The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutpitkin.planning.264321307009 (2)DOCUMENT LAYOUT THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION LISTED BELOW IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER Summary Sheet Resolution for the BOCC and/or P&Z Ordinance for the BOCC and/or P&Z Determination for the Hearing Officer Administrative Determination Staff Memo Application Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter Site Plan Miscellaneous Plat(s) Parcel ID: 2643-21-3-07-009 Application Date: 8/22/14 Description: Scotty William Cathcart Revocable Trust & Pamela Dianne Cathcart Revocable Trust Minor Amendment to a Development Permit Project Address: 90 SAGEBRUSH LN, ASPEN, C081615 PropertyOwner: SCOTTY WILLIAM CATHCART Address: 90 SAGEBRUSH LN ASPEN, CO 81611 Case No: P072-14 Planner: Lance Clarke # Copies: 1 Allocated Hours: 3 % Over Hours: 3.6 Owner Phone: Owner's REP: SCOTTY WILLIAM & PAM CATHAddress: 90SAGCO RUSH LN REP'S Phone: ASPEN 815 REP'S Email: jimcdog@comcast.net Referrals: ALL OTHER REFERRALS Other Referrals: Brush Creek Metro District none ZONING REFERRAL Housing 9/26/14 Comments Due Date: 09/26/2014 Meetings: 7st Meeting: 2nd Meeting: 3rd Meeting: Meeting Date' Review Body Public Hearing? Notice Date: Meeting Notes: Approvals: BOCC Resolution #: BOCC Ordinance #: Admin Determination #: 10/08/2014 bocc no 101-2014 #614722 Other Information: VR Approval Date: Plat Recorded Date VR Expires Date Plat (Bk, PG): Remarks: no vesting P&Z Determination #: HO Determination #: Application Type: Minor Amendment to a Development Permit RECEPTION#: 614722,10/21/2014 at 09:47:59 AM, 1 OF 3, R $0.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL TO SCOTTY AND PAM CATHCART FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL TO REPLACE AN EMPLOYEE DWELLING UNIT DEED RESTRICTION WITH A CARETAKER DWELLING UNIT DEED RESTRICTION Resolution No. _-2014 RECITALS 1. Scotty and Pam Cathcart ("Applicants') have applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado ("BOCC") for a minor amendment to a development permit to remove the requirement for an employee dwelling unit ('EDU") deed restriction on the property and substitute a caretaker dwelling unit (CDU) deed restriction on an existing attached accessory unit. 2. The property is located at 90 Sagebrush Lane in Brush Creek Village and is more specifically described as Lot 5, Block 3, Brush Creek Village Subdivision, Filing I. 3. The lot contains 2.7 acres, and is non- conforming in size in the AR -l0 zone district. 4. The EDU was granted approval by the BOCC by Resolution No. 94-126. 5. The BOCC heard this application at a regularly scheduled meeting on October 8, 2014, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to the application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the BOCC that it does hereby grant approval for a minor amendment to a development permit for the Cathcart property to remove the EDU deed restriction on an existing accessory dwelling unit and to replace the EDU deed restriction with a CDU deed restriction, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors to interest: The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in public meetings and in the application. 2. Within 90 days of this approval, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval of the County Attorney and Community Development a Caretaker Dwelling Unit deed restriction for the accessory unit meeting all current terms and conditions for such deed restriction. The unit will be inspected by the Housing Office for compliance prior to recording the deed restriction. The EDU deed restriction will be removed coterminous with the recording of the CDU deed restriction. 3. The CDU shall: a. Not exceed 1,000 net livable square feet; b. The floor area of the unit shall be included in the total allowed floor area on the parcel; c. One off street parking place shall be provided for the unit; d. The kitchen must contain at minimum a two burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a refrigerator plus freezer. The oven must be able to bake and broil and be at least 5 cubic feet. Th( sink must measure at least 14"W X 16"DX5 '25"H. The refrigerator must be at least 5.3 cubic feet and must include a.73 cubic foot freezer. e. Have floor plans approved by Housing and Zoning; f Be inspected for compliance prior to recordation of the CDU deed restriction. Resolulion No. 101 -2014 Page 2 4. Failure to comply with the conditions of this approval may result in revocation of this approval, or any subsequent permits or approvals related to this property, or vested rights associated with this property. Resolution No. IN -2014 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED on the day otMf ,2014. APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely, County Att y s PID 4264321307009 P072-14 Imcedcathcart edu to edu reso doc BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO By \4iC�G Robert A. Inner, Jr., Chair Date to Z"I APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Indy Houben, Community Development Director MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting — October 8, 2014 THRU: Cindy Houb``enn,,�Community Development Director FROM: Lance Clarkl ssistant Director RE: Cathcart Request to Remove Employee Dwelling Unit Deed Restriction and Substitute a Caretaker Dwelling Unit Deed Restriction REQUEST: The Applicant requests approval to remove the Employee Dwelling Unit ("EDU") deed restriction on an existing accessory dwelling unit and replace it with a Caretaker Dwelling Unit ("CDU") deed restriction. APPLICANT/OWNER: Scotty and Pam Cathcart LOCATION: 90 Sagebrush Lane, Brush Creek Village ZONING/LOT SIZE: The lot is 2.7 acres, and is non -conforming in the AR -10 zone district. BACKGROUND: The BOCC originally approved the EDU on the property in 1994. The Applicants had applied for a CDU status on an existing attached accessory dwelling unit. The unit had been built without benefit of building permits, and it can be seen from the attached minutes of the 1994 BOCC meeting that the Board felt that the fact that the unit had been built without permit warranted a more "complete" deed restriction. The Applicants obtained the proper permits, recorded the EDU deed restriction, and were granted a Certificate of Occupancy for the EDU. The unit has been occupied as an EDU for 20 years. STAFF COMMENTS: The owners have indicated that changes in their family needs over time have led them to request that the status of the accessory unit be changed from an EDU to a CDU. The Land Use Code no longer includes an EDU as an allowed use. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the BOCC adopt a motion "to approve the Cathcart request to remove the EDU deed restriction and substitute a CDU deed restriction, subject to the attached Resolution." Exhibits A. Letter of Request B. BOCC Res. #94-126 C. BOCC Minutes, July 12, 1994 000001 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL TO SCOTTY AND PAM CATHCART FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL TO REPLACE AN EMPLOYEE DWELLING UNIT DEED RESTRICTION WITH A CARETAKER DWELLING UNIT DEED RESTRICTION Resolution No. -2014 RECITALS 1. Scotty and Pam Cathcart ("Applicants") have applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado ("BOCC") for a minor amendment to a development permit to remove the requirement for an employee dwelling unit ("EDU") deed restriction on the property and substitute a caretaker dwelling unit (CDU) deed restriction on an existing attached accessory unit. 2. The property is located at 90 Sagebrush Lane in Brush Creek Village and is more specifically described as Lot 5, Block 3, Brush Creek Village Subdivision, Filing 1. 3. The lot contains 2.7 acres, and is non- conforming in size in the AR -10 zone district. 4. The EDU was granted approval by the BOCC by Resolution No. 94-126. 