HomeMy WebLinkAboutadditional_exhibitsADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT THE APRIL 06, 2004 PITKIN
COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL MEETING
EXHIBIT AGENDA ITEM EXHIBIT DATE
NO.
A Conundrum Retreats Letter from Marta Steinmetz April 12, 2004
to Board of County
Commissioners
B Conundrum Retreats Letter from Matra Steinmetz April 14, 2004
to Board of County
Commissioners
C Elam Gravel Pit Special Review Letter from Michael M. April 12, 2004
Owsley, Chairman Woody
Creek Caucus Planning
Commission
D Airport Master Plan Letter from George April 8, 2004
Stranahan, Co-Chair,
Woody Creek Caucus
From: Rev Marta Steinmetz <revmarta~sopris.net>
To: "Jeanette Jones" <jeanette~ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: 4-14-04 1041 Conundrum Retreats LLC/Heidi Houston - Steinmetz Issues-
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 10:19:30 -0600
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MX-Spam: final=0.0090000000; heur=0.5000000000(1900); stat=0.0090000000; spamtraq-
heur=0.5000000000(2004041301)
X-MX-MAIL-FROM: <revmarta~sopris.net>
X-MX-SOURCE-IP: [216.237.72.68]
X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Page 1 of 4
4-12-04
Maria Steinmetz
Box 325
Aspen Co 81612
970-925-7663 x 10
970-925-6831 Fx
revmarta@sopris.net
Pitkin County 1041 Planning Process
Conundrum Retreats LLC
Heidi Houston
0757 Conundrum Rd
The Steinmetz property is connected to Conundrum Road by a driveway
easement Bk 225 Pg 87 the full length of the Houston property at the base of the
hillside we have in common.
It is my understanding that Heidi Houston wishes to make changes to my entrance
easement of 37 years.
The changes will be acceptable, 'IF' the following is taken into consideration.
PART ONE- 2 PARKING AREAS, 2 SNOW STORAGE AREAS, 2 FIRE BREAK-
BERMS AND 1 TURN AROUND
It has been my experience after living on my property for 44 years that:
I Our 2 parcels receive more snow than any other place in the Conundrum
Valley. Please see the 6 attached pictures of snow in my driveway, taken 3-16-04
of this year and the Topog Map of the Driveway Easement, Bk 225 Pg 87, showing
Fire Berms, Parking, Snow Storage and large vehicle Turn Around.
2 My plow men over the years have required more 'snow storage' both temporary
and long term than the rest of the Conundrum Valley.
file://C:\DOCUME- 1 \j eanette\LOCALS- 1 \Temp\eud 19.htm 4/13/2004
Page 2 of 4
3 FIRST FEATURE of my driveway easement is the 'Straight a Way' parking-
snow storage area with Fire Break-Berm. It is derived from 37 years of experience
and use. It is a strip 10'X100 along the Creek side or right side of the driveway
150' from the entrance with the Berm to the right side of the strip.
The temporary snow storage area is at the end of the strip closest to the
Conundrum Rd. The parking is mainly at the end closest to the Steinmetz property.
After the temporary snow storage area becomes full we bring in a loader and place
the snow on top of the berms to make room for more temporary snow. This has to
be done once a month on average.
Both Fire Break-Berms provide protection from the dense stand of timber creekside
of the driveway in case of Wildfire. It is kept wet with a soaker hose during the Fire
Season.
Heidi intends to remove the existing berms to install her septic system, afterwhich,
she wants to replace them and replace the soaker hose with an irrigation system.
This will be an acceptable use of the 'Straight a Way', 'IF'
1 The berms don't get moved off their current location.
2 The amount of parking and snow storage is not diminished, relocation is open
for discussion, perhaps on the other side of the driveway.
3 A survey map is provided.
The purpose of this parking-snow storage area is to facilitate efficient snow
removal. When the plow comes, its first job is to clean out the 'Striaght a Way', in
other words to allow for 'Musical Cars'.
This allows us to move our vehicles out of the plows way long enough for them to
do a good job. We move the vehicles often enough to keep the access relatively
clean, that might mean once a week with only a few inches per snowfall and even
up to several times a day depending on the quantity of snowfall.
