Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.246533401015DOCUMENT 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 copies (11x17) #33~4°56.O8/~S/91 1tcQie*~.~.00 BK 655 PG 200 t-~ r. ,,. ~. . ~,~~- ~ 1 Silvia Davis, Pitkin C: /. _ert.; Doc ~.00~~ ~~•- ;__ ~~ --- ~'~ RESOLIITION,OF THE BOARD OF COIINTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO GRANTING GENERAL SIIBMISSION APPROVAL TO MOORE HIIFFMAN TO CONSTRIICT A SINGLE. FAMILY. HOME ON LOT 38 OF SOPRIS:MOUNTAIN.RANCH,. Resolution No. 91-~ WHEREAS, Moore Huffman.(hereinafter,."Applicant") has applied to Pitkin County for a 1041 Hazard Review approval to construct a single family residence in a wildlife and wildfire hazard area pursuant to Section 5-40.0 of the., Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the property is located south of West Sopris Creek Road within the. Sopris.. Mountain Ranch .subdivision ..which is more. specifically described in Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter, "Commission") considered the request at a duly noticed public hearing on'March 19,-•-1991, and granted 1041 Hazard. Review approval and recommended General Submission approval to the Board of County Commissioner's (hereinafter "Board"); and WHEREAS, the Board considered the request at a duly noticed public hearing on May 28, 1991 at which time it found the Applicant"s request to be in compliance with the General Submission requirements of the Land Use Code.. NOW, THEREFORE EE IT RESOLVED_ by the Board of County Commissioners that it hereby grants Moore Huffman General Submission approval to construct a single .family .home subject to the following conditions: #3359.~i6 08/^8/91 12•gla--"bs¢r g,pq ~F,. 655 FG 201 Silvia Davis, F'itkin G Y, lerF~, Doc x.00 Resolution No. 91-~ Page 2 r`~ r"',. 1. The Applicant shall file a 1041 Hazard Review Map for the Planning and Zoning Commission chairman's signature, prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. The Applicant shall mitigate wildfire hazards in the following manner: a. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall install an underground water storage tank of no less than two thousand (2,000) gallon capacity for fire fighting purposes: b. The proposed driveway shall meet County Driveway Standards and shall be no less than twenty (20) feet in width from the internal roadway to the building site, to accommodate fire apparatus. c. The Applicant shall install a residential sprinkler system and automatic fire alarm system at the time of construction. d. The Applicant shall abide by the guidelines for wildfire mitigation, as shown in the Colorado Forest Service publication, "Wildfire Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowners,° as follows: o All roofs shall be kept cleared of debris; o Firewood shall be stacked on a contour away from the building; o The base of buildings shall be kept clear of weeds and debris; o At least one (1) ten-pound ABC-class fire extinguisher shall be placed in each structure; o Roof coverings shall be of a non-combustible Underwriters Laboratory approved material; o All power and telephone, lines shall be underground; and 3. The Applicant shall address the following concerns identified by the Environmental Health Department: a. The Environmental Health Department shall approve of water well yield, provision for domestic supply, septic system design and location prior to issuance of a building permit. 3#335956 48/8/91571 Rec x.44 BK 655 PG Silvia Davis, P. x. ~Cnty Clerk, Doc ~:Od .~~ ,,,,. . Resolution No. 91-~ Page 3 b. A domestic water supply with appropriate water rights granted by the Division of Water Resources shall be established "by the applicant prior to issuance of a'building permit. c, Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall clear all financial obligations with the Environmental Health Department. 4. The following conditions of the Division of Wildlife .shall be adhered to by the applicant: a. The homesite shall be located as indicated in the application (Exhibit S) and shall maintain native vegetation to act as a screen. b. No dogs shall be allowed on site. c. Fencing shall be 42" in height or less, and shall be 4 strand or less. d. All livestock/horse grazing shall be located in the common area at the base of the ranch. No `grazing shall be allowed on this parcel. 5. The following conditions of the County Land Use Engineer shall be adhered to by the applicant:. a. The 1041 Hazard Review map 'shall be amended to include the following note: "The provisions of the "1041" land use regulations do not in any way assure or imply that lands designated as removed from hazard areas 'will be free from hazards": b. The Applicant shall receive am Access permit from the County Engineer°prior to issuance of a building permit. c. All ranch roads used to access the property, with the exception of the driveway, shall meet Class V Country Access Standards, prior to the issuance a building permit. 6. The 1041 Hazard Review Plat shall be modified to show a building envelope not to exceed two acres in size, prior to signature of the 1041 Plat. All development henceforth must be restricted to this envelope. 7. All material representations made by the Applicant in the application and public meeting shall be adhered to #335956 U8/^B/91 1^:01 Re~~~7 Ft~. 655 PG 203 ~ "~ ~"'~ ms's' lvi-a Davis, Fitkin Cnty ~l~~~k', Doc x.00 ' Resolution No. 91-~ Page 4 and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED by the Board at its regular meeting on May 28, 1991. BOARD OF COIINTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITRIN COIINTY, COLORADO ATTEST: clerx v , AS TO FORM: •-- By Way a thridge, Chai n Date ~ ~?j? ~ ~~ APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~/~~ ~ i3~ Amy arq , Pla ninq~ irector reso.gs.huffman -~ #35956 08/^c8/91 1?tA"~$ ~""~9c , ~. ~JO BK 655 PG 204' .,, Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.nn _. Exhibit "A" ' Huffman General Submission Legal Description: Parcel 38 (Revised) being part of Lot 4, the SW#SE# and the E}SE} of Section 33 and being part of-the SW} of Section 34, all ~.n Township 8 South, Range 87 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, .Colorado, and being more . particularly described as follows... . - Beginning at a point whence a_brass cap found in place and properly marked for. the. Sou„thwest Corner of said Section 34 bears S 29°05'06° W 847.00 feet; thence` N 62°50'00" W 280.00 feet; thence N 88'd~0'00" W 1078.78 feet; thence N 53°10'.00" W_,467 84 feet,'thence N 10°32'42"•E . ° '"' ~'"'"' ~.b0 feet; thence 126Q.15 feet, thence S 47 2"`b f~0 E 5`~B ~` S 32°-00'00" W 120.00 feet; thence S 61°14'51" E ,1540.73 feet; thence S 29°29'00" W, 507.78 feet to the point of beginnsag, containing 36.01 acres'mare or less, subject. to any tax, special assessment, charge or lien for any special district, rights-of-way and easements for ditches, pipelines .and roadways appearing of record, patent reservations, including the right of a proprietor to remove ore as reserved in Book 55 at Pages 42, 43, 49 and 69, and Book 55 at Pages 160 and 278., and mineral. reservations recorded in ,. Book 162 at Page 436, Book 162 at Page-420 and Book S62 at Page 524 and mineral royalty-interests in Book 178 at Page 436 and Book 193 at .,Page 479 as they may affect such property 'and the following restrictive covenants which do not cont;iiu a right ,of reverter. Declaration of Protective Covenants and Dedication of Easements in Book 437 at Page 748, Wand first Amendment to Declaration of `Protective .~ '.M'^. ~ e:.. :LS^ ' .N.MµxSL ~s . Cdvenants in Book 551 at Page 253, and~excep,'"tYie easements defined :ia the declaration for equestrian, pedestrian, grazinq,•'~utilities and access and subject to building and zoning regulations, including H.B.~1041 .review (migration, wildfire and slope), and provisions of the Articles of Incorporation of the Sopris Mountain ..Ranch homeowner's Association recorded in Book 5,07 at Page 689 and `By=Laws recorded in Book 507 at Page 693';'f a~ `of the records of Pitkin County,"`Colorado, together with all its appurtenances except'•water rights which are not,,'aonveyed hereby and warrant the title against all persons. - -- - - Lo} 2~ °4 drvi' f by l/e: ~/ elw ` blb eW era p,y]j ery YQ e~ ' ~ rllor /.Ult Zy BJE ~ er~ ~ Y~ ~/ /_ / I ~~ IN ~ yp ~ x.u r-/m 4 ~$~ '~.~ O~ ~ ~ e4 Lo{ 3'1 .'~~~i" °ry 1` Z.6..` tin eW ~4e'- ~.,. ~/ ~' 3:, . .\ Alrce/ No Yb /'~- i ~- _--r _ y ~ r -T _.._......._. ~~ /~ ,v oo ee - ~~/oat. vs - ~' _' . Lor a9 [nf 4/ l.af 41 NW IL%IIn1a~ INK6 F.11 tY [I/t N W 3~1/~ Np N W 1. tR M/1 N W %IN eM ~N«N L[tla ll Utl 1M SYI/1 N MNIM Y ~y M MISIII YMl.ll bK111N INIIM~Y yNgIIMIM IMI01pY !11 Yh fw. Nx fenMed taM1 N Nu I«uM W Wp s i1'R' Vj-tA. (~ Mt.R rxt: tYwn Y YYtl'R` Y. M.M f«t: UMte I Rt I.On.11 Mn WKY Y n•11'R' Y M1.M rMl' INK. Y N Fe N• r. I,w.u rnl~ !Mm s nM6~R• !. YR.AI rMl tY. In~btO°• s ntii'm'v~ ur {I~w Ivlie~:i eS i:airlw" t~+, ~ taulnlM nen «n..1 IMI w. M Int. yN P RvI R%IIIIIa. W1111R On101[ V A Nml el I W MIM Nrt of leml b. M. k«le IMMIi ~ I1Vl IM. nNn feral). al«W. W MIM qn rN 11 Me.IY ~ ly rwM: N, ~ Iplml el a IN «w%Y W b/I.T.M1 [«M. N IIp1111 r~~ Ixet: t~iwlin'!13 N'0{'N~ Y jN~fll nib StKKi3 N,II'n'1 N ini:llrq~ie « limla il~/«~~°e ivaMUnte«ui~roul l ~ ~ ~ M• t~ Sernbra an«mm T ~ I. SIN) IIKKaY. b MM) fM111 IMt 1 « I Ipltina! I«J qmM I ~ ~~,~ IM el W St1M el bIMNe. WI lMt flte IIM It • lM. fOtnYt W ttl `MI W tIK InIF It IMe MIM. tMl te11511e IIM Mt We fm M' /~ M n11 NMn1 b«IIM Men h w M Mill eI Yli«I «Clnltlw ~~ V IM 1«etlM Mt alwNMt N IM I~Mn) lM e! IM NIIIIM Mellbn ly bl tMne11Y W Mtt N q eIn'lepr W Mllel. '/ Ie NiK\t «em11 Nn MIg4M Utl 1p1 UIt~Nr alp ? T tl:T:S~IAIt- (~ nN n r W Nim .S C w:IILY ti.iriwi: piitnsi u.i%ez«i we o11)..:M°ii .ewe iin:n~KI .T C N. ~ ANn•N lal w.m Mlll. b: ) N au: 0 4•Iltml•t Yom: n T^ w VUj' o I-v KRINRI fR tl<bDIR O V• an IMI NM, Mee K<plp la lRIMM W.I,InNIMfIM WMt. " Lents. GI Na M Mlt N) e1 . Y.O. n_ le Ilel b 1 V AIM ~ el r«pllM ~ O ~ N O' r. rt eI belMllM N NIIIIM Llle MIYaMVII1M a11Y177~IN~b IYN Mlle W YwI1~tIA bHOIINtIHrte(pwww Mlll) ~ Yleltle~nry K«eN1M NMN bwlN. a«Y ML.Iie M MLL b) MIt INl1YI. NE1 ~ IV[ORn•Yt4[MRR tlna LNIIIRn RRA'ra%IIIR'1~ ~~- • Rnp'!RalW'I~~ ~~ ~1~.:.e#~336731 09/24/91 09:Y9 Fte, .00 bk 657 FG 393, iIvia Davis,F3tkinCntyerk,~Doc x:00 RESOLIITION OF THE PITRIN COIINTY BLANKING AND ZONING COMMISSION GRANTING MOORE_HIIFFMAN 1041, HAZARD REVIEW APPROVAL. TO.CONSTRIICT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ,ON LOT. 38 OF SOPRIS MOIINTAIN RANCH Resolution No. PZ-91-~i ' WHEREAS, Moore Huffman (hereinafter "Applicant"), the owner Lot 38 of Sopris Mountain Ranch more .specifically described in Exhibit "A", has applied to Pitkin County for a 1041 Wildlife and Wildfire Hazard review to ,construct a sngle_family house; and WHEREAS, the Pitkin County Planning and .Zoning Commission (hereinafter, "Commission") considered the request at a duly noticed public hearing on March 19, 1991; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that it hereby grants Moore Huffman. Wildlife and Wildfire Hazard Review„approval and recommends General Submission approval to the Board of County Commissioners to construct a single family home subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall file a 1041 Hazard Review Map for the Planning and Zoning Commission chairman's signature, prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. The Applicant shall mitigate wildfire hazards in the following manner: a. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall install an underground water storage tank of no less than two thousand--(2,000) gallon capacity for fire fighting purposes. b. The proposed driveway shall meet County Driveway Standards and shall. be no less than twenty (20) feet in width from the roadway to the building site, to accommodate fire apparatus. c. The Applicant shall install a residential sprinkler a ~ rm._ r ~ ,..Y r.., rrai,,~,R.r4wah~ E,,~~. a,..m,a h, ~,.Aa „rzCs~cw~sti #336?31 09/24/91 U9:19 fte x.00 BY.. 657 PG 3q4 ` ' Silvia Davis, Pitkin'Cnty erk, Doc x.00 Resolution No. PZ-91-~ Page 2 system and automatic fire alarm„system at the time of construction. v d. The .Applicant shall abide by the guidelines for wildfire mitigation, as shown in the Colorado Forest Service publication, "Wildfire Safety Guidelines fore. Rural Homeowners:" They are as follows: o All roofs shall be kept cleared of debris; o Firewood shall be stacked on a .contour away from the building; o The base of buildings shall be kept clear of weeds and .debris; o At least one., (1) ten-pound ABC-class fire extinguisher shall be placed in each structure; o Roof coverings shall be of a non-combustible Underwriters. Laboratory approved material; o All power and telephone .lines shall be underground; and o No structures shall, be ,.places on densely vegetated hillsides with slopes greater than. 30%. 3. The Applicant shall address the following concerns. identified by the Environmental Health Department: a. The. Environmental Health Department shall approve of water well yield, provision for domestic supply, septic system design and location prior to issuance of a building permit. b. A domestic water supply with appropriate water rights granted by the Division of Water Resources shall be established ,by the applicant prior to issuance of a building permit. `- - c. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall clear all financial obligations with the Environmental Health Department. 4. The following conditions of_the Division of .Wildlife shall be adhered_to,by the applicant: a. The homesite shall be located as indicated in the application and shall mantain,native„vegetation to' • #'336731 49/24/91 49`:`19 R x.40 BY, 657 P6 395 ' S~irhlvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty C1erh:, Doc x.44 Resolution No. PZ-91-ivt Page 3 77-- act as a screen.. b. No dogs shall be .allowed on site.... c. Fencing shall be 42" in height or less, and shall be 4 strand or less. d. All livestock/horse grazing shall be located in the common area at the base of, the„ranch. No grazing ,_ shall be allowed on this parcel. 5. The following conditions of .the County Land Use Engineer shall be adhered to by the applicant: a. The 1041 Hazard Review map .shall be amended .to include the following note: "The. provisions of the "1041" land use regulations do not in_any way assure or imply that lands designated as removed from hazard areas will be free from 'hazards". b. The Applicant shall receive an_Access permit from the County Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. c. A13 ranch roads used to access.. the,„property, with the exception of the driveway, shall meet Class V Country Access Standards, prior. to the issuance...a building permit. 6. The 1041 Hazard Review Plat shall be_modified to show a building envelope not to exceed two acres in size, prior to signature of the 1041 Plat., All development henceforth must be restricted to this envelope. ~~ 7. All material representations_ made_by the Applicant in the application and public meeting shall be ,adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular `meeting on March 19, 1991. tu,.y„tmlat +~e. ..,'.+. ie, ,.., yep.-. Ykki2-4-~J +Yy3.+c 4.... e~r..iw ,.+..,;. ~^1,.. rau>F ra *+`' #3~1 09/^c4/9i 69:19 Rec 5.ti'. 657 PG 396 Silvia Davis, Pit4;in Cnty Cierk, Doc $.