions 1. The project should utilize earth toned, non - reflective materials. 2. All construction parking should be limited to on -site. No parking shall occur on the Road 3. All areas disturbed by construction should be re- vegetated with native vegetation as listed in the Pitkin County Revegetation Guideline within one growing season of the project's completion. 4. No structural development, with the exception of fencing, in excess of 30" shall occur within the setbacks of the Lot. Landscaping in the form of berms shall not exceed four feet from the most restrictive grade. Any external development located within setbacks mandated by County zoning regulations shall require a variance from the Board of Adjustment. Approval of a landscape envelope within such setbacks does not assure approval of a variance 5. Outdoor lighting should be minimal for health and safety purposes. 6. Provide a copy of the landscape plan with plant species along with your building /zoning permit. Be advised that all other zoning and building codes and regulations are applicable. This exemption is not vested and may not be applicable at the time of permit submittal. Provide a copy of this letter as proof of your Land Use approval to obtain your Building /Zoning Permit. You are responsible for requesting and obtaining all additional permits as needed. Additionally, if you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to call me at 970 - 920 -5092. Sincerely, Cari Anne Holcomb Planner Community Development Pitkin County 970 920.5092 (Phone) 970.920.5439 (Fax) cariannehaco.pitkin.co.us Attachment: Scenic View Protection 2006 Pitkin County Land Use Code, Section 7 -20 -120 UUu UU2 - - ti 1 Z In i,AO03 0 O 0 W w 8 W E O, J 1 V ` .^ W v' �: \Zr L 1 I ,!f4 \ O/ 1 J I 1 I I w cn a6 F3 0 d Z I�l:,l• I ra =1 <� s a W '4 I v +~ /. �3�/i \11�� 1 Z In i,AO03 0 O 0 W w 8 W E O, J 1 V ` .^ W v' �: \Zr L 1 I ,!f4 \ O/ 1 J I 1 I I cn a6 F3 0 d Z <� s a W J <.' j 1 Z In i,AO03 0 O 0 W w 8 W E O, J 1 V ` .^ W v' �: \Zr L 1 I ,!f4 \ O/ 1 J I 1 I I DETERMINATION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL TO THE KARP 1041 HAZARD REVIEW Determination No. M -2000 RECITALS Robert Karp ( "Applicant ") has applied to the Pitkin County Hearing Officer for 1041 Hazard Review approval to establish a building envelope which will encompass an existing single family residence and proposed septic system. 2. The property is zoned APR -2 and contains 2 acres. 3. The property is located at 181 Liberty Lane in Woody Creek. 4. The Hearing Officer heard this application at a duly noticed public hearing on October 17, 2000, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application. 5. The Hearing Officer finds that the building envelope avoids the 100 year floodplain, is categorized as low wildfire, and has no adverse impacts on existing wildlife habitat. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Hearing Officer that approval is hereby granted to the Karp 1041 Hazard Review for a building envelope 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 conditions and material representations made in the application and public meetings except as amended herein. 2. The Applicant shall record a 24 X 36 inch mylar 1041 Hazard Review Site Plan in accordance with Section 5 -70 -040 of the Land Use Code. The site plan shall also be submitted in digital format for integration in to the County Geographic Information System (GIS) prior to submission of a building permit or septic permit. 3. No development, including, landscaping, native vegetation removal or disturbance, and well /septic, shall be permitted outside the approved building envelope except as necessary to implement wildfire mitigation measures required herein, removal of the existing septic system, and demolition of the existing residence. 4. A revegetation plan, for the slope area where the existing septic system will be removed, shall be approved by Community Development and Land Management prior to building permit submission. 1111111111111111111111111111 IN 111111 III 111111111 IN / 448431 11/01/2000 08:448 DETERNIN DAVIS SILVI V U i;,JU 4 1 of 4 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Hearing Officer Determin:..,, i No.2000 _ Page 2 5. The building envelope shall be modified on the site plan to exclude any portion of the existing access easement and shall be approved by planning staff prior to recordation. 6. No development greater than 30" shall occur within the property setbacks without approval from the Board of Adjustments. 7. The Applicant shall comply with the following wildfire mitigation measures Defensible Space: Note: Actual vegetation manipulation to meet these conditions may not be necessary where the natural vegetation patterns have already fulfilled these conditions. A. Brush, debris, and non - ornamental vegetation shall be removed within a distance a 10 foot perimeter of all structures. Existing Gamble oak shall be removed within 15 feet of all structures. B. Vegetation shall be reduced to break up the vertical and horizontal continuity of the fuels a minimum of a 30 foot perimeter around a structure built on flat ground. C. Spacing between clumps of brush and vegetation within the 30 foot perimeter shall be a minimum of two times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the clumps shall not exceed 10 feet. All measurements shall be from the edges of the crowns of the fuels. D. All branches from trees and brush within the 30 foot perimeter shall be pruned to a height of 10 feet above the ground and removal of ladder fuels from around trees and brush. E. Tree crown separation within a 30 foot perimeter shall have a minimum of 10 feet between the edges of the crowns. This does not apply to mature stands of Aspen trees where the above recommendation for removal of ladder fuels have been complied with. F. All branches which extend over the roof eaves shall be trimmed and all branches within 15 feet of the chimneys shall be removed. G. The density of fuels within a 100 foot perimeter around all structures shall be reduced where natural reduction has not already occurred. H. All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed. 1. The Applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space vegetation requirements. 8. The Applicant shall comply with the following additional wildfire mitigation standards: A. Rooting: New roofs shall have a class A, non - combustible roof system. Wood shake /shingle roof coverings and flat roofs (up to a 3:12) pitch are prohibited. B. Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh with mesh one - fourth- inch (1/4") maximum. C. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris. D. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable debris. 111111111111 "III' 1'1'11'11" 1111111111111111111111 IN l�liu`jU 2 R 00 0.00 DETERMIN DAVIS COUNTY CO Hearing Officer Detertnina, i No. 2000 Page 3 E. All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from any structure. F. Weeds and grasses within the 15 foot perimeter shall be maintained to a height not more than 6 inches. G. Firewood /wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from any structure. 11. Swimming pools shall accessible to Fire Department vehicles. t. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris. J. Wood fences shall not connect to any structure. K. Any outbuildings or additional structures shall adhere to the same standards as structures. L. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container. M. Propane tanks shall be installed according to NFPA 48 standards and on a contour away from the structure with standard defensible space vegetation mitigation around any aboveground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall be constructed with materials approved for 2 hour fire resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls. N. Each structure shall have a minimum of one pound approved ABC fire extinguisher placed in a visible and accessible location. O. Addresses shall be clearly marked with 2 inch non - combustible letters and shall be clearly visible at the primary point of access from the public or common access road and installed on a non - combustible post. P. New utility lines shall be buried. Q. The underside of decks shall be enclosed with 1 hour fire resistive construction materials, 8. Fencing outside of the building envelope shall comply with Section 3 -80 -080 (A)(l 1) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. The Applicant shall install a bear -proof trash container which shall be approved by the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for any new residence. 10. Floor area exempt from growth management shall be limited to 5,750 square feet. Floor area shall be calculated based on the definition in effect at the time of building permit submittal. 11. 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, § 4 -140 and C.R.S., § 24 -68 -105. The statutory vested rights granted herein shall expire on October 17, 2003. 111111 IIIII 111111111111 IIIII II" 111111 III "I" IN I"I 448431 11/01/2000 08:448 DETERMIN DAVIS SILVI 3 of 4 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO L; U jt1U Hearing Officer Determina,,, No. 3 Page 4 NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON THE 16th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2000. APPROVED ON THE 17th DAY OF OCTOBER 2000. PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON Qc�a6ev - jr I x000 ATTEST: Tenley Ta lor, Administr tive As istant HEARING OFFICER OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Lance Clarke Hearing Officer Date: le- APPROVED AS TO FORM: John ounty Attomey Case #P91 -00 PID# 264316200018 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: m y ouben, Community Development Director 1111111 11111 111111 111111 11111 IS 111111 III 11111 1111 1111 448431 11/01/2000 08:44A DETERNIN DAVIS SILVI 4 of 4 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO UUG"jU MEMORANDUM TO: Pitkin County Hearing Officer FROM: Brian McNellis, Planning Technician /'1'n# RE: Karp 1041 Hazard Review DATE: October 17, 2000 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The Applicant requests 1041 Hazard Review to establish a building envelope which will encompass an existing single family residence and new septic system. APPLICANT: Dr. Robert Karp LOCATION: The property is located at 181 Liberty Lane in Woody Creek. ZONING /SIZE: The property is zoned AFR -2 and contains 2 acres. The property is conforming in size. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Referral agency comments are incorporated throughout this memorandum and are attached for reference. Written comments were not received from the County Attorney and Floodplain Administrator. Joanna Schaffner, the Pitkin County Zoning Officer, reviewed the application and indicated that the building envelope should avoid the designated access easement. She also indicated that no development exceeding 30" is permitted within the designated setbacks without Board of Adjustment approval. STAFF COMMENTS: 1041 Hazard Review: Wildfire: Vince Urbina, of the Colorado State Forest Service, rated the wildfire hazard on the property as low. He mentioned that the proposed building envelope is flat and that vegetation on the property is widely spaced with no fuels in- between. He recommended the removal of Gamble Oak within the building envelope and on the slopes approaching the river. Mr. Urbina suggested defensible space standards that have been incorporated as conditions of approval in the attached determination. Slope: The proposed building envelope is relatively flat and contains no slopes in excess of 15 percent. There are potentially unstable slopes associated with the hillside approaching the river. Staff has recommended a setback of at least ten feet from the top of the slope. vEi�.i',)UU Floodplain: The proposed building envelope avoids the 100 year floodplain as shown in the attached site plan. Historic: The existing structures on the property have no significant historic value. Wildlife: Jonathan Lowsky, the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist, visited the property and had no concerns regarding the proposed building envelope as it avoids significant riparian habitats existing on the lower portions of the property near the Roaring Fork River. Mr Lowsky recommended mitigation standards to minimize impacts to these sensitive areas. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Hearing Officer approve the Karp 1041 Hazard Review subject to the conditions in the attached Hearing Officer Determination. Attachments 1. Draft Resolution 2. Colorado State Forest Service Letter 3. Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist Letter Application and Site Plan attached separately. * Mr. McNellis has received a Bachelors Degree in Environmental Design from the University of Colorado and has worked as a Planning professional for 5 years. Mr. McNellis has been an employee of Pitkin County for a total of 4 years. u0v',1u`) Colo June 16, 2000 FOREST SERVICE Mitch Haas Haas Land Planning State Services Building 222 S. 6th Street, Room 416 201 N. Mill St., Suite 108 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Aspen, CO 81611 Telephone: (970) 248 -7325 Re: Karp (181 Liberty Lane) 1041 Wildfire Hazard Review Dear Mitch, Please include this letter with any correspondence to Pitkin County. When the county contacts me about this property I will defer to the comments contained in this letter. 1 visited the Karp property with Mitch Haas the owner's representative on May 31 Access to the property is good from Liberty Lane a dirt road that passes in front of the existing house. The owners are planning to remove the existing structure and build a new one. The new home will sit on the same building footprint. Some of the existing mature landscaping will remain and other mature trees will be removed. The new home will sit on a nearly level bench above the Roaring Fork River. The existing vegetation consists of mature willow, crabapple and blue spruce trees. All of these trees were planted in their present locations. Mowed turf occupies the space between these trees. I would rate the existing wildfire hazard as low because the trees are widely spaced and there is little to no fuel between these trees. There is a small patch of Gambel oak south west of the existing house. This patch may be removed with the new construction. If it stays it must be no closer than 15 feet to the new house and the lower limbs should be removed up to half the total height of the trunk to eliminate ladder fuels. Due west of the house the slope drops dramatically for a short distance to an existing grass covered path to the Roaring Fork River. This path will remain and does serve as a small fueltfire break. This grass should be t mowed regularly to maintain the break in fuels. The slope then levels out from the path to the river. From the path to the river is mostly riparian vegetation consisting of cottonwoods, aspen and chokecherry. There is a small patch of Gambel oak between the path and the start of the riparian vegetation. I recommend removing this patch of oak because it is dense and could impact the house if a fire were to originate in the area between the river and the new house. The existing riparian vegetation (i.e., cottonwood, aspen) can stay in its present configuration. The lower limbs of all cottonwoods and aspens below the house should be removed to a height of 10 feet or half the total height of the plants whichever is least to eliminate ladder fuels. This ladder fuel removal should take place within a perimeter of 125 feet of the house. I recommend enclosing the undersides of all decks with 1 -hour fire resistive construction material if the owners' plan on having decks on the west side of the house. This side of the house would be most impacted by any wildfire. This recommendation is described in the Pitkin County Land Use Code. I also recommend that future woody landscaping be no closer than 10 feet to any structure. Feel free to call me with any questions. Sincer A. Vince Urbina Assistant District Forester iui,•�tll� JUN.20.2000 12:47PM PITKIN COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS ' PITKIN COUNTY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT r June 20, 2000 I I I EJ I 1. #1 I I E �I I I I I Mitch Haas Hass Land Planning Dear W Haas: NO. 5144 P. 1 I have no substantial ptoblems with development of the Karp parcel (Parcel id# 2643 162 00 018) as proposed. The proposed building envelope is located in a previously developed area and is not significantly extending the influence of development. The only significant wildlife habitat on the property is below the proposed building envelope along the Roaring Fork River and on the west. facing slopes, The parcel lies in an area with a history of black bear/human conflict and bears actively use the Roaring Fork River riparian area as a movement corridor. Given the above, the following conditions should be applied mini —ir impacts to wildlife: 1. Fencing outside the building envelope must comply with §3- 80,080(A)(10) and 53- 80.080(A)(11) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. 2. Native vegetation must be maintained outside the building envelope as per §3- 80.080(A)(3). 3. Installation and use of approved bear-proof trash containers' should be required. Verification of this condition should be required prior to issuance of s certificate of occupancy. ee BdAn McNcuis Sincerely, 1 A bear ptwf teach emninu m is be a My codas*{ and codtakw of *oy IL" with a v=1 lid 4w ha* am* etap ap 4 mcch*nime Appmnl ie owocd by the P" Coanty wife Bblo& oe pmemed of the CObado DrVWW of wimufa 76 66RVICa CCHTaR NO • Aa PrN. CO • •1611 PHONE: 070.9E0.3306 • PAAt !70.930.637/ J0NATHAN000.PITKIN.00.V6 uUU1Jj-2 LM 11 AN APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF 1041 ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS REVIEW FOR DR. ROBERT KARP Submitted by: Dr. Robert Karp 401 East Ontario, Apartment 501 Chicago, IL 60611 Prepared by: HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC Planning Consultants 201 North Mill Street, Suite 108 Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925 -7819 fax: (970) 925 -7395 mhaas @gateway.net PROJECT CONSULTANTS PLANNER Mitch Haas, AICP Haas Land Planning, LLC 201 North Mill Street, Suite 108 Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925 -7819 ARCHITECT David F. Gibson, AIA Gibson Architects, LLC 201 North Mill Street, Suite 101 Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920 -3007 SURVEYOR David W. McBride, RLS 16129 Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. 210 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925 -3816 UUUJ-L3 I w TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION ............................................ ..............................1 A. Description of Application ........................ ..............................1 B. Overview of Neighborhood and Subject Property .......................2 C. General Submission and Procedures ........... ..............................4 II. 1041 ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS REVIEW ...... ..............................5 A. Section 3 -80 -050, Geologic Hazard Areas ...... ..............................6 B. Section 3 -80 -070, Wildfire Hazard Areas ....... ..............................7 C. Section 3 -80 -080, Wildlife Habitat Areas ...... ..............................9 • Section 3- 80- 080(A), General Standards .. .............................10 • Section 3- 80- 080(G), Riparian, Shoreland and Wetland Areas ............................ .............................11 • Section 3 -80 -040, Floodplain Hazard Areas .......................... 11 • Section 3 -80 -030, General Standards ...... .............................13 III. VESTED RIGHTS ........................................... ............................. IV. SUMMARY .................................................... .............................1 EXHIBITS Exhibit #1: Proof of Ownership Exhibit #2: Letter of authorization Exhibit #3: Pre - Application Conference Summary Exhibit #4: Referral Letter from Vince Urbina Exhibit #5: Referral Letter from Jonathan Lowsky Exhibit #6: Agreement to Pay Form Exhibit #7: List of All Adjacent Property Owners A M , I. INTRODUCTION A. Description of Application This is an application for administrative approval of a 1041 Hazard Review Site Plan (building envelope) for a single - family residence and customary accessory uses at 181 Liberty Lane (Parcel ID 2643- 162 -00 -018). The property is located between the Roaring Fork River and the Woody Creek Trailer Park. The property contains areas mapped for low risk wildfire hazards, geologic hazards (slopes greater than 30 %), and floodplain hazards. Pursuant to Section 3- 80- 010(B)(1), the proposed building envelope limits all development such that it will entirely avoid these areas of Local /State Interest /1041 Environmental Hazards. As such, the proposed building envelope may be approved pursuant to the procedures of Section 440, Administrative Review Procedures. This application is being submitted by Dr. Robert Karp (hereinafter "the applicant'), who is the owner of the subject property. Proof of ownership of the property is provided in Exhibit #1, the title insurance commitment. A legal description of the property is included on the proposed 1041 Hazard Review i Map. Authorization for Haas Land Planning, LLC, and Gibson Architects, LLC, A to represent the property owner for this application is provided in Exhibit #2. A pre - application conference was held with a representative of the Pitkin County Community Development Department (Brian McNellis) on May 10, 2000, to discuss this project (see Exhibit #3, Pre - Application Conference Summary). Based on this meeting, it was confirmed that the project could proceed as an administrative 1041 Hazard Review given the building envelope that is being proposed, provided a topographic survey demonstrates avoidance of slopes of 15% or greater and favorable reviews are received from the State Forest Service and the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist. The floodplain of the Roaring Fork River is not an issue since the proposed building envelope is located substantially upslope of it (more than 50 vertical feet) and between 165 and 235 horizontal feet from it (see survey/ site plan). Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, LLC, has visited the site with Brian " McNellis (County Planning Department), Vince Urbina (Colorado State Forest Service), and Jonathan Lowsky (County Wildlife Biologist). Mr. McNellis suggested some modifications to the westerly boundary of the building envelope and his suggestions have been incorporated into the proposal made herein. Mr. Urbina agreed with the 1041 mapping inasmuch as he rates the existing wildfire �. hazard as "low" because the trees are widely spaced with little to no fuel between. He felt that the proposed envelope is not problematic from a wildfire ,.e Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 1 UU J14J v >.r .