HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.246717400012~ ~~~ -
DOCUMENT LAYOUT
THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION
LISTED BELOW IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER
Summary Sheet
Resolution for the BOCC and/or P&Z
Ordinance for the BOCC and/or P&Z
Determination for the Hearing Officer
Administrative Determination
Staff Memo
Application
Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter
Site Plan
Miscellaneous
Plat copies (11x17)
' #~45 i?1/1~/94'i?9:49 Rec ~ Bk: 738 r^G 725
Silvia Dav'S, F~itkiin Cnty Clerk:, Doc x.00
i
" RESOLIITION OF THE BOARD`. OF COIINTY COMMISSLONERS OF PITRIN
COUNTY COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL TO THE
LAMBERT CARETAKER DWELLING UNIT4 ..,;,.
Resolution No. 93-~.3
RECITALS
1. David Lambert., hereinafter "Applicant", has applied to
the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin,COUnty, Colorado,
hereinafter "Board", for approval of a caretaker dwelling unit
pursuant to Section 3-8.13(d) of the.'. Land Use Code.
2. The Applicant's lot is zoned AF-1 and is approximately
3.5 acres in size.
3. Said "parcel is described as being in Tract 55, Sec.17-
_.
8-86, W.6th.P.M., as described by-metes and bounds in deed.
book 611, page 547, Pitkin County records, more specifically
described in Exhibit "A", attached.
4. The Applicants propose to deed restrict the caretaker
dwelling unit pursuant to .Ordinance '91-11,
5. The Board heard this application at a regularly scheduled
meeting on October 12, 1993, at which time evidence and
testimony was presented with respect to this application.
6. The Board determined that the proposed caretaker unit
meets the criteria established in Section 3-8.13 (d) of the
Land Use Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board that it does ~
~,
hereby grant approval to the Lambert Caretaker Dwelling Unit
application subject. to the. following conditions:
1. The Applicant shall _record a caretaker dwelling unit deed
#36:~ c~1 / 13/94 "9:49 Rec y. c~c:°~:. 738 FG 727
,.
Silvial7avis, Fi't4=in CntyCler•k,~Doc $.U~]
Exhibit "A"
Lambert Caretaker Dwelling Unit Review
Legal Description:
p, parcel of land situated in Tract 55, Section 17, Township 8
South. Rance d6 i~lest of the 6th P.M., described. as follows:
Sectiennl7atthencesSouth 33°22x31"pkest 479r15tfeet~tosthe
center of a 60 foot cul-de-sac at the Northerly terminus of an
existing 30 foot private road; '
thence along the centerline of said private road as follows:
South 45°34' West 67.99 feet;
thence en a curve to the left having a radius of 100 feet with
a central angle of 100° an arc distance of 174.53 feet;
thence South 54°26' East 110.73 feet;
thence ~n a curve to the right having a radius of .82.83 feet with
a central angle of '27°28'30" an arc distance of 39.72 feet;
thence on a reverse curve to the left having a radius of 82.83
feet with a central angle of 29°10'30"`an arc distance of 42.17
feet;
thencs South 56°OS' East 69.58 feet:.and „f 18.58 feet
thence on a cuL-ve to~the right having a radius
witi, a central angle of "15°26'30" an arc distance of 25.77 feet;
thence leaving the.. centerline of said road, South 66°39'30" East
101.6 feet: ~ point of beginning.
thenc_ i•Jerth 00°03'48" West 827.75 feet to the
Countp of Pit kin. State of Colorado
~~
r
~'"' ,
.MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
Regular Meeting - October 12, 1993
THRU: Reid Haughey, County Manager
Suzanne Konchan, County Planning Director
FROM: Rick Magill, Planner
RE: Lambert. Caretaker. Dwelling Unit
REQUEST: Pursuant to Section 3-8.13(d) of the Code, the Applicant
is requesting approval of a caretaker dwelling unit to be located
in a legally approved outbuilding. The Applicant is building a new
principal residence on the property and wishes to deed restrict
the existing residence to "caretaker unit" status.
