HomeMy WebLinkAbout20070926mines
,
MEMORANDUM
.
Board of County Commissioners
Regular Meeting - September 26, 2007
Cindy HOu~~,~~nity Development Director
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
Ezra Louthis, Planner
RE:
Mines Major Amendment to a,Qevelopment Permit
.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The AppU,cant1s requesting a major amendment to build out the
lower level of an existing residence, as well lIS to build a garage.
APPLICANT: Michael Mines
REPRESENTATIVE: Francis Krizmanich
LOCATION: 0075 Capitol Creek Road
WNINGILOT SIZE: RS-30 PUD/1.98 acres
BACKGROUNDI EXISTING CONDmONS: The property was denied 1041 hazard review
approval pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 95-64. It then received 1041 hazard review approval
in 1995 pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 95-236 (see application for Reso). The approval was
the result of a takings procedure due to the presence of wetlands and riparian habitat on the
subject property. The approval restricted the floor area on the parcel to 2,400 square feet, and
located a parking pad to the west of the. residence.
The parcel is located at the intersection of Capitol Creek Road and Snowmass Creek Road, across
from the entrance to Lazy 0' Ranch. The property contains a number of isolated wetlands, as
weB as riparian vegetation. It is developed with a single-family residence of approximately 2,400
square feet, with the majority of the residence located on the second floor. The residence was
built on stilts as a result of the approval process, in order to preserve as much of the wetlands as
possible. The Applicant was required to maintain the wetlands on the property, as weB as replant
some wetland species below the residence. Aside from the area that was to be replanted under the
house, the wetlands and riparian habitat remain intact. It is unclear whether the area below the
second story of the house was ever planted with wetland species, but at this time there is no
vegetation to be found there.
REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting to build a garage where the parking pad is located, and to
build out the lower level so that it essentia11y matches the second floor, thus adding approximately
1,200 square feet to the residence. The Applicant has not provided a square footage total for the
garage.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: The SnowmasslCapitol Caucus was referred, but it provided no
comments.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Page 2
VIEW OF THtlmSIDENCE FACING WEST
MAJOR AMENDMENTS (SECTION 2-20-1S0.D.2)
a) Major amendments to a development approval or permit approved through the
Administrative Review process shall require a new application of the same type
required for the original approval, and shall be reviewed and approved by the same
decision-making body (Community Development Department stqff or the Hearing
Officer) that made the original approval, as shown in Table 2-1.
Response: The review is not administrative.
b) Major amendments to a development approval or permit not approved through the
Administrative Review process shall require a new application of the same type
required for the original approval, and shall be reviewed through a One-Step process
to the same decision-making body {Board of A4justment, Planning and Zoning
Commission, or Board} that made the original approval, as shawn in Table 2-1.
Response: The original approval was granted by the BOCC via a 1041 hazard review. The
primary 1041 concerns were wetlands and riparian habitat, and the requested amendment
addresses these concerns.
c) If the original approval required a notice and hearing, the notice and hearing
requirements shall be repeated for the proposed amendment.
Response: The original hearing required a public notice and hearing, and the Applicant has
complied with this requirement.
Page 3
d) In the event approval required a recommendation from any other board or commission,
the proposed amendment shall be referred to the same board or commission for
recommendation.
Response: The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the original 1041 hazard review
request and made a recommendation to the BOCC. At this time the P&Z does not review
Activity Envelope requests (I 041 reviews), and does not need to make a recommendation.
e) If the proposed amendment is to a condition imposed as a result of comment from a
referral agency, the proposed amendment shall be referred to that agency for comment.
Response: No conditions that are subject to the requested amendment were the result of a
specific referral agency comment (with the exception of the County Wildlife Biologist).
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE REVIEW (7-10-SO):
The Applicant has not requested a new envelope, nor an expansion of the approved envelope, but
certain standards from this Section must be addressed to comply with the major amendment
procedures.
Steep tmd Potentially Unstable Slopes:
,
Land Use Code Sec. 7-20-20 addresses standards for development on potentially unstable slopes;
Response: The approved envelope contains no slopes in excess of30%.
7-10-20: RlVERAND STREAM CO~RS AND WETLANDS
(a) Riparian and Wetland Areas and Buft'en
(1) PROTECTED FEATURES
Each Site Plan shall identify each of the folIowing features on the property.
a) "Blue line" perennial streams shown on U.S. Geological Survey maps of the area; and
b) Intermittent streams or streambeds known or apparent from field study, with the
exception of man-made waterways such as ditches and water features.
c) Isolated, natural wetland and riparian areas.
(2) MINIMUM SETBACKS
All activity and development shall maintain a minimum setback from the protected features
identified in subsection (I) above.
a) All activity and development after the 5th of July, 2006 shall maintain a riparian
area/wetland btdfer of at least one hundred (100) feet, measured horizontally from the
identifiable high water line of each feature identified in subsections (a)(l)(a) and (b)
above. This one hundred (100) foot setback may be reduced to between one hundred
(100) feet and a minimum of fifty (50) feet upon demonstration by the applicant that
such reduction shall not result in water quality degradation, stream bank erosion
and/or a reduction in the quality of riparian or wetland habitat.
Response: The proposed development is located outside the 100' setback.
b) All activity and development after the 5th of July, 2006 shall maintain a btdfer of a
minimum of twenty-flVe (25) feet from isolated wetlands and/or riparian areas
identified in (a)(l)(c) above. .
.
Page 4
Response: The Applicant has provided an updated wetlands report, including onsite flagging that
shows the location of the wetlands to be adjacent to the existing building envelope. At this time, the
garage location has not been surveyed in, but the proposed garage must be located outside the 25'
setback from the wet1ands. The proposed addition to the lower level of the residence does not
comply with the required 25' setback, and thus Staff recommends that the addition, as proposed,
should not be permitted. A smaBer addition could meet the setback requirement.
SCENIC REVIEW (SECTION 7-20-120)
Capitol Creek Road and Snowmass Creek Road are scenic corridors. All non-exempt
development located within a mapped Scenic View Protection Area shall comply with the
foBowing standards.
(1) The proposed development shall utilize existing topography and natural vegetation, such
as ridges, hills, and existing trees, to screen buildings to the maximum extent
racticable when viewed om those ri ht-o -w listed ir, sub$ecti " ~ above.
.~;
", . ",~
View of parking area (proposed garage site) as viewed from Capitol Creek Road.
Response: The proposed garage is located adjacent to the residence, and is positioned in the only
possible site for the property due to the presence of wetlands and riparian habitat. There is
existing screening from Capitol Creek Road, and the garage wilJ be set below the level of the
Road. Any addition to the lower level wilJ have no scenic impacts.
(2) The proposed development shall avoid the location of structures within the Scenic View
Protection Areas. and shall avoid the location of structures within any View plane
Page 5
identified in the State Highway 82 Corridor Master Plan and Dawn Valley
Comprehensive Plan if possible. If location outside the Scenic View Protection Area
pnd defined Viewplanes is not practicable, then the proposed development shall not be
located on the highest ground or most visible portion of any site as viewed from those
corridors listed in subsection (b) above.
Response: There are no scenic viewplanes associated with this Lot
(3) The proposed development's height and bulk shall be designed to avoid, to the maximum
extent practicable, the visibility of buildings from those corridors listed in subsection (b)
above. This may include, but shall not be limited to, breaking the mass of the building
down into a series of smaller forms. articulation of the building fOfades to avoid a wall
or raw effect, and staggering roojlines to avoid a long unbroken plane.
