The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutpitkin.planning.264320403004, 264320407003DOCUMENT LAYOUT THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION LISTED BELOW IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER Summary Sheet Resolution for the BOCC and /or P &Z Ordinance for the BOCC and /or P &Z Determination for the Hearing Officer Administrative Determination Staff Memo Application Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter Site Plan Miscellaneous Plat(s) , PARCEL ID: 2643 - 204 -03 -004 26 DATE ROVD: � PIES: I CASE NO 11977 CASE NAME: Geittman Subdivision Exemption Planners - PROJ ADDR: 0135 Turtle Cove 0138 Turtle Cove Lot 22 Blk 2 Ag 2 Brush Creek Village OWNIAPP: Pttma, , Gunther ADRf CISIZ:F PHN:F— REP ADR:F— CIS/Z: Email Addr: FEES DUE:— FEES RCVD:F- REFERRALS PHN:F ALLOCATED HOURSF OVER: I. REF: 8YF— DUE:F- MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED DATE OF FINAL ACTION: 8/2211977 8/2211977 BOCC No F BOCC Reso: 77 -122 #197979 INo I e Lot 21 Flg 2 Blk 2 G Exemption no vesting BOCC Ord: PZ: HRG OFF: CLOSED: BY: F HO INDEX: ADMIN: PLAT RECORDED— PLAT (BK,PG): nla ADMIN INDEX: VR APPROVAL DATE: �— VR EXPIRES:- , CASE TYP: Subdivision Exemption CASE TYPS: CASE TYP2: CASE TYPE: �- CASE TYP3: _� CASE TYP7: CASE TYP4: , Date Scanned: 31. File Location: ,,IFF Box #214 -d at 4:13 P.M., Oct 5, ]-- 7 Julie Hane, Recorder Receptic. ,Number: BOOK336 PAA0 t PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Resolution No. 77 )Aide Re: Geittman Subdivision Exemption WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners considered the subdivision exemption application of Gunther Geittman at its regular meeting on August 22, 1977, and WHEREAS, the exemption is considered under Section 4.02.02a.2 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code and is for the purpose of revising the lot lines between Lots 21 and 22 in Brush Creek Subdivision, Filing No. 2, and WHEREAS, this Board finds that the lot line revision: 1. Does create no more than the original number of recorded parcels 2. The lots created will not increase the existing non - conformity of the two substandard -sized lots 3. The lots are in substantial compliance with applicable policies and regulations of this Code provided that measures are taken to insure that the development of the lots will not adversely impact wildlife habitat as designated in the area. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, that the Subdivision Exemption aoplication for lot line revision is hereby approved subject to a prohibition on dogs or fencing to contain dogs. A revised subdivision plat shall be filed in the office of the Clerk and Recorder upon approval by the County Attorney. Effective this 22nd day of August, 1977. ATTEST APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sandra ht. Steller, County Attorney OUOOUI d z.v PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COM("ISSIONERS M1 nsley,'Gnairman O PITKIN COUN'ry BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Michael Kinsley, Robert Child (Edwards arrived later) i 'Geittman Karen Smith, of the Planning Office, presented a request for a subdivision exemption Subdivision by Gunther Ge it [man. This is for a revision of lot lines between lots 21 and 2 n !Exempt. ! Brush Creek subdivision, filing 2. Because filing 2 was platted by formal action of the Board of County Commissioners pursuant to county subdivision regulations, both lots jl are considered separately developable even though they are substandard as to minimum lot III size. Geit[man wants to sell lot 21, however the existing house on lot 22 encroaches on 21 because it is located on the common boundary. A building permit has been issue !i for construction of a dwelling on lot 21. The problem has been dealt with privately by the owner now wishes to publicly correct the offi- the granting of an easement, however cial recorded plat to extend lot 22 into lot 21 by the bounds of the granted easement. jj Exemption from subdivision regulations for lot line revision is authorized by section 'i ode. This section allows th a Commissioners to determine 4.02.05 a.2 of the Land Use C I� that an exemption does not increase the number of parcels and that the lots do not become more non - conforming. The Planning Office originally recommended three conditions for IIthe exemption: an engineering and geologic analysis of the foundation design for the P existing house and the one under construction, prohibition against dogs or fencing to contain same, and some appropriate contribution toward future road improvement which might be set by the County