The plow as well as the emergency vehicles and all of us driveway users depend
on this parking-snow storage feature of the driveway to guarantee a FUNCTIONAL
ACCESS.
4 Parking for emergency vehicles is another purpose of this parking-snow storage
area. In 1994 the Mountain Rescue and Sheriffs Department made good use of
that area when they came to retrieve the body of my friend in the teepee that the
avalanche had taken out. That amounted to 10 vehicles.
6 SECOND FEATURE of my driveway easement is a 'Scoop Out' parking-snow
storage area and Fire Break-Berm with 'large vehicle' Turn Around. It is also on the
right side of the driveway about 15' from the Steinmetz/Houston common
file://C:\DOCUME- 1 \j eanette\LOCALS- 1 \Temp\eud 19.htm 4/13/2004
Page 3 of 4
boundary. It is 60' wide and 40' deep.
Heidi wants to replace the current driveway with a new Loop-Through Drive to
accomodate the needs of the Fire Dept.
It will be acceptable to relocate my 'Scoop Out' parking-area to a site along our
common boundary, 'IF':
1 The amount of parking is not diminished.
2 The amount of snow storage is not diminished.
3 A survey map is provided.
PART TWO - Steinmetz Water structures and easements on Houston Property
1 There are 2 Steinmetz Water structures on the Houson property, one is 3/4 of
the Steinmetz lower pond and the Steinmetz outflow ditch. These Structures are
fully adjudicated by the Co Water Court in the Steinmetz name and come with
maintenance easements as in dredging, pest or beaver control and high water and
general maintenance.
2 There is a Co Sup Crt Case, Roaring Fork Club v St Judes (Reno Cerise) that
guarantees my water structures and maintenance easement from being
altered without my permission.
Heidi wants to configure her new ditch system going under my outflow ditch via pipe
& intersecting my outflow ditch with her new outflow ditch.
It will be acceptable, 'IF':
1 I am guaranteed that there shall be no alteration or modification of my water
structures or easements without my explicit permission.
2 I am provided with a survey map for the new FarvedHouston headgate, ditch
and pond system. There is cause for concern because the current description
places the headgate outside the bounds of the Houston parcel to the North on
Highland Ranch property.
Heidi wants to place a Dry Hydrant at my lower pond.
This will be acceptable, 'IF' the Dry Hydrant does not alter, damage or interfer with
any of my water structure, maintenance and easement ie dredging etc.
PART THREE - LOCATION OF HOUSTON SEPTIC SYSTEM
Houston Septic System has been placed on top of a spring that surfaces in the
driveway and flows towards her building envelope and proposed well site.
file://C:\DOCUME- 1 \j eanette\LOCALS- 1 ~Temp\eud 19.htm 4/13/2004
Page 4 of 4
This is acceptable, 'IF' a sealed tank system will counteract any problems with the
water table or well.
Please contact me if you need any further clarification.
Matra Steinmetz
file://C:\DOCUME- 1 \j eanette\LOCALS- 1 \Temp\eud 19.htm 4/13/2004
?
~Ftom: Rev Marta Steinmetz <revmarta~sopris.net>
To: "Jeanette Jones" <jeanette~ci.aspen.co.us>,
"Double J Ventures - Aspen" <john~jwalla.com>
Subject: 4-14-04 1041 Conundrum Retreats LLC - Heidi Houston Marta's comments
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 13:13:39 -0600
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
Page 1 of 4
X-MX-Spam: final=0.0090000000; heur=0.5000000000(1800); stat=0.0090000000; spamtraq-
heur-0.5000000000(2004041402)
X-MX-MAIL-FROM: <revmarta~sopris.net>
X-MX-SOURCE-IP: [216.237.72.68]
X-MailScanner-lnformation: Please contact the [SP for more inlbrmation
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
4-14-04
Pitkin County 1041 Planning Process
Conundrum Retreats LLC
Heidi Houston
0757 Conundrum Rd
1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission
Takings Remediation
ISSUES:
Access Easement:
There are 3 easements of record: one, 'no longer in effect', one, 'controlling' and
one, 'invalid' because I didn't authorize it. The Controlling Easement is for "Road
Purposes" and that includes all the uses related to a Road that I have employed for
37 years.