Response: The proposed garage will be limited in height, and will sit well below Capitol Creek
Road.
(4) The proposed structure shall be placed so it does not project above a ridgeline such that
a structure silhouettes against the sky when viewed from thase corridors listed in
subsection (b), unless there are no alternate building sites on the lot or parcel.
Response: Not Applicable.
(5) The proposed development shall be designed to complement the natural topography of
the land through the use of techniques such as earth-sheltered design, the use of natural
materials and coloring, the use of low-rejlectance materials, or clustering of structures
on the least visible portions of the site. When a building is proposed near a ridgeline,
then its form (particularly its roof form) shall replicate, porallel, or complement the
natural form of the ridgeline so that it appears to be an element of the natural ridgeline.
Response: The proposed garage is located adjacent to the existing residence and will mimic the
natural f~ade of the house.
(6) The proposed development shall preserve natural vegetation and avoid development
within irrigated meadows, to the maximum extent practicable.
Response: The garage is to be located in a previously disturbed area and will not impact any
natura! vegetation. The proposed addition will have no impacts on existing vegetation.
(7) The proposed development shall install utilities in locations and through procedures
that minimize visual impacts to the maximum extent practicable.
Response: No new utilities are proposed.
(8) All satellite dishes in the proposed development shall be located to minimize visibility
from those rights-of-way listed in subsection (b), and shall use earth tone colors and/or
screening to minimize their visual impact.
Response: The Applicant has made no mention of installation of satellite dishes.
(9) The proposed development shall not use earth moving and berms as the primary means
of compliance with these regulations, but earth moving may be utilized in conjunction
with other techniques to comply with standards in this section. Where earth moving
techniques are necessary, man-made forms should be undulating and natural in
appearance.
Response: The Applicant will be conditioned to submit for approval a landscape plan acceptable
to the Community Development Department. No berms are proposed.
-
Page 6
(10) The exterior of all development, except development located and designed in the form of
a ranch compound, shall be built or painted with indigenous earth tone materials or
colors. The exterior of a ranch compound should be built or painted with indigenoJlS
earth tone materials, or shall be painted or stained using local, traditional ranch colors,
which shall include shades of red. brown, or white. Paints or stains that simulate
weathered barn wood also shall be permitted.
Response: The Applicant will be conditioned to use natural earth tone colors. No barns have
been proposed.
(11) All roofs shall have a non-reflective color or composition. Reflective roof materials
shall not be used unless the materials are treated prior to installation to eliminate
reflection, with the exception of materials associated with solar or photovoltaic
equipment.
Response: The Applicant will be conditioned to use non-reflective roofing and also comply with
the appropriate exterior lighting standards.
(12) Lands disturbed by earth moving or berms should be revegetated using native species
that are alreody growing on or near the site. Topsoil shall be stockpiled and placed on
disturbed areas. Irrigation shall be provided to the revegetated areas if it is necessary to
ensure survival of planted native species.
Response: The Applicant will be required to submit a revegetatation plan for disturbed areas that
is consistent with vegetation of the surrounding areas, however, no vegetation removal is
proposed.
(13) To the maximum extent practicable, roads and driveways shall be located to skirt the
edge of and avoid dividing meadows and pastures and to avoid major road cuts. Roads
and driveways should take advantage of the screening potential of natural topography
and existing vegetation. Existing roads and driveways shall be used where practical. To
enhance screening, a row of trees may be planted along the roads or driveways. To the
maximum extent practicable, roads and driveways located around the edge of or in
meadows shall be laid out with soft, curving edges and shall avoid straight line
corridors that are incongruous with the natural setting.
Response: Not applicable.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board make a motion to approve the Mines
request for a garage and small addition that can meet wetland setback requirements, subject to the
conditions of the draft resolution.
ATIACHMENTS:
A. Draft Resolution
B. Environmental Health and Natural Resources comments
.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY,
COLORADO, APPROVING THE MINES MAJOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT
Resolution No. _-2007
RECITALS
1. Michael Mines ("Applicant''), has applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin
County, Colorado ("BOCC") for a Major Amendment to Development Permit to build a garage
and do a small addition to the lower level of the existing residence.
2. The subject property is located at 0075 Capitol Creek Road and is more specifically described in
Exhibit A.
3. The property is zoned RS-30 PUD and contains 1.98 acres.
4. The BOCC denied the 1041 hazard review pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 95-64. The parcel
then received 1041 hazard review approval in 1995 pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 95-236.
5. The Board heard the request at their regularly scheduled and duly noticed public hearing on
September 26, 2007, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this
application.
6. The BOCC finds that the request for a new garage and small addition complies with the appropriate
Sections of the Land Use Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners that
they hereby approve the Mines request for a Major Amendment to Development Permit to build a garage
and do a small addition to the lower level of the existing residence subject to the following conditions,
which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest.
I. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in the application and public
meetings.
2. The Applicant shall comply with BOCC Resolution No. 95-236, except as amended herein.
3. Condition No. I of Resolution No. 95-236 shall be eliminated.
4. Housing, road and other applicable impact fees shall be calculated at time of building permit.
5. The garage shaB be located outside of the 25' wetland setback within the existing parking pad. A
variance from Capitol Creek Road may be necessary, but this approval does not guarantee
approval of the variance.
6. Any addition to the lower level of the residence shall comply with the 25' setback from existing
wetlands. It should be noted that the proposed addition in the application dated July, 2007, does
Resolution No. _-2007
Page 2
not comply with the setback. A survey delineating the wetlands shall be submitted prior to
building permit submittal.
7. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a landscape plan shaB be submitted to Community
Development for review and approval.
8. Statutory vested rights for the approval contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitkin
County Land Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitkin
County Land Use Code, ~ 2-20-170 and C.R.S., ~ 24-68-105. The statutory vested rights granted
herein shaB expire on September 26, 20 I O.
PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS in the Asoen
Times Weeklv on the _ day of ,2007.
APPROVED on the 26th day of September, 2007.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
By
ArrEST:
Michael Owsley
Chair
Date
Jeanette Jones
Deputy Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
~C~~ ~c~
. 6y Houben,
Community Development Director
John Ely,
County Attorney
PID# 246734400549
P118-07
.
MEMORANDUM
To: Ezra Loutbis, Planning Depar1ment
From: Warren Rider, Environmental Health and Natura1 Resources Depar1ment
Date: September 14,2007
Re: Mines Major Amendment to a Development Pennit (Case PI 18-07, PID 2467-344-00-549)
The Pitkin County Environmental Health and Natura1 Resources Depar1ment has reviewed the details of the Mines
application under the authority of the Pitkin County Land Use Code and has the following comments.
Section 7-20-80: River and Stream Corridors and Wetlands:
Applicant proposes the constroction of a garage and additional living area on the property. The proposed area for
the garage lies in an area that was previously approved for an elevated parking pad. The area is near wetlands and
riparian resources but maintains the setbacks required under this section of the Land Use Code. Granting applicant's
request to enclose the parking area to construct a garage will not increase impacts to riparian and wetland resources
or water quality. Enclosing the parking area may, in fact, be beneficial to natura1 resources on the parcel by
containing any spills or vehicle drips inside the garage and not allowing them to be exposed to stonnwater, wind, and
soils.
Applicant's proposal to constroct additional square footage on the main residence does not present any increases in
impact to wetland or riparian resources and lies entirely within the previously approved footprint for the residence.