Engineer. Jeff Davis, the County Engineer, has since stated j that only private roadways are present so the third condition no longer applies. Kinsle:: Iasked how the County could prohibit dogs on the land, since all other homeowners in the area are allowed to have dogs. Smith noted that this parcel is in the critical elk i winter range area. Child felt this would at least prevent more dogs in the area. Bob Nelson, County Sanitarian, stated that a 155' well has been drilled, which should be sufficient. He noted that the crucial problem with water in Brush Creek is recharge of I the wells. John Kelly, representing the applicant, felt it is unfair to impose restric- tions on two landowners in a subdivision just for a lot line adjustment. He noted that the geological analysis would probably be expensive. Smith added that the geological analysis could be done after construction. Fred Crowley, Building Inspector, stated that Chick Collins did special engineering on the foundation plans, and the foundation should be more than strong enough. Smith agreed to remove the first condition since the foundation met with Crowley's approval. The Commissioners discussed whether U;.e restriction against do's should api�ly. Child noted that the County expects to .adopt a I I' August 22, 1977 CDOIIIItFFionery Mrotin), �iuj,J2 f general dog resolution soon, so this restriction could be made contigent upon adoption of the resolution. Kinsley moved to approve a subdivision exemption for Gunther Geittman for a lot line adjustment for lots 21 and 22, Brush Creek Village filing 2 effective today, with dogs to be prohibited from the property or with adequate fencing to contain them. Child seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Smith will present a resolution at the next meeting. en Karen Smith and John LaSalle, representing Paul Adams, were present to discuss ;{ ows ivision Hidden Meadows subdivision. In August, 1976, the Adams' request for final plat •I signature for the subdivision exemption was tabled pending resolution of three condi- tions= referral of the final plat tothe County Engineer for review of trail easement language, a protest of an access easement to the subdivision which affected the pro- perty of adjacent owners, and signature on the plat by Mr. Camel, owner of lot 1, II Hidden Meadows subdivision. (Edwards arrived.) The first issue has been resolved. 'I Mr. Camel's condition for signature of the plat is that the access easement through adjacent lots remain as is. Sandy Stoller stated that she spoke to Mr. Camel and he agreed to grant an alternate easemeni for pedestrian and horse access only. Stoller added that since the easement is to the benefit of the Hidden Meadows homeowners he �I felt there should be some compensation if it is removed. John LaSalle introduced himself and stated he is representing the Adams, Kreidlers and Harmons, the three II owners of the original subdivision. He then gave a brief history of the Hidden it Meadows subdivision. In April of 1972 the Adams and Kreidlers purchased 35 acres of II land and entered into a contract with the Harmons for the Harmons to purchase a 1/3 Ii undivided interest in the property. The property was then surveyed into six lots; II each owner was to pick one lot for their homesite and sell the other. At that time i (hey were told by an attorney that this division of land did not violate any State or i County laws regarding subdivisions. LaSalle stated that the contract did defy State it law in effect at that time. The deeds for conveyance of the property could not be signed until each party had an opportunity to choose their lot. By the time the I deeds were signed the County law on subdivision had changed. The three landowners then applied for a subdivision exemption to solve the problem. In October, 1973, Mr. Camel purchased one lot and applied for a building permit, which was denied. In April of 1975 Cite Commissioners granted a subdivision exemption subject to three or four conditions r,l�arding water, trails, etc. When these conditions had been satisfied and the applicants were about to get the Commissioners' signatures on the final plat, Diane F ystad, an adjacent property owner in Snowmass Springs subdivision, raised the quest(nn of th , northern access route and the tree cutting this would require. August 72, 1977 - 2 'Comm Lr;lonrrs `ire Crop, i GuUUu3 t 1 C M O R A N D U M TO: Board of County Cornissioners George Ochs, County Manager Sandy Stuller, County Attorney FRO14: Planning Office (KS) RE: Geittmann Subdivision Exemption DATE: August 18, 1977 The attached application requests subdivision exemption for the revision