The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutadditional.exhibits ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT THE APRIL 12, 2006 PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SPECIAL JOINT MEETING WITH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RE: LAND USE CODE REVISIONS EXHIBIT AGENDA ITEM EXHIBIT DATE NO. A Land Use Code - Re: TDR Letter from John April 12, 2006 Program McBride to the BaCC and P&Z B Land Use Code - Re: West Letter from Norm April 11, 2006 Sopris Creek Road Clasen to the BaCC C Land Use Code - Re: Tree Grafton Smith's April 12, 2006 Removal and Mitigation submittal of Land Use Code Section 7-30-10(c) for discussion , ~ RECEiVE~ APR f ;12006 BOCC OFFICE To: Pitkin County BOCC/P & Z From: John McBride EXHIBIT Re: TOR Revisions I Date: April 12, 2006 T do not like the Pitkin County TDR program and would not pnrtieipate in it as it is functioning. While conceptually I believe in TDRs, where in county growth can be clustered in urban areas, our program has evolved into a different creature. It has become an engine of growrh for mainly the real estate industry and second home ownerS. It is even an opportunity for speculators outside of Pitkin County (see the ad in last week in the Daily News-713 is a Houston area code!) If, instead of promoting excess, the program could help locals secure a home or a smal1 business, or help a kid get a scholarship, I'd be supportive. However, it might work; there could be a community gain at both ends. Now there is not. Any house over 5,750 sqft seems unnecessary and wasteful to me.. . especially in a county corrunitted to conserving. . And it seems especially lInnecessary and wasteful if it is owned by a non-resident and is vacant a significant part of the year. That was the sentiment voiced at the first round of hearings. Do we really want to allow and even encourage people to build houses up to 15,000 sqft. That is a building 50 feet wide and a football field long.. . like a 1110telwith a 10 foot central hall and forty rooms! We live on a lot of land in a 3,000 sqft house. The longer I live here; I wish it was even smaller! The only reason we were able to buy and reswre a ranch in Pitkin County was because in 1979 the rules and regulations were so tough. Between the GMQS system and 1041 it was almost impossible to do anything but ranch. 1 had looked at ranches in CoUbran., Muddy Creek and Cedaredge in the late 1970' s, when Bob Child suggested I look at Old Snowmass. I responded, "no way, this valley will be too pricey". He encouraged me to check it OlLt anyway and, low and behold, we bought here. Prices were no higher in the Roaring Fork Valley than other ranching communities. That was due entirely to Pitkin County's then tough rules and regulations. And, so to you, I say keep them tough. Don't allow sp~wl and the loss of open lands. Don't do '}- ASPEN BUSINESS CENTEr~ . 303 E . ASPEN, CO 81611 . 970-925-2102 . FAX 970-925-2104 [/2:d 861:S026:CJl b01:2S260Lb ~8~:WOd~ 22:L0 9002-21-dd~ anything to promote huge un-Pitkin County like homes (corporate retreats or private hotels). Hang on to what we have. Prices will still go up 'Without outside speculation. Finally, if you do adopt a new TDR program, please put the brakes on the direction it's been going and find alternatives at the receiving end that will benefit the residents of OUT magnificent valley and be environmental. If you can do this, I'd participate. Si elYj};cQ ~ 000 McBride ~ ~>[:d 86tS026:01 b0t2S260L6 J8~:WO~~ 22:L0 9002-2t-~d~ '9 . ii '. ~ ~ ......1..:..., "I .", . . .' " c/c:d , \.. .' ":".:, , \ ;. .-,,' 1'.1 ,. " . ..- , . . ':i ';' ..~. \ ""':.' :: ~ ::..:: .' \. .~'.'.,:.:.:\:..'...~.'.::: """':':"':J'~'\:'~';"': :.:....:,...:,:...> ':'.'::. ':..' :..I~..:.-.,.:.: . '~'~>'" ~':j/ '/ . <\:> ... .... ,1:,. '. " :',. " 'J-' ..... ". , -.' " 'IiTevotable . Certificate of Transferable .... .Develop~~nt Rights'{'~TDRs") . i . ~. '::~rchaser.& Seller of .TDRs l .:" '~-:r':,~':\:. Offer: $240 000 'I" :- ... ~ :~ ..~~....,. ~ , 1 :. .:Aslc $265 ,000 ~ No 'Commissions 1 Efficient Execution .~ 713-503-5070 1'!\lCES SUBJ6l:T TO CHANGIl BASED ON ~ CONDmONS . -. ."' '. .. ., . 'I. , ' '. ,~ ,:-.",_~:,.:,~J .' I, '" "', '. "~\"\":., ~ ':~': : . .\ ; L 861S026:[J1 b01c~c60L6 )8~:WO~~ 2~:L0 9002-2~-~d~ RECEIVED APR 1 2 200& aacc OFFICE April 11, 2006 EXHIBIT I_~ Ii - ,.~. - t:J-,^ Pitkin County Commissioners [ Address] Re: Proposed New Land Use Code - West Sopris Creek Rd Scenic Designation Dear Commissioners: As you know, we have had a number of meetings with you and with County staff regarding the surfacing of the dirt portion of West Sopris Creek Road, and, at your invitation, have met with and been discussing with County staff the economics of doing so and how to finance it. Also as you know, the Emma Caucus has endorsed the surfacing of the dirt portion of West Sopris Creek Rd. We hereby request your confirmation that designation of West Sopris Creek Rd. as a scenic road under the proposed new Pitkin County Land Use Code as mentioned in the Aspen Times awhile back will not in any way impede getting the dirt portion of the road surfaced ~i.e., that it is neutral element in the analysis. Very tml y yours, By_NORM CLASEN Norm Clasen for the Sopris Mountain Ranch Ad Hoc West Sopris Creek Road Committee ~ , fRom G)__)~, SlOllK Option one: 4/ 12-/0~ ~ 7-30-10 (c) Tree Removal and Mitigation Each tree with four (4) inches or larger diameter at breast height (DBH) that is removed within the Activity Envelope shall be replaced with one (l) or more trees with total DBH at least equal to the caliper(s) of the trees removed. Revegetation shall also comply with the Pitkin County revegetation Guidelines. [New] ( I) Exception: Development on lots in County approved subdivisions with designated building or development envelopes. Option Two: EXHIBIT IC!- " -12.