However, it should be noted that directly outside the footprint of the existing home are large areas of
undisturbed riparian areas. These areas shall not be used for any construction activities, shall not be
modified for landseaping, and should not be disturbed under any circumstsnees. All riparian areas and areas
of native vegetstioD near the home shall be fenced during construction aetivities to eliminate risk of
disturbance.
,
.... _ _,.__.,.." . _. "."" ..._""""'"_<'1-.',...._ ~.. ~:~-.".ll..,.~.....~.
The
Mines Residence
At
75 Capitol Creek Road,
Snowmass, Colorado
'.
An Applreatlot\ for' an oddnu.. to the existing
residence and to odd agaroge.
Parcel I.t>. # 264734400549
Prepared by:
Francis X. Krizmanich
Land Use Planning
79 Light Hill Road
SnoWIl1QS$ ,CO 81654
Phone & FAX (970)9Z7-4263
E-mail -bfxkriz@soDris.net
July, ZOOT
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
fi. Site Data
m. Request
IV. Development Standards
V. Attachments
1. Vicinity Map.
2. Pre-application Conference Summary
3. Proof of Ownership
4. Wetland Report and Map
5. Architectural Plans
6. Board of County CommisSioners Resolution No. 95-236
7. Existing Home Photographs
* 24"x 36" site plans are included with this application
2
I. INTRODUCTION
The subject property is owned by Michael J. Mines, Trustee, the Applicant. The property address
is 75 Capitol Creek Road, Snowmass, CO. The development of the property was approved by the
Board of County Commissioners by Resolution No. 95-236 (attached). That approval resulted
frorn an appeal by the Applicant through the County "Takings" process because the origina1
application was denied due to wetland concerns. The property is developed with an existing
residence. The Applicant requests approval to add an addition to the main residence and to
expand and add a covered garage on top of the previously approved parking pad. A new wetland
analysis bas been performed which indicates that the proposed improvements will not be in
wetland areas.
II. sITE DATA
Project Representative:
Francis X. Krizmanich
(970) 927-4263 (phone & FAX)
Email: bfxkriz@sopris.net
Owner:
Michael J. Mines, Trustee
Parcell.D #:
264734400549
Zone District:
RS-30
Lot Size:
1.98 Acres +/-
Access:
Access to the property is provided by a private drive onto
Capitol Creek Road.
Water.
A private well serves the property.
Sewage:
An existing individual sewage disposal system serves the property.
Electric:
The Applicant bas electric power to the site at this time.
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
m. REQUEST
The Applicant requests approval to construct a lower level addition of approximately 1,200
! .
square feet of floor area to the existing single-family residence. The Applicant also requests
approval'to construct a garage on the previously approved parking pad to provide a rnore
effective parkin8 area and to hide vehicles and equiprnent frorn the public view.
IV. I:>EVELOPMENT ST ANI:>AR[)S
2-20-150(E) 2: MAJORAMEN~$ TO DEVELOPMENT APPI.:I~ATIONS
AND PERMITS
(a) After the Issuance of a Development Permit
(2) MAJOR AI8NDIIENTS
(a) Major a~nts to a dElvelopment approval or permit approved through the
Adminlstrallve Review proces$ sh8IIl'eqUlre a new application of the same type required
for the original approval, and shall be reviewed and approved by !he slime decision-
making body (Community Development Department staff or the Hearing Officer) that
made the original approval, as shown In Table 2-1.
APPLICANTS' RiSPONSE: The existing development was approved by the Board of County
Commissioners; therefore, this requirement is not applicable.
(b) Major amendments to a development approval or penni! not app~ through the
Admir1isl1'alive Review process shall req_ a new lIPPlicalion of the ~ type required
for the original approval, and shall be reviewed through a One-StfiIp process to the same
decision-making body (Board of~justment, Planning and Zoning Commission. or
Board) that tl'iadethe original appriwal;'lIs~inTabIe 2-1.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant has pI'llplnd an application for review by the Board of
County Commissioners because they granted the priOr approval.
(c) If the original approval requiredll notice and hearing, the' notice and hearing
requirements sIlaH be repeated for ~ JlI'IIPOS8ll amendment
APPUCANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant Bgrees WIth this requirement
4
.
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(eI) In the event approval required a recommendation from any other board or commission,
the proposed amendment shall be referred to the same board or commission for
recommendation.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The approval did not require a recommendation from any other
Board or CommiS$ion.
(e) If the proposed amendment is to a condition imposed as a result of comment from a
referral agency, the proposed amendment shall be referred to that agency for
comment.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The proposed amendments are to conditions imposed soley by the
Board of County Commissioners.
7-20-80 RIVER AND STREAM CORRIDORS AND WETLANDS
(a) Riparian and Wetland Areas and Buffers
(1) PROTECTED FEA TURES .
Each Site Plan shall identify each of the following features on the property.
(a) "Blue line" perennial streams shown on U.S. Geological Survey maps of the area; and
(b) Intennillent streams or S\n!lmIbeds known or apparent frOm field study, with the
exception of man-made.~ such as ditches and..... features.
(e) Isolated, nalural wetland and riparian areas.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The approved "Mines 1041 Hazard Review Map" shows Capitol
Creek and weUandson the property. The Applicant is not proposilljJ any changes to the previously
approved site plan and development envelope.
(2) MINIMUM SETBACKS
All activity and development shan maintain a minimum setbal:k from the protected features
identified in subsection (1) above. .
(a) All activity and development after the 5th of J~.~ shall maintain a riparian
arealwetland buffer of at least one hundred (100) fellt, measured horizontally from the
identifiable high water tine of each feature identified llnubseclions .(a)(1)(a) and (b)
above. This one hundred (100) foot setback may be J8duced to between one hundred
(100) feet and a minimum of fifty (50) feel upon demClnstration by the applicant that
such reduction shall not result in water quality degradation, stream bank erosion and/or
a reduction in the qualltyof riparian or wetland habitat.
(b) All activity and devekiPment after the 5th of July, 2006 shall maintain a buffer of a
minimum of twenty-five .(25) feet from isolated weUands and/or riparian areas identified
in (a)(1)(c) above. .
(c) All activity and development existing on the 5th of July, 2006 shall (i) maintain a riparian
arealwetland buffer of at least fifty (50) feel from each feature identified in subsection (1)
above to the maximum extent practicable, and (ii) not be extended or expanded further
into such frfly (50) fool buffer area.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPLICANTS' RESPON$E: The proposed garage pad expansion will maintain a minimum 100
foot selbackfrom Capitol Creek as requ~.' by subsection (8) a~ and win also maintain a
minimum 25 foot setback from the wetland as required by subsection (b) above.
7-20-120(0 AND E) SCENIC VIEW PROTeCTION
. .
(d)S.......for Development WilhIaScenic View Protection AI.- ~
A1ll101HlXernpt development located within a mapped Scenic VIf!fW Ploledlon AIea shall comply
with the following standards.
(1) The,~ development shall utilize~.' '. t topography and natural ~l:~ as
ridges, hUls, and existing trees, to screen ~ to the maximum exlelll jIi'lICI/callle when
viewed from those right-of-way listed in subsection (b) above.
,.; .' ~ l .
