Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.273720400014 (2014)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: 2737-20-4-00-014 Application Date: 9/12/14 Case No: P080-14 Description: Warren Creek Mountain LLC MinorAmendment to a Development Permit Planner: Mike Kraemer # Copies: 6 Allocated Hours: 3 Project Address: 44010 HWY 82, ASPEN, CO 81611 % Over Hours: 3.6 Property Owner: WARREN CREEK MOUNTAIN Address: 44010 HWY 82 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 Owner's REP: GLENN HORN REP's Email: ghorn@rof.net Address: 215 S MONARCH ST, 104 ASPEN, CO 81611 Owner Phone: REP's Phone: (970) 925-6587 Referrals: OPEN SPACE & TRAILS REFERRRAL Other Referrals: CDOW Comments Due Date: 10/24/2014 Meetings: let Meeting: 2nd Meeting: 3rd Meeting: Meeting Date: 11/05/2014 Review Body: bocc Public Hearing? no Notice Date: Meeting Notes: Approvals: BOCC Resolution #: 125-2014 #620213 P&Z Determination #: BOCC Ordinance #: HO Determination #: Admin Determination #: Other Information: VR Approval Date: Plat Recorded Date: VR Expires Date: Plat (Bk, PG): Remarks: no vesting Application Type: MinorAmendment to a Development Permit RECEPTION#: 620213, 05/28/2015 at f 09:42:21 AM, 1 OF 5, R $0.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING THE WARREN CREEK MOUNTAIN LLC MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT Resolution No. jAf -2014 RECITALS Warren Creek Mountain, LLC ("Applicant"), has applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, ("BOCC"), pursuant to Section 2-20-150(6) ofthe Pitkin County Land Use Code ("Code"), to amend condition #I ]A in Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 that prohibits dogs. 1. The property is located at 44010 1-lwy 82, and is zoned AR -10, is approximately 2.5 acres, and is non- conforming in size. (Legal Description, Atlochment A). 2. The subject lot is part of multiple previous approvals. In 2004, the property received a Special Review approval for an "Indoor Research Facility" identified as the "Aspen Field Biology Lab" pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 101-2004. In tandem with this approval, the Land Use Code was also amended to identify Indoor Research Facility as a Special Review Use in the AR -10 Zone District. In 2006, a new owner applied to rescind the Special Review approval for the Indoor Research Facility and requested the ability to construct a single family residence of 5,750 square feet. This approval was granted pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 (Reception No. 525181). Also, in 2006, the new owner applied to land a Transferrable Development Right (FDR) to construct an 8,250 square foot single family residence. The approval was granted pursuant to Hearing Officer Determination No. 014-2007. In 2010, the new owner submitted an administrative application to eliminate the dog prohibition and this request was denied pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 60-2010 (Reception No. 573026). The parcel is currently developed with an 8,250 square foot residence. 3. The Application was reviewed at a regularly scheduled public meeting on November 5", 2014 and a continued public meeting on December 17"i, 2014 in which time and testimony was given to the request. 4. The BOCC finds that pursuant to Section 2-20-150(6) the request to amend condition 41 IA in Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 that prohibits dogs, is consistent with actions taken during previous development approvals for the property and will not violate any other Sections of the Land Use Code. 5. The BOCC further finds that the allowance of dogs on the subject property is limited to the conditions outlined below. The BOCC expressed serious concern about having resident dogs adjacent to a "nature preserve". If any of the conditions of this approval are violated, the ability to have dogs on the property will result in notice and a hearing on the possible revocation of this approval. 6. The BOCC further finds that the allowance of dogs on the subject property in accordance with the limitations outlined in this resolution, is uniquely tied to the allowance of dogs to be leashed under human supervision while on the East of Aspen Trail. If a fidure management plan or policy is Page / of 4 adopted that prohibits dogs on the East of Aspen Trail, this resolution automatically becomes null and void, and dogs will no longer be permitted on the property. 7. Attachment B of this resolution outlines the perimeter of the kennel and depicts the kennel and fir and spruce tree plantings. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners that it hereby approves the Warren Creek Mountain, LLC request for a Minor Amendment to a Development Permit, subject to the following conditions: I. Condition #11A of Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 shall be rescinded and replaced with the following language: "Dogs are allowed on the property subject to the following: A. No more than two (2) dogs are allowed and shall be kenneled within a fenced in area and/or inside the residence; B. When dogs are outside the kennel or residence, they shall be leashed and under human supervision; C. The kennel shall be contained within the existing lawn/landscaped area, shall be no more than 50' from the residence, and shall be at least 25' away from the western and northern property lines; D. Fir or spruce trees shall be planted to screen the James 11 Smith property from the kennel and shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director,- E. irector;E. The kennel construction and plantings shall be completed by June P, 2015. A portable kennel shall be used until the new kennel is constructed, - F. If any of the conditions of this approval are violated, the ability to have clogs on the property will be subject to a hearing for possible revocation; G. f a .future management plan or policy is adopted that prohibits dogs on the East of Aspen Trail, this resolution automatically becomes null and void and dogs are prohibited on the property". Page 2 of 4 APPROVED this 17°i day of December, 2014. APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely, County. orn PID9273720400014 P080-14 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISISONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO BY i (YCd4 T— l 1 I Steven 1'. Child, Chair Date 7 19 2L"(r APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Cindy Houben, Community. Development Director Page 3 of 4 Leal Description Attachment A COUNTY .OEPrM]N,`STATE,OFCOLORADO,.,.: ' also kuaiyn by streeCand namber. as 44010 & 44012Hlghway 82; Aspen, CO 81611 Page 4 of 4 - Ri �gw U sxynWl qg;n 55 xa x frx3P a �,.Yx��'g� �i �n�tely9 xya i { dL Y$y ,ip.v-47<Y9.Yf SEE=_ E• `- r`3iaxxe FE i EI Y isisrf43�i eni rzras 3` 5 _b a e'saysa�3'�s:.a . x cxanv xu l� MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners, Pitkin County Colorado FROM: Michael Kraemer, PlannerJOK THRU: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director RE: Warren Creek Mountain, LLC - Minor Amendment to a Development Permit DATE: December 17°, 2014 REQUEST: The Applicant desires to amend a condition of a previous approval that prohibits dogs on the subject property. The owner of the property was issued a Notice of Violation for having dogs on the property which contravenes this condition. The Applicant has the option of compliance with the requirement or attempt to change the requirement. The Applicant has elected to propose an amendment to the condition of approval. The review process for this request is a Minor Amendment to a Development Pemrit and is typically scheduled for an Administrative Review. The condition that restricts dogs on the property resides in multiple previous approvals but originated in a BOCC Resolution in 2004. Given the previous BOCC actions, pursuant to Section 2-30-20(i)(1)(a), the Community Development Director is referring this administrative application to the BOCC for review and decision. APPLICANT: Waren Mountain Creek, LLC LOCATION: 44010 Hwy 82, east of Aspen ZONINGILOT SIZE: The Lot is zoned AR -10, approximately 2.5 acres, and is non -conforming in size. PREVIOUS APPROVALS and EXISTING CONDITIONS: The subject lot is part of multiple previous approvals. hi 2004, the property received a Special Review approval for an "Indoor Research Facility" identified as the "Aspen Field Biology Lab". In tandem with this approval, the Land Use Code was also amended to identify Indoor Research Facility as a Special Review Use in the AR -10 Zone District. Building envelopes were established at this time and avoided wetlands and riparian vegetation constraints on the property. Additionally in 2004, bird nesting habitat, medium and small mammal habitat, and elk migration condors were identified as important wildlife habitat in the North Star Preserve area, immediately adjacent to the subject property. Given this important habitat, at the P&Z on May 0, 2004, a dog prohibition condition was implemented and carried through to the final approval granted by the BOCC pursuant to Resolution No. 101-2004. hi 2006, a new owner applied to rescind the Special Review approval for the Indoor Research Facility and requested the ability to construct a 5,750 square foot single family residence. This approval was granted pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 (Reception No. 525181) and included the dog prohibition. A short time later in 2006, the new owner applied to land a Transferable Development Right (TDR) to construct an 8,250 square feet single family residence. The approval was granted pursuant to Hearing Page 1 of6 CSI 000001 6f Officer Determination No. 014-2007 and included the dog prohibition. In 2010, the new owner submitted an administrative application to eliminate the dog prohibition and, with the request, submitted a "dog management plan" to mitigate the impact of dogs on the property. Given the sensitive habitat areas, and with referral comments from the Pitkin County Open Space and Trails Department and City of Aspen Parks and Open Space (co-owners of the adjacent James H. Smith Open Space) opposing the request, the application was denied pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 60-2010 (Reception No. 573026). The parcel is currently developed with an 8,250 square foot residence. 2010 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OF THE AREA: REQUEST: The Applicant is desirous of amending previous development approvals to remove the dog prohibition on the property and add a condition that would require containment or "kenneling", among other ancillary requirements. The applicant has argued that the original 2004 BOCC Resolution that approved the "Aspen Field Biology Lab" included a dog prohibition because the prohibition was voluntarily offered with Page 2 of 6 000002 approval of the research facility. The Applicant further states that now that the research facility has been eliminated and a single family residence has been constructed, circumstances have changed and the amendment should be approved. The Land Use Code states (Sec. 7-20-70) that if a property is mapped within or adjacent to Deer, Elk, and Bighorn Sheep Winter Concentration Areas and Severe Winter Range, the property shall prohibit dogs. The Applicant has engaged a wildlife consultant, Johnathan Lowsky, to field verify exact locations of these big game ranges. Lowsky suggests that the subject property is not within or adjacent to these ranges and that the previous approvals for the property lack a "foundation" for the prohibition. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Open Space and Trails (OST) — Attachment A and Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) — Attachment B. OST is a co-owner of the adjacent James H. Smith Open Space and the owner of the Northstar Preserve. OST is opposed to the removal of the prohibition and allowing dogs to be kenneled. CPW states that they do not object to the removal of the prohibition with the recommendation that if dogs are allowed on the property, they be kenneled using dog proof fencing with a minimum of 25'from the OST property and other ancillary recommendations. The City of Aspen is a co-owner of the James H. Smith Open Space and Aspen Parks and Recreation have verbally stated to Staff that they are not in favor of allowing dogs on the property, even if kenneled. STAFF COMMENTS: Field verification and purchase of the James H. Smith Open Space and the Northstar Preserve by public entities suggest that these lands contain important scenic value and wildlife habitat areas, not only for big game but also small mammals. Significant public funds have been used to purchase these properties and specific management plans have been enacted to protect the wildlife integrity of these areas. Both the James H. Smith and the Northstar Preserve Management Plans prohibit dogs. The James H. Smith property was purchased by OST and the City of Aspen and a management plan was implemented in 2001. In this document (page 9, Attachment C), it stales: There is some history of elk calving in the aspen of the alluvial fans (approximately May 15th to June 15th) on the Property. Historically, as many as 50 elk rows calved in the aspen on the alluvial fans of the greater North Star Ranch. Currently, only a handful is doing so. Although it is difficult to determine the cause of this decline, it is likely that human and dog activity has contributed. In addition, elk use the Property as a staging area during migration (spring and fall) as they move between summer and winter ranges. As indicated in the adopted James H. Smith Management Plan, the greater Northstar Area does contain big game habitat which may have eroded over the years from human and dog activity. The specific management plan document can be viewed in Attachment C. The Applicant suggests that the dog prohibition was a voluntary restriction offered by the Applicant during the Special Review application for the Aspen Field Biology Lab. Staff has listened to the recordings of the May 0, 2004 P&Z meeting where the condition was discussed. It should be clarified that at these meetings there were many neighbors that spoke during the public comment period and voiced concerns regarding the Page 3 of 000003 wildlife impacts of the proposed development. The Applicant responded at the hearing stating that the property currently had a self-imposed dog prohibition. In response to [Ire wildlife concerns, P&Z Cormrrissioner Michael Augello asked the Applicant "are you okay with dogs being prohibited rather than kenneled?" The Applicant responded that dogs would be prohibited and the condition was implemented in the approval resolution and carried forward in all future land use decisions. Minor Amendment to a Development Permit. Pursuant to Section 2-20-150(b) of the July 6', 2006 Land Use Code, a minor amendment to any development application or permit is one that meets the following criteria, as determined by the Community Development Director: 1. Is consistent with actions) taken during previous development approvals for the property; and Response: Staff recommends that the BOCC make a finding that the request is inconsistent with BOCC Resolution 101-2004, Administrative Decision No. 50-2006, Hearing Officer Determination No. 014-2007, and Administrative Decision No. 60-2010, which all prohibit dogs on the property. 1. Does not change theme of the proposed development between residential, commercial, and tourist accommodation uses; and Response: The request does not change the use of the proposed development. The current use of the property is large scale residential development and will remain in that use. 3. Does not change the basic character of the approved use of land on which the activity occurs, including basic visual appearance and method of operation, and Response: Allowing dogs on the property will not change the approved use of the land but will alter the basic character and operating method for the residential development in that even though the dogs are proposed to be kenneled, there is no guarantee that the dogs will not bark and potentially breach the kennel. Additionally, there is no mechanism for the County to inspect the property without owner consent. Even if owner consent was provided, a violation of the kenneling could have already occurred and the problem remedied prior to consented access. 4. Does not constitute a new land development activity; and Response: The request does not constitute a new land development activity. 5. Does not increase off-site impacts in the surrounding neighborhood; and Response: It should be anticipated that if dogs are allowed, County Staff has limited enforcement abilities unless it can be witnessed firsthand that dogs have breached their kennels. The offsite impact of this would be the potential harm to big game wildlife. 6. Does not endanger the public health, safety or welfare, and Response: The request does not endanger the public health and safety, but does implicate the public welfare. The welfare provision stated in this Code section includes what a community can define as Page 4 of 000004 welfare via their adopted statements of policies and principles. Chapter 1 of the Land Use Code identifies the General Provisions of the Land Use Code. Specifically, Section 1-60-290, General Land Use Policies, states: "WILDLIFE It is the policy of the County that proposed land uses (including structures) are compatible with the ecosystem of wildlife habitats and do not pose immediate, long term or potential detrimental impacts to such habitats. The County seeks to preserve, restore and perpetuate native wildlife and plant diversity by maintaining sufficient habitat." The public welfare is protected through the implementation of a dog prohibition on the property which promotes the protection of sensitive wildlife habitat. Removing the dog prohibition may compromise this stated policy and endanger public welfare. Additionally, pursuant to Section 7-20-70(b) of the Code, the General Wildlife Principles state: "These principles shall be evaluated not only on a site specific basis, but should also be used to consider the location and role of the property in the context of larger habitat and wildlife patterns. Implementation of these principles may also include consideration of connectivity between other parcels and the cumulative effect of the proposed activity or development in light of other activity in the area affecting related habitat areas. Approveddevelopment shall: (5) Minimize the combined and cumulative impacts of activities and development on wildlife species, wildlife habitat, wildlife movement, and unique landscape elements. " In effort to minimize the combined and cumulative effect of the activities and development on wildlife species, a dog prohibition was enacted in 2004 and remains in effect on the subject property. In the context of the larger wildlife habitat in the Northstar Area, and the preservation of large tracts of public lands adjacent to the subject property, continuing the dog prohibition and denying the request is consistent with the stated general principles of the Code and does not endanger the public welfare. 7. Does not violate any Land Use Code standard, and Response: Though the Applicant has argued that field verified big game mapping does not support a dog prohibition, Land Use Code Section 7-20-70(e)(5) states: "Ifthe County determines that one or more wildlife species on or near the property are subject to predation by domestic animals, including dogs and cats, the County may impose additional standards to reduce or eliminate such predation". As indicated in previous letters from the Division of Wildlife, loose and uncontrolled dogs can cause significant impact to wildlife through direct and indirect mortality, displacement to less preferred Page 5 of 6 000005 habitat, and increased stress and disturbance. If dogs would breech kennels, it is plausible that wildlife could be harassed. Staff recommends that the BOCC determines that there are one or more wildlife species on or near the property and there is the potential for predation by dogs, and that the prohibition shall remain in full force and effect. 8. Does not substantially increase the need for on-site parking or utilities, or affect affordable housing generation; and Response: The request will not result in any impacts mentioned in No. 8. 9. Does not increase theJloor area of the use by more than five (5) percent or decrease the open space on the site by more the five (5) percent. Response: The request will not violate this. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a motion denying the request to eliminate the condition in BOCC Resolution 101-2004, and subsequent Land Use Decisions, subject to the attached draft resolution. ATTACHMENTS: A. Pitkin County Open Space and Trails comments B. Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife comments C. James H. Smith North Star Open Space Management Plan Page 6 of 6 000006 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, DENYING THE WARREN CREEK MOUNTAIN LLC MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT Resolution No. -2014 RECITALS Warren Creek Mountain, LLC ("Applicant"), has applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, ("Direcmr'), pursuant to Section 2-20-150(b) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code ("Code'), to amend the condition in BOCC Resolution No. 101-2004 that prohibits dogs. 1. The property is located at 44010 Hwy 82, and is zoned AR -10, is approximately 2.5 acres, and is non- conforming in size. (Legal Description, Attachment A). 