� hazard standpoint, and basically suggested only that some of the Gambel oak located down -slope of the proposed envelope be removed and the stumps be treated to prevent regeneration (see Exhibit #4). Mr. Urbina had no concerns with regard to any of the area to the east of the proposed westerly envelope boundary other than to require that future woody landscaping be no closer than ten (10) feet from any structure. Mr. Lowsky stated that the proposed building envelope is located in a previously developed area and is not significantly extending the influence of development; moreover, he has "no substantial problems with development of the Karp parcel as proposed" (see Exhibit #5). Since the property is zoned AFR -2 and contains two acres, it is a conforming lot. Conceptual architectural designs for the residence have already been prepared such that the structure and related improvements will fit within the proposed envelope and will respect the applicable setback requirements. The proposed envelope extends to the front and side property lines in an effort to allow for landscaping in these areas, however, it is recognized that all structures and other improvements that would exceed 30" above or below natural grade must respect the setback limitations. Finally, the applicant is requesting that vested rights be granted with this 1041 Hazard Review Site Plan. ar The following sections of this application identify and respond to the applicable standards of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. First, however, an overview description of the existing conditions of the neighborhood and subject property is provided. B. Overview of Neighborhood and Subject Property The subject lot is a metes and bounds parcel located on the west side of Liberty Lane. Its physical address is 181 Liberty Lane, and it has been assigned a Pitkin County Parcel ID Number of 2643 - 162 -00 -018. Liberty Lane is a private gravel road accessed via River Road, just north of the Woody Creek Trailer Park and Tavern. Single family residences and vacant lots line both the east and west sides of Liberty Lane, with the homes /lots on the east side backing up to the Woody Creek Trailer Park. The homes and lots on the west side extend down into the Roaring Fork River. The area is zoned AFR -2, Agricultural/ Forestry/ Residential. a The subject property is a conforming lot containing 2.00± acres. It is broken into distinct upper and lower portions. The upper portion is essentially flat and more or less even with the level of Liberty Lane. The upper portion Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 2 \\ 299993 \ 299999 A y 82 R oA 96 Fog K �eivERi 1 � I IJ , II l , � 11 U ,. � 20007l1'� � 1901 Q �J . �� I90fItYf 191 if 1901 3 300079 1900 n 190190 0 700M > 3NO32 493902 KA R P 965 IDEHCE 'Vicinity M•p' Mof to SCAL-fi WOODY c ReGK TizA i tS k PARA 10002} 1 I I I I �I ��I 1 %,. -W ., contains an existing single - family residence with a rear terrace /deck', a walkout basement, a fenced in dog area in the northerly side yard, a landscaped and grassed area in the southerly side yard, a gravel, looped driveway in the front y (easterly) yard, and a run -down carport /storage area in the center of the driveway loop. For the most part, the upper portion is sparsely vegetated with a few scattered willow, crabapple, and blue spruce trees (all of these trees were planted in there present locations), as well as a small patch of Gambel oak west of the existing house. Mowed turf occupies the space between the trees. The southerly end of the upper area, in the side setback area, is covered with sagebrush and the property line is delineated by a one foot tall stone wall. Overhead electric lines extend the length of the front yard in a north -south i , direction, with an overhead electric connection from the northerly property boundary to the existing house. The lower portion of the property (due west of the existing house) extends into the floodplain of the Roaring Fork River and the river itself. The lower portion is separated from the upper portion by a steep, brush covered embankment with a slope in excess of 30 %. The steep slope drops dramatically ® for a short distance from the sparsely vegetated upper portion to an existing grass covered path which leads to the Roaring Fork River. (Note: the proposed building envelope sets back some 11 -17 feet from the top of the slope.) The path is an old, overgrown driveway that extends from the northerly side of the upper portion of the property, down and southerly across the embankment, into the lower portion of the property. This driveway is no longer capable of being used for vehicular access due to a lack of maintenance over the years and the vegetation which has grown thereon. Below the driveway /path, the slope flattens out as the property extends into the river. The area between the driveway /path and the river is mostly covered with riparian vegetation consisting of cottonwoods, aspen, and chokecherry. There is also a small patch of Gambel oak between the path and the start of the riparian vegetation. There .� are a couple of old sheds and similar outbuildings located in the relatively flat area between the driveway/ pathway and the river. Water to the existing residence is provided by a well, and sewage disposal _ is accommodated by an on -site septic system. The existing septic system is located down -slope of the proposed building envelope, and will be removedz. A I The existing house /terrace /walkout area extends beyond the westerly boundary of the proposed building envelope and its demolition will require activity outside of the envelope. The disturbed areas will a+ be restored following reconstruction. Approval of this application should include a condition to allow this demolition and restoration activity outside of the designated envelope. 2 The existing septic system is located outside of the proposed building envelope and its removal will require activity outside of the envelope. The disturbed area will be restored following removal of the septic system. Approval of this application should include a condition to allow this removal and restoration activity outside of the designated envelope. Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 3 1'- M N, .. r new, engineered septic system will be built within the proposed building envelope, subject to review and approval of an ISDS (Individual Sewage Disposal System) permit by the Pitkin County Environmental Health Department. Fire protection is provided by the Woody Creek Rural Fire _ Protection District whose station house is located within a one to two minute drive of the subject property. Police service is provided by the Pitkin County Sheriffs Department. ® The neighborhood is mostly built out, with just a few undeveloped parcels remaining. It has a somewhat rural feel, with most of the homes being relatively modest in size and design, and the road and driveways being dirt /gravel. The ,. home sites are relatively spread out, with the exception of the Woody Creek Trailer Park to the east. Based on a review of the Pitkin County Parcel Maps, the y subject lot appears to be fairly average in size when compared with the majority of surrounding properties (excepting the trailer park). y Homes exist on the adjacent parcels to both the north and the south of the subject lot. The abutting lot to the north has recently been re /developed with a single- family residence in the area adjacent to the proposed building envelope. There is also a single- family residence tucked into the vegetation to the immediate north of the lower portion of the subject property; this house appears to be in the floodplain. Similarly, there is a single- family residence on the lot a immediately to the south of the subject site, and this house, too, is located on the lower portion of its property, down -slope and southwest of the proposed building envelope. There is also an existing residence across Liberty Lane, to the east of the Karp property. C General Submission and Procedures Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, LLC, met on -site with Mr. Vince Urbina of the Colorado State Forest Service to evaluate wildfire hazards and ' mitigation requirements. Mitch also met on -site with Mr. Jonathan Lowsky, Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist, to evaluate wildlife concerns, and with Mr. Brian McNellis of the Planning Department. The accompanying topographic ^ survey /1041 Hazard Review Map demonstrates that all slopes between 15% and 30% or exceeding 30% have been avoided. Further, the proposed envelope represents a setback ranging from 11 feet to over 17 feet from the top of any such slopes. ^ Mr. Urbina has provided a letter containing his recommendations for wildfire hazard mitigation, and said letter is included herewith as Exhibit #4. In general terms, Mr. Urbina felt that the proposed envelope is not problematic a Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 4 UUU,J 9 El .r from a wildfire hazard standpoint, and suggested only a few simple mitigation measures, as described below. Mr. Lowsky has also provided a letter stating that the proposed building envelope would not result in any wildlife impacts and that he has no substantial problems with development of the subject property as proposed (see Exhibit #5). In accordance with Section 3- 80- 010(B)(1), this application is submitted pursuant to Section 4-40 for Administrative Review by the Community Development Director. That is, the proposed building envelope will accommodate development of one single family dwelling unit and customary accessory uses located entirely outside of any Area of Local and State w Interest /1041 Environmental Hazard Areas. While 1041 mapping for the site includes low wildfire hazards, floodplains, and geologic hazards, these hazards affect only the portions of the property to the west of and below the proposed building envelope. Nonetheless, a few basic conditions will be appropriate, as suggested herein and as recommended by Mr. Lowsky and Mr. Urbina. Once this application is determined complete, Section 4 -40 -020 calls for Planning Office Review with a decision by the Planning Director. After review by the Planning Office, the Planning Director may: a) issue a development permit, b) issue a development permit subject to conditions based upon the ' standards of the Code, c) issue a written denial of the application, or d) schedule a public meeting before the Board of County Commissioners to consider the application. It is our hope that the outcome of the Administrative Review will be either option "a" or option "b." II. 1041 ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD REVIEWS A review of the County's 1041 maps during the pre - application conference indicated that the applicant should address the potential for geologic hazards, wildfire hazards, and floodplain hazard areas on the property. Given the presence of the Roaring Fork River and its floodplain on the site, it was also felt that the potential for riparian and wildlife habitat concerns should also be analyzed. Specifically, the mapped areas which we were directed to address are as follows: A. Geologic Hazard Areas: Slopes between 15% and 30 %, as well as greater than 30% are present on the property. B. Wildfire Hazard Areas: The property is classified/ mapped as being ■ subject to "low' wildfire hazards. Vince Urbina, Assistant District Forester of the Colorado State Forest Service, agrees with the "low" rating. Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 P 1/A m 5MCUON 10 R Oe1AlC0�[ I IO.TI' � O rOV/N LIMY Y/ Be �� iOVMD 4PIN[ ^ W r NN� f A•'•N N•A4 � W F � W B RNR w 8010 CERTIFICATION . ] 1]NOt..M P.. C DlP C. YaBRWR A R61RTOn0 IAMD BORPRTOR P TtlR 31Ai6 OP COWPADp �] CBBIVY TRAT . PUT tM Mo.. FRD. ♦ T0D WIROM PRVJOI® VMD6 MY RU XM DDMM IN ---------- . _ MO CI fAUR AXR [UPBRIT TO m REST DP LYORUDFR MO BEI] ®, iH69 CRRIRIPJf1pP ®YOO UNI.BN R6t BTA]VIO OX M .D. HLVIBRR DA SIpX® TR® ___, DA PI - Ep0_. bivm - wo YORROR RIA 1biip ----------------- .MT uT+L .xoa rvr oiuev® eeu A. I Pw ]H PAID N M1Y OmRA � bndaTYM 1P ]rA® p I AREA = 2.00 ACRES p oFw OVIW.DMG9 IGma) oX IRDU ��B ' \ I IBFn. Nm 9eptn 6 � LEGAL DESCRIPTION A . 01 LAND ®MG TART 01 . r. Y Ix BOlrte. MD.. 6 DIRT Or . BIR P.Y. SAO .CT B YORE NLLY D6CWBG M PGWBR: .MftNM AT AT 1. DlmlR RE NOFM 1/A COAN[p OP SAID SRCfIpN le BPlR9 N. ISIN Ab' Y 1800.49 POR: TDR S MNO'B 20E... IRT: RMLY M BTNII ..AA. IRT fb }BE [IIFTEB Or TAB ROAROO IORR PNOI: TB8NC6 N Y0.1B I OO. FY MIT AIDMG T10 CYnOI YNE Mr M P.M. IOR[ Rfl6: TI®i6 N D.. E ...AA RET AIDNe tG CYM®1 MME OF TIB "'MD FORE NIRR: TPCICH M OENY E IO.TI PRt AIONL T6 C6 .MD OP M6 ROMMO FOG W... TGIQ s MN� [ AM.eI PEAT TO R[ .1. Br NXDI INO, vmDn covurr srATE or rowRAw d/A KARP 1041 HAZARD REVIEW MAP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ' �xenyu APPRO I P I ;I 1 'D 'DI. I a[ IMI .M 1L1 BY tW i I � \ Ir, w \ T P TR® '— COYYVMM OBFYDPI[EfrFP RR.REI6FT YVT�IViM A OREAYM.TON Xp. \ I I rIn LEGEND & NOTES \ s 1 WAIVER I I o F..M. svMn uo .. As D6 \ vi I I SIIRRY O. v" ON ..-D I/1 SeC1'10.Y IINS 16 1®AP GP YTL BEVIG TXE NF 10 .1 1➢1 ANB TIB Nt COY BC 100 PG Y]I AM. T6 MOIRN 1/I MP OL 4ECTOX IB - YRG SWIYB' F APPY[Mr µ'pOt1Y0p® TOA1 fl8/9/IB 8I$ RLM pPop130 0 PTTM TAB IR�PQR. MT OPAOP6YLV13. AMR m m AMD�OCCO ` MCY THaroi. RB PROWIOXE '1868 APOVIATOXB RO MM M ANY XAY 512 ART . OP MPYM. IMC. I'm COYp}YlM GROG MO. OCO¢ If DAM I.-,. It33D IM x38 PPGAPATION OP T113 9VRPEY. 