APPucANYS' RESPONSE: The property and existing residence is within the Selenic VIf!fW
Proledlon AIea atong Capitol Creek Road. The Proposed lower level residence addition is heavily
screened by existing vegetation and the existing residence itself. The proposed gerage is located
againstlhe ~ at the lowest 1e\18I~'~ below Capitol Creek Road. The p10party is
heavily screened by existing mature vegetaIIocL . .
(2) The proposed development shan avoid the localion of structures within the Scenic VIf!fW
Protedion Anlas, and shall avoid the IooBliOn of structures within any VIf!fWPIane identified In the
Stale Highway~82 Conidor Muter Planand'Jilown Valley Comprehensive PIan,If,pallible. If
location OUl8ide'the Scenic V_ Plotection'-'lInd defined Vl8WJlIanes Is not Jll8Illk~, then
the proposed development shall not be IocaI8d on the highest ground or most vi8ibIe portion of
any site as viewed from those corridors listed In subsection (b) above.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The existing development is adjacent to, and can be seen from
Capitol Creek Road; however, the proposed new development does avoid the highest and most
visible _ of the property.
(3) The proposed development's height and: bulk shall be designed to avoid, to the m~um
extent practicable, the visibility of buildings from lhose oorridora listed. in sull88cti'.lrqb) .bove.
This may include, but shall not be limitedtD, bntaklng the mass of the building dowiY intO a series
of smaler forms, articulation of the buikfmg ~es to avoid a wall or row effect, and staggering
roofIines to avoid a long unbroken plane.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The proposed,d!Wtfopment win consist of a lower IlMII additiqn and
a garage attached. The Applicant beI~ that any view impacts will be insignificant The
proposed garage will also allow for the indoor parking of vehicles which will enhance the view
along Capitol Creek Road."
(4) The proposed structure shaH be placed so it does not project above a ridgeline such that a
sltuctunl silhouatles against the sky when'~ from those corridors flstled in subsection (b),
unless there are no altemate building siteS C!I"the lot or parcel.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The dave\opmlllftwlll not break a rldgeline.
6
.
7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(5) The proposed development shall be designed to complement the natural topography of the
land through the use of techrilques such as earth-sheltered design, the use of natural materials
and coloring, the use of low-teflectance materials, or clustering of structures on the least visible
portions of the site. When a building is proposed near a ridge/ine, then its form (particularly its
roof form) shall replicate, parallel, or complement the natural form of the ridgeline so that it
appears to be an element of the natural ridgeline.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The aclditions are proposed for the least visible portion of the
property - against and under the exISting home. The additions wlII malCh the eXisting house which
is stucco, stone and natural wood.
(6) The proposed development shall preserve natural vegetation and avoid development within
irrigated meadows, to the maximum extent practicable.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The development will preserve aU existing natural vegetation on the
property.
(7) The proposed development shall install utilities in locationS and through procedures that
minimize visual impacts to the maximum extent practicable.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: Utilities already exist. No additional utilities are necessary.
(8) All satellite dishes in the proposed development shall be Ioc8ted to minimize visibility from
those rights-of-way listed in subseCtion (b), and shall use earth tone colors and/or screening to
minimize their visual impact.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant agrees.
(9) The proposed development shall not use earth moving and be~ as the primary means of
compliance with these regulations, but earth moving may be utilized in conjunction with other
techniques to comply with standards in this section. Where earth moving techniques are
necessary, man-made forms should be undulating and natural inllPtJ88rance.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: No berms or earthmoving are ProPosiid'.
(10) In the Rural Areas only, development shall be located so that activities and development
occur in at least one of the locations $paCified in subsection (f) as they- may apply to the particular
property.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The development complies with siting guidelines
(11) EARTH TONE MATERIALS
The exterior of aU development, except development located and designed in the form of a
ranch compound, shall be built or painted with indigenous.earltl tone materials or colors. The
exterior of a ranch compound should be built or painted with indigenous earth tone materials,
or shall be painted or stained using local, traditional ranch -colors, which shaD inolude shades
of red, brown, or white. Paints or stains that simulate weathered barn wood also shall be
permitted.
I
I
.
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The additions will match the existing home exterior with earth tone
stucco, stone and wood as the primary siding materials.
(12) ROOFS
AU roofs Shlll!'/lave a non-reflective color or composition. Reflective roof materials s/1;Ill not
be used unless the materials are ~ prior to installation to eliminate reflection, with the
exception of materials associated with solar or photovollaic equipment
APPlICANTS' RESPONSE: All roof materials will be non-refleclive.
(13) RelEGETA 'IJON OF DISTURBED AREAS
Lands disturbed by earth moving or belTllS should be revegetated using native species that
are ~;~ on or near the ~. Topsoil shaH be stockpiled and placed on disturbed
areas. Irrigation shall be provided to the revegetated areas if it is necessary to ensure
survival of planted native species.
APPUCANTS' RESPONSE: No belTllS are proposed. Disturbed areas will be revegetated.
(14) DRIVEWAYS AVOID DMDlNG MEADOWS AND PASTURES
To the maximum extent preoticable, I'lIads and driVeways shall be located to skirt the edge of
and avoid dividing meadows and pastures and to avoid major road cuts. Roads and
driveways.lIhpuId take advantage of. the screening poteI otiaI of natl!Jal topography and
existing vegetation. Existing roads and driveways shall be used where pract!caI. To enhance
screening, a row of trees may be planted along the roads or driveways. To the maximum
extent practicable, roads and driveways located around the edge of or in meadows shall be
laid out with soft, curving edges and shall avoid straight line corridors that are incongruous
with tile .natuJal selting.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: No new roads are proposed.
(e) Rural Character Guidelines for Building Location
In addition to complying with the standards of subsection (d) above (if applicable), all development
in Rural Areas should be located so that aclIvities and development occur in one or a combination
of the following locations as they may 8IIlIY,b1lthe ptI\1icuI8r property. (1) at the edge of an open
meadow or JllI!IWre; (2) behind an existing,~ of. vegetation; (3) behind or built into a change In
natural tOpography; or (4) wilbin a pastuleOf:m~. cIuslllred in the form of a ranch compound,
or adjacent to or integrated into an existing ranch compound. Where guidelines reference
distances from a road, and more than one road borders the property, the guideline applies to the
road carrying the gRJaler amount of traffic. GuidelineS for each of these locations follow:
(1) DEVELOPJIENT LOCATED AT EDGE OF MEADOW OR PASTURE
When Iodated at the edge of an open meadow or pasture, the development shaH comply with
the following standards:
(a) Distance
Located at the greatest practicable distance from the road and, where 1Ippl1cable, it shall
be located adjaCent to existing dfMIopmenl
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: Tha proposed development includes a lower level addition and a
garage attached to the existing residence.
8
-
9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(b) Edge of Meadow or Pasture
Located along the edge of the meadow or pasture, where the meadow or pasture meets
the toe of a hillside, or on a relatively less steep, lower hillside area adjacent to the
meadow.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The existing and proposed developi'nent is located next to Capitol
Creek Road to preserve wettarids and riparian vegetation.
(c) Separate Developed AnNIS
located so as to separate developed areas that from natural areas and pastures, and to
preserve open space in the largest contiguous tracts Pf1P!cable, taking into account the
allowed densities and uses.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The developed area of the property is separated from the natural
areas of the property to the greatest extent possible.
(3) DEVELOPMENT LOCATED BEHIND EXISTING STAND OF VEGETATION
When located behind an existing stand of vegetation, the development shall comply with the
following standards:
(a) Scale of Development
The scale of the development shall not interrupt or obscure the existing occurring stand
of vegetation behind which it is located.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The development will not interrupt or obscure the existing vegetation
which screens the property from Clwitol Creek Road.