2. The subject lot is part of multiple previous approvals. In 2004, the property received a Special Review approval for an "Indoor Research Facility" identified as the "Aspen Field Biology Lab" pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 101-2004. In tandem with this approval, the Land Use Code was also amended to identify Indoor Research Facility as a Special Review Use in the AR -10 Zone District. In 2006, a new owner applied to rescind the Special Review approval for the Indoor Research Facility and requested the ability to construct a single family residence of 5,750 square feet. This approval was granted pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 (Reception No. 525181). Also, in 2006, the new owner applied to land a Transferable Development Right (TDR) to construct an 8,250 square foot single family residence. The approval was granted pursuant to Hearing Officer Determination No. 014-2007. In 2010, the new owner submitted an administrative application to eliminate the dog prohibition and this request was denied pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 60-2010 (Reception No. 573026). The parcel is currently developed with an 8,250 square foot residence. 3. The Application was reviewed at a regularly scheduled public meeting on November 56, 2014 and a continued public meeting on December 176, 2014 in which time and testimony was given to the request. 4. The Board of County Commissioners fords that pursuant to Section 2-20-150(6) the request to amend the condition that prohibits dogs in 13OCC Resolution 101-2004, and subsequent Land Use Decisions, is inconsistent with actions taken during previous development approvals for the property. 5. The BOCC further fords that pursuant to Section 7-20-70(ex5), there are one or more wildlife species on or new the property and there is the potential for predation by dogs, and that the prohibition of dogs shall remain in full force and effect. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners that it hereby denies the Warren Creek Mountain, LLC request for a Minor Amendment to a Development Permit. Page I of3 000007 DENIED this I r day of December, 2014. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISISO OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO ATTEST: Robert A. Ismer Jr., Chair Date Jeanette Jones, Clerk to BOCC APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: John Ely, Cindy Houben, County Attorney Community Development Director PID# 273720400014 P080-14 Page 2 af3 000003 Legal Description Attachment A 0 and Lot2,l of Scotion 2b. Townabip Mouth, al Meiidien. dewrlbad mag fallyss fulloovsr iotac.ection of the south boundary linq 4 lot 21 p10 the west t%ht olt-nay of:CMaedo V, ltadmimbpfas. 44010Q44012Hi*MY82;AlpM-M 81611 Page 3 of 00000 +�1lflt N g ATTACHMENT ael Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> RE: 10/24/14 Due Pitkin County Land Use Warren Creek Mtn LLC Application 1 message Matt Adelettl <matt.adeletti@pitkincounty.com> Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:05 AM To: Bonnie Shiles <bonnie.waechtler@pitkincounty.com> Cc: Michael Kraemer <michael.kmemer@pitkincounty.com> Hi Bonnie, Open Space and Trails is 100% against allowing dogs on this property. The prohibition was put in place at the time because it was a part of the entire application, and it was one of the items negotiated to and agreed upon by all the parties involved which allowed development by the landowner at the time and this was one of the conditions of that agreement. This property is bounded on the north, south and southwest by the Northstar Open Space Preserve, and a considerable amount of environmental survey work was accomplished to determine that the Preserve is a significant and sensitive wildlife habitat area. Allowing dogs on this property would go against that earlier agreement and would subvert all of the environmental impact studies that state this property should not have dogs on it. Another aspect is that there is the possibility that dogs could leave their kennels or get free from their leashes and get onto the Preserve, and the only way to monitor this activity would be to have our Open Space and Trails Rangers continually monitor this activity, which of course they cannot do. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks You Matt Adeletti Matthew F. Adeletti Acquisition Manager Pitkin County Open Space and Trails 530 E. Main Street Suite 300 Aspen Colorado 81611 970429.2796 matt. adeletti. @ pitkincounty. com ,00.911 y ATTACHMENT SS COLORADO Parks and Wildlife Department ofNaWmI aeaourcea Glenwood 5Pd4 Area 0ffke O Wildlife Way GleoWood sprYmo' CO 81681 October 20, 2014 Mike Kraemer Community Planner Pitkin County 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Warren Creek Mountain LLC Minor Amendment to Development Permit Dear Mike, Colorado Parks and Wildlife has reviewed the application for a minor amendment to a development permit for the property located at 44010 Highway 82. The applicant is requesting the removal of the dog prohibition and proposes to add a condition of approval to guarantee dogs will be kenneled at all times. After a review of the submitted materials, CPW does not object to the removal of the dog prohibition for this property as long as the recommendations made by Jonathan t.owsky in his August 11, 2014 letter are adhered to. These recommendations include: 1. The fenced area (or "kennel") should employ physical dog -proof fencing encompassing a portion of the parcel; a. Invisible fence type barriers are not acceptable. 2. The kennel should be built so that it does not disrupt native vegetation. 3. The kennel should be set back a minimum distance of 25 feet perpendicular to the nearest boundary with the Open Space property so that the presence of dogs does not disrupt normal wildlife behavior on North Star. 4. Any dog(s) on the property must be leashed and under human supervision when outside the required kennel. 5. Guests must be required to comply with these restrictions. 6. Ali contractors, caretakers, or other service providers must be prohibited from bringing their dogs on site. Furthermore, all pet food should be stored indoors to eliminate attractants for bears and other wildlife. V M1aD.B tleJ. An Cobmm4iba,IK'SOiF.%A wIWM1-0ik C"nmm�admW BnY•C1ri C]mlun SmamY•lenclMe „�Y`� ^^�� aW.,�Cki.fWarame.CbkPal.bnNbA•Iam Vk�•LEnWR'�M.Ma4YeZinmvw.A6lw .\! +D• ld 2000311 1001 Colorado Parks and Wildlife appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. If there are any questions or needs for additional information don't hesitate to contact land Use Specialist, Taylor Elm at (970) 947-2971 or District Wildlife Manager, Kevin Wright at (970) 947-2938. Sincerely, erryWill, Ar Wildlife Manager Cc. Kevi�t, District Wildlife Manager Taylor Elm, Land Use Specialist File 000012 L ATTACHMENT JAMES H. SMITH NORTH STAR OPEN SPACE INTERIM MANAGEMENT PLAN AUGUST 8, 2001 1.0 INTRODUCTION The acquisition of the 70+ acre James H. Smith North Star Open Space ("the Property') is a highly significant conservation achievement for the upper valley. The Property links Pitkin County's 174 acre North Stat Nature Preserve with the 65 acre Aspen Center for Environmental Studies (ACES) parcel. Together, these conserved properties comprise a 309 acre expanse of preserved open space containing significant wetland and riparian ecological communities and wildlife habitat, only minutes from downtown Aspen. The North Star Nature Preserve and the Property offer opportunities for limited public recreational use, managed to minimize impacts to the ecological values of the properties. forth in this document are based on occur in the area surrounding the property. This Plan highlights those areas that are ecologicany important and consequently warrant conservation emphasis and identifies some potential threats to the persistence of the biological resources of the Property. This Management Plan is consistent with the management plan for the neighboring North Star Nature Preserve, and written to complement that plan. A fully developed resource management plan will be developed by City of Aspen and Pitkin County staff once the Property is transferred and biological inventories are completed according to the 2000 Pitkin County Open Space Biological Inventory and Monitoring Protocols. This interim plan will serve for the first three years or less of public ownership, until a full Resource Management Plan is developed. 2.0 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES AND PRIORITIES • Perpetuate and restore the mosaic of high quality native plant communities. • Maintain viable populations of all native fauna currently living on the property. Special emphasis will be focused on great blue herons, mountain mads, sorts and other wading birds, and riparian obligate songbirds. • Maintain and restore the hydrological regime of the property that supports its ecological communities. 8/ON] LAMES H. SMITH NORTH SrA0.OrEN $PACE MANRGFMEHi PIAN 000013 5.0 SIGNIFICANT WILDLIFE RESOURCES Ecological studies and inventories conducted at North Star Ranch over the years have revealed that the existing ecological complex supports a high level of biological diversity: 14 species of small mammals (e.g., mice, voles, shrews, squirrels); at least 107 species of birds, more than 43 of which are likely to breed on or around the property (including at least 4 U.S. Forest Service Region 2 Designated "Sensitive" species); 13 medium to large mammals (e.g., elk, coyote, black bear, bobcat); 3 species of amphibian (including the mountain [or boreal] road which is a "warranted but precluded" Candidate species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act); and one reptile species (western terrestrial garter snake). ® There is some history of elk calving in the aspen of the alluvial fans (approximately May 15th to une 15th) on the Property. Historically, as many as 50 ells cows calved m the as en on the alluvial fans of the greater North Star Ranch. Cumentl), wily a handful is doing so. Although it is difficult to determine the cause of this decline, it is likely that human _and dog ac= has contributed. In addition elk use the Property as a staging area during out gradon (sprang an as they move between summer and winter ranges.. Of particular conservation interest is the Great Blue Heron colony on the Property. It is estimated that there are approximately 63 Great Blue Heron colonies in the entire state of Colorado and the Smith colony is thought to be the only one occurring over 8500 feet in elevation and in blue spruce trees (most occur in cottonwoods). In other words this Great Blue Heron colony is quite unique and ecologically significant. The presence of this colony has important management implications. Researchers over the last 10 years have found that a 200 meter buffer zone from the periphery of colonies in which no human activity takes place during the courtship and nesting seasons is necessary to avoid 'negative effects on recruitment. Currently, there are seven active nests with as many as three nestlings. This buffer zone will be honored in the management of the Property. On two occasions, an adult mountain (or boreal) toad was seen in the area in June — onceon North Star Nature Preserve (1999) and once on the Property itself (2001). If, and it appears likely, mountain toads are federally listed as Endangered or Threatened, then we will be bound by law to increase the protective status of the Property. Surveys will be conducted in 2001 and 2002 for breeding toads, non -breeding toads, tadpoles, and egg masses. 5.1 Recreation and Wildlife Open space land use by mcreationists has increased throughout the United States. As open space use rises and penetrates natural areas, encounters between humans and wildlife increases. There is concern among scientists and the public that recreationists may have a negative impact on wildlife. Ramationists can affect wildlife through unintentional disturbance, the primary way recreationists affect wildlife, or intentional disturbance (Knight and Cole 1995). Due to the escalating use of open space unintentional disturbance has become particularly impactive. Understanding the impacts and responses of wildlife to recreationists can provide open space managers with the information to develop mitigation measures such as codes of conduct. The behavior of recreationists affects wildlife responses. Predictability of a behavior partly 000014 $1082001 JAMES H.s H NOmH STAR OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT KF: v , t Z 19L op i v PITKIN COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT Courthouse Annex Bur/ding 530 East Main Street, Suite 302 Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-429-2814 / 970-379-6872 May 22, 2014 Warren Creek Mountain LLC 44010 Hwy 82 Aspen, Co 81611 To Whom It May Concern, I am the Pitkin County Code Enforcement Officer and I am writing you regarding the property located at 44010 Hwy 82, Aspen, Colorado. Pitkin County assessor records indicate that the property is owned by the Warren Creek Mountain LLC. I recently received a complaint that dogs are present on this property. In response I walked the public lands adjacent to the property on May 15, 2014 and May 20, 2014 and saw an " Invisible Fence" dog retention fence installed around the property. I also saw two dogs (5/20/14) wearing significant sized blue collars on the property. The dogs appeared to be Brittany Spaniels or a similar type dog. As you may or may not be aware of, dogs were prohibited on this property by the original Pitkin County conditions of approval for the property via Pitkin County Resolution No. 101-2004. The prohibition was reiterated by Administrative Decision 50-2006. The owners previous to Warren Creek Mountain LLC appealed that dog prohibition to Pitkin County Community Development in August of 2010. That appeal to have the prohibition of dogs on the property removed was denied by Pitkin County Community Development on August 25, 2010 via Administrative Decision No. 60-2010;1 have enclosed a copies of the pertinent Resolution and Administrative Decisions for your information. Unfortunately, the current presence of dogs on the property places the property in violation of Resolution No. 101-2004 and Administrative Decisions 50-2006 & 60-2010. To remedy this violation please abide by Resolution No. 101-2004 and Administrative Decisions 50-2006 & 60-2010 as soon as possible and notify me when you have done so. I am available to discuss this situation with you at 970-429-2814 or 970-379-6872 (mobile) Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, Carrington Brown Pitkin County Code Enforcement Cc: Lance Clarke, Assistant Director Pitkin County Community Development I OT 5 Michael Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> (no subject) 2 messages Rachel Gildor <ragildor@gmail.com> Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 2:31 PM To: michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com, Glenn Hom <ghorn@rof.net> To the Board of County Commissioners, I am writing in regards to our upcoming hearing on Nov 5th. This matter is extremely important to all of us. We love our dogs as they are part of our family. However, we have a family emergency in Israel and have to depart today. We will be back on Wed November 12th. We respectfully ask that you seek continuance and provide us with a later hearing date in December. Sincerely, Warren Creek LLC Ephraim and Rachel Gildor Michael Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> To: Lance Clarke <lance.clarke@pitkincounty.com> [Quoted text hidden] Mike Kraemer Planner Pickin County Community Development 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 970-920.5482 Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 9:03 AM From: Michael Kraemer [mailto:michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com] Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 1:32 PM To: Austin Weiss Subject: Re: dogs [Quoted tent hidden] Michael Kraemer<michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:30 PM To: Austin Weiss <austin.weiss@cityofaspen.com> Got it. Thanks, Mike [Quoted text hidden) r2 austi n.weiss@cityofaspen.com From: Michael Kraemer [mailto:michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 12:52 PM To: Austin Weiss Subject: dogs [Quoted text hidden] Michael Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> To: Austin Weiss <austin. weiss@cityofas pen. com> Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 1:32 PM Thanks. And just to be clear, it is a private piece of property adjacent to the James H. Smith open space that has the dog prohibition. Map attached. Thanks, Mike [Quoted text hidden] WarrenCreekMountai n LLC_m ap.j pg 708K Austin Weiss <austin.weiss@cityofaspen.com> To: Michael Kraemer <Michael.Kraemer@pitkincounty.com> Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:38 PM Thanks Mike I should have expanded on that a bit farther. We feel the prohibition on dogs on this adjacent parcel is important because it essentially has the same effect on the wildlife regardless of what side of that parcel line the dogs are on. Thanks, Austin Austin Weiss Open Space and Natural Resource Manager Aspen Parks & Open Space 970-429-2023 austin.weiss@cityofaspen.com Michael Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> dogs 5 messages Michael Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> To: Austin Weiss <austin.weiss@cityofaspen. com> Hey Austin, Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 12:51 PM I'm just thinking ahead of what my board is going to ask me, and, they may ask if city parks had a written statement regarding dogs and the James H. Smith Open Space. Would you mind flipping me an email representative of what we talked about yesterday regarding not amending the dog prohibition? Thanks so much, Mike Mike Kraemer Planner Pitkin County Community Development 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 970920.5482 Austin Weiss <austin.weiss@cityofaspen.com> Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:53 AM To: Michael Kraemer <Michael.Kraemer@pitkincounty.com> Hi Mike, Thanks for your email. As we discussed, the City of Aspen does not support the lifting of a dog prohibition at James H. Smith Open Space. The open space property has been preserved with the intent of providing a wildlife sanctuary and allowing dogs in this area would have significant negative impacts to the wildlife that use the property. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Best, Austin Austin Weiss Open Space and Natural Resource Manager Aspen Parks & Open Space 970-429-2023 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners, Pitkin County Colorado FROM: Michael Kraemer, Planner c,�,, CN THRU: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director RE: Warren Creek Mountain, LLC - Minor Amendment to a Development Permit DATE: November 5th, 2014 REQUEST: The Applicant desires to amend a condition of a previous approval that prohibits dogs on the subject property. The owner of the property was issued a Notice of Violation for having dogs on the property which contravenes this condition. The Applicant has the option of compliance with the requirement or attempt to change the requirement. The Applicant has elected to proposed an amendment to the condition of approval. The review process for this request is a Minor Amendment to a Development Permit and is typically scheduled for an Administrative Review. The condition that restricts dogs on the property resides in multiple previous approvals but originated in a BOCC Resolution in 2004. Given the previous BOCC actions, pursuant to Section 2-30-20(i)(1)(a), the Community Development Director is referring this administrative application to the BOCC for review and decision. APPLICANT: Warren Mountain Creek, LLC LOCATION: 44010 Hwy 82, east of Aspen ZONING/LOT SIZE: The Lot is zoned AR -10, approximately 2.5 acres, and is non -conforming in size. PREVIOUS APPROVALS and EXISTING CONDITIONS: The subject lot is part of multiple previous approvals. In 2004, the property received a Special Review approval for an "Indoor Research Facility" identified as the "Aspen Field Biology Lab". In tandem with this approval, the Land Use Code was also amended to identify Indoor Research Facility as a Special Review Use in the AR -10 Zone District. Building envelopes were established at this time and avoided wetlands and riparian vegetation constraints on the property. Additionally in 2004, bird nesting habitat, medium and small mammal habitat, and elk migration corridors were identified as important wildlife habitat in the North Star Preserve area, immediately adjacent to the subject property. Given this important habitat, at the P&Z on May 4", 2004, a dog prohibition condition was implemented and carried through to the final approval granted by the BOCC pursuant to Resolution No. 101-2004. In 2006, a new owner applied to rescind the Special Review approval for the Indoor Research Facility and requested the ability to construct a 5,750 square foot single family residence. This approval was granted pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 (Reception No. 525181) and included the dog prohibition. A short time later in 2006, the new owner applied to land a Transferrable Development Right (TDR) to construct an 8,250 square feet single family residence. The approval was granted pursuant to Hearing Page I of 6 000001 0- /c/ Officer Determination No. 014-2007 and included the dog prohibition. In 2010, the new owner submitted an administrative application to eliminate the dog prohibition and, with the request, submitted a "dog management plan" to mitigate the impact of dogs on the property. Given the sensitive habitat areas, and with referral comments from the Pitkin County Open Space and Trails Department and City of Aspen Parks and Open Space (co-owners of the adjacent James H. Smith Open Space) opposing the request, the application was denied pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 60-2010 (Reception No. 573026). The parcel is currently developed with an 8,250 square foot residence. 