LOCATION: The site. is located adjacent to the Holland Hills __
Subdivision off SH`82, approximately one and one quarter miles
southeast of Basalt.
APPLICANT: David Lambert
ZONING: AF-1, ten acre minimum lot size
PROJECT INFORMATION: The parcel is approximately 3.5 acres in size
and is a non-conforming lot within the AF-1 zone district. The
proposed caretaker dwelling unit is located over a garage, and is
approximately 680 square feet in size. The Applicant has resided
in the unit since 1981 and is currently constructing a new
,principal residence on the lot. The new residence consists of 4,400
square feet of living space and 2,055 square feet of garage, shop,
mechanical, and office area. The proposed caretaker unit is located
approximately 120 feet from the new residence. The principal unit
contains four bedrooms with six (6) off=street parking spaces and
the caretaker unit is one-bedroom with five (5) off-street parking
spaces.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Referral agency comments are attached for
reference.
1. The Housing office is recommending approval of this request.
Upon submission of the deed restriction, net livable square
footage will--have to be calculated for this unit. Cindy
Christensen reviewed this application prior to the
modification of the unit floor plan and, subsequently, the
total square footage is approximately 680, not 724 square.
feet.
2. The Environmental .Health Department has indicated that the
~`".~ _ ""
individual sewage disposal system is not adequate to support
both the main house and the caretaker unit. The Applicant
will need to apply for a Septic Permit to increase the size
of the existing system, prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
3. The County Attorney has not commented on this action.
BACKGROUND: The Applicant previously applied for Employee Dwelling
Unit status for the subject residence in July of 1989. The Board
of County Commissioners denied Mr. Lambert's request because the
application did not conform to the minimum lot area requirements
of the AF-1 zone district, or meet some of the other requirements
of those sections (see attached Resolution 89-78). This section of
the Land Use Code has subsequently been repealed and reenacted
pursuant to Ordinance No. 91-11, and the resulting legislative
changes have prompted this current application. While the Code now
provides a mechanism to permit the unit, the Board's previous
.Resolution found that an additional unit on this site would Yesult
in overcrowding. This issue, would still be relevant to this
request.
STAFF COMMENTS: The originally proposed floor plan showed that the
unit exceeded the 700 square foot maximum floor area size limit for
caretaker units. The Planning Staff and Mr. Lambert have agreed
that in order to comply with the 700 square foot maximum allowable
living area, a small portion of the existing unit must be walled
off, so that the tenant may not access the space (see attached
floor plan). The Applicant has 'represented to the Planning Office
that the reduction of the existing square footage will be
accomplished prior to the submission of the deed restriction.
In regards to the previous finding of the Board that there is
potential for overcrowding, Staff has determined through a site
visit, that there are site-specific factors that should be
considered in the disposition of this application:
1. The relative proximity of the proposed caretaker dwelling unit
to the. new. primary residence ..(120 feet) would seem to be in
character with the Holland Hills Subdivision as a whole. Staff
noted several instances where residential dwellings are separated
by approximately 50 feet or less.
2. The Lambert property is accessed by a dead-end drive, which
serves only the proposed caretaker unit and the new primary
residence.
3. The existing topography and mature vegetation provides enough
screening to prevent "visual overcrowding", not only as viewed from
the Subdivision, but within the Lambert development itself.
4. The proposed caretaker dwelling has been provided five (5)
off-street parking spaces and the primary residence has six (6)
off-street spaces.
~, _- r~
5. The closest residential structure to either of the Lambert
units is approximately 200-300 feet away.
It is important to note that both the primary dwelling and the
proposed caretaker unit are served by a private well, with 2500
gallons of storage. The Applicant has purchased water rights from
the Basalt Water Conservancy, which allows the installation of
another well, should more water be required for the development.