93 1 ARBAB tN M RRY O W�IIPE. 0R TNAT 0PRO100 TIIX YWVR6 T11 OVAMN166 TR SAVPtY OP AMY 1 I P Y�� $ t000 08MR LAR —Y— nG .N A LIMO ' I PRRAR® OF Mal ACKNOD KODAM r 0 POF6 POIA • CoNTML .4PAC RIbs..1 A6 oTBPJQ'AO 8L8CRIC YN6 - DAM- . YOW UP.ROBBRT YARP R8 OROVNO tM NPBPID tPIX SNOF AT TXC TIYB OP SVMVBY PxoxB/Pn loiol Yae —AMID POST® ADDRCSS IS 0101 VBEYTf 1AM" PYFIG . aVMA 11 :000 GR R RG RECORDING CERTIFICATE N9 NO 6010 PO. E]. IWB w ne w D ,ID' xr ao• w � Damuws n� r`�wxc RrPIi Ire m" rn�xn c�i.v �`�oro n D`n .Y. TAP ___. wr or _ ___ obo In PIAT aaD. .. r.DR M IvoPiraN eDIPoti SCALE: 1 "= 20' -0' 818L Y RAEED ON TB. Y. + ]W.O' (SCl SPII[8) __— CORBWR RR6TAL 6 Y T6i A A A �� q'a p}',(jb3pi� P 1/A m 5MCUON 10 R Oe1AlC0�[ I IO.TI' � O rOV/N LIMY Y/ Be �� iOVMD 4PIN[ ^ W r NN� f A•'•N N•A4 � W F � W B RNR w 8010 CERTIFICATION . ] 1]NOt..M P.. C DlP C. YaBRWR A R61RTOn0 IAMD BORPRTOR P TtlR 31Ai6 OP COWPADp �] CBBIVY TRAT . PUT tM Mo.. FRD. ♦ T0D WIROM PRVJOI® VMD6 MY RU XM DDMM IN ---------- . _ MO CI fAUR AXR [UPBRIT TO m REST DP LYORUDFR MO BEI] ®, iH69 CRRIRIPJf1pP ®YOO UNI.BN R6t BTA]VIO OX M .D. HLVIBRR DA SIpX® TR® ___, DA PI - Ep0_. bivm - wo YORROR RIA 1biip ----------------- .MT uT+L .xoa rvr oiuev® eeu A. I Pw ]H PAID N M1Y OmRA � bndaTYM 1P ]rA® p I AREA = 2.00 ACRES p oFw OVIW.DMG9 IGma) oX IRDU ��B ' \ I IBFn. Nm 9eptn 6 � LEGAL DESCRIPTION A . 01 LAND ®MG TART 01 . r. Y Ix BOlrte. MD.. 6 DIRT Or . BIR P.Y. SAO .CT B YORE NLLY D6CWBG M PGWBR: .MftNM AT AT 1. DlmlR RE NOFM 1/A COAN[p OP SAID SRCfIpN le BPlR9 N. ISIN Ab' Y 1800.49 POR: TDR S MNO'B 20E... IRT: RMLY M BTNII ..AA. IRT fb }BE [IIFTEB Or TAB ROAROO IORR PNOI: TB8NC6 N Y0.1B I OO. FY MIT AIDMG T10 CYnOI YNE Mr M P.M. IOR[ Rfl6: TI®i6 N D.. E ...AA RET AIDNe tG CYM®1 MME OF TIB "'MD FORE NIRR: TPCICH M OENY E IO.TI PRt AIONL T6 C6 .MD OP M6 ROMMO FOG W... TGIQ s MN� [ AM.eI PEAT TO R[ .1. Br NXDI INO, vmDn covurr srATE or rowRAw to • u I, �m 1 1 L lL 1 ra.u. = aoO.R• , d/A NO 4 ' �xenyu I P I ;I 1 i I � \ Ir, w \ \ I I rIn 1 3 I \ to • u I, �m 1 1 L lL 1 ra.u. = aoO.R• , 000021 rIn 1 3 I \ s 1 I I I I I \ vi I I 1 1 I ' I PRRAR® BP ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. RIbs..1 A6 P.R. WT AERA Mr.. row. A.,. PxoxB/Pn loiol Yae —AMID PYFIG . aVMA 11 :000 TOP. ADO® YM. A. IIPo N9 NO 6010 PO. E]. IWB 000021 A. C. Floodplain /Riparian, Shoreland and Wetlands Areas: The site contains areas mapped as being within the floodplain of the Roaring Fork River. As such, this application also includes a review of the wildlife habitat standards applicable to riparian, shoreland and wetlands areas. Our responses to each of the applicable standards of the County's Land Use Code with regard to these hazards follows below and is illustrated on the g proposed 1041 site plan. A. Section 3410 -M Geologic Hazard Areas Section 3 -80 -050 identifies development standards applicable to specific geologic hazard areas, including avalanche areas, landslide areas, potentially unstable slopes, rockfall areas, alluvial fans, talus slopes, mancos shale, faults, expansive soil and rock, and ground subsistence. Of these, the only hazard type believed to be present on the subject lot is potentially unstable slopes. To the extend that any of the other geologic hazard types are present on the site, the proposed building envelope entirely avoids any consequent impacts. An engineered foundation based on soils analysis will be provided as part of the subsequent building permit application. Section 3- 80- 050(C), Potentially Unstable Slopes, provides standards for the review of development proposed on slopes of between 15% and 30% as well as slopes in excess of 30 %. The currently proposed building envelope does not encroach upon any slopes of 15% or greater. The subject site has an obvious "top of slope and the proposed building envelope provides a setback of between eleven and seventeen or more feet from it. The applicant is amenable to a condition of approval (or note on the site plan) requiring site specific soils engineering studies to determine proper foundation and interceptor drain designs. With regard to the septic system and leach field, we believe that the building envelope will accommodate a properly designed ISDS. There is no intention on this applicant's part to place any portion of the septic system or leach fields to the west where slopes are steeper; in fact, the existing septic system will be relocated from the upper portion of the embankment to within the proposed building envelope. At any rate, it is understood that an engineered ISDS will need to be designed and a permit therefor will need to be applied for and approved by the Environmental Health Department. Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 6 The specific standards of Section 3- 80- 050(C), Potentially Unstable Slopes, are provided below (indented and italicized), and each standard is directly followed by a response. 1. Development is prohibited on slopes greater than fifteen percent (15 0 16) unless a specific development proposal is fotind to result in a site design that creates less impact than if the development was limited exclusively to slopes of less than fifteen percent (15 9 1 6). In the event that a development proposal utilizes slopes in excess of fifteen percent (15 9 1 6) or if a development site is comprised exclusively of slopes which exceed fifteen percent (15%), design and development shall be based on a detailed site analysis, including geologic and engineering studies to identify the best development area based on the following considerations: a. Adequate mechanical support shall be provided for cut slopes. b. Adding water which may decrease slope stability shall be avoided. c. Adding weight to the top of the slope shall be avoided d Disturbed slopes must be contoured so that they can be revegetated. e. Steepening of existing slopes shall be avoided. f Confine cuts, fills, grading and excavation to the minimum area needed for construction. The proposed building envelope is limited exclusively to less than 15% slopes. Since, no slopes of 15% or greater are included in the proposed envelope, sub - standards a f are not applicable. 2. Development is prohibited on slopes greater than thirty percent (30%), except as permitted herein. a. Exception for Minor Changes in Slope - Development may be permitted on lands that have a slope in excess of thirty percent (30%) when the slope is due to the presence of a minor natural or matt -made change in the gradient of a continuous slope, provided the following conditions are met: 1. Not Subject to Instability — The applicant demonstrates that the slope's ground surface are not prone to instability or failure and that the proposed development will not cause greater instability or increase the potential for slope failure. .. 2. Compliance with Other Regulations — The applicant demonstrates that development on slopes in excess of thirty percent (30 9 1 o) does not increase visual, wildlife, or wildfire impacts, or compromise or conflict with other ti policies or standards of the Land Ilse Code. The proposed building envelope avoids all slopes in excess of thirty percent (30 %); thus, sub - standards a.1. and a.2. are not applicable. B. Section 3- 80-070, Wildfire Hazard Areas Section 3 -80 -070 was repealed and re- enacted with the adoption of Ordinance 99 -6. As amended, the section establishes mitigation standards Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 7 uu+:iz3 0 �. applicable to developments within either severe wildfire hazard areas, or low and medium hazard wildfire areas. The property is mapped as a low risk wildfire hazard. On May 31, 2000, Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, LLC, met on -site with Mr. Vince Urbina, Assistant District Forester of the Colorado State Forest Service, to evaluate wildfire hazards and mitigation requirements. Mr. Urbina has provided a letter containing his recommendations for wildfire hazard mitigation, and said letter is included herewith as Exhibit #4. As explained in Exhibit #4, the proposed building envelope ensures that the replacement residence will be located on the nearly level bench above the Roaring Fork River. The existing vegetation consists of mature willow, crabapple, and blue spruce trees, all of which were planted in their present locations. Mowed turf occupies the space between these trees. Mr. Urbina has rated the wildfire hazard as low because the trees are widely spaced and there is little to no fuel between the trees. Based on his site visit and a review of the proposed building envelope (a copy of the plan was provided to Mr. Urbina), Mr. Urbina provided a few recommendations aimed at ensuring a defensible space around the structure(s). In total, Mr. Urbina provided the following recommendations in his comment letter (see Exhibit #4): 1. If the small patch of Gambel oak located just southwest of the existing house is to be maintained, it must be separated from the replacement structure by at least fifteen (15) with its lower limbs removed from the ground to half the total height of the trunk. Otherwise, remove this patch of Gambel oak altogether. 2. West of an below the building envelope, maintain the old driveway path as a small fuel /fire break by mowing it regularly. 3. Remove the small patch of Gambel oak located between the old driveway path and the start of the riparian vegetation. Once removed, treat the stumps to prevent regeneration. -F 4. West of an below the building envelope, remove the lower limbs of all cottonwood and aspen trees within 125 feet of the house to a height of ten (10) feet or half the total height of the tree, whichever is least. 5. If decks are ever to be installed on the west side of the house, enclose the undersides with one -hour fire resistive construction material. 6. Make no future plantings of woody vegetation within ten (10) feet of any structure. The applicants hereby agree to comply with Mr. Urbina's recommendations, as described above. Further, as required under Section 3-80 - 070(C)(1), the proposed building envelope is not located in a draw or canyon, or on slopes greater than 30 %. To the extend that the sub - sections of Section 3 -80- . 070(C) directly include any mitigation recommendations that, above and beyond those put forth by Mr. Urbina, are deemed to be necessary and are reasonable, Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 8 A 1+ the applicants are willing to accept such recommendations as conditions of their 1041 approval. w Upon review of Mr. Urbina's recommendations and those of Mr. Lowsky (detailed below), there is an apparent conflict. Mr. Urbina suggests complete removal of a small patch of Gambel oak located below and outside of the proposed building envelope. Mr. Lowsky's letter (Exhibit #5) states that, "Native vegetation must be maintained outside the building envelope as per §3- 80.080(A)(3)." After discussing this conflict with Mr. Lowsky, he consented to supporting the removal of the Gambel oak patch as suggested by Mr. Urbina, provided a wildlife habitat mitigation plan for the affected area is agreed upon by the applicant and the County Wildlife Biologist for implementation by the applicant prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the replacement residence. C Section 3-80 -080, Wildlife Habitat Areas Section 3 -80 -080 was repealed and re- enacted with the adoption of Ordinance 98 -20. As amended, the section establishes land use standards for wildlife habitat areas, as mapped by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) on the County's adopted Wildlife Resource Information System (1041 Wildlife maps) and as otherwise known to be wildlife habitat areas by the DOW. The site is not mapped for, nor does it contain, deer, elk or bighorn sheep: winter concentration areas; severe winter range; critical habitat, migration patterns, corridors, or highway crossings; or, production areas. The only wildlife habitat area believed to be applicable to the subject property falls under the category of riparian, shoreland and wetland areas. As mentioned earlier in this application, the subject property includes a portion of the Roaring Fork River and the riparian area adjacent thereto. The applicant's representative met on -site with Jonathan Lowsky, Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist, to evaluate wildlife concerns. Mr. Lowsky's states in his referral letter (Exhibit #5), that he has "no substantial problems with development of the Karp parcel (Parcel id# 2643 162 00 018) as proposed." Moreover, Mr. Lowsky's letter explains that, "The proposed building envelope is located in a previously developed area and it not significantly extending the influence of development. The only significant wildlife habitat on the property is below the proposed building envelope along the Roaring Fork River and on the west - facing slopes." Due to the fact that the surrounding area has a history of black bear /human conflict and black bears actively use the Roaring Fork River riparian Karp Administrative 1011 Review Application Page 9 �` ti11i;�JC� area as a movement corridor, Mr. Lowsky's recommends that the following conditions be applied so as to minimize impacts to wildlife: I. Fencing outside the building envelope must comply with Section 3- 80.80(A)(10) and (11) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. 