5. The BOCC heard this application at a regularly scheduled meeting on October 8, 2014, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to the application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the BOCC that it does hereby grant approval for a minor amendment to a development permit for the Cathcart property to remove the EDU deed restriction on an existing accessory dwelling unit and to replace the EDU deed restriction with a CDU deed restriction, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: 1. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in public meetings and in the application. 2. Within 90 days of this approval, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval of the County Attorney and Community Development a Caretaker Dwelling Unit deed restriction for the accessory unit meeting all current terms and conditions for such deed restriction. The unit will be inspected by the Housing Office for compliance prior to recording the deed restriction. The EDU deed restriction will be removed coterminous with the recording of the CDU deed restriction. 3. The CDU shall: a. Not exceed 1,000 net livable square feet; b. The floor area of the unit shall be included in the total allowed floor area on the parcel; c. One off street parking place shall be provided for the unit; d. The kitchen must contain at minimum a two burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a refrigerator plus freezer. The oven must be able to bake and broil and be at least 5 cubic feet. The sink must measure at least 14"WX16"DX5.25"H. The refrigerator must be at least 5.3 cubic feet and must include a.73 cubic foot freezer. e. Have floor plans approved by Housing and Zoning; f Be inspected for compliance prior to recordation of the CDU deed restriction. 000002 Resolution No. _-201 d Page 2 4. Failure to comply with the conditions of this approval may result in revocation of this approval, or any subsequent permits or approvals related to this property, or vested rights associated with this property. 000003 Resolution No. _-2014 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED on the day of , 2014. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO LA ATTEST: Jeanette Jones Clerk to the BOCC APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely, County Attorney PID #264321307009 P072-14 laocec/cathcart edu to cdu reso.doc 0000U Robert A. Ittner, Jr., Chair APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 4��' 0�&�,C=ff Indy Houben, Community Development Director August 17, 2014 Pitkin County Community Development Attn: Lance Clark, Planner Re: Scotty and Pam Cathcart 90 Sagebrush Lane Aspen, CO 81611 The intention of this letter is to explain the purpose of our request to amend the development permit on the above referenced property. We are asking for a status change from the present, EDU to an ADU. A little history... We built and moved into our house in 2003 and at that time the attached unit was unfinished. Our intention was to finish it as we could, apply for legal status and rent it out to local, working people. Friends of ours were losing their live in nanny as she had decided to live with her boyfriend and they wanted a place of their own. They, we knew, would be the perfect tenants for us because our two children already knew the nanny (as our kids played together with our friends' children) and the couple agreed that they would be willing to help us with our kids occasionally too. They were in a hurry to move in so we decided to quickly finish the unit and apply for legal status with the county later as we knew the permitting process could be lengthy and we'd lose the renters that we wanted. In other words we "put the cart before the horse" so to speak. To make a long story short, the BCCC were unhappy with us for not following the proper procedure and we were "penalized" by giving the unit EDU status. For the past 21 years the EDU status has never been a problem since our intention for the very beginning was to rent, as I said earlier, to local, working people. The fact that the rental price is controlled hasn't mattered at all because we usually charged less that what was allowed anyway. The reason we are requesting a status change at this time has to do with Scotty's health. Four years ago he had a kidney transplant and even though the surgery was deemed successful, clearly his overall health has been deteriorating ever since making it more and more difficult for him to work in his field; electrical contracting. Consequently, meeting our financial obligations has become quite difficult. We have had our house on the market for the past three summers with very little interest. The time has come that we feel we need to occupy the rental unit ourselves and rent the main house until such time as it sells. In addition, lifting the EDU status might make the home more attractive to a potential buyer. Please let us know if you have any questions about the above information. Thanks you for your consideration. Scotty and Pam Cathcart 970.618.0210 970.379.1475 372797 B-757 P-516 08/03/94 04.20P PG 1 OF 3 SILVIA DAVIS PITk::IN COUNTY CLERK &< RECORDER REC"(' DOC RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITRIN COUNTY COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL TO THE CATHCART EMPLOYEE DWELLING //UNIT Resolution No. 94-./ "g-4 RECITALS 1. Scotty and Pam Cathcart, hereinafter "Applicants", have applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, hereinafter "Board", for approval of a caretaker dwelling unit pursuant to Section 3-1511 of the Land Use Code. 2. The Applicant's lot is zoned AFR-10 and is approximately 2.7 acres in size. 3. Said parcel is located at 0090 Sage Brush Lane, Snowmass Village, legally described as Lot 5, Block 3, of the Brush Creek Village Subdivision. 4. The Applicants propose to deed restrict the caretaker dwelling unit pursuant to Section 3-1511(4) of the Land Use Code. 5. The Board heard this application at a regularly scheduled meeting on July 12, 1994, at which time evidence and testimony was presented with respect to this application. 6. The Board found that the Cathcarts had constructed and rented this unit without the benefit of County approvals and as a consequence, the Board required that an employee deed restriction be applied to the rental unit, pursuant to Section 3-1510 of the Code. The Board determined that this is an appropriate variation of the EDU requirements (1500 sq.ft. minimum livable area), given the size of the lot and the 000006 372797 B-757 F'---,,,,, 09/03/94 04:20P PG 2 3 Resolution No. 94- Page 2 "after the fact" application for land use approvals. 7. The Board also found that the Applicants shall pay double Zoning Plan Check and double Building Permit fees. 8. The Board determined that the rental unit meets the criteria established in Section 3-1510 of the Land Use Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board that it does hereby grant approval to the Cathcart Employee Dwelling Unit application subject to the following conditions: 1. Within 30 days of approval by the Board of County Commissioners, the Applicant shall request an inspection of the existing rental unit by the Aspen/Pitkin Regional Building Department to assure compliance with the health and safety regulations of the Uniform Building Code. If outstanding UBC compliance issues are identified, said issues shall be rectified to the satisfaction of the Chief Building official within 90 days of the initial inspection. 2. The Applicant shall record a employee unit deed restriction on the existing residence pursuant to Section 3-1510 of the Code. The Applicant shall record the deed restriction within 30 days of final approval by the Building Department. 3. The Applicant shall pay double Zoning Plan Check and double Building Permit fees, prior to final approval by the Building Department. 4. The Applicant shall comply with all material representations made in the application and in the public meeting. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 1994 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO A Robert W. pphild, Chairman Date 000007 Resolution No. 94-„A6 Page 3 Do¢$ty Clerk and Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: mao_®m�s_edu_boce 3i279f �� § SusaRoncha , Count Planning Director b-757 F-518 08/03/94 04.20P FG 3 OF 3 satistaci_cry Child openerl tie hearing to public comment. There being no uom,aent, he closed the public hearings. Ireland moved approval of the Rubey Caretaker Dwelling Unit. With a second by True, the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL TO THE CATHCART CARETAKER DWELLING UNIT - MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED - True said he would be abstaining from discussion and action on this matter necause o2 his special relationship with the Cathcarts. Rick_ Magill introduced this item as an application, submitted by Scotty and Pam Cathcart to request approval of a caretaker dwelling unit to be located within the existing single family residence at 0090 Sage Brush Lane, Brush Creek Village Subdivision. The applicants wish to convert approximately 600 square feet of an area above an attached garage to a caretaker unit. The total floor area for the residence is 3,500 square feet, including the 600 square feet to be converted to the caretaker unit. Magill submitted a letter receivsd by the Planning Office on July 8, 1994. He said t`iis letter clearly indicates that the caretaker 4 unit has indeed been built and has been occupied since May 1, 1994. A copy of this letter is made a part of this record as BMIBIT "A". He said in the memorandum, staff recommended approval of the application, but he would suggest that it is now up to the Board's discretion on how to proceed. But staff would suggest that the bandit unit type conditions be imposed, i.e., the 30 day inspection by the building department and giving them 90 days to rectify any UBC violations and tying the deed restriction to a certain amount of time which is typically 30 days. The other option would be to remove the tenants that are currently there and then remove the 1 kitchen an reapply under the same section of the land use code. Magill said the only other issue that staff has been made aware of that is that of a water line easement dispute with the adjacent property owner;. He referred to a letter from the Brush Creek Metropolitan District, which would seem to indicate that they have adequate water to serve the unit. A copy of this letter is made a part of this record as EXHIBIT 11899. Glenn Horn, representing the applicant, said the applicants came to him for his advise on this matter and what they should do about it. And he advised them that he thought the best thing to do would be to write a letter to the Planning Office and the County Commissioners advising them about the entire situation regarding this unit. He said Scotty misjudged the amount of time that would be necessary to get approval for a caretaker unit in this space. The space already existed in his house and he and his wife had made BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3 JULY 121 1994 OU -0000 a commitment: to Lesa Miller and Terrance McGuire, the qualified employees who are living in the unit. there is no doubt that the work that they did was done without permits and not legal. They did it so they could honor their commitme,it to Terrance and Lesa to putting in that unit, and they know that they have not done the right thing and therefore, they are trying to go through the process now to get all the leaal land use and building permit approvals. Ireland advised the applicants that their actions puts the Board in a very difficult situation. He said he thought the community was becoming familiar with people building something and then applying for the permits, and the public outrage that this causes. He referred to instances such as Wilk Wilkinson's and Peter c-+•ber's illegal structures. He told the Cathcarts that this puts the Board in a difficult position of not only having to impose wasteful punishment on the them, but it puts the Board into a position where they have to inflict harm on Lesa Miller and Terrance McGuire, who are hostages to the oversight. Mr. Cathcart explained that he realized there was an opportunity to apply for a permit before he left for Central America this March. However, he had a lot going on in his mind related to this trip and he just overlooked the permitting process. Tuite commented that he is concerned about approving this because it is inviting precedent by the Board, but we are trying to house 0 employees, He said he would like to hear from the applicant what they are renting the unit for and what kind of terms are involved. t Mrs. Cathcart replied that they are renting the unit for $700 a month with a third of the electric bill, and a month to month lease. The tenants do some child care for them, but they compensate them for that. Child advised the Cathcarts that when they build something without a permit they are also putting people at risk if there is faulty wiring or something of that nature. That is one reason the whole caretaker unit ordinance came to be because there were people at risk and the Board wanted to make sure that situation dial not exist anymore. Child opened the hearing to public comment. Sezanne and Stan Tener, adjoining neighbors commented that the Cathcart's water line is trespassing across their property and they do not think the Board should approve a caretaker unit when the water is illegal in the first place. They said that Mr. Cathcart has consistently violated rules since he has been their neighbor and they are moving into litigation with him with regard to the water line issue. With respect to the caretaker unit, Mrs. Tener said there is a need for housing under the rules, but the Cathcarts BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4 JULY 121 1994 000010 have not followed the rules. She said they applied for a caretaker unit and it took them over eight months to get through the permitting process, inspections, etc. Tim Whitsitt, County Attorney, addressed the water line issue by saying that it is clear that the Cathcarts are in a snbdivision that has an adequate water supply and they may have put their water line in the wrong place, but that is not an issue that is pertinent to whether or not they are going to have an employee unit in place. A r--,ident of the Brush Creek Village Subdivision asked if a person; in Brush Creek who is building a new home, applies for a caretaker dwelling unit at the same time as they apply for a permit on the home, if it was apt to be approved? Whitsitt _-esponded that there is no different standard for review if you c --.ie in having already built the house and asking to add a caretake-_ unit as opposed to coming in to build a house and caretake_ unit. it would be the same standard of review and the same iss-2s involved. There be -ng no further comment, Child closed the public comment section cf the hearing and brought the matter back to the Board for a decision. Whitsitt suggested that the Board make payment of the building and planning fees a requirement or a condition of granting of this. He noted that the building code requires that people who go ahead and build without the I.ermit, are assessed double fees and there are also planning department fees. Suzanne Konchan commented for the benefit of the applicant, that the land use code fees in the Planning Office state that for applications proposed for after the fact approvals, have an additional $300 charge added in addition to whatever are etandard. A discussion ensued with regard to a caretaker unit versus an employee dwelling unit. Konchan explair..1 that under the County's Land Use Code, an employee dwelling unit has a more restrictive deed restriction than the caretaker unit under that provision in that it requires the unit to be rented rather than making the rental voluntary. Also, it caps the rental price at no greater than the Category III rental restrictions in place under the housing guidelines. Child said given the facts under this case, it would be his tendency to approve it, but approve it as a employee dwelling unit ratner than a caretaker dwelling unit. He thinks tha Board does have this authority. He thinks to remove a unit once it has been built is something that is bard for im to do. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 5 JULY 12, 1994 U00011 Ireland said he c,n not approve the application as appl'ed for. He simply cannot have pecrle blowing off the rules and regulations when they have every opportunity and ability to know those regulations and to comply with them. He chinks maybe converting it into an EDL' and letting the tenants stay in it warrants some consideration. Tuite said he wou h -i like to hear from the applicant about converting it into u,, employee dwelling unit. Mr. Cathcart commented that the reason they are renting the unit for $700 a month is because they need the income; that the only concern he has is that he can still rent it for that amount. Glenn Horn asked if the Board were apt to go with an employee dwelling unit rather than a caretaker unit, that a finding be made to address the issue of nonconforming. He said this is a sub- standard size lot, and the code says a caretaker dwelling unit, but when it comes to an employee dwelling unit, it dictates that they be on lots that are of a standard size in the zone. So he would not want to place Pam and Scotty in a situation where they have a sub -standard size lot and also, a nonconforming use because of the fact that it is an employee dwelling unit instead of a caretaker dwelling unit. Whitsitt addressed the issue by saying that he thinks the finding can be male because the lot is in a platted subdivision. Horn suggested that the finding be that because the unit is less than 700 square feet in size and to qualify as an employee dwelling unit, and to necessitate a lot that is standard size, it: would have to be 700 square feet. whitsitt said that he thinks these findings can be made; given the size of the lot and given the late application for approvals. Child asked the applicants if they understood the provisions of an employee dwelling unit. Cathcart said he understands everything, but what is hard is the amount of rental they can charge. Tuite moved that based upon the findings as discussed here, be Mould approve an employee dwelling unit for this application, specifically not a caretaker dwelling unit because of the discussion and the presentation that we have had. with the applicant paying the penalties and the additional fees as discussed. And to direct the planning staff to mane a finding with respect to the nonco!,,:)rmity., With a second by Ireland, the motion passed unanimously. RESOLIITION GRANTING APPROVAL TO THE PATTERSON CARE ARER DWSLIING BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 6 JULY 12, :1,94 MEMORANDUM TO: Lance Clarke, Community Development Department FROM: Cindy Christensen, Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority DATE: September 26, 2014 RE: Cathcart Amendment to a Development Permit Parcel ID No. 2643-213-07-009; P072-14 REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval to convert the approved, fully deed -restricted employee dwelling unit, to a caretaker dwelling unit (CDU). APPLICANT: APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: xerw."16321 ZONING: LOT SIZE: SUMMARY: Scotty and Pam Cathcart Scotty and Pam Cathcart 90 Sagebrush Lane AR -10 2.7 acres CARETAKER DWELLING UNIT: According to Section 4-30-50(e)(1), CDU as Permitted Accessory Use, in the RS -160, RS -35, RS -30, RS -20, AR -10, AR -2, R-30, R015, R -15A and R-6 zone districts one CDU shall be a permitted accessory use provided that: 1. It is attached to a single-family home (the principal dwelling). 2. The caretaker dwelling unit shall not exceed 1000 net livable square feet on lots or parcels that are 30,000 square feet or greater in lot area, and 700 net livable square feet on lots or parcels that are less than 30,000 square feet in lot area. 3. The floor area of the caretaker unit shall be included in the total allowed floor area for the lot or parcel of land. 4. Two off-street parking spaces shall be provided for each caretaker dwelling unit. The applicant shall, by deed restriction or other permanent commitment running with the land, guarantee that the caretaker unit: a. shall not be required to be rented; b. shall not be sold or otherwise conveyed or separated from the original parcel regardless of the ultimate form of ownership of the caretaker unit; c. shall be limited to occupancy by not more than two adults and related children, who qualify as (and have been found by the Housing Authority to be) employees of the community under such guidelines as may be from time to time established, or by members of the owner's immediate family even though they may not qualify as employees of the community; d. shall be rented for terms not less than six months if rented. 6. The caretaker dwelling unit restriction may be removed by the property owner upon approval of the Community Development Director, subject to the requirement that the dwelling is removed or modified. If modified, the remaining improvements must no longer be capable of occupancy as a dwelling unit and must meet otherwise applicable Code requirements. 7. The provisions of this regulation are for the purpose of providing a voluntary caretaker dwelling unit on a legally created lot or parcel in the County. Any unit approved under this provision shall not be used for mitigation of employee housing requirements as established elsewhere in the Land Use Code. Section 4-30-50(e)(2)(c) allows a caretaker dwelling unit, as a special review, to be detached from the principal single-family dwelling on the lot or parcel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is not a requirement to have a fully deed -restricted employee dwelling unit on this property; therefore, APCHA recommends approval to record a caretaker dwelling unit deed restriction to supersede the deed restriction recorded at Reception No. 374438, as long as the unit meets the following criteria: 1. Conditions 1 through 5 stated above in the CDU section are met. 2. The kitchen contains at a minimum a two-bumer stove with oven, standard sink, and a refrigerator plus freezer. The oven must be able to bake and broil and be at least 5 cubic feet; the sink must measure at least 14"WX16"DX5.25"H; refrigerator must be at least 5.3 cubic feet and include at least a.73 cubic foot freezer. 3. A caretaker dwelling unit deed restriction shall be recorded prior to building permit; the CDU deed restriction shall be provided by APCHA, superseding the deed restriction recorded at Reception No. 374438. 2 PITKIN COUNTY PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PROJECT: Cathcart Minor Amendment to Development Permit LOCATION: 90 Sagebrush Lane - Lot 5,Block 3, Brush Creek Village PID# 264321307009 ZONING: AR -10 ScoN� vJ ��,c Cok�co�! SIZE: 2.7 acres OWNERS: See Revo cc.�1a TQvs REPRESENTATIVE: TBD Pomo\cn t+,knee- PHONE and EMAIL: 923-6687 Cu-1ticQ�A D.�2 v jimcdog:(,comcast.net DATE: November 27, 2013 PLANNER: Lance Clarke, 920-5452 Type of Application: Minor Amendment to Development Permit Description of Project/Development: The Applicant wishes to amend the approval in BOCC Resolution No. 94- 126 by allowing a CDU deed restriction instead of the approved EDU deed restriction. Land Use Code Sections to be addressed in letter of request (application): Sec. 2-20-150(b): Minor Amendments Application requirements as designated in: Sec. 1: Pitkin County Application Manual; General Application Information. l z" "e A n,.M,. Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: Brush Creek Metro District, Housing Review by: BOCC. (Review is being forwarded to BOCC for determination as BOCC made initial determination). Public Hearing: No. FEES: $1,066.00(make check payable to "Pitkin County Treasurer") ■ Planning Office flat fee: $936(non-refundable; based on 3 hours of staff time; if staff review time exceeds 3.6 hours, the Applicant will be charged for additional time above 3 hours at a rate of $312/hour) • Clerk Fee: $130 To apply, submit 4 copies of the following information, unless noted otherwise: 1. Summary letter explaining the request, providing background on prior approvals and permits, and { addressing compliance with the Code sections listed above; 2. Proof of ownership of subject property; 3. Parcel description, including legal description and vicinity map; 4. Total fee for review of the application; 5. „ Signed fee agreement (1 copy); 6. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (1 copy); 7. Copy of this preapp form (1 copy). NOTES: ➢ PLEASE SUBMIT ONE UNBOUND AND ONE-SIDED COPY OF YOUR COMPLETE APPLICATION. PLEASE SUBMIT TWO-SIDED COPIES OF ALL REMAINING COPIES OF YOUR APPLICATION (IF 000001 C4 I q August 17, 2014 Pitkin County Community Development Attn: Lance Clark, Planner Re: Scotty and Pam Cathcart 90 Sagebrush Lane Aspen, CO 81611 The intention of this letter is to explain the purpose of our request to amend the development permit on the above referenced property. We are asking for a status change from the present, EDU to an ADU. A little history... We built and moved into our house in 2003 and at that time the attached unit was unfinished. Our intention was to finish it as we could, apply for legal status and rent it out to local, working people. Friends of ours were losing their live in nanny as she had decided to live with her boyfriend and they wanted a place of their own. They, we knew, would be the perfect tenants for us because our two children already knew the nanny (as our kids played together with our friends' children) and the couple agreed that they would be willing to help us with our kids occasionally too. They were in a hurry to move in so we decided to quickly finish the unit and apply for legal status with the county later as we knew the permitting process could be lengthy and we'd lose the renters that we wanted. In other words we "put the cart before the horse" so to speak. To make a long story short, the BCCC were unhappy with us for not following the proper procedure and we were "penalized" by giving the unit EDU status. For the past 21 years the EDU status has never been a problem since our intention for the very beginning was to rent, as I said earlier, to local, working people. The fact that the rental price is controlled hasn't mattered at all because we usually charged less that what was allowed anyway. The reason we are requesting a status change at this time has to do with Scotty's health. Four years ago he had a kidney transplant and even though the surgery was deemed successful, clearly his overall health has been deteriorating ever since making it more and more difficult for him to work in his field; electrical contracting. Consequently, meeting our financial obligations has become quite difficult. We have had our house on the market for the past three summers with very little interest. The time has come that we feel we need to occupy the rental unit ourselves and rent the main house until such time as it sells. In addition, lifting the EDU status might make the home more attractive to a potential buyer. Please let us know if you have any questions about the above information. Thanks you for your consideration. Scotty and Pam Cathcart 970.618.0210 970.379.1475 000002 RECEPTION#: 589633, 06/07/2012 at 01:58:06 PM, 1 OF 2, R $16.00 DF $0.00 Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made this 4 day of lune 2012, between SCOTTY WILLIAM CATHCART and PAMELA DIANNE CATHCART as joint tenants, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, GRANTORS, an undivided one-half ('/x) interest in The Scorty William Cathcart Revocable Trust and an undivided one- half ('/2) interest in The Pamela Dianne Cathcart Revocable Trust, whose legal address is 90 Sagebrush Lane Aspen, CO 81611 of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, GRANTEES: WITNESSETH, that the grantors, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby ac- knowledged, have granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the grantees, their heirs and assigns forever, all the real property, together with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, described as follows: Lot 5, Block 3 Brush Creek Village Subdivision Filing No. I County of Pitkin, State of Colorado; Also known by street and number as: 90 Sagebrush Lane, Aspen, CO 81611 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantors, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described with the appurtenances, unto grantees and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns forever. Grantors, for Grantors, and grantor's heirs, successors and assigns, do covenant and agree that grantors shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above -bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of grantees, and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns, against all and every person or persons claiming the whole or any part thereof, by, through or under the grantors. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantors have executed this deed on the date set forth above. WIL IAM CATHCART PAMELA DIANNE CATHCART NOTARIZED ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ON FOLLOWING PAGE 0U UUd D�, W RECEPTION#; 589633, 06/07/2012 at 01:58:06 PM, 2 OF 2, Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO STATEOFCOLORADO ) as. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 70, day of June 2012, by SCOTTY WILLI T. y{1�t ad official seal. Comm sio pires:p3/Z3/1j lKaryPublic Ad ress OF STATE OFr" ) ) ss. COUNTY OFL1�� ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1± day of lune 2012, by PAMELA DIANNE CATHCART. Witness my hand and official seal. My com ' ' s: ota none c t, ... ......... p Address S� I %OTARYcs��s ..1`4 PUBLIC ,p 000004 POSSIBLE). THE PARCEL IDs SHOULD BE INCLUDED ONALL DOCUMENTS INCLUDED IN YOUR APPLICATION ➢ ALL MAPS SHALL BE FOLDED. ➢ AT LEAST ONE COPY OF APPLICATION SHALL HAVE ALL DOCUMENTS AT NO LARGER THAN l l ' X 17 " SHEETS. ➢ 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 staff's interpretations based upon representations of the applicant. Additional information may be required upon a complete review of the application. 000005 �ITKI v PITKIN COUNTY TREASURER cee�TEAIN SUIE 201 PITKIN COUNTYTAX NOTICE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-2903 0) For 2013 taxes due In 2014 PHONE # n i in.co /t FAX # (970) 920-5775 TREASURER & PUBLIC u:.ee www.as en itI<in.com/taxes Subdivision: BRUSH CREEK VILLAGE Block 3 PITKIN COUNTY GENERAL FIND 2.416 -0.681 $260.35 Lot: 5 COUNTY TV&FM TRANSLATORS 0 280 -0096 $30 18 COUNTY ROADS & BRIDGES 0.178 -0.050 $1918 COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES 0 065 $701 HEALTHY COMMUNITY FUND 0 778 -0.007 $83.85 ASPEN AMBULANCE DISTRICT 0.220 -0.058 $23.71 OPEN SPACE & TRAILS 3.783 $407.69 PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY 1.439 -0.195 $155.08 ASPEN FIRE PROTECTION 1.477 $159.18 BRUSH CREEK METRO DIST 28.569 $3,078.89 SITUS ADDRESS: ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL 2.539 $273.63 90 SAGE BRUSH LN - - ASPEN SCHOOL DISTRICT 9 333 $1,005.83 - COLORADO MTN COLLEGE 1997 $430.76 PARCEL NUMBER: 264321307009 COLORADO RIVER WATER CONS 0 254 $27.37 ASPEN HISTORIC PARK & RED 0.300 $32.33 LAND 475,000 BUILDING 878,900 PERSONALPROPERTY EXEMPTION - DISABLED VET. OR SENIOR HOMESTEAD NET TOTAL VALUATION 1,353,900 TAX DISTRICT ACCOUNT NUMBER TYPE OF PRC 041 R013923 Real 37,810 69,960 ' A mill levy Is the tax rate per $1,000 of assessed valuation 107,770 Without state legislative funding your school NET MILL LEW I FULL TAX mill levy would have been: 11.7280 55.628 $5,995.04 IS YOUR ADDRESS CORRECT? Please check the box on the coupon for change of address. I CATHCART SCOTTY WILLIAM REV TRUST 50% CATHCART PAMELA DIANNE REV TRUST 50% 90 SAGEBRUSH LN ASPEN CO 81611-9609 0001000 $2,997.52 $2,997.52 Sao Make checks payable to: PITKIN COUNTY TREASURER Post-dated checks are not accepted. If your real (not personal) property taxes will be paid by your mortgage company, please do not duplicate payment. If you have sold this property please forward this statement to the new owner or returnll to this office marked 'property sold" (and include the name and address of the new owner if known). PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS RETAIN TOP PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS. FORM FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. TAX NOTICE PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF LAND USE APPLICATION FEES PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter "COUNTY") and 7 c (hereinafter "APPLICANT") AGREE AS FOLLOWS: APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for (hereinafter, the "PROJECT"). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Ordinance No. 30-2009 establishes a fee structure for land use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. The fee structure is based on the COUNTY'S policy that development shall pay, in full, the cost of development review in the COUNTY. Fees have been set to be consistent and fair to the public and to reflect the expense incurred in providing such services to the public. 3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed PROJECT, it may not be possible at the time of application to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. 4. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that fees charged for the processing of land use applications shall accumulate if an application includes more than one type of land use review. 5. COUNTY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for COUNTY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to enable the Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to make legally required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 6. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the COUNTY'S waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay a base fee in the amount of $ which is based on_ hours of staff time, and if actual time spent by staff to process the application exceeds the average number of hours by more than 20%, then the COUNTY will bill the APPLICANT quarterly for the additional time spent. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing. PITKIN COUNTY ("APPLICANT") Cindy Houben Community Development Director 000007 Ln A,.Vy, -- Print Name and Title (if applicable) Date: 9 — 22 — Mailing Address: rf 372797 P-757 P-516 tie/03/94 04.20P PG 1 OF 3 SILVIA DAVIS PITK:IN COUNTY CLERK: & RECORDER REC 0.0 DOC RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITRIN COUNTY COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL TO THE CATHCART EMPLOYEE DWELLING UNIT Resolution No. 94- Ia G RECITALS 1. Scotty and Pam Cathcart, hereinafter "Applicants", have applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, hereinafter "Board", for approval of a caretaker dwelling unit pursuant to Section 3-1511 of the Land Use Code. 2. The Applicant's lot is zoned AFR-10 and is approximately 2.7 acres in size. 3. Said parcel is located at 0090 Sage Brush Lane, Snowmass Village, legally described as Lot 5, Block 3, of the Brush Creek Village Subdivision. 4. The Applicants propose to deed restrict the caretaker dwelling unit pursuant to Section 3-1511(4) of the Land Use Code. 5. The Board heard this application at a regularly scheduled meeting on July 12, 1994, at which time evidence and testimony was presented with respect to this application. 6. The Board found that the Cathcarts had constructed and rented this unit without the benefit of County approvals and as a consequence, the Board required that an employee deed restriction be applied to the rental unit, pursuant to Section 3-1510 of the Code. The Board determined that this is an appropriate variation of the EDU requirements (1500 sq.ft. minimum livable area), given the size of the lot and the ui�t�r703 �. 372797 B-757 F'-517 ii8/03/94 04:20P PG 2 OF 3 Resolution No. 94- /aY Page 2 "after the fact" application for land use approvals. 7. The Board also found that the Applicants shall pay double Zoning Plan Check and double Building Permit fees. S. The Board determined that the rental unit meets the criteria established in Section 3-1510 of the Land Use Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board that it does hereby grant approval to the Cathcart Employee Dwelling Unit application subject to the following conditions: 1. Within 30 days of approval by the Board of County Commissioners, the Applicant shall request an inspection of the existing rental unit by the Aspen/Pitkin Regional Building Department to assure compliance with the health and safety regulations of the Uniform Building Code. If outstanding UBC compliance issues are identified, said issues shall be rectified to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official within 90 days of the initial inspection. 2. The Applicant shall record a employee unit deed restriction on the existing residence pursuant to Section 3-1510 of the Code. The Applicant shall record the deed restriction within 30 days of final approval by the Building Department. 3. The Applicant shall pay double Zoning Plan Check and double Building Permit fees, prior to final approval by the Building Department. 4. The Applicant shall comply with all material representations made in the application and in the public meeting. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 1994 BOARD OF COUNTY C0MMISSI0NERS OF PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO f% A By / Robert W.�hild, Chairman Date / 00000 Resolution No. 94-� Page//'��3 ATT$8,: Je"tte-Jones / Den4ty Clerk an Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORK: a yn..,....3 .. County Att m ani .a. ,- 00001O APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Gl/►MFQ Sus&a Roncha , Count Planning Director b-757 F-518 08/03/94 04:20P PS 3 OF 3 374438 B-761 F-941 09/22/94 09!39A GG 1 OF 4 REC DOC NO SILVIA DAVIS FITKIN COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER 20.00 OCCUPANCY DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT FOR AN EMPLOYEE DWELLING UNIT APPROVED PURSUANT TO SECTION 3-1510 OF THE PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE CODE /�4IS AGREEMENT is made a d entered into this Z� day of A USS 19' , by Scotty William Cathcart and Pamela ianne Cathcart, (hereinafter referred to as "Owner"), whose address is 0090 Sagebrush Lane, located in the County of Pitkin, and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, a multi - jurisdictional housing authority established pursuant to the AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT recorded in Book 605 at Page 751 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office (hereinafter referred to as "Authority"). W I T N E S S E T H WHEREAS, Owner owns real property more specifically described in Lot 5, Block 3, Filing 1, Brush Creek Village Subdivision (hereinafter referred to as "Real Property"), which Real Property shall contain a one bedroom, Employee Dwelling Unit, which shall contain 600 net liveable square feet and is attached to the principal residence (hereinafter "Employee Dwelling Unit"), approved by the Board of County Commissioners pursuant to Resolution 4t1L&, recorded in Book i57 at Page 974, of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. For purposes of this Agreement, the Employee Dwelling Unit, the Real Property, and all appurtenances, improvements and fixtures associated therewith shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, this Agreement imposes certain covenants upon the Property which restrict the use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit to employees and their families who are employed in Pitkin County and meet the qualification guidelines established and indexed by the Authority on an annual basis. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations contained herein, the Owner hereby covenants and agrees as follows: Owner hereby covenants that the Employee Dwelling Unit described above shall at all times remain a rental unit and shall not be condominiumized. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit shall henceforth be limited exclusively to housing for employees and their families who are employed in Pitkin County and who meet the definition of "employee" as that term is defined by the qualification guidelines established and indexed by the Authority on an annual basis. Owner shall have the right to lease the Employee Dwelling Unit to a "qualified employee" cf 7,74438 R-761 P-942 09/22/94 09:39A PG 2 OF 4 his own selection. Such individual may be an employee of the Owner, provided such person(s) fulfills the requirements of a qualified employee. 3. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall not be occupied by the Owner or members of the immediate family ("Immediate Family" shall mean a person related by blood or marriage who is a first cousin [or closer relative] and his or her children) nor shall the Employee Dwelling Unit be used a guest house or guest facility. 4. Written verification of employment of employee(s) proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the Authority by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Unit prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the Authority. 5. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall be required to be rented for periods of no less than six (6) consecutive months. Upon vacancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit, the Owner is granted ninety (90) days in which to locate a qualified employee. If no employee is placed by the Owner, the Authority may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. 6. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category #3 rental rate as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the Authority and may be adjusted annually as set forth by the Guidelines. The maximum permitted rent for the u it on the date of execution of this deed restriction is 3 . Rent shall be verified and approved by the Authority upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the Authority as to employment only, and not maximum income or asset limitations. Lease agreements executed for occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit shall provide for a rental term of not less than six (6) consecutive months. A signed and executed copy of the lease shall be provided to the Authority by the Owner within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. This Agreement may be removed by the Owner with the approval of the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners, subject to the requirement that the Employee Dwelling Unit is removed or modified. If modified, the remaining improvements must no longer be capable of occupancy as a "dwelling unit" as defined in the Pitkin County Land Use Code and must meet otherwise applicable code requirements. Unless modified as stated above, this Agreement shall constitute covenants running with the Real Property as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically G00012 374438 B-761 P--943 09/22/94 09;39F FIG 3 OF 4 enforceable by, the Authority, the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Pitkin, Colorado, and their respective successors, as applicable, by any appropriate legal action including, but not limited to, injunction, abatement, or eviction of non-qualified tenants. 10. This Agreement further guarantees compliance by requiring the Owner to pay the equivalent cash -in -lieu fee for an equal employee dwelling unit if found by the Board to be in default of the required employee dwelling unit deed restrictions. The equivalent cash -in -lieu fee shall be determined by amortizing the current price of an equivalent dwelling unit fee over a thirty (30) year period to determine the daily cost of the unit. The daily cost shall be multiplied by the number of days that the unit was found to be in default by the Board to determine the equivalent cash -in -lieu fee. Fees so collected shall be applied to the Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Fund. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on this date and year above first written. ;OWNERdS:y William Cathcart Pamela Dianne Cathcart Mailing Address: O, gol 99751 Q.pw._co gliea— STATE OF Colorado ) ss. COUNTY Rfkit The oregoing instrument was cknowledged }�e€€ore me pxhis a% day of �_, 19 by 1d11lIrQm ( thmrt w YQnaaln -• WITNESS MY hand and official seal. -Diam Who rf My Commission expires: 4� r� 3�1�313 `1Y� k. -a Notary Pylic 4(5 L. ('{, MOA *a05 Asp), 60to. 8(G(I 374438 B-761 F-944 09/22/94 09:396 GG 4 OF 4 ACCEPTANCE BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY The foregoing agreement and its terms are accepted by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSINGA ITY By: David J. My , Chairman Mailing Address: Executive Director Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 530 East Main, Lower Level Aspen, CO 81611 STATE OF COLORADO ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN v The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 7 day of 1924, by David J. Myler. WITNESS MY hand and official seal. My Commission expires: -7-.%2-90 Dat No ry Pub21c .tet P ZpY "G� \•.rk\dr\cath ed� 4 4JiTN * I111IN commuNlfJ DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TMENT TILL+ CERTIFW iT£ ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OFSEC77ON 30T OF THE 19$8 EDITION OFTR£ UAVMM BUILDING CODE. IT CERTIFIES TRAT AT THE DATE OFLSSUANC$ THE STRUCTUREAS DESCRIBED BELOW WAS IN COMPLIANCE IYTIR TRE VARIOUS RMLUTTONS AND ORDINANCES RE6UL TING BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AND USE IN TILLS JURISDICTION. Use Classification: Employee Dwelling Unit Building Permit: 4-443 Legal Description: Lot 5, Block 3, Brush Creek, Building Address: 90 Sage Brush Lade Owner of Building: Scotty Cathcart Owner Address: Box 9974, Aspen Group: R-3 'Type Construction: V -N Use Zone: ' AFR-10 Description: 600 squkre feet including one bedroom, one 3/4 bath, and one kitchen. Comments & Restrictions: BOCC 94-126. Deed Restriction BK 761 PG 941. ' qYiief Buildink Of.' ial Date Note: In an occupancies, creept R this certificate mast be posted in a conspicuous place near the main crit on the premises for which it is issued. Any alteration or use of these described premises or portion thereof without the written approval of the Building Official shall negate this C.O. and subject it to revocation. 9/9/2014 Pitkin County Mail - 9/26/14 Due Pitkin County Land Use Scotty William Cathcart Revocable Trust... application f)I rl.l♦ 9/26/14 Due Pitkin County Land Use Scotty William Cathcart Revocable Trust... application Bonnie Shiles <bonnie.waechtler@pitkincounty.com> Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 1:55 PM To: Joanna Schaffner <joanna.schaffner@pitkincounty.com> Cc: Tami Kochen <tami.kochen@pitkincounty.com> PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone (970) 920-5526 FAX (970) 920-5439 MEMORANDUM TO: Pitkin County Housing Brush Creek Metro District Pitkin County Zoning Officer FROM: Lance Clarke, Community Development Department Lance.clarke@pitkincounty.com I C1 OV/ 'IJ.Jvw.