of lot lines between Lots 21 and 22 in Brush Creek Subdivision, Filing #2. Because Filing #2 was platted by formal action of the 3oard of County Commissioners pursuant to county subdivision regulations, both lots are considered separately developable even though they are substandard as to minimum lot size. In other words, the lots are excepted.from the "cumulation clause" by virtue of Section 7.22 b. of the Code. In fact, a building permit has been issued for construction of a dwelling on Lot 21. The problem which needs correction is that the existing house (on Lot 22) encroaches on Lot 21 because it is located on the common boundary. The problem has been dealt with privately by the granting of an easement. The owner now wishes to publicly correct the official recorded plat to extend Lot 22 into Lot 21 by the bounds of the granted easement. Exemption from subdivision for lot line revision is authorized by Section 4.02.05 a. 2. of the code. Conditions of exemption include that no new parcels be created and that if the lots are non - conforming, the action does not increase the existing non- conformity. The former condition is satisfied. With respect to the latter, we could argue that the action further reduces the size of Lot 21 and thus makes it more non - conforming. (The zoning is AF -1 requiring 10 acres minimum lots. The proposed lot configuration yields a 2 acre and a 2.4 acre lot). However, the non - conformity of the 2 lots viewed together remains the same with Lot 22 becoming more conforming. Proper setbacks for building sites on both Lot 21 and 22 are maintained by the proposed boundary change. Section 4.02.02 b. additionally stipulates that the exemption comply with other policies and regulations of the Land Use Code. In this regard, we note that Brush Creek Subdivision generally lies within a geologic hazard area, specifically is underlain by Mancos shale. Additionally, the area is noted as elk winter range on the CSU wildlife habitat maps. .Finally, the notorious problem of quantity and quality of water supply becomes relevant. The applicant has provided a well test report and we have asked Bob Nelson to comment on its sufficiency with respect to water quality and quantity goals. Because of the poor design of Brush Creek Subdivision generally, including access and location with respect to poor soils and resultant insuitability for water supply, building, and septic systems, we are reluctant to recommend approval. However, since the lots are separately developable by virtue of 7.22 b. and development has commenced on the second lot, we can recommend the second best alternative of attaching conditions to the exemption which attempt to bring the sites more in conformance with applicable regulations and policies. Such conditions might include: Requiring an engineering and neologic analysis of the suitability of foundation design for the existing house and the one under construction. 1. jUL) 4 Memorandum 4C Geittminn Subdivision Exemption Page Two August 18, 1977 2. Prohibition against dogs or fencing to contain same to mitigate impact on wildlife. 3. Some appropriate contribution toward future road cI improvement which might be set by the County ,.Oq *Oft" �7 � Engineer. !thye Of course, any approval should be contingent on certification water report by the Environmental Health Officer. A copy of the proposed plat will be left with Kim for your inspection. l �b mk enc. �, Ct.dt t> ; �v► Cask, cyw�t�ct� koko ..b A&oe c.e%A;+;an.. If dA 4z' 4,46"r r r a,.'ken 1. -Prof (Ao'elX" X" tvY MXk, rAk& �vis5�5 JouN TIIOMAS KELLY ATTORNEY AT LAW POST OFFICE BOX 1109 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 August 5, 1977 Ms. Karen Smith Pitco Planning Department 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Geittmann exemption Dear Karen: TELEPHONE (303) 925 -1216 The purpose of this letter is to make a formal request for an exemption for the definition of a sub- division on behalf of my client Gunther H. Geittmann who is the record owner of Lots 21 and 22, Block 2, Brush Creek Village, Filing No. 2. As you are aware, the purpose of this request is to adjust the common boundary line of Lots 21 and 22 to reasonably provide for an encroachment, as shown on the plat, which arose from the erroneous location of a dwelling straddling the common boundary line separating Lots 21 and 22. What is contemplated adding is an area approximately .231 acres in size to Lot 22 to provide for the encroach- ment. All other external lot lines would remain the same. The proposed change would not create more than the existing number of parcels nor would it increase in any way the density