-0" 7-30-10 (c) Tree Removal and Mitigation Each tree with four (4) inches or larger diameter at breast height (DBH) that is removed within the Activity Envelope shall be replaced with one (I) or more trees of the same type (aspen. snruce. nine. etc..) with total DBH at least equal to the caliper(s) of the trees removed. Significant large conifers shall be retained/or transnlanted onsite if at all possible. (1 ) The above replacement trees may be planted on the property outside the Activity Envelope if it can be shown that... (a) there is insufficient room within the Activitv Envelope to plant the replacement trees without hampering access to the property or endangering the public safety or, (b) the planting of the replacement trees would endanger the undisturbed natural vegetation and/or other trees remaining within the Activity envelone. (2) Offsite mitigation in the form of (in order of preference)... (a) nlanting trees in the common areas of the subdivision -with the permission of the Homeowner's Association. OI~ (b) planting replacement trees on other private property(ies) in the subdivision or other adiacent land(s) with the pennission ofthe respective land owner(s) (c) donating the replacement trees or a cash equivalent to Pitkin County Open Space and Trails . . .. can be considered an option if. . . (a) (c)(l)(a) or (c)(l)(b) above applv and (b) it can be shown that planting the replacement trees anyWhere else on the property would exacerbate a slope issUl~ through either the installation itself and/or the addition of irrigation water to a potentially unstable slope., or, ' (c) the planting of the replacement trees would endanger the undisturbed natural vegetation and/or other trees on the property outside the Activity Envelope or. (d) the replacl:ment trees likelihood of survival in the new area would be minimal. (3) The type of replacement tree planted outside the Activity Envelone or in offsite mitigation as allowed in (l) and/or (2) abovle shall be changed to a type more annropriate to the location in which they are being planted. Ie if the develonment cuts down aspen trees but the replacement area outside the activity envelone is a pine forest then pine trees should be installed instead. When changing types of trees to be installed the new trees will be equal in DBH or the cash equivalent whichever is greater. (4) The installation of the replacement trees will take place prior to the granting ofa final inspection and those replacement trees, which fail to survive for a full year shall be replanted with like stock within the next growing season. (5) Exceptions: (a) Deseased trees ma'! be removed at anv time on the property without replacement (b) The replacement of cottonwoods will be with the "cottonIess" variety. Revegetation shall also comply with the Pitkin County revegetation Guidelines. ~ Option one: 7-30-10 (c) Tree Removal and Mitigation Each tree with four (4) inches or larger diameter at breast height (DB H) that is removed within the Activity Envelope shall be replaced with one (I) or more trees with total DBH at least equal to the caliper(s) of the trees removed. Revegetation shall also comply with the Pitkin County revegetation Guidelines. [New] (1 ) Exception: Development on lots in County approved subdivisions with designated building or development envelopes. Option Two: 7-30-10 (c) Tree Removal and Mitigation Each tree with four (4) inches or larger diameter at breast height (DBH) that is removed within the Activity Envelope shall be replaced with one (1) or more trees of the same type (aspen. spruce. pine. etc.,) with total DBH at least equal to the caliper(s) of the trees removed. (I) The above replacement trees may be planted on the property outside the Activity Envelope if it can be shown that... (a) there is insufficient room within the Activity Envelope to plant the replacement trees without hampering access to the property or endangering the public safety or. (b) the planting of the replacement trees would endanger the undisturbed natural vegetation and/or other trees remaining within the Activity envelope. (2) Off site mitigation in the form of (in order of preference)... (a) planting trees in the common areas of the subdivision -with the permission of the Homeowner's Association. or, (b) planting replacement trees on other private property(ies) in the subdivision or other adiacent land(s) - with the permission ofthe respective land owner(s) (c) donating: the replacement trees or a cash equivalent to Pitkin County Open Space and Trails .... can be considered an option if.. . (a) (c)O)(a) or (c)(1)(b) above applv and (b) it can be shown that planting the replacement trees anywhere else on the propertv would exacerbate a slope issue through either the installation itself and/or the addition of irrigation water to a potentiallv unstable slope. or. (c) the planting of the replacement trees would endanger the undisturbed natural vegetation and/or other trees on the property outside the Activity Envelope or, (d) the replacement trees likelihood of survival in the new area would be r ~ minimal. (3) The tvpe of replacement tree planted outside the Activity Envelope or in off site mitigation as allowed in (1) and/or (2) above shall be changed to a type more appropriate to the location in which thev are being planted. Ie if the development cuts down aspen trees but the replacement area outside the activity envelope is a pine forest then pine trees should be installed instead. When chancing types of trees to be installed the new trees will be equal in DBH or the cash equivalent whichever is greater. (4) The installation of the replacement trees will take place prior to the granting of a final inspection and those replacement trees, which fail to survive for a full year shall be replanted with like stock within the next growing season. Revegetation shall also comply with the Pitkin County revegetation Guidelines. s