This application meets the conditions set forth in Section 3-
8.13(d) of the Code, in that the proposed caretaker unit:
1. does not exceed 700 square feet in size;
2. the total floor area of the principal and caretaker unit
does not exceed the allowable FAR of the applicable zone
district;
3. the Applicant is providing at least one (1) off-street parking
space for the caretaker unit;
4. the Applicant will deed restrict the unit as per Section 3-
8.Y3(a)(4) of the Code and Housing Authority Guidelines;
5. the Applicant understands that the deed restriction may be
removed by the owner, subject to the removal or modification
of the caretaker.. unit and the .approval of the. Planning
Director.
Board of County Commissioners approval is required because the
caretaker. unit is in a detached outbuilding and is located on a
non-conforming parcel.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners approve the Lambert Caretaker Dwelling Unit subject
to the following conditions:
1. The Applicant shall record a caretaker dwelling unit deed
restriction, pursuant to Section 3-8.13(d)(3) of the Code.
2. Upon submission of the deed- restriction, the net livable
square footage of the unit shall be no more than 700 square
feet.
3. The current individual sewage disposal system permit shall be
.reviewed by the Environmental Health Department prior to the
submission of the deed restriction.
4. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations
made in the application and in the public meetings.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Caretaker Unit floor plan
2. Resolution #89-78
3. Exhibit "A"
memo_lambert_cdu_boCC
~YnPc.o~e~' Unrt~' fIDD~-rr~rl,-~- t~ -7~zr~j3
L>~~aU'
Gur principol residence and the propdsed erriployee d'•~ti•elling unit are on a
?.535 acre ?ot ~Lia~~ed rirr-? In it act 55, Lei:. ~7-i-vu, 'S'i'. bth. ~.1i., b'.'ing
described by metes and bounds in dee~i_hoot, rat 1, page 547, rr^itkin County
record•~. The principal residence •,~~ill be completed very soon grid as E=k55
sf. tata? consisting of 4=~Cit7 sf of l~,~ina and ~`C55 sf of garage, shop,
1~rechanical and office. St is located, t2C~ feet pvray frarn the approved
dutbuilding v,~hich_cansists of qn 1760 sf structure, 72~ sf of r~~~hich is
being applied far as an emplayee dtt~elling unit, and 9c~~~ sf is garage and
storage. Ttie principal +.snit is ~ be?~room~ ~'•~~itfi fi affstreat parking places
and the ernpioyee unit is one beuroam with 5 offstreet parking places.
I have resided in ttie proposed emplayee unit far 1~ years, having built it
in ?G8~ with t11e hopeful ?ntention bf sorne~iay conv>rting into ari
employee unit when I built tt~>= primary residence. The 12 fapt maximum
height limitations for detached structures in Af-? tirti••as adhered to by
build•;ng 70° of the unit beto'~r~• grade. It is a eery efficient and ww•ell bui?t_
unit •~vhich has received praise frarn the rnernbers of the county
gotirernrr~ent ~~•rho ha~:~e inspected it over- ttie years including twvo county
managdrs and. four county cammis~onet-s.
In t ~G~ 1 applied to the 6GCC far approval of the unit as emp?ogee housing,
', but 5~~ras turneb ia+~~fn pecause the lot vas non-canfarming (by a 4-2 vote).
I vrauld like to paint out that the planning department notzti that bof.h the
ne•,fr house and the proposed unit were of eery la;~r impact Goth density-
..
vrise ar~d visually and in fact could only be seen at a distanie from
High•Vvay d2, and then bnly in a fe••rr lacatiorjs. t ha~ve'given s lot of
attention to kbeping both structures rys lour as possible to existing grades,
~.:
,t "and as hidden as possible in the heavy`'growth of pinion and cedar trees on
the prc,perty ~^rtiich is bordered on the Narth_by 6it~i.