2 Native vegetation must be maintained outside the building envelope as per Section 3- 80 80(A)(3) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. 3. Install and use approved bear -proof trash containers (fully enclosed steel containers of any size with steel lids that have a two -step opening mechanism, and approved by the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist or personnel of the CDOW). Verification of compliance with this condition must occur prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. As explained above, Mr. Urbina suggests complete removal of a small patch of Gambel oak located below and outside of the proposed building W envelope in order to minimize wildfire hazards. Mr. Lowsky's second recommended condition conflicts with Mr. Urbina's suggestion. After discussing ., this conflict with Mr. Lowsky, he consented to supporting the removal of the Gambel oak patch as suggested by Mr. Urbina, provided a wildlife habitat mitigation plan for the affected area is agreed upon by the applicant and the County Wildlife Biologist for implementation by the applicant prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the replacement residence. Our responses to the applicable standards of Section 3 -80 -080, as provided below, demonstrate compliance therewith as well as with the recommendations of the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist. Section 3- 80- 080(A), General Standards There is no commercial, industrial or high impact recreational development, open pit mineral extraction, or road construction being contemplated or requested. The proposed building envelope would ensure that residential development on the subject site is located outside of habitat areas to avoid impacts on wildlife. Vegetation removal will be kept to the minimum y necessary for construction, installation of utilities, development of a driveway, and mitigation of wildfire hazards. Disturbed areas will be revegetated with and future landscaping will be comprised of appropriate species. Food, cover, and water sources beneficial to wildlife exist only on the ® lower portion of the property and the embankment. The proposed building envelope completely avoids creating any impacts on these areas. All areas adjacent to the River will be preserved. At no point is the proposed building envelope within 160 feet of the floodplain. There is a vertical gain of more than 50 feet from the floodplain to the proposed building envelope. The proposed i Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 10 �. building envelope ensures that no structures, including decks and the similar, would encroach upon or otherwise hang over slopes. The site is not known to contain any endangered or even threatened species habitat. There are no known " nesting sites on the property. If any fencing is to be installed, the applicant is willing to comply with DOW fencing recommendations and those of Sections 3- 80- 080(A)(10) and (11), as suggested by Mr. Lowsky. The wildlife protection standards encourage preservation of standing dead trees whenever possible, but the Colorado State Forest Service recommends that the scrub oak located on the embankment be removed for wildfire mitigation reasons. The applicant will remove these trees and restore the area in accordance with a wildlife habitat mitigation plan to be agreed upon by the applicant and the County Wildlife Biologist. The wildlife mitigation plan will be implemented by the applicant prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the replacement residence. Section 3- 80- 080(G), Riparian, Shoreland and Wetland Areas Section 3- 80- 080(G), Riparian, Shoreland and Wetland Areas, states that development shall be prohibited within such areas with the exception that bridges, roads, utility crossings and other structures such as irrigation devices may be permitted upon a finding that there is no feasible alternative location and that any impacts will be adequately mitigated. This application does not propose any development in riparian, shoreland or wetland areas. To the extent that such areas exist on the subject property, they are a good distance below and to the west of the proposed building envelope. As mentioned above, the proposed building envelope resides some 175 feet to the east and more than 50 feet above the floodplain boundary. After visiting the site and reviewing the proposed building envelope, the County Wildlife Biologist concluded that the proposed building envelope would ensure avoidance of riparian areas and wildlife _ . impacts. Since the proposed building envelope will not permit development in a riparian, wetland or shoreland area, sub - standards 1 -14 of Section 3- 80- 080(G) are not applicable. Said standards apply only in cases where development is to be permitted in such areas. Section 3 -80 -040, F000dplain Hazard Areas In addition to the standards applicable to riparian, shoreland and wetland areas, as well as the General Standards of Section 3 -80 -030 (below), the standards of Section 3 -80 -040 specifically apply to mapped floodplain hazard areas as depicted in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 11 J Insurance Rate Map, National Flood Insurance Program (June 4, 1987) and areas later found to be in flood hazard areas. The proposed "Karp 1041 Hazard Review Map' depicts the boundary of the 100 year floodplain as it affects the subject property. The depicted boundary is based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map, National Flood Insurance Program (June 4, 1987). From a review of the "Karp 1041 Hazard Review Map" and the depicted floodplain boundary shown thereon, one can see that the proposed building envelope is located between 165 and 233 horizontal feet (depending where one measures) away from the floodplain. Similarly, the proposed building envelope is located .. well over 50 vertical feet above the floodplain boundary (probably more, but the topography was not surveyed that far down the hillside). Nevertheless, the standards of Section 3 -80 -040 arguably remain applicable to the current application and are provided below with responses to each. A. No development, use, fill construction, excavation, embankment, or alteration on or over any portion of the floodplain shall be permitted which would result in any of the following: As explained above and depicted on the proposed "Karp 1041 Hazard Review Map," the building envelope will effectively and completely preclude any development, use, fill, construction, excavation, embankment, or alteration on or over any portion of the floodplain. As such, it is not necessary to list and respond to "any of the following' (sub - standards 1 -8). B. The following uses shall be permitted in a floodplain area to the extent that they are not prohibited by any other regulation and they comply with the guidelines set forth in 3- 80.40(A). No uses are proposed in the floodplain. As such it is not necessary to list the uses permitted under sub - standards 1 -3 or respond to "the guidelines set forth in 3- 80.40(A). " C. Development is prohibited within the 100 year floodplain. In the event that .. there is no hazard free area on a site a development application is subsequently denied, all applicant may appeal the denial to the Board of County Commissioners pursuant to Section 3 -290 of this Code. If an appeal is granted by the Board and development is permitted, an application shall be reviewed according to Section 3- 80.40(A) and the following standards: s harp Administrative 1031 Review Application Page 12 ++ The property contains a hazard -free site and, as such, no development is proposed within the floodplain. As such it is not necessary to list and respond to "the following standards" of Section 3- 80- 040(C)(1) and (2) Section 3 -80 -030, General Standards " The standards of Section 3 -80 -030 apply to all Areas of Local and State Interest /1041 Environmental Hazard Areas. In response to the standards of this Section, the proposed building envelope has been sited such that it would restrict development to the portions of the site which entirely avoid Areas of Local and - State Interest /1041 Environmental Hazard Areas. The foregoing responses to the �+ applicable 1041 hazard review sections and other narratives demonstrate compliance with and satisfaction of the general standards of this Section. III. VESTED RIGHTS The applicant hereby requests that Vested Rights be granted to this site specific development plan and approval pursuant to Sections 4 -140 and 4-40 - 020(G) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. 0 TV. SUMMARY " The property which is the subject of this application is located between the Roaring Fork River and the Woody Creek Trailer Park. It contains areas mapped for low risk wildfire hazards, geologic hazards (slopes greater than 30 %), and floodplain hazards. In accordance with Section 3- 80- 010(B)(1), this application is submitted pursuant to Section 4 -40 for Administrative Review by the Community Development Director. That is, the proposed building envelope will accommodate development of one single family dwelling unit and customary accessory uses located entirely outside of any Area of Local and State Interest /1041 Environmental Hazard Areas. While 1041 mapping for the site includes low wildfire hazards, floodplains, and geologic hazards, these hazards affect only the portions of the property to the west of and below the proposed building envelope. Section 4 -40- 020(D)(2)(b) allows for the administrative approval of a 1041 application with a conditions. In light of this, we believe a few basic conditions will be appropriate, as summarized below. All suggested conditions are underlined and printed in bold. Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 13 ui;(.., J2`) M w The only geologic hazard type known to be present on the subject lot is ® potentially unstable slopes. Section 3- 80- 050(C), Potentially Unstable Slopes, provides standards for the review of development proposed on slopes of between 15% and 30% as well as slopes in excess of 30 %. The proposed building ,. envelope does not encroach upon any slopes of 15% or greater. The subject site has an obvious "top of slope' and the proposed building envelope provides a ' setback of between eleven and seventeen or more feet from it. There is no intention on this applicant's part to place any portion of the septic system or leach fields to the west where slopes are steeper; in fact, the existing septic system will be relocated from the upper portion of the embankment to within the proposed building envelope. At any rate, it is understood that an engineered ISDS will need to be designed and a permit therefor will need to be applied for and approved by the Environmental Health Department The applicant is amenable to a condition of approval requiring site specific soils engineering studies to determine proper foundation and interceptor drain designs Similarly, an engineered foundation based on soils analysis will be provided as part of the subsequent building permit application In addition, removal of the existing septic system and demolition of the existing house will require limited amounts of activity outside of the building envelope herein proposed and, if approved, the approval should specifically allow for such activi The site is mapped as a "low" wildfire hazard area. Based on this mapping, a site visit, and a review of the proposed building envelope, Mr. Vince Urbina provided the following recommendations in his comment letter (see Exhibit #4): 1. If the small patch of Gambel oak located iust southwest of the existing house is to be maintained, it must be separated from the replacement structure by