The Vegetation Map is showing the driveway as 16' wide. The map must be
corrected to reflect what area, in toto, I use for all inclusive, 'Road Purposes', that
includes parking, snow storage and turn around and it varies in width from 20' to
60'.
I On Feb 15, 66 the Crosby Family: Bedelia E Tiedeman of Jefferson County and
Maymie E Kearns and Thomas S Crosby conveyed to me the, what is now Houston
property, with an easement that reads: "subject to a right of way for road purposes,
along the existing County Roadway, across said property to property previously
granted to the second party by first parties over which the right of ingress and
egress is hereby granted to second party".
From the minute I owned both parcels, this easement was no 'longer in effect'.
2 The controlling Easement is at Bk 225 Pg 87 and is a deed Steinmetz, Grantor
file://C:\DOCUME- l\jeanette\LOCALS- l\Temp\eud 1E.htm 4/14/2004
Page 2 of 4
and Rand. Grantee. Up to the time of this deed Dec 21st 1966 I owned both the
Houston and the now Steinmetz parcel. The easement within this deed reads as
follows: "Grantor reserves a right of way for road purposes across the above
described property to property owned by Grantor located upstream and southerly of
the property herein conveyed".
Since I was the owner of both parcels I was fully within my rights to grant myself this
fully legitimate easement. Therefore it is the 'controlling' easement.
3 On Nov 6 1968 Rand recorded an easement that he granted to me described
as: an easement for ingress and egress extending from the County Road through
the land of the first party recorded in Bk 225 Pg 87 of the records for Pitkin County
as said road is now constructed and in use to the land of the second party recorded
in Book 196 Pg 355 of the records for Pitkin County. Said roadway is 14' in width.
Said road is located in HES 112, being part of Sec 2, T 11 S, R 85 W of the 6th
PM.
This was done without my consent and is 'invalid'. My own easement as Grantor
predates this document and I have never recognized it to be valid. The Historic
width of roadway, parking and snow storage varies from 20' to 60'. Rands 14'
easement is nothing more than 'real estate trickery' like "locking the barn after the
horse was stolen", and it has no force.
Site Plan:
Why is there no Site Plan with this submission? Heidi is requesting to augment her
building envelope. When was the last Site Plan filed on this parcel? Helda, the
owner prior to Lassie LLC, included my large Scoop Out Parking/Snow Storage
Area on the site plan recorded Aug 26, 1994.
Permission to change 'roadway' easement:
Heidi has not requested that I relinquish any part of my easement. She must obtain
my permission to make any changes to any part of my easement.
Round a Bout Placement:
The proposed location for the Round a Bout as seen on the Vegetation Map will
force the cutting of at least a dozen large Pine and Spruce 8" to 20" in diameter,
one 12" Aspen and a half a dozen small conifers. It would require removing a small
shelf/bench of earth 5' to 6' high, 20'in the horizontal and 60' along the driveway, in
towards the steep hill where a 12' retaining wall would have to be installed. Please
see the pictures of the bench/shelf and trees in question and the Round a Bout
superimposed on a Topog and the Vegetation Map.
This is a serious hill to mess with because it is all made up of glacial and river
file://C:\DOCUME-I\jeanette\LOCALS- 1 \Temp\eud 1E.htm 4/14/2004
Page 3 of 4
-'"rnorrain and crumbles if you just look at it. If you take too much away from the
bottom support you could bring the whole hill down on you.
The removal of these dozen or so trees and the flatening of the terrain will denude
the entrance to my property and it will loose some of its remote qualities that are so
dear to my heart for the last 44 years.
Expanding Heidi's building envelope will prevent the optimal placement of the
Round a Bout, optimal meaning the least disruptive, the least expensive and the
least obvious.
Using the non augmented Building Envelope Heidi can enter her property at an
angle, beginning just past the big conifer on the right as you come in the driveway,
roughly 140' in from the Conundrum Road and make her loop snug up to her non
expanded building envelope. Her Round a Bout will provide a sight and to some
degree a sound buffer between us. Please see a Topog and a modified Vegetation
Map to see the options.
