HomeMy WebLinkAboutLandUseCase.cr.Arapahoe.A111-012735-123-05-001 A111-01
Arapahoe Ridge County Referral"1
CASE NUMBER
A111-01
PARCEL ID #
2735-123-05001
CASE NAME
Arapahoe Ridge County Referral
PROJECT ADDRESS
PLANNER
James Lindt
CASE TYPE
County Referral
OWNER/APPLICANT
Arapahoe Ridge LLC
REPRESENTATIVE
Glenn Horn
DATE OF FINAL ACTION
12/14/01
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
PZ ACTION
ADMIN ACTION
Comments Returned
BOA ACTION
DATE CLOSED
12/14/01
BY
J. Lindt
•
•
PARCEL ID: 2735-123-05001 QATE RCVDr 11/21/01
CASE NAME: Arapahoe Ridge County Referral
PROJ ADDR: mwP
OWN/APP Arapahoe Ridge LLC ADR
REP: Glenn Horn ADR: 215 S. Monarch St., st
FEES DUE: None FEES RC1
C
ounty
# COPIES: `�
CASE NO A111-01
PLNR:z� _�j
V��
Referral
STEPSF
C/S/Z:
PHN:
CIS/Z:
Aspen/CO/81611
��
PHN.
925-6587
STAT:
None
REF:1 BYJ DUE:
MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTIC
1
T-) DATE OF FINAL ACTION: � 2
REMARKS CITY COUNCIL:
PZ:
_. BOA:
CLOSED: BY:IT.--- --- DRAC:
PLAT SUBMITD: PLAT (BK,PG), ADMIN:� VNR
Of
0
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tamara Pregl, County Planner
THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
Joyce Ohlson, City of Aspen Deputy Director
FROM: James Lindt, City of Aspen Planning Technician V L_
RE: Arapahoe Ridge City Planning Referral Comments
DATE: December 14, 2001
The City Planning Staff reviewed the Arapahoe Ridge LLC. proposal to construct a
single-family residence and has the following concerns:
Staff recommends that the County require that all materials be non -
reflective and painted with dark earth -tone colors to minimize the
visibility of the structure.
2. Staff recommends that the County require the building envelope to be
fenced during construction to prevent any prohibited grading,
vegetation removal, and development that is not allowed outside the
approved building envelope.
3. Staff encourages the County to request that the applicant provide
significant natural landscaping to the west of the proposed residence to
screen and minimize the visual impacts from Highway 82.
4. Staff requests that the County consider restricting the height limit on
the proposed residence to the City of Aspen height limit of 25 feet as
measured by the City Land Use Code. Staff feels that restricting the
proposed height of the residence to the City of Aspen height limit
would make the residence fit better with the scale and character of
some of the neighboring houses that are within the city limits.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on this County application.
0
Memorandum
TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council
THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director
FROM: James Lindt, Planning Technician VA'_
RE: Request for Council Comments
Arapahoe Ridge County Referral Application
DATE: November 27, 2001
Please find attached a copy of an application submitted by Arapahoe Ridge LLC. to the
County Planning Staff requesting Scenic Overlay Review approval for a 12,300 square
foot single-family residence to be constructed off of South Seventh Street, just outside of
the city limits (Please see attachment "C" for vicinity map). The application has been
referred to the City Planning Staff for comments. The subject property is a court ordered
lot split that established a development right.
The property is bisected by two county zone districts. Because of the dual zoning, an
agreement was made between the County Attorney and the applicants that would allow
them a Floor Area Ratio of 12,300 square feet if they kept 3,500 square feet of structure
below the 8,040 elevation line that bisects the property, to minimize the visual impacts of
the proposed structure. Please find attached draft comments formulated by staff in
response to the referral. Staff thought it necessary to make Council aware that this
application had been submitted for approval and that any additional concerns that
Council had regarding this application be addressed in staff's comments. Please let staff
know of any additional concerns or comments that Council may have regarding this
application by December 14th so that the may be included in staff s referral responses.
Exhibits:
Attachment "A" — Proposed Application
Attachment "B" — Staffs Draft Referral Comments
Attachment "C" — Site Vicinity Map
- 1 -
,P���T,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tamara Pregl, County Planner
THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
Joyce Ohlson, City of Aspen Deputy Director
FROM: James Lindt, City of Aspen Planning Technician
RE: Arapahoe Ridge City Planning Referral Comments
DATE: November 27, 2001
The City Planning Staff reviewed the Arapahoe Ridge LLC. proposal to construct a
single-family residence and has the following concerns:
1. Staff recommends that the County require that all materials be non -
reflective and painted with dark earth -tone colors to minimize the
visibility of the structure.
2. Staff recommends that the County require the building envelope to be
fenced during construction to prevent any prohibited grading,
vegetation removal, and development that is not allowed outside the
approved building envelope.
3. Staff encourages the County to request that the applicant provide
significant natural landscaping on the west of the proposed residence
to screen and minimize the visual impacts from Highway 82.
4. Staff requests that the County consider restricting the height limit on
the proposed residence to the City of Aspen height limit of 25 feet as
measured by the City Land Use Code. Staff feels that restricting the
proposed height of the residence to the City of Aspen height limit
would make the residence fit better with the scale and character of
some of the neighboring houses that are within the city limits.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on this County application.