~?n Resolution No. PZ-91-~ Page 4 PITRIN COIINTY PLANNING, AND ZONING CO1!lQSSION ~im~Reser, Moderator Dwight. Spellman, Qla~rman Date: ~ (?iZ ~'~ ~ Date ~ ATTEST: Debbie Skehan, Office tanager APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO .CONTENT- . ~. L~c~. ~. ~~~t,,= I-f-~.. _ / r Tim i tt, AmY 1Sargelum,'t Coun y A t rney Planning Director J reso.pz.1041.huffman_ f .. ... ,..: ..... a..a~,asv~3.a.,a ,. a. wrm. :c.«~~...,,; ,..,-av,. „aw.~aus.4mvaN,4smAn,*.-=„ ,:~.r.ur. " :,..~. ~ UO BK 657 FG 397 ,r3~6731 Oki/-4/91 ?9:19 RecCler.k;, Doc '~.DV Silvia Davis, Fitkin Cnty Exhibit._"A" Huffman 1041 Hazard Review. Legal Description: A parcel of land known as Sopris Mountain Ranch Parcel 38 (Revised) being part art of tYie 3W}Sof Section 34e E}SEA of Section 33 and being p all in Township 8 South, Ran`g`e°87 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado, and being more . particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point whence a brass cap found in place and properly marked for.. the Southwest Corner of said Section 34 bears S 29°05'06" W 847.00 feet; thence N 62°50'00" W 280.00°feet;'thenoe N 88°00'00" W 1078.78 feet; thence N 53°10'00" W 467.84 feet; thence N 10°32'42" E •1260.15 feet'; thence S 47°20'00" E 590.00 feet; thence S 32°00'00" W 120.00 feet;` thence S 61°14'51" E 1540.73 feet; thence S 29°29`00" W 507.78 feet to the point of beginni-ag, containing 36.01 acres more or less, subject to any tax, special assessment, charge or lien for any elines district, rights-of-way and easements aEent 3reservations, .and roadways appearing of record, p including ,-the right of a proprietor to remove. ore as reserved in Book 55 at Pages 42, 43, 49 and 69, and Book 55 at Pages 160 and 278; and mineral reservations recorded in Book 162 at Page 436; Book 162 at Page'420 and Book 162 at Page. 524 and mineral_ royalty interests in Book 178 at Page 436 and Book 193 at' Page 479 as they may"affect "such property and the following restrictive.. covenants which do not ,cont~lia a right of reverter: Declaration of Protective Covenants and Dedication of Easements in Book'"437 at Page " 748, `and First Amendment to Declaration of Protective 'Covenants in Book 551 at Page 259, and except tedestrian nts defined .in the declaration for equestrian, p grazing,'utilities and access and subject to building and Zoning regulations, inanda1rovHsions0of the Articles tofn~ wildfire and slope), P Incorporation of the Sopris Mountain„Ranch. HomeCwner's Association recorded in Book 507 at Page 689 and. By-Laws recorded in Book 507 at Page"'693, all of the re urtenances Pitkin County, Colorado, together with all its app except'~water rights which are not conveyed hereby and^ _ . ,.. warrant the title against all persons. .. .a ri~.r{„ 3i,~ _.. eeSU.vt>Yt~YiM'&SA.^~e~,.r..a~a.~F.~,3 {.1.-'s'ss..A&1d~`3."*v...d.~Pn.f.. ~°ds:.J.: ~~ AGENDA ITEFI SUlII+lARY TO: Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting - May 28, 1991 THRU: Reid Haughey, County Manager ~ Amy Margerum, Planning Director ~J" CJ"'•3~ RE: Huffman General Submission FROM: Mary Lackner, Planner REQIIEST: The applicant is requesting General Submission approval to construct a single family residence with an attached garage on a metes and bounds parcel. SIIMMARY: The applicant has received 1041. Hazard Review approval for wildlife and wildfire hazards by the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 19, 19'91. The Planning Office and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend General Submission approval. APPLICANT: Moore P. Huffman. APPLICANT' S REPRESENTATIVSs__ John B. Young. LOCATION: Lot 38 of the Sopris Mountain Ranch is located. in Township 8 South, Sections 33 and 34, Range 87 West. ISSIIES: The following three issues are. related to the General. Submission criteria: 1. The applicant needs to meet the requirements of the Environmental Health Department for the location and development of the proposed water and septic systems, and verify that there are .appropriate water rights granted by the Division of Water Resources. 2. The interior ranch roads used to access the property , ~ ' _.e.....~.,,...~a. ~«~, ~.. ~..~.,, Standards will need to meet Class V Country Access prior to the issuance of a building permit on this site. 3. There are wildlife hazards on the property and the applicant .has agreed to the recommendations of .the Division of Wildlife to mitigate potential impacfs. ALTERNATIVES: The Board of County Commissioners may: 1. Approve the applicant's request with conditions. 2. Deny the applicant's request. _.._ ..tom .. .._;a ,.. .~... .,.. .,, .~. w,x ~. .>w.,~.cyr,: tau„ ' ,. rw 4w'r~~4p'~;.~c,. ,.uw a.'s ,. „~ ggCO1+II+IENDATION: The Planning Office and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend alternative 1, with the conditions listed in the attached memo. ais.gs.huffman ., ...,:-_...as~.,..~.u~u~s~s ~,.w.~,..>.,~sre.. ,~., anw ~..~sd~n.4d;,x~.~'Naat~~.:a.~'~ro'`~Ssa,u~i~s,4...b~.&s%u1d: r~oRArrovM TO: Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting - May 28, 1991 THRU: Reid Haughey, County Manager Amy Margerum, Planning Director RE: Huffman General Submission FROM: Mary Lackner, Planner REQUEST: The applicant is requesting General Submission apprvvai to construct a single family residence with an attached garage on a metes and bounds parcel. On March 19, 1991 the Planning and Zoning Commission granted the applicant 1041.. ..Hazard Rediew approval for mapped wildlife and wildfire hazards. APPLICANT: Moore P._Huffman. APPLICANT'S. REPRESENTATIVE: John B. Young. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL LOCATION: Lot 38 of the Sopris Mountain Ranch is located in Township 8 South, Sections 33 and 34, Range 87 West. ZONING:. The 35,02 acre property is zoned RS-30. ACCESS: Access to the property is via Ranch. Roads #1 and #6 from West Sopris Creek Road. WATER: The applicant proposes to drill an onsite well to provide water for domestic and fire flows. SEWER: Aseptic system is proposed for the property. OVERVIEW: The applicant's property is within the Sopris Mountain Ranch which is comprised of 54 residential lots. The parcels are approximately 35 acres in size and. were not platted or approved through the County land use process. When reviewing this application it is important to focus on both the site .specific lot concerns as well as the general submission .issues which result from the cumulative impacts in the area. REFERRAL AGENCY .COMMENTS: 1. County Land IIse Engineer- Tom. Newland submitted the following comments in a memo dated ,January 7, 1991: Plat- Section 5-400.7 of the Land Use Code recites a disclaimer that hazards may exist outside of mapped areas: It is recommended.. that .the plat be amended to include the ,following note: "The provisions of the !'1041" land use regulations do not in any way assure or imply that lands designated as "removed from hazard areas will be free from hazards". Internal Road System- Access to the building envelope is gained from 'a 60' wide road easement which bisects .the property. It is recommended that the applicant receive an Access permit from this office prior to issuance of a building permit. Impacts to the Road Svstem- presently under capacity. upgraded and is capable of generated from this request. West Sopris Creek Road is The road has been recently handling additional traffic 2. Environmental Health Department- This. department submitted the following comments in a memo dated December. 20, 1990 (Attachment 1): SewacLe- The soils in Sopris Mountain Ranch contain. a significant amount_of clay. Most of the parcels that have been developed thus far have received an engineer designed system because of slow percolation rates. On June 25, 1990, this office did a soil. percolation test on the Huffman parcel which had a percolation rate in excess of 240 minutes per inch.. This„ precludes the installation of a standard system. However, a system designed. by an engineer that still meets the regulations can most likely be constructed. We would recommend that the applicant explore other parts of the building envelope to determine whether other areas may be more suitable for the sewage disposal system. Soil percolation tests should be done in any other areas that are considered. We would recommend 'that the applicant's engineer repeat the soil percolation `test in any case. In addition,. a soil profile hole was not dug at the time.. of .the perc test.. This will need to be done as part of the final site evaluation to check for possible limiting factors such as bedrock or high ground water. Water- The applicant proposes. to drill a new well to provide water for domestic use. In looking at Ehe 'size of the parcel, and the experiences. of neighboring property owners in developing wells, we would anticipate that the applicant will be of sufficient water quantity and quality. We would suggest that the applicant provide documentation of the physical and legal water supply, or evidence from the Division of Water Resources that a permit can be issued for this well. Once the new well is developed, we would recommend that it be tested to determine if its water quality parameters do meet the requirements`of the Colorado Department of Health. One important .consideration for the. 2 _,._,. .. tir ~. r.~*a~r„:~, s.k a. .:en. ,~..F...,,1.,~..u~-suo-;.~V. ,:..,ay, .. <s p:a,rr~ .a,):~f~.«~..a9ws ..,nt~%:~. placement of the new well is the location of the new septic system. Air uality- In this area of the County, single family homes are limited to one woodburninq fireplace and one certified woodstove. 3. Division of Wildlife- In a letter dated, July 23, 1990, Randy «.n ~w,, rv , .. Cote submitted the following"comments s'" The lot lies in elk transitional range and adjacent to an elk calving area. There is some winter use in ,lighter snow years as well as early and late winter,, It also lies within an elk/deer migration pattern as elk/deer filter through the area on their way to the "Crown". Huffman selected a building envelope in the northwest side of the subdivision road in a meadow surrounded. by small aspen and oakbrush. The road splits the lot. The following will minimize impacts to wildlife: 1. Homesite located .along the edge of the meadow maintaining native vegetation to act as a screen. 2. No dogs. 3. All fencing be 42", 4 strand or less. 4. All livestock/horse grazing be located in the .common area at the base of the ranch. 4. Fire District- In a letter dated July 13, 1990, Chief Thiering submitted the following comments: An on site, inspection of the-Huffman property has no immediate wildfire hazard at the proposed building site. The following items 1 and 2 are mandatory while 3 is only recommended: L It will be mandatory that a water storage tank. of no less than two thousand. (2,000) gallon capacity be placed on the property near the_buildng site for Fire Fighting purposes...... 2. Driveway(s) shall be_no less than twenty (20) foot in width from the roadway to the building `site. 3. Due to the distance of travel for the Fire Department, I strongly recommend the installation of a residential sprinkler system and automatic fire alarm system at the time of construction. The cost of the systems would be 3 m, ~W>xw.x. Una ,.s. ., i vsrr..m:x~;^eaiic3xw.a~.rix v~wdMl~-nt we46 rS~n zk1?s~~ n .,. paid back in possible lowAr insurance premiums. (T e potential home builder should check with their insurance company for any possible reductions in premiums). STAFF COMMENTS: The. applicant is requesting 1041 Environmental Hazard review approval. for wildlife and wildfire hazards and General Submission approval to construct a single family home`on Lot 38 of the Sopris Mountain Ranch, pursuant to_sections 5-400 and 6-3 of the Land Use Code.. The proposed house is to be less than 3,000 square feet in size. The Planning and Zoning Commission granted 1041 Hazard Review approval on March 19, 1991 for the wildlife and wildfire hazards on site. A copy of their resolution with conditions is Attachment 2. Section 6-3 General Submission The following General Regulations .(Article _5) and Policies (Article 2) of the Land Use Code are .applicable to the applicant's proposal. Section 2-2 Conformance with Other Laws- ,The applicant must meet all applicable codes and requirements of the Building Department, County Land Use. Code, Environmental Health Department and State Forest Service standards. Section 2-3 Natural and Zian Bade Hazard and Resource Areas- The applicant is proposing to build within a. known wildlife habitat area. There appear to be no geologic hazards within the building envelope or access road from West.. Sopris Creek Road. Sections 2-6 and 5-205 Adequate Provision for Water Needs- The Environmental Health Department has indicated that sufficient water quantity and quality could be obtained on the property. The applicant needs to provide documentation of the physical and legal water supply, or evidence from the_ Division of Water Resources that a permit can be issued for .this well. Once the new` well is developed, it is recommended to be tested to determine if its water quality parameters do meet the requirements of the Colorado Department of Health. The placement of the new well must be sited to avoid conflicts with the location of the new septic system. Sections 2-7 and 5-200 Sewage Treatment and Collection- A soils percolation test was conducted on the, property which resulted in a perc rate which 'precludes tlie'installation of a standard system. However, according to the Environmental Health Department a system designed by an engineer that 4 .^,. s ~, .k ,.~&ca%u.. :..~ x .,::."~ rr cua%,.~,, ....max r*.a-"r.a/aw_xt vv~.,er,..~v.n,.~tu x~ a~~~~<. rXi ~ ~ complies with the regulations can most likely be constructed... The Environmental Health Department recommends that the applicant explore other parts of the building envelope to determine whether an alternative area may be more suitable for the sewage disposal systeitt, Sections 2-8 and 5-201 Impacts on Road. System- The increase in use from this proposed residential ,structure will not have a negative impact on the County road system, as there is sufficient capacity on West Sopris Creek Road... Sopris Mountain Ranch has easements for use of roads that are dedicated in the protective"covenants aiid dedication. of easements recorded for the ranch. This insures that the property has legal access from the County road to the property. Sections 2-9 and 5-202 Road Design and Construction- The... road system within the Sopris Mountain Ranch has not been granted County approval despite its construction approximately 10 years ago. The County Engineer has indicated that ranch access road to the property will be ,.. . required to meet the requirements of Class V Country Access Standard ._ The applicant's driveway will be virtually flat and will be gravel .surfaced. The. applicant has agreed to construct the driveway to the Fire District's standard. of a 20 foot surface to accommodate fire truck access. Sections. 2-10 and 5-203. Logical Extension. of _IItllities- Sopris Mountain Ranch has extended underground utilities throughout most of the ranch, without County approvals. The applicant has indicated, that utilities will be extended .. o.a~ ..~.. underground to the building site, from`~.he adjoining access road. The Planning Office recommends utility extensions be placed under the driveway in order to avoid vegetation removal and long term maintenance disturbance. Sections 2-il and 5-102 Erosion- The applicant has indicated that the following measures will be provided during construction to prevent erosion and sedimentation. 1. All topsoil within the construction zone will be stripped and stock piled on the site for use in landscaping and Yevegetation. 