The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutbocc.res.037.2002 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO SETTING FORTH THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND DETERMINATION OF THE ANDLINGER PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL REVOCATION RESOLUTION#03 7 -2002 Recitals and Findings of Fact 1. Pursuant to Section 7-20-030(E)(2) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code, the Board of County Commissioners conducted a public hearing in compliance with Section 4-140 of the Land Use Code to ascertain the nature and extent of violations of the Code and previously granted development approvals that may be present on the Andlinger property. 2. The Andlinger property is located in the upper Capitol Creek drainage, address 6855 Capitol Creek Road. The property is approximately 152 acres and is located in the RS-30 zone district, more specifically described as Exhibit "A". The property is subject to a certain Order Authorizing Sale entered in Pitkin County District Court; Case P-1201, dated September 9, 1980 recorded at Book 395, Page 738, Pitkin County Real Property Records. 3. Pursuant to the Court Order and an application filed by Andlinger jointly with his predecessor in title, Edward Adelson, Administrative Decision 8-2000 was recorded establishing a 1041 Hazard Review building envelope for a single-family residence and associated structures. 4. The pertinent elements of Administrative Decision 8-2000 are the following: • Residential units shall not exceed a combined size of 7,500 square feet, (condition#19). • Development on slopes exceeding 30% is prohibited, without further 1041 Hazard Review, (condition#15). • No development shall occur within fifty (50) feet of the high water line of East Sopris Creek, (condition#11(I)). • Native vegetation shall be preserved outside of the building envelopes, with the exception of any thinning and spacing required to accommodate wildfire hazard mitigation (condition#I I(Q. • Some vegetative screening consisting of mature trees must be established between the homesite and meadow area to mitigate impacts of development on wildlife, condition#11L). • Defensible space must be maintained around all structures for wildfire mitigation, (condition#3). 465473 Page:03/26/2002 :52P 0 00 R„ 037-zeo'v • No development including grading, landscaping, berming, entry or ranch gates, and vegetation removal or disturbance shall occur outside of the designated building envelopes, except for utility and driveway extension and maintenance, and as may be necessary to implement the wildfire mitigation measures required elsewhere in the Resolution (condition#4). 5. An amendment to this administrative decision was obtained by Andlinger and was recorded as Administrative Decision 2-2001. The pertinent elements of this second decision are the following: • Two additional development envelopes were established for the construction of two ponds. • Prior to any building permits being issued on the property, an amended site plan survey depicting the building envelope and development envelopes must be recorded, condition#2. 6. The Board finds the following violations of the Land Use Code and these two administrative decisions to have occurred: • A roof was installed on the residential structure, which violates condition #3 of Decision 8-2000. This condition has been corrected by Andlinger. • The meadow west of the residence, which was identified as sensitive to wildlife, and being located outside of any building or development envelopes was significantly graded and stripped of vegetation. Approximately 10,000 cubic yards was moved and or regraded without benefit of a permit. • The area between the established building envelope and the development envelopes for the ponds has been stripped of vegetation and re-graded. • No amended site plan was ever recorded for the property. 7. There is no basis in law to justify these violations including the tenuous reference to a non-existent agricultural exemption for construction activity. It was evident that plans for the water system were developed months in advance of the actual violations. 8. A second amendment to the original administrative decision was also sought by Andlinger to allow the construction and development of a water system running from a spring on the property to the residence. This water system includes a pipeline, water storage tank and electrical services lines. Applicant was aware that a permit would be required for the water system. 9. A pre-application conference occurred for this second amendment to the administrative decision on April 26, 2001. The application was submitted by Andlinger for this second amendment on July 24, 2001, however work had already been undertaken 465473 g 03/26/202 9.52P SILVIR DAVIS on July 19, 2001 without benefit of a permit. By August 30, 2001, the water system was completely installed. 10. On or about August 2, 2001, Andlinger's contractors on site were told by Andlinger's consulting engineer that permits were needed for the construction of the water system and that they were not yet obtained. Further, Andlinger's contractors were informed that the plans being used for the construction of the water system were marked "preliminary-not for construction". 11. On August 30, 2001, a site visit was conducted by Pitkin County staff. At that time, the water system improvements and the other violations recited above were discovered and were completely in place. As a consequence of these violations, the second amendment to the original administrative decision was denied (Administrative Decision 053-2001) and a stop work order and correction notice was issued. 12. All improvements to the water system were done in violation of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. None of the development work for the water system was permitted, the development work occurred outside of the previously identified building and development envelopes, excavation occurred without any grading or building permits, the work disturbed wetlands and the East Sopris Creek floodplain, and work occurred in areas in excess of 30% slope. A required federal permit was not obtained before work commenced. 13. Andlinger and Andlinger Properties Capital Corporation knew of the need for appropriate development approvals before work began on the water system as evidenced by the conduct of a pre-application conference and the submittal of an application for this work. 14. Andlinger and Andlinger Properties Capital Corporation should have known that work was being conducted for Andlinger's benefit in violation of the Pitkin County Land Use Code and the conditions of the previous development approvals. 15. The ultimate responsibility for all violations on the property lies with the property owner, Andlinger Properties Capital Corporation, and Mr. Andlinger has acknowledged such responsibility. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, determines that the following actions must occur in relation to the Andlinger property. 1. Andlinger and Andlinger Properties Capital Corporation must submit a plan for the restoration of the property to a condition that would be permissible pursuant to Administrative Decisions 8-2000 and 2-2001, subject to the following: A. The plan for restoration must be acceptable to the Pitkin County Community Development Department and must contain dates for completion of the work needed for this restoration. Such schedules shall include provisions for II III IIIIII I IIIII IIII III III III II II IIII II 465473 002 09:52P SILVIP DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 0.00 D 0.00 Q: 0 37^loot the submittal of applications pursuant to paragraph 3 below, such that restoration work which would be inconsistent with the approval of any such application will not be required unless and until such application is denied and any appeals exhausted. B. The cost for this restoration to occur within the acceptable time limitation will be estimated and agreed to by the property owner and the Community Development Department. To insure completion of the restoration plan, financial security in a form acceptable to the County Attorney shall be furnished to Pitkin County. C. Upon submission of a stipulated and signed restoration plan and appropriate financial security, the previously issued Correction Notice and Stop Work Order will be removed from the property. D. The restoration plan will include provisions for rendering the existing water system inoperable. The domestic water system shall not be made operable unless and until approved pursuant to paragraph 3 below. E. The restoration plan must include modification to the building envelope established through Administrative Decision 8-2000 to accommodate the existing residence in its current location and the appropriate vegetative screening described in Administrative Decision 8-2000 for the protection and benefit of wildlife. F. Within ten(10) days of executing this Resolution, Andlinger shall record a current site plan survey reflecting the changes to the building envelope and the appropriate locations of the ponds and their associated development envelopes as they now exist. G. The restoration plan must also establish work(construction) envelope(s) to define allowable limits of the work. This envelope(s) shall be fenced with orange construction fencing. H. The restoration plan shall also include a comprehensive drainage and erosion control plan. I. All other federal, state and local permits that are required for the implementation of the restoration plan shall be in place before work commences. 2. Following the removal of the Correction Notice and Stop Work Order, the property owner may continue to rely upon previously obtained development approvals and permits and may continue work pursuant to those approvals and permits. 3. Any and all work not specifically approved and permitted and still desired by the property owner, including but not limited to, the ponds and associated improvements, the domestic water system, vegetation modification or earthmoving work must be applied for 465473 I IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIII IIIIII IIII IIIIIII III IIIII IIII IIII Page:03/26//2069:52P 0 000 D37-2.00z- by the property owner pursuant to all terms of the Pitkin County Land Use Code and receive appropriate development approval and permits before any such work may continence. Pitkin County will review any such application(s) pursuant to the terms of the Pitkin County Land Use Code and any decision is appealable as otherwise provided by law. If any such approval(s) are granted, an amended site plan shall be recorded. 4. The property owner shall be responsible for all costs incurred by Pitkin County in relation to enforcement of the County's Land Use Code, development approvals and building permits. Payment of these costs must be made prior to the removal of the Correction Notice and Stop Work Order. As of March 7, 2002, these costs are $27,288.75. 5. As a result of the temporary loss and destruction of wetlands in the East Sopris Creek drainage, the property owner shall be responsible for working with the Rocky Mountain Institute to preserve an amount of wetlands designated and chosen by that body located within the State of Colorado in an amount commensurate with the destruction of the .083 acres which occurred within the vicinity of Adelson Spring. INTRODUCED AT A PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 14, 20019 CONTINUED TO NOVEMBER 28, 20019 CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 19, 20019 CONTINUED TO JANUARY 23, 20029 CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 12, 2002 AND CONCLUDED AT A SPECIAL PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 12,2002. A d NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON THE 131h DAY OF OCTOBER, 2001. PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON THE 23`d DAY OF MARCH,2002. IIIIIIIIIIIIII 0fi5473 7 SILVIP DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO 20 09.52P R 0.00 D 0.00 03/13/2002 12:34 FAX 561 234 4952 ANDLIN6LK & cU. o37- 2Ooo ATTEM' BOA" OF OOIIN T GCR S5Y0303It6 OPMMCo' m-7.,�LIDLO'R 1D0 rota ].1e Clem f APPROVW A$ TO YORMC J AQ b'1 er Puai uatyAttorney ao'anss Awaga The poropeM owner vmd dwe1cpM=tPwm9t appilcaa%having rerien"d&e aj3ovafiadiag6and%)ctermil uuOf �°Qt 91i1rd theBmYSc� of ._ . . sakRoseledE�the Badlogs County Co=m1SAwmw9. Gerhard And]ingq'and. Tvdr lrh'tchA President AnditZer PrOperK"Capital Corpora6nn clV�om�m�t�lc�as4lndfmR�aopReo,doe 465473 I . -__ _ _ IIII IIIII II III IIIII III III IIII IIIII I III Page://20 2 09:52P i SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 0.00 0 0.00 1 I EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION - The Westerly one-half of the•following described tract: In Township 9 South, Range 87 West of the 6111 P.M. Section 23: S12NE1/4NW1/4 Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and. 11' All that part of H.E.'Survey No. 111 In Sections 14 and 23 lying Soulhedy of the South line of,Lot 10 of said Section 23 (as said Lot Is established by Supplemental Plat accepted April 23, 1964) extended.Easterly to the East line of said Section 23. Thal portion of Lot 2In said Section 23 lying Southerly of the South line of Lal 10 In said Section 23 (as established by Supplemental Plat accepted April 23, 1964) extended Westerly to the West line of said Lot 2. H.E. Survey 107 in said Section 23 as particularly described in Patent eco(ded in Book 157 at Page 116 of the Pitkln Count/records, Excepting any portion of the above as set forth in Deed recorded October 5, 1981 In Book 415 at Page.365, IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 465473 VIA DAVIS PITKIN COL NITY CoIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 03//26/2002 09:62A 0'00 D 0.00