•
•
/. NOS 2��1 ASPEN/PITKIN
I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
C�H AOMP'��S 130 South Galena Street
Ir' Q{ii4✓
` Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone (970) 920-5090 FAX (970) 920-5439
MEMORANDUM
TO: County Attorney
Zoning
Maroon/Castle Creek Caucus
Land Management
FROM: Tamara Pregl, Community Development Department
RE: Arapahoe Ridge, LLC Scenic Overlay Review
(PID 2735-123-05-001; CASE # P179-01)
DATE: November 16, 2001
Attached for your review and comments are materials for an application submitted by Alex Furlotti
with Arapahoe Ridge, LLC. The Pitkin County Hearing Officer will review the application on
Tuesday, January 29, 2002.
Please return your comments to by Monday, December 17, 2001.
PLEASE RETURN APPLICATION MATERIALS TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IF YOU
HAVE NO FURTHER NEED OF THEM.
Thank you.
•
•
/3v,,/J/,4e /�7mv.
e
V, C'O C C, /C 61�5-
,� Cl oq vo 5 e-
- C o IA� pil ,e 1� 5
,.-< C//C(
wkes�-
•
Davis Horn -
PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING
November 12, 2001
Tamara Pregl
Aspen Pitkin Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO. 81611
RE: Hefner Subdivision Lot 1: Scenic Overlay Review
Dear Tamara:
Davis Horn Incorporated represents Arapahoe Ridge, LLC, (hereafter referred to as "applicant"),
owner of Hefner Subdivision Lot 1. The applicant is seeking Scenic Overlay Review approval for
a new single family home on the subject property.
This letter first addresses the background of the subject property including the creation of the lot
by court order, floor area issues, and information on the approved building envelope. This letter
also demonstrates compliance with the Scenic Overlay Review standards of the Pitkin County
Land Use Code. The applicant is also seeking approval for Vested Property Rights.
BACKGROUND
The subject property, Hefner Subdivision Lot 1, is vacant and contains 1.03 acres. It is located
just past the south end of Seventh Street on Toby Lane next door to the old Hefner house. Lot 1
resulted from a court ordered lot split pursuant to the Stipulation and Order dated June 28, 1983
in Civil Actions 82CV3, 82CV152, and 82CV216 (Attachment 1) and the Hefner Subdivision plat
recorded in Book 17, Page 11 in April 1985 (Attachment 2). By Stipulation and Order, dated
July 19, 2000 (the "Amended Order" in Attachment 3), the court approved the parties' stipulation
confirming the Applicant's right to develop a single family residence, accessory uses and
structures within Lot 1. Exhibit A to the Amended Order contains a copy of a County
memorandum establishing the 1041 hazard mitigation conditions for the Lot.
The building envelope designated on the Subdivision Plat is bisected by the 8,040-foot elevation
contour line. Attachment 4, a topographical map of the subject lot, shows the land area within
each zone district. Approximately 10,010 square feet of the lot is located above the 8,040
contour line in the AFR-10 zone district where 15,000 square feet of floor area is allowed by
right. Approximately 34,990 square feet of the lot is located below the 8,040 line and falls within
the R-15 zone district where there is a floor area ratio of .16. Approximately 5,598 square feet
of floor area is permitted on this R-15 portion of the lot below the 8,040 contour line.
-1-
ALICE DAVIS, AICP 1 GLENN HORN, AICP
215 SOUTH MONARCH ST. • SUITE 104 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • 970/925-6587 • FAX: 970/925-5180
Attachment 9 and is the definition for properties within the "Rural Area and properties within the
Aspen Area Urban Growth Boundary not subject to floor area ratio restrictions through
underlying zoning". This definition is used in the AFR-10 zone district and is more inclusive and
therefore more restrictive than the definition used for the R -15 zone district.
The applicant's request for 12,300 square feet of floor area is 2,700 square feet of floor area less
than the 15,000 square feet allowed in the AFR-10 zone district and 8,298 square feet less than
the total theoretical floor area of 20,598 square feet permitted on the site. Although the applicant
may have the right to build 15,000 square feet in the AFR-10 which is above the 8,400 foot
elevation contour, development is more appropriate below the 8,400 elevation line. A strict
application of the floor area limits within each of the applicable zone districts would encourage
the applicant to develop more of the home within the AFR-10 zone district above the 8,040
elevation line because more floor area is available there.
The County Attorney's office found merit in permitting floor area within the building envelope on
the subject lot in exchange for the applicant's agreement to limit the development within the entire
lot and to further limit development within the lot above the 8,040 elevation line. Under this
scenario, the development of the subject site results in a greater portion of the floor area being
constructed on the lower portion of the building envelope which results in fewer visual impacts
than if the development took place in the upper portion. The County Attorney's office found that
this agreement would promote the public benefit by defining the applicant's right to build within
the subject lot in a manner consistent with and which promotes the policies and requirements
contained in the County Code. Therefore, in exchange for 12,300 square feet of total floor area,
the applicant agrees to construct no more than 3,500 square feet of floor area above the currently
existing 8,040 foot elevation contour. The applicant will place a survey marker to monument the
location of the existing 8,040 foot elevation contour at two edges of the approved building
envelope prior to earthmoving. The applicant may initially build less than 12,300 square feet of
floor area and reserves the right to add floor area in the future up to a maximum of 12,300 square
feet.
In summary, the applicant proposes the following floor area limitations:
The maximum permitted total floor area for Lot 1 Hefner Subdivision is 12,300 square
feet. Floor area shall be calculated pursuant to the definition in Paragraph I of Section 8-1
of the County Land Use Code adopted through Ordinance 23-2000. (See Attachment 9
for completion definition from Paragraph I.)