��1 RE: Scotty William Cathcart Revocable Trust & Pamela Dianne Cathcart Revocable Trust Minor Amendment to a Development Permit (CASE P072-14; PID 2643-213-07-009) DATE: September 6, 2014 Wns //mail aoonle com/mail/u/0/7ui=2Rik=81ee80a58c&view=nt&searrh=inhox&th=1484cA9e6d50d999&siml=1484c89e6d50d999 1/2 9/11/2014 Pitkin County Mail - Cathcart Minor Amendment Cathcart Minor Amendment Joanna Schaffner<joanna.schaffner@pitkincounty.com> Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:07 AM To: Lance Clarke <lance.clarke@pitkincounty.com> I copied the Certificate of Occupancy for the EDU and added it to your paper file. My only comment is that the Deed Restriction for the CDU not be recorded until the EDU restriction is lifted from the property. APCHA may do this in one document, but the idea is to not let the EDU restriction linger. (I know it's what the applicant wants, but it's what we want too.) 3 https'//mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=eb410f3ac7&view=pt&search=inbox&th=1486541 c13838c40&sim1=1486541 c13838c40 1 /1 9/9/2014 Pitkin County Mail - 9/26/14 Due Pitkin County Land Use Scotty William Cathcart Revocable Trust. application Attached for your review are materials for an application submitted by Scotty William Cathcart Revocable Trust and Pamela Dianne Cathcart Revocable Trust. The Board of County Commissioners will review the application on Wednesday, October 8, 2014. Please return your comments to me by Friday, September 26, 2014. http://www. aspe n pitki n. com/Portals/0/docs/county/Com%20 Dev/Plan n i ng/La nd_U se_ Applications/P072_14 app.pdf Thank you, Bonnie Shifes Administrative Assistant to Planning And Zoning Pitkin County Community Development 130 South Galena St, 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Phone: 970-920-5109 Bonnie.Waechtler@pitkincounty.com Please note Pitkin County email addresses have changed. Please change your contact list to reflect my new address. Thank you! 0 httos //mail 0000le com/mail/u/o/?ui=2&ik=81ee8oa58c.&view=ot&search=inbox&th=1484c89e6d50d999&simi=1484c89e6d50d999 212 MEMORANDUM TO: Lance Clarke, Community Development Department FROM: Cindy Christensen, Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority DATE: September 26, 2014 RE: Cathcart Amendment to a Development Permit Parcel ID No. 2643-213-07-009; P072-14 RE UEST: The applicant is seeking approval to convert the approved, fully deed -restricted employee dwelling unit, to a caretaker dwelling unit (CDU). APPLICANT: APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: LOCATION: ZONING: LOT SIZE: SUMMARY: Scotty and Pam Cathcart Scotty and Pam Cathcart 90 Sagebrush Lane -11=1I 2.7 acres CARETAKER DWELLING UNIT: According to Section 4-30-50(e)(1), CDU as Permitted Accessory Use, in the RS -160, RS -35, RS -30, RS -20, AR -10, AR -2, R-30, R015, R -15A and R-6 zone districts one CDU shall be a permitted accessory use provided that: 1. It is attached to a single-family home (the principal dwelling). 2. The caretaker dwelling unit shall not exceed 1000 net livable square feet on lots or parcels that are 30,000 square feet or greater in lot area, and 700 net livable square feet on lots or parcels that are less than 30,000 square feet in lot area. 3. The floor area of the caretaker unit shall be included in the total allowed floor area for the lot or parcel of land. 4. Two off-street parking spaces shall be provided for each caretaker dwelling unit. The applicant shall, by deed restriction or other permanent commitment running with the land, guarantee that the caretaker unit: a. shall not be required to be rented; b. shall not be sold or otherwise conveyed or separated from the original parcel regardless of the ultimate form of ownership of the caretaker unit; c. shall be limited to occupancy by not more than two adults and related children, who qualify as (and have been found by the Housing Authority to be) employees of the community under such guidelines as may be from time to time established, or by members of the owner's immediate family even though they may not qualify as employees of the community; d. shall be rented for terns not less than six months if rented. 6. The caretaker dwelling unit restriction may be removed by the property owner upon approval of the Community Development Director, subject to the requirement that the dwelling is removed or modified. If modified, the remaining improvements must no longer be capable of occupancy as a dwelling unit and must meet otherwise applicable Code requirements. 7. The provisions of this regulation are for the purpose of providing a voluntary caretaker dwelling unit on a legally created lot or parcel in the County. Any unit approved under this provision shall not be used for mitigation of employee housing requirements as established elsewhere in the Land Use Code. Section 4-30-50(e)(2)(c) allows a caretaker dwelling unit, as a special review, to be detached from the principal single-family dwelling on the lot or parcel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is not a requirement to have a fully deed -restricted employee dwelling unit on this property; therefore, APCHA recommends approval to record a caretaker dwelling unit deed restriction to supersede the deed restriction recorded at Reception No. 374438, as long as the unit meets the following criteria: 1. Conditions I through 5 stated above in the CDU section are met. 2. The kitchen contains at a minimum a two -burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a refrigerator plus freezer. The oven must be able to bake and broil and be at least 5 cubic feet; the sink must measure at least 14"WX16"DX5.25"H; refrigerator must be at least 5.3 cubic feet and include at least a .73 cubic foot freezer. 3. A caretaker dwelling unit deed restriction shall be recorded prior to building permit; the CDU deed restriction shall be provided by APCHA, superseding the deed restriction recorded at Reception No. 374438. 2 PIM PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone (970) 920-5526 FAX (970) 920-5439 MEMORANDUM TO: Pitkin County Housing Brush Creek Metro District Pitkin County Zoning Officer FROM: Lance Clarke, Community Development Department Lance darkePpitkincounty.com RE: Scotty William Cathcart Revocable Trust & Pamela Dianne Cathcart Revocable Trust Minor Amendment to a Development Permit (CASE P072-14; PID 2643-213-07-009) DATE: September 6, 2014 Attached for your review are materials for an application submitted by Scotty William Cathcart Revocable Trust and Pamela Dianne Cathcart Revocable Trust. The Board of County Commissioners will review the application on Wednesday, October 8, 2014. Please return your comments to me by Friday, September 26, 2014. http //www aspenpitkin com/Portals/o/docs/county/Com°/20Dev/Planning/Land Use Applications/P072 14 app PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 PHONE# (970) 920-5526/FAX# (970) 920-5439 September 6, 2014 Scotty William 90 Sage Brush Ln Aspen, CO 81615 jimcdog@comcast.net Re: Scotty William Cathcart Revocable Trust & Pamela Dianne Cathcart Revocable Trust Minor Amendment to a Development Permit (PID#2643-213-07-009; CASE# P072-14) Dear Mr. William: The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is complete. After a more detailed review of the submittal information, additional information specific to the application may be requested in order to adequately review and process the application. The planner in charge of the review will request the information from you directly. We have scheduled this application for review by the Board of County Commissioners on Wednesday, October 8, 2014, at a meeting to begin at 12:00 P.M. in the Rio Grande Conference Room, 455 Rio Grande Place, Aspen. Should this date be inconvenient for you, please contact me within 3 working days of the date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and changes to the schedule or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at the Community Development Department. If you have questions, please call Lance Clarke, the planner assigned to your case, at 920-5452. Sincerely, Bonnie Shiles Administrative Assistant PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Permit Receipt RECEIPT NUMBER 00036640 Name: Pam Cathcart Date:8/22/2014 Project Address: 90 SAGE BRUSH LN Type: Permit Number 0072.2014. PLAN 0072 2014.PLAN check # 1001 Fee Description Amount PP- Flat Fee 936.00 PP- Clerk Fee 130.00 Total: 1,066.00