Then there would be no need for altering the upstream half of my easement nor my
parking/snow storage & large vehicle Turn Around.
There would be no trees to cut down along the hillside and no bench/shelf
to flatten and no retaining wall to build. Much simpler and less costly.
With this new Round a Bout, I will loose my 'Straight Stretch' parking/snow storage,
but I would be willing to make up for the loss by clearing a few trees by the Scoop
Out Parking next to our common boundary and expanding the parking there where
it is totally out of everyones way.
Alternate Snow Storage:
Heidi is attempting to get permission to dump all the snow from our driveway on the
Highland Ranch Property. No decision will be made about that until July 04 when
Mac Coffey C.O. of the Ranch is to visit. We must make some Alternative Plan for
snow storage because we might get a refusal to dump on the Ranch property
because that is their driveway entrance for the meadow and pastures above on this
side of Castle Creek.
Water Issues:
Heidi needs to get an easement from me to bring her new irrigation ditch via pipe
under my 'Outflow Ditch'. And if she wants to deposit her Waste Water in my
Outflow Ditch, that must be covered by the easement as well.
Heidi's new water right that will be piped from the creek to her pond stands a good
chance of freezing and getting clogged up either by silt, beaver or muskrats. Is it
file :ftC :\DOCUME~ 1 \j eanette\LOCALS- 1 \Temp\eud l E.htm
4/14/2004
supposed to be only a summer Water System?
Septic Field:
The Septic Field is best placed in the middle of the Round a Bout. This placement
gives it greater distance from the Spring and the Well.
Construction: Staging and Parking:
Where will the parking and staging aCeas for the Construction be?
Page 4 of 4
file://C :\DOC UME~ 1 \j eanette\LOCAL S~ I \Temp\eud 1 E.htm
4/14/2004 /¢
WOODY CREEK CAUCUS PLANNING COMMISSIOn~Ilmml'
P.O. BOX 299 WOODY CREEK CO 81656
Pitkin County Community Development
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
April 12, 2004
Re: Annual review, Elam gravel pit
To Whom It May Concern:
In the past year, the Woody Creek Planning Commission has received no negative
feedback or comments concerning the operation of the Elam pit. Recently, two members
of our commission took a tour of the gravel pit given by John Elam. The tour revealed a
clean, well-ordered pit, with no apparent problems. Noise and dust over the past year
have been kept to a minimum.
Therefore, we support the annual renewal of Elam's operation in Woody Creek.
Sincerely,
Michael M. Owsley, chairman
Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners
530 East Main St.
Aspen, CO 81611
8 April 2004
Dear BOCC:
At the monthly meeting of the Woody Creek Caucus held March 31,2004 26 members
listened to a presentation by Jim Elwood ot~ the Airport Master Plan which is now the
subject of two hearings belbr¢ thc Board. Mr. Elwood was applauded Ibr his presentalion.
Following debate the Ibllowing motion was made: "The Woody Crock Caucus rQccts
thc Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Muster as presented by Jim Elwood to the Catlctts oll 3-
31-04" and was ultimately passed by vote of l I to 5.
An amendment was made and accepted to clarify the sense of the meeting; "Individual
aspects and implementation of the Master plan, if passed, shall only occur when the
service and usage of airport facilities require a change to be made. The Woody Creek
Caucus will be informed prior to any changes being considered and will have the
opportunity for a public hearing."
Several members had other obligations and left prior to the vote. ! will give my own
summary of the sense of the meeting. We support master planning efforts and applaud a
solid body of work represented by the Airport Master Plan. Our fear, whose strength is
reflected in the vote to reject, is implementation of such plans, particularly for
infrastructure. Is the implementation a comtnunity chosen response to growth made at the
time of growth and in the context of deliberated community desires at that time, or is the
implementation an inadvertent engine of growth, self-propelled once adopted, that is
neither deliberated or chosen by the then community at large? Hence the sense of the
meeting was; let us consider in public meeting each stage of implementation in the
context of the community perspective of community needs at the time that growth seems
to press for that next stage.
For the Woody Creek C~ucus,
George Str"anahan
Co-Chair.