Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutspencer.ext.vested.rightsREADING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON DRAFT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO APPROVING THE SPENCER EXTENSION OF VESTED RIGHTS AND MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO RELOCATED AND ENLARGE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE TO: THRU: FROM: RE: MEMORANDUM Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting- January 12, 2005 Cindy Houben, Cmmnunity Development Director OJ~ Ezra Louthis, Planner Spencer Extension of Vested Rights and Minor Amendment REQUEST: The Applicant requests Extension of Vested Rights and Minor Amendment approval to re- locate the primary building envelope for Lot 16 oftbe Section 36 (Majestic Peaks Pointe) Subdivision, and to receive extended vesting for the parcel. The request is at the County's urging to relocate the envelope and comply with the ridgeline criteria in an attempt to resolve a ridgeline issue relating to tbe Capitol Creek Valley by relocating the existing approved envelope off of the ridgeline while still maintaining compliance with 1041 regulations. As part of the request, the Applicant has requested a 10-year extension on the vesting of the approval. APPLICANT: Spencer Enterprises, LLC LOCATION: The property is Lot I6, Section 36 Subdivision, and is located on tbe south side of East Sopris Creek Road in Section 36 (TBS, R87W). ZONING/LOT SIZE: The properties are zoned RS-30 PUD. Lot 16 contains 35.073 acres. BACKGROUND: The subject parcel received 1041 Hazard Review aud Conceptual Submission approVal in 2002 pursuant to Hearing Officer Determination No. 47-2002 (Attachment 3). The Applicant had also submitted 1041 applications for three other lots within the subdivision that are located adjacent to the subject parcel. Lots 13, 15, mid 16 received Hearing Officer approval for the 1041 reviews in 2002, while lot 14 went through a takings iu front of the BOCC due to access encroachment on slopes in excess of 30%. Lot 14 received approval pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 125-2002. Lot 13 is currently developed with a single-family residence that avoids all ridgelines, and Lot 14 is under construction for a single-family residence, which is nearly complete. In the fall of 2004 it was realized that through no fault of the Applicant's, tile single-family residence on Lot 14 broke the rldgeline as viewed from Capitol Creek Road. No landscaping is planned at this time to disguise the residence. After it was discovered that the residence on Lot 14 broke the ridgeline, it was discovered that Lots 14, 15, and 16 were located iii mapped ridgeline areas, mid that during the original review, Staff did not recognize that the Lots were mapped for ridgeline (see Attachment 2). Through tbe approval process, the building envelopes for Lots 14 and 16 were placed in such a way that the ridgeline would be broken on both Lots as viewed fi'om Capitol Creek Road, and would not be in complim~ce with Section 3-60-040, Scenic Overlay. The location of the building envelope on Lot 15 is located off of the ridgeline, and the residence will not break any ridgelines. Although the Applicant received approval of the building envelope on Lot 16 that would not maintain compliance with the ridgeline criteria, the Applicant has not yet submitted a filial 1041 site plm~ for recordation. At tile urging of the County, tile Applicant has submitted an application to amend the envelope and the conditions of approval in order to comply with Section 3-60-040 and adjust the envelope so as to accommodate a residence that will avoid the ridgeline. MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (SECTION 3-200-080): The amendment must not change the use of the proposed development between residential, commercial and tourist accommodation uses. Response: The proposed amendment does not change the use of the proposed development. The a~nendment must be consistent with action taken during the revien, of the original development and does not cons:titute a new land development acth~ity. Response: The Applicm~t is proposing to slightly relocate and enlarge the envelope for Lot 16 in order to provide some flexibility for the development of a single-family residence that will not break the ridgeline as viewed from identified public right-of-ways (Capitol Creek Road and Highway 82). At time of building permit, the Applicant (or subsequent owners) shall be required to do a ridgeline review to show compliance with the scenic/ridgeline standards itl Section 3-60-040. The proposed activity does not: 1. Change the basic character of the approved use of the land on which the activity occurs including basic visual appearance and method of operation; 2. Increase off-site impacts in the surrounding neighborhood; 3. Endanger the public health, safety, or welfare; 4. Violate any land use Code Standard; 