2. The applicant, his successors or assigns, may develop less than 12,300 square feet of total
maximum floor area and more floor area may be added at a future time up to the 12,300
square foot maximum. The maximum floor area of 12,300 square feet will be available to
the applicant for 15 years.
3. Of the 12,300 square feet of total maximum floor area, the applicant agrees to construct
no more than 3,500 square feet above the currently existing 8,040 foot elevation contour
-3-
Total permitted floor area is approximately 20,600 square feet. Please refer to Attachment 5
shows the proposed home's footprint by level as it relates to the 8,040 contour line.
Under current definitions, the AFR-10 and the R-15 zone districts each have a different
methodology for how floor area is to be calculated; the AFR-10 zone does not a floor area ratio
restriction through underlying zoning while the R-15 zone district does. Due to this unique
circumstance of two zoning districts bisecting the building envelope on one parcel, this
application clarifies permitted floor area for a single family residence, how the floor area is to be
measured and on what portion of property the allowed floor area can be built. A blend of the two
zone districts is proposed.
SITE VICINITY AND ZONING
As noted previously, a portion of the subject site is zoned AFR-10 and a portion is zoned R-15.
The property is bordered by single family residences on all sides. Attachment 6 is an 8 1/2" x I I
Vicinity Map depicting the location of the subject within the City of Aspen and surrounding areas.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is proposing a 12,300 square foot single family residence to be built within the
approved building envelope designated on the Hefner Subdivision Plat. (Attachment 2.) Please
refer to Attachment 7 for a site plan of the property and Attachment 8, elevations of the proposed
home.
The approved building envelope designated on the Hefner Subdivision Plat for Lot 1 is bisected
by the 8,040-foot elevation contour line. With 10,011 square feet of the lot located above the
8,040 line in the AFR-10 zone district and 34,989 square feet of the lot located below the 8,040
contour line in the R-15 zone district, total floor area permitted on the lot is theoretically
approximately 20,600 square feet. Due to the unique circumstance of two zoning districts
bisecting the building envelope on one parcel, this application clarifies the permitted floor area
allowed for a single family residence, how the floor area is to be measured and where the allowed
floor area is to be built.
The applicant's attorney communicated with the County Attorney's office in order to reach
agreement on these floor area issues. After there was an understanding of the problem and
solutions between the two parties, the Attorney's office and the applicant agreed to document the
clarification of these issues as part of the Scenic Review approval.
The applicant is proposing a blend of the AFR-10 and R-15 zone districts. Under this proposal, a
maximum of 12,300 square feet of floor area for the subject site will be permitted based upon the
standards set forth in paragraph I of the "Floor Area" definition of Section 8-1 of the County
Code adopted by Ordinance #23-2000 on June 19, 2000. This definition is given in full in
-2-
! 9
within the subject lot.
4. Prior to altering the grades on the subject site, the applicant agrees to place a survey
marker to monument the location of 8,040 foot elevation contour at two edges of the
building envelope on subject lot, Lot 1 Hefner Subdivision.
LAND USE REVIEWS
This section of the application demonstrates compliance with the Land Use Code Scenic Overlay
standards identified in the Pitkin County Pre -Application Summary Sheet (see Attachment 10).
The applicant also requests approval for Vested Property Rights for a 15 year period. For the
Scenic Review, please refer to Attachment 7, the site plan showing landscaping and a conceptual
footprint for the proposed residence; Attachment 8, elevations of the proposed residence; and
Attachment 11, photos of the existing subject site and computer generated photo simulations of
the site after development. The photos are seen from the two public view points along Highway
82. First, the photos are from the intersection of Highway 82 and Cemetery Lane and second
from Highway 82 at the west, downvalley side of the roundabout.
Section 3-60-040 Scenic Overlay
1. Whether the proposed development has utilized existing topography and natural
vegetation, such as ridges and hills to screen buildings to the maximum extent
possible.
When the building envelope was approved for the subject site and 1041 hazards were
considered, the location of the envelope was a logical choice due to the naturally
occurring relatively level bench. Development on this bench avoids most of the large
existing trees on the site. The approved building envelope's location is the only logical
place to build. The existing, natural vegetation, large aspen and and conifer trees, native
scrubs and grasses, will help to screen the proposed home. Some vegetation within the
building envelope will be removed to comply with wildfire hazard mitigation measures
required by the County.
Please refer to Attachment 11, photos of the subject site from the two more visible points
along the Highway 82 corridor. The first photo on each page shows the existing view
from Highway 82 and the second photo is a computer generated photo simulation of the
view after development of the home. It is the west elevation of the proposed home which
is most visible from Highway 82. (See Attachment 8 for elevations.) The home is shown
first from Highway 82 at its intersection with Cemetery Lance as this stretch of Highway
82 between the Castle Creek Bridge and Cemetery Lane is where the site is most visible
from the Highway corridor. Second, photos are shown from along the west, downvalley
side of the roundabout (traffic circle). The photos show that the proposed home will be
screened well by the large, existing trees on the property.
-4-
The new Castle Creek Road pedestrian/bicycle overpass reduces the visibility of the
subject site from the State Highway 82 roundabout at it intersection with Castle Creek
Road. Photos were originally taken from here prior to installation of the pedestrian
bridge, but the new bridge obscured the view after it was installed. New photos were
taken from a point further west on Highway 82 on the downvalley side of the roundabout
where the site was more visible.
2. Whether the proposed development has been designed to complement the natural
topography of the land, including, whenever possible and appropriate, the
utilization of innovative architectural techniques such as earth sheltered design,
natural materials and coloring, non-reflectability and clustering of structures on the
least visible portions of the site.