at least fifteen (15) with its lower limbs removed from the around to half the total height of the trunk. Otherwise, remove this patch of Gambel oak altogether 2. West of an below the building envelope, maintain the old driveway path as a small fuel/fire break by mowing it regularly 3. Remove the small patch of Gambel oak located between the old driveway path and the start of the riparian vegetation. Once removed, treat the stumps to prevent regeneration 4. West of an below the building envelope, remove the lower limbs of all cottonwood and aspen trees within 125 feet of the house to a height of ten (10) feet or half the total height of the tree, whichever is least 5. If decks are ever to be installed on the west side of the house, enclose the undersides with one -hour fire resistive construction material 6. Make no future plantings of woody vegetation within ten (10) feet of any structure Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application U lIr,l l ",.) Page 14 As mentioned earlier in this application, the subject property includes a portion of the Roaring Fork River and the riparian area within and adjacent to its floodplain. The floodplain of the Roaring Fork River is not an issue since the proposed building envelope is located substantially upslope of it (more than 50 vertical feet) and between 165 and 235 horizontal feet from it (see survey /site plan). The applicant's representative met on -site with Jonathan Lowsky, Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist, to evaluate wildlife concerns. Mr. Lowsky's states in his referral letter (Exhibit #5), that he has "no substantial problems with development of the Karp parcel (Parcel id# 2643 162 00 018) as proposed." Moreover, Mr. Lowsky's letter explains that, "The proposed building envelope is located in a previously developed area and is not significantly extending the hfuence of development. The only significant wildlife habitat on the property is below the proposed building envelope along the Roaring Fork River and on the west facing slopes." Nevertheless, due to the fact that the surrounding area has a history of black bear /human conflict and black bears actively use the Roaring Fork River riparian area as a movement corridor, Mr. Lowsky's recommends that the following conditions be applied so as to minimize impacts to wildlife: 1. Fencing outside the building envelope must comply with Section 3- 80.80(A)(10) and (11) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code 2. Native vegetation must be maintained outside the building envelope as per Section 3- 80.80(A)(3) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. (See modification described and suggested below.) 3. Install and use approved bear -proof trash containers (fully enclosed steel containers of any size with steel lids that have a two -step opening mechanism, and approved by the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist or personnel of the CDOW). Verification of compliance with this condition must occur prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy .. Mr. Lowsky's second recommended condition seemingly conflicts with Mr. Urbina's suggestion that the small patch of Gambel oak located below and outside of the proposed building envelope be completely removed in order to minimize wildfire hazards. After discussing this conflict with Mr. Lowsky, he consented to supporting the removal of the Gambel oak patch as suggested by Mr. Urbina, provided a wildlife habitat mitigation plan for the affected area is agreed upon by the applicant and the County Wildlife Biologist for implementation by the applicant prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the replacement residence. Thus, Mr. Lowsky's suggested condition number 2 should be modified to read as follows: " Native vegetation must be maintained outside the building envelope as per Section 3- 80.80(A)(3) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 15 P. however, the small patch of Gambel oak located between the old driveway path and the start of the riparian vegetation shall be removed for wild mitigation purposes Once removed the stumps shall be treated to prevent regeneration. A wildlife habitat mitigation plan for the described area affected by removal of Gam bel oak shall be agreed upon by the applicant and the C ounty Wildlife Biologist for implementation by the applicant prior to the issu of a certificate of occupancy for the replacement residence " N With approval of the proposed building envelope and the conditions described above, their will be no impacts to or from Areas of Local and State Interest /1041 Environmental Hazard Areas. As such, we feel this application should be administratively approved by the Community Development Director pursuant to Section 440- 020(D)(2)(b). To the extend that additional conditions are deemed necessary under the standards of the Code and are reasonable, the applicants are willing to accept such recommendations as conditions of their 1041 approval. q r w • w Karp Administrative 1041 Review Application Page 16 "'° �1 'iJv•�VL EXHIBITS Exhibit #1: Proof of Ownership /Title Commitment Exhibit #2: Letter of authorization for Haas Land Planning, LLC, and Gibson Architects, LLC, to represent the applicants Exhibit #3: Pitkin County Pre - Application Conference Summary (5/10/00) Exhibit #4: Referral Comments Letter from Vince Urbina of the Colorado State Forest Service (6/16/00) Exhibit #5: Referral Comments Letter from Jonathan Lowsky, Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist (6/20/00) Exhibit #6: Executed Agreement to Pay Form Exhibit #7: List of All Adjacent Property Owners r A���3 n -4 gm EXHIBIT #1 eni by: inomas N. Meloc-y nevi csLd LCD aduuez rouoi 0U� UU �•����•�, �ay� ��� SCHEDULBA Order Number.• 00023017 -C3 " 1. FTvctiw date: Sarah 30, 1998 at 7:30 A.H. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued. r (a) A. L. T.A. Owner's (standard) Proposed Insured: ROBERT 5, KARP AND SORDRA 0. RARP (b) A.L. T.A. Martgagee's (standard) Proposed Inswed; TO HE DRI2'RMINED N Leasehold Proposed insured: Amount of Insurance $ 700,060.00 $ 520,660.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is '-' fee stmpte 4. Intle to the foe simple estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof Jested in: G$N$ S. XRILL and EvA j. xRZLL 5. the land referred to in this Commitment is des,:tibed as fol lows; See Attached Legal Dewcription r r �. STT-'WART 777LI OF ASPEN, INC. 6201;, Hopkins, Aspen, Co 81611 Authori7ld�ters azure- Pet Ce2any STATF.MF.M' OF CHARGES There charger are due and payable b#br+e a Policy cnn be Issued. Owners Premium $1,721.00 Form 110.1 (Owner) $ 100.60 Mortgage Premium $ 50.00 Tax Certificate $ 12.00 n� — tJuC'Jj5 H EXHIBIT #2 ,11 w 0 iY Pitkin County Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 -1975 RE: Karp 1041 Environmental Hazards Review To whom it may concern: I hereby authorize Haas Land Planning, LLC, and Gibson Architects, LLC, to act as my designated and authorized representatives with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for my property located at 181 Liberty Lane. Mitch Haas is authorized to submit an application for 1041 Environmental Hazards Review. He and Gibson Architects are also authorized to represent my P.. interests in meetings with the personnel, officers, and boards of Pitkin County. Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review, ,r please do so through Haas Land Planning, LLC, whose address and telephone number are included in the application. �. Dr. Robert Karp, Owner V 401 East Ontario, Apt. 501 Chicago, IL 60611 ,M 1. UJU11J 0 EXHIBIT #3 y .r MAY -22 -2000 MON 10 :55 AM FAX NO. 0 PrMN COUNTY PRE- APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY DATF: PROJECT: LOCATION/'LONE: OWNER) APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE: May 10, 2000 S3 �Administrativc1041 Hazard Review 181 Liberty Way /AFR -2 Dr. Robert Karp Mitch Maas Tcl: 925 -7819 PLANNER: Brian McNellis Tel: 920 -5099 1. Type of Application: Administrative 1041 Hazard Review 2. Description of Project/Development: 1he Applicant proposes to establish a building envelope which will contain a proposed single family residence. 3. Areas in which the Applicant is requested to respond, types of reports: Land Use Code Sections: • Section 3-80,1041 En IIa7ard Review 4. Review is before: Community Development Director S, Public Hearing: No 6. Will he referred to: Attorney, Floodplain Administrator, Wildlife Biologist, Colorado State Forest Service, Woody Creek Caucus. I' 1 7. What fee was the applicant requested to submit: Planning Office (deposit) $460 (additional hrs. are billed at a rate of $185/hr) 8. To apply, submit copies of the following information, unless otherwise noted: • Letter of request (application), addressing Code Sections listed above, and giving background information and summarising the 1041 hazards and mitigation. If application is to be submitted before the expiration of Pilkin County Ordinance No. 2000 -0025, the applicant must specify that proposed development will not exceed 5,750 square feet (all inclusive) as dermed by the Uniform Building Code; • 24" X 36" Site Plan (please see attached); „! J ) U UuI a MAY -22 -2000 MON 10;55 AM FAX NO. P. 03 • Proof of ownership (from a title company or attorney licensed in the State of Colorado) including legal description; • Letter from owner authoriy3ng the representative; • Agreement for payment form; • A list of adjacent property owners; • Total deposit for review of the application; • Copy of this pre- application form; PLEASE NOTE: 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 stajj's interpretations based upon representations of the applicant additional information may be required upon complete review of the application. This application is subject to the provisions of Pttkin Counry Ordinance No. 2000- 0028. iiuG 140 w I cm EXHIBIT #4 J� ;141 a/ W W fI H cm EXHIBIT #6 m MAY -22 -2000 MON 10:55 AM cm FAX NO. _« ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT , a . _,. i P. 05 PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and B,2. 15amaer ri (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1, APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for . (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). ? . APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pirkin County. Resolution - ^ No. 96 -52 establishes a fee structure for Planning applications and the payment of - -all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination- of-application °— -- �----- �: completeness. 3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and - COUNTY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties to all APPLICANT to make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit Zdditional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANNT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash. liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the COUNTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. COUNTY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICA- "s application. w d. 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. ' 1 U �EJ E_, : /�. MAY -22 -2000 MON 10;56 AM FAX N0. P. 06 w -V mT� 5. 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 an initial deposit in the amount of $ gA�—O which is for hours of Planning staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional w monthly billings to COUNTY to reimburse the COUNTY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date, APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing. PITKIN COUNTY APPLICANT Cindy Houben - �Cemwvaity-Development Director a is g:bupporNCurm —igrpay dec 2/19/95 i ;*M ?. Print e Signature Date: 2 -3 Mailing Address: 4 of E- L) 44 6- 45 EXHIBIT #7 cm .r ,r MA LIST OF ADJACENT OWNERS* Parcel Identification Number 2643 - 162 -00 -019: Freeman, John R. and Sydney J. 100 East Main Street, Suite 101 Aspen, CO 81611 Parcel Identification Number 2643 - 162 -00 -013: Schermerhorn, George and Helen R. P.O. Box 127 Woody Creek, CO 81656 Parcel Identification Number 2643- 162 -00 -014: Jellinek, John I. and Jane H. c/o Jelco Ventures P.O. Box 06447 Chicago, IL 60607 -0447 Parcel Identification Number 2643 - 162 -00 -015: Woods, Ransom B. III & Jeanne E. P.O. Box 11468 Aspen, CO 81612 Parcel Identification Number 2643 - 162 -00 -017 Bradley R. Miller & Mollie Savour P.O. Box 89 Woody Creek, CO 81656 Parcel Identification Number 2643 - 162 -00 -020: Orville Leroy Fields P.O. Box 279 Woody Creek, CO 81656 * This list was generated using the Pitkin County Assessor's information as of June 26, 2000. jr MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is made and entered into this S day of 2002, by and among Pitkin County Colorado ( "Pitkin County"), Landforms, Inc. ( "Landforms'), Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America ( "Travelers "), and Robert Karp ( "Karp ") in reference to the following facts: 1. On October 17, 2000, Pitkin County approved, in Determination No. 33 -2000, the building envelope sought by Karp in a 1041 Hazard Review subject to terms and conditions contained in Determination No. 33 -2000, which allowed for development to be undertaken within said building envelope. 