(b) Supplementary Vegetation
Where natural vegetation does not adequataly screen the development as detennined
by the visual analysis, native vegetation shell be planted to augment the existing
vegetation and maintain the visual integrity of the protected view.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant believes that the existing vegetation screening is
appropriate for the site. .
(4) DEVELOPMENT BEHIND OR BUILT INTO NATURAL TOPO(iRAPHIC BREAK
When located behind a natiJnlllllpographic break or built lI*i' \he natural topography in an
earth-sheltered design, ~1Op01ent shall comply with thefOlkiWlllg guidelines:
(a) Scale
Scale and height of the development shall be subordinate to the natural change in
topography.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The proposed development use the natural topography of the site to
minimize visual impacts.
(b) Earth Moving
Earth moving shall be used to the minimum extent pt8Cticable to extend a naturally
occurring topographic change and screen the development, but not to creata a new,
man-made landform.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: Earthmoving is not proposed.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(5) RANCH COMPOUNQ WlTHINJRRI~TED PASflJRE OR MEADOWS
Whiln develOpment is' located wl!hin an irrigated pasture or rneaclOW in the form of a ranch
compound or adjacent to or integrated into an existing ranch compound, It shaH comply with
the following guidelines.
(a) VIews to Rear Portion of propitty'
It shall not preclude views from the public road to the rear portions of the pasture or
m~OOw. '
APPLl(:ANl$' RESPONSE: The proposed ~JOpment does not preclude views to \tie rear of
the property. '
(b)C1i18t8ring Structures,
Structures shall be clustered together in close proximity to preserve the maximum
amount of the m~dow or pasture as open areas.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The proposed ctevebpment is dlhs.Jled to the existing home.
(c) Native Vegetation ," " ,
Native vegetation shall be planted tQ mimic either the existing sPecills Com~ and
~.of grow!h or traditional fi!nn ljInd ranch$leadplantlng patterns (e.'9"', '" ',or
lin. tree plantings to l!Cl as, winC,1,~k$J, Applicants, lire strQngIy ~ to, ',", ftative
plant materials and CQIlSider' CQIoiado Division of Wildlife recom " 'with
respect to their relative ~ to wildlife. '
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: No additional planting is proposed at this time.
(tl) PARTIAL IMPRACTlCABlUTY
If a' ,portion. but not all, of the proposed activity or development can be ,tOC8lIed in
conformance with the guideHnes in subsections (1) through (4) above. thenthe',poI1Ion that
cannot be located in conformance with such guidelines shaH be located in aocordance with
the following guidelines:
(a) Along Front Edge of Meadow or Pasture
:,"0 ~e extent practicable, It shall be Ioc;:ated al(lng the front edge of the ~ or
,~re and in proximity to simUarly ~ltullted development on adjacent Iandll., , :
APPUCNft'S' RESPONSE: The Applicant belieYes that this project complies with guld.lilles (1)
through (4) above.
(b) MaIntain ContIguous Open Space
It shaH be'IllaI*I.$O as to maInlain the largest amount of contiguous open space
ptaQticlilb1e, iluelation to the scenic view being protected.
,.-'1 -
APPLIC~ RESPoN$E: The development complies by maintaining all of the existing
contiguous open space on the property.
(c) Screening of Development
The development shall be screened with native vegetation planted to mimic either the
existing species composition and pattem of growth or traditional fann and ranchstead
planting pattems (e.g., clustered or lin~r tree plantings to act as windbreaks).
~o
.
11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Applicants are strongly adviSed to use native pJaht m!lterials and consider Colorado
Division of Wildlife recOmmendations with respect to their relative attractivenEl$$ to
wildlife. ' ,
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The development is screened by existing vegetation.
(7) ALTERNATE LOCATION
Proposed development may be located in an area of the property that is not in conformance
with the guidelines in subsectiOns (1) through (5) above, if th8 applicant can demonstrate that
the proposed location will have less scenic impact than if the development was sited in
conformance with the guidelines.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant believes that the propoeed development complies with
the guidelines.
7-20-130 LANDSCAPING AND VEGETATION PROTECTION
(b) General Provisions
(1) RURAL VEGETATION
In order to protect thill, rura"., ',cha,' ,racter of Pitkin COU~~I vegetation should be
PreselVed to the maximum ~ practicable, and any '" . ,', landscaping shall use the
species plant materials natiJ~ occurring on the site or oil ilelghboting properties (except
for flower gardens). Reslricllonll on removal of natural vegetation, and requirements for
revegetation, are set forth in other portions of this Chapter 7.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant agrees.
(2) CONFORMANCE WITH WILDFIRE REGULATIONS
In the event the provisions of this Sec. 7-20-130 conflict wllllllny provisions of Sec. 7-20-60,
as those requirements may be varied by a wildfire expert approved by the County, the
provisions of Sec. 7-20-60 shall govern.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant agrees.
(3) BERMS
Benns may be incorporated mill any required IandscapiQg, btlffering, or screening area,
provided that the County ~, during the develQpthenl approval process, that the
proposed berms will not caUSe dniinage or erosion problel'ns. No installed berm shall have a
slope of greater than four-to one(4:1), nor a height greater than four (4) feet above grede.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: No berms are proposed.
(4) LANDSCAPE ENCLOSURES
Landscaping shaD not be U88d to mark or enclose the boundaly of a parcel, or to privatize an
otherwise public viewplane. u.. of indigenous shrubs or nes to enclose a portion of the
property immediately surround,ing a dwelling, bam, and/or 8OC8S$OIY bWldings (as opposed
to the entire property or a large area of the property) are pennitIed if made to resemble
similar windbreaks located near older properties in Rural Areas of the County.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: Landscape enclosures are not proposed.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(5) VlSIBIUTY CLEARANCE
All landscaping shall be installed and maintained so that it does not interfere with the ability of
drivers to see nearby traffic at the intersection of any driveway with a public road, or at the
intarsection of two public roads.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant agrees.
(6) UTlUTY EASEMENTS
Whenever the provisions of this Sec. 7-20-130 would require the installation of trees or
shrubs over or on utility easements, where branches or roots might interfere with utility lines
or pipes, the required location for such trees and shrubs shaD be modified to require
installation at the closest location that would avoid potential confticls with utilities and would
enable the trees and shrubs to serve the same landscaping purpose.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: Not applicable.
(8) FINANCIAL SECURITY
The Community Development Department may require financial security in a form
acceptable to the County Attomey to ensure completion of installation of all required
landscaping and/or successful establishment of plants.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant will provide financial security if necessary.
(9) MAINTENANCE
All plants shall be maintained continually in a healthy condition in accordance with generally
acoepted professional horticultural standards and practices. WIthin areas required to be
landscaped with installed plant materials, plants that die or are unhealthy shall be replaced.
Landscape areas shall remain free of weeds, litter, junk, rubbish and other nuisances and
obstructions.
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The Applicant agrees.
(c) Required Landscaping in Rural Areas
In the Rural Area:
(1) landscaping is required for the following purposes: (i) to screen satellite dishes and other
telecommunications equipment when located within five hundred (500) feet of adjacent public
roads and visible from such roads, and (ii) to screen parking areas and service areas when
viewed from adjacent public roads, (iii) where necessary to comply with the standards of Sees. 7-
20-70, 7-20-80, or 7-20-120, and (Iv) to revegetate disturbed areas.