5. Substantially increase the need for on-site parking or utilities, or affect affordable housing generation; and 6. Increase the floar area of the m'e by more than. (2) percent or decrease the open space on the site by more than three (3) percent. Response: The proposed envelope amendment does not chm~ge the basic character of the approved use, and will improve the visual appearance by not developing a residence that would break the ridgeline. The proposal will not endanger public health, safety or welfare nor violate any kmown Code Standard, as it will still comply with 1041 standards. Finally, the proposal will noffincrease the need for on site parking or affordable housing, or increase the floor area of the use. EXTENSION OF VESTED RIGHTS (SECTION 4-140-030): The following is a review and analysis of the proposal relative to the applicable standards of Section 4- 140-030 of the Land Use Code. In reviewing a request for the extension of vested property rights, the Board shall consider, but not be limited to, the following criteria: The applicant's compliance with any conditions requiring performance prior to the date of application for extension or reinstatement of vested rights'. Response: There were no conditions which required performance prior to the date of application for extension of vested rights, with the exception of recording a 1041 site plan, which will occur upon approval of the amendment. The progress made in pursuing the project to date, including the effort to obtain any other permits, such as building permits, and the expenditures made by the applicant in pursuing the project. Response: The Applicant is currently under contract for the sale of the parcel as was originally represented and approved with no ridgeline concerns. The contract buyer is willing to comply witb the ridgeline requirements, aud the extended vesting will allow the contract buyer more time to design a residence that can comply with the ridgeline criteria. No building permits have been applied for at this time. The nature and extent of any benefits already received by the County as a result of prq/ect approval, such as impact fees or land dedications. Response: There have been no benefits received by the County such as impact fees or land dedications. There were no land dedications required. The Applicant will comply with the Fair Share Requiremeuts pursuant to Ordiuance No. 002-2000 and will pay a road impact fee at the time of building permit issuance. However, the County will benefit with the Applicant's continued cooperation to comply with the ridgeliue requirements in spite of the County's approval of the building envelope, and the Applicant requests the extended vesting in return. The needs of the County and the applicant that would be served by approval of the extension or reinstatement request. Response: As noted above, tbe Applicant will be served with the exteuded vestiug in order to better comply with the ridgeline criteria and provide some flexibility, and the County will be better served to avoid development on the ridgeline. An extension or reinstatement may be in the form ora development agreement duly authorized and executed by the applicant and the County. Reasonable conditions may be imposed by the Board when granting any such extension or reinstatement. Response: The Applicant bas indicated agreement to reasouable conditions imposed by the County to comply with new 1041 Enviroumeutal Hazard Review and Scenic Review staudards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Spencer ExSension of Vested Rights aud Miuor Amendment of a Development Permit for Lot 16 subject to the conditions of approval iu the attached draft Resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Staff Memo Dated 10/12/2002 3. Heariug Officer Determination RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING THE SPENCER EXTENSION OF VESTED RIGHTS AND MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO RELOCATE AND ENLARGE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE Resolution No. -2005 RECITALS Spencer Enterprises, LLC ("Applicant") has applied to the Pitkin County Board of County Commissiooers ("BOCC") for Extension of Vested Rights aad Minor A~nendmeot approval to relocate and enlarge a building eovelope on Lot 16 of Section 36, T8S, R87W. 2. ' The parcel is zoned RS-30 PUD aod contains 35.073 acres. 