2. Areas to be disturbed will be limited to excavation, material storage, vehicle access "and parking and driveway embankments.. 3. Landscaping and revegetation will occur on all 5 ,~ _„.~,,~..~ ,.. .., ~~,.~ .,k,.~,H~~~~.~..x._,t..~~,~~,~na~B:~., ~y~ areas disturbed and be completed ,as quickly as .possible following exterior building construction. Areas revegetated will be irrigated to ensure seed germination and plant survival. 4. Any disturbance by utility construction will be revegetated and restored. 5. Following project completion, any temporary sedimentation control measures will be removed .and the site will be cleaned 'of all construction debris. Sections 2-13 and 5-104 Compatibility with Agricultural Lands and Operations- The 'site has not historically been ranched, other than by occasional grazing by ranch animals. The Division of Wildlife has recommended a prohibitation of grazing on the property,"and; kioraever;~ if grazing were to occur they would prefer it be restricted to the lower ranch property. The applicant .has indicated that the lower "` portion of the Sopris Mountain Ranch has been historically ranched and irrigated since the late_1500's. The DOW also indicated that property owners wishing to graze horses'riay" do so on the lower pastures on the ranch, since grazing is prohibited on the project site. Sections 2-16 and 5-105 homesite is not visible visible from the interior z building site. The struc visible location .from the this would increase the i hazards on the site. ~nic Quality- The County roads, but ~ahich loops"past the "could`be located i ernal road system, Fc nn'ui~~dfre and proposed will be proposed n a less however, wildlife Section 2-21 Compatibility with Existing Neighborhoods- Lot 38 of the Sopris Mountain Ranch is bordered entirely by other parcels within the ranch. Some of these parcels are much more constrained with wildlife habitat, than the Huffman parcel. The Sopris Mountain Ranch has 54 parcels of roughly 35 acres each, encompassing approximately 2,100 acres. Sections 2-22 and 5-107 Water Resources Impacts- A domestic. water supply, with appropriate water rights granted by the Division of Water_Resources, needs to be established by the applicant prior to issuance of a building permit. Section 2-24 Compatibility with Adjacent or Nearby Public Lands- The majority of the Ranch is surrounded. by National Forest Service Lands; however,' there .is no public access through the ranch to these. public lands. 6 .~e, »~~~, ~> ..z, i . _.u ,.. z. ,c,,. ,ewt d., ~.a.e.a „c+N+r, v34 uw...k&G,zba. ..ia. ~ma°a'..„umnnd»,..wui;~e:;i~a i I -'- Section 2-25 Growth Rate; Phasing of Public Services and Facilities- The sopris Mountain Ranch was "subdivided" prior to approval of the GMQS system. The ranch has been upgraded with improved roads and utility extensions, without County approval. Five of the ranch's 54 lots have been approved by Pitkin County for development. SUI~Il+IARY: The applicant's proposal appears to be consistent with the Policies and General Regulation sections of the Land Use Code. The Division of Wildlife and Basalt Fire District recommendations are consistent with the" Land Use Code for development within hazard areas. RgCpM[+IENDATION: The Planning Office and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the Board of County Commissioners grant General Submission approval £o Moore Huffman, 'subject to the following conditions:.. 1. The Applicant. shall file a 1041 Hazard Review Map for the Planning and Zoning Commission chairman°s signature, prior to issuance of a,building permit. 2. The .Applicant shall mitigate wildfire hazards in the following manner: a. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall install an underground water storage tank of no less than two tf`iousand (2,000) gallon capacity for fire fighting purposes. b. The proposed driveway shall meet County Driveway Standards and _shal,l be no less than twenty (20) ,,„, feet in width from the internal roadway to the building site, to accommodate fire apparatus. c. The Applicant shall install a residential .sprinkler system and automatiq fire alarm system at the time of construction. d. The. Applicant shall abide _by the guidelines for. wildfire mitigation, as shown in the Colorado Forest Service publication, "Wildfire .Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowners," as follows: o All roofs shall be kept cleared of debris; o Firewood shall be stacked on a contour away from the building; o The base of buildings shall be kept clear of weeds and debris; 7 I ~. .. v,+h L^"etalsv rse t. ~~xs s,iaa s:nro.,^.r;.i s~5$tkp*nx~F.c95?T, ~Wk.a'4k~+wv3h_" £~~a ~.:, r ~ ~ Y o At least one,(i) ten-pound ABC-class fire extinguisher shall be placed in each structure; o Roof coverings shall be of a non-combustible Underwriters Laboratory approved material; o .All power and telephone lines shall be underground; and 3: The Applicant shall address the following concerns identified by the Environmental Health Department:; a. The Environmental Health Department shall approve of water well yield, provision for domestic supply, septic system design and location prior to issuance of a building permit. b. A domestic water supply with appropriate water rights granted by the Division of Water Resources ..: shall be established by the applicant. prior to issuance of a building permit. c. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall clear all financial obligations with the Environmental Health Department, 4. The following conditions of the. Division of Wildlife _ ~ .., shall be adhered to by the'applicanti~ a. The homesite shall be located as indicated in the application (Exhibit B) and shall maintain native vegetation to act as a screen.. b. No .dogs shall be allowed on site._ c. Fencing shall be 42" in height or less, and shall be 4 strand or less. d. All livestock/horse grazing shall be located in the common area at the base of the ranch. No ~...~ ~_ grazing shall be allowed on this parcel:'" " 5. The following conditions of the_ County Land Use Engineer shall be adhered. to by the applicant: a. thel 1041'heland use n egulat ons a e not in lany way assure or imply that lands designated as removed from hazard areas will be free from hazards". 8 ~, .. .. ., _, .~.,~~. ,. m>,.xA,..''..,..fa,,.,.*~w a~zn?.~:~c tiA'~.a. q.o ~,..~.., .. nsti. :.~:.3,v„' ~~v, ». iA:w" b. The Applicant shall receive an Access permit from the County Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. c. All ranch roads used to access the property, with the exception of the driveway, shall meet Class V Country Access Standards, prior to the issuance a building permit. 6. The 1041 Hazard,Reyiew Plat shall be modified to show a building envelope not ~to'~eXCeed' two a~cres'~`in size, prior to signature'of the 1041 Plat. .All development henceforth must be restricted to this envelope:" 7. All material representations made. by the Applicant in the application and public_meeting'shall be adhered to and oonsidered_conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. gs.bocc.huffman 9 9 _:.. ,.,,-~azvmss~u uaoz..m.x~ .ti.~.a .ud: .~.. ~,w+:eu. .~~...,..:rw,.,,.e x~„~..~. ~eLna,e~n«rcx: v~"`m~h ... ~ _-..m,...BS~~.. .,... ..,. .. ,....r ... w~~.~..~ ~,_.,.~,.... ., .~nglJ-„t~.`:a ,~xs~ sz.~:fir` ° CfiefiSi.~~F ~ s -xk`~ 5 aa, rgE?~Y ~ ~i FR ~xy z~°3~s's's'9a Se : E °" ~s ~ ~ige ~ ° :C ° : R ~ 3 Ci ~°.Y ~ ass&>$e „CC ~ 6y~nag$:Y ~nO s e$ 4 Ls ~F F`~.b 8~...RSy 3. FS ~_S:~ Z~`~~~ b R 8A F p~ ~fi flQ 6 Y = E CY$8~F j = ~ ~ ° CC F'YZF ~ ° a s E '[ ~ ST 5 w Y ` S ~4 £iL~' ~gy~= :a 3 I.:. LgeE~ r ° F ~~F ' ` • S d &~. _ l °~ L~ ~ I s~; Ci_.:F . 'e P Y ~~ ¢ ::.'.Y:E ' %~ 8 :~'z t~~ H a~ , GYa~~~~ , Yfl YS{S5= ° ~ " ~ 2• y z . as ' ~ ~ b 'YYE~S'y ' •j 3 E Ca`ai ib~ ~ ` P C i .LE YY~ = s ~3% 3 ~ E 5~ ~a° ;' ~a F ea 8 "-a sP 3 a Fgs Y $ ~e• 5 4 a" I _ 4 '~a E ` ~~' i t 3yC~ ~g3 d'yy3 6 6 6 AYX E ~ 3 k ~ fi !~' y ~? y v p e . „;. , .~. s.,..ae.M ~ ..,a: z ~,.vz=~ ..,c,.tMa a6 .aV,,at.r~,'~w.< wL r~r, a.,~w ~.+r.o* 3 ~ ATTACHMENT 1 ~k ~ ASPEN*PITKIN ,. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM. 1 To: Mary Lackner, Planning Office From: Environmental Health Department Date: December 20, 1990. Re: Huffman 1041 Wildlife and Wildfire and General Submission Parcel ID # 2465-334-01-015... The applicant plans to install system for the. disposal of v residence. The application stal with the Pitkin County Regulatic Systems. Our preliminary evaluai individual sew water from i experience in 5opris Mountain Ranch and on the. disposal proposed parcel. The soils in Sopris Mountain Ranch contain a significant amount of clay. Most of the parcels that have been developed thus far.. have required an engineer designed system because of slow percolation rates. On June 25, 1990, this office did a soil percolation test on the Huffman parcel. The percolation .rate was in excess of 240 minutes.. per inch. This precludes the installation of a standard system. However, a system designed by an engineer that still meets .the regulations can most .likely be constructed. We would recommend that the applicant explore other parts of the building envelope to determine whether other areas may be more suitable for the sewage disposal system. Soil percolation tests should be done iti any other areas .that are considered. We would recommend that the applicant's engineer repeat the soil percolation test in any case. In addition, a soil profile hole was. not dug at the time of the perc test. This will need to be done as part of the final site. evaluation to check for possible limiting factors such a bedrock, or high ground water. We would like to remind the applicant that he has not paid the $100 fee for the percolation test that was done_by this office in June. 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 61611 303/920-6070 t +,a L`i.~aw ..:. ..F ., ,:..s,..wt ,.s,<~5ah~ia,3t:.Lw3„k.v.s.~t' . x,av.ai=.,Ra^::.~zla~~EM1ihm...^s ek'e~a"T,l.;af~•4,~r. The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the above-mentioned land use submittal under authority of the Pitkin Counter Code, Title II, and'tias the following comments. ~,,,~ _ ~ Huffman 1041 January 7, 1991 Page 2 '^ - ADEQUATE PROVISIONS, FOR WATER NEEDS Sections 2 6 and 5 205:x"" The applicant proposes to_drill a new well to provide. water for _~.. domestic use. In looking at the size of the parcel, and the experiences of neighboring property owners"in developing wells, we would anticipate that the applicant will _be able to obtain a permit for. drilling a new well, and that this well will he`"o`f`" sufficient water quantity and quality. We would suggest that the applicant provide documentation of the physical and legal water supply, or evidence from.. the Division of Water Resources that a .,~.- permit can be issued for this well. Once the` new," well is ~...r~ ~.~. a~ Wr..~ developed, we would recommend ~that.;it be tested to determine if its water quality parameters _do meet the requirements of"`the' _ ~ ,_. Colorado Department of Health. One important consideration for the placement of the new,_well is the location of the new septic .. ..iy. W <. .. «~ a ... ~ n r ~ .(da ..w . "a tmlMabw.eo~`14.p13+Rf..`J ... .:-n . ... i... system. AIR QUALITY: Sections The applicant states county standards. In homes are limited to < woodstove. 2-17 and 5-106: ~,LL m ,., ~., ~.~,.~ ~,, ,.~ ~,, , .., <~ ~. .. .,.,,~~. that '!all fireplaces" will comply with _. ~ ,~. ~,..~..A this portion of "the county; single family one woodburning fireplace and one certified NOISE: Section 2-23 ~b Due to the remote,,,, etting this structure will be built in, there is little chance noise~impactswill be realized in,the immediate ~.._~ ~, ...a_ ~. ..,..,...< neighborhoods However,. should .complaints be received by this office, Title 25 Article 12 CRS 1973 - Noise Abatement, will be the document used ,: in the investigation. CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: Section 2-2 ;O ..._H, "~Y..m,w,as,waaw.~.».~. F, ~.a+i~...x "" ~.u. ay, a.~ arm , .~~ nw ~z wsw~rc ,..aea.. s .,~ „ .;'war None that are enforced by this office.. CONTAMINATED SOILS:%h The applicant is advised to ..contact this office for_ comment should mine waste, waste rock or mine dumps be encountered during the excavation phase of the project. Disposal of such materials off-site is discouraged due to the possibility of excessive heavy metals being present in the soil. This is not a requirement, but simply a request based on past experience in dealing with mine .waste and possible negative impacts to humans. ' " ~c,, .n>~=k."f;:/~3$m-~'r.;w,..w'stiEk,#'A'yt,~,aAW ~^r~yss?aik+.attr;s'nb,'d:.+.~Sia};~~.a A~¢?~5^5?3N.3*,i'~G.~z'au ' ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTIONOF THE PITRIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMlIISSION . ,. rv. r r,~a~:~. ~ ~ ~~..~ ..a.~ ~.~ GRANTING MOORE HQFFMAN 1041 HAZARD REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRIICT A SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENCE ON LOT 38 .~ ,,. re... ~„~ ~ ,~t..,.._ ~~ ~, ,.. ,. OF SOPRIS MOUNTAIN RANCH Resolution No.-PZ-91-_ WHEREAS, Moore Huffman ..(hereinafter "Applicant"), the owner Lot 38 of Sopris Mountain Ranch more ,specifically described in Exhibit "A", has applied to Pitkin County for a 1041 Wildlife and Wildfire Hazard review to construct a single family house; and WHEREAS, the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter, "Commission") considered the .request at a duly noticed public hearing on March 19, 1991; and NOW, THEREFORE BE _IT RESOLVED by the Commission that it -.hereby grants Moore .Huffman. Wildlife and Wildfire Hazard Review approval and recommends. General Submission„approval to the. Board of County Commissioners. to construct a single family home subject to the following. conditions: 1. The Applicant shall file a 1041 Hazard Review Map for the Planning and Zoning Commission chairman's signature, prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. The Applicant shall mitigate wildfire hazards in the following manner:. a. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the _. _.,, . Applicant shall install an underground water storage tank of no less than two thousand (2,000) gallon capacity for fire fighting purposes: b. The proposed driveway shall meet County Driveway Standards and shall be no less than twenty (20) foot in width from the roadway to the"'building site, to accommodate fire apparatus. c. The Applicant shall install a residential ...„ - . , o a~ ,m s+.. F t~ ~. ~n « ~a„ n .+.d.,,,ckR>ss ,,., rswa 3s gt~xx k~ ~ ~ Resolution No. PZ-91-_ Page 2 sprinkler system. and automatic fire alarm system at the time of construction. d. The Applicant shall abide_by the guidelines for wildfire mitigation, as shown in the Colorado ... Forest Service.. publication, "Wildfire Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowners." They are as follows: o All roofs shall be kept cleared of debris; o Firewood shall be stacked on a contour away from the building; o The base of buildings shall be kept clear of weeds and debris; o At least one (1) ten-pound ABC-class fire extinguisher shall be placed in each structure; o Roof coverings shall be of a non-combustible ., . Underwriters Laboratory"approved material;' o All power and telephone lines shall be underground; and o No structures µshall be places on densely ~._.. vegetated hillsdes~with slopes greater than. 30$. _ 3. The Applicant shall address the following concerns identified by the Environmental Aealth~Departments a. The Environmental Health_Department shall approve of water well yield, provision for domestic. supply, septic system design and location prior to issuance of a building permit. b. A domestic water supply with appropriate water rights granted by the Division of Water Resources shall. be established by the .applicant prior to issuance of a building permit: c. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the ,. Applicant shall clear all financial obligations with the Environmental Health,Department. ' g i_sion of Wildlife 4~ shall be adhered tolby the appl cant: ._ ~' ~.:w~~ s..~i.>v..nwn`mww~awa~..a~we~w..~wreew,aa~d~~»~,sn~ ..3w.~"~;w~+u.L.tu~w~w i . _r .x Resolution No. PZ-91-_ Page 3 a. The homesite shall be located as indicated in the. application and shall ittaintan native vegetation to act as a screen. b. No dogs shall be allowed on site. c. Fencing shall be 42" in height or less, and shall. be 4 strand or less. d. All livestock/horse grazing shall be located in the common area at the base of the ranch. No grazing shall be allowed on this parcel. 5. The following conditions of the County Land Use Engineer shall be adhered to by the applicant: a. The 1041 Hazard Review map shall be amended to include the following noEe: "The provisions of the "1041" land use regulations do not in any way assure or imply that 'lands designated as removed from hazard areas will be free from hazards". b. The Applicant shall receive,an,Access permit from the County Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. c. All ranch roads used to access the property, with the exception of the driveway, shall meet Class V Country Access Standards, prior to the issuance a building permit. 6. The 1041 Hazard Review Plat shall be modified to show a ~,_ ,.. building envelope not to exceed two 'acres in size, prior to signature of the 1041 Plat. .All development henceforth must be restricted to this envelope. 7. All material representations made :by the Applicant in the application and public meeting shall be adhered. to and considered conditions of approval, unless .otherwise amended by other conditions.. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on March 19, 1991., ~,,, .m ~,~. ~~ ..w.t~t,~. ~..,. b, _, .. ....~„ i +i Resolution No. PZ-91-_ Page 4 PITKIN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMI~SSION By: BI'• Jim Reser Moderator Dwight Shellman, Chairman Date: Date ATTEST: Debbie Skehan, Office Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Tim Whitsitt, County Attorney Amy Margerum, Planning birector reso.pz.1041.huffman _... ~ ,..... __: ._ S ~.., .vazGa.SS+,uwaauw~ce,+,a.+.a~ r..mw.,a~x~eAa~S~a+±~tc~i~skT^bur•,&u~2i~'.tiY~~:W.awbm<...?`&`~~ei. --'• f. p E ._~. `A.. ~ ~. r.. l+~lSORAND V.a TO: Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Mary Lackner, Planner RE: Huffman 1041. and General Submission DATE: March 19, 1991 REQIISST The applicant is requesting 1041 Hazard~`Review approval' for Wildlife and Wildfire hazards and General Submission. approval pursuant to_Section 5-400, and 6-3 of~~the'"Land `bse~`Code. The applicant proposes to construct a single family residence with ah attached garage and no outbuildings. All improvements to the property are to be contained within a 5 acre building envelope. APPLICANT: Moore P. Huffman. APPLICAN'P'S REPRESENTATIVE: John B. Young.. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSALe The. application is included in the memorandum packet. LOCATION: Lot 38 of the Sopris Mountain Ranch is located in Township 8 South, Sections 33 and 34, Range 87 West. ZONING: The 35.02 acre property is zoned RS-30. ACCSSS: Access to the property is via Ranch Roads #1 and #6 from West Sopris Creek Road... WATER: The applicant proposes to drill an on site well to provide water for .domestic and fire flows. SEWER: Aseptic system is proposed for the property. OVERVIEW: The applicant's property is within the Sopris Mountain Ranch which is comprised of 54 single family homesites. The parcels are approximately 35 acres'in size and were not platted or approved through the County land use process. When reviewing this application it is important to keep in ..mind the site specific lot concerns as well as the general submission. issues which result from the cumulative impacts in the area. REFERRAL AGENCY CO1~Il~ITS' 1. County Land IIse Engineer- Tom oNewland submitted the. following comments in a memo dated January 7, 1991: Plat- Section 5-400.7 of the Land Use Code recites a disclaimer that hazards may exist outside of mapped areas: i. _. .. It is recommended that the., plat be amended to include the following note: "The provisions of the "1041" land use regulations. do not_in any way assure or imply that lands designated as removed from hazard areas will be free from hazards"._ Internal Road Svstem- Access to the building envelope is gained from' a 60' wide road easement which bisects the property. It is recommended that pkie"applicant receive an Access permit from. this office rior to issuance of a building permit. Impacts to the Road Svstem- West Sopris Creek Road is presently under capacity. The `road has been recently upgraded and. is capable of handling additional traffic generated from ths_request. 2. Environmental ,.Health„ Department- This department submitted the following comments in a memo dated December. 20, 1990 (Attachment 1): Sewaae- The soils in Sopris Mountain Ranch contain a significant amount.. of clay. Most of the parcels that have been developed thus far have ,received an .engineer designed system because of slow percolation rates: On June 25, 1990, this office did a soil percolation test on the Huffman parcel which had a percolation rate in excess of 240 minutes per inch. This precludes the installation of a standard system. However., a system designed by an engineer that still meets the regulations can most likely be constructed. We would recommend that the„applicant explore other parts of the building envelope to determine whether other areas may be more suitable for the sewage disposal system. Soil percolation tests should be done in any other areas that are , considered. We .would recommend' that the applicant's engineer repeaf the soil percolation test in any case. In .addition, a soil profile hole was not dug at the time of the perc test. This will need to be done as part of the final ._ site evaluation to check for possible limiting factors such as bedrock or high ground water. Water- The applicant proposes to drill a new well to provide water for domestic use. In looking at the size of the parcel, and the. experiences of neighboring property owners in developing wells, we would anticipate that the applicant will be of sufficient water, quantity and quality. We would suggest that the applicant provide documentation of the physical and legal water supply, or evidence from the Division of Water Resources that a permit can be issued for this well. Once the. new well is developed,. we would recommend that it be tested to determine if its water quality parameters do meet the requirements of the Colorado Department of Health. One important consideration for the placement of the new, well is the location of the new septic system. Air Quality- In this area of the County, single family homes are limited to one woodburning fireplace and one certified woodstove.' 3. Division of Wildlife- In a letter dated July 23, 1990, Randy Cote submitted the following comments: The lot lies in elk transitional range and adjacent to an .. elk calving area. There is some winter use in lighter snow years as well as early and late winter. It also lies within an elk/deer migration pattern as_elk/deer filter through the area on their way to the "Crown11. Huffman selected a building envelope in .the northwest side of the subdivision road in a meadow surrounded by small- aspen and. oakbrush. The road splits the lot. The following will minimize. impacts to wildlife: 1. Homesite located along the edge of the meadow maintaining native vegetation to act as a screen. 2. No dogs. 3. All fencing be 42", 4 strand or less 4. All livestock/horse grazing be located in the common area at the base of the ranch. 4. Fire District- In a letter dated July 13, 1990, Chief Thiering submitted the following comments: An on site inspection of the Huffman.., property has no immediate wildfire hazard_,at the proposed building site. The following items 1 and 2 are mandatory while 3 is only recommended• 1. It will be mandatory that a water storage tank of no less than two thousand__,_(2,000) gallon capacity be placed on the property near the building site for Fire Fighting purposes. 2. Driveway(s) shall be no less than twenty (20) foot in width from the roadway to the building site. 3. Due to the distance of travel for the Fire Department, ~. I strongly recommend. the installation of a residential sprinkler system and automatic. fire alarmsystem at thee 3 ~._ time of construction. The cost of the systems would. be paid back in possible lower insurance premiums. (The potential. home builder should check with their insurance company for any possible reductions in premiums). STAFF COMMENTS:. .The applicant is requesting 1041 Environmental Hazard review approval £or wildlife and wildfire hazards and General Submission,, approval to construct a single family home on Lot 38 of the Sopris Mountain Ranch, pursuant to sections 5-400 and 6-3 of the- Land Use Code. The proposed house is to be less than 3,000 square feet in size. Section 5-403 Wildfire Hazard Area The property has mapped wildfire. hazard on-site, however the building envelope is not within this mapped hazard. The average slope of the building envelope has been represented by the applicant as approximately 13%. The. building envelope consists of meadow type vegetation. The Basalt Fire Protection District has determined that the building site has no imriiediate wildfire ..,~.<~ hazard but has recommended' standard wildfire mitigation conditions for this property due to the remote location of the site. These conditions are:. 1. It will be mandatory that a water storage tank of no less than two thousand _.,,(2,000) gallon capacity be placed on the property near the bui ding site for Fire Fighting purposes. 2. .The driveway shall be no less than twenty (20) foot in width from the roadway to the building site: 3. Due to the distance of travel for the Fire Department, ,,,. w.,.,~ _ . I strongly recommend the installation of a residential sprinkler system and automatic fire alarm system at the time of construction. The cost of the systems would be paid back in possible lower insurance"premiums. (The potential home builder should check with their insurance company for any possible reductions in premiums). Planning staff further recommends that the .applicant abide by the recommendations made in the Colorado Forest Service; publication, "Wildfire Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowne'rs''', to mitigate potential wildfire hazards. Section 5-404 Wildlife Hazard Area There are portions. of the Sopris Mountain Ranch .which contain. critical wildlife. habitat. and .calving areas for elk. The 4 ~, `~ proposed building envelope is approximately 2,000 feet away from an elk calving area, lies within elk transitional range and within an elk migration pattern, and receives some winter use in lighter snow years as well as early and late winter, according'to` the Division of Wildlife.. The. building envelope is located at the furthest distance on the propertyfrom the elk calving area. The Land Use Code addresses development within migration routes as follows in section 5-404.2(c): (c) Migration Routes (1) Development which. would close off a migration ,~ .,~.e. corridor and_ prevent migration between summer and winter ranges shall be prohibited... (2) Development may be clustered as in (b)(i) above. (3) Removal or alteration of vegetation should only be permitted upon approval as in (a)(5) above. (4) Disturbances within one quarter (1/4) mile of a deer migration route. and within one half (1/2) mile of an elk migration route shall be minimized. Specifically, dog control measures shall be approved'as in (a)(6) above. Fences which would restrict movement in a migration corridor shall be prohibited. Section 5-404.2(d) Calving area of the Land Use_Code reads: (1) Calving areas shall. be left in .their present natural state without further development. (2) Human activity and use of such areas shall be prohibited during periods of calving activity as established by the Division of Wildlife. The Code also mentions development within proximity to Biq Game Critical Winter Range in Section 5-404 .,2(a): (6) Harmful or disturbing impacts (permanent occupancy, dogs, noise and other physical disturbances) shall be minimized in a development or activity occurring within one (1/2) mile of elk critical winter range and within one quarter (1/4) mile of deer and bighorn sheep critical winter range. Appropriate measures may include covenants prohibiting or restricting dogs, restricting dogs to controlled agriculture-related use, and fences provided and maintained by the development. Randy Cote, District Wildlife Manger recommended that .the. applicant follow the following conditions to minimize impact from 5 .:... . ,. .»<n z.n,:~v*mWC?ne~n ~e vz .mnc..:'r;=t,.r., .. ~a~:,..e~'o-vshP%~e; ~ "8~is:titi"w."~Q 5~ .:: ~;5 ~ _ ~ __ the development to wildlife habitat on the, property: 1. Homesite located, along the edge of the meadow ,,... maintaining native vegetation to act as a screeh, 2. No dogs. 3. All fencing be 42", 4 strand or less 4. All livestock/horse grazing be located in the common area at the base of the ranch; No grazing shall be allowed on this parcel. Neither the Land Use Code ,.requirements or the Division of wildlife comments suggest prohibitation of development on this site. The Planning Office shall recommend that the applicant follow the recommendations of the Division of Wildlife, if approved. Section 6-3 General Submission The following General Regulations (Article __5) and Policies (Article 2) of the Land Use Code are applicable to the applicant's .proposal. Section 2-2 Conformance with Other Laws- The_applicant must meet all applicable codes and requirements of the Building Department, County Land Use Code, Environmental Health .Department .and State Forest Service standards. Section 2-3 Natural and Man-Made. Hazard and Resource Areas- The applicant is proposing to build within a known wildlife habitat area. There appear to be no geologic hazards within the building envelope or access road from West Sopris Creek Road. Sections 2-5 and 5-101 Drainage- The applicant has indicated that the building envelope is located away from"any natuYal drainage courses. Sections 2-6 and 5-205 Adequate Provision for Water Needs- The Environmental Health' Department has indicated that sufficient water. quantity and quality could be obtained on the property. The applicant needs to provide documentation of the physical and legal water supply, or evidence from the Division of Water Resources that.,a permit can be issued for this well.„ Once' the new well is developed, we would recommend that it' be tested 'to` d`eterinine if its water quality parameters do meet the requirements of the Colorado. Department of Health. One important consideration for. the placement of the new well is the location of the new septic system. 6 ... ~., ~. e._e~ ~:. W .... w.