2010 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OF THE AREA: REQUEST: The Applicant is desirous of amending previous development approvals to remove the dog prohibition on the property and add a condition that would require containment or "kenneling", among other ancillary requirements. The applicant has argued that the original 2004 BOCC Resolution that approved the "Aspen Field Biology Lab" included a dog prohibition because the prohibition was voluntarily offered with Page 2 of 6 000002 approval of the research facility. The Applicant further states that now that the research facility has been eliminated and a single family residence has been constructed, circumstances have changed and the amendment should be approved. The Land Use Code states (Sec. 7-20-70) that if a property is mapped within or adjacent to Deer, Elk, and Bighorn Sheep Winter Concentration Areas and Severe Winter Range, the property shall prohibit dogs. The Applicant has engaged a wildlife consultant, Johnathan Lowsky, to field verify exact locations of these big game ranges. Lowsky suggests that the subject property is not within or adjacent to these ranges and that the previous approvals for the property lack a "foundation" for the prohibition. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Open Space and Trails (OST) — Attachment A and Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) — Attachment B. OST is a co-owner of the adjacent James H. Smith Open Space and the owner of the Northstar Preserve. OST is opposed to the removal of the prohibition and allowing dogs to be kenneled. CPW states that they do not object to the removal of the prohibition with the recommendation that if dogs are allowed on the property, they be kenneled using dog proof fencing with a minimum of 25'from the OST property and other ancillary recommendations. The City of Aspen is a co-owner of the James H. Smith Open Space and Aspen Parks and Recreation have verbally stated to Staff that they are not in favor of allowing dogs on the property, even if kenneled. STAFF COMMENTS: Field verification and purchase of the James H. Smith Open Space and the Northstar Preserve by public entities suggest that these lands contain important scenic value and wildlife habitat areas, not only for big game but also small mammals. Significant public funds have been used to purchase these properties and specific management plans have been enacted to protect the wildlife integrity of these areas. Both the James H. Smith and the Northstar Preserve Management Plans prohibit dogs. The James H. Smith property was purchased by OST and the City of Aspen and a management plan was implemented in 2001. At that time, Johnathon Lowsky worked in the capacity as the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist and aided in the crafting of this management plan. In this document (page 9), it states that: There is some history of elk calving in the aspen of the alluvial fans (approximatelv May 15th to June 15th) on the Property. Historically, as many as 50 elk cors calved in the aspen on the alluvial fans of the greater North Star Ranch. Currently, only a handful is doing so. Although it is difficult to determine the cause of this decline, it is likely that human and dog activity has contributed. In addition, elk use the Property as a staging area during migration (spring and fall) as they move between summer and winter ranges. As indicated in the adopted James H. Smith Management Plan, the greater Northstar Area does contain big game habitat which may have eroded over the years from human and dog activity. The specific management plan document can be viewed in Attachment C. The Applicant suggests that the dog prohibition was a voluntary restriction offered by the Applicant during the Special Review application for the Aspen Field Biology Lab. Staff has listened to the recordings of the May 41, 2004 P&Z meeting where the condition was discussed. It should be clarified that at these meetings Page 3 of 6 0U-10003 there were many neighbors that spoke during the public comment period and voiced concerns regarding the wildlife impacts of the proposed development. The Applicant responded at the hearing stating that the property currently had a self-imposed dog prohibition. In response to the wildlife concerns, P&Z Commissioner Michael Augello asked the Applicant "are you okay with dogs being prohibited rather than kenneled?" The Applicant responded that dogs would be prohibited and the condition was implemented in the approval resolution and carried forward in all future land use decisions. Minor Amendment to a Development Permit. Pursuant to Section 2-20-150(b) of the July 61, 2006 Land Use Code, a minor amendment to any development application or permit is one that meets the following criteria, as determined by the Community Development Director: 1. Is consistent with action(s) taken during previous development approvals for the property; and Response: Staff recommends that the BOCC make a finding that the request is inconsistent with BOCC Resolution 101-2004, Administrative Decision No. 50-2006, Hearing Officer Determination No. 014-2007, and Administrative Decision No. 60-2010, which all prohibit dogs on the property. 2. Does not change the use of the proposed development between residential, commercial, and tourist accommodation uses; and Response: The request does not change the use of the proposed development. The current use of the property is large scale residential development and will remain in that use. 3. Does not flange the basic character of the approved use of land on which the activity occurs, including basic visual appearance and method of operation, and Response: Allowing dogs on the property will not change the approved use of the land but will alter the basic character and operating method for the residential development in that even though the dogs are proposed to be kenneled, there is no guarantee that the dogs will not bark and potentially breech the kennel. Additionally, there is no mechanism for the County to inspect the property without owner consent. Even if owner consent was provided, a violation of the kenneling could have already occurred and the problem remedied prior to consented access. 4. Does not constitute a new land development activity; and Response: The request does not constitute a new land development activity. 5. Does not increase off-site impacts in the surrounding neighborhood; and Response: It should be anticipated that if dogs are allowed, County Staff has limited enforcement abilities unless it can be witnessed firsthand that dogs have breeched their kennels. The offsite impact of this would be the potential harm to big game wildlife. 6. Does not endanger the public health, safety or welfare, and Page 4 of 6 Response: The request does not endanger the public health and safety, but does implicate the public welfare. The welfare provision stated in this Code section includes a community's definition of welfare via their adopted statements of policies and principles. Chapter 1 of the Land Use Code identifies the General Provisions of the Land Use Code. Specifically, Section 1-60-290, General Land Use Policies, states: "WILDLIFE It is the policv of the County that proposed land uses (including structures) are compatible with the ecosystem of wildlife habitats and do not pose immediate, long term or potential detrimental impacts to such habitats. The County seeks to preserve, restore and perpetuate native wildlife and plant diversity by maintaining sufficient habitat. " In this case, the public welfare is not compromised through the implementation of a dog prohibition that is a land use regulation on the property that promotes the protection of sensitive wildlife habitat. Removing the dog prohibition may compromise this stated policy and endanger public welfare. Additionally, pursuant to Section 7-20-70(b) of the Code, the General Wildlife Principles state: "These principles shall be evaluated not only on a site specific basis, but should also be used to consider the location and role of the property in the context of larger habitat and wildlife patterns. Implementation of these principles may also include consideration of connectivity between other parcels and the cumulative effect of the proposed activity or development in light of other activity in the area affecting related habitat areas. Approved development shall: (5) Minimize the combined and cumulative impacts of activities and development on wildlife species, wildlife habitat, wildlife movement, and unique landscape elements. " In effort to minimize the combined and cumulative effect of the activities and development on wildlife species, a dog prohibition was enacted in 2004 and remains in effect on the subject property. In the context of the larger wildlife habitat in the Northstar Area, and the preservation of large tracts of public lands adjacent to the subject property, continuing the dog prohibition and denying the request is consistent with the stated general principles of the Code and does not endanger the public welfare. 7. Does not violate any Land Use Code standard; and Response: Though the Applicant has argued that field verified big game mapping does not support a dog prohibition, Land Use Code Section 7-20-70(e)(5) states: "If the County determines that one or more wildlife species on or near the property are subject to predation by domestic animals, including dogs and cats, the County may impose additional standards to reduce or eliminate such predation". Page 5 of 6 Ui}iit�®5 As indicated in previous letters from the Division of Wildlife, loose and uncontrolled dogs can cause significant impact to wildlife through direct and indirect mortality, displacement to less preferred habitat, and increased stress and disturbance. If dogs would breech kennels, it is plausible that wildlife could be harassed. Staff recommends that the BOCC determines that there are one or more wildlife species on or near the property and there is the potential for predation by dogs, and that the prohibition shall remain in full force and effect. 8. Does not substantially increase the need for on-site parking or utilities, or affect affordable housing generation; and Response: The request will not result in any impacts mentioned in No. 8. 9. Does not increase the floor area of the use by more than five (5) percent or decrease the open space on the site by more the five (5) percent. Response: The request will not violate this. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a motion denying the request to eliminate the condition in BOCC Resolution 101-2004, and subsequent Land Use Decisions, subject to the attached draft resolution. ATTACHMENTS: A. Pitkin County Open Space and Trails comments B. Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife comments C. James H. Smith North Star Open Space Management Plan Page 6 of 6 0UUa06 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, DENYING THE WARREN CREEK MOUNTAIN LLC MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT Resolution No. -2014 RECITALS Warren Creek Mountain, LLC ("Applicant'), has applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, ("Director"), pursuant to Section 2-20-150(b) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code ("Code"), to amend the condition in BOCC Resolution No. 101 2004 that prohibits dogs. 1. The property is located at 44010 Hwy 82, and is zoned AR -10, is approximately 2.5 acres, and is non- conforming in size. (Legal Description, Attachment A). 2. The subject lot is part of multiple previous approvals. In 2004, the property received a Special Review approval for an "Indoor Research Facility" identified as the "Aspen Field Biology Lab" pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 101-2004. In tandem with this approval, the Land Use Code was also amended to identify Indoor Research Facility as a Special Review Use in the AR -10 Zone District. In 2006, a new owner applied to rescind the Special Review approval for the Indoor Research Facility and requested the ability to construct a single family residence of 5,750 square feet. This approval was granted pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 (Reception No. 525181). Also, in 2006, the new owner applied to land a Transferrable Development Right (TDR) to construct an 8,250 square foot single family residence. The approval was granted pursuant to Hearing Officer Determination No. 014-2007. hi 2010, the new owner submitted an administrative application to eliminate the dog prohibition and this request was denied pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 60-2010 (Reception No. 573026). The parcel is currently developed with an 8,250 square foot residence. 3. The Application was reviewed at a regularly scheduled public meeting on November 5th, 2014 in which time and testimony was given to the request. 4. The Board of County Commissioners finds that pursuant to Section 2-20-150(b) the request to amend the condition that prohibits dogs in BOCC Resolution 101-2004, and subsequent Land Use Decisions, is inconsistent with actions taken during previous development approvals for the property,. 5. The BOCC further finds that pursuant to Section 7-20-70(e)(5), there are one or more wildlife species on or near the property and there is the potential for predation by dogs, and that the prohibition of dogs shall remain in full force and effect. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners that it hereby denies the Warren Creek Mountain, LLC request for a Minor Amendment to a Development Permit. Page 1 of 3 000007 DENIED this 5b day of November, 2014. ATTEST: 011 H-04III � APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely, County Attorney PID# 273720400014 P080-14 00000'3 J BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISISONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Robert A. Itmer Jr., Chair Date APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: (��a Cindy Houben, Community Development Director Page 2 of 3 Legal Description Attachment A A !riot of laird being part of Lot 20, and Lot 21 of Section 20, Township. 10 South. Range 84 Vilest of the 6th Principal Meridian, describad more fully as follows: Beginning at'a point being the. intersootiori of the south boundary line, of Lot 21 with tho west right-cf way of Colorado. JJighway 82; thenceNorth' 89°20.'00'.' West a distance of 474.16 feet slang the south tine of Lot 21 and Lot 20 to'a point on the easter;y line of.the Joy Smith Prop atty'as described in that Iraprovement Survey recorded at Reception No. 459080; thence North 06°00'00" East it dWinncs of 200.00 feet along,ihe easterly litre of said Joy. South Property; thence; North 90°00'00"East a distance of.11.3.22-feet *Lg a southerly Roe of said Joy Smith Property to a point on the j easterlylineofsaid Lot20; . thence North 05°03' 18" Gast a distance of 18.90 feet along said easterly line to a point in that fence described at Reseptian No. thence the following four (4) courses aloag said fence line; i North 83°48'28" Fast; a distance of 154.50 feet; thence South 78°48' 15". East a distance of 46.89 f et; thence South 77°07'26" F ast a distance of 87,73 feet; thence South 02"42'33" But adistance of 10.09 teat; - lhenoe North 90°00'00" East a distance of 9.;3 feet to'a paint on said west rioft-of-way tine of Colorado Highway 82; . thence the following,two. (2) courses along stud west right -of --way lino of Colorado Highway 82; South'04°23'00".> asta distance of 18.60 foot;: ; thence 190.10 along the arc of a curve to,the left having a radius of 985.00 feet a central angle of 11°03'28" the chord of which 6aars 509.°54`95"E a diatanct: of ! 8980 feat to.tho point of be'glruung; :." , _ . COL'NI'Y OF. Prrm,'STATE OF COLORADO also known by stioet and number as; 44010 & 44012 Highway 82, Asptn, CO 81611 Page 3 of 3 061030 i #' "y ATTACHMENT '10i�'reI Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> RE: 10124/14 Due Pitkin County Land Use Warren Creek Mtn LLC Application 1 message Matt Adeletti<matt.adeletti@pitkincounty.corn > Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:05 AM To: Bonnie Shiles <bonnie.waechtler@pitkincounty.com> Cc: Michael Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> Hi Bonnie, Open Space and Trails is 100% against allowing dogs on this property. The prohibition was put in place at the time because it was a part of the entire application, and it was one of the items negotiated to and agreed upon by all the parties involved which allowed development by the landowner at the time and this was one of the conditions of that agreement. This property is bounded on the north, south and southwest by the Northstar Open Space Preserve, and a considerable amount of environmental survey work was accomplished to determine that the Preserve is a significant and sensitive wildlife habitat area. Allowing dogs on this property would go against that earlier agreement and would subvert all of the environmental impact studies that state this property should not have dogs on it. Another aspect is that there is the possibility that dogs could leave their kennels or get free from their leashes and get onto the Preserve, and the only way to monitor this activity would be to have our Open Space and Trails Rangers continually monitor this activity, which of course they cannot do. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks You Matt Adeletti Matthew F. Adeletti Acquisition Manager Pitkin County Open Space and Trails 530 E. Main Street Suite 300 Aspen Colorado 81611 0 10 970-429-2796 matt.adeletti.@pitkincounty.com ATTACHMENT October 20, 2014 COLORADO Parks and Wildlife Department of Natural Resources Glenwood Springs Area Office 0088 Wildlife Way Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Mike Kraemer Community Planner Pitkin County 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Warren Creek Mountain LLC Minor Amendment to Development Permit Dear Mike, Colorado Parks and Wildlife has reviewed the application for a minor amendment to a development permit for the property located at 44010 Highway 82. The applicant is requesting the removal of the dog prohibition and proposes to add a condition of approval to guarantee dogs will be kenneled at all times. After a review of the submitted materials, CPW does not object to the removal of the dog prohibition for this property as long as the recommendations made by .lcnathan Lowsky in his August 11, 2014 letter are adhered to. These recommendations include: 1. The fenced area (or "kennel") should employ physical dog -proof fencing encompassing a portion of the parcel; a. Invisible fence type barriers are not acceptable. 2. The kennel should be built so that it does not disrupt native vegetation. 3. The kennel should be set back a minimum distance of 25 feet perpendicular to the nearest boundary with the Open Space property so that the presence of dogs does not disrupt normal wildlife behavior on North Star. 4. Any dog(s) on the property must be leashed and under human supervision when outside the required kennel. 5. Guests must be required to comply with these restrictions. 6. All contractors, caretakers, or other service providers must be prohibited from bringing their dogs on site. Furthermore, all pet food should be stored indoors to eliminate attractants for bears and other wildlife. e5z dobD. Bivdeil D.otrCdocd lilsmaWaaiE•I'.ulioMWilmdeCrnmave RohnW ar+y•Ckn Cackn Sammy•lwclime em/.vv.Cloi•C" ib,ic.• Dak Pis-hm P-W'La Vla - DMW"" - M-1,Ak Tinlc -Ak. ZW 000,311 Colorado Parks and Wildlife appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. If there are any questions or needs for additional information don't hesitate to contact Land Use Specialist, Taylor Elm at (970) 947-2971 or District Wildlife Manager, Kevin Wright at (970) 947-2938. Sincerely, ;erry�Will,Ar Wildlife Manager C. Kevin Wright, District Wildlife Manager Taylor Elm, Land Use Specialist File 000,012 ATTACHMENT JAMES H. SMITH NORTH STAR OPEN SPACE INTERIM MANAGEMENT PLAN AUGUST 8, 2001 1.0 INTRODUCTION The acquisition of the 70+ acre James H. Smith North Star Open Space ("the Property") is a highly significant conservation achievement for the upper valley. The Property links Pitkin County's 174 acre North Star Nature Preserve with the 65 acre Aspen Center for Environmental Studies (ACES) parcel. Together, these conserved properties comprise a 309 acre expanse of preserved open space containing significant wetland and riparian ecological communities and wildlife habitat, only minutes from downtown Aspen. The North Star Nature Preserve and the Property offer opportunities for limited public recreational use, managed to minimize impacts to the ecological values of the properties. This preliminary management plan reflects the significant ecological communities within the Prnnerty. The regulations and management guidelines but forth in this document are based on nrcur in the area surrounding the property. This Plan highlights those areas that are ecologically important and consequently warrant conservation emphasis and identifies some potential threats to the persistence of the biological resources of the Property. This Management Plan is consistent with the management plan for the neighboring North Star Nature Preserve, and written to complement that plan. A fully developed resource management plan will be developed by City of Aspen and Pitkin County staff once the Property is transferred and biological inventories are completed according to the 2000 Pitkin County Open Space Biological Inventory and Monitoring Protocols. This interim plan will serve for the first three years or less of public ownership, until a full Resource Management Plan is developed. 