Please refer again to Attachment 8, elevations of the proposed residence and Attachment
11, the photos of the subject property. Project architects, Bill Poss and Associates, have
carefully designed the proposed house to reduce massing and compliment the topography.
Although the home is one structure, the design has significantly broken down the massing.
There are two pods connected by small corridors and there are several roof forms which
are flat; both features further reduce massing. The house appears to be only one story,
particularly from the west elevation which is visible from Highway 82. The house steps up
the hillside and a some portion of the house is built into the hillside, which reduces visual
impacts significantly. A large portion of the garage and office are buried.
The architecture of the house along with the screening provided by existing large trees
should reduce visual impacts. Building materials may include but will not be limited to
stone veneer walls, wood siding and trim, glass, stucco, concrete and metals. Natural
earthtone colors will be utilized which should further reduce visual impacts. The approved
building envelope is the least visible portion of the site due to it location on a natural
bench on the property and is further screened by existing large trees.
3. Whether the proposed development's height and bulk has been designed to avoid, to
the maximum extent possible, the visibility of buildings from the highway and
public viewplanes.
The building height shall comply with the Pitkin County Land Use Code. As mentioned
previously, the visible mass and bulk of the house will be minimized by the home being
built into the hill, stepping up the hill, as well as by the use of a design which breaks the
mass with two different pods and several.different rooflines. The applicant is utilizing
existing vegetation along with the above discussed design techniques, natural materials
and colors, all of which will allow the home to blend with the surroundings much better
than the adjacent home which has been a visible structure. The home is not located within
a public viewplane and is approximately one half mile from Highway 82.
—5—
4. The proposed structure shall be placed so it does not break a ridgeline, unless there
are no alternate building sites on the lot.
The proposed structure will not break a ridgeline.
5. Whether the proposed development has avoided the location of uses on the highest
ground or most visible portion of the site as viewed from State Highway 82 and
public rights -of -way, identified in Section (13)(1) above.
The proposed home is not located on the highest point on the property. Instead, it is
located mid way on the site in the most easily accessed and developable portion of the site
in an already approved building envelope. The west elevation of the proposed home is
most visible from Highway 82 and the mass of the home is minimized on this side.
6. Whether the proposed development has been located outside of the designated
Scenic Overlay, or on a suitable site at the greatest distance possible from State
Highway 82 and identified ridgelines.
This standard is largely a site planning tool used in determining an appropriate building
envelope. As the building envelope is already approved, this standard has limited
applicability. The building envelope is in the most logical, obvious and appropriate
location on the site as it consists of a naturally occurring, relatively flat bench mid -way up
the site, with the remainder of the site rising above and falling below the envelope.
7. Whether the proposed development has been landscaped in accordance with the
adopted State Highway 82 Corridor landscape guidelines and has preserved natural
vegetation, to the maximum extent possible, including the avoidance of development
within irrigated meadows. Existing vegetation shall be maintained to the maximum
extent possible, while using existing vegetation to screen development. A
landscaping plan shall be submitted by the applicant and approved by the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Please refer to Attachment 7, the site plan for the subject property which shows the
approved building envelope and the proposed landscaping within the building envelope.
The existing conifer and aspen groves surrounding the building envelope will be preserved.
Great effort was taken to preserve the large, mature trees on site when the building
envelope was designated. These large, existing trees outside the building envelope will
help screen the home. The smaller aspens on the site are located within the building
envelope. Existing vegetation within the building envelope will be preserved where
possible. The Bristlecone Pine, Colorado Blue Spruce and Austrian Pine proposed for the
site should blend nicely with the substantial existing vegetation. The landscaping will be in
accordance with the adopted State Highway 82 Corridor landscape guidelines. There are
no irrigated meadows on the site.
ZZ
8. Whether the proposed development's exterior lighting has been designed in such a
manner that light sources, such as facade and landscape lighting, will not be seen
from public rights -of -way as identified in Section (B)(1). In addition, an application
shall be consistent with the lighting regulations identified in the Pitkin County Land
Use Code.
All lighting will comply with the strict requirements of the County Land Use Code.
9. Landforms and earth moving shall generally not be acceptable as the sole measure
of compliance with these regulations. However, they may be utilized in conjunction
with other site techniques designed into the development plan. These methods may
be acceptable when utilized as one of several methods to complement and enhance
development, rather than as the single device for screening development from view
from the State Highway 82 Corridor and as mapped.
No landforms are proposed for mitigation of scenic issues as they are not appropriate or
necessary given the nature of the subject site.
10. Whether the proposed development has been designed so as to avoid, to the
maximum extent possible, any Scenic Viewplane identified on the State Highway 82
Corridor Master Plan and Down Valley Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed home is not in a Scenic Viewplane.
11. In the case where 1041 hazard areas may be in conflict with preservation of scenic
areas, the Board acknowledges that 1041 issues take precedence over scenic
concerns. These issues shall be reviewed on a case -by -case basis.
The building envelope has already been designated and approved after considering 1041
hazard areas. There are no conflicts between 1041 issues and scenic concerns.
The visual impacts of the proposed structures have been minimized through architectural
techniques, screening by the large, existing trees on the site, natural materials and
earthtone colors. The visible west elevation of the home appears to be only one story and
scenic impacts from the proposed home should be minimal.
VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS
Approval is also requested for vested property rights for a fifteen year period. Vested Property
Rights are requested pursuant to Section 4-140 of the Land Use Code.