~. :.:.; w. ~ .. ,. ~ ~ <~ Sections 2-7 and. 5-200 Sewage Treatment and Collection- A soils percolation test was conducted onwthe,,,property which resulted in a perc rate which precludes the installation of a standard system. However, a system designed by an engineer that still meets the regulations can most.. ,likely be constructed. The Environmental Health_Department recommends.. that the applicant explore°other parts of the building envelope to determine whether .other areas may be more suitable for the sewage disposal system. Sections 2-8 and 5-201 Impacts on Road System- The increase in use from this proposed residential .structure will not have a negative impact on the County road system, as there is sufficient capacity on West Sopris Creek Road. Sopris Mountain Ranch has_ easements, for ,use_of roads that are dedicated... in the protective covenants and dedication ,of easements recorded for he ranch. ,This insures that the property •has legal access from the_ County road to the property. Sections 2-9 and 5-202 Road Design and Construction- The road system within the Sopris Mountain Ranch has not been granted County approval. The road system within the Sopris Mountain Ranch was constructed approximately 10 years ago. The County Engineer has indicated that ranch. access. road. to the property will be required to meet the requirements of Class V Country Access .Standard. The applicant's driveway will be virtually flat and will be gravel surfaced. The applicant has agreed to construct the driveway to the Fire District's standard_ of a 20 foot surface to accommodate fire truck access. Sections 2-10 and 5-203. Logical Extension of IItiltes- Sopris Mountain Ranch has extended underground utilities throughout most of the ranch, without County approvals. The applicant has indicated that utilities will be extended underground to the building site, from the adjoining access road. The Planning Office recommends utility extensions be placed under the driveway. Sections 2-11 and 5-102 Erosion- The ;applicant has indicated that the following measures will be provided during construction to prevent erosion. and sedimentation.. 1. All topsoil within the construction zone_ wll_ be stripped and stock piled on the site for use in landscaping and revegetation. Areas to be disturbed will be limited to excavation, material storage, vehicle. access and parking and driveway embankments. 3. Landscaping and revegetation will occur on all areas disturbed and be completed as quickly as possible following exterior building construction. Areas revegetated will be irrigated to ensure. seed germination and plant survival. 4. Any disturbance by utility construction will be revegetated and restored. Following project completion, any temporary sedimentation control measures will be removed and the site will be cleaned 'of all construction debris. Sections 2-13 and 5-104 Compatibility with Agricultural Lands and_Operations- The site has not been historically ranched other than. by occasional grazing by ranch animals. The Division of Wildlife has recommended a prohibitation of grazing on the property, and prefers grazing on the lower ranch property. The applicant has indicated that the lower portion of the Sopris Mountain Ranch has been historically ranched and irrigated since the late 1800's. He also indicated that property owners: wishing to graze horses may do so on the lower pastures on the ranch, since grazing is prohibited on this parcel. Sections 2-16 and 5-105 Scenic _ Quality- The proposed homesite is not visible from County roads. The .structure will be visible from the interior road which loops past the proposed building site. The structure could be located in a less visible location from the internal road system, however this would increase the impacts on wildfire and wildlife hazards on the site. Sections 2-17 and 5-106 Air .Quality- The applicant shall meet Environmental Health regulations regarding woodburning devices and dust control. Section 2-21 Compatibility with Existing Neighborhoods- Lot 38 of the Sopris Mountain .Ranch is bordered entirely by other parcels within the ranch. Some of these parcels are much more constrained with wildlife habitat on the property, than the Huffman parcel. The Sopris Mountain Ranch has 54 parcels of roughly 35 acres each, encompassing approximately 2,100 acres. Sections 2-22 and 5-107 Water Resources Impacts- A domestic water supply with appropriate water rights granted by the Division of Water Resources needs to be established by the 8 ,~~~: ...._... , _. ~..,~,.~ti~; .. ~" a w~ ~ ~-. . . -- ,, applicant prior to filing a 1041 Hazard Review Plat for approval. Section 2-24 Compatibility with Adjacent or Nearby Public Lands- The majority of the Ranch is surrounded _by National Forest Service Lands, however there is no public access through the ranch to these public lands. Section 2-25 Growth Rate; Phasing of Public Services and Facilities- The Sopris Mountain Ranch was "subdivided" prior to approval of the GMQS system. The ranch has been upgraded with improved roads and utility extensions, without County approval. The ranch consists of 54 lots, of which five have been approved by Pitkin County for development. SDMMARY: The applicant's proposal appears to be consistent with the Policies and General Regulation sections of the Land Use Code. The Division of Wildlife and Basalt Fire District recommendations appear to be consistent with the Land Use Code, for development within hazard areas. RECO1'Il+IE[iDATIONSs The Planning Office recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission grant 1041 Hazard Review approval and recommend .General Submission approval to the Board bf County Commissioners subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall file a 1041 Hazard.. Review .Map for Planning and Zoning Commission's chairman's .signature, prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall mitigate wildfire hazards in the following manner: a. -=Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall install an underground water .storage tank of no less than two thousand (2,000) gallon capacity for fire fighting purposes. b. The .proposed. driveway shall meet County Driveway Standards and shall be no less than twenty (20) foot in width from the roadway to the building site,. to accommodate fire apparatus. c. The applicant shall install a residential sprinkler .system and automatic fire alarm system at the time of construction. d. The applicant shall abide by the guidelines for wildfire mitigation, as shown in the .Colorado Forest Service publication, "Wildfire Safety Guidelines for Rural Homeowners:" They are as follows: o An external water supply for fire fighting shall be provided (small pond, cistern, well or hydrant); o All roofs shall be kept cleared of debris; o Firewood shall be stacked on a contour away from the building; o The base of .buildings shall be kept clear of weeds and debris; o At least one (1) ten-pound ABC-class .fire extinguisher shall-be placed in each structure; o Roof coverings shall be of a non-combustible Underwriters Laboratory approved material; o All power and telephone lines shall be underground; and o No structures shall be places on densely vegetated hillsides with slopes greater than 30%. 3. The applicant shall address the following concerns identified by the Environmental Health.Department: a. The Environmental. Health Department shall approve of water well yield, provision for domestic supply, septic .system design and location prior. to issuance _of _a building permit. b. A domestic water supply with appropriate water rights granted by the Division of Water Resources"shall be established by the applicant prior to signature and recordation of a 1041 Hazard Review ..Plat for. approval. c. .Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall clear all financial obligations with the Environmental Health Department. 4. The following conditions of the Division. of .Wildlife shall be adhered to by the applicant: a. The homesite shall be located as indicated in the application and shall maintain native vegetation to act as a screen. b. No dogs shall be allowed on site. c. Fencing shall be 42" in height or less, and shall. be 4 strand or less. 10 ,. . .. d. All livestock/horse grazing shall be located in the common area at the base ,of the ranch. No grazing shall be allowed on this parcel. 5. The following conditions of the County Land Use Engineer shall be adhered to by the applicant:. a. The 1041 Hazard Review map shall be amended to include the following note: "The provisions of the !'1041" land use regulations do not in any way assure or imply that lands designated as removed from hazard areas will. be free from hazards". b. The. applicant shall receive an Access permit from the County Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. c. All ranch roads used to, access the property, with the exception of the driveway,' shall meet Class V Country Access Standards, prior to the issuance a building permit. 6. All material representations made by the applicant in the application. and public meeting shall be adhered to and considered. .conditions. of _approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions.. 1041.huffman 11 .~. <.., -aw ,w .. ,. MEMORANDIIM TO: Mary Lackner, Planning Office FROM: Tom Newland RE: Sopris Mountain Ranch DATE: March 12, 1991 This is to follow-up with you regarding the ability of West Sopris Creek Road to handle the additional., traffic__generated by a new homesite. West Sopris Creek Road has been recently upgraded to a Class 2V, Rural. Access Road by'the County. A Class IV roadway is capable of carrying up to 700 vehicles per day (VPD). Traffic counts taken: by the. County last summer gauge existing traffic on West. Sopris Creek Road at 323 VPD. The addition of a single homesite along West Sopris Creek Road would increase. traffc_by 7 VPD to 340 VPD. This is well below the design capacity of 700 VPD. Please contact me if you have any questions. ~ .,, MEMORANDUM FEB - $ }: TO: MARY LACRNER, PLANNING OFFICE FROM: TEMPLE L. GLASSIER, ENGINEERING OFFICE ~-~:~ TABU: TOM NEWLAND, ASSISTANT TO THE COIINTY MANAGER J"~"~/ DATE: JANUARY '7, 1991 RE: HIIFFMAN 1041 SUBMISSION Pl ,.- _., v .~., .,~.., I have reviewed the information submitted and would like to forward the following comments to you: PLAT: Section 5-400.7 of the Land Use Code recites a disclaimer that hazards may exist outside of mapped areas. It is recommended that the_plat be amended to include the following note: "The provisions of the "1041" land use regulations do not in any way assure or imply that lands designated as removed from. hazard areas will be free from hazards". INTERNAL ROAD SYSTEM: Aacess to the building envelope is gained from a 60' wide road easement which bisects., the property. It is recommended that the applicant receive`ari Access permit from this office prior to issuance of a building permit. IMPACTS ON COUNTY,ROADS:__There will be no_significant impacts on West Sopris Creek road. tlg:referal:huffman .. z, ,...... ~_ ~.M...,.,w .sew., aa~,.~ro~,.~~~.~e STATE OF COLORADO Roy Romer, Governor ~~~ _ REpER to: DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Q ~~~1 `~1AR9~o DIVISION OF WILDLIFE - rye AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ~ Perry D. Olson, Director ~J'r~VgV 6060 Broadway +Ypg~ Denver, Colorado 80276 Telephone: (303) 297-1192 1-2-91 Pir:)cin County Planning 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Mary: I refer you to my 7-23-90 letter for the Huffman 1041, This letter was included in the .1041: packet. If you have any questions, please give me a calla Since ely: C ~rL Kevin Wr t District Wildlife Manager Carbondale e DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Hamlet J. Barry, Executive Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION, George VanDen Berg, Chairman • Robert L. Freidenberger, Vice Chairman • William R. Hegberq, Secretary Eldon W. Cooper, Member • Rebecca L. Frank, Member . Dennis Luttrell, Member .Gene B. Peterson, Member • Larry M. Wright, Member :; ~^ r< MAJOR 1041 REVIEW AND GENERAL SUBMISSION ~, ""' Sopris Mountain Ranch, Lot 38 Moore P. Huffman, Owner ,.. ~., ,. :, ,~.. November 75, 1990 *n ~. k'r: .~ 9P1~?1! ~' t 4 p. .::, wow i F, _; k; .. .. .. ~+ h .-. . °... ..<~, ~ ... N.~ MO MAJOR 1041 REVIEW AND GENERAL ~ SUBMiSSiON "' .e Lot Sopris Mountain Ranch, 38 Moore P. Huffman, Owner .. `r G~ emitted To' -. Pitkin County Planning Office . 130 South Galena *~* . Aspen, Colorado 81611 .aw - Aoolicant: Mr. Moore P. Huffman °"q 508 Pixie Mill Valley, California 94941 (415) 388-8594 Aoclicants Representative and Preparation Bv: w. Mr. John B. Young P.O. Box 1099 t"'"". Basalt, Colorado 81621 (303) 927-4252 ..r .+. 2 ,.~ hPM ~. ink .. .,~..-, s.~.m., vA.mv ~, ,x.a., ..,M rnava~8~wwNC.ktia+~w~,..wa„w.na~nu n+W-...a. u... ,NA_«. ,mom. ... : ~"" Table of Contents r.+ ~,,,, I. Introduction A. Land Use Applicatidn Form B. Letter of Introduction From Jghn B. Ypung C. Description of Proposed Development "~' D. Site Vicidity and Characteristics »+ II. 1041 Concerns A. Mapped Hazards B. Wildfire ,,, C. Wildlife D. Slopes in Excess of 30% E Sewer and Water F. Other Concerns III. General Submission ~+, A. Compliance with Policies and General Regulations Division One -Resource and Environmental Division Two -Fiscal and Services Impact and Design Division Three -Social ,.., °- Division Four -Areas of Local and State Interest B. Additional Information *Rt Illusttations ., t. Vicinity Map 2. Subdivision Map 3. Wildfire Map ""` 4. Wildlife Map 5. Copy of the Plat........ 6. Schematic Design of Home ... ; APPendix .b Exhibit 1: Pie-Application Summary Exhibit 2. Proof of Ownership and Representatives Authorization Exhibit 3. list of Adjacent Owners ""! Exhibit 4. Sandy Stuller's Opinion Letter and Subsequent Title Information :. (To Comply with 6-3.2(b) df the L.U:C:) Exhibit 5. Evidence of Road Easement „~, Exhibit 6. Letter dated 7-23-90 from Kevin Wright df the D.O.W: Exhibit 7. Letter dated 7-13-90 from Ron Thiering of Basalt Fire District 3 ,~. _ _ ..v~,x~. y:.. . ,.,~ _~ .< ,~.~~ .., +.. p:. APPLNUIX 13 Pro Number ,,. .. .. Section/Parcel g Date Submitted i . pitkin cotanty ~ ..nom y<. ~cYtr'r -. ., Sp6 mast mein street / LAND USE APPLICATION aspen, Colorado 8'16'1'1 ~~\ . . 'O'BE C~OAMPLE~T,AED BY THE APPLICANT: TAME rl~'. I ID-~D~ZE ~ ~~~FFMIRt~ 1DDRESS /S,,f(~~ ZtX~E ~'(~u..yllu~.Y C1C ~'111~1 , 'HONE l"Tl'a' 3P$-$59~ LAME OF PROJECT }tu~`1'A'~~ ~~S~~N« owing boundaries of .any ROJECT LOCATION: (On attached sheet, locate on zoning map, sh ~ n~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ •~~ ~ ~~ ...• natural hazard end resource areas, any other special regulatory districts, Section 5, Land Use Code; and locate on'appropriate CSU/ ERA Maps any areas not covered by the above.) TOTAL AREA 3S.aZ ~~i ES EXISTING USE(S) ~t~IM1~aVt~ Sl1Jb1-E ~•AM~~.Y..l.~'r .. ,. PROPOSED USE(S) Co13ST't`.~-'t• tt~t"t-oXI~"lA`T~-`~ 2+~'~ (.approximate square "` '' footage for each) PRESENT ZONING OF SITE ~ 5 " DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE PROPOSAL ~ V-Ct"lt•4~1•~6~ ~~, BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING OFFICE TYPE OF APPLICATION: REZONING P.U.D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION SPECIAL REVIEW BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW 35-acre + SUBDIVISION REVIEW PHASE: PRE-APPLICATION DATE COMPLETED DATE GENERAL SUBMISSION P.C. ACTION BOARD ACTION GATE UETAILEU SUBh1ISS10N P.C. ACT10~d DATE BOARD ACTION DATE I FIP;AL PLAT ~ BOARD ACTION DATE _.. I .~.. .. , ._::< , u, a.. evy:.,~. .,, .,t?v-.~~'....'$~. ...., S.-~ „~.",'3.r-^aS"'~ow......«:., 1i st$.akc„^~,.w.(.~:4"~.~'t~'`~r3d~,«r~¢ «~ November 15 ..1990 Ms. Ellen Sassano, Planner Pitkin County 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Ellen, Enclosed. please find the information requested for the Mayor 1041 and. general submission on the Huffman"home, Lot 38, Sdpris Mountain Ranch. Included, for your 7eview are: 1. The original pre-applicatwn conference summary dated 6/20/90.. 