2.0 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES AND PRIORITIES • Perpetuate and restore the mosaic of high quality native plant communities. • Maintain viable populations of all native fauna currently living on the property. Special emphasis will be focused on great blue herons, mountain toads, soras and other wading buds, and riparian obligate songbirds. • Maintain and restore the hydrological regime of the property that supports its ecological communities. 8/08/2001 JAMES H. SMITH NORTH STAR OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT PLAN 000013 5.0 SIGNIFICANT WILDLIFE RESOURCES Ecological studies and inventories conducted at North Star Ranch over the years have revealed that the existing ecological complex supports a high level of biological diversity: 14 species of small mammals (e.g., mice, voles, shrews, squirrels); at least 107 species of birds, more than 43 of which are likely to breed on or around the property- (including at least 4 U.S. Forest Service Region 2 Designated "Sensitive" species); 13 medium to large mammals (e.g., elk, coyote, black bear, bobcat); 3 species of amphibian (including the mountain [or boreal] toad which is a "warranted but precluded" Candidate species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act); and one reptile species (western terrestrial garter snake). ® There is lune 15 of elk caping in the aspen of the alluvial fans ,nerty Historically_ as manv as 50 elk cows 15th to on the alluvial fans of the greater North Star Ranch. Current}, only a handtul is aomg so. tumougn it is difficult to determine the cause of this decline, it is likely that human and dog activity has as a sta g area as thev move Of particular conservation interest is the Great Blue Heron colony on the Property. It is estimated that there are approximately 63 Great Blue Heron colonies in the entire state of Colorado and the Smith colony is thought to be the only one occurring over 8500 feet in elevation and in blue spruce trees (most occur in cottonwoods). In other words this Great Blue Heron colony is quite unique and ecologically significant. The presence of this colony has important management implications. Researchers over the last 10 years have found that a 200 meter buffer zone from the periphery of colonies in which no human activity takes place during the courtship and nesting seasons is necessary to avoid negative effects on recruitment. Currently, there are seven active nests with as many as three nestlings. This buffer zone will be honored in the management of the Property. On two occasions, an adult mountain (or boreal) toad was seen in the area in June — once on North Star Nature Preserve (1999) and once on the Property itself (2001). If, and it appears likely, mountain toads are federally listed as Endangered or Threatened, then we will be bound by law to increase the protective status of the Property. Surveys will be conducted in 2001 and 2002 for breeding toads, non -breeding toads, tadpoles, and egg masses. 5.1 Recreation and Wildlife Open space land use by recreationists has increased throughout the United States. As open space use rises and penetrates natural areas, encounters between humans and w ldlife increases. There is concern among scientists and the public that recreationists may have a negative impact on wildlife. Recreationists can affect ualdlife through unintentional disturbance, the primary way recreationists affect wildlife, or intentional disturbance (Knight and Cole 1995). Due to the escalating use of open space unintentional disturbance has become particularly impactive. Understanding the impacts and responses of wildlife to recreationists can provide open space managers with the information to develop mitigation measures such as codes of conduct. The behavior of recreauonists affects wildlife responses. Predictability of a behavior partly UU001.4 8/08/2001 JAMES H. SMITH NORTH STAR OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT PLAN September 10, 2014 Davis tlorIl,�nc- PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING Mike Kraemer Pitkin County Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Minor Amendment to a Development Permit for the Property at 44010 Highway 82 (PID#273720400014) Dear Mike: Davis Horn Incorporated represents Warren Creek Mountain LLC, the applicant in this request and the current owner of the 2.269 acre property at 44010 Highway 82. Please refer to the Vicinity Map in Attachment 1. The applicant is requesting a minor amendment to a development permit to amend BOCC Resolution No. 101-2004 that prohibits dogs on the property. The applicant is willing to guarantee that dogs on the property will be kenneled (fenced) at all times as a condition of approval. Letters recommending kenneling as the means of dog control from Jonathan Lowsky of Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC (2014), Perry Will, Wildlife Officer with the Division of Parks and Wildlife (DPW) (2010) and Kevin Wright, State of Colorado District Wildlife Manager (20 10) and Lowsky as the County Wildlife Biologist (2004) are included in Attachment 2. The application is addressed under the following headings: • Current Request • History • Pertinent Sections of the Land Use Code Addressed • Summary Current Request The Applicant is requesting a Minor Amendment to a Development Permit to remove the dog prohibition and to add a new condition of approval to guarantee that dogs be kenneled at all times. If any method of kenneling or fencing does not contain the dogs, a backup alternate means of kenneling will be used to guarantee that dogs will be contained at all times. The Division of Parks and Wildlife (CPW) officers and Johnathan Lowsky of Colorado Wildlife Science LLC have all found that owners often violate a dog prohibition and allow their dogs to run at large. Since dogs running at large have a much greater impact on wildlife than dogs that are kenneled and fenced, guaranteed containment of the dogs is their recommended solution. Kevin Wright of the DPW (previously known as the Department of Wildlife, DOW) was the Wildlife Officer for the DOW and Jonathan Lowsky was the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist for Pitkin County in 2004 when the condition prohibiting dogs was approved. Neither recommended or required the dog prohibition. Both recommended that dogs be kenneled, not prohibited. The dog prohibition condition was place on the property as a voluntary prohibition by Bob Lewis, the owner at that time. Bob received County approval for the Aspen Field 215 SOUTH MONARCH ST 000001 0 T L/ ,I 1 ALICE DAVIS AICP S GLENN HORN AICP SUITE 104 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • 970/925-6587 • FAX: 970/925-5180 adavis@rof.net ghorn@rof.net Biology Laboratory (AFBL) whose goal was to provide a working environment for selected scientists who, through their field research, would contribute to finding solutions to issues of concern in stream ecology, plant ecology, migratory deer herds, forest ecology, water resources and noxious weeks. Lewis placed the dog prohibition on the property voluntarily due to the proposed research use. The property is now developed with a single family home and the biology research has been eliminated. The heavily used Pitkin County East of Aspen Trail is adjacent to Highway 82 and adjacent to the subject property. People with dogs pass by the property and the adjacent Northstar Nature Preserve all the time. The presence of dogs is a given with this nearby, heavily used trail. Dogs running at large are the problem, not the presence of dogs. Jonathan Lowsky field verified the presence of a neighbor dog at the home to the south of the subject property at his recent site visit. The current Pitkin County Land Use Code (LUC) does not prohibit dogs unless the project is within or adjacent to field verified elk, mule deer and bighorn sheep severe winter range, and winter concentration areas or within .25 miles of production areas. The subject property does not meet these criteria. There are no other provisions in the LUC for prohibiting dogs. As the initial dog prohibition was voluntary and not required by Pitkin County, the Department of Wildlife, the County Wildlife Biologist or the Land Use Code, the applicant requests an amendment to the current condition of approval for the subject property which states "Dogs are prohibited." The amendment will state that "Dogs will be kenneled at all times and the owner will guarantee that the method of containment works at all times so dogs are always contained." History The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) granted approval to the Aspen Field Biology Lab (AFBL) pursuant to Resolution No. 101-2004 including Special Review for an indoor research facility and a Caretaker Dwelling Unit (CDU), GMQS exemption for an essential community facility and 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission to establish a building envelope. The approval included a dog prohibition, but it was voluntarily placed on the property by the owner, Robert (Bob) Lewis, due to that owner's intention to use the property as a research lab. At the time of this application, the Department of Wildlife (now the DPW, Division of Parks and Wildlife) and the Pitkin County Wildlife Officer recommended kenneling of dogs, as they have with every land use approval since. The property was sold and the new owner, Stella Polare, LLC applied for and received a minor amendment pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 50-2006. The Decision replaced the previous approval and established a new building envelope and conditions of approval. The dog prohibition was carried over into this approval without much discussion or foundation for the prohibition. The Wildlife expert recommendations were for kenneling. Pursuant to Hearing Officer Determination No. 014-2007, the applicant obtained approval to utilize a TDR for additional floor area up to 8,250 square feet. 000002 Again, the dog prohibition was carried over, but not substantially discussed or elaborated upon, but kenneling was always recommended by the wildlife experts. The referenced approval documents are found in Attachments 3 through 6. A review of the approval documents for the 2004 AFBL development approval, the 2006 single family home and the 2007 TDR and amendment to the development approval was completed by Davis Hom Incorporated and also by Johnathan Lowsky of Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC. The reviews of these approval documents that began the dog prohibition condition on the property found no real basis for the prohibition except that the initial owner volunteered it. As stated in Lowsky's current July 30, 2014 report found in Attachment 2, "the approval documents do not provide any foundation for the prohibition". Davis Horn Incorporated was the owner's representative in the original 2004 approval that first established the dog prohibition. Therefore, we have firsthand knowledge and were fully aware that the restriction was voluntary, placed as a condition of approval by the owner due to the nature of the Biological Laboratory use on the property. Wildlife experts have always recommended kenneling for the property and for similar land use applications when, like the subject property, the property is compliant with the Land Use Code. In 2010, the owner (still Stela Polare, LLC) requested approval to amend the prior condition of approval that prohibited dogs in order to allow dogs on the property. That request was denied pursuant to Administrative Determination No. 60-2010 as being inappropriate and not consistent with the Land Use Code. That application sought approval to use an invisible fence, which often does not work to effectively contain dogs. This application seeks approval for a kennel, not an invisible fence, as the means of containment. This application will document that kenneling of dogs is appropriate and consistent with previous and current recommendations by wildlife experts, with similar single family land use conditions of approval and that kenneling of dogs is consistent with the requirements of the Land Use Code and is appropriate for the property, especially in light of the fact that dogs reside on neighboring parcels and dogs are permitted on the public trail adjacent to the property and the North Star Preserve. Pertinent Section of the Land Use Code (LUC) Addressed The Community Development Department's pre -application conference summary by Mike Kraemer is found in Attachment 7. The summary states that Section 2-20-150, Minor Amendments to a Development Permit, is the section that must be addressed in this letter of application. This section of the Code is addressed and compliance with the criteria for a minor amendment to a development permit is demonstrated in the following discussion. The Code criteria are in bold, followed by the applicant's response. 000003 2-20-150: AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS (a) Applicability This section establishes the procedures for minor and major amendments to development applications. (b) Minor Amendments Defined A minor amendment to any development application or permit is one that meets the following criteria, as determined by the Community Development Director: (1) Is consistent with action(s) taken during previous development approvals for the property; and In 2004, Pitkin County did not require the dog prohibition. The dog prohibition was offered voluntarily by the owner at the time, Bob Lewis for the Aspen Field Biological Laboratory (AFBL). The 2006 County land use approval eliminated the AFBL use and approved access, development and building envelopes for a single family home. The dog prohibition was carried over but not substantially discussed or reviewed. The LUC has never required the prohibition of dogs except when a property is within or adjacent to field verified wildlife elk, mule deer and bighorn sheep severe winter range and winter concentration areas and within .25 miles of production areas. The subject property does not fall in this category as the property is not within or adjacent to field verified winter range, concentration areas or production areas. As stated by Jonathan Lowsky of the Colorado Wildlife Sciences LLC (which includes comments by Kevin Wright, CWM), removing the dog prohibition and replacing it with a kenneling restriction would be consistent with County policy. Other wildlife experts from the State of Colorado as far back as Pat Tucker of the Department of Wildlife in 2004 have recommended kenneling. The prohibition was voluntary when it was placed on the property in 2004 and was volunteered due to the use of a Biological Research Lab, not a single family home. If the owner had not volunteered the prohibition, Pitkin County would most probably have required kenneling as they have done in many other similar circumstances on many other similar properties near the subject property and in Pitkin County. The property does not meet LUC criteria for requiring a dog prohibition. (2) Does not change the use of the proposed development between residential, commercial and tourist accommodation uses; and The proposed dog kenneling restriction and elimination of the dog prohibition condition does not impact the approved and developed residential use of the property. (3) Does not change the basic character of the approved use of land on which the activity occurs, including basic visual appearance and method of operation; and The approval of the proposed dog kennel requirement will not change the basic character of the approved use of land, including basic visual appearance and method of operation. 0 000004 (4) Does not constitute a new land development activity; and The proposal does not constitute a new land development activity. (5) Does not increase off-site impacts in the surrounding neighborhood; and The proposed kenneling of dogs will not increase off site impacts in the surrounding neighborhood. It is our understanding that adjacent property owners have dogs. A dog at the home to the south of the subject property was visually verified by Jonathan Lowsky at his July, 2014 site visit. (6) Does not endanger the public health, safety or welfare; and The proposed dog kenneling restriction replacing the dog prohibition will in no way endanger the public health, safety and welfare. Many owners and their dogs use the County trail adjacent to the property. This heavily used trail is also adjacent to the entire length of the Northstar Nature Preserve. (7) Does not violate any Land Use Code standard; and The request is consistent with the Pitkin County Land Use Code (LUC). No prohibition is required pursuant to the current or any previous LUC requirements. As mentioned previously in this application and as stated in Johnathan Lowsky's report in Attachment 2, dog prohibition is only required by the LUC when the property is within or adjacent to field verified elk, mule deer or bighorn sheep severe winter range and winter concentrations areas (Section 7-20-70(f)(l)(b) or within .25 miles of production areas (Section 7-20-70(f)(4)(b). The subject property does not meet these criteria and therefore a dog prohibition would not be required by the LUC. As stated in Lowsky's report and as verified by Keven Wright in Lowsky's report, required dog kenneling is often the preferred solution to dog prohibition as dog owners quite often violate a prohibition and dogs run at large. The presence of dogs is common in the area, in neighboring homes and on the adjacent East of Aspen County Trail which is heavily used. The Trail runs the entire length of the Northstar Preserve and is heavily used by dogs and their owners. (8) Does not substantially increase the need for on-site parking or utilities, or affect affordable housing generation; and Parking is not impacted and this criterion is not applicable to the proposed minor amendment to a development permit. (9) Does not increase the floor area of the use by more than five (5) percent or decrease the open space on the site by more than five (5) percent. Floor area is not impacted and this criterion is not applicable to the proposed minor amendment 000005 This letter demonstrates that the applicable criteria have been met and that the request to require guaranteed kenneling of dogs at all times on the subject property is compatible with the Pitkin County Land Use Code. The applicant is requesting approval for a Minor Amendment to a Development Permit to remove a dog prohibition and to add a condition requiring the guaranteed kenneling of dogs at all times. The existing dog prohibition was placed on the property voluntarily by the owner when it was approved as the Aspen Field Biological Laboratory (AFBL) in 2004; a kenneling restriction was recommended by Pitkin County and the Department of Wildlife at that time. The property owner's voluntary dog prohibition was for the different AFBL use and not for the current single family use. This request complies with past and current Pitkin County Land Use Codes and is consistent with the intent of the previous land use approvals for a single family home, the existing use of the property. The Code requires a dog prohibition when a property is adjacent to and within field verified elk, mule deer or bighorn sheep severe winter range and winter concentration areas or within .25 miles of production areas. The subject does not meet these criteria as has been field verified by Jonathan Lowsky of Colorado Wildlife Sciences LLC. Lowsky was the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist in 2004 and he recommended kenneling of dogs in the 2004 AFBL land use review. Although they understand the potential impacts of dogs on wildlife, Kevin Wright, Colorado District Wildlife Manager and Perry Will of the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife (DPW) have recommended kenneling as well. The property is adjacent to the heavily used East of Aspen Pitkin County Trail which abuts both the Northstar Preserve and the subject property. Dogs are very present in the area, on the Trail and in the neighborhood. As stated by the wildlife experts, (Lowsky, Wright and Will) dogs' running at large is of primary concern and kenneling dogs at all times prevent dogs from running at large. Although we understand that this is a discretionary approval, eliminating the dog prohibition and adding a mandatory dog kenneling restriction would be consistent with the Land Use Code and with previous and current actions by Pitkin County in similar circumstances. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. The following items are included with this letter of request. Attachment 1: Vicinity Map Attachment 2: Johnathan Lowsky of Colorado Wildlife Sciences LLC, 2014 Wildlife Report; (including attached letters from Perry Will of DPW and Keven Wright DWM) Attachment 3: Attachment 4: BOCC Resolution 101-2004 approving the AFBL; Attachment 4: Administrative Decision 50-2006 eliminating the AFBL use and approving development, access and building envelopes for a single family home; 0 Attachment 5: Hearing Officer Determination No. 014-2007 approving a TDR for the property to allow up to 8,250 square feet of floor area in the single family home; Attachment 6: Administrative Decision No. 60-2010 denying amendment to a development permit to remove the dog prohibition; Attachment 7: Pre -application conference summary; Attachment 8: Proof of Ownership (Warranty Deed); Attachment 9: Letter authorizing Davis Horn Inc. to submit this land use application on behalf of the owner and to represent the owner in the land use review process; and Attachment 10: Signed Fee Agreement. Please call if you need anything further or if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED GLENN HORN AICP 7 000007 �s .r. � .; :..:r. : 1 •. SIF .