—7—
•
Summary
This letter has requested approval for (1) Scenic Review, (2) a floor area clarification, and (3)
vested property rights. All relevant land use standards identified during the pre -application
conference have been addressed. The applicant demonstrated non -merger to the satisfaction of
the County Attorney as part of the 1041 Hazard Review and is not providing non -merger
information at this time.
The following list summarizes included attachments which should assist you in the review of this
application.
Attachment 1 - Stipulation and Order dated June 28, 1983 in Civil Actions 82V3,
82CV 152, and 82CV216;
Attachment 2 - Hefner Subdivision Plat;
Attachment 3 - Amended Stipulation and Order dated July 19, 2000;
Attachment 4 - Topographical survey of the subject site;
Attachment 5 - Footprints of the Upper, Main and Lower Levels as they relate to the
8,040 contour line;
Attachment 6 - Vicinity map of area around the subject property;
Attachment 7 - Site Plan with landscaping;
Attachment 8 - Elevations of the proposed single family home;
Attachment 9 - Definition of floor area as written in Paragraph I under "Floor Area", from
Section 8-1 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code adopted through
Ordinance 23-2000;
Attachment 10 - Pre -application Summary Sheet;
Attachment 11 - Photos of the subject site. Existing view and computer generated
simulation of the view of the subject site after development from (1) Hwy.
82 and Cemetery Lane; and (2) Hwy. 82 at the west, downvalley side of
the roundabout;
Attachment 12 - List of Adjacent Property Owners;
Attachment 13 - Proof of Ownership;
—8—
E
Attachment 14 - Letters of authorization from property owner, Arapahoe Ridge, LLC,
authorizing Davis Horn Inc. to submit this land use application and to
represent them in the review process, and
Attachment 15 - Agreement to pay fees.
Please call if you have any questions or if we have inadvertently neglected to address any of your
concerns.
Sincerely,
DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED
GILECP
•
•
ATTAEaT'_3
DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COm(SkW60 1 , "7 r,Co
Case No. 82-CV-216
STIPULATION AND ORDER
KEITH HEFNER.
Plaintiff,
V.
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
Defendants.
COMES NOW the Parties by and through their undersigned
attorneys and hereby submits this Stipulation to the court and
requests that the Court enter an Order in the :Form provided hereon
approving the terms of this Stipulation.
Now therefore, the Parties Stipulate as follows:
1. A previous Stipulation and Order (the "Previous
Stipulation and Order") was entered in this action at the time it
was consolidated with certain other actions. The Previous
Stipulation and Order was dated June 28, 1983 in Civil Actions
82CV3, 82CV152 and 82CV216 and recorded in Book 449, page 649 of
the records of Pitkin County, Colorado on August 3, i983. A copy of
the Previous Stipulation and Order is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
2. The parties wish to clarify the intent of the Previous
Stipulation and Order and to impose certain requirements on the
development of the affected property in order to enure its
development in a manner consistent with certain regulations of.
Pitkin County.
3. The parties agree that the Previous Stipulation and Order
was intended to and did in fact grant a development right: for the
development of a single family residence and accessory uses and
structures, to Lot 1, Refner Subdivision according to the Plat map
thereof recorded in Boole 17 at Page 11, recorded April 15, 19a5
("Lot_1,,), including the right- to obtain a building permit without
the necessity of obtaining a development allotment or any other
development orders or approvals under the Pitkin County Land Use
Code, subject to compliance with the conditions described in
paragraph 4 below. This is based upon the finding that the land use
application which the Previous stipulation and Order approved was
a lot split in the R-15 PUD zone which was an exemption from the
Pitkin County Growth Management Quota System.
4. The parties agree that the development of Lot 1 shall
require only the mitigation of the 1o41 hazards as required by the
memorandum and attachments thereto, from the Pitkin County
Community Development Office, dated December 21, 1999, a copy of
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference
at exhibit A. Nothing herein shall prevent the parties from
mutually agreeing to site specific modifications to the
requirements set forth on Exhibit A and the Court's involvement in
.such changes shall not be required. The requirements of Exhibit A
reflect the current conditions for development of Lot 1 and the
development of Lot 1 will be immune from any changes or amendments
to the Pitkin County Land Use Code for a period of three (3) years
(the "Vesting Period") from the date of execution of the Order
carrying out the terms of this Stipulation. The owner. of Lot 1 may
apply to Pitkin County for an extension of the Vesting Period,
acccrdina to the procedures for an extension of vested rights as_
contained in the Pitkin County Land Use Code.
5. Paragraph 3(d) of the Previous Stipulation and Order is
amended to allow water service to be provided either by connection
to the City of Aspen public water supply or by a private well.
G. All other terms of the Previous Stipulation and Order
shall.remain in effect.
7. The Court shall retain 3urisdiction over this matter to
deal with any disputes which may arise in the future concerning the
terms of this Stipulation.
Respectfully submitted this ��day of July, 2000.
ATTORNEY FOR KEITH HEFNER:
KLEIN-ZIMET PROFESSIjONAL CORPORATION
By:_
Herbert Klein, Esq. (#Se03)
201 N. Mill Street, Suite 203
Aspen, Colorado 0161i
Tel: (970) 925-8700
Fax: (970) 925-397-1
J
ATTORNEY FOR PZTKIN COUNTY
By:
John
Ely 67)
530
E in Street
As
n, Colorado
Tel:
(970) 920-5190
Fax:
(970) 920-5198
3
7I / I I
I
1
w
> �O
6s` /
ti
U
a
N
bA
S'N
I
I
t
D
D
n
Ll
L
0 ATTACMENT
Existing View
Arapahoe Ridge LLC. Proposed View
Highway 82 at Cemetery Lane
11 - 01 - 01
low
t . a s•. - � .