2. A letter of authorization for representatjon from the owner. 3. A copy of the general warranty deed. 4. Sandy Stuller's (Then Pitkin County Attorney) memo to comply with section 6-3.2(b) of the Pitkin County Land use Code. 5. Evidence of a road easement. 6. Wildfire map and related photd showing approximate home site. 7. A subdivision map showing lot location. 8. A copy of the July 23, 1990 letter from Kevin Wright of the D.O.W.. 9. A copy of the letter addressing wildfire issues frpm Ron Thieving, Chief of the Basalt Rural Fire Protection District. 10. Twelve copies. of the text for members of the Planning Commission and B.O.C.C., plus one _. _ ;, for you. 11. A mylar of the 1041 Hazard revigw,map which includes the restnctions_requested by Kevin Wright of the D.O.W. 12. A USGS map showing the mapped wildlife concerns in the adjacent areas, 13. Text prepared by the applidants representative addressing the typical 1041 and general submission concerns. 14. A description of the proposed development. 15. A copy of the applicants site plan. '^ If there is any other information .required by you, please. dq not hesitate to ask. I will make myself . available to meet with you, the Planning Director, or the County Attorney, at your convenience if you feet it is necessary. <A, J B. ng Authorized Agent for; *~+ Moore P. Huffman, Jr., Owner Sopris Mountain Ranch Lot 38 4 '~ __ _... , .~..~~_... ,, . ~c _^-sn..c,yxry~.ru ar ,. .~.z_wV ,..a..a.....~x~^.x+x~svro1~5,"~+.rcn`;~a~dak~,``+x -vv.r n nxv+J+w an kcF **hU +/3a Sr 4t #mW.vm+ vO V ~...,~Y 5 n z . x. ^i,.: +d a :C'~ ~"yi"R'FYFr"``i r'~~:_.4MC.tCApF4~YI~~~~~':.w ' 1 ~ ~ 7 m, ~ ff _ ~ .y.. F, i sr+z s ., rlaR "~ ~ ~ Yy !'Ais j yy ~ -`~ ax +. ` ~ ~ c Y N '^, ~ ~ t ~f} * H~a S ".."tom"` ... e~ :.rgs yW ~ mac. G ~~{{ ~ ~ F'RM+ ~ m Yi `'' ` z h a r :. .~. 1 .. ,yy/'Y}' V ~ . T'i ~~ t 3 ~~ F sib ~ ~ 'F ~ • Y ~ may, ~ l`'~~ ~~ , 'nY.WfN~ Su .vsa+fh`~aw*S'n %tYr~i ~' ~~ gb Y! ' ~' R. ^y'. F'4 Y7 ...: Yrc't+:YaeKF6n`¢6~%~aaks n ~fiiX~ '..5.e]{ ' • 1'~1 v ."~^r...~ ~ w. ,«..w+ r „y ~} ~ t •~r {st. ". " ~"% ~~h' 1111 B ' ~S !rR ~ ~ ~ ~ e w .: ~` e €x . - i y R r ~ ~ a r'A' m ~ ~ v y £ ~ X z'_ 3 t t aik x„ ~ ~ ,t ¢ f _ ~ t ,~ afi { $ , ac . ~ } ~' i~ ~ • a ~ f g; r ~ ; ` m I r i l . 6 +! ~ F ~.. .ss i ~~ µ :. ~ '^- fec k:~ t~ y li^'_.y ~FY ~ h. M^ dA ~v ~ 1 ~a ,.,, ..~, ` .~ ' ; ^ n ~-- . ,, ~,~, _. ,..: r~ ._~` 4m 4 f ~ ~ a ~1 I ~ 9 ff R11p ~.. j v ~~ ' l~ ~ ~'1 } ~ A 1 ~4 ~~ ~. iii M ~ { ' ~ '~ i xq i ~ ~ 1 Yt ; ~ 3 ~ . #~ 7 a. j..#t~ lla~~r :P: qj tiA * 3~: _~ ~ Y " # ~ n.. ~ t.'u 61 ~+ Y 4~ . ~ ~ v x 1 y~f~' i ~ ~: . ' i~ f fey } . s. ~ , r ~ >J , . r..„ } ! ~'. v .~ ~ n, ~ .. ..: r " . ~ u a ` . 3 n ky .~ .` ~n~. ' x ~}. ~' b+ ~ Y~ f Y ~ T' 1a ~ 3 t w {~{ t p ~ - ~ } w k t y yr ~ i fi Flr 16 .sr..., . +.b ear, T ~, ~w; y~,(`, ~ y a.^ x .~n^ ' ° gar ~Y +~,~ .~' ? ~ i ar G ' a ~ nRE2 `~ t y 4 ~ }Mn i ». tt .,y,. iR4 > W '"' ^.~3'S ~ ~. ~ t s f . t ~ ryp ~` f ~ ~ ~ ~~ Y F kt ~'. A'Y£4~m i Y ` Y `[1' 4 ~ ~ ~ k ~ w ~x r ~ i ,^,~,~. . ' ' .p w a +s .Cw -n.~~u .~ ~ v~. _zhta,+x; . - ~,.- , . --- ... . -.... ,. ,. ~ .. e., ,.-,tea,... n,u,~ss}a,~cA `.I~~ . ~~a~a~sm~.~~."-:~ I. (c) Description of Proposee uevewprne~n. The applicant is requesting permission to construct a single family home on lot 38_of Sopris Mountain Ranch. The proposed home would conform to aIf Pitkin County Code Yequirements as well as all of the restrictive covenants of the subdivision. The home has been designed, (A copy of the schematic design has been .included for your review), and features strong solar elements. Access to the lot will be from Ranch roads #1 and #6 via West Sopris Creek Road. The home will tie approximately 2,450 square feet and the )ot is 35.02 acres. "`"' L (d) Site Vicinity and Charagteristics _ The site is located in the Sopris Mountain Ranch subdivision, which is an unapproved subdivision formed in 1974. Located off bf West Sopris Creek Road, the Ranch is made up of 54 lots and is approximately 2,100 acres large, (see vidinity and subdivision maps) ~ The site is bounded by lots 40, 39, 41, 37, 23, and 27 and is zoned RS 30. The site has alatge meadow area surrounded by mountain shrub vegetation and spine aspen trees. The proposed building site is located on the lower portion of the lot with the main subdivision road """ separating it from the bulk of the 35+ acres. Utilities o the site (telephone and elegtrigity) are supplied by local companies and are buried already throughout the Ranch.. Potable water will be from a well, and sewage disposal is by means of septic system. 1041 C9NCER .~ A. Mapped Hazards -The site selected by Mr. Huffman is free, from .,any mappea nazaras ana - its"slopes do not. exceed 13.3°/u anywhere within the building envelope. The site is located in the. optimum spot for wildlife with the vast majority of the lot left in its natural, °^ undisturbed condition. B. Wildfire-Ron Thiering, Chief of the Basalt Fire District has reviewed the lot and ,,.. determined that the lot has no immediate wildfire danger, (see attached Ietier). -He has _., ... > . requested that Moore put in a 2,006 gallon water"s"fdra~e tank and maintain a 20' width driveway and the applicant .has agreed with those conditions. .~n C. Wildlife -Kevin Wright of tfie D.O.W. has reviewed the site and has forwarded some suggestions to help minimize wildlife impacts. The applicant has agreed to the approved fencing and no dog requests. D. Slopes in excess of 30% -There are np slopes greater than 30% and as previously mentioned there are. no slopes in excess of 13.3% in the building envelope. ..n 5 ,., ,,- r ~~. I J l._ ( ~ ,. f ~ ~ r. - r r .. / r ~._ ~r i ~ J i , 1 ., \.. \ 1 I . ~ I ~ a I I \ ( 1 r/ ~ ~ ~ ~~. I _ .~ .. ~ C~ ~~ ~ / I ~ ~, . \ ., ~ ~ I ~ .. ~. ' ~i ~ ~ - _. ~ ~ . I ~ r r ', ~~ f ~ ccl / ; • , ` i, ~. ~ / ~ ~ ', ' ,. ~.a I , ~ 1 ~ I~ I ~ m f 1"S r ~! ~ ~' ." ... (( .. _: r ,; 1 ; _. '--~, ~ .. F. ~I I(' .//~rr-- .. nil J ~jl .~' r _, ,:: -, ~ -=~ I~ `, ;,- , ,~ ~ ~~ ~; ~ 1... ,~ ~ i If I 1 ~ ~. I I ~l . . A ~ ~ ~ ) ~ r ~ ~ i I r ...... ._ 1(j l; i )~ \ll ~,; .1. ~ ' ~~, ~ l - b r ~,~ ~ L ------cps f -` ~ ~ r .' 4^ \ ~ 1 I ~I ~' I 1 ~ ~ ~ is , ~ ~. ( t i . '; ~ )1 4~ I r i\ ,, It /r r ~ ~\ f N ~ ~N \~ I j. ~ ~ C .' ~ ~~... ~' 1 Ir I f Lr. nn ~ r I ' ` r ....i 11~`/'tr1, ,1 e 1 +^l+ '~1 f ~':,. ;.' y ':.. ~~ ~ I / -1 ;l ij~ ~`~ I ~~ ~A7rl ~I Ilr ~.'i17 { \ ~ ..I I /r \ I I ~..~ 4~1 I ~ I_ r..l ( l~~~i rii: 'j 1999 r~ I II~~I'. ~' - ~~ n \ IlI ' '' ~t1 m ~~ - / ~!~~ 1 ~ I r ,• tom, ~/ ;i ,~ .. .' ~~.... .... /::' I ~ ~ , ~~ ~. ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ( 1 ~ / ~ ~ _~ 1 l..i ~ ~ V ~ n i. _. ..._ .. ~ r (~ l~ ~t f ,-et t ~ ~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~{ t~+ i.~~~ ((tea I ~~ ti - ,~~ > ~ ~ :` ~ / ~ .: (t _i ~ ~ `~' ~' ti ~~ ~ ~ I lV~~. ~ ~ l ~ " i , ~'~ A`~ r ~j~ `;~` ~ ill/ o % ~ i t 1 I /~ , ~~~ I Iti I i ~ ~ _ t~ ~ ~ i ~ ~~ ~I,. j, i ~~ l~il ,.. +.,. ' ~ ~ 1' u ... ~ ... ~ --> -- ~ ., ,. I ~ I1 \ ~ `i ~! I ~ ~ I ( l ~N ~ iH 1~i'l ' __r ~ ~S i + ~ ~ ~ v ', if ~ ~ ,O ' ~ ~. ~' >n. ,, 1 I~ ~ x '^ a '~ t r Y~j, ~ r ,f I ~ `5, a +' ~ .. _~, flti ,r ~ ~ ~, x ~ ..~ ~~ a. .+..~.J~' ev _ ~ "~ ~ ~/..r. //i r''.~! % ~ ~.; i ~ i ' ~ ~Ga f.F ~y ~t ~ ~ ~ t ~.~ ,f~^r aa„~ '~ I. ... . ~ i 1 r 2 ~~ ~ ~n ~ ~ ~ ~~: I ~i~ ` ~~li i~) ' 7 i mj °!~ ~ rix~ to f ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ C~° ~i S ~ Q~. ~~`' ~ i v ~ ~ l i ~ ( ~ ~~` fi01S '91~ ~f / ~'~ I ~ ~ ~It ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .,~ 1.._ 1 t', ~~~ xr) ~~ i ) ~~k ' J i ~. I i .~. ,... at 1 t ~ 1 ~ ~~~~ I I~ 1 ~~ t P ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~, i J J v t ~/ ~ r~~_ A ~ ~ ~~ T J ~ ~ O( Ihh I ~~ -` ~\ ~ \ I` ~ ~1~ .Y~jJ I ~' ~~ \%\ ~ ~~ tl ,ill/ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~i ~ 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p.. A ~ 1 0 1 /% i ' .. _ ~~ ~~ ) ~~ ~t, i v 0 ~" ~ ' ,yx ~' _ ~ ..> .. a.., .~,.rt.. ~. ..; _~ __ --~- .., E Sewer and Water - The applicant agrees to comply with the Pitkin County Environmental ~+ Department for the. septic Sank and field.. The water will be provided by a domestic well r.n, .. to be drilled prior to a building permit being issued. The applicant expects no Crduble with the quantity or quality of the water due tq the success of all previous neighbors. ,.. F. Other Concerns- There are no other 1041 concerns applicable to this application. ' r*^ III GENERAL SUBMISSION A. Division One - Resource and Environmental ^^t 5-100: ° '' ~~rficial Gedldgical Characteristics and Radiation ,.. The applicant agrees to supply the building department with whatever soils information necessary ! prior to issuance of a building permit. The homes that have been built so far have experienced np unusual soil conditions. ~ The slopes in the building envelbpe range from 10 to 13.3%. ?^! 5-101: Drainage The home is designed at approximately 2,500 square feet sq the change in quantity of impervious ,,,,, surface will be minimal and the overall drainage impact will be simila(, 'The building envelope is Iodated away from any natural drainage courses in the area. ""`" No water quality issues or pollutants are expected from construction. _ r 5-102: Erosion: The home has been located tp minimize, disturbance of natural vegetation and soil cover. The driveway is designed to fit the form of the land and np major cuts dr fills will be necessary: Prevention against erosion and sedimentation will be provided for during construction. The !^ following will. occur to_manage construction: 1 . All topsoil within the construction zone will be stripped and stock piled on the site for use ,,,, in landscaping and revegetation. 2. Areas to be disturbed will be limited to excavation, material storage, vehicle access and parking, and driveway embankments. ,, 3. Landscaping and revegetation wilt occur do all areas disturbed and be completed as quickly as possible following exterior building construction. Areas revegetated will be irrigated n to ensure seed germination and plant sorvivaC 6 a~+ _ ~, .. ,~, 4. Any disturbance caused by utility construction wilt be revegetated and restored. .A, 5. Following project completion, any temporary sedimentation cohtrdl measures will be removed and the site will be cleaned bf all construction debris. 5-103: Compatibility witfi Historic and Archaeological Resources ~^^+ There are no known historic or archaeological resources on the site.. ~,,, 5-104: Compatibility with Agricultural Land and Operations As each lot in the Ranch is developed, it furthef strengthens the viability of the common agricultural lands by providing additional homeowners assessments. ~ _ `. The site selected has not. been "ranched" in the past other than some sporadic grazing byRanch animals. .., The homeowners covenants are structured with the continuatwn of Ranch operations in mind. m..~ 5-105: Scenic Quality The proposed homesite will be well hidden from most of the Ranch lots and area vistas by virtue of the fact the area selected utilizes the existing vegetation to shield it from all angles. The design of the home has accentuated a "low profile"_approach and wjll blend. in very well with ,.. the natural setting. 5-106: Air Quality All fireplaces will comply with Pitkin County Resolution No. 86-91 and emissions standards established by the County. n*, 5-107: Water Resources Impact The septic system will comply with the Pitkin County Indviiiuaf Sewage Distridt Regulations. The septic system will be on the .owners lot. .. The development does not advefsely impact the availability of water for irrigation of agriculture lands. Garden areas will be irrigated with well water. ~, There are no flood plain impacts associated with the lot. +~ 7 ,~ .. .,,„ ~.,x <,.x'-. x,.a~ ,~r ._ _.n' __,.-,r..iar,-w ,, ., iurc<sw,.~.~awmt~...w~n~r+. `r+m.~A~ov _. _. .;. ~. _- } Division Two - Fiscal and Services/Impact and Design .., 5-200: wage Treatment and Collection ~„~ The septic system will comply with the Pitkin County Individual Sewage and Disposal System Regulations. On site investigation will determine the best. location for the septic field. ^' S-201: Impact on Road Svstem Road system impacts are projected to be seven ohe-way trips per day which is the impact of one ,.,, single family dwelling unit. The actual impacts will be less due to the second hgme ,nature of the applicants use. This will create minimal impact on West Sopris Creek and Emma roads. ... The Ranch and the. County have completed recent road improvements by jointly funding an upgrade of West Sdpris Creek Road, thus dramatically increasirig the roads safety and drivability: 5-202: Road Design and Construction The driveway will be virtually flat and will be gravel surfaced. The applicant has agreed to the Fire District's requesT of providing a 20 foot surface to facilitate fire. truck access. _ Adequate parking has been provided for on the building site. -- 5-203: ~ical Extension of Utilities r++ The power line will be placed underground from the main. buried subdivision line. Telephone service will be provided by U:S. West: Lines wjjl be placed underground: Television is available from the Pitkin Cdunty Translator System and/or satellite dish capability. r" 5-204: Facts on Taxes and Man,~gement of Necessary Services and Facilities It is anticipated that there will be a positive fiscal impact as a result of increased .property taxes ,,, to the County with virtually no new services required. The applicant has agreed to provide a 2,000 gallon system to aid in the fire protection of the home.. 5-205:.. A~~uate Provision for Water Needs Water will be supplied to the home by an individual well. The applicant agrees to provide adequate water information prior to the issuance. pf a building permit. `' There have been excellent.. wells at each of the gther improved lots in the subdivision. .~ $ a.* _. n ~~ ..-. ... ....... .mv~~,: ~~.. ~ .r. ~ ~,, ~ ~.+~, ~; bivision Three - Social .,. 5-300: Housing The single family home improvement requires no employee housing requirement and does .not """ contemplate one. Division Four - Areas and Activities of Local and State Interest The site contains no known geologic or floodplaih hazards. The Basalt Fire District has determined there are no immediate wildfire hazards (see Exhibit 7) There a're ni known Historic or archaeological resources on"this site. 5-404: Wildlife Habitat Generalized mapping indicates deer and elk migratory possibilities througH the lot. There is a mapped elk calving area within a mile of the site and the, applicant has agreed to the dog and fence restrictions requested by ttie D.O.W. The location of the homesite.is in the_pptimum location for wildlife and the nature of the lot, (divided by the road) allows for approximately 30 acres to be untouched by the development. B. Additional Information ~, The home is scheduled to be built in the spring of 1991. ~,,, Further information will be supplied upon request.. z c . aa~„s~a`»xa~w+4 m;s,„marcdwr,.rs"'uv~";:FMS"va.At~'y`au~"'X~~a~s°<~' vr~. Y ~ ~ _ :~ ?= ~ $ e~. ... ~~ ; ~ ;g ~ 6:ppg§~ I s~ ~$~ 9aE ~BEe~L: ~~ £ E3 gF.. °. ~CSSB~pa...~F s~. $ yj. % 4e. Y9i R f ~% ~ 8~ [F' fig °Y Y.._ Q ~ s~z€P~~fi~~ ,fie °qas~ ~. ~S~gg a ~=c fr ~=~ .. ~~5~6`SERB Yg. 8, ~5~ &~3~3 vl . Ye ~ F' "6 8Y8 ie p8 C ~ iY+: -,gyp F ° ~ a~,~~$sy. ~s~ ~3 Vie. zn t's. ~~ € 3~ ~ a~ag~sa~~~E s afr ~"~a~ 3s.fi~P '~ ~~ F E pP~.'Y~SZSB~ f ~~ fi£84~ .~~p~C P kGa EEW M B=. €Ea~~~g£g ~ 55 F~TC€ . 