3. Tile parcel is Lot 16, Section 36, and is more specifically described in Exhibit A. The parcel received Hearing Officer approval in October of 2002 pursuant to Determination No. 47-2002. The BOCC heard this application at a duly ooticed public hearing oil January 12, 2005 and at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application. Tbe BOCC has determined that the proposed use meets the criteria established in Sections 3- 200-080 and 4-140-030 of the Lm~d Use Code, and therefore found the proposal to be appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by tile BOCC that it does hereby graot approval to the Spencer Extensioo of Vested Rigbts and Minor Amendment to a Development Permit for Lot 16, Section 36, subject to tbe following conditioos, which shall run with tbe land and be binding on ail successors in interest: 1. The Applicant shall adhere to all conditions and material representations made in the application and public meetings except as ~.mended herein. Prior to submittal for aoy buildiag permits ou Lot 16, tbe Applicmat shall record a 24 X 36 inch mylar 1041 Hazard Review Site Plan in accordance witb Section 5-70-040 oftbe Land Use Code. 3. Tl~e Applicant shall comply with the provisioos of Hearing Officer Determination No. 47-2002, uuless otberwise replaced or amended by the conditioos oftbis approval. Prior to tile submittal ofa buildiug permit on Lot 16, the Applicant shall provide evidence to Community Developmeot that the proposed structure(s) do not break the ridgeline as viewed fi'om Capitol Creek Road or Highway 82. 5. The Applicm~t shall comply with Section 3-60-040, Scenic Overlay, of the Pitkin County Land Use Code as it relates to Ridgeline Review. No building on Lot 16, Section 36, shall break the ridgeline as viewed from Capitol Creek Road or Highway 82. lfthe County determiues that the proposed structure(s) do not break the ridgeline, then the County will BOCC Resolution No. __-2005 Page 2 issue a buildiug permit for the proposed developlnent and will not utilize the ridgeline review process as an opportunity to prevent development of this lot. 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 January 12, 2015. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY on the 11~' day of December, 2004. APPROVED ON THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2005. PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS in the Aspen Times Weekly on the day of ,2005. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO .leauette Jones Deputy County Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Patti Kay-Clapper, Chair Date: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: John Ely, County Attorney Cindy Houben, Community Development Director Case #P210-04 PID# 246536400013 EXHIBIT A SECTION 36 PARCEL NO. 16 A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 36, TOWN- SHIP 8 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL ~RIDIAN, BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST COP~NER OF SAID SECTION 36; THENCE FOLLOWING THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 36 S 86°29'56" W 1734.95 FEET; THENCE N 01"59'45" E 1397.42 FEET; THENCE 152.80 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 300.00 FEET, THE CHORD OF WHICH CURVE BEARS S 65"45'28" E 151.15 FEET; THENCE S 51"10' E 382.00 FEET; THENCE 411.68 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 850.00 FEET; THENCE 411.03 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 900.00 FEET; THENCE 127.99 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURV/ TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 160.00 FEET; THENCE S 22~18'53" E 981.44 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 35.234 ACRES MORE OR LESS. RESERVING, however, unto the party of the firs% part, its successors, assigns, and grantees, an easement or rieht- of-way over and across that portion of the above-desCribed real property situated within Easement No. 3, as described below, for a private roadway and equestrian trail purposes and for the location of utility lines to be used in common with owners of adjacent property. TOGETHER with any and all easements and rights~of-way appur- tenant to the above-described real property, including, but not limited to the following easements: Easement No. 1. A non-exclusive easement or right- of-way for road purposes and for location of utility lines over, through and across a tract sixty (60) feet in width, being in Section 25, Township 8 South, Range 87 West of the 6th P.M., the centerline of which is more fully described in Book 234 at Page 703 and in Book 245 at Page 195, Pitkin County, Colorado, records; Easement No. 2. A non-exclusive easement or right-of- way for road purposes and for the locatiun of utility line over, through and across a tract sixty (60) feet in width, being in Section 25, Township 8 South, Range 87 West of the 6th P.M. granted by that certain Special Land Use Permit C-7694 issued by the Department of In- terior, Bureau of Land Management. Easement No. 3. A non-exclusive easement or right-of- way for road purposes and for the location of utility lines situated in Section 36, Township 8 South, Range 87 West of the Sixth Principal Meridiun, Pitkin County, Colorado. Said easement is 60 feet in width, lyinq 30 feet on each side of the following described centerline: BEGINNING AT OF SAID SECT] TBENCE S 73"5 T~ENCE 89.52 HAVINC A RAD]' TBENCE 147.23 }lAVING A TI~NCE 125.1] I~VING A TI~NCE S 66:0 TI~NCE 125.54 }~VING A THENCE S 09~3 Tt~NCE 206.53 ~VING A F~ADI T~NCE 129.81 ~VING A ~ADI THENCE S 08°0 T~NCE 316.67 HAVING A P~DI] THENCE S 89~0~ THENCE 131.74 ~VING A ~DI~ T~NCE S 29~0{ THENCE 124. 