C�
fie,
eoo)( 449 FAA49
DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORJ+DO
Civil Action Nos. 82CV3, 82CV152 ar.d ;2CV216
STIPULATION AND CROC?
PETER VOUGHT, Plaintiff,
�.J J
THE COUNTY OF PITKIN; THE BCARD OF COUNTY COX,4ISSIONERS OF PITKIN
COUNTY, ROBERT CHILDS, F1ICH:.EL XINSLEY, HELEN KLANDERUD, THOMAS
BLAXE and GEORGE MACSEN, COM-MISSIONERS ACTING IN THEIR OFFICIAL
CAPACITY, and EDIIARD ZASACXY and CINDY ZASACKY, Defendants.
FETER VOUGHT and KEITH IICII:F.R, Plaintiffs,
V.
THE BOARD OF -COUNTY CO:'-MISSIO'-'ERS OF uI^KIN COUI:TY, F.CBERT
CHILDS, MICHAEL KINSLEY, HELEN KLANDE UD, THO?:1S RI.AJ-Z and GORGE
MADSEN, COVLMISSIOKERS THEREOF ACTING IN HEIR OF'F'IC:AL CAPACITY,
Defendants.
KEITH HEFNER, Plaintiff,
V.
THE COUNTY OF PITKIN; THE BOA'S OF CCUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN
COUNTY, ROBERT CHILDS, MICHA.' XINSLEY, HELEN KLANDERUD, THOMAS
BLAXE and GEORGE MADSEN, COMMISSIONERS ACTING IN THEIR OFFICIAL
CAPACITY, Defendants.
COMES NOW the above-nam-d Plaintiffs, Peter Vought and Keith
fiefner, by and through their attorneys, Sachs, Klein c Seigle,
Professional Corporation, by Herbert S. Klein, Esq., and
Defendant Pitkin County and the Board of County Comnissioners, by
and through their attorney, Wesley A. Light, Esq.,._.:nd Edward and
Cindy Za<_acky (hereinafter ':-sackys") stipu late 'and agree as
follows:
1. Plaintiff Peter Vought (hereinafter "Vought") shall be
entitled to subdivide his Property -nre fully described in
Vought's Complaint in Civil Action I:o. F.:CV3 and axhibits
thereto (hereinafter 'Vaught Property"), located in the County of
Pitkin, State of Colorado, so as to pernit the separate parceling
and sale of one additional parcel of Lind consisting of approxi-
mately 1.7 acres. The precise boundaries -)f the parcel so
created are shown on the site plan rap accc-.panyinq the
Application for subdivision approval referred to at paragraph 2
of Vought's Complaint in Civil Action No. 82CV3.
I
•'t
J
rY
or 449 Fz- w
2• Plaintiff Keith Hefner 'Hefner'(hereinafter referred to as
) shall be entitled to subdivide his particularly described at paproperty moreragraph 1 of Hefner's Complaint in
Civil Action No. 82CV216 and exhibits thereto to permit the
separate parceling and sale of one additional approximately 45,000 scuare feet. parcel of land of
The precise boundaries of the
parcel so created are set forth in the site plan map accer..panyhe
the Application for subdivision approval referred to a paragraph
2 of fefner's Cc -.plaint in Civil Action No. 82CV216.
3. The subdivision of the property of the Plaintiffs
respectively as set forth tbove shall be conditioned upon
ccn,Pliance with the following requirements:
(a) Plaintiffs shall each prepare and cause to be filed
a plat map indicating the bcundaries of their respective
Properties and the boundaries of each parcel subdivided
therefrom. Each plat map shall show: (1) to be
the location all
accass and utility easements necessary to serve the parcels to be
subdivided from the Properties; (2) designated building envelopes
on each parcel consistent with the building envelopes shown in
the Hefner subdivision application referred to above and
consistent with the area designated as 'Potential
referred to on the geologic map Building Area"accor,:panying the Vought
Application for subdivision referred to above; (3) a well
easement alignment shall be shown on the Vought plat map and a
driveway easement alignment shall be shown on the Hefner plat
map.
(b) The above -described plat maps shall bear a legend
evidencing the agreement of Vought and Hefner each respectively
that no further subdivision of the Property shall ever be
permitted. Said legend shall be deemed a covenant running with
the land.
(c) Soils engineering studies shall be undertaken prior
to the issuance of any building permit for any dwelling to be
located within the building envelopes referred to above.
(d) Any dwelling to be constructed within the building
envelope referred to above on the Hefner Property shall utilize
water provided by the City of Aspen Water Deportment public water
supply and shall be served by sewage facilities lccated on the
Hefner Property which comply with the Pitkin County Individual
Sewage Disposal Regulations the tinof for onsite septic systems unless, at
envelope e the construction of a dwelling within the building
the
to above, the Aspen Metropolitan Sanitation
District has placed a sewer line within 400 feet of said building
envelope and, in such event, then said dwelling shall utilize
said public sewer lines and shall m.en�cr into or s
line agrecent with the D'etropolitan service
Sanitation a main or
therefore.