presently existing. Accordingly, I have enclosed the following documen- tation as part of the application: (1) 3 copies of the completed Land Use Application. (2) 3 copies of the proposed final plat. UU, JUG _J vULjjUl �r Ms. Karen Smith Pitco Planning Department August 5, 1977 Page 2 (3) 3 copies of an updated Transamerica Title Certificate, together with a final update prepared by myself pursuant to the Code. (4) 3 copies of a well test performed by Mountain Drilling indicating sufficiency of water from the existing well and also a receipt from the State Department of Health indicating water purity. In closing, I would add that Mr. Geittmann is a local resident and intends to use the house on Lot 22 as his his permanent residence. JTK /jeo enc. Sincerely, John Thomas Kelly e' APPENDIX B PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE APPLICATION FORM PROJECT NUMBER Section /Parcel DATE SUBMITTED TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT: NAME Carolf 0 E 9- N. G F1 T m 4IrN ADDRESS PHONE NAME OF PROJECT 4 7121 -f f,� �i �f �d- g1C,j(f Z /J�Ks� lip tL PROJECT LOCATION: (On at ached sheeL, locate on zoning ma showin boundar P i • 4 es of any natural hazard and resource areas, any other special regulatory districts, Section 5, Land Use Code; and locate on appropriate CSU /ERA Maps any areas not covered by the above.) TOTAL AREA EXISTING USE(S) PROPOSED USE(S) (approximate square footage for each) PRESENT 'ZONING OF SITE DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE PROPOSAL v u A TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING OFFICE TYPE OF APPLICATION: REZONING c- IVISION P.U.D. EXEMPTION H SPECIAL REVIEW 35 -acre + SUBDIVISION El BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW REVIEW PHASE: PRE - APPLICATION 2Zk' % % DATE COMPLETED GENERAL SUBMISSION P.C. ACTION _ DATE BOARD ACTION _ DATE DETAILED SUBMISSION P.C. ACTION DATE BOARD ACTION DATE FINAL PLAT BOARD ACTION DATE ULiLiUj 1. 2. 3. Appendix B .,,,• PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE APPLICATION FORM SUMMARY OF FINDINGS REQUIRED BY REVIEW PHASE Directions: Any applicant for a development requiring a permit under this code shall be responsible for showing conformance with any applicable policies of Section 2 as listed below. The applicant shall submit those requirements necessary to show conformance with these policies and the related general regulations of Section 5. Upon submission of the applica- tion and all submission contents, the Planning Office shall distribute same to appropriate referral agencies which shall indicate its certifica- tion or non - certification of the proposal as being in conformance with policies and as satisfying submission requirements and review guidelines of relevant general regulations. Referral agencies shall also indicate whether further study in a later review phase is required and any further recommendations or conditions, attachinq co=L ents and returning same to the Planning Office. ^ rA = rCe-Appiicatlon GS = General Submission DS = Detailed Submission FP = Final Plat IS ID LOCAL REVIEW- CERTIFICATION CONDITIO1 STUDY REQUIRED POLICY FACTOR ING STAFF YES NO AND INITIALS DATE RECOMMENI TIONS PA GS DS FP* Not inconsistant Planning with Master Plan/ Office Rate of Growth — -- -- - hazard & Rpsourca Planning Arcas Office Geologic Hazards Floodplains Riparian Areas Wildlife Wildfire Radiation Soils /Erosion County Ex- tension { Agent I Extractable Planning Resources I Office Mineral Vegetable i Other i ^ rA = rCe-Appiicatlon GS = General Submission DS = Detailed Submission FP = Final Plat IS ID I, Appendix B PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE APPLICATION FORM STUDY REQUIRED POLICY FACTOR LOCAL REVIEW- CERTIFICATION CONDITIONS ING STAFF YES NO AND INITIALS DATE RECOMMENDA- TIONS 4. PA GS DS FP Agricultural Planning Conservation Office 5. Scenic Planning Quality Office 6, ]/ Water Supply Environ- mental Health Environ- 7, Sewage Dis- -- posal mental Health g, Noise Environ- mental Health 9, Air Quality Environ- mental Health 0, Historic/ Historical Archaeological Society Resources UL) Appendix B °nr PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE APPLICATION FORM STUDY REQUIRED POLICY FACTOR LOCAL REVIEW- CERTIFICATION CONDITIONS ING STAFF YES NO - AND INITIALS DATE RECOMMENDA- TIONS PA GS DS FP 11. Roads /Trails De- County sign & Construe- Engineer tion Impact on G/ Road system Maintenance pro- visions 12. Drainage County Engineer 13. Impact on Trans- County portation Engineer 14. Impact on Public Planning Office Facilities/ Services Solid Waste County Engin- Disposal & eer Collection Fire & Police