39 ~VING A P3~DI( T~NCE S 05 ~3 T}~NCE 77.32 ~VING A PJ~Di; BEARS N 66~06' THENCE N 36 ~34 THENCE 445.0~ ' HAVING A T}LENCE 102. 9.; :DAVING A PJ:~IU. BF~RS S 02o.!0': T;[ENCE 195.40 ~ ~VING A RADIU' T~NCE 420.00 ~VING A RADIUS T}~NCE S 20~13' THENCE 119.94 F T~NCE 155.26 F~ HAVING A PJ~DIUS T}~NCE ~51.35 F3 ~VZNG A PJ:DZUS T~NCE 229.09 F3 ~VING A PJ~DIUS T}~NCE S 10~33'f T~NCE 97.98 FEE~, I~UING A ~'~DZUS TI~NCE S 40~14'G ~ TI~NCE 90.32 ~VING A ~%DIUS ~ TI~NCE 97.36 FEE' ~VING A RADIUS f~ TI~NCE S 68°25'0( T~NCE 199.OS FEI }~VING A ~ADIUS C T}~NCE N 54~33'00~ THENCE 135.26 ~VING A ~ADIUS O ~ TN~CE 85.88 FEET ~L~VING A ~%DIUS BEGINNING AT A POINT W]IENCE TIIE NOF, TU O'~-.©UA}~TiU~, C~)2NER OF SAID SECTION 36 ~;EA~{S N ~749'28" E 315.70 FEET; TBENCE S 73"39'10" W 24.57 FEET; TBENCE 89.52 FEET ALO:~G THE '+ ,~.,C OF A CUR%~ TO TEE ~L~T ~AVINC A ~DIUS OF 81.00 FEET; THENCE 147.23 FEET ALONe THE ARC OF A CURVE TO TE? RIGHT HAVING A [~DIUS OF 97.00 FEET; THENCE 125.11 FEET ALO~[G THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT ~VING A ~DIUS OF 230.00 FEET; THENCE S 66~08'00" W 82.00 FEET; THENCE 125.54 FEET ALON,~ THE ARC OF A C;Ui%~ TO z'~ = }~VING A ~IDIUS OF 95.00 FEET: THENCE S 09"35'00' E 195.00 FEET; T]~NCE 206.53 FEET ALONG T~ ARC OF A C~,,,,:, TO THE ~VING A ~DIUS OF 250.00 FEET: T}~NCE 129. 81 FEET ALO~;G TUE ARC OF A ','- ~VING A ~DIUS OF 250.00 FEET; C~.,. , TO ~h'i THENCE S 08"00'00" W 128.00 FEET; T~NCE 316.67 FEET ~O>:G THE ARC OF A C.,_..., ~ T3Ui HAVING A ~DIUS OF 252.00 FEqT; THENCE S 80=00'00'' W 279.0n FEE?; THENCE 131.74 FEET ;~ONG Tup 7,kC OF A Ci~E'.:E Tq T'U] · }~VING A i~%DIUS OF 14C. 0O FEET: T}~NCE S 29~00'00. W 319.00 FEET; THENCE 124.39 ~'~ ALONG ~{~ .~ ,C OF A CUE"]] -n ~VING A ~%DIUS OF 305. 00 FEET: ..... 7 Tt~NCE S 05~ "' - 3~ 00 W 98z.00 FEET: T~NCE 77.32 FEET ALONC T3~ A~C OTM ?, C!'R'.~ -D ?? ~VING A P~DIUS OF 75. 00 FEET, T~iE ........... BEARS N 66~06'00- E 73.94 FilET: C :..? ~ : il~h'~ ~': THENCE N 36~34'00,, E 740.00 FEET; THENCE 445.08 FEET '' ' ·-O..C TEE AEC OF A ~'~":' r'.~ T~? HAVING A F~%DIUS Of =0-0.o, FEE~. THENCE 102.94 FEET ALONG Tile ;,~c C~ A CUL"E ~ ~u:~ /~VING A ~DIuo OF 89.00 '~=- TUE C~[OED CF ~<EICE BF~RS S 02~40'50- = ~= THENCE. S 57"40'00" THEMe ~31,69 FEET HAVI,%, "R~"~.US OF THENCF. - ~.'R8 FEET HAVING A RADIUS OF THENCE 171,04 FEET HAVING ~, RADIUS OF THENCE N 17"00'00" THENCE 323,76 FEET HAVING A RADIUS OF T~{]~NCE 223,48 FEET HAVING A HADIUS OF THENCE N 33"25'00" THENCE 223,99 FEET }{AVING A RADIUS OF T}LENCE 797,03 FEET }}AVING A RADIUS OF THENCE 159,03 FEET ' }{AVING A RADIUS OF THENCE S 43"50'00" THENCE 431.68 FEET HAVING A RADIUS OF Tt~ENCE 877,03 FEET ]{AVING A RADIUS OF T}IENCE S 01"15'00" THENCE 209.42 FEET HAVING A RADIUS OF THENCE N 13"15'0'0" THENCE 541,99 FEET HAVING A RADIUS C '" THENCE N 58"45'00" TI{ENCE 261.22 FEET F-AVING A RADIUS OF THENCE N 21"20'00" THENCE 562,87 FEET E 280,00 FEET; ALONG Tm ARC OF A CURVE TO T}~ LEFT 225,00 FEET; ALONG Tm ARC OF A CURVE TO T~]~ RIGHT 500,00 FEET; ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE _mO THE LEFT 100.00 FEET; E 160,00 FEET; ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGH~ 350.00 FEET; ALONG TH~ ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT 350,00 FEET; E 482.50 FEET; ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT 630.00 FEET; ALONG TI{E .ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT 1000,00 FEET; ALONG T}tE ARC OF A CURVE TO T}TE RIGHT 55.00 FEET; W 350.00 FEET; ALONG T}IE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT 400.00 FEET; ALONG TI{E ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT 3000.00 FEET; E 265.00 FEET; ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT 72,50 FEET; E 117,50 FEET; ALO~G THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT 682,50 FEET; E 147.50 .FEET; ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE. LEFT 400.00 FEET; E 275.00 FEET; ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 300.00 FEET; THENCE S 51~10'00'' E 382.00 FEET; · · THENCE 411,68 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 850.00 FEET; THENCE 411,03 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 900,00 FEET; THENCE 127.99 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT }~AVING A RADIUS OF 160,00 FEET TO THE END OF SAID ROAD. TO: FROM: RE: DATE: MEMORANDUM Jim True, Pitkin County Hearing Officer Brim~ McNellis, Planner Spencer 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission October 15, 2002 REQUEST: The applicant requests 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Snbmission approval to establish. building envelopes for single-family residences and customary accessory structures on Lots 15 and 16 of Section 36 (Majestic Peaks Pointe) Subdivision. The application also entails the construction of new driveways to access the proposed building envelopes. - APPLICANT: Paul Spencer LOCATION: The properties are located on the south side of East Sopris Creek Road in Section 36 (T8S, R87W). ZONING/LOT SIZE: The properties are zoned RS-30 PUD. Lot 15 contains 35.034 acres and Lot 16 contains 35.073 acres. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Comments from the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist, Division of Wildlife, the Couuty Engineer and Basalt Fire District are incorporated throughout this memo. 1041 HAZARD REVIEW: ENVIRONMENTAL & AESTHETIC STANDARDS (SECTION 3-60): Preservation of Natural Landscape: The Applicaut proposes building envelopes that will be well hidden from any viewplane associated with East Sopris Creek Road. The building envelopes will require that access drives be constructed to each of the proposed locations and will likely require greater disturbances to hillside vegetation than if the envelopes were to be located elsewhere. Solar Access: Although not south facing, the building envelopes allow for limited utilization of solar exposure. Scenic Overlay/Scenic Quality: The property is not within a mapped scenic area. Development within the proposed building envelopes will not be visible from any major transportation corridors. WATER RESOURCES (SECTION 3-70): Water Supply: The Applicant has proposed individual wells for each of the lots. 104 l HAZARD REVIEW (SECTION 3-80): Wildfire: The properties have been mapped as a severe wildfire hazard area with scattered areas medium and Iow wildfire hazard. John Denison of the Colorado State Forest Service visited the property and made no mention as to whether each of the building envelopes were rated Iow, medium, or severe hazard. He mentioned that the service road to the lots is surrounded by severe wildfire hazard. Mr. Denison also mentioned that the building envelopes would be further from heavy fuels if they were situated higher on the hillside and out of the saddle (assumed to mean on the southern aspect). Geologic: Both properties contain steep slopes iu excess of 30 percent. The building envelope for Lot 16 avoids these steep slopes and is contained on slopes of less than 15 percent. The building envelope for Lot 15 is proposed on slopes of less than 30 percent but greater than 15 percent. Pursuant to Code Section3- 80-050 (C) (1) Development is prohibited on slopes greater than 15percent (15%o) unless a specific development proposal is found to result in a site design that creates less impact than if development was limited exclusively to slopes of less than fifieen percent (15%). Staffhas identified another suitable building location within Lot 15 that avoids sloes of greater than 15 percent and would ultimately result in less hillside disturbance for access mid would likely be considered less extreme wildfire hazard. Wildlife: Both Lots 15 and 16 have been mapped for elk production areas. Jonathan Lowsky, the Pitkiu County Wildlife Biologist, and Kevin Wright from the Division of Wildlife visited the site with staff. Both were concerned with the elk and mule deer migration routes that exist on the properties and wanted assurance that development would not encroach into these areas (especially on the east or south side of the ridge that cuts through Lots 15 and 16). Mr. Wright was satisfied with the location of the building envelope for Lot i6 with the condition that vegetation be used as screening device for the beuefit of wildlife iu the area. Both Mr. Wright and Mr. Lowsky were not, however, in favor of the proposed location of the building envelope for Lot 15 siuce it is situated on the draw that he would like to see void of development. An alternate building site was recommended on the lower slopes (the same as that identified by staff in the geologic section above). It was also mentioued that the area is vital habitat for bears and mountain lions. Couditions of approval as suggested by the Divisioo of Wildlife and the Wildlife Biologist are incorporated into the attached Hearing Officer_determination. IMPROVEMENTS & SERVICES (SECTION 3~110): Water & Sewer: The Applicaot proposes to install an individualized septic system on each of the lots. Access: The property is accessed from "Section 36" road, which intersects with East Sopris Creek Road. The road is improved up to the Spencer property where the applicant proposes to construct separate driveways to each of the lots. The proposed driveways are proposed on slopes of less than 30 percent. Joauna Schaffner, the Pitkin County Zoning Officer reviewed the application mid mentioued that it should be demoustrated ou the site plan as to whether the proposed driveway can be constructed within the easement provided. Scott Thompson, of the Basalt & Rural Fire Protection District submitted a letter expressing concera of emergency access on Section 