2. Following approval of the building envelope pursuant to the above referenced Dcrcrmination No. 33 -2000, Pitkin County determined that certain development activities were being undertaken outside the authorized building envelope and prohibited any further development from proceeding unless and until a remediation plan acceptable to Pitkin County was agreed upon. 3. In a joint memorandum dated July 30, 2001 ( "Revegetation Memorandum "), Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist Jonathan Lowsky, and Pitkin County Land Manager Michael Craig determined what remedial measures would have to be undertaken in order for Pitkin County to allow development to recommence. The measures the Revegetation Memorandum required primarily consisted of revegetating certain areas outside of the above referenced building envelope Pitkin County determined had been damaged by development activity not authorized by Determination No. 33 -2000. 4. In addition to the revegetation, requirements described in the Revegetation Memorandum, Pitkin County required Landforms to post a Maintenance Bond (the "Bond") which would authorize payment to Pitkin County in the event the remediation of the alleged damage was not completed in accordance with the requirements stated in the Revegetation Memorandum, prior to allowing development to recommence. 5. On August 23, 2001, Landforms, as Principal, and Travelers, as Surety, posted the Bond (attached hereto) by which Landforms and Travelers were bound to pay to Pitkin County the sum of FIFTEEN THOUSAND AND N01100 DOLLARS (S15,000.00) unless the revegetation comported with the requirements of the Revegetation Memorandum after a period of time described in the Bond; as a-result, Pitkin County allowed development to recommence on the property in accordance with Determination No. 33 -2000, 6. Following the posting of the Bond, Landforms and other contractors working on the Property noted that the root structures of many of the plants and life -forms that the drafters of the Revegetation Memorandum required to be replanted/revegetated were in tact and would likely re- grow on their own and that it would be prudent to give said root structures a chance to develop in order to determine what would need to be replanted/revegetated. 7. The existence of the root structures was brought to the attention of representatives of Pitkin County who agreed that it would be wise to delay the revegetation of the Property until the next summer in order to determine what was likely to re -grow and what would need to be C.\NtPonb IVM.mLm \GGOR DON \77167_2.nOC z d tia« 'ON LJU i47 PH:0� Zoom 'W replanted/revegetated in order to comply with the requirements of the Revegetation Memorandum. NOW THEREFORE, the undersigned parties mutually understand and agree as follows: A. Revegetation The process of revegetation will be delayed until September 1, 2002 in order to allow the parties to determine which of the root structures presently in place are likely to re -grow obviating the need to revegerate those particular plants and/or organisms. B. Initial Inspection Within thirty (30) days of September 1, 2002, representatives of Pitkin County will inspect the Property for the purpose of determining what plant/life forms are re- growing, and which need to be replanted/revegetated in order to comply with the requirement of the Revegetation Memorandum. C. Remediation Following the initial inspection described in Paragraph B above, representatives of Pitkin County will confer with Landforms and inform its President, Mark Bedell, in writing, which plants must be replanted/revegetated. Following the initial inspection and conference described herein, it may not be necessary for Landfomis to undertake as thorough a revegetation as was initially required by the Revegetation Memorandum, or the scope of the rcvcgctafion may be the same as originally required by the Revegetation Memorandum but will not become greater in breadth or scope than was originally required by the Revegetation Memorandum. D. Final Inspection and Release of Bond Regardless of whether the scope of the revegetation decreases or remains the same as a result of the initial inspection described in Paragraph B above, Pitkin County's right to conduct a final inspection in order to determine if the Bond should be released, must occur, if at all, within the time frame described in the Bond, and nothing understood or agreed to in this Memorandum of Understanding extends the date for such final inspection or any other time frames defined and/or described by the terms of the Bond. E. Consequence of Delay As a consequence of waiting until September 1, 2002 in order to commence the revegetation of the Property described herein, the extent of the growth that will occur in the plants that are rcvegetated will inevitably be less than would have otherwise occurred had Landforms commenced revegetation without delaying same until September 1, 2002 as described herein. Pitkin County will, in good faith, consider this when undertaking its final inspection, pursuant to the terms of the Bond, for purposes of voiding the Bond and the obligations there under. F. Entire Agreement This Memorandum of Understanding is the entire agreement of the parties hereto and modifies the obligations of the parties to the Bond referenced herein. This Memorandum of Understanding may not be altered, amended, or modified unless otherwise agreed to in writing signed by all parties hereto. G. Inspection Fees Subsection 7 -20 -30 of Section 7 -20 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code (the "Code ") authorizes the assessment of an investigation fee for enforcement of the provisions of the Code. To date the accrued inspection fees are $1493.01 \ (a schedule of accrued inspection fees is attached hereto as Exhibit "X . Concomitant with his signing this Memorandum of Understanding, Karp agrees to pay to the Community Development Department of Pitkin County the sum of one thousand four hundred ninety three and 01 /XX dollars ($1493.01) for the investigation fees accrued to date, and agrees to L r J4� �( iul_ CAN rPoribl \iMnnnge\GG0RD0N\73 167 200C 'd bRL 'ON NVEb :01 ZW 'U '8dd :+0:0! AM; Nei I Gan no Apency ;9705450676 MAINTENANCE BOND Pllkln coamy. Catnadn DOND n 19 S L09SO770 aCM KNOW ALL MEN BY TIMSE PRESENTS That we, the undersigned, as, Mark Bedell, of LANDFORMS, INC., as Principal, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor" and TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, a corporation organized under the laws of the Srate of Connecticut, and qualified to transact business in the State of Colorado, as "Surety ", are held and firmly bound unto Pitkin County Colorado, as obligoe, hereinafter referred to as "Owner ", in the penal sum of (the greater of $2,000 or the total value of the work to be performed) FhFT EEN THOUSAND AND N01100 DOLLARS (;615,000,00), lawful money of the United States of America, for the payment of which sum well and truly made to the Owner, we bind ourselves, and our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigrrees,jointly and severally, by these presents: SIGNED AND SEALED this 23RD day of AUGUST . 2001 WHEREAS said Contractor is about to commence revegetation of riparian lands located on the tract of land described in the "Karp 1041 ldeaard Review Site Plan" filed with the Pitkin County Cleric and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado in Plat Book 54, Page 74, in accordance with detailed plans and specifications as stated in 7onathan Lowky's. Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist, and Michael Craig's, Pitkin County Land Manager, joint memorandum dated July 30, 2001 (the "Memorandum ")(attached herero). NOW 1=EF'ORE, The conditions of the foregoing obligations are such that if said Contractor shall well and truly perform all of the covenants and conditions contained in the Memorandum and such covenants and conditions remain sarkiied after two full growing seasons after Contractor completes the initial revegetation, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect in law (for purposes of this bond a "growing season" shall commence May 1 " and expire on September 1" of the Sartre year, and die inspection rights of the County described herein must be exercised, ifat all, within 60 days ofthe end of the second growing season), TIIIS Bond is fur; 7{X Bingfe pro j=4R Multiple occurrence Work, J3lankes Coverage (check only one category) and guarantees that the revegotation work will be performed by Contractor in compliance with terns of the Memorandum. This bond shall be non - cancelable until the expiration of the time provided for the Piddu County Land Management Ofliee to complete its final inspection of the riparian area following two fall growing seasons subsequent to the Contractor's completion of the initial revegetation. In the event that the work is deemed unsatisfactory to the Pitkin County after such final inspection, Pitch County shall be entitled to payment of the surety amount hereunder within a reasonable time after the Surety is provided with an affidavit executed by the Pitkiu County Attorney's Office which states that Pitkin County is entitled to the disbursement of such monies. Contractor hereby agrees to hold Surety harmless in the event that it is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction that such funds were improperly requested by Pitkin County. Company's to U001 WILSON W. M:mmnnleonurJ 1pm�iudJeOMWn9WacMO0.M Or MMNTI24ANCF BOND tseeoodmnmOnll.dw and 4 2/ 3 AMERICA S 'd bEL 'ON NHbl 0 f HE '0l 'Uv d- 30- 01;10:01AM;Nei1 Garina ADenCy IN WITNESS WHEREOF, TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY and FA RMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY have caused this instrument to be signed by their Senior Vice President and their corporate seals to be hereto affixed this 9th day of April 2001, STATE OF CONNZcTiCUT }SS. Hartford COUNTY OF HARTFORD �.rw rwv lom catr.coN�tL�. m I f i S o 6� . 'M� ►y ,1J On this 9th day of April, 2001 before me personally came GEORGE W. THOMPSON to me known, who, being by me duly swam, did depose and say; that he/she is Senior Vice President of TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA. TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY and FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY, the corporations described in and which executed the above instrument; that he /she knows the Seals of said corporations; that the seals affixed to the said instrument are such corporate seals; and that he/she executed the said instrument on behalf of the corporations by authority of his/her oMce under the Standing Resolutions thereof. � M ' t � ✓vC ��T Y//T�u'' waL,G I My eemmuslon cVlroa December 31, 2002 Notary Public Carol A. Thompson CERTIFICATE ;9709450576 # a/ 3 TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY -- George W. Thompson Senior Vice President 1, the undersigned. Assistant Secretary of TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA. TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY and FARMINGTON CASUALTY COMPANY, stock corporations of the State of Connecticut, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing and attached Power of Attorney and Certificate of Authority remains in full force and has not been revoked; and furthermore, that the Standing Resolutions of the Boards of Directors, as set forth in the Certificate of Authority, are now in force. Signed and Scaled at the Home Office of the Company, in the City of Hanford. State of Connecticut. Dated this 231tD day of AUGUST 2001. By v.