Sheriff/ Protection, Fire Response District Service Sanitary Land County Engin- fills eer 1'.ospital Hosptial Capacity Board Library Sub- Library station Site Board Post Office Postal Substation Service Site UJ�1 Appendix B PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE APPLICATION FORM STUDY REQUIRED POLICY FACTOR LOCAL REVIEW- ING STAFF CERTIFICATION YES NO CONDITIONS - AND INITIAL DATE RECOMMENDA- TIONS PA GS DS FP Extension of Rocky Mtn. -- utilities, Natural Gas water and Aspen /Holy sewer Cross Electric Mountain Bell Municipal Water & Sewer Districts Public shops, County garages, yards Pf.anager Recreation Sites City Recreation Director General Tax Cost/ County Finance 3. ^_nefit Officer -� — - 15,- Contribution to Housing Housing Stock Coordinator 16. Man-made Hazards Building _ _ _ _ Safety Official wildlife Colorado Div. Preservation of Wildlife 18. Energy Building c=servaticn Official Water Resources 19. Distict Water Impact Court 20. Final Plat County Engineer, Contents Attorney, Plan- ning Office COLORADO REGION ALTA OWNER S POLICY -FORM 0 -1970 IAMENDED 10.17.701 Policy of Title Insurance Issued by Transamerica Title Insurance Company SUBJECT TO THE SCHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS CON- TAINED IN SCHEDULE R AND THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS III {RF.OF, TRANS 01FRICA TITLE INSURANCE, COMPANY, a California corporation, herein called the Company, inures, a. of Date of Policy shoirn in Schedule A, against loss or d:uuage, not exceeding the :unount of insurance stated in Schedule A, and costs, attorneys' fees and expenses which the Company may become obligated to pay hereunder, sustained or incurred by the inured by reason of: 1. Title to the estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested otherwise than as stated therein; 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on such title; 3. Lack of a nght of accazss to and from the Lind; or 4. Unmarketability of such title. fn IT itnree If hereof, Transamerica Title Tnsur nce Company has caused this policy to be signed and sealed b} its duly authorized officers as of Date of Policy shown in Schedule A. 1ljuj A Tpan'samericaTrile lnsupance Company A��A ! , 4�� By President. V Attest Secretary Authorized Officer or Agent 22 mrk Cov - - - . ....v.,,_ -. SG0- IEDULE _ NUMBER 046,900,250 -3 0 AMOUNT [1$18,000.00 Dated this 1St day of May _1913 , at the hour of 8:00 o'clock A.M. The name of the insured and the estate, or interest of the insured in the land described below and cov- ered by this policy is as follows: GUNTHER H. GEITTMANN, in Fee Simple 2. The land, the title to which is insured, is described or known as follows: LOTS 21 and 22, BLOCK 2, BRUSH CREEK VILLAGE, FILING NO. 2, COUNTY OF PITKIN, SPATE OF COLORADO. rir,1- 4F- 2DULF= B This Policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the follovemg. 1, Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown of record, including unrecorded easements, 2. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a cor- rect survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. 3, !',':h.mcs liens, or aiy rights 11 er eta, where no notice of such bens or rights appear of record. 4. Tcxes and essessm,c,,ts not fet d,e or pcyable, cnd Spenal Tares or A,,,mnants certified to the office of the County Treasurer subsequent to: February 21, 1973, except taxes for the year 1972 in the amount of $92.40. u1jG j14 COLORADO REGION, ALTA OWNER'S POLICY -FORM B -1970 (AMENDED 10- 17 -70) i 5• 09 0. 00, CONTINUED Restrictions, which do not contain a forfeiture or reverter clause, but omitting restrictions, if any, based on race, color, religion, or national origin, as contained i.n instrument recoxded August 29, 1966 in Book 222 at Page 348. Easements reserved by Elay Corporation in instrument recorded August 29, 1966, in Boot 222 at Page 348, providing as follows: The seller named hereby reserved to itself, its successors and assigns, perpetual ease- ments ten feet in width on each side of the boundary line along the entire perimeter of each lot for the purpose of constructing, maintaining, operating, replacing, enlarging and repairing electric, telephone, water, irrigation sewer, gas and similar lines, pipes, wires, ditches and conduits, and walking and bridle trails; provided, however, in the event more than one lot or tract as shown on the plat is sold in one unit at one time, to be used as one unit, said ten foot easement shall be around the perimeter of said lots or tracts sold as a unit and not around each individual lot or tract. The seller herein named hereby reserved to itself, its successors and assigns a permanent easement not exceeding thirty (30) feet in width on each side of the roadways or streets to be shown in the plat of the subdivision for the purposes of the initial installation of the roads, but to be exercised only in the event the Seller at its discretion deems the same necessary for bypassing roads_or for the proper installation of the roads. 