36 Road. Mr. Thompson mentioned that sprinkler systems should be installed in the proposed residences to mitigate m~y potential wildfire danger. Public Utilities: the Applicant plans to utilize wind energy to generate electricity for each of the lots. RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommeads approval of the Spencer 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission for Lot 16 subject to the conditions of approval in the attached draft Hearing Officer Determination. Stafffurther recommends denial of Lot i5 since the Applicm~t has not explored the possibility of developing portions of the property that contain less than 15 percent slopes pursuant to code Section 3-80-050 (C) (1). Staff further recommends denials of Lot 15 as there are alternate buildiog sites tbat would have significaatly less ilnpact on local wildlife. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Colorado State Forest Service letter 2. Division of Wildlife memo 3. Division of Wildlife letter 4/06/02 4. Wildlife Biologist memo 5. Zoning Officer melno 6. Draft Determinatioa DETERMINATION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTM3~NT OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL TO THE SPENCER 1041 HAZARD REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION FOR LOT 16, SECTION 36 Determination No. ~'7-2002 RECITALS Paul Spencer ("Applicant") has applied to the Pitkin County Heating Officer for 1041 Hazard and Conceptual Submission approval to establish a building envelope on Lot 16 of Section 36, T8S, R87W. 2. The parcel is zoned RS-30 PUD and contains 35.073 acres. The Hearing Officer heard this application at a duly noticed public hearing on October 15, 2002, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application. The Hearing Officer finds that the building envelope and access for Lot 16 is situated in an acceptable location to avoid, valuable wildlife habitat, severe wildfire hazard, and slopes in excess of 30 percent. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Hearing Officer that approval is hereby ~anted to the Spencer 1041, Lot 16 subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest. 1. The Applicant shall adhere to all conditions and material representations made in the application and public meetings except as amended herein. Prior to submittal for an), building permits, the Applicant shall record a 24 X 36 inch mylar 1041 Hazard Review Site Plan in accordance with Section 5-70-040 of the Land Use Code. The site plan shall also be submitted in digital format for integration in to the County Geographic Information System (GIS) prior to submission of a building permit. 3. The Applicants shall obtain an access permit from the Pitkin County Engineer prior to building permit submission. 4. The Applicant shall comply with the following wildfire mitigation measures: Defensible Space: Note: Actual vegetation manipulation to meet these conditions may not be necessary where flue natural vegetation patterns have already fulfilled these conditions. Hearing Officer Determination No. __-2005 Page 2 A. Brush, debris, and non-ornamental vegetation shall be removed within a distance a 10 foot perimeter of all structures. B. Vegetation shall be reduced to break up the vertical and horizontal continuity of the fuels a minimmn ora 30 foot perimeter around a structure built on flat ground. C. Spacing between clmnps of brush and vegetation within the 30 foot perimeters shall be a minimum of two (2) times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the clmnps shall be two (2) times the height of the fuel. All measurements shall be from the edges of the crowns of the fuel. E. Tree crown separation w/thin a 30 foot perimeter shall have a minimum of 10 feet between the edges of the crowns. This does not apply to mature stands of Aspen trees where the above reconu-nendation for removal of ladder fuels have been complied with. F. All branches which 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 around all structures shall be reduced where natural reduction has not already occurred~ 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. 5. Tl~e Applicant shall comply with the following additional wildfire mitigation standards: A. Roofing: New roofs shall have a non-combustible roof covering on a class A, assembly roof system. Wood shake/shingle roof coverings and fiat roofs (up to a 3: t 2) pitch are prokibited. B. Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh with mesh one-fourth- inch (1/4") maximum. C. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris. D. Yards shall be kept clear of all liner, slash, and flammable debris ..... E. Ail flatmuable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimmu of 15 feet away from any structure. F. Weeds and. grasses within the 15 foot perimeter shall be maintained to a height not more than 6 inches. G. Firewood/wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a mirfimum of 15 feet away from may structure. H. Swi~rnning pools shall accessible to Fire Department vehicles. I. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris. J. Wood fences shall not connect to any structure. K. Anxy outbuildings or additional structures shall adhere to the stone standards as structures. L. Fuel tat~ks shall be installed underground with an approved container. M. Propane tm-is shall be installed according to NFPA 48 standards and on a contour away from the structure with stmadard defensible space vegetation mitigation around aaV aboveground tm~k. Any wood enclosure arom~d the tank shall be Hearing Officer Determination No. __-2002 Page 3 constructed with materials approved for 2 hour fire resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls. N. Each structure shall have a mini, mum of one pound approved ABC f~re extinguisher placed in a visible and accessible location. O. Addresses shall be clearly marked with 2 inch non-combustible letters and shall be clearly visible at the primary point of access from the public or conunon access road and installed on a non-combustible post. P. New utility lines shall be buried in the driveway aligmnent. Q. Fire sprinlders shall be installed in all residential structures. No development, including grading, excavation, fill placement, berming, landscaping, entry or ranch gates, and vegetation removal or disturbance shall occur outside of the approved building [and/or] development envelopes unless otherwise specified in this document, such as necessary wildfire mitigation. Construct[on, staging, parking, utility mud driveway extension and maintenance shall only occur with/n approved building envelope or access (h'iveway. 7. The Applicant shall comply with the following wildlife mitigation conditions: a. Dogs are prohibited on the property. Construction workers shall allow no dogs on the property. b. Construction shall not be allowed from October 1 through December 15 and April 15 through May 30. c. A landscaping plan shall be submitted and approved by the Pitkin County Wildlife biologist prior to building permit submission to help screen development from the wildlife corridor. Native vegetation must be maintained outside the building envelope as long as it complies with the wildfire mitigation stated above. d. )nay disturbed areas outside the building envelope must be revegetated with native plants according to a revegetation plan and implementation of a weed management plan to be submitted by the applicant and approved by the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. e. The Applicant shall comply with the 2001 Wildlife Protection Ordinance No. 010- 200i for waste storage. The Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist shall verify compliance with this condition prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. f. 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, mad twelve inches in width (top view), and shall have at least 18 inches between the rails. Wire fencing shall consist of ~o more than three strands of smooth wire and shall not exceed 42 inches in height. Property perimeter fencing shall not be allowed. g. Fruit bearing trees shall not be allowed for landscaping on the property. Tall, overly mature trees and standing dead trees should be retained whenever possible. h. If horses are kept on the property, ail hay must be kept within 8 foot mesh game proof fencing m~d all grains, cookies, and pellets shall be kept in bear proof containers. i. All exterior lighting shall be directed downwards and shall comply with Pitkin County Lighting Standards at the time of building permit submission.. Hearing Officer Determination No. __-2002 Page 4 j. All utility lines shall be buried h~ tlCe driveway aligmnent. Pm'suant to Ordinance No. 022-2000, the Applicant is subject to the Fair Share Requirements m~d shall pay a road impact fee as calculated at the same time as building pem~it issuance. 9. The Applicm~t shall join a Section 36 Road Improvement District should one be formed. 10. Floor area shall be limited to 5,750 square feet exempt from growth management or use of TDRs. 11. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or construction activity, the Applicant shall stake the corners of the building em, elope mid install construction fencing around the perimeter of the building envelope to minimize the overflow of dirt und siltation. The fencing shall remain in place until issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 12. Statutory vested rights for the approval contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitldn County Lm~d Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitk/n County Land Use Code, § 4-140 and C.R.S., § 24-68-105. The statutory vested rights granted herein shall expire on October 15, 2005. Hearing Officer Determination No. __-2002 Page 5 NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON THE 14r~ DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2002. APPROVED ON THE 15ru DAY OF OCTOBER 2002. PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON ATTEST: Isabel CalderBn Administrative Assistant APPROVED AS TO FORM: HEARING OFFICER OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO ~f~es R. True '~' Hearing Officer Date: r~f, ~'fc> -~ APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~Z~6unty Attorney Cindy Houben, Community Development Director Case #P97-02 PID# 246536400012 December 27, 2004 Mr. Ezra Louthis Mr. Lance Clark Aspen-Pitkin Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Spencer 1041 Minor Amendment to a Development Permit (building envelope) and Extension of Vested Property Rights Lots 16, Section 36, TBS, R87W, Pitkin County, Colorado Dear Ezra and Lance: This letter is written as application for a minor amendment to the existing 1041 development rights and extension of the vested rights granting for a single family dwelling unit located on Lot 16 of Section 36, TBS, R87W, Pitkin County, Colorado. This amendment and extension are being sought at staff' s urging to establish a mutually adequate building site which suits staff's recent ridgeline review concerns from Capitol Creek Road as well as the owner's concern to preserve the physical positioning and eventual utilization of the existing building rights. As mutually agreed, the needs of the County and the application would be well served by approval of the envelope amendment and rights extension. Site Location and Description The proposed residential lot, approximately four and three quarter miles south off from East Sopris Creek Road, lies primarily in the SE quarter of Section 36 as shown on the attached USGS vicinity map. Lot 16, part of the 1974 Subdivision of Section 36, is zoned RS-30 and contains approximately 35.073 acres. A copy of the existing 1041 vested development rights is attached hereto. As shown on the attached, proposed amended 1041 Site Review Plan for Lot 16, two foot interval topographic mapping was completed for an expanded building envelope and access route. The slope analysis shows that the ground slopes in the proposed envelope are less than 30 percent. The enlarged development envelope is being proposed to adequately allow for mitigation of staff's ridgeline concerns. Site Access The site access consists of an improved road, within a 60-foot wide access easement, heading south from East Sopris Creek Road continuing approximately four and three quarters miles up to Lot 16. Here, the proposed driveway access traverses back to the west on the north face of the lot for approximately 600 feet. Wildfire The original approved building envelope for this lot was found to be acceptable (with the standard mitigation Colorado State Forest Service conditions applied). It is assumed that the expanded envelope also complies with this acceptance as it encompasses similar terrain and vegetation. Wildlife Kevin Wright, Colorado Division of Wildlife Officer during two site visits, assisted in the selection of the original site in an effort to minimize wildlife impact. South facing slopes, knobs and saddles are mule deer and elk winter range areas and routes and have been avoided. Mr. Wright recommends no construction on South facing slopes or saddle areas. The expanded envelop conforms to these concerns by enlarging the envelop to the north and east faces only. 1041 Environmental Hazard Review The environmental hazard impacts within the building envelope, including Geologic, Wildfire, and Wildlife Hazards, have been satisfied in the original acceptance of this development site. Extension of Vested Property Rights An extension of the vested rights to 10 years for Lot 16 is requested to further serve the needs of the county and property owner. This extension will allow the property owner ample time to leverage the amended development rights contemplated herein, resulting in satisfactory development per staff's recommendation and acknowledgement. Attachments 1. Spencer Enterprises, LLC 1041 Site Review Plan for Lot 16 (24"x36") 2. List of Adjacent property Owners Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have. Respectfully yours, Paul Spencer Manager - Spencer Enterprises, LLC Property Owner Name & Address Dana & Abby Brackett 4707 Tract 36 Road Basalt, CO 81621 Paul Spencer 5000 Tract 36 Road Basalt, CO 81621 Tundra Properties, LLC PO Box 995 Basalt, CO 81621 Bureau of Land Management P.O. Box 1009 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS Property Location Sopris Creek Lot 13, Sec. 36 E. Sopris Creek Rd Basalt, CO 81621 Sopris Creek Lot 14, Sec. 36 E. Sopris Creek Rd Basalt, CO 81621 Sopris Creek Lot 15, Sec. 36 E. Sopris Creek Rd Basalt, CO 81621 GRAPHIC SCALE ~---~--'~ TT ?UTTI~ SUNV%YINO 226 Heother Lone (~?o) 92a-9?oa (TAX YI£I#I~f ~ -- ! *-- ~000' L~nd ond Note~. 5~pe~ce~' P~ope~Hes ~.~.C. 704! Haza~'d Neuiew 5~(te Pla~ o.~