> > � ` - a-,�, ' - 7,� .,�IIA�.u�la� i .� 2 � XCRstlMR1 J R ,e'Y ,,'•,- a.-4. .'a 'N LIfTLP :�A 1t, + �1.•. 1 / ' inn . ✓ .� M4 UD K� / 1� 9 M Af + .>- _g UOT 693 I ... •_ - •- s.. 41[B ° a 9an_ • l ... It FrJi tao _rlasaft •. 0 12 R.,ea I,.. 'EAGLE' CO E / e to s 7e : IT�KIN �':-�' � io Is rtroi7 ��°t4 - 1 ate t' ur` .'•to 11 �� z� 1 ,+v �' _.! DEA 14. V W _- .0 •[ �'� `II If I 7,: ,a MPRCtliTNhlk Sloane C2° / A 10502 Pk 0 v \I I �'^. � I I N f 1050 °S H --I g --I---- y/Jt' d:c sot" Wino O1 oa Go Ge -. } ... Ford I ltsa s� / +.' � gg '2lw5nneYr 2> 2• a��o'°�o z0 !�•: as '� ( c,\#2ovP°?ab 2t '22 Oy"2s rel Zig 3e 3 311°wymaBB •2/ taAM 3o z9 29 27 a-a�-=i \ ry ^ \ ? OOr(R 7011 _ �r.I1I1 I -.y 2B l! 23 2e z 33 35 3e° al iriangls 8819;✓ 1 ti; -9225 94 /N t. ,`•y I� p�31 I 34 I 2ii; i a ((•'.�/ 3, )'' 1!F-,��� J. obey o9 .I C11 • '3 I 2 O. •� 9< kir W al Park 4 It \\))PORPHYRY MTN —},2( I 1155601 3o II Iz 9314 Glx: 9h�/ to ty-' 2i a•� 9 }I@a. '.o I..�at I 1 000 It, 103611 '.- .,Y >-'- '� L; LhrksPur WoooT I Iasis Is I u nI a tae t> Is Creekdy ra, t3 Iti .il is to 24 I t Baca + _Colu i• --"C)- ._=•s___CJ4 1 JV 24 II a / =ate z 2a c� . I TI I z 1 j Y 2�1� {I • 1% t9 20 2i1, 2� 23 — 51 P I 1 I I _9 3 I)I1II I C\ c £zs 2s27 WilG°/ s•t0 `2h Res k I -::;1r: Creed a41 i R gt�n Point Sa dY Gavin --. '1i'a, (^ _-TI--_-I-__-v:.._ �'•L :! 33 t I /3s 13e I Field \ aZ:: .•y0.� 36 rl„ 31 32 I 33 35 rSS I. 1`3',3 32 33_, 3• WGGDY B81d:•• ..''o�ac9..•..•..• , Mtnle I II I i U` + .l\+fo t ``.'O7fain I /'/ IA Tl9al 11092&K 'ob 3 q �? _ _ Ty ­ 3' _. ,° i'• =o1rJ- J /Sri mase o wx.//``=p�✓" Iq�.�{ 'Thin F 10924t ? �. •(a•-'� \ \ - I /' Village ilage iMumu t2\ Res _i(1/ - 1,q to I L- `� -moo o't \Lake it �tr •.:.SaFN .k 4A.� 61 r'�: I // •.I c ! 1 F\ '- a I/ 3RLAN IYl I H-�p3,'• 1 !D IS 1 Wi ! to u m 11 ti u / � Ij V Ilt -� II t. H t 1, •'� ! yti°� 0 \ .: 1 } ' ' ` !I la a -- - -I it 7 1E I:i�\....: 11395 in .:9 , Gaa%I ' yL $"�' TI,L l va F' Warren ��•' l o I •' 21 as It \�zi:j, L/.•:: °d I':.f I 2z I G ^\II I.i rtj r• 22'•.ik3': \� �3 ..#a `I'`�J\J_-I I ' .. w,.L\�6i I A I 4g12' l Id i a 1 a— s Baldyi 21 I 1. I 2 a�P .lam 21 I m 211 WARREN ''`Men I I I 41 SILVER BAR C_G_ I G� I//�_F• C• : I EI__ 1 _ _ -'"13156 - _ "4' _ _ - - _ _ ::} _ _ -,. LO a Pk - - - �/iJ I r - . "'4._-�'ai'�}.;.,-. 7195L_ SIIIou h _ n _ _ I _� g Cc II I ' �" '- 1IFFICULT CIS %%" e' y W I I I I I-+ Men S rILLVER B LL 11615 Annie -i //` - v \ I I l I/ I Ja I C ✓ I I V I at, 3�y� 3 ,J 13117 Ja a. as I` n pa .CG v 3a a5 Baser) •_.?, q RM 8177 3e •::: JN I I ) raae.rs Lake_ le - Highland__ �_ -��:;. I .7.-...TI;]ef. Pk I •!! I ;.k ( I� r' J' J• / SILVERQELG•:. ^ `y;;'. {-- I e. i � I 3l J I Iy I e- �:i• /._}�__ ���^( /• I I- .I. f4 `,'1� s `I :.j 1 [_AST MAROON ____ I� —�`..I+.J,krt: M1)l'.;RyO_Oo,N:•r:r'y:r•y '•h iI "1;�-- III HC -AD- I 77RAIL 17IUCKS \�Pau Luke! PF CG toA Oiib] uruan 1B IJ nu .kIII ,•„,I { :�:'�s¢�••;..3A:•: II __ ,— 1 iF• ,.+<;:;���`}� t 1IIj 3i1I� %?• I 'ear I w . it f LaAe y I I 1,1 ••�• � •' R Ia le Ia 4. �c� Ci 1-I I U:.. ? Ib .•. I i� nd�l �n nnnR _ (1100 61-21 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCELLC Ecological Research, Management & Consulting Ii. August 11, 2014 VIA EMAIL: ghorn@rof.net Glenn Horn Davis Horn Inc. 601 E. Hyman Aspen, CO 816117 �2 RE: Wildlife & Ecological Assessment Regarding Domestic Dog Restrictions - Warren Creek Mountain, LLC Parcel Dear Glenn; Per your request, I have conducted an assessment of the wildlife and wildlife habitat on and adjacent to the Warren Creek Mountain, LLC property at 44010 Highway 82 in unincorporated Pitkin County, Colorado (the Property) as regulated by the Pitkin County Land Use Code (LUC). The purpose of this assessment is to determine whether an amendment to the development approval for the Property regarding the prohibition of dogs will comply with the wildlife and ecological sections of the LUC. On June 3, 2014, I conducted an assessment of the Property and surrounding area. Specifically, I evaluated the boundaries on the north and west sides of the Property bordering the North Star Nature Preserve and evaluated the habitat on and adjacent to the Property. I also visually confirmed the presence of a dog on the adjacent property to the south to determine whether dogs were present. I have reviewed the background documents you sent me approving and amending development on the Property. Although these documents prohibit dogs on the Property, none of the documents provides any foundation for the dog prohibition. The LUC only prohibits dogs within or adjacent to field verified elk, mule deer and bighorn sheep severe winter range, and winter concentration areas (Section 7-20-70[f][1][b]) and within 0.25 miles of production areas (Section 7-20-70[f][4][b]). There are no other provisions within the LUC for prohibiting dogs. Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife (CPW) Species Activity Data indicates that the Property is not within or adjacent to any of the habitats described above and is not within 0.25 miles of production habitat. My assessment of the Property in combination with intimate familiarity with the habitat and wildlife use of the too Elk Run Drive, Suite tz8 • Basalt, CO 8t62i • 970.927.4549 - Jonathan@coloradowildlifescience.com • www,coloradowildlifescience.com 000009 Warren Creek &Iounrain, LLC Wildhfe & Ecotogical Assessment Regarding Domestic Dog Restncnnns Page 2 --- ------- --------- ------ ------- -- - -- -- - - -- North Star Nature Preserve and surrounding area supports the CPW data. The Property is within 0.25 miles of an elk migration corridor (which requires a "kennel" restriction). The prohibition may have been applied due to concerns regarding the perceived sensitivity of North Star. This is supported in the 2010 Administrative Determination denying the previous Minor Amendment. The LUC, however, does not address dogs on parcels adjacent to County open space. In light of the perceived effect on North Star, it is important to note that the East of Aspen Trail parallels the entire east boundary of North Star Nature Preserve as well as the Property. This very popular multi -use recreational trail does not prohibit dogs and, in fact, many people walk their dogs on this trail each day. Although the existing development approval establishes a dog prohibition, I believe that, given certain restrictions in combination with the natural vegetational screening on the Property, amending the development approval for this Property from a dog prohibition to a kennel restriction (i.e., fenced yard), would not result in any additional disruption to the conservation and ecological values of the North Star Nature Preserve. The following restrictions would minimize the impacts of the amendment: 1. The fenced area (or "kennel") should employ physical dog -proof fencing encompassing a portion of the parcel; a. Invisible Fence type barriers are not acceptable; 2. The kennel should be built such that it does not disrupt native vegetation; 3. The kennel should be set back a minimum distance of 25 feet perpendicular to the nearest boundary with the Open Space property so that the presence of dogs does not disrupt normal wildlife behavior on North Star; 4. Any dog(s) on the Property must be leashed and under human supervision when outside the required kennel; 5. Guests must be required to comply with these restrictions; and 6. All contractors, caretakers, or other service providers must be prohibited from bringing their dogs on site. Kevin Wright, District Wildlife Manager, Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW) was contacted for his professional opinion on this matter. He stated that a kennel restriction was acceptable to CPW and would not pose any substantial impacts to wildlife. This corroborates the referral memos Mr. Wright submitted to the County in 2010 in response to the Stella Polare LLC Minor Amendment Application (Exhibit A). In these memos, Mr. Wright was quite adamant that a 000010 Warren Creek Nfounttin, U.0 Wildhle & Rcological Assessment Regarding Domestic Dog Rcmiaions Page 3 dog prohibition was not necessary and while dogs roaming at large pose a threat to wildlife, dogs under control or in a kennel would not present a problem. In 2004 in my capacity as the County Wildlife Biologist, I submitted a referral memo to Community Development recommending a kennel restriction (Exhibit B). Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information. Sincerely, COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC )b adiaa-dwsky, MS Principal Wildlife Biologist/ Ecologist 000011 Warren Creek Mountain, LLC Wildlife & Flcologicd Assessment Reguding Domestic Dog Resnictions Page 4 11-1 -1-1— ---- --- -- - -- -- - - - ------ Exhibit A — Kevin Wright Memos 000012 STATE OF COLORADO Bill Ritter, Jr., Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Thomas E. Remington, Director 6060 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80216 Telephone: (303) 297-1192 wildllfe.state.co, os July 16, 2010 Pitkin County Community Development 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Stella Polare LLC Minor Amendment 11301.11d0jOADO lq; t: rtt:xo^ ow T z inn Ajunoo uimj!r �°waaDo d'OF� ForWildlije- ForPeofik Dear Cari Anne: The Stella Polaro property, formerly Bob Lewis', does not lie within any mapped big game habitat areas. It does lie across Highway 82 from elk winter range and severe winter range. These areas are located up onthe side of Smuggler Mountain. The property does lie just southeast of an elk migration corridor as elk cross the North Star Preserve, This corridor is not as active as it once was and is still utilized but to a lesser degree. The main value of the property as well as the surrounding North Star Preserve and James H. Smith Open Space is its riparian and wetland values. It provides critical habitat for a variety of wildlife species and is known by many for its breeding snipe and waterfowl. Loose or uncontrolled dogs can have a significant impact on wildlife from direct and indirect mortality, displacement to less preferred habitat, increased stress and disturbance, and in the case of waterfowl and shorebirds, disruption of nesting as well as reduced nesting success. if dogs are not controlled, there would be significant off site impacts, contrary to the statement on page 2 of the application. These impacts would be most significant on the open space properties where shorebird and waterfowl nesting would be impacted There are surrounding properties with dogs. In fact the bear research team caught a loose and roaming dog in a black bear research trap this summer in the immediate vicinity of this property. If the dog prohibition is lifted on the property, it will be critical that the dog(s) is(are) properly controlled and not allowed to roam Sincerel , /Pe illCom! a Wildlife Manager Cc: R. Velarde, K. Wright, file SC NEO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Mike King, Fxecutive Director tT 1 C1 WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Tim Glenn, Chair RoherlStreeter, Vm Chair. Mark Smith, Secretary V t I Members, David R. Brougham +Dennis Buechler • Dorothea Farris • Alan Jones • John SNotary • Dean Wingfield 000013 August 5, 2010 Stella Polare, LLC 44010 Highway 82 Aspen, CO 81611 RE- Dog Management Plan Dear Mr. Throw: I have looked over the dog management plan provided for this property. I have a couple of comments: 1. The electriclinvisible fence must be installed and operational before dogs are brought on to the property. If the fence fails to control the dogs then an alternative needs to be identified. Either a physical kennel be constructed or go back to the dog prohibition. Dogs need to be controlled at all times. Just for your information, some dogs can and do defeat invisible fencing. 2. The plan mentioned limiting the number of dogs but did not specify that limitation The decision whether to allow dogs or not is not a decision the DOW makes or recommends. It is a county decision. Dogs can have tremendous impacts on wildlife and habitat suitability. I cannot stress enough that dogs need to be properly controlled. Sincerely, Kevin Wright District Wildlife Manager Aspen Cc: P. Will, C. Holcomb DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Mike King, Executive Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Tim Glenn, Chat • Robed Sinister, Vice Chair- Malt Smith, Secretary 30 jell Members, David R Brougham • Denr ssB� Members, * Dor Mike King and JohnFarris * Allan �Stulp John Singletary • Dean Wingfield 4p STATE OF COLORADO GO�10 Bill Ritter, Jr., Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES O DIVISION OF WILDLIFE p" �ON AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER OF�V Thomas E Remington, Director For Midlife - 6060 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80216 For People Telephone: (303) 297-1192 midaYe.state.co.us August 5, 2010 Stella Polare, LLC 44010 Highway 82 Aspen, CO 81611 RE- Dog Management Plan Dear Mr. Throw: I have looked over the dog management plan provided for this property. I have a couple of comments: 1. The electriclinvisible fence must be installed and operational before dogs are brought on to the property. If the fence fails to control the dogs then an alternative needs to be identified. Either a physical kennel be constructed or go back to the dog prohibition. Dogs need to be controlled at all times. Just for your information, some dogs can and do defeat invisible fencing. 2. The plan mentioned limiting the number of dogs but did not specify that limitation The decision whether to allow dogs or not is not a decision the DOW makes or recommends. It is a county decision. Dogs can have tremendous impacts on wildlife and habitat suitability. I cannot stress enough that dogs need to be properly controlled. Sincerely, Kevin Wright District Wildlife Manager Aspen Cc: P. Will, C. Holcomb DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Mike King, Executive Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Tim Glenn, Chat • Robed Sinister, Vice Chair- Malt Smith, Secretary 30 jell Members, David R Brougham • Denr ssB� Members, * Dor Mike King and JohnFarris * Allan �Stulp John Singletary • Dean Wingfield STATE OF COLORADO Bill Ritter, Jr., Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Thomas E. Remington, Director 9060 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80216 Telephone: (303) 297-1192 AdIdlife.state.co.us July 16, 2010 Pitkin County Community Development 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Stella Polare LLC Minor Amendment Dear Cari Anne: tU0Wdo;0n9p lq;t:nu::::O^ otos z z inr Ajunoo uiNl!r v°��Oo 'y0F`"" For 571dlife- For People The Stella Polare property, formerly Bob Lewis', does not lie within any mapped big game habitat areas. It does lie across Highway 82 from elk winter range and severe winter range. These areas are located up on the side of Smuggler Mountain. The property does lie just southeast of an elk migration corridor as elk cross the North Star Preserve. This corridor is not as active as it once was and is still utilized but to a lesser degree. The main value of the property as well as the surrounding North Star Preserve and lames H. Smith Open Space is its riparian and wetland values. It provides critical habitat for a variety of wildlife species and is known by many for its breeding snipe and waterfowl. Loose or uncontrolled dogs can have a significant impact on wildlife from direct and indirect mortality, displacement to less preferred habitat, increased stress and disturbance, and in the case of waterfowl and shorebirds, disruption of nesting as well as reduced nesting success. If dogs are not controlled, there would be significant off site impacts, contrary to the statement on page 2 of the application. These impacts would be most significant on the open space properties where shorebird and waterfowl nesting would be impacted. There are surrounding properties with dogs. In fact the bear research team caught a loose and roaming dog in a black bear research trap this summer in the immediate vicinity of this property. If the dog prohibition is lifted on the properly, it will be critical that the dog(s) is(are) properly controlled and not allowed to roam �'�Sincerel ] PPS ;w e �s Wildlife Manager Cr: R. Velarde, K. Wright, file rCj� E DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Mike King. Execubu Director �'} l u• t1 WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Tim Glenn, Chair. Robert Streeter, VK)e Chair • Mark Smith' Seamy U tJ Members, David R. Brougham • Dennis Buechler. Dorothea Fans • Awn Jones • John SIVetery, • Dean Wingfield 000015 Warren Creek Mountain, LLC VAIdlife & Ecolopcal Assessment Regarding Domestic Dog Itctriction, Page, 7 Exhibit B — County Biologist Memo /�r( At„,( 1 1 c r 1, --4- I . -4' .. PITKIN COUNTY WILDLIFE PROGRAM MEMORANDUM TO: Suzanne Wolff, Community Development FROM: Jonathan Lowsky, Wildlife Biologist SUBJECT: Aspen Field Biology Lab1041 Hazard Review DATE: April 19, 2004 This property is virtually surrounded by protected conservation lands. The J.H. Smith North Star Open Space lies to the north and west and parcels protected by Aspen Valley Land Trust and the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies lie to the southwest. The habitat on and around the property consists of cottonwood -blue spruce riparian forest, willow Carrs, sedge dominated emergent wetlands, and wet meadows. This interspersion of habitat types results in a very high level of biological diversity and is very sensitive to human disturbance. Ecological studies and inventories conducted at the North Star Nature Preserve (a'/e mile downstream) have found that these ecological communities support at least: 17 species of small mammals; at least 107 species of birds, more than 40 of which are known or likely to breed in the area; 13 medium to large mammals (e.g., elk, coyote, black bear, bobcat); 3 species of amphibian (including the boreal toad which is a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered Species Act "Candidate' species); and one reptile. In addition. the property lies within a broad active elk migration corridor between Richmond Ridge and Smuggler Mountain. Black bears are very active in this area. The application proposes a building envelope in the transition between riparian and upland habitat consisting of aspen, red -osier dogwood, narrowleaf cottonwood, willows, riparian grasses (e.g., tufted hairgrass), non-native pasture grasses, and some sedges. The rezoning of this property could result in a significant increase in the level of human activity and, consequently, greater impacts to the sensitive habitat on adjacent conservation lands. Given the above, the following conditions should be applied minimize impacts to wildlife: 1. The applicant must comply with all of the General Standards as described in §3-80.80(A) of the Land Use Code, 2. Dogs must be kenneled as per §3-80.80(C)(2) of the Land Use Code. 3. The 2001 Wildlife Protection Ordinance (# 010— 2001) requires installation and use of approved bear -proof trash containers or that trash is kept indoors until the day of pick-up. This property is adjacent to a very active black bear fall feeding area. Accordingly, bear - proof trash containers (rather than indoor storage) are highly recommended. 76 SERVICE CENTER ROAD • ASPEN, CO • 9 16 11 PHONE: 970/920•S395 • PAX: 970/920-5374 30 i-.;12 000017 4. All new fencing outside the building envelope must comply with Sections 3-80.80(A)(10) and 3-80.80(A)(11) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. Existing fences must be brought into compliance with current fence standards: Wood fencing shall employ three rails or less. be the round or split rail type, shall not exceed 48 inches in height above ground level and 12 inches in width (top view), and shall have at least 18 inches between two of the rails. Wire fencing shall consist of no more than 3 strands of smooth wire and shall not exceed 42 inches in height. 5. Fruit -bearing trees and shrubs should be avoided in any landscaping due to the high level of black bear activity in this area. 6. An orange safety fence must be required around the building site to prevent any unnecessary vegetation disturbance during construction, 7. Native vegetation must be maintained outside the building envelope as per Section 3- 80.80(A)(3). 8. Any wetland impact greater than 0.08 acres require notification of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) and application for a 404 Nationwide Permit. Verification of a USACE determination should be required prior to issuance of a building permit. 9. No riparian or wetland vegetation shall be damaged or removed as per Section 3- 80.80(0)(3) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. 10. Tall, overly mature and standing dead trees should be retained whenever possible as nesting and roosting habitat as per Section 3-80.80(A)(13) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. 11. Surface and ground water flows intercepted by roads, utility trenches and other development improvements shall not be diverted away from an existing wetland. 12. Activities below the seasonal high ground water table, decreases in infiltration and diversions of surface and ground water flows with drainage ditches or fill shall be prohibited outside the building envelope. 13. Only plant species that are identified by the Pitkin County Revegetation Guide as being appropriate for wetland or riparian areas, or native species found to occur on site but not listed in the Pitkin County Revegetation Guide, may be introduced into or used for revegetation any wetland or riparian area, The planting or introduction of any other plant species should be prohibited. 