(2) Landscape treatments shall cluster shrubs and trees into groupings similar to those naturally occurring
on the site or neighboring sites, shall use indigenous species of shrubs and trees, and shall not be
installed in regularly spaced lines or rows, unless more specific provisions of Sees. 7-20-70, 7-20-80, or 7-
20-120 require a different treatment
APPLICANTS' RESPONSE: The property contains existing mature landscaping that includes
indigenous species and shrubs. Tree species include pinon, aspen and cottonwood trees. Shrubs
include service berry, native grasses and wildflowers
12
13
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AlTACHMENT 1
VIaNITY MAP
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~.:...l~
JJ '0,
..
i. 6
~ -......
lJ '"
..".1'
..
..'...tl.....
~
-~,.
t',
'~,:
.1';
.~',
\l: ~
~i
~.
~i
III
I., ~t.
; bot
~!
! (.II
I 'I) I....
,,.
: ti.
<:
."
, it..
l.;
; #1
ATTACHMENT 2
PRE_APf'llCATIoN CoNf~sOMMARV
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
-
\4
I
I
I
I
I Type of ~~.. Major Amendment
I
I
I Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: Environmental Health (Natural Resources),
Snow/Cap Caucus.
I Review by: P&z, BOCC
I
I
FEES: $2,202 (make check payable to "Pitkin County Treasurer")
I . Planning Office flat fee: $1,617 (non-refundable; based on 7 hours of staff time; if staff review time
exceeds 8.4 ~,the Applicant will be charged for additional time above 7 hours at a rate of $231/hour)
I . Environmental Health: $225
. Clerk and Recorder: $310
. Public Notice: $50
I To apply, submit 12 copies of the following Infonnatlon, un.... noted otherwise:
I 1.
I 3.
4.
I 5.
6.
7.
I
I
PITKIN COUNTY PRE-APPLlCATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PROJEct: MmMajbr Amendment
LOCATION: IntenlecIion of Capitol and Snowmass Creek Road PID# 246734400549
OWNER: MIchael Mines
REPRESENTATIVE: Francis Krizmanich
DATE: JulY,,~8. 2f1J7
Phone: 927-4263
PLANNER: Ezra.louthis, 920-5092
Description of P!'OjectIDeveIopent The Applicant is requesting an amendment to enlarge a non-vested
1041 approved~ envelope, develop a garag!illl{1!i incre.!I88 the allowed ftoor area.
Land~'lP~ad4~ In ~..~laDDllcatlon):
Sec. 2. .. Amendments,
Sec. 7-20-80: RIver snd Stream Corridors and Wetlands;
Sec. 7-20-12O(d snd e): Standards for Scenic VIeW Plutection Areas;
Sec. 7-20-130: L.anclscaping and vegetation Protection.
Public Hearing: Yes, at BOCC. The applicant shall post a public notice sign on the property at least 15 days
prior to the hearing and shall mail notice to all acljacent property owners at least 30 prior to the hearing with
the retum address of the Community Development Department (copy of the notice to be obtained from the
Community Development Department). The names and aclclresses shall be those on the current tax records
of Pitkin County as they appear no more than 60 days prior to the date of the public hearing.
Summary letter explaining the request, providing background on prior approvals and permits, and
addressing compliance with the Code sections listed above.
2. 24" by 36" Site Plan as designated in Section 2.1.1 and 2.1.12 of the Pitkin County land Use Application
Manual;
Wetlands delineation;
Previous land Use approvals;
Proof of ownership of subject property;
Parcel description, incIucIing legal description and vicinity map;
Total fee for review of the application;
-
8. Signed fee agreement (1 copy);
9. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative, if applicable (1 copy);
10. Copy of this preapp form
NOTES:
>> PLEASE SUBMIT ONE UNBOUND AND ONE-SIDED COPY OF YOUR COMPLETE APPUCA TION.
PLEASE SUBMIT TWO-SIDED COPIES OF ALL REMAINING COPIES OF YOUR APPLICA TION (IF
POSSIBLE). THE PARCEL IDs SHOULD BE INCLUDED ON ALL DOCUMENTS INCLUDED IN YOUR
APPLICATION.
>> ALL MAPS SHALL BE FOWED.
>> This prfHJpplication conference summary is advisory in nature and nof binding on the County. The
infonnation provided in this summary is based on cUfT8nt zoning standards and staff's interpretations
based upon representations of the applicant. Additional infonnation may be required upon a complete
review of the application.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
,.-rrACWAel'f 3
~Of~
l
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
1S
-
Parcel Detail
"
Pitkin County Assessor/Treasurer
Parcel Detail Information
Assessor/Treasurer Property Search I Assessor Subset Query I Assessor Sales Search
Clerk & Recorder Reception Search
Basic ]3uildiIlgCharacterlstics I Tax lnfor:mation
Parn:1 Detail I Value Detail I Sales Detail I Residential/Commercial Improvement Detail
Land Detail I Photographs
I Tax Area II Account Number
I 014 II R008902
II Parcel Number II Mill Levy I
II 246734400549 II 63.347 I
Owner Name and Address
jMINEs MICHAEL J TRUSTEE I
IPO BOX 985 I
IEDWARDS, CO 81632 I
Legal Description
ISECT,TWN,RNO:34-8-86 DESC: LAND IN I
ITRACT 82 SEC 34-8-86 DESC BY MJB BK I
1592 PO 14 I
Location
Physical Address: 175 CAPITOL CREEK RD SNOWMASsl
Subdivision:
Land Acres: ~ I
I Land Sq Ft: 110 I
I Section II Township II Range I
I 34 II 8 II 86 I
Property Tax Valuation Information
II
I
'I
II
Actual Value
Assessed Value
II
1/
http://www.pitkinassessor.org/assessorlParcel.asp?AccountNumber=R008902
4/27/2007
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ATT'ACHA\l:NT 4
WE1'LANI> REPORT ANI> IMP
16
July 31, 2007
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ROCKY MOUNTAIN ECOLOGICAL SERVICES. INC.
NEPA..WILDLIFE..VEGETATION..WILDFIRE MITIGATION..WEUANDS..PLANNING
Francis Krizmanich
79 Light Hill Road
Snowmass, CO 81654
RE: Mines Property Wetlands
Dear Mr. Krizmanich
I visited the Mines property in Pitkin County, on May 7, 2007 with Mr. Francis Krizmanich, the
owner's representative. I visited the Mines property again on June 1, 2007 to flag the
approximate boundary of jurisdictional weUands, for which impacts to these wetlands would
be regulated by the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACOE) for compliance with Section 404
of the Clean Water Act. The flagging of the wetlands was not done to USACOE jurisdictional
determination standards, but rather is a "guideline" for areas that exhibited wetland
vegetation, and assumingly therefore had wetland function. A wetland delineation done
according to USACOE standards would likely be along the same boundary.
The area underneath the existing homesite overhang did not contain hydrophitic vegetation,
and would therefore not be considered to be jurisdictional weUands.
A garage could be erected over the proposed slab area as long as it did not impact
vegetation on the northem side of the pink "wetland delineation" flagging as staked on June
1, 2007. Existing piers were on the property, and elevated garage slab could overhand
weUand areas, and still be within compliance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Any
garage slab or plan could extend up to the wetlands boundary, as flagged on June 1, 2007,
however any plans that were immediately adjacent to the flagging should have a formal
jurisdictional determination (wetland delineation) as per USACOE guidelines, and be
reviewed by the USACOE.