� Kori M. Johanson Assistant Secretary, Bored Uuu. J 9 'd tiGLI 'ON N06:0[ U06 , 01 *M pay in a timely manner reasonable future investigation fees which will accrue upon the initial inspection described in Paragraph B and the final inspection described in paragraph D, herein, in an amount not to exceed the amounts authorized by the Code in effect at the time of such inspections. ' H. Attorneys' Fees and Costs In the event legal action is brought to enforce or interpret any or all of the terms of this :Memorandum of Understanding, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fecsrand costs. L Counterparts This Contract may be executed in counterparts. Facsimile signatures shall be binding. AGREED to as of the date first written above: PrrKIN COUNTY BY: C'OVh rm t PL^) . fl LANDFORMS, INC. By: Mark Bedell, President TRFormn4ey-in-Fact CASUALTY S RETY COMPANY OF AMERICA By: (Wilson W. Coleman) i Robert Karp C:WrFo bl\iManagclGGORDONl73167_7-DOC UUC-I J, C.Wr VV[bl4Mmag t 'd MLL 'ON wv* U 600z , 0t ,8db 0 +52 O o A 3 �'a� A 200 I111 1 O 2 1 � o m °? -f1 O AI I. �f P> o 0 2 RP �I O r 33 • D m Z m M n f j d Ln O I3 4�� --� o � O m � r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920 -5090 Pitkin County Land Use: 172 Board oCAdjustment 159 Counts Land Use Code 173 Deposit 174 Flat Fee 162 Zoning, and Sign 169 Public Notice C 160 Planning Enforcement Referral Fees: RB115 Access Permit LUCOI County Clerk 193 Countv Engineer 194 Environmental Health 198 Housing 190 Land Management 196 Wildlife Officer Building Fees: 170 Board of Appeals 135 Building Code Sales 105 Building Permit 100 Contractor License 120 Electrical Permit 195 Energy Code Review 115 Mechanical Permit 150 Plan Check 110 Plumbing Permit 130 Reinspechon 151 Aspen Sanitation 152 AVFD Fire Marshal Other Fees: 155 Use Tar 165 Copy Performance Deposit 185 Park Dedication 186 Parking Cash in Lieu 166 CIS Maps IS CIS Requirements R131 16 Road Impact Fees B 1202 Road Impact Fee B1203 School Impact Fee ] /� TOTAi. County of Pitldn } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE & } ss. MAILING PURSUANT TO State of Colorado } PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE CODE SECTION 4 -90 I, 1 t"—'s ' being or representing an Applicant to the Pitkin County Development Permit, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 4 -90 of the Pitkin County Land Use Regulations in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first -class, postage prepaid U.S. Mail at least 30 days prior to the public hearing to all owners of property adjacent to the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the 13 day of jer, 2004 (which is11lays prior to the public hearing date of /O . The names and addresses of the adjacent property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin Countv as PUBLIC NOTICE DATE oU rIZ000 TIME Arm PLACE PURPOSE-- K no more than 60 days prior to the public hearing. place on the subject property (as it could be seen that said sign was posted and visible continuously from Dto the day of OGl' 2006• (Must be days before the hearing date). A photograph of the WITNESS MY HAND AgD 9sgj,g0A'AL My commission expim *: Notary Public Notary Public's Signature Signed before me this 3— day of VG'r 20Caby PUBLIC NOTICE RE: KARP 1041 HAZARD REVIEW (P91 -00) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 17, 2000 at a meeting to begin at 3:00pm before the Pitkin County Hearing Officer, Pitkin County Courthouse, 506 East Main St., Aspen to consider an application submitted by Robert Karp 1041 Hazard Review approval to establish a building envelope which will contain an existing single family residence. The property is located at 181 Liberty Way and is described as a tract of land being part of Lot 9, & 12 South, Range 85 West of the 6" PM. For further information contact Brian McNellis at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, (970) 920 -5099. s/Lance Clarke Pitkin County Hearing Officer Original Notice Published in The Aspen Times on September 16, 2000 Pitkin County Account No. 002.02 [3 0 0tt" i�) � LIST OF ADJACENT OWNERS* Parcel Identification Number 2643 - 162 -00 -019: Freeman, John R. and Sydney J 100 East Main Street, Suite 101 Aspen, CO 81611 Parcel Identification Number 2643- 162 -00 -013: Schermerhorn, George and Helen R. P.O. Box 127 Woody Creek, CO 81656 Parcel Identification Number 2643 - 162 -00 -014: Jellinek, John I. and Jane H. c/o Jelco Ventures P.O. Box 06447 Chicago, IL 60607 -0447 Parcel Identification Number 2643 - 162 -00 -015: Woods, Ransom B. III & Jeanne E. P.O. Box 11468 Aspen, CO 81612 Parcel Identification Number 2643- 162 -00 -017: Bradley R. Miller & Mollie Savour P.O. Box 89 Woody Creek, CO 81656 Parcel Identification Number 2643 - 162 -00 -020: Orville Leroy Fields P.O. Box 279 Woody Creek, CO 81656 This list was generated using the Pitkin County Assessor's information as of June 26, 2000, a av R;6- i gAa> -' „ ; Zry� u,C' "!''5 PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to the general public that on October 17, 2000, the Hearing Officer of Pitkin County granted 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission approval for the Karp(P91 -00) property located at 181 Liberty Way and is described as a tract of land being part of Lot 9, & 12 South, Range 85 West of the 6 PM. This site specific development plan grants a vested property right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes. s/Lance Clarke Hearing Officer Pitkin County, Colorado Published in the Aspen Times on October 28, 2000 Pitkin County Account 002.02 CO_, : XNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTM r 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920 -5090 i Pitkin County Other Fees: 155 Land Use: 172 Board of Adjustment 159 County Land Use Code 173 Deposit 174 Flat Fee 162 Zoning and Sign 169 Public Notice 160 Planning Enforcement 150 Referral Fees: RBI 15 Access Permit LUCO1 County Clerk 193 County Engineer 194 Environmental Health 198 Housing 190 Land Management 196 Wildlife Officer Other Fees: 155 Building Fees: 170 Board of Appeals 135 Building Code Sales 105 Building Permit 100 Contractor License 120 Electrical Permit 195 Energy Code Review 115 Mechanical Permit 150 Plan Check 110 Plumbing Permit 130 Reinspection 151 Aspen Sanitation 152 AVFD Fire Marshal Other Fees: 155 Use Tax 165 Copy Performance Deposit 185 Park Dedication 186 Parking Cash in Lieu 166 GIS Maps IS GIS Requirements RB116 Road Impact Fees TOTAL ADDRESS /PROJECT: CHECK# CASE /PERMITC tt �I�C! #OFCOPIES: DATE: 44L — INITIAL aI KARP 1041 HAZARD REVIEW SITE PLAN RECORDING CERTIFICATE .am .R lW W HEARIN , OFFICER'S APPROVAL OWNER'S SIGNATURE BLACK NOTE: ER: �L v MAL DESCRIPTION [mcrsYmrw sw[...s rs.v. xxa [[m am[. rx ra.un• [mxm .[we[. u [an �wv r LL«[e s.x re w nm�ma.m u"ssm m�[ex�ca� fYIR [ [>.[I [ uru rae .p mm ra�Y LL.gmW ![x> [s Na LEGEND NOTES 0 I �& x[W a ASPEN SURVEY MCINTERS. C1C, Kmu msw [r ! • xxaa n� '. � 3 OY IfYR/ru Y O-L[ s woc xaa ua m re+v axe y • [xixm av "= SCALE: I 20' —O" RECORDING CERTIFICATE .am .R lW W HEARIN , OFFICER'S APPROVAL OWNER'S SIGNATURE BLACK NOTE: ER: �L v MAL DESCRIPTION [mcrsYmrw sw[...s rs.v. xxa [[m am[. rx ra.un• [mxm .[we[. u [an �wv r LL«[e s.x re w nm�ma.m u"ssm m�[ex�ca� fYIR [ [>.[I [ uru rae .p mm ra�Y LL.gmW ![x> [s Na 000058 Yfdnity yM 1' e ASPEN SURVEY MCINTERS. C1C, • xxaa n� '. � 3 OY IfYR/ru Y O-L[ II 000058 Yfdnity yM 1' N 05027'00" 10.71' O i t a 3 RD P OLO FOUND SPIKE W/ # RI3 GUARD & LATH m v w d a 0 w NO, 5 REBAR RED CAP 9018 LE'GAI, I) J SC RIPTION A TRACT OF LAND BEING. PART OF LOT 9, & 12 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. SAID TRACT IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT AT POINT WHENCE THE NORTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16 BEARS N. 1.5344'45" F 1209.49 FEET; TIH NCL S 1 io4O'E 208.05 FEET; THENCE N 81a41'W 446.40 FEET TO THE (ENTER OF THE ROAR{NG FORK RIVER; 'THFNCI N 20x13' W 60 7T FEP 1' ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF 1 TE ROARING FORK RIVER; 'TH1 NCE N 03o36' E 133.26 FEET ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF HE ROARING FORK RIVER; 'IHE,NCE N 05c E 10.71. FEET ALONG 'THE CENTERLINE OF T11 ROARING FORK RIVER; THENCE S 87o41' E 407.81 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING: PITKIN COUNTY STATE OF COLORADO r v n 0 w n a 2 b ° o w a r a 1.041- HA ZARD � 1,i t a V j j,' Y 1 r. ➢ IT P] I I I_ A N 0... - 10' 20' 30' 40' Q CALE: I. = 2o, --() CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 2 FEET FO iJPIMtSPIKE ARIA .- 2.00 ACRES +/ M)ul' MMJUNGS (SHEDS) ON LOWER LEVEL NOT SHOWN END --- -_ ^ - �� - - -- Relocate 11" Existing Tree 0 1,11JGIENI) & NOT ES 0 FOUND SURVEY MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED SURVEY ORIENTED BETWEEN MONUMENTS FOUND ON THE N -S 1./4 SECTION LINE /iii REBAR CAP 2376 BEING THE NW COR OF' 1.01' AND 'THE NW COR BK L96 PG 231 AND THE NOR'T'H 1/4 COE OF SECTION 16 - BRG= 500128' W ST'EWART TITLE OF' ASPEN, INC. 'TIT'LE COMMITMENT ORDER NO. 00023817 DATED 6-- 09- 1997WAS USED IN THE PREPARA'T'ION OF 'THIS SURVEY. �•• WOOD PENCE LINE WIRE FENCE LINE POWER POLE CONTROL, SPIKE - - - -- OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINES THE GROUND WAS COVERED WITH SNOW AT THE 'TIME OF SURVEY POSTED ADDRESS IS ° 0161 LIBERTY LANE" M � SPRUCE TREE yet 4 0 DECIDUOUS TREE ELEVATION DATLM IS ARBITRARY BASED ON T.B.M. = 300.0' (SET SPIKE) CONTOUR INTERVAL, IS 2 FEET In cV l N 1/4 COR SECTION 16 Mpf S'kI S � w t t. x RECORDING CERTIFICATE THIS KARP 1041 HAZARD REVIEW SITE PLAN HAS B3IN ACCEPTED FOR I' "LNG 1N THE UFEICII O1 I IF PITKIN COUNIY CI1RK AND RECORDER AT a' 4 0 (,LOCK CV .M. THIS DAY OI' .Yk� 2000 Tl PLAT D) K 1 AI PAGE �It- AS RECEPTION �JM FR � GInd R" ERK a HEARING OI�'I'ICER S APPROVAL ° 1 TEAS 1041 BOARD REVIEW SITE PLAN HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED 13Y ItIF PI'I'KI OUNTY HEARING OFFI ER THIS ?i '.T*,. DAY OF IM 4 ?Vaa�t'". 2000, SUBJECT TO HEARING OFFICER DE'T'ERMINATION �UM�1ER ' _ Ca1�C) RECORD AS RECEP NUMBER �?. Allzl_k.���� - -- nATln (�:�a, 2000 Lance Clarke, Hearing Officer O1VNI SIGNArI,uRE ACCEPTED: DATEll� 2' Dr. Robert Karp NOTE: E: THIS KARP 1041 HAZARD REVIEW SITE PURSUANT 'I'0 AND I'N CONFORMANCE OF PITKIN COUNTY HEARING OFFICER AND DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPER'T' DISCLAIMER: \ � 1041 F.NVIRONMEN'TAL HAZARD AREAS I': %IS'1' '1'FIA'J PROPERTY, ANY IMPROVEMEN'T'S, AND THE USE A Remove k Ca LPN PP110NE ' _ _..p __- _...(_ Existing Lions - -� ` yE;BA S tS /041'00'} / Terminations _ / N CA FOUND V \✓� t / YFL / OD ITERAT anti lg o (: Gas Pap Gravel 1)a ^lve 7 a I '/ �/ / AFR -2 SF IDACIC I,IN / Relocate Fl ' �-- ti Q F;xist8lg � 1 �� 1 �. b / / $ Tree Shed 1 Metal 9 0 < Shed to et ^11 Demollxhad � I � Relocate �_ \ E xistin g I1' D,� Tree/ 1 i q r � Existing Tree Existia \ � g Carport � 14' n. coYtQ Mem_ / ` to e � o wl.ed . ` Remove Existing / e;xtetln Mstwl Rook Retaining Wall Well � / N r1 llemolixhoA 1 � --•` ' 6 1 l t 3O O p ` I 1 Remove � M ' Existing _ 9 . i Rouse Drive ." \\\ ..,.,, Demolished tlg t 9-1 1 M t Dock ' C Demotehed � OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINES NO F;ASEMENT FOUND Existing Utflity —� tines to be Relocated to Underground AFR -2 SETBACK LINIG / �� _ _ • „_ �� ............. Septlo ° tiYo 87041'00 "W Stone Wall (V-0" Above Grade) P 1 I \ I ItET�AR` \ C D \ \ 1 \ \ 1 T.B.M. = 300.0' 1 \ S,, 30 _ � - 136 FG a.�.. ACCESS EA� � \ 1 1 1 ;? \ 1 � r� w 10 � `��• ?1 • � � , 1 V ` ` a \ 1 a I 1 I i I 6 1 I i Ia . -5 11 Lines of View \ I Aspen 114 1dands Mountain Peak Found Reber — Found Old 1.5' Out i Spike 0,5' of Ground I Under Gravel 31.0' WC •. -. Remove & cap I Existing Utility Terminations 1 I BLOCK PREPARED AND CONT�1110 S NUMBER �'t. ?_" 000 THE SAME. MIGHT AFFECT 'TILE VD OCCUPANCY THEROF. SOURCE 00 SURVEY INFORMATION: David W. MCDride, R.L.S. 16129 ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC''. 210 S. GALENA STREET 1 .0 BOX 2506 AS FN COLO. 81611 PHONE FAX (970) 025 -3816 1041 REVIEW ADDED JUNE 12, 2000 TOPO ADDED MAR. 3, 1999 JOB NO 28049 FEB. 23, 1998 _ DI N 2u -)tP ?- cc's - 01.' p C(A-ls e .. C� 0 CX.a