-2-
wx
(e) .he dwelling to be constructed ��� °�_65t
the Vought P:�perty referred to above shall be
pr,wided water from *he t: r-)lt well pursuant to the terms of a
well and easement .reemenf- recorded at Book 409, Page 313 of the
records of Pitkir _aunt• , provided, ho%.cver, that if said
dwelling togcthe: tt, a,y dtiiel.'n
- reatter
g presently or he located on Lot 1 of the Vought subdivision as set forth on the
appli-ation for said subdivision a-)aroval pre,.,iously referred to
in pa:egraph 1 of this Siipulatio- anc order is ever served with
ter .'ron the City of Aspen Vater Department public water
supply, then all rights in and :o the !'arolt well shall be
conveyed to Pitkin County w.'lh no additional consideration.
Sewage disposal and service fur the dwelling to be constructed
within th.� building envelope located on the Vought Property
referred to above shall be according to the same terns and
conditions as for the Hefner Property set forth in the preceding
subparagrapa except that the Individual Sewage Disposal
Pegulations applicable to the Vought Property shall be those in
effect as of the date of this Stipulation and Order.
1. Vought and Hefner stipul,**.. and agree as to the validity
Of the road vacation complained of by Vought and Hefner Ly their
Complaint in Civil Action No. 92CV152 and further agree that the
dedication of said roadway referred Lo at Exhibits D and E to the
Complaint of Peter Vought in Civil Action 'Jo. 82CV3 is null and
void and of no effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Hefner and
Vought agree to comply with the obligations set forth at
Paragraph / entitles Road Maintenance Agreement of Exhibit D to
Vought's Complaint in Civil Action No. 82CV3, recorded at
Book.412, Page 939 of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado. In
light of the foregoinq, Vought and Hefner and Defendant altkin
County, agree that the roadway Portion described at Exhibit C to
the aforesaid Agreement shall regain a private road., Vought and
Hefner agree to place a sign along said portion of roadway
described at Exhibit C co the above -described Agreement which
sign shell indicate that such road is a private road and shall
specify a 10 mile per hour speed limit thereon. Said sign shall
be placed at a site agreed upon by Fitkin County and any land owner adjacent to the port+on of roadway upon which said
sign is placed. ?:either Vought nor f?e_`ner shall undertake any
irprovements to any portion of roadway %.hick is not adjacent to
their respective Properties nor shall Vought or Hefner
intentior.ally remove or disturb any bushes or trees lying along
any area of said roadwar which is not adjacent to either of their
respective Properties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, routine
raintenance and repairs to the road,,.ay to maintain its condition
as of August 10, 1981, shall be permitted. -he rights, duties
and obligations of Hefner and Vought respectively, contained in
this paragraph 1 with respect to road mainte.�ance and repairs,
shall be binding uper. the respective record ownerfs) of the
:Hefner and Vought Properties respectively, as they exist from tinQ to time. Hefner and Vought, each individually, Fhall be
-3-
a= 449 ��fi!
relieved of all liability hereunder upon tie conveyance of said
party'b interest
in their respective Properties. Upon the
conveyance of the parcels created pursuant :o this Stipulation
and Order, the owners thereof shall be liable for the obligations
set firth herein
on a Fro-rata basis as to tt:e number of parcels
to which thmse obligations pertain. Likewise.
upon any
subsequent :;ale by said grantees of Hefner anc/or Vought, said
=
-==
grantees shall be reIievcd of liability hereunder and said
liability
:a
shall be the obligation of the record owner(s) of said
parcels as they exit from time to time.
5. Nothing herein shall exempt Vought cr H:ifner from any obligation to
W-1
pay any park dedication fee to ritkin County as
provided by law.
6. Hefner and Vought aqree to pay the `sum of $5,000.00 each
to Pitkin County upon the first sale of one of the parcels
permitted to be subdivided pursuant to the terms of paragraphs 1
and 2 hereinabove. Said sums (510,000.00) shall be utilized by
Pitkin County only for improvements, landscaping and/or
modifications to the South 7th Street right-of-way. Said sums
will be expended upon Resolution of the Hoard, provided said
expenditures are (a) desired by a majority cf landowners whose
property is adjacent to the area propo;ed for said Improvements,
• Ztc., and (b) in the general public interest. Nothing herein
shall be deemed to rocuire that Hefner and Vought be obligated to
maintain any improvements, landscaping and/or modific:.tions
constructed accoreing to the terns of this paragraph 6.
7. No trail east_csents shall be required to be dedicated by,
Hefner and Vought, nor shall Pitkin County.take any action to
condemn any trail or easement therefor- along or -within the
property of either 9efner_. or Vought:
.. ' - ` :_. F_, .. ._ �, ��y.r„ 'ter ;^ `• ,_ -
I=:` - 8. The:undersigned attorneys warrant and represent that
`=they have authority from their'respective clients to enter into
s:this Stipulattca and do hereby -request that". the Court issue as
.'order incorporating the terms of this 5tip{tlaticn so that the
agreement of the parties may be given full legal effect.
9. Vought, Hefner and Zasackys do hereby agree that upon
issuance of an order of this Court carrying out the purposes,
intents, terms and conditions of this Stipulation, that all
claims, actions and causes of action set forth in Civil Action.