7 An undivided 1/2 of all minerals in subject property as reserved by Robert M. Burlingame, in instrument recorded Au;;ust 26, 1959 as Reception No. 103470. (The Company insures that by instrument of record the said Robert M. Burlingame relinquished any right to enter upon the surface of subject property.) 8. Reservations of a right of way for ditches and canals constructed by tLe authority of the United States and of all coal and other minerals, together with the right to prospect for, mine and remove the same pursuant to the Provisions of the Act of December 29, 1916 (39 Stat. 362) as contained in United States Patent recorded April 17, 1937, reception No. 88970. I Terms and conditions of Contract for water service between the City of . 9• Aspen and the Elay Corporation as set forth in instrument recorded in Book 228 at Page 269= Stater, sanitation and similar districts to be formed and the rules, 10. regulations and charges by said District. i NOTE: EXCEPTION WILL NOT APPEAR IN THE MORTGAGE SGHEOUL.E B CONTINUED NUMBER 046,000,250 -3 11. Any loss or damage by reason of the lack of acknowledgement on Deed from Sam Butler, Frank S. Schneider and Howard D. Lutz doing business as Butler, Schneider, Lutz and Company to Gunther H. Geittmann recorded March 14, 1973 in Book 273 at Page 590. U V .0 J a 6 COLORADO REGION, ALTA OWNER'S POLICY -FORM B -1970 (AMENDED I0-17-701 M..- I ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. 46,000,250 -3 -0 issued by: TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY The effective date of said Policy is hereby changed from May 1, 1973 at 8 :00 A.M. to June 7, 1977 at 8 :00 A.M. The total liability of the Company ments therein shall not exceed, in Policy and costs which the Company and Stipulations thereof to pay. under said Policy and any Endorse - the aggregate, the face amount of said is obligated under the Conditions This Endorsement is made a part of said Policy and is subject to the Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations therein, except as modified by the provisions hereof. TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY BY: D f Authorized Signatu SEE ATTACHED SHEET FOR MODIFICATIONS paragraph 1 under Schedule A of said Policy is hereby modified to read as follows: Gunther H. Geittmann and Maureen M. Geittmann, in Joint Tenancy, in fee simple. The following exception is hereby added under Schedule B of said Policy: 12. Deed of Trust from Gunther H. Geittmann and Maureen M. Geittmann to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin for the use of The Bank of Aspen to secure $153000.00 dated September 3, 1976 recorded September 8, 1976 in Book 316 at Page 392. UL)uj:.J, POST OFFICE BOX IIOB ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 uU'bill `7 M . JOHN THOMAS KELLY ATTORNEY AT LAW August 8, 1977 Ms. Karen Smith Pitco Planning Department 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Gunther H. Geittmann Dear Karen: TEIEPMONE (303) 925 -1216 This is to certify that I, John Thomas Kelly, an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Colorado, have examined the public records of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado from June 7, 1977 up to and including August 3, 1977 at 8:00 A.M. regarding the following described real property: Lots 21 and 22 Block 2 Brush Creek Village, Filing No. 2 As a result of my examination I find that title to the subject property is vested in: GUNTHER H. GEITTMANN, in Fee Simple subject to the following liens and encumbrances: 1. Deed of Trust from Gunther H. Geittmann and Maureen M. Geittmann to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County, Colorado, for the use of the Bank of Aspen, recorded September 8, 1976 in Book 316 at Page 392 of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado. Karen Smith August 8, 1977 Page 2 2. Deed of Trust from Gunther H. Geittmann to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County, Colorado for the use of the Bank of Aspen recorded July 8; 1977 in Book 332 at Page 80 of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado. 3. All those items shown on Schedule B of Transamerica Title Insurance Company Policy No. 46,000, 250 -3 -0 to which this certificate is attach . JTK /jeo Si Y. John Thomas Kelly, #2554