Sincerely,
Eric Petterson
Principal Ecologist
Rocky Mountain Ecological Services, Inc.
0222 BOBCAT LANE' REDSTONE' COLORADO' 81623
PHONE/FAX: (970) 963-2190 . CELL: (970) 309-4454
EMAIL: ERIC.PETTERSON@STARBAND.NET
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MiMI Prqperp. WetlamJ M_
Tt(fJ 31. 2007
~
-.,-
Eo_II_Inc.
0222 BoI:lcaI Lane. Rtdstone. co 81823
870.liIIIS32180
ft. rband.net
Figure
1
Drown By: ESP
Dale: July 2007
scale:
- Boundary
IIIInes Pn>peIty
_C~.~
2
17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ATTACHMENT !5
ARCHITECTURAL PLANS . .
I
I F'RCI'l : ICR IZl'R'lI CH
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PHDE NO. : 978 9'Z1 .a3
Jul. 18 2IlI7 85'''''''''' PI
tJ/' ti .
~~ ,
. ~ ~'\ \
,"./ .
/. ,,/'" \ o. .. ~ ~
/' '" '\. ~ ~'.
<;) _ C;;
d1 .~
{~
"1
It'"
iii
u
,.
-
,
..
.. .
.,
c!
.
.
z.....
..~.Qt.... -'A'NKftf I .ft~a ~.__ .MwW ~~ ~~,_. I___._~ft~
. ...
n"-T""_lt'lont'!'1_i"'Illt'!'1
ua~J~~~a~ O~~~ a~~t'T In 1_1 ynr
I
I I
,
\ I
1
I
o.cr \ I
.1
\
\J.\~ \ I
~4 1
6-(J. I
~~ \
1 I
a-t.!> \
\
I
,
1
I
,
I
1
1
..
\~,'
It
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
, " I
' , I
" , ,
,
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I
Dr I
---
\,1.111.\
~ ,
d6
~
(L.
I
I .
. --............................- ....... ............... . ........... -......... ............. O.oJ roo..,....... "__~__""II"..
-
18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ATTACHMENT 6
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION No. 95-236
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IS9048
SILVIA
I
RESOLUTrON OF THE BOAJlD OF Comn'Y COI!IIaSS:I01IIBlUl OF 1':t'l'llDl
COlm'l'Y, COLORADO, REJ?EJ'T.TIIIG llESOLUTrON #95-64 AI!ID G1UUlI'1':DIG
1041 .IliIlIv,Ut()fOMll'lll'l'J\L HAZlUlD :u:vD:W AI!ID ............uu. smaaSS:I01I JU'l'tl0VJl.L
FOR 'rJIB ..-. l':R.01'l!:ll'rY
Resolution No.
95~
DC""T.~
1. Thomas Mines (hereafter 'Applicant') has requested a "takings
determination hearing" be conducted bY the Board of County commissioners
of Pitkin County (hereafter "Commission') pursuant to Section 3-290 of
the Pitkin County Land Use Code.
2. This request was made in an effort to appeal the '1:oll1lllission's.
denial of the Mines 1041 Environmental Hazard and General Submission
application, which denial occurred on April 12, 1995. as evidenced by
Resolution i95-64 (attached).
3. The resolution of denial identified above was specific to the
application submitted to. the County on June 27, 1994 (Case iP87-94) as
modified through the review process with the Pitkin County Planning
Commission and the Board of County Commissioners.
4. Specifically, the application involved a proposal for a 3,800 square
foot home (not including garage), an on-site septic system and well, to
be developed on a, metes and bounds parcel approximately 1. 98 acres in
size, ~d located at the intersection of Capitol Creek Road and Snowmass
Creek Road and described in detail in the attached 'EXhibit A'.
01/11/9& 11:38A PG 1 OF 6
DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER
REC DOC NOT
_. ,..., .., 1,'.; ,,'-. ._,_ ..... (.f ~j.
-
389048
01/11/9& 11:38A PG 2
OF Eo
I
I
I
.
.
.
,.
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
.
I
I
I
Resolution No. 95-~
Page 2
5. The Board of County Commissioners conducted a "takings determination
hearing" on May 10, 1995; June 28, 1995; August 9, 1995; and September
13, 1995 at which time evidence and testimony was heard fram Staff and
the Applicant.
6. The Board of County Commissioners considered evidence regarding
various al ternati ve development scenarios for the property. The Board
also considered information regarding the economic issues associated
with the property including information from the Assessor's Office and
an appraisal which was provided by the applicant.
7. The Board finds that development can be allowed in the applicants
preferred location subject to the conditions identified in this
resolution. If these conditions are adhered to. development of the
property can be done in conformance with the criteria for development
within a wetland area as outlined in Section 3-80.80(G) of the pitkin
County Land Use Code.
NOW, '1'BI!:lUD'ORE, JIB rr RESOLVED by the Board that it does hereby
repeal resolution #95-64 (resolution of denial).
BE J:'l' FllR'l'BEll RESOLVED by the Board that it does hereby grant 1041
Environmental Hazard and General Submission approval for the Mines
property subject to the fOllowing conditions:
1. The total cumulative square footage of all structures on the
property shall be limited to 2,400 square feet. For purposes of
this calculation. a ,parking deck (uncovered) shall not, be
considered a structure. All other structures e.g. sheds, dog
house, garage, pump house, etc. shall be included in the
calculation.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Resolution No.
Page 3
95;Jt
2. Prior to building permit application, the Applicant shall recqrd a
24 x 36 inch mylar 1041 Hazard Renew Site Plan which meets the
approval of the planning Office and the County Attorney. The site
plan shall include the following'WaiVer language:
"The proviSions of these regulations do not in any way assure
or imply that areas outside of designated hazard areas will
be free from hazards, or that approved mitigation measures
will guarantee the safety of any property. "
"iF
3. The building envelope shall include the individual sewage disposal
system_ Both the well and in~i'l7idual sewage disposal system shall
be located entirely outside of' the designated wetland area as
depicted on the site plan.
4. All development (including the well and individual sewage disposal
system) shall occur within th~ building envelope. There shall be
no vegetation alteration outsi~ of the building envelope. Natural
vegetation shall be preserVed within the building envelope to the
greatest extent possible.
5. Prior to building permit appliCjltion, the Planning Office shall
review and approve the site c specific construction plans and
specifications (including well and septic system location) for the
proposed residence and all othez:,improvements. The Planning Office
review will be based on repre$entations made in the materials
provided in association with the application and representations
made in public meetings.
6. construction shall be done in a manner that results iri the least
possible impact to the delineated wetland. Specifically, no heavy
equipment or vehicles shall be driven into the wetland area. There
shall be. no stockpiling of any construction materials or soil
within the wetland.
7. No development. other than that associated with extension of
utilities, foundation construction; driveway construction,
individual sewage disposal system installation and landscape
planting shall be allowed on the steep slope adjacent to Capitol
Creek Road.
B. An access permit shall be obtained prior to any driveway
construction.
389048
01/11/9& 11:3BA PG 3
OF &
-
389048
01/11/96 11:38A PG 4
OF 6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Resolution No.
Page 4
9S..J1(,
9. All utilities shall be extended underground.
10. Plans for drainage and building foundation shall be designed and
certified by a Colorado registered Professional Engineer., Said
plans shall be sul:Jmitted at building permit application.