8~" fib 3 ?¢ fr y 65fi SEEE ~e 5P~1S ~ Z ~ ~ E 8 ~ ~~ 3: SE ~.. I v & T%%~ ~ ~ I 6 E E$ ~ ~ ' . aCl ~°? 6~ Y ° ^ cC_E _~3Xs EVE SQ - i ~3S & £ ~ _ ~ 8 ~ ~ g E> 5 ..'3~ .. E fb E $ ~ S 3 3 .Y~: ~+ 8 ~- ~< ~r ~; ~"' a e- ~g• ~ ~ \ ~, ~ d es \ :~ a q~~ ~ : ~ ~ ~§ ~, ~ ~ ~° ~_ ~ 1}6~ J p~ 3y` \ 4 62 v / ~ I ~~\ ~~~~ ~,I _ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~,~ ~ ~ ~, 1 ~, ~~ ~ I ~ - ~ ~~ I 0 V 1 ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ \ 9 8 ~~ ~~ 4 \ Y~5 - . °:= ~11~ " ~~~ g A 8 a g5~ Atl ^ p~ppp~Y: 6 YqbE£y~55 x P.~3 54: (4 / ~ M 0 R~ +~; kk N ~~ \~ i ,• A°~ } r1 j ~( ~ \ ,~~/ r~, ~~l \~~ ', /' - =~. _ II. J IIII 6 J W 7 W i C J :.i I~~J } l~ \y v } V 1 r ~ _~ ~r ; \ ---`.9 s,~ { rI i W 2 f 6 O 2 0 M 6 2 W ~- 0 ~; . W I t i, ~. . 1,. W V f O ,~ f III l~i W W ~~~ N:~ y~{~"~', L O O 6 O J Q F U W w ~_ l ~I L.I I , I _: III ~~ ~~~~ ~I ~ r~~ ~~~I~,~Ii~~~,, , `, I a h ~ I~ ~~ ~, r~„ I ~ I I ~,i ~~ ICI l ~ i ~ ~ •. ~__ ~. \~ 2 r ~..~ i ~ f ,3. ~y i W J b 6 W 2 O r s W J W F p ~~ w a~wus. , ~ u ~,..6n.,k+~...u,~. ~«y.d~.f4n~.w.~.aw,~.,wMOm2iM.~q~aa.f:~~"„fi733:`.`h Plti;-AYPLI C7+'1'1UN CONPEI2ENCE SUhihlAliY ~QY~ItQCI(hD/ ~p/d.D qp w: ~ " ~'~ ¢. DATE ... .aP` a i., .. . rnoJECr: N~F'Fr~gh 141 a~c1 C~er\evaDS,h/tit~s ~~ uA ALjPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: 1Ua~rP 1-1~I~~F w"~t^ CS~e.-C-~,~ ., .REPRESENTATIVE' S PRONE: _ ~a 3- 0'11,3 O _... .. _.... OWNERS NAME: pmt OOrc? ~~ r-~ _.. n. ' 1. Type of Application: I09~1 ~ ~v~./~ ~,b n, ss ,o^ "~ '~ 2. Desccibe action/type of development being request,eda ~ p io41 ~ f,~t'x~PN'n~ SJb~ rs ro -E Ga.'t Cl) ~e v~2.w 7. Areas in which ..Applicant has been Yequested"to cespond, types of «.. reports requested: _ _ Policy Acea/ Ref eS ral Aaent S mm t '•, _ en s .Q :(~C~VJ _ 5-go`4 - W~Id (i(~e c1K Prcx~~cftor~ ~~;~e~ n~iS-~'rir~ - _5-~0 3 - Seyeae t~~lcl~~re. ~-. - G ~}Orv..Qy - ~' ~ ~ . 1-1 P~.Q~-h , ,., ~our~ ,y ~c~q ~ n¢o r_ _. .,_~_. ~ _ {. Review is a (PSZ Only) (CC/SOCC Onlyf (P&Z then to CC/SOCC r 5. Public Hearing: (YES) (NO). --- - 6. Did you t applicanttb submit OWNERS? (YE~ ) (NO) Disclo r f lint of ADJACE PA`OPERTS' "' `°"` - """ j su e o Ownership: (YES ; (NO) ~ ('(1 (S/o0 ,.a 7. Hhat fee was applicant requested t CH SS o submit:`~I.G~-]C1 '. .. _ ~ 9 8• , Anticipated "date of s_ubmiss ion: ~ -(-f'0}o,Q-4-I b-~~ °^" 9. COHhIENTS/UNIQUE CONCERNSF".~ rzn n9 ~ c)6^^i { -}Ly ~1(Owln ' ... ,\ n. ~ ene CP r'1'1 i-~~~ny wl.oh In"f l~x,re4 ('/ym ~-PC~~~ w~.O ~(-Lo Lar, ~Y ~,yo..s ` ~ ,~ '7A S2 _ _ ' _ . _ ~ .. _ .. ,_., ...,, < . <t~ '~oir=P rr, o -H: ~ no ~ ~ I b-ly,oa 3\~ C'~~I gry,n "~ ~/'o,~~~~ r~~v.o/g (ari nlre~fe rt PY~vel rzv~ S b~ S t ~~' t ~ vcQ> a~+ P A,v~ S l~ n n,~ P tiy ~P ~, P ra n r P S M'~'ba 0 P' S -I-~ ~ ~ ~ ar~v~ ., ~ S' /~/1'1n 1 !-{e.Y~ -vk'rJ ~Qtn rLd 1re0 ~c'~ .... ,~ S l-1 ~-l-1~ --z ~. rte: ~~c_a'fi'(vn v. a GIl arJCa reSS CJ/ t-4-e r i ~. .Q,c cep fZC~~ / it's ~-v~P_irC'i~Q S'Jb ~ oto., c`~ (l"X{ ,' i i , ,,r < .. _. w!+ Ed. ,.. .~ .a_.r,,. .,~.. ~ -;L.;, .u ..a,..,uh~ .r.... ~..~.,.,uw.v Y ,.,uw.i«~'.,iwiriaY~~d+s~.:.. ~. ~- JULY 2, 1990 MUORE HUFFMAN 508 PIXIE TR. MILL VALLEY, UA. y4N41 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: MR. JOHN YOUNG Or~ SNOWMASS, COLORADO IS HEREBY. AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT US IN ALL NEGOTIATIONS WITH PITKIN COUNTY REGARDING LOT 38 OF THE SOPRIS MOUNTAIN ~_ ~, ., eooK 605 aac~ 26 >> ~ ~; m ~ v o . . , c~ to _:~ v ~ F . :; GENERAL WARRANTY DEED o n - co a e. MOUNT SOPRIS RANCH JOINT VENTURE NO. 1, whose address is c/o Joseph E. Edwards, Jr., Suite 109, 201 North Mi11 Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, Pitkin County, Colorado, for the consideration of ten dollars ($10.00) and other good and ~ valuable consideration_in hand paid, hereby bargains, sells ` and conveys to MOORE P. HUFFMAN, JR., whose legal address is 508 Pixie Trail, Mill Valley, California S4941, the °^` following real property in Pitkin County, Colorado. A parcel of land known as Sopris Mountain Ranch ~, Parcel 38 (Revised) being part of Lot 4, the SW$SE} and the EASE} of Section 33 and being part of the SW$ of Section 34, all in Township 8 South, Range 87 West of the 6th Principal , Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado, and being more ~, , particularly described as follows. ~ ~ Beginning at a point whence a brass cap found "" ~ ~ in place and properly marked for the Southwest Corner of ~ ' said Section 34 bears S 29°05'06" W 847.00 feet; thence ~n N 62°50'00" W 280.00 feet; thence N 88°00'00" W 1078.78 feet; thence N 53°10'00" W 467.84 feet; thence N 10°32'42" E I-- 1260.15 feet; thence S 47°20'00" E 590.00 feet; thence tLL~'~b-% S 32°00'00" W 120.00 feet; thence S 61°14'51" E 1540.73 `- feet; thence S 29°29'00" W 507.78 feet to the point of '""' beginning, containing 36.01 acres more or less, subject to -- 1 any tax, special assessment, charge or lien for any special 0 ~-: `- ~ district, Yights-of-way and easements for ditches, pipelines " !~+ f- ~ :.and roadways appearing of record, patent reservations, including the right of a proprietor to remove ore as reserved in Book 55 at Pages 42, 43, 49 and 69, and Book 55 ,,, w at Pages 160 and 278, and mineral reservations recorded in o Book 162 at Page 436, Book 162 at Page 420 and Book 162 at ,~,-, Page 524 and mineral royalty interests in Book 178 at Page ~ 436 and Book 193 at Page 479 as they may affect such """ z ` property 'and the following restrictive covenants which do F not bont~sia a right of reverter: Declaration of Protective n ~ Covenants and Dedication of Easements in Book 437 of Page +., ~ ~ 748, 'and First .Amendment to Declaration of Protective Cdvenant's in .Book 551 at Page 259, and except the easements ~ defined :in the declaration for equestrian, pedestrian, grazinq,'utilities and access and subject to building and zoning regulations, including H.B: 1041 review (migration, wildfire and slope), and provisions of the Articles of .Incorporation of the Sopris Mountain Ranch Homeowner's "^? Association recorded in Book 507 at Page 689 and By-Laws recorded in Book 507 at Page 693, all of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado, together with all its appurtenances „~, except 'water rights which are not conveyed- hereby and - _ warrant the title against all persons. - - = """ Dated ~~`7Z%~:T'~ 1989. ~, , O~ I ~~G~:; _. w ., .,.. »m .. .,.~~~ .e. .. .~r.+r .r. ~a.u.rx&Er~R~* u.- ti-.,a a ..-b. ,.., .. ~'.,. a,,,, ~. «~. .._ __ ~ '~ m ~ o e m Y O o~ c= ^°'~c ui c ~~~ 8 ~ MO SOPRIS RANC DINT V NTUE2E NO. 1 D E. NSEN RANCHGOOD REAL Y, By: CHARLES MOSS, Presiden HELLER,WARNER-VILLA, a joint venture ~7 MORTON A.' HELLE~ STATE OF COLORADO ss. COUNTY OF ~-~'~c~l+ ) The foregoing General Warranty Deed was acknowledged me sa~t,~_,..~.J-. 3-~ !Ja'S , 1989, by DAVID E. CHRISTENSF commis' ibn expires ~. !3, 19f3 Witness and official seal. ~- STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF ~~_) The foregoing General Warranty Deed was acknowledg me Aiinfi,5f .~/ 1989, CHARLES MOSS as Pre Ranchgoo Realty, Inc, My commissioh`' exp~~r o?-//-907 .Witness my han-d~/a/nd of~,i-i Nota v Public -, STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foreg~oing General Warranty Deed was acknowle~ me ~!/9uSf .3/ , 1989, by MORTON A. HELI venturer min Heller, Warner-Villa, a joint vent commission expires ~ //_ %~ Witne and official seal. c~Ky Public ;",,ur,,,r,..,,, ,, l1'J,h~mdr ~'; ~ ~_ ~:~~ cr. :i. ', ~= '~~;;;a3 3~a3y =~i b-efore ~~ . c =ade~.~`DGzy ~ ~:a,1~~Ca~Y ESL-o-o-r o - ,~ - . •y -~-r q ,~ :~~. V ,:,before ~a ~;j-oi~,t ~XQ~la~~l ~•. -0-0--0- CF'~O~,C D18/13 -2- _ _ _- r. n .,, ~.b«rOw #ke 2....e.ea ,i.vPw~. ,.:%.,.?.G~msv.M:3x "" ®COMMONWEALT-"~` IANDTITLE INSURANCE COMPAh. ~' ' A Reli,uxe Gout/ HolAings ConryanY e*e SCHEDULE A~WNER'S POLICY , CASE NUMBER DATE OF POLICY AMOUNT OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER ,,, PCT-3897 10/16/89 fd 4:38 P.M. S 2'I5.000.00 128-009298 ~""" 1. NAME OF INSURE D: MOORE P. HUFEM AN. JR. na 2. THE ESTATE OR IIPiBT2EST IN THE LAND HEREIN.AND,FII~IICH IS OOVERED BY THIS POLICY IS: ..., 3. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST REFERRED TO HEREIN IS AT DATE OF POLICY VESTED IN: z~n MOORE P. HUFFM AN. JR. : 4. THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS POLICY IS DESCRIBID AS FOLLOWS: PLEASE REFER TO E3~3I8TT "A" A1'PACff~D HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF ~., ~.+ PITKIN COUNTY TITLE. INC. 601 E. HOPKINS AVE. ~~~i Authorized Agent ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 rL4~~ (303) 925-1766 aA* THE POLICY NUMBER SHOWN ON THIS SCHEDULE MUST AGREE WITH THE'PREPRINTED NUMEiER ON THE __. . COMER SHEET.< a., _____ . ~ .. _. __ . u~.._ ~ ,~ , ~ .. _~ ~.,mv_~.z "= LIST Ur' ADJACIN`I' LANDOWNB,RS LOi 40 Mount Sopris Ranch Jt. Venture #1 clo Morgan r~ Grant Bos !J 4£16 Snowmass Village, Co. 81615 LO' 39 Mr. Robert .Bean #8 Hilltop Rd. Norwall~, Conn. 0685.4 LO'I' 41 Mount Sopris Ranch Jt. Venture #2 c/o Morgan & Grant Box 5488 Snvwmass Village, Co. 81615 LOT 37 Mount Sopris Ranch Jt. Venture #3 c/o Morgan & Grant Bow 5486 Snowmass Village, Co. 81615 l,U'T 28 Mr. Chris Newbert Box 1953..... . Kailua Kona, Hawaii 96'745 LOT 27 Mr. Dither Van Vlamitvr~he Box 151 Augillan, British West Indies LAW OFFICES ,. .. GATES, HUGHES & KNEZEVICH e,a PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION "" THIRD FLOOR. ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 333 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE l~ 'ASPEN. COLORADO 616^ AREA CODE 303 LEONARD M. GATES - TELEPHONE 920.1900 ROBERT W. HUGHES TELECOPIER 920-fl 21 RICHARD A. KNEZEVICH November. l5, 1990 ~' JOHN M. ELV - OF COUNSEL: JOHN THOMA9 KELLY Ms. Ellen Sassaho Aspen/Pitkin Planning Commission x, 130 South Galena Street '°' Aspen, CO 81611 R.. RE: Huffman 1041 .Review Dear Ellen: "^ Enclosed herewith is the title tree regarding Parcel No. 38 of the Mount Sopris Ranch from January 6, 1982. The reason that this date is used as a starting point is that Pitkin County, through ,,~, then County Attorney Sandra Stuller, has previously analyzed the Huffman parcel and, in fact, the entire ranch. regarding the "merger" question and the .applicability of G.M. Q. S. Sandra's letter to Joe Edwards setting forth the County's position is '"' attached. As Sandra states it is olear that this lot was legally created in July of 1974 and is not subject to subdivision, mandatory P.U.D. or GMP allocation procedures. n. _ .... The enclosed title tree. prepared by Pitkin County title likewise indicates no "merger" or cumulation with adjacent tracts. ,,,,, Accordingly, it is this firm's_ opinion that this tract. is not subject. to the subdivision, or G.M.Q. S. provisions of the Code. - Please let me know if you need anything further. m^+ Sincerely, GATES, HUGHES & KNEZEVIC P~C~. gy Leonard M' "O tes s+, :' JTK/klh Enclosure s- r ,: n '~' ` '" PITKIN COUNTY TITLE,Inc. "~` Title InsurOhce Company °°'' Vincent J. Higens 601 E. Hopkins, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Christina M. Davis 303 925-1766 • (303j 925-6527 FAX Vice President President ~ ~ ~+ TITLE CHAIN PARCEL # 27, 1982 TO DATE ~ -- MOUNT SOPRIS JOINT VENTURE #4 """ 06/30/89 " Wp 800K 596 AT PAGE 561 .,. DIOIER VAN V~AMERTYNGHE " KERIN VAN VLAMERTYNGHE (CURRENT OWNER) ran v, ~...,..~.w ._... a. .,,., ~ .. ~~..~. -,.,...- ~, ~ .,~. ~, I , .. !~z '`~ '' Inc. ~ItKIN COUNTY TITLE , r . . ,~ Title Insurance Company ~+ Ho kins, As en, Colorado 81611 Christina M. Davis 601 E p p Vincent J. Higens n . Vice President (303) 925-1766 • (303) 925-6527 FAX t Preside ..~ TITLE CHAIN PARCEL # 37, 1982 TO DATE MOUNT SOPRIS JOINT VENTURE #3 . . w. . (CURRENT OWNER) ;; .n _. r- ~'" e; .~, .~ ;' .. !"' .~, ~r . ~, : _ Wx ~"" - , en a*+ n PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, Inc. . ,.~. ~. Title Insurance Company' "" Vincent J. Higens 601 E. Hopkins, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Christina M. Davis " President (303) 925-1766 • (303) 925-6527 FAX Vice President n ` TITLE CHAIN PARCEL # 38, 1982 TO DATE ,.w MOUNT SOPRIS JOINT VENTURE #1 '~' I 10/16/89 --. WD ~ BOOK 605 AT PAGE 026.. ~'* MOORE P. H UFFMAN, JR. (CURRENT OWNER) F^ .., A^, _ . C'a ;: ~~ i P^ w:E r I' re.. _.. ~PLTKIN.000NTY TITLE,yInc. ,, Title Insurance Company Higens "" Vincent J 601 E. Hopkins, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Christina M. Davis . i (303) 925-1766 • (303) 925-6527 FAX Vice President dent Pres n TITLE CHAIN PARCEL # 39, 1982 TO DATE .~, MOUNT SOPRIS JOINT VENTURE #3 ~ ' 01/11/90 ,..~ W0 BOOK 611 AT PAGE 831 *^ DAVID E. CHRISTENSEN 01/11/90 ,,,, WD BOOK 611 AT PAGE 833. °- ROBERT B. BEAN NANCY J. BEAN ~""' - (CURRENT OWNER) ~„ ~+, o** _ ~,. ,, ~, r~+ te'+ , e., r~ `A ITKIN COUNTY TITLE, Inc. - Ttle Insurance Company. " ~"" Vincent J. Higens 601 E. Hopkins, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Christina M. Davis President (303) 925-1766 • (303) 925-6527 FAX Vice President TITLE CHAIN PARCEL # 40, 1982 TO DATE ~+e i MOUNT SOPRIS JOINT VENTURE #1 (CURRENT OWNER) -r r+ ~' ~ '- "~F?ITKIN COUNTY TITLE, Inc. ,.., ~. __ . Title Insurance C , ,,., - . ~ ... '"' Vincent J. Hi ens 601 E. Hopkins Aspen, Colorado 81611 Christina M. Davis President (303) 925-1766 • (303) ompany ' 925-6527 FAX Vice President .~, TITLE CHAIN PARCEL # 41, 19II2 TO DATE n .- MOUNT SOPRIS JDINT VENTURE #2 (CURRENT OWNER) d'r .,. .+n e, :i ... .,. ~.+ ~,. 4"'!_.. n .. ir* _ ~, .~ a-'""~ ~:; `~ ,. ~~ pi~kin c 506 east main street aspen, Colorado 818'11 April 27, 1982 Joseph E. Edwards, Jr. 201 South Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 HAND DELIVEI2BD Re: Bart Strang Ranch Dear Joe: Being returned to you are the Aspen Title Company abstract and corporation docu- m?nts earlier submitted with respect to the former Bart Strang Ranch, Based on these docuR~nts and information supplied by you I offer the following opinion. IiISTORY T_n July of 1974 Brewer Properties, Inc.("Brewer") executed 34 deeds for the former Bart Strang Ranch (2004A) for lots varying in size from 35 to 50 (approx.) acres to three corporations. Three correction deeds (survey errors) were recorded on October 1st; but other than these, all cronveyances were recorded on July 29, 1974. All the deeds were special warranty deeds;shawed doctimientary fees of from $2.50 to $3.00; and had detailed survey descriptions. The conveyancos were admittedly done in anticipation of the proposed amendment-to include large lots (35+ acres) within the definition of subdivision. With respect to the County's action on the acrendment, the records show: October 23, 1974 P & Z recotmiended approval of the a~rendment deleting the 35 acre exception. November 14,1974 Published notice of the public hearing. December 16,1974 BOCC public hearing. Decem~-ier 23,1974 ~ BOCC adopted resolution amending the code. The Board has been presented. with several proposals for development, the most recent was considered and denied in late 1974. The reasons given for denial were insufficient access roads (West Sopris Creek & Prince Creek Roads); impacts on other public facilities; location next to critical elk wintering, migration and calving areas; inconsistency with adjacent agricultural areas; and questions as to the adequacy of the water supply. ~. .< .. e u b,. .. ~ . ~ ~,~_ , a~, .. , .~ ~, ~~ ~ , .,....:~ ~~ m u ~ ,. ~ , ~• ~~ °" ~ :~ y ~„„ { Page 2. ~' ;: .