There is a ~rrell .supplying excellent S•5rater to 25q~J gallons of storage
t~hich then feeds both structures. It has pro~:~ed more than sdeauate at all
times,of the year. I also have purchased >•+rater rights for an additional
residence from the Basslt 'pt'ater Conservancy Eo3rd some. years ago in
case that. question rnigY,t come up someday. The septic system far both
units is inter-connected and ~~•as specified by BrJb haelsan of Environmental
Health tc potentialiy Handle bath structures in case county land use cages
might someday allu•vs an emplayee unit. Hilly Crass has inst~iled a nev,~
tr ansforrr~er ::0 feet frarn thz nZ`r;' hi;U~e'v,'h1C:tl then feeds bath strUCUtreS
mare than ade,yuat•el,a.
---- _
-,~ _,
There is a contingency an my 1041 approval tan the principal) unit that the
proposed emplc,yee unit have the kitchpn_and nzcess~ry plumbing removed
sa that it cannot be lfi,+ed_in. It is my intention to obtain approval of this
unit as ernplayee housing before calling far my find building inspection
and ha~~rit~ig to tear-out sornetting which could eventually Ge re-installed
under the ordinance Pda. 91-1 1 of the BOCC Repealing`and Reenacting ~° "~`
~p ~ ~ z f d Use Code Entitled "Employee and
~.,ct~on .:-8.1.. Of the Pit4.in County Lan
Caretaker Dt~relling Units".
Thanks far your consideration,
~~' -( -~-
91125/1992 0?: 12
ii
~~~
3939279830
Lfi'~/Y~L3~2'T C~~S'~~tx'6'R dN/T
PAr,E 03
Jr>~i~93
a. a 3
r ~naH o:i(~ aa~
.. .a ..
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, DENYING SPECIAL REVIEW APPROVAL FOR
AN EMPLOYEE DWELLING UNIT TO DAVID LAMBERT
Resolution No. 89 Z
.WHEREAS, David Lambert (hereinafter "Applicant") has
requested special reyew_approval for an employee dwelling unit.
pursuant to section 3-8....13 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code;
and
WHEREAS, the Lambert _ste is located in Section 17,
Township 8 South, Range 86 West, more specifically described in
Exhibit "A"; and
i
WHEREAS., said site is 3.5 acres in size and located in the
AF-1 zone district; and
WHEREAS, a meeting was held before the Board of County
Commissioners (hereinafter "Board") at their regular meeting on
July 11, 1989, at which time the applicant presented evidence and
testimony; and
WHEREAS, this application does not meet the requirements of
Section 3-8.13 (a) or (b) because it .does not conform to the
minimum lot area. requirements of the zone district, or meet some
of the other requirements of those sections; and
WHEREAS, this application cannot meet the requirements of
Section 3-8.13 (d) (1-4) because that provision was intended to,
and does, apply only to illegal employee units in existence prior
to June 8, 1981 .and the. proposed employee unit ~.s not such a
n ti
° - :.~
unit; and ~, z
n r
z < .~
cD -' i
-<
N-. A ..L1
co m ~
a- o m W
s
~\ - ~
¢~ ^' Cf
¢0 ~
~ ~^7
80J+( ~JJ '~(i~!,J t
WHEREAS, Section 3-8.13(d) (5) of the Code allows approval
of an application that cannot meet the requirements of that
section only upon a finding that approval will not result in or
constitute BOCC endorsement of overcrowding on the property or in
the neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds that due to the substandard size of
the Lambert site, approval of the application would result in and
constitute its endorsement of overcrowding on the property and in
the.neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board that it does
hereby deny Special Review approval of an Employee Dwelling Unit
as requested by David Lambert; and i
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the presently existing residence
on the Lambert site. be rendered uninhabitable as a residence,
through removal or disabling of plumbing, prior to issuance of
the certificate of occupancy for the new residence; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the presently existing residence
on the Lambert site not be utilized as a residence immediately
following issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the new
residence.
APPROVED by the Board--at its regular meeting on July il,
1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMi~fISSIONERS
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
By
olette Penne, Chairman
~h€
~'
Book 6v0 ~a~=' 33
ATTEST:
j
J nette Jonesl
eputy County Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
"Y239ytt35-F~.-Sinit3l~ --~?-2 ~~/~
/~ 5 ~ ~ County Attorney
els/reso_lambert_emp_unit
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/~®~~~GG
Thomas M. Baker,
Interim Planning Director
i
,: ~- .~ ..; ~r ..