14. A silt fence is required between any construction and all bodies of water during all phases of contraction to avoid impacts to wetlands. Silt fences must meet the guidelines in the 2004 Pitkin County Assets Management Plan. 15. Any riparian or wetland areas disturbed during construction must be revegetated with 30 i'�" 13 w ldbfe.doc 000018 native riparian plants according to a revegetation and mitigation plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the Wildlife Program prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy as per §3-80.80(A)(4) of tate Pitkin County Land Use Code. 16. Any areas permanently impacted by construction or construction related activities must be mitigated at a 1.5:1 ratio immediately adjacent to or as close as possible to the impacted area according to a revegetation and mitigation plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the Wildlife Management Department prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy as per §3-80.80(A)(4) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. 17. Any revegetation and mitigation plan submitted must contain the following elements: A. The name of the project; B. The name, address and phone number of the person preparing the Revegetation Plan; C. The name, address and phone number of the person(s) responsible for executing the plan; D. if applicable, the availability of irrigation water and, if available, the amount of water, the name of the ditch company and the method of delivering water to the site; E. A brief narrative describing the planting and seeding methods; F. A description by common and scientific name of the species of plants to be used, seed ratios and source. and container size or caliper measurement of plants to be installed: G. A drawing of the site with the location of plants to be installed shown clearly. wddltfe.doc 000019 1).3 Warren Creek Mountain, LLC Wildlife & Ecological Assessment Regarding Domestic Dog 2estnctions Page 11 -- - - - ----- ----- --- --- - - -- BACKGROUND & QUALIFICATIONS Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC (CWS) is a small wildlife and ecological consulting firm based in Basalt, Colorado, specializing in wildlife research, management, and monitoring, ecological assessments, wetland & riparian delineations, conservation easement baseline inventories, ecological planning, habitat management, and ecological restoration. CWS applies a scientifically sound approach to biological resource studies and management. Our work combines professional integrity and strong academic training with extensive experience working for government, private, and non-profit clients. With an extensive network of professional collaborators that includes plant ecologists, foresters, hydrologists, and soil scientists, CWS leverages the collective knowledge of experienced professionals working toward practical, effective and cost saving solutions. CWS provides expert services to a diverse array of clients. Since we are a small company, personal attention is ensured. We combine full in-house GIS (ArcGIS) with real time, sub -meter GPS to provide state-of-the-art spatial data, analyses, maps, and presentations. We have prepared Biological Assessments and Biological Evaluations, and contributed to EAs and EISs. CWS has worked with large private firms such as Jacobs, Carter and Burgess, Parsons, CH2MHILL, and SAIC as well as city and county agencies and governments such as City of Aspen, City of Glenwood Springs, Pitkin County, Colorado Department of Transportation, and Roaring Fork Transportation Agency. CWS is currently collaborating on the Pitkin County Airport Wildlife Hazard Assessment. CWS has prepared over 60 conservation easement baseline and Present condition reports for 8 different conservation organizations in 5 western Colorado counties. Owner and Wildlife Biologist Jonathan Lowsky, M.S. Wildlife Biology, Colorado State University, has a broad range of knowledge. With more than 21 years of professional experience with federal (US Forest Service), state (Colorado Division of Wildlife), and county agencies as well as two major universities (Colorado State University and University of Washington), Jonathan's career has focused on a diverse array of wildlife from bighorn sheep, elk, and songbirds to northern goshawks, flying squirrels, small mammals, and spotted bats. Mr. Lowsky's experience includes biological assessments and evaluations for NEPA compliance, conservation planning, GIS mapping and modeling, wildlife research, and ecological monitoring design and implementation, as well as wetland and riparian delineations, evaluations, and restoration. He has authored management plans and conservation easement baseline inventory reports and published scientific papers. An expert birder, experienced tracker, certified wetlands delineator, trained fluvial geomorphologist, and passionate observer of wildlife, Jonathan has spent countless hours studying and appreciating Colorado's diverse ecological communities. A detailed description of Mr. Lowsky's professional experience and references are available. For additional information, please visit our website at www.coloradowildlifescience.com. 000020 P1, g4be&Wfft '*3 �1 c� 0'q RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITHIN COUNTY, COLORADO GRANTING APPROVAL TO ROBERT LEWIS FOR THE ASPEN FIELD BIOLOGY LABORATORY SPECIAL REVIEW, 1041 HAZARD REVIEW, CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION AND GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AN ESSENTIAL COMMUNITY FACILITY Resolution No. 10( -2004 RECITALS The Aspen Field Biology Laboratory and Robert Lewis ("Applicant') have applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado ("BOCC") for special review approval for an "indoor research facility." The Aspen Field Biology Laboratory ("AFBL") provides facilities and financial support for research in the biological sciences. The primary goal of AFBL is "to provide a working environment for selected scientists who, through their field research, will contribute to finding scientific solutions to issues of concern in stream ecology, plant ecology, migratory deer herds, forest ecology, water resources and noxious weeds." The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals: A. Special Review for an indoor research facility B. GMQS Exemption for an essential community facility C. 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission to establish a building envelope. D. Special Review for a Caretaker Dwelling Unit 2. The property is located at 44010 East Highway 82, south of the North Star Preserve and James H. Smith Open Space, and is more specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. The property contains a 2,810 square foot residence that was constructed in 1962. The residence contains 3 bedrooms and the offices and meeting room for AFBL. AFBL has been in existence on the property since 1962, and has been the headquarters for the Brail Trail, Wildwood School, Environmental Research Group, Independence Pass Foundation and a biology film studio. 4. The Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission considered the proposed application at regularly scheduled meetings on May 4 and 18, 2004, and recommended approval by a vote of 3-0. 5. The BOCC considered the proposed application -at a duly noticed public hearing on June 23, 2004. 6. The BOCC finds that the application is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Pitkin County Land Use Code ("Code"), including Section 9-110-053, standards for a GMQS exemption for an essential community facility, and that the proposed development avoids 1041 hazard areas OR is located such that hazards can be mitigated. 7. The BOCC further finds that the proposed use complies with the special review criteria in Section 3- 210 of the Code and is compatible with the character of the surrounding area, since the AFBL facilities will look and function in a similar manner as a single family residence, and that the impacts will be equal to or less than those generated by a single family residence. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the BOCC that it hereby grants approval to Robert Lewis for the Aspen Field Biology Laboratory, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: ` 1. Approval is granted for operation of the Aspen Field Biology Laborafory as follows: O U U U� SIIII I lilil [IIIiI II III f III I[ ILII III �Iif III Ilii 0 Page: I of 7 8© 0440 0:22 Resolution Na/OI -2004 Page 2 A. A maximum of 3 visiting researchers shall be allowed to stay on-site each year from May I to -November 1. B. AFBL shall maintain a vehicle(s) on-site for use by the visiting researchers. Visiting researchers shall be prohibited from bringing their personal vehicles to the site. C. Three on-site parking spaces, plus one additional space for the caretaker unit, shall be provided. Additional parking shall be considered or an alternate plan provided if determined necessary during the annual review. Parking shall be prohibited within the highway right-of-way. D. AFBL shall be limited to a maximum of 2 employees, exclusive of visiting researchers. E. Seminars, lectures, classes, and similar activities shall be prohibited. No more than 4 local school groups may visit the site each year with no more than 25 students per visit. 2. The facilities may be used year-round as the residence of the AFBL Director and as the administrative center of the AFBL. Only one kitchen is permitted within the facilities; an additional kitchen is permitted in the CDU. 3. Prior to submission of any earthmoving, access, or building permit applications for new development, the Applicant shall submit the 1014 hazard review site plan to the Community Development Department for approval and recording. The mylar copy of the site plan must be signed by the owners prior to submittal for recording. 4. Prior to submission of a septic permit, the Applicant shall provide documentation to the Environmental Health Department of an adequate quality and quantity of water for the expanded use from the existing well. 5. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the Applicant shall: A. Obtain approval of a septic permit from the Environmental Health Department to expand the existing system. The system must be designed by a registered professional engineer and shall be located within the approved building envelope. B. Obtain fireplace/woodstove permits from the Community Development Department, if necessary. C. Pay the applicable road impact fee. D. Submit a comprehensive drainage and erosion control plan for the property for review and approval by the County Engineer. The plan shall demonstrate that the additional development will not increase off-site drainage impacts. E. Obtain a driveway/access permit from the County Engineer for improvements to the driveway. F. Submit a landscaping plan for review and approval by Community Development staff. G. Submit deed restrictions to the Housing Office and County Attorney for review and recordation.The deed restrictions shall ensure that the three additional bedrooms will be occupied only by visiting researchers from May I to November 1, and will not be rented to or occupied by anyone not associated with AFBL or outside of the specified timeframe. 6. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or construction activity, the Applicant shall stake the corners of the building envelope and install construction fencing around the perimeter of the building envelope. The fencing shall remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the residence. 7. The Applicant shall ensure that the driveway, parking spaces and fire access are accessible to vehicles in the winter. I�EIII illll Illllf III! III!! IIIIIfI IIIII ill iilll II If100 �Q8 5 0 6 t6.22 000022 0 L - Resolution No.)D1 -2004 Page 3 8. All sigris and lighting shall comply with applicable regulations in the Land Use Code. 9. The Applicant shall comply with the County's Weed Management Plan. 10. No development, including grading, excavation, fill placement, berming, landscaping, vegetation removal or disturbance, utility or driveway extension, or septic system shall occur outside of the approved building envelope. 11. All areas disturbed by construction shall be revegetated with native shrubs and grasses to limit water consumption and additional runoff within one growing season of the project's completion. 12. The Applicant shall comply with the following landscaping and wildfire defensible space mitigation standards: A. For a distance of 10-15' around all structures, maintain vegetation ata height of 6" or less with mowed grass, low growing perennials or hardscape. Woody vegetation shall not be planted within this perimeter. B. Vegetation shall be reduced to break up the vertical and horizontal continuity of the fuels a- distance of 100 feet on the downhill side and 75 feet uphill and to the sides of all structures. C. Spacing between clumps of brush and vegetation within the perimeter specified above shall be a minimum of two times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the clumps shall be two times the height of the fuel. All measurements shall be from the edges of the crowns of the fuel. D. All branches from trees and brush within the perimeter shall be pruned to a height of 10 feet above the ground and ladder fuels from around trees and brush shall be removed. E. Tree crown separation within the perimeter shall have a minimum of 10 feet between the edges of the crowns. F. All branches that extend over the roof eaves shall be trimmed and all branches within 15 feet of the chimneys shall be removed. G. The density of fuels within a 100 foot perimeter of all structures shall be reduced. H. All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed. 1. The Applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space vegetation requirements. 13. The Applicant shall comply with the following additional wildfire mitigation standards: A. Roofs shall be constructed with a Class A roof covering or a Class A assembly as defined in the UBC 1997 Section 1504. Wood shake/shingle roof coverings are prohibited. Roofs with less than a 3:12 pitch are not permitted unless they comply with the following: 1) All roof coverings shall be noncombustible materials as defined in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) 1997 Section 1504 and installed on a Class A roof assembly. 2) All roof coverings shall have a surface that shall facilitate the natural process of clearing the roof. 3) All roof designs shall facilitate the natural process of clearing roof debris. Protrusions above the roofline, such as parapets, shall be prohibited. 4) Roofs shall be installed as required by UBC 1997 Chapter 15 and shall hav@ a minimum slope of 1:48. 5) All roof designs, coverings, or equivalent assemblies shall be specifically approved by the Fire Marshal prior to submittal of a building permit application. B. Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh with mesh '/, inch maximum. C. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris. D. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable debris. 000023 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111110 8o©ge 410:22 ,� 6 Resolution No.101 -2004 Page 4 E. All flammable materials and firewood/wood piles shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from any structure. F. -Swimming pools or ponds shall be accessible to Fire Department vehicles. G. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris. H. Wood fences shall not connect to the structure. 1. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container. J. Propane tanks shall be installed according to NFPA 48 standards and on a contour away from the structure with standard defensible space vegetation mitigation around any above -ground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall be constructed with materials approved for 2 hour fire -resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls. K. Each structure shall have a minimum of one 10 pound approved ABC fire extinguisher placed in a visible and accessible location. L. Addresses shall be clearly marked with 2 inch non-combustible letters and shall be visible and installed on a non-combustible post. M. New utility lines shall be placed underground within the driveway/access. 14. The Applicant shall comply with the following to mitigate impacts on wildlife: A. Dogs shall be prohibited. B. No riparian or wetland vegetation shall be damaged or removed. Any wetlands or riparian vegetation removed, filled, or otherwise damaged without prior approval must be mitigated at a ratio of 1.5:1 according to a professional mitigation plan submitted to and approved by the County. C. Silt fences shall be installed according to the County standard between any construction and any body of permanent or ephemeral water body during all phases of construction (See Pitkin County Asset Management Plan for silt fence standard). D. Wood fencing shall employ three rails or less, be the round or split rail type, shall not exceed 48 inches in height above ground level and 12 inches in width (top view), and shall have at least 18 inches between two of the rails. Wire fencing shall consist of no more than 3 strands of smooth wire and shall not exceed 42 inches in height. All non -conforming fencing on the property shall be brought into compliance within one year from the date of this approval. E. Native vegetation shall be maintained outside the building envelope. F. Install and use approved bear -proof trash containers as required by the 2001 Wildlife Protection Ordinance. Verification of this condition is required before issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first new structure on the property.. G. Fruit -bearing trees and shrubs should be avoided in any landscaping due to the high level of black bear activity in this area. - H. Any areas disturbed outside the building envelope shall be revegetated with native plants according to a revegetation plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the County prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Only plant species that are identified by the Pitkin County Revegetation Guide as being appropriate for wetland or riparian areas, or native species found to occur on site but not listed in the Pitkin County Revegetation Guide, may be introduced into or used for revegetation of any wetland or riparian area. The planting or introduction of any other plant species is prohibited. 1. Tall, overly mature and standing dead trees should be retained whenever possible as nesting and roosting habitat as per Section 3-80.80(A)(13) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. J. Surface and ground water flows intercepted by roads, utility trenches and other development improvements shall not be diverted away from an existing wetland. K. Activities below the seasonal high ground water table, decreases in infiltration and diversions of surface and ground water flows with drainage ditches or fill shall be prohibited outside the building envelope. 500856 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlIIIIIlIIIIIIII VIIIIIIVIIIIIi1111100 Page: 00002 . , Resolution No./0/ -2004 Page 5 15. To mitigate for potential debris flow from Warren Creek. the Applicant shall construct walls or berms along the southern boundary of the property, pursuant to a plan prepared by a registered professional engineer or geologist. In addition, windows and doors shall be located at least 3 feet above grade on the sides of the buildings adjacent to the drainage. 16. The caretaker dwelling unit shall be limited to 700 net livable square feet and the kitchen shall contain a minimum of a two homer stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6 cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer. One off-street parking space shall be provided for the unit. 17. Prior to submission of any building permits for the caretaker unit, the Applicant shall obtain and the Housing Office shall record a caretaker dwelling unit deed restriction. Actual floor plans of the unit shall be submitted to the Housing Office with the deed restriction. 18. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the caretaker dwelling unit, the Housing Office shall inspect the unit. 19. This permit for an indoor research facility shall expire five years from the date of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the three additional bedrooms. The Applicant shall submit an application to extend the permit at least 6 months prior to the expiration of the permit, which application shall be reviewed by the BOCC at a public hearing. The application to extend the permit shall address in detail the special review standards in the Land Use Code at that time in addition to the annual report requirements specified below. 20. The Applicant shall submit an annual report to the Community Development Director at least 45 days prior to the anniversary of the BOCC's approval, which documents uses, activities and site development that have occurred. The Community Development Director shall refer the annual report to the East Aspen Caucus for review and comment. The report shall include, but not be limited to the following: A. Actual traffic generation. B. Number of employees. C. Number of visiting researchers and length of stay. D. Conformance with conditions of approval. E. Parking. F. Number of school group visits and number of students with each group. 21. Violation of the terms of this special review permit maybe grounds for revocation of the permit. The Community Development Director shall determine if an alleged violation warrants consideration by the BOCC, in which case the BOCC shall consider and act on permit withdrawal after a public hearing, notice of which shall be mailed to the Applicant and published in a newspaper of general circulation in the County no less than 30 days prior to the hearing. 22. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in the application or in public meetings or hearings and shall consider those representations to be conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions. 23. Statutory vested rights for the approvals contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitkin County Land Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitkin County Land Use Code, § 4-140 and C.R.S., § 24-68-105. The statutoryvested rights granted herein shall expire on June 23, 2007. IIII ILII III IIII II{ fl �It IIIA III III�I Ilii Ilf 8°��e610:22���� i COR 0.00 D 0.00 000025 Resolution No.fpL-2004 Page 6 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TAVIES WEEKLY on the 22'" day of May, 2004. APPROVED AND ADOPTED on the 23`d day of June, 2004. PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS in the Aspen Times Weeld on the —day of ZjXV 12004. APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Ci y ouben Community Development Director P033-04 PID 4273720400014 000026 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Dorothea awls, Chalr APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely Cott' '** 'ttomey 856 �Q8004 10:22 SILVIR DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 0.00 D 0.00 C LEGAL DFSCR/PT70N— .Ey k � t i A- A tract of land being pad ofLot20 and Lot 21, Section 20, Township 10 Soutar, Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Mardian, described more fully as follows: Beginning at a point being the Intersection ofthe south boundary line of Lot21 with the west right-of-wayline of Colorado Haghway82,• thence N89 20n0"W a distance of474.16 feetalong the south line of Lot 21 and Lot 20 to a point on the easterly line of the Joy Smith Propedyas described an that Improvement Survey recorded at Reception No. 459080 thence,- N00 00VOEa distance of 200.00 feet along the easterlylane of said Joy Smith Properly, thence N90 00770 Ea distance of 1 f3.22 feet along a southerfyline of said Joy Smith Property to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 20,- thence N05 003781E a distance of 18.90 feet along said easterly fine to a point in that fence described at Reception No. 459082,• thence the follow four (4) courses along said fence Tine, - N83482B Ea distance of 184.50 feet Hence S78 48'15Ea distance of 46.89 feet- thence S7710726 Ea distance of87.73 feet, thence S02,42:93 Ea d1manca of 10.09 feet, thence N9000'00Ea distance of 9.73 feet to a point on said west rightof-wayline of Colorado Highway 82," thence the folbtwng Avo courses along said wastdght-of- way line of Colorado Highway V SO4 23n0 Ea distance of 18.60 feet, d5ence 190.10 along the an: of curve to the lett hewing a radius of 985.00 fee4 a cenba/angle of 11'0328'the chord of which bears S09 54%45 Ea distance of 189.80 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 2.306 acres more or less 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 0.00 500656 Page: 7 of 7 06/17/2004 10:22 0 0.00 000027 �% Administrative Decision No.� 72006 't �1 «``"+ RECITALS T� Pursuant to Section 3-200-080 of the Land Use Code, Stella Polare LLC ("Applicant") has applied to the Community Development Director of Pitkin County, Colorado ("Director") to amend the prior approval for the Aspen Field Biology Laboratory ("AFBL") to eliminate the potential use of the property for the AFBL and the conditions related thereto, and to "convert" the approval in order to develop a single family residence on the property. The Applicant also proposes to amend the site plan to designate a development envelope in place of a portion of the access envelope; the building envelope will remain the same as previously approved. 2. The parcel is located at 44010 East Highway 82, and is more specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. The parcel is zoned AFR-10 and contains 2.306 acres. 4. The Board of County Commissioners granted the following approvals to the AFBL pursuant to Resolution No. 101-2004: Special Review for an indoor research facility and a caretaker dwelling unit, GMQS exemption for an essential community facility, and 1041 hazard review and conceptual submission to establish a building envelope. The 1041 site plan was recorded in Plat Book 71 at Page 43. 5, The Director finds that the proposed amendments to eliminate the conditions related to use of the property by the AFBL are appropriate, given that the new owners do not intend to continue the research facility use, and that the use of the property for a single family residence and caretaker unit is consistent with the zone district and the surrounding uses, and is supported by the East Aspen Caucus. 6, The Director further finds that the proposed amendment to the access envelope will not change the use of the proposed development or the basic character of the land, is consistent with action taken during the original review, does not increase off-site impacts or the allowable floor area, and will not endanger the public health, safety or welfare. 7. The Director further finds that the proposed amendment will not create any additional impacts on 1041 hazard review areas, and that the prior approval, as it relates to construction of a new single family residence and caretaker dwelling unit, shall remain vested until June 23, 2007. THE DIRECTOR DOES HEREBY APPROVE the Stella Polare LLC Minor Amendment, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: 1. The conditions of this Administrative Decision shall replace the conditions of BOCC Resolution No. 101-2004. II I 525181 IIIIIIIIIII� I�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIII�IIIIVIIIIIIIII�I 0 06%13/20 00 1.40 JANICE K VDS CAUDI 000028 Site Plan to the Community Development Department for approval and recording. The mylar copy of the site plan must be signed by the owner(s) prior to submittal for recording. 3. Prior to submission of aseptic permit, the Applicant shall provide documentation to the Environmental Health and Natural Resources Department of an adequate quality and quantity of water. 4. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the Applicant shall: A. Obtain approval of a septic permit from the Environmental Health and Natural Resources Department to expand or replace the existing system. The system must be designed by a registered professional engineer and shall be located within the approved building or development envelopes. B. Obtain fireplace/woodstove permits from the Community Development Department, if necessary. C. Pay the applicable road and housing impact fees. D. Submit a comprehensive drainage and erosion control plan for the property for review and approval by the County Engineer. The plan shall demonstrate that the additional development will not increase off-site drainage impacts. E. Obtain a driveway/access permit from the County Engineer for improvements to the driveway. F. Submit a landscaping plan for review and approval by Community Development staff. 5. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or construction activity, the Applicant shall stake the corners of the building envelope and install construction fencing around the perimeter of the building envelope. The Applicant shall install silt fencing along the western boundary of the building envelope adjacent to the wetlands. The fencing shall remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the residence. 6. All signs and lighting shall comply with the applicable regulations in the Land Use Code. 7. The Applicant shall comply with the County's Weed Management Plan. 8. No development, including grading, excavation, fill placement, berming, landscaping, vegetation removal or disturbance, utility or driveway extension, or septic system shall occur outside of the approved building or development envelopes. 9. All areas disturbed by construction shall be revegetated with native shrubs and grasses to limit water consumption and additional runoff within one growing season of the project's completion. 10. The Applicant shall comply with the following landscaping and wildfire defensible space mitigation standards: A. For a distance of 10-15' around all structures, maintain vegetation at a height of 6" or less with mowed grass, low growing perennials or hardscape. Woody vegetation shall not be planted within this perimeter. B. Vegetation shall be reduced to break up the vertical and horizontal continuity of the fuels a minimum of a 30 foot perimeter around all structures. 000029 of two times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the clumps shall be two times the height of the fuel. All measurements shall be from the edges of the crowns of the fuel. D. All branches from trees and brush within the 30 foot perimeter shall be pruned to a height of 10 feet above the ground and ladder fuels from around trees and brush shall be removed. E. Tree crown separation within the 30 foot perimeter shall have a minimum of 10 feet between the edges of the crowns. F. All branches that extend over the roof eaves shall be trimmed and all branches within 15 feet of the chimneys shall be removed. G. The density of fuels within a 100 foot perimeter of all structures shall be reduced. H. All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed. I. The Applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space vegetation requirements. 2. The Applicant shall comply with the following additional wildfire mitigation standards: A. Roofs shall be constructed with a Class A roof covering or a Class A assembly as defined in the International Building Code (IBC) Section 1505.2. Wood shake/shingle roof coverings are prohibited. Roofs with less than a 3:12 pitch are not permitted unless they comply with the following: 1) All roof coverings shall be noncombustible materials and installed on a Class A roof assembly. 2) All roof coverings shall have a surface that shall facilitate the natural process of clearing the roof. 3) All roof designs shall facilitate the natural process of clearing roof debris. Protrusions above the roofline, such as parapets, shall be prohibited, 4) Roofs shall be installed as required by the adopted building code and shall have a minimum slope of 1:48. 5) All roof designs, coverings, or equivalent assemblies shall be specifically approved by the Fire Marshal prior to submittal of a building permit application. B. Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh with mesh '''A inch maximum. C. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris. D. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable debris. E. All flammable materials and firewood/wood piles shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away from any structure. F. Swimming pools or ponds shall be accessible to Fire Department vehicles. G. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris. H. Wood fences shall not connect to the structure. I. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container. J. Propane tanks shall be installed according to NFPA 48 standards and on a contour away from the structure with standard defensible space vegetation mitigation around any above -ground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall be constructed with materials approved for 2 hour fire - resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls. K. Each structure shall have a minimum of one 10 pound approved ABC fire extinguisher placed in a visible and accessible location. L. Addresses shall be clearly marked with 2 inch non-combustible letters and shall be visible and installed on a non-combustible post. 000030 l 1. The Applicant shall comply with the following to mitigate impacts on wildlife: A. Dogs shall be prohibited. B. No riparian or wetland vegetation shall be damaged or removed. Any wetlands or riparian vegetation removed, filled or otherwise damaged without prior approval must be mitigated at a ratio of 1.5:1 according to a professional mitigation plan submitted to and approved by the County. C. Silt fences shall be installed according to the County standard between any construction and any body of permanent or ephemeral water body during all phases of construction. D. Wood fencing shall employ three rails or less, be the round or split rail type, shall not exceed 48 inches in height above ground level and 12 inches in width (top view), and shall have at least 18 inches between two of the rails. Wire fencing shall consist of no more than 3 strands of smooth wire and shall not exceed 42 inches in height. Non -conforming fencing on the property shall be brought into compliance prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new residence. E. Native vegetation shall be maintained outside of the building envelope. F. Install and use bear -proof trash containers as required by the County's Wildlife Protection Ordinance. Verification of compliance with this condition is required before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the residence. G. Fruit -bearing trees and shrubs should be avoided in any landscaping, due to the high level of black bear activity in this area. H. Any areas disturbed outside of the building envelope shall be revegetated with native plants according to a revegetation plan submitted by the Applicant and approved by the County prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Only plant species that are identified by the Pitkin county Revegetation Guide as being approved for wetland or riparian areas, or native species found to occur on site but not listed in the Guide, may be introduced into or used for revegetation of any wetland or riparian area. The planting or introduction of any other plant species is prohibited. I. Tall, overlay mature and standing dead trees should be retained whenever possible as nesting and roosting habitat as per Section 3-80.80(Ax 13) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. J. Surface and ground water flows intercepted by roads, utility trenches and other development improvements shall not be diverted away from an existing wetland. K. Activities below the seasonal high ground water table, decreases in infiltration and diversions of surface and ground water flows with drainage ditches or fill shall be prohibited outside the building and development envelopes. 12. To mitigate for potential debris flow from Warren Creek, the Applicant shall construct walls or berms along the southern boundary of the property, pursuant to a plan prepared by a registered professional engineer or geologist. In addition, windows and doors shall be located at least 3 feet above grade on the sides of the building adjacent to the drainage. 13. The caretaker dwelling unit shall be limited to 1,000 net livable square feet and the kitchen shall contain a minimum of a two bumer stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6 cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer. One off-street parking space shall be provided for the unit. 14. Prior to submission of any building permits for the caretaker unit, the Applicant shall obtain and the Housing Office shall record a caretaker dwelling unit deed restriction. Actual floor plans of the unit shall be submitted to the Housing Office with the deed restriction. 000031 I S. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the caretaker dwelling unit, the Housing Office may inspect the unit. 16. The Applicant shall comply with the codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District, including but not limited to provision of adequate emergency access and water supply. 17. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in the application. APPROVED by the Director, this 41�,,day of 2006. -;Z, AA Q. 6 901W Cind HVben, Community evelopment Director PID #273720400014; Case #P130-06 IIID III I IIIIII II I IIIIIII IIID VIII III VIII IIII IIII525181 06/13/2006 01:4e JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 0.00 D 0.00 000032 Beginning at a point being the intersection of the south boundary line of Lot 21 with the west right-of-way of Colorado Highway 82; thence North 89°20'00" West a distance of 474.16 feet along the south line of Lot 21 and Lot 20 to a point on the easterly line of the Joy Smith Property as described in that Improvement Survey recorded at Reception No. 459080; thence North 00000'00" East a distance of 200.00 feet along the easterly line of said Joy Smith Property; thence North 90°00'00"Bast a distance of 113.22 feet along a southerly line of said Joy Smith Property to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 20; thence North 05°03' 18" East a distance of 18.90 feet along said easterly line to a point in that fence described at Reception No. 459082; thence the following four (4) courses along said fence line; North 83148'28" East a distance of 184.50 feet; thence South 78°48' 15" East a distance of 46.89 feet; thence South 77°07'26" East a distance of 87.73 feet; thence South 02°42'33" East a distance of 10.09 feet; thence North 90°00'00" East a distance of 9.73 feet to a point on said west right-of-way line of Colorado Highway 82; thence the following two (2) courses along said west right-of-way line of Colorado Highway 82; South 04°23'00" East a distance of 18.60 feet; thence 190.10 along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 985.00 feet a central angle of 11103'28" the chord of which bears S09154'45"E a distance of 189.80 feet to the point of beginning, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO (VIII IIIIIVIIIIIIIIIIOS IIIIIIII VIII VIII III VIIIIIII IIIIO 06/13/2006 800 1:42 000033 ♦'S RECEPTION#: 539200, 06/2112007 at 04:06:02 PM, 1 OF 3, R $0.00 Doc Code ADMIN DECISION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO DETERMINATION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF PITIQN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING THE STELLA POLARE LLC GMQS EXEMPTION AND SPECIAL REVIEW TO UTILIZE A TDR FOR ADDITIONAL FLOOR AREA FOR UP TO 8,250 SQUARE FEET Determination Noo�-2007 RECITALS 1. Stella Polare LLC ("Applicant") has applied to the Pitkin County Hearing Officer ("Hearing Officer") for GMQS Exemption & Special Review approval to utilize one TDR for Additional Floor Area up to 8,250 square feet. 2. The parcel is located at 44010 East Highway 82, and is more specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. The parcel is zoned AR -10 and contains 2.306 acres. 4. The Board of County Commissioners granted the following approvals to the parcel pursuant to Resolution No. 101-2004: Special Review for an indoor research facility and a caretaker dwelling unit, GMQS exemption for an essential community facility, and 1041 hazard review and conceptual submission to establish a building envelope. The 1041 site plan was recorded in Plat Book 71 at Page 43. The parcel was then sold, and the purchaser, Stella Polare LLC, applied for and received a minor amendment pursuant to Administrative Decision 50-2006. The Decision replaced the previous approval, and established a new building envelope and conditions of approval. 5. The Hearing Officer considered this application at a duly noticed public hearing on April 17, 2007, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application. 6. The Hearing Officer finds that the development is consistent with the Special Review criteria for a TDR receiver site, and that the proposed development otherwise complies with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Community Development Hearing Officer that he does hereby approve the Stella Polare LLC GMQS Exemption and Special Review to utilize a TDR for Additional Floor Area up to 8,250 square feet, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest. 1. The Applicant shall comply with provisions of Administrative Decision No. 50-2006, unless otherwise replaced or amended by the conditions of this approval. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall provide a visual mitigation plan that includes a landscape plan in conjunction with various height reductions to Community Development and City/County Open Space and Trails for review and approval. 3. At building permit application, the Applicant shall surrender one Certificate of TDR and a copy of the deed evidencing the Applicant's acquisition of the Certificate (if applicable), in order to construct additional floor area in excess of 5,750 square feet up to 8,250 square feet. 000034 Hearing Officer Determination No. OIA-2007 -2007 Page 2 4. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in the current or prior applications or in public meetings or hearings and shall consider those representations to be conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions. 5. Statutory vested rights for the approval contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitkin County Land Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitkin County Land Use Code, § 4-140 and C.R.S., § 24-68-105. The statutory vested rights granted herein shall expire on April 17, 2010. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY on the 17i° day of September, 2006. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17'h day of April, 2007. PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS in the Asoen Times Weekly on theZ day ofL�O , 2007. ATTEST: ,1�L h ( " Bonnie Waechtler, Administrative Assistant APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely, County me P153-06 PID#273720400014 000035 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING OFFICER OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO By // — 17— James R. True, Hearing Officer Date U 1171 W APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ;��� L�ind� Houben, Community Development Director HQM U Vi - <�,Lt1 R: lot-soey LsgwDEsoi*77ov L+ j �da(rrdbe rrawrdca2nadtaz� Spdn20, roWW* YOSOdtRa 84116efdA5.MAiKWA*fdbnawv!q nwm Adyss A aenrni�p•r•aahtdaievsishairssalb�do'Jfsaorr,aoviDlryirsar i Laf2fWhBis~,4# cf-wyfxdG�danbH iwrYR�Mievlas A7rVs dffMK1 dl7t 1BA�a1ab��4esDc45ik►o/ Ld2f hdLof29b s pdXaD i'+a aaearry,Ns dOYs.bySmah Hgawyaa 4 Say. 