11. The applicant shall' adhere to the criteria for development on
steep slopes as follows:
a. Cuts shall not be made into slopes steeper than thirty
percent (30\1 unless mechanical support is provided.
b. Cuts and fills, and grading and'scraping shall be confined to
the minimum area needed for cOnstJ:Uction.
c. Steepness of cut and fill slopes shall be the maximum which
will insure stability and still allow revegetation.
d. Development plans shall include reasonable but adequate
control measures. Large tracts' should be developed in small,
workable units without leaving large areas for long periods.
e. Use mulches or temporary cover on exposed soil areas and re-
establish permanent vegetation and install erosion control
measures as soon as possible.
12. Drainage and erosion control, plans shall be approved by the County
Engineer prior to building permit,application. The erosion control
plans shall show, in detail how the area beneath all structures
shall be treated to minimize erosion potential.
13 . The elevation of the first floor of the single-family residence
shall be at least 1 foot above the 100 year flood plain elevation.
14. The Applicant shall sul:Jmit additional infozmation to the
Environmental Health Department regarding the quality and quantity
of well water prior to building permit review.
lS.
septic system and
the Environmental
application.
well design and location shall be approved by
Health Department prior to building permit
16. All material representations made in the application and in publiC
meetings shall be adhered to.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
1389048
1
1
1
Resolution No.
Page 5
95':~
17. All development shall be done in accordance with requirements and
limitations identified in the nationwide permits issued by the
u.s. Army Corps of Engineers, unless the specific conditions in
this resolution are more restrictive, in which case. the
conditions in this memo shall be adhered to.
18. A detailed landscape plan shall be provided at building pennit
application. . This plan shall be approved by the Planning Office
prior to building permit issuance.
APPROVED JIm) ADOP'rED OB TBJ: 13th DAY OF ....r......aD, 1995.
BOAlID OF COu......." COI8aSSJ:Cl1IIDS,
P.~.A..UlI COO....;z;, COLOBaDO
BY?H~
..:1(;5'1"" Oai~
.lI:
:
Al'PJtOVED AS '1'0 FOllJI:
Director
~-':;:;<-
~on.. B1 At:tOrDSY
~
c:\cases\ I 041 \mines\resappr. doc
01/11/9& 11:38A PG 5
OF &
I
I
ATTACHMENT 7
EXISTIN6 HOME PHOTOGRAPHS I
I
l I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
19 I
:i .r
\
).
o
: "J ",,'~~-t.".
......( ~
'~..~~
~ lit-
~/.
"8JlJi1l'Jij~,Jf~
..! ~ :. .:.-.-1~
'''.r- - . -- -,.
.~ .' ,~-- .---...- - "-~'.~
-'-.~ . . .--. --~-
.' ~~!1q~--:- '~~Fcnn
.''- '" .
,
-*,*,-
....-..
...
~.
....~ ";;-'-00'",,,;,
.......__ei.
..f'l"....~.fIr
'.,,:1/,;""
I
~.....
~~i ~;;
~:,r.. -&;(>1..;1
't~~ . '~~~i
1~:~ n~<' .'
i!~ iliij. .~
~f! il!'r. , ~
m ;Id~i I I ;~
~;r~ !fl?i! \ lj
'J "ii; : lill! . ~~
'ibi~ 1* .~
~~~dl H :i
"':"{
),
,.,.
"
(
'f, ,;, ~.. ....,
" U.~ .'" Q!'I!
. ~. !~ ;J1, J!~i .~~
.1 ~!t"aHlldE'!i
~. ,s ~ii. !':i~'
.' ,. .~~ ~,!ql
. : ;:t! ~. !j~ ;s i,~!il:1
-~. . .... ~ i' ~ ai ~~ ~!~i~i; ~li I
~ ; ,9~ ~l" ~"'Ili! is'S
. " j" . '\ ~ :., !~~ J~~gJ!i lalit' ,
. ~~ ,,31, i%~" ele. _ 1Il1i.
.., "~",;! ~..~ I".""
.... ~ ~~ !,!-~ B't' l!!
1 I~ :'" ~!t ~.~~
" . > "'~' .",. ~O".
;;~~. '" .", ....."". 1iI1:ii1t..
. "-. " .? 111'
,.
~,~:..
:\;
t~:;~': ::
.~ ; :-c.
..(
'.;;
~~~i~;[
.....'." .;'
~~-~F :~. ~
,fl.:.~, '." '.
i i~~~~t,
\n~~a~
~ {r~~~; (
I i
~ >
'j .
..~ ~
.:
.~ a
,
.
~
'\/
'~~I ('f!' ~.;.~, ~,
u:li .'; 1lrJ. "l.;'''&~~'
. I;~! i~~"~$~;,,H::~~~~ ' '
<!r'l ,'~Ij"'."i':"j'" ~
'f . ~'" "~~",;f'" !I.\!o .' II'
. 1''',-,,'''.0;'';''''
" i!t-.1;:~~~)!>l,'!:t,.-, ,.""~
~J ;r!~ ;~~~~~~~;~~{s1~L
1;i ;,f.W-G 4;~... ,....,..~...,.....~~ "-
lit ~..~"'. :",f~:~.~r:;"".,~,J"J,"<'~...
<jl!::lllll~ '.. ~~'" ;""'J ....., f-':~ i-
f .>>Q't~ 1I(1"'!':.r:.'~}""'li1.,:t.)!j..1l"r.
~ Da~:tli" lic~~).~:.t."'l:jil:'!l<~'",,::;,:,,:
~;~1I~ ~>'!~~":.~~~.f.:~:~..::;::<-t.
~ ''1~'~'~'" '.' '~.. '," ',.
~iU~ ~~~;~;~1i" '. ,;
\
.. .
:...". :-~<";oQ.':
~. ,. .'. . ~ '. '". ." .::
<Oi _ ~ . " .
'.
"
.~
"
:'.1
, ~ '
.:~
" ~,'
Ii
"
. >,~
,
'.
.",i:f).
'~~!~.~:~_~~;:;:'-"'F'
.,..' /. ~l;)i~~'~V"l'
;'):TX'~r" .: "l"", :.~~;::'t~,j~;jf~:,:,~;P:f
,...... ;t:>N90lSla'S3Nlw, ,,', ." .
_"i'.:' >,.' '"i;~<;';;'~':":'{;":~
I
I -~.','
I. ~'.
\~ .
I
,.
,
"
t
~
d
J ..
\
I
~. r
I .
-~
I
et
J J
! J
1 !
I ,
..
"1
,
,
., - \ .
,; , ,
,.:
i. f
;
.'
-
~......
9 a 'i
!!:l~
I ·
.t ~!
1 K..'~ <
-!~'t
"- it t
~~jt
~j.d
:. '"
-< "- ~
~ ~~
.......1
io.~j1"
,-,.
I
I
,
".
.~
....\
I .
. ...J~'
....... .'.,j ....
'I .
l / .. .
( . ''1,,''
U. :
, I
-" j.
. I ;
r, I
il
'.
1Q)
",..,
,.
t--
.. j .
" ~ .
r
I'
..
:)
..t
,
..'1' ,'"..
I
I'
'. .
i: ':~,f'
,
,I.
~'.~.\ c.
. .
i
I
i
~ L
....,.1
--\
I
I'
I
,
'.
........ \
, .
.,
(J)
.I
,