Order Number: 16034 Commitment Number:
Exhibit "A"
A parcel of land situated in Tract 55, Section 17, Township 8
South, Range 86 iaest of the 6th P.M., described as follows:
Beginning at a Brass Cap marked A.P. 4 of Tract 53 of said
Section 17; thence South 33°22'31" West 479.15 feet to the
center of a 60 foot cul-de-sac`at the Northerly terminus of an
existing 30 foot private road;
thence along the centerline of said arivate road as follows:
South 45°34' West 67.99 feet;
thence en a curve to the left having a radius of 100 feet with
a central angle of 100° an arc distance of 174.53 feet;
,thence South 54°26' East 110.73 feet;
thence on a curve to the right having a radius of 62.83 feet with
a central angle of 27°28'30" an arc distance of 39.72 feet;
thence on a reverse curve to the left having a radius of 82.83
feet with a central angle of 29°10'30"`an arc distance of 42.17
feet;
thence SoutP, 56°08' East 69.58 feet; and
thence on a curve t.o the right havinq_ a radius of 18.58 feet
with a central angle of 79°28'30" an arc distance of 25.77 feet;
thence leaving the centerline of said road, South 66°39'30" East
101.63 feet;
thence lJerth 00°03'48" West 827.75 feet to the point of beginning.
Countp of Pitkin, State of Colorado
Page
STEW.A,Y2T TYTLE" q
. ..,,.,
w",,
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE.
130 S. Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
Phone 920-5090 FAX 920-5197
MBNORANDUM
TO: County Attorney
Housing
Environmental Health
Holland Hills Homeowners Association
,,
FROM: Rick Magill
RE: Lambert Employee Dwelling Unit
DATE: August 4, 1993
Attached for your review and comments is an application. submitted by
David Lambert.
Please return your comments to me no later .than September 3, 1993.
Thank you.
~~.~ _., _ .,..n~, _. r ;
~ ~
To: Planning Office
From: Environmental Health Department
Date: September 8, 1993
Re: Lambert Employee Dwelling Unit
The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the
above-mentioned land use submittal under authority of the Pitkin
County Code, Title II, and has the following comments.
SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Sections 2-7 and 5-200:
The existing septic system is not adequate to support both the main
house and the one-bedroom employee unit. Mr. Lambert will need to
apply for a Septic Permit to increase the size of the existing
system. We foresee no problem with increasing the existing system.
AIR QUALITY: Sections 2-17 and 5-106•
Only that development is permitted which will not contribute
significantly to degradation of air quality in Pitkin County. This
project is not expected to contribute significantly to air quality
degradation.
R-, €~
August 18, 1993
,,~;, , ~,
MANAGEMENT
MAINTENANCE
LEASING
SALES
P.O. Box 12047
Aspen, Colorado 81612
(303) 925.4446
®,
Mr. Rick McGill ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office ~ f I j~_,:vH~A '~ ~1
130 South Galena ~ ~,, ~ ~°-"'""-"°~`"~
Aspen, Colorado 81611 ~ "~~'
Re: Lambert Employee Dwelling Unit
Dear Rick,
With regard to your August 4, 1993 correspondence related to subject
employee dwelling unit application, comments are as follows:
We have reviewed all of the data enclosed with your memorandum. We
have no objections to the application as put forth. Mr. and Mrs. Lambert
own a large secluded property which is not actually a part of this subdivision,
but utilizes our road system for ingress and egress. Only a small portion of
the primary residence is visible from a great distance away. Neither the
primary residence or the original dwelling, which would now become the
employee unit, are visible from most areas of the subdivision.
It would be a shame to have this perfectly acceptable and useable dwelling
lost to the employee rental pool.
Please advise if we can be of further service.