'i a hdrt hq'vw►isnfS�neY%aDrc{rdafRba�gAb, �'ii1CM7 i Aer,>ati Aiw w w � • dRgwcr d2gROD ARefsgrp A4saeenlrfy670 d ! :sitobySaaPlSHWJArQ A4anarAfA17'CI�tADEadRisxtiGfIMMAwt i atVWRsarid &*AwvfWMAr&MAWw&A7apaNwAe eseAR'4 SWOfJMWLa2D; A)W=Ag9178y8'Saakfrmd19917&W Mxpeetiar�binsbapd�lh/1et6nns.i,.. ;...'afAbcyp6pt Ata �tsaaBx tlrwaga bts AabwAxr pJ causes sbro+ukf Aewe sr,4 AWv ad lb7Wd18#WAPStfiWW987r4f75V8d Wjmof �989iGeta7en�s,/ii �isocadfkrwde7.rsA►xabrxn I Si7?'4?93Fa ¢6dvRas d fgWfAdtA'lwwv AAD7YGg7'Ea dbdrnas d RT9 b•f ba pahf m Brad rast�M#wyix dQtbaD(D f!(�fiwy �+�f�6i+w8G4"1JGb'L�ao6drncwd 9f � �d 1917fOsbphsavedacow bariakAfwft&mdwvfmsi f7 +fitaaeni w4*difIRMYftdjoryo/ y�680agQgWWEN I d*VX@offB&A7be A2ftp!ahfdbffPW* c CVl)&h*rp 2JWap,w mare arAwa: I fILYIR OIIViR /IiRtN Cglny ry a a N a:Z7 D e.N 000036 17 RECEPTION#: 573025, utsiztilzu"lu at 09:04:09 AM, 1 OF 2, R $0.00 Doc Code ADMIN DECISION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, DENYING THE STELLA POLARE LLC MINOR AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW DOGS ON THE PARCEL Administrative Determination No. LQ(—�2010 RECITALS 1. Pursuant to Sections 2-20-150 and 7-20-70 of the Land Use Code, Stella Polare LLC ("Applicant") has applied to the Community Development Director of Pitkin County, Colorado ("Director") to amend the prior condition of approval to allow dogs on the parcel. 2. The parcel is located at 44010 East Highway 82, and is more specifically described in Exhibit A. 3. The parcel is zoned AFR-10 and contains 2.306 acres. 4. The Board of County Commissioners granted the following approvals to the Aspen Field Biology Lab pursuant to Resolution No. 101-2004: Special Review for an indoor research facility and a caretaker dwelling unit, GMQS exemption for an essential community facility, and 1041 hazard review and conceptual submission to establish a building envelope. The 1041 site plan was recorded in Plat Book 71 at Page 43. The parcel was then sold, and the purchaser, Stella Polare, LLC applied for and received a minor amendment pursuant to Administrative Decision No. 50-2006. The Decision replaced the previous approval, and established a new building envelope and conditions of approval. Pursuant to Hearing Officer Determination No. 014-2007, the Applicant obtained approval to utilize a TDR for additional floor area up to 8,250 square feet. 5. The Director finds that the proposed change to eliminate condition number 11 A of Administrative Determination No. 50-2006, the prohibition of dogs on the parcel is inappropriate, given that the parcel adjoins two open space parcels, the North Star Preserve and the James H. Smith Open Space. 6. The Director further finds that the proposed amendment could change the use of the proposed development or the basic character of the land and the surrounding area, and that the amendment is not consistent with action taken during the original review. THE DIRECTOR DOES HEREBY DENY the Stella Polare LLC Minor Amendment to a Development Permit to remove condition of approval #11 A of Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 to allow dogs on the parcel. APPROVED by the Director, this ` day of 2010. t-�d-P/sU Cindy Houben, Community Development Director PID #2737-204-00-014 Case #P047-10 000037 Administrative Decision No.0-2010 Page 2 Exhibit A Legal Description Section: 20 Township: 10 Range: 84 A TRACT 'BEING PART OF LOT 20 SEC 20-10-84 CONT 2.1 ACS IM/L DESC BK 295 PG 371 _i 000033 PITKIN COUNTY PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY LOCATION: 44010 Hwy 82 ZONE: AR -10 PID# 273720400014 OWNER: WARREN CREEK MOUNTAIN LLC or REPRESENTATIVE: Glenn Horn PHONE and EMAIL: 925-6587; ghan(a,rof.net DATE: June 9, 2014 (updated 7-30-2014) PLANNER: Mike Kraemer, 920.5482 Type of Application: Minor Amendment to a Development Permit Description of Project/Development: An application may be made to amend BOCC Resolution No. 101-2004 that prohibits dogs on the property. The owner was issued a Notice of Violation on May 22nd, 2014 that stated that dogs were present on the property. Land Use Code Sections to be addressed in letter of request (application): Sec. 2-20-150: Minor Amendments to a Development Permit Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: none. Review by: Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing: No. FEES: $2,247 (make check payable to "Pitkin County Treasurer") • Planning Office flat fee: $1,872 (non-refundable; based on 3 hours of staff time for review); 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) o BOCC Clerk Fee: $375 *Fines double for violations To apply, submit 6 unbound 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. Previous Land Use Approvals; 3. Disclosure and proof of ownership of the property, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company or attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property and all mortgagees, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting use and development of the parcel and proof of the owner's right to use the land for the purposes identified in the development application. 4. Parcel description, including legal description and vicinity map; 5. Total fee for review of the application; 6. Signed fee agreement (1 copy); 7. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (1 copy) 8. Copies of this pre -app form NOTES. ➢ PLEASE SUBMIT ONE UNBOUND AND ONE-SIDED COPY OF YOUR COMPLETE APPLICATION. PLEASE SUBMIT TWO-SIDED COPIES OFALL REMAINING COPIES OF YOUR APPLICATION (IFPOSSIBLE). THE PARCEL IDs SHOULD BE INCLUDED ONALL DOCUMENTS INCLUDED IN YOUR APPLICATION ➢ ALL MAPS SHALL BE FOLDED. ➢ This pre -application conference summary is advisory in nature and not binding on the County. The information provided in this summary is based on current zoning standards and staffs interpretations based upon representations of the applicant. Additional information may be required upon a complete review of the application. 000039 RECEPTION#:;. .d33, 0811112011 at 01:50:04 PM, 1 OF 3, R $21.00 OF $1350.00 Doc Code WD Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO WARRANTY DEED PHIS DEED, is dated the 11th day of August, 2011, and is made between stella Polare, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company be "Gondar," of the County of Pitkin and State of Colorado, and Narren Crack Mountain, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company At More roypMr is t State Doc Fee: $1,350.00 he "Grantee;' whose legal address is: 44010 Highway 82, Aspen, CO 81611 of the County of Pitkin and State of Colorado WffNESS, that the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ( $10.00 ) and other good and valuable ansideradon, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, bargains, sells, conveys and onfinms onto the Grantee and the Goatee's heirs and assigns forever, all the real property, together with improvements hereon, located in the County of Pitkin and State of Colorado described as follows: k tract of land being part of Lot 20 and Lot 21 of Section 20, Township 10 South, Lange 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, described neare fully as follows: 3egimdng at a point being the intersection of the south boundary line of Lot 21 with the west rigl of -way of Colorado dighway 82; hence North 89020.00" Wes[ a distance of 474.16 feet along the south line of Lot 21 and Lot 20 to a point on the easterly line sf the Joy Smith Property as described in that improvement Survey recorded at Reception No. 459080; hence North 00°00'00" East a distance of 200.00 feet along the easterly line of said Joy Smith Property; hence North 90°00'00"East a distance of 113.22 feet along a southerly line of said Joy Smith Property to a point on the sstedy, line of said Let 20; hence North 05'03'18" East a distance of 18.90 feet along said easterly line to a point in that fence described at Reception No. t59082; hence the following fora (4) courses along said fence line; Sorih 83048'28" East a distance of 184.50 fact; hence South 78-48'15" East a distance of 46.89 feet, hence Saudi 77°07'26' East a distance of 87.73 feet; hence South 02°42'33" East a distance of 10.09 feet ;hence North 90°00'00" East a distance of 9.73 feet to a point on said west right-of-way line of Colorado Highway 82; Oren the following two (2) coupes along said west right-of-way, line of Colorado Highway 82; South 04°23'00" East a distance of 18.60 feet thence 190.10 along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 985.00 feet a central angle of 11"03'28" the chord of which beats S09°54'45'T a distance of 189.80 feet to the point of beginning. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO also known bystraet and number as: 44010 & 440121Hghway 82, Aspen, CO 81611 TOGETHER with all and singular the hareditamens and appurnommces thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, the roversiooa, remainders, rens, issues and profits thorsot and all the este, right, tide, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the Grantor, aid= in law or equity, of in and to the show bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtammces; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenancea, unto the Grantee and the Grantee's heirs and assigns forever. The Graosr, for the Grantor and the Grantor's hcio and assigns, does coveawdt grant, bargain, and agree to and wnh the Grameg, and the Grantee's being and assigns, that at the time of the emealing and delivery of these presents, the Grantor is well seized of the premises above described; has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible este of inheritance, in law, in fee simple; and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey die same in manner and form as aforesaid; and that the same ars free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, Geos, taxes, assessments, incumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or name soarer, except and subject to those matters set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. , And the Grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above described premises, but nal my adjoining vacated street or alley, if any, in the quiet and peaceable possession of the Grantee and the heirs and assigns of the Grantee, against all and everyperms or person claiming the whole or my part thereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this deed an the date act forth above. OnI.Number. 949257-C2 Na. 932A Rev ILLa9 Werenty 0CW Tvr Photogvpluc P—eld) 00CC4fl-- - -- Page 1 oft No. 932A Rev(0-09. W..tyD.a (Fw Ph j.,Nc Record) Png loft 000041- N. 00041 EXHIBIT A EXCEPTIONS 1. Tares for the year 2011 and subsequent years not yet due and payable. 2. The effect of inclusion in the following tar districts: Pitkin County, Healthy Community Fund, Aspen Ambulance District, Open Space & Trails, Pitkin County library, Asp= Fire Protection, Aspen valley Hwprtal, Aspen School District, Colorado Mountain College, Colorado River Water Conservancy, Basalt Water Conservancy, Bear Aspen Metro District, Aspen historic District 3. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract end remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to Penetrate or intersect the premises and right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as reserved in United States Patent recorded to Book 55 at Page 265 on March 13, 1923. 4. Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1996 of the Board of County Commissioners recorded October 3, 1996 as Reception No. 397717. 5. Trail and Tails Facilities Easement Agreement recorded October 3, 1996 as Reception No. 397715. 6. Holy Cross Energy Underground Right -of -Way Easements recorded November 4, 1999 as Reception No. 437384. 7. Easements, rights of Way and all matters as shown on Lend Survey Plot recorded February 10, 2003 in Plat Book 64 at Page 35 as Reception No. 478492. 8. Administrative Decision No. 50-2006 by Community Development of Pitkin County Approving the Stella Polam LLC Minor Amendment to Development Permit recorded June 13, 2006 as Reception No. 525181. 9. Determination of the Community Development Dept Piticin County Approving the Stella Polare LLC GMQS Exemption recorded June 21, 2007 as Reception No. 539200. 10. Right of way easement to Holy Cross Energy recorded January 9, 2008 as Reception No. 545732. 11. Trench, Conduit and Vault Agreement recorded January 9, 2008 as Reception No. 545733. 12. Restrictive Covenants by Stella Polars LLC recorded November 6, 2007 as Reception No. 543885. 13. Order Concerning the Jnclusion of lands in the Basalt Wirer Conservancy District recorded January 23, 2008 ea Reception No. 546032 14. All matters shown on the 1041 Hazard Review Map Stella Polare LLC recorded in Plat Book 80 at Page 18. 15. Contract for Electric Service with Holy Cross Energy recorded November 18, 2009 as Reception No. 564619. 16. Administrative Determination by Community Development Director Pitkin County recorded August 26, 2010 as Reception No. 573026. 17. Occupancy Deed Restriction and Agreement recorded November 8, 2010 as Reception No. 574945. 18. Restrictive Covenant ea contained is the Deed recurded May 2, 2006 as Reception No. 523610. 19. Any rights, casements, interests or claims which may exist by reason of or reflected by the following facts shown on the survey dated 6/4/11 by Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. No. 40214: fence along the north and cast property boundaries sitting off of the property boundary line and right of way for the flow of Warren Creek crossing subject property and pond crossing unto adjoining property to the west; septic and patio partly outside of building envelope; 0,der Numb¢ 949257-Q Wa Dcd-IW,Nt 1(Paeepnone) Page I of] Warren Creek Mountain, LLC c/o Ephraim Gilder Manager 44010 Highway 82 Aspen, CO. 81611 August 25, 2014 Mike Kraemer City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Authorization to Submit a Land Use Application for the Warren Creek Mountain LLC Property on Highway 82 East of Aspen (Parcel ID #2737-204-00-041) Dear Mike: Warren Creek LLC is the owner of a property at 50 Warren Creek Lane in Aspen, CO, also known as 44010 Highway 82. As the manager of the LLC, I authorize Davis Hom Incorporated to submit a land use application on behalf of the Warren Creek Mountain, LLC and to represent the LLC in the land use review process. Glenn Hom or Alice Davis of Davis Hom Incorporated can be reached at 970 925-6587 and are located at 215 South Monarch Street Suite 104 in Aspen Colorado. The parcel identification number (PID) for the property is 2737-204-00-041. Sincerely, Warren Creek Mountain, LLC Ephraim Glldjor, Manager 000043 ,q.#p4lman+, '* lD PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENTOFLAND USE APPLICATION FEES PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter "COUNTY") and � � %Cil r Jl (rge F (hereinafter "APPLICANT') AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for I t oor Avner d waf- -b et- o(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 inconsideration 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 $ 2224''% which is based on 3 hours of staff time, and if actual time spent by staff to process the application exceeds the average number of hours by more than 20%, then the COUNTY will bill the APPLICANT quarterly for the additional time spent. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing. PITKIN COUNTY Cindy Houben Community Development Director 0.7ar-rtn CrreC� Mt�v in, �-►-C (`APPLICANT") By: E - h rQ i m G l y olbr, PAW N �e and Title (if ap 'saute) Fes- CLO blt � f IJ i(�l�tCEiO/1 Date: Mailing Address: 000044 PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 PHONE# (970) 920-5526/FAX# (970) 920-5439 October 12, 2014 Glenn Horn 215 South Monarch Street, Suite 4104 Aspen, CO 81611 ghorn@rofnet Re: Warren Creek Mountain LLC Minor Amendment to a Development Permit (PID#2737-2014-00-014; CASE# P080-14) Dear Mr. Horn: 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, November 5, 2014, at a meeting to begin at 12:00 P.M. in the Rio Grande Conference Room at 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 Mike Kraemer, the planner assigned to your case, at 920-5482. Sincerely, Bonnie Shiles Administrative Assistant PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone (970) 920-5526 FAX (970) 920-5439 MEMORANDUM TO: Colorado Parks and Wildlife Pitkin County Open Space and Trails FROM: Mike Kraemer, Community Development Department Michael kraemer(a�pitkincounty.com RE: Warren Creek Mountain LLC Minor Amendment to a Development Permit (CASE P080-14; PID 2737-204-00-014) DATE: October 12, 2014 Attached for your review are materials for an application submitted by Warren Creek Mountain LLC. The Board of County Commissioners will review the application on Wednesday, November 5, 2014. Please return your comments to me by Friday, October 24, 2014. http•//www aspenpitkin com/Portals/O/docs/count,//Com°/u2ODev/PlanninWLand Use Applications/ P080 14 app.pdf Thank you. ATTACHMENT 5 October 20, 2014 COLORADO Parks and Wildlife Department of Natural Resources Glenwood Springs Area Office 0088 wildlife Way Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Mike Kraemer Community Planner Pitkin County 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Warren Creek Mountain LLC Minor Amendment to Development Permit Dear Mike, Colorado Parks and Wildlife has reviewed the application for a minor amendment to a development permit for the property located at 44010 Highway 82. The applicant is requesting the removal of the dog prohibition and proposes to add a condition of approval to guarantee dogs will be kenneled at all times. After a review of the submitted materials, CPW does not object to the removal of the dog prohibition for this property as long as the recommendations made by Jcnathan Lowsky in his August 11, 2014 letter are adhered to. These recommendations include: 1. The fenced area (or "kennel") should employ physical dog -proof fencing encompassing a portion of the parcel; a. Invisible fence type barriers are not acceptable. 2. The kennel should be built so that it does not disrupt native vegetation. 3. The kennel should be set back a minimum distance of 25 feet perpendicular to the nearest boundary with the Open Space property so that the presence of dogs does not disrupt normal wildlife behavior on North Star. 4. Any dog(s) on the property must be leashed and under human supervision when outside the required kennel. 5. Guests must be required to comply with these restrictions. 6. All contractors, caretakers, or other service providers must be prohibited from bringing their dogs on site. Furthermore, all pet food should be stored indoors to eliminate attractants for bears and other wildlife. Wbt).B,.6d4D.evr Cebm&R k.a ,d WW*—PyhmdWitllifeC�11* iW aoy•Club Cm Iinsxwwy•Ja Ibm ea Aaa Clvi•Gagen ltniae•Ikk 15s1•Jases P�byl•Ixm V�pl•Oan WsgkW•Mcldle Lnm�ma. AIa LPP rr 1.76 I d ZI ounl1 Colorado Parks and Wildlife appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. If there are any questions or needs for additional information don't hesitate to contact Land Use Specialist, Taylor Elm at (970) 947-2971 or District Wildlife Manager, Kevin Wright at (970) 947-2938. Sincerely, 44t- erry Witl, Ar Wildlife Manager Cc. Kevin Wright, District Wildlife Manager Taylor Elm, Land Use Specialist File OU6012 2 ATTACHMENT —""Wciael Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> RE: 10/24/14 Due Pitkin County Land Use Warren Creek Mtn LLC Application 1 message Matt Adeletti<matt.adeletti@pitkincounty.com> Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:05 AM To: Bonnie Shiles <bonnie.waechtler@pitkincounty.com> Cc: Michael Kraemer <michael.kraemer@pitkincounty.com> Hi Bonnie, Open Space and Trails is 100% against allowing dogs on this property. The prohibition was put in place at the time because it was a part of the entire application, and it was one of the items negotiated to and agreed upon by all the parties involved which allowed development by the landowner at the time and this was one of the conditions of that agreement. This property is bounded on the north, south and southwest by the Northstar Open Space Preserve, and a considerable amount of environmental survey work was accomplished to determine that the Preserve is a significant and sensitive wildlife habitat area. Allowing dogs on this property would go against that earlier agreement and would subvert all of the environmental impact studies that state this property should not have dogs on it. Another aspect is that there is the possibility that dogs could leave their kennels or get free from their leashes and get onto the Preserve, and the only way to monitor this activity would be to have our Open Space and Trails Rangers continually monitor this activity, which of course they cannot do. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks You Matt Adeletti Matthew F. Adeletti Acquisition Manager Pitkin County Open Space and Trails 530 E. Main Street Suite 300 Aspen Colorado 81611 U00Uu10 970-429-2796 matt.adeletti.@pitkincounty.com lo Name: Project Address Type: Permit Number 0080.2014.PLAN 0080.2014.PLAN PITKIN G,.,,UNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOOMENT Permit Receipt RECEIPT NUMBER 00036773 WARREN CREEK MOUNTAIN LLC Date:9/12/2014 44010 HWY 82 check # 120 Fee Description Amount PP- Flat Fee 1,872.00 PP- Clerk Fee 375.00 Total: 2,247.00