•ISSUES ~`h With the recent decision in Pennobscot v Board of Count Comni.ssioners the ability of a landowner to subdivide 35+ acre tracts without subcli.vision approval. . is no longer at issue. Friiat is of concern to us, however, is whether the tracts ~, parcelled in 1974 are to be deemed subdivided lots (prior to the adoption of the C~ quota allocation system) so as to be exempt from the quota requirements ~^+ (5-510.2) and the mandatory PUD requirementsl. Two elements of our subdivision regulations appear to be relevant. They are subsections (b) and (c) of the defini- tion of subdivision found in Section 20-1 (p.234 Supp.2) ~" "(b) No subdivision of land shall be deemed to have occurred merely by reason of the establishment of a public right-of-way (for access or utility purposes) across such land without regard as to whether ~'^ such right-of-way was ao3ui.red by dedication or establishment by ,, , prescription. (c) In the event that two or more contiguous parcels of .land, previously separately conveyed (or described) shall cones under single aanership, the division of land into two (2) or more lots, tracts, sites, parcels, separate interests, interests in common or other division, even if divided along the line of a previously described or conveyed pazcel, shall constitute a subdivision of land. Nothing herein shall be deemed ~ to apply to a lot shoran on any recorded subdivision plat, unless such subdivision plat shall not have received those approvals required by state or local law." '"' The two issues as I see them are (1) did Brewer affect a subdivision (parcelling _._ and conveyance) of the lots in 1974 and (2) if so, have these lots maintained their separate identity (or, conversely "merged"under (b) or (c)) subsequent to that titre. .- 1974 CONVEYANCES As noted above the deeds issued were in .good form, with complete legal descriptions, +"'" and dociment fees indicating consideration was received. Grantees of the deeds ,;,.from Brewer are: 1. Hawaiiana Investment Co. ,Inc. ("Hawaiiana") (16 lots) 2. C.B. Kilauea Inc. ("Kilauea") (15 lots) ~ 3. Hawaiiana Modular Co. ,Inc. ("Hawaiiana Modular") (10 lots) ~' with 13 lots being retained by Brewer. Documentation submitted by you shows: ~ 1. Hawaiiana was incorporated in October 1970 in Hawaii and was.a co ration in good standing in 1974. ~o 1• It is my understanding that the land is zoned RS-30 POD. The PUD requirements, however, are not applicable for the construction of a si~}gle family have where the subdivision. of land is not proposed. 3-1.9(c) r*, n ~. ..... .. '(.u ..~nu.v.w. v~v ..~ ...r..: ~ .. .. .wa i. nrsz•b •V~.+a, f }~rsrv Ti~JVV .......Iv,eq`wni+!.A`aL u. ~nt.r .:li,. t i 4*' ~:{, ~~'~ ~ Page 3, ,r, ; ~'~ 2. Kilauea was incorporated in 1972 in Hawaii and was a corporation in gcod ""r - .. ,., _ standing in 197:4. ~ 3. Hawaiiana Modular was into tion in good standin rporated in Hawaii in 1973 and was acorpora- c• gin 1974. 4. Brewer is a Delaware corporation incorporated in 1972 also in good stand- ing (at least in Hawaii) in 1974,1 ., You have stated that in 1974 all corporationother than Brewer were wholly owned subsidiaries of Brewer or each other, ~' It is true that the ~rere execution and recordation of a deed does not create a wn_ elusive presumption of a wave any of Y an interest in land. Curtiss v Ferris, 452 p. 2d 38(Colo.l969), And that the Colorado worts will ignore the snarate le -~ identities of corporations when neressary to Prohibit the gal evasion of the law, or whenever justice so r 1~rPetration of fraud or (C.A.A. Colo. 1926); Fish vs. East, 114 F 2de177r(~. p h Cars U. S., 16 F 2d 410 ~ 336 F 2d 467 (C.A. 19th Cir. 1964 Fink vs.Mont Win, F 940 Se11__ vs, U,S,~ (1966); Contractor's Heatin and Su 1 4 levator Co „ 421 P,2d 735 dustrial Ca'rmission vs. Lavach, 439 P.2dC359v(Co oe1968432 P.2.d 237 (Colo. 1967 P.2d 367 Colo. ); Rosebud vs. )% In- ~"^ App. 1977 H111 vs. Dearmin Boggis, 561 'Lakewood, Colorado Su 609 P.2d 127 (1980); Dude vs. Citv of prey Court No. 80 SC 81 decided November 2, 1981.°-- HO`"re`7er, 2 think that under the facts of this case a wort would not "pierces .the '°'~" corporate veils" of the wrporate entities involved. But, rather the facts evi- denco effective wnveyances to separate legal entities, for consideration, not established for the purpose of perpetuating fraud or evading the law. t~RGER ,~, ~lY~ng on the abstract and January 6, 1982 ~~ ~ which the results of the ab- stract were analyzed, I would conclude that: 1. Lots 26 & 28 the Cow ,and lots 40 & 43 have merged under subsection (c) of ~"'; ty definition. -• 2. Lot 54 is less than 35 acres in size; the location of the right-of-way does not establish it as a separate parcel (see subsection (b) of the definition of subdivision); and develo -- Sent compliance with the Coun pment authority would not be granted Pfeifer v Board of Coun C ~' subdivision and GMP regulations. amiissioners, 546 P.2d 946 (1976). DIDI R Be advised that the above does not guarantee issuance of any development permits. ~ '~""' Calla-ante with Section 18-2 of the Land Use Code, inter alia, is required. This ~~° °P~on is directed solely to the question of the need for conq~liance with the ~ County s subdivision, mandatory P.U.D, and CIS allocation r ~ p ocedures prior to i m 1 I have relie fd ro ttu.s and subs uent Aspen Title abstract and Jan ~ co~~nts °R ownership exclusively on the uary 6, 1982 file memo for my comrents; as well as „~ _ the wrporate docim~nts submitted by you. n e e-ayn rvve...e.3c:. s-46ia.x ieta at>YM /q klLn~m.AxtY W5.M1V f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~j ~ Page 4. ~* ,~ issuance of development authority for the separate parcels (identified as 1 through 54) of the Strang Ranch. Very truly Yours, ~- ~ ~~.y Sandra M. Stoller Cotmty Attorney n r++ SMS:pb ~., .~ „' ~~ ~.: n ~. r , r+ ~., ;., ~ u ~~e .. ,r.,m^~ xw.. ~. - ~., .r ~fi».~p. th arv„. -v;~i ,», .r j...'Ty.» s f..Wiei§ ,, .. _ ~ :" ' -' k ., d.: ~ ~r~ ~._ x4~ ( ~r ±. (~~~: , eao . . W ' :*J . ia . . ~~ ~ , •~ N '' N Zi Ga m.- ~~~ ... ~ ' ~ O U 7 n* '... C7 77 ir'1 w ... ~ ~ e}++ DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS ... AND DEDICATION OF EASEbIENTS .~„ _ . FOR. n SOPRIS MOUNTAIN RANCH PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO .~ n ~+ es n ----- ~, . K437 ~~..~~'75" general area and must be watered and maintained until fully - established on their own. .. t. Restriction oh Animals. No animals shall be allowed to run` loose or unreasonably bother or ~,,, constitute a nuisance to others. Grazing of animals any- where on the property requires advance permission of the. ~- Association. Such permission shall be granted by one-year permits .identifying the number and location of such animals. "" In the event of overgrazing of property by horses or other animals or if any such animals or poultry become a nuisance to other property owners, the Design Committee may require the removal or restriction of such animals or poultry. u. Variances by Design Committee. The ,,, Design Committee may authorize variances from compliance with any of the provisions, covenants, conditiohs ahd restrictions contained in this Declaration when circum- stances such as topography, 'natural obstructions or hardship '"" may require. Such variances must be evidenced in writing. __The granting of such a variance shall not waive any pro- visions of this Declaration except as to the particular !~* property and provision covered by the variance. ... .., p~ 5. Easements Reserved. .•~2`Y, a. Road Easements Dedicated. The owners herebv dedicate and reserve to the Association for the benefit of all owners, appurtenant to the 54 parcels identified on Exhibit B, perpetual easements for ingress and egress as described on Exhibit D`attached hereto to and from the public roads and between such parcels together with the .right in the Association to construct, maintain .and repair such roads and improvements thereon which are deemed by the Association to be necessary or appropriate to facilitate the purposes of such easement. The Association. shall have the right, with the approval of a number of owners sufficient to effect a change of these covenants, to authorize either temporarily or permanently the use of such easements for the purposes indicated for the benefit of lands not included in the Sopris Mountain Ranch, including the authority to dedicate such private roads and .easements to public use, b. Utility Easemehts Dedicated. The owners hereby dedicate to the. .Association for the benefit of all owners perpetual primary utility easements te'n"feet in width on each side of the boundary line along the entire perimeter of each lot identified on Exhibit B ,,,,.and along a dedicated county or private road, for the purpose of cohstructing, maintaining, operating, replacing, enlarging and repairing electric, telephone, water, irrigation, sewer, gas and similar lines, pipes, wires, poles, ditches and conduits, together with additional anchor easements ,adjacent to all such utility easements sufficient to allow 'all utility poles e*+ __ _6_ ~_. .STATE OF COLORADO "` " " ` ... ... ::..... ."REFER rO: Roy Romer, Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES `oWR.9oo DIVISION OF WILDLIFE o ,. ' AN EQUAL OPPORTU PITY Eh1Pl0'tER 3s~w~~ e.. Perry D. Olson, Director 6060 Broadway `Y OF `~ Denver, Colorado 80276 ' Telephone: (303) 297-1192 *-+ July 23, 1990 Pitkin County F'kanni.ng ,,,,,, 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 8161.1 Uear t•lary Gn 7-12-90 I rnel, rii.th Mr. John S'oung for the Huffman Iil~l1. rec'ieca nl' lot: 38 of the t•1 t.. Ropris Ranch, lJes t, .~',opris C•reelE (l'}nnss~n Ttiinch). 'l hrr tnt. ^^ lies in e]. it trans}t,}onal. range ernci adjacent. i.o an eiic cal.yi.n>? nir>a. There is some wi.nter• use in li~+hCer• snin•r years as wel 1. as enrly ami laP,e winter. Its also Iles wit.h.in an e.l.lc/deer mgr:it.i.on pattern as ells/dear ,,,,, Filter through the sr•ea on t.hei.r rosy to the Crotgn. Iluf•f.'mnn selectr.d a hu}kdi.ng envelope on the ^orl:hwest, side of the subrii.vision road in a. meadow surrounded by smal..l aspen and oalcbrn9h. The road sl>7:it,s thr' loh. a.w The foilciwi.ng will minimize impacts to wildlife: 1. Homesite located along t;he edge of tho` mear.iow maintaining nat.ice_ vegetation I: it act, as a screen. "'""' Z. No dogs 3. A17. fencing be -12", ~} strand or. less. 4. All l.ivest,oclc/horse grazing be located in hhe common area trl: I.he ~.~! base of l,he ranch 'i'hanlcyou for the opport.uniCy to r..ommetrt. Tf you have anc r}uesl:icnrs, ,!, p.l.ease give me a cal.1. Si.nc, ... ~ , Kec-in Wrigh e^-+ Ui strict Wi.ld_l, i. fe P1ana.ger t' Carbondale ne! cc:Wright Young File .,~ _ s.* ., DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Hamlet J. Barry, Executive Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION. George VanDenBerg, Chairman . Robert.L. Freidenberger Vice, Chairman . William R. Negberg, Secretary ;.. Idon W. Cooper. Member . Rebecca L Frank, Member . Dennis Luttrell, Member .Gene 6, Peterson, Member . Larry M. Wright, Member ,., BASALT. P.O. BOX 801 BASALT, COLORADO 81621 9273365 July 13, 1990 ~" John B. Young, Consultant Services.. ,_, P.0. Box 1099 Basalt, CO. S1b21 RE: Field inspection of Sopris Mountain Ranch, Lot 38. ,,,~ Dear Mr. Young, - An on site inspection of the above property owned by Moore Huffman, has no immediate wildfire hazard at the proposed building site. The following items 1 and 2 are mandatory while 3 is only s. recommended: 1. It will be mandatory that a'water storage tank of no less than two thousand (2,000 ) gallon capacity be "placed on the property near the building site for Fire Fighting purposes. 2. Driveway(s) shall be_no less than twenty (20) foot in !*'+ width from the roadway to the building site. 3. Due to the distance of travel for the Fire Department, I strongly recommend the installation of a residential ,,,, sprinkler system and automatic fire alarm system at the I- time of construction. The cost of the systems would be paid back in possible lower insurance premiums. (The potential home builder should .check with. their ®'" - -insurance company for any possible reductions in pre- miums.> en. _ I hope thiswill be_of assistance to the propertyowner but if there are any questions that still need to be addressed, `" please feel free to contact me. . , _ _, R ~e~,,c~fully, AGO rn. Ronald W. Thieving, Chief Basalt ahd Rural Fire ,~„ Protection District ~.,, ~, .,. ~,.,.4 ,.-. wx..i=n~.~~ .i~.:.~k~ f ~~ CASELOAD SUMMARY,$HEET, Pitkin COUii~ty DATE RECEIVED: 12 3 90 PARCEL~ID AND CASE NO. DATE COMPLETE: o'Z 5 0 C~65-33~-©1'015 P145=90 STAFF MEMBER: ML PROJECT NAME' Project Address APPLICANT: Moo Applicant Addr REPRESENTATIVE' Representative re P. Huffman ess:508~~Pixie Mi11 Valley CA 94941 PAID: YES7{XI10 AMOUNT S1.670 NO. 'OF COP ES RECEIVED: 1 TYPE OF APPLICATION: q1 STEP: 2 STEP: P&Z Meeting Date ~ ~ I PUBLIC HEARINGq ES NO VESTED RIGHTS:. YES NO BOCC Meeting Date ~ ~ 8 ~ PUBLIC_HEARING: YES NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES _ NO Staff Level: 1041 Minor.Hazard Review: Date of Approval .. .., ..a,.v,•,~ .. smn ~. ... .,t .L," REFERRALS: ~/ Attorney Aspen Consol S.D. School District Engineer ~[ Mtn. Bell Rocky Mtn Nat Gas _ Housing -.:Holy Cross State. Hwy Dept Aspen Water Aspen Fire (Glwd) (GrJtn) Slth. ~/ Envir, Basalt Fire Snowmass Vll ` _ _ Manager / Carbondale Fire (Carbondale) USFS ~/ Div. Wildlife Div. Water Res. IISFS (Aspen) Caucus Airport Manager BLM Zoning CO Geo. Survey City P&Z Other: ners Assoc. Hom e ow ~ 0 ~ ~ ) ~ ~ DATE REFERRED: O A INITI ~ ~- ALS: ~`~ -- FINAL ROUTING: .DATE ROUTED: INITIAL: _ County Attorney County Engineer Zoning _ Housing Envir. Health.. Other• FILE .STATUS AND LOCATION: ` V a- . =~ , .: E~6 O Ehfi!Cinqq E.aueJase 7e - / / /. 3 v~ 2l;O 5zx, El/O h s~~ ~ 7 f ~ az_o (~ i . , ash ~ :, .. ~...__,_..~~ ~,~_ ...~ _~A, ..~r.~_~ ~. ~~~ ..~,.~ ~ ~~ ~.,~~ ...~_._ s __ ,. o ,,. ,.. ~~ 1041 ;~IAZARI) KEt11~1N ~L,4T =;f~tt' HG`FF~A1~I ~. e ~~ ;~ ~ ~ t ~ ~. ~.~, ~- tdt 4, 5W%48E%4 ~ E!~Z SE a SEC. 33 t€ SW l4 SEC. 34, T. 85,y,Q ~~ GTr a~' z=ee ~1~ :~l•;.- - '. 1 PITK/N COUrVTY, COLOI~'AL1G f ra _ t ~.~~n_~~= . ~, s ~ - A a ~^D ~ ~Fii.. w s s ,n c ~ s ~ - ~ ~ ~ .o .,a y ~ ~~x >P . a.~ ~ ~t"~ s LL y _ I - a, u : Y ~ Y _ ,~. Y V _ 5.''9 Z7%5^<. ~~- ~ \~, T z 5. .'+~ ~~ may.-~„~ ~ ~~ie s-~a.~ n. - 29/pg~ ~ ~ _ y. t. i .~:. n • t Y IVokM~' ~ ~ ~ .gTpj rt f ~ v b 1 f ~~ n~ t ~ :ifOing Frue c~ ,f ~ "t "' ~ ,y ~ < .:eres m ~' t ~ 1 ~ - ~~ ~ 1 } , t u ` { Payee AP' ~!. ~ s~ ~.~ t t _ ~ 1~~/ Nl_ -so ~ ~ ( ~ o t ~ ~ ~,,.-f' \~ \ ~ Gff/XITY M.CP ~ t .~ ~ -~ , ... e,. _ , e ~ < ~ ~a i. ~ ~ N, <. s x H 3' as s b-c~ er i ~~ ~ ~~40 ,,,ike+~.-^'_ '" ~ ~qz-~ Y. - c =,as. s. -,~ s 9/-:a`!- 9 .~a _. i~ a n 't'xa7ne N./f( n - ~ I -+P~s24'2_'E i.ow No. ~55l5L, cols ~. ~ -~ ~ ~ _ ~ , ~ ba _ By P m 8Z~ ~- ~_ //' .. ]«- ..+--r -~ i - ~ I ' _ ~ k~ ~ e- ~ - - ~ ~ -- ,~-__ ~~ ~~_ - - - -- ~, . - = l r< ~\ E3%v '"\ ~ ~ ~P6F'CC/ rY6~ a,- ~ ~~ ~- - ~~~ ~ -~z a s y -e w ~, iJ - _ ~^ ~ r - - - - ~ e I ~ `. _ _ - _~V.~ :: a c. 2-. ~ ~ . ,. 1 ~: ~ - ~ - _ ~ 1 ~ ~, ~~--~ ~.; ., h - x- '' - ~- ~~, ; .. t - .. .~ s~~ ~ ~ ~ ~=-~-. ~,_ -'~_~- ~ - _ ~~ ay, 5.111 r„U= j <- ~"~_ ~~ ~ / - ~ ~ 205 ~ - _ ~ ~ _ _ / q ~6+ / i -~~ .: ~ OVA= "~-~ ~~"~~ ~ ~~ - ~ ~ _.~ ~ ~'~ 9~ < S-. ~L~, 4. c ' _ c~ ~ , . _` __ - -~ ~ ~- = h` 88'OD'O6' #V fd-79 78 ~ ,. ~ ~ ~ r ~ $ ~. > a-z iF° f ~'r.Y $ ~ `~ 2 Sc. ~_- 7 u i a ~ ~- I f .`` .; .. ~,R" r ,, eL .a zs )l4`r f1pZr~lt~ f'.G/,'t:Y yrl~m ~~s A x.3N ^%.' l9 tiY F . ;..' T=e ~ 5.-x"'l1 r ~ ~.t~r~ s E.s n ;cx ~3 tfr +.r, 3 ,,.,:-.. ^" - ,. .-~- s~=. etas-~ ,ores M,eunfrr~~i9 ~s ,e.h -;. ~"~ * - - \+, f rrn Gamy. Cv:v~..ldc - '. ~ '.~svtr <- c~: >[ `. - ., Tg~„te aJO!_-€r?k~i ..~:s-~:^.~_..~s.~r cr 2nw~= rm47 - -•~o'