MGS:sIv
cc: David & Lynn Lambert
Holland Hills Homeowners Association
e ~
f, ~i ~
i
MEMORANDUM SEP 9 !{~~~~
,. ~~,'~
TO: Rick Magill, Planning Office
BROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing
DATE: September 7, 1993
R8: LAMBERT EMPLOYEE\CARETAKER DWELLING UNIT
Parcel ID No. 2167-174=00-012
After reviewing the above-referenced application, staff recommends
the approval of this request. Upon submission of the deed
restriction, net liveable square footage will have to be calculated "
for this unit.
The floor area requirement is for net liveable square feet as
defined by the Housing Office below:
Net Liveable Square Faataae is calculated an Interior INing area and is measured interior wall to
interior wall, Including all Interior partitions including; but not Iimkeii to, habitaTile basements aril
interior storage areas, closets and laundry area. 6cclusions include; but are riot limited to,
.uninhabitable basemerns, mechanical areas, exterior torage, stairwells, garages (either attached or
detached), patios, decks antl porches.
Per Section 3-8.13 (d) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code, the
proposed caretaker dwelling unit is 24 square feet larger than
permitted by Code. The Housing Office does not have a problem with
this difference, but this would be up to the Board of County
Commissioners to decide if this is appropriate.
1. CaretakerUnits -Outbuildings: The Board may permit one caretaker dwelling unit not to exceed 700 square
feet, to be located wfth(n a properly approved outbuild(ng onany lot wRhinthe R-30, AF'-1, AF-2, RS-20; RS=30
antl RS-160 zone districts under the following oonditlons and limitations:
a. The total floor area of the principal and caretaker unR shall not exceed the allowable FAR of the
applicable zone district. '
b. There shall be provided one (t) off-street parking space for each bedroom wRhin the principal unit
and one (1) off-street parking space for each bedroom in the caretaker unit.
c. The applicarn shall by deed restriction or other permanent commitmern running with the land,
guarantee that the caretaker unit shall not beYequired to be rented; not be condominiumized or sold;
not be occupied by the owner or spouse; be Ilmfted to occupancy by not more than two (~ adults,
and related children, who qualify as (and have been found by the Housing Office to be) employees
of the community under such guidelines as may be from time to time established by sold Authority;
be rerned for terms not less than six (6) mornhs iF rented. The caretaker dwelling may be occupied
by members of the immediate family even though they may not qualify as' employees of the
community. °Immediate Family" shall mean a person related by blood or marriage who is a first
cousin (or closer relative) and his or her children: ;
This approval is for a caretaker dwelling unit and not an etnployee
dwelling unit. There would be some minor differences should this
be classified as an employee dwelling unit. Section 3-8.13(b)(1)
states:
Detached or attached employee dwellings shall not exceetl one thousand five hundred (1500) square
feet of floor area
As stated in the application, the proposed unit will be 724 square "
feet, which is within the maximum square footage required by the
Aspen/Pitkin County xousing Office, and will be detached from the '
primary residence.
The applicant must also comply with Section 3-8.13(b)(4)(A), (B)
and (C), added per a Code amendment enacted with Ordinance 91-11,
which statese
(A) Shall be required lobe rerned antl be rented for periods of no less than 6 mornhs. Upon
vacancy of the unk, a landlord is granted 90 days ih'which to locate a qualfied tenant. ff no tenant
is placed by the landlord, the Housing Authority may rent the una to a qualfied tenant.
(B) Shall not be occupied by the owner or members of the immediate famlfy nor sha0 it be used
as a guest house or guest facilities.
(C) Maximum rental rates shall not exceed the Housing Authorfry Category 3level or equivalern.
Employees shall be qualified by APCHA as to employmernbnty; and not maximum income or asset
limitation.
Prior to building permit approval, a signed and recorded Deed Restriction must be completed. An example of the
required Deed Restriction is enclosed for the applicarn. This process could take from"three to four`days. -The Housing `
Office must have the recorded book and page number prior to building permit appFoval.
\wordkeferra4lambert.cdu
2