449 mr,
No 8 2
Civil Action No. 82Cv15I nd Civil Action No A2Cv21i
shall be thereby dismissed w, ,�irtJ dice. (� t
c•
SACHS, KLEIN i SEIGLE
- Professional Corporation
Herbert S.' Klein ) es ey A L g t •�Jl
�r Attorney for Peter Vou --
4ht Attorney for Pitkin Count '
and Keith Hefner Board of Coune Coassiasioryest
201 North Mill Street et al.._ i,
Aspen, Colorado 81611
3) 925-9700 •_Y
_ R c, ar Cum= n '72 )
i" Attorney for -Edward and Cindy Zasacky
612 W. Hain Street
Aspen, Colorado 91611 -
ORDER
The Court, having reviewed the pleadings in this matter and
the foregoing Stipulation of the Plaintiffs and Defendant Count
Of Pitkin :. , Board of County Cosmissioners; et al.,- and Edward and,
a Cindy 2asackY in Civil Action Nos.,82CV3,-82CV352 and 82CV216 •x;
3r does hereby. find. that the t" of -said Stipulatloa: era:: reasonable as betweea the pas{iea end do not .violate as F
s, rs policy or the intereatn. of asshould,-Y Publio t-
y•other party and in 1- interest of justice::and-equity; bs gives effect' the �Y, :' f .. •ter: ?:V --':.. il..
.y.a._ , .. lati ' be e* 23 AEREBZ°pRDERED;':thaCwthirNraa'ot tlie'.
Stipulation be tween.Plaintiffs Peter Vougbt'and'Xeith lefner
Defendants, County 61. Pitkiri The Board of County Commissioners
of Pitkin County;. et al.' jEdward Zasacky and Cindy Zasacky shall
be given effect according: to all terms and conditions stated
therein as it fully incorporated herein by this reference as the _
order of this Court. -
Done this Z,& day of
Colorado. 1983, at Aspen,
COURT JUDGE:
ORDER
THE COURT BEING FULLY ADVISED AS TO THE PREMISES, does hereby
ORDER that the terms of the above Stipulation of the parties }..e
given effect.
Dated: �f%L y 2000
—Hy the Court:
Dis rict Court Judge
hefner\9C1p
cTurm
I certify tbat a c ze ry or
IFaregoiw.. wuz. ITAP42L
Tili
4
_.
T T'TV7V r+V,% +o TD 0+o
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Ely, Pitkin County Attorney
FROM: Gabe Preston, Planner
RE: Hefner Court Ordered Subdivision 1041 Hazard Mitigation
DATE: December 21, 1999
BACKGROUND: The County Attorney found that the Stipulation and Order dated June 28,
1983 in Civil Actions 82CV3, 82CV 152, and 82CV216 and the Hefner Subdivision plat recorded
in Book 17 Page 11 in April 1985 constitute the right to develop a single family residence and
accessory uses within the building envelope depicted on the Plat. Staff has the ability to apply
1041 hazard mitigation conditions to this property. The Attorney will ask tl�e IIOCC whether
appl
they want to attach these conditions to an amendment to the Court Order or to a C CC
resolution. This memo consists of a brief review of the 1041 hazard concerns a the properly
and the associated mitigation conditions.
OWNERS: Keith Hefncr
REPRESENTATIVE: Herb Klein
LOCATION: The property is located on Toby Way.
ZONING: The zoning is R-15 and the property is 1.03 acres.
STAFF" COMMENTS:
Wildfire: Vince Urbina of the Colorado State Forest Scrvice visited file site and rates it as
medium wildfire hazard (Sec Attachment A). He recommends the following defensible space
conditions to mitigate the wildfire haz trd.
1. For a distance of 10 ft. around all structures establish and maintain vegetation at 6" or less.
Woody vegetation should not be planted here.
2. ' For a distance of 40 feet around all structures, thin existing conifers so that the outside edges
of tree crowns are no closer than 10 feet to one another and to structures.
3. The lower limbs of all conifers should be removed up to a height of 10 feet or Ralf tite total
height of the tree, whichever is less, to eliminate ladder fuels.
4. All deadfall should be removed within 100 feet of the structure.
Staff will add standard defensible space and structural wildfire mitigation conditions.
Wildlife Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist Jonathan Lowsky found that although the site is
mapped as critical elk habitat and severe winter range, it is actually winter ranoc. He stated that
the greatest concern in this area is wills the high level of predator activity in this area (Bears,
Pine Martens, Bobcats, Mountain Lions). He recommends the following conditions:
• Dogs shall be kenneled.
• Fencinn outside of the building envelope must comply with current Pitkin CotmryFencing
Guidelines.
• The Applicant shall install an approved bear -proof trash container and all trash shall be kept
in it.
• In order to avoid attracting bears, there should be no fruit bearing trees or shrubs.
• Native vegetation shall be maintained outside of the building envelope.
Geologic:
Slopes: Staff does not have contour information on this site, but Staff estirnates from a site visit
i
D(NIBIT
� r
that there are slopes steeper than 15% on site and will apply standard conditions to mitigate
hazards associated with potentially unstable slopes on this site.
Rockfoll and Avolonche: As part of the original review process for this subdivision, Mr.
Lampiris conducted a geologic investigation of this property. He made the following
observations:
CSU maps indicate that [lie building envelope is located in rockfall and avalaoclic hazard
areas.
• In severe conditions, rockfall and avalanches could reach the building envelop,
• The topography and the vegetation on site will ensure that were rocks or avalanche
materials to move through the building envelope they would do so with "low energy.
Bruce Collins in a recent report recommended and one of the following conditions:
• Reinforce foundations and eliminate of doors and windows on the east-soutltcast side of
the residence for an adequate height;
• Construct a 6 foot tall wall to the east-southeast side of (lie residence able
600 pounds per square foot: to withstand
• Construct a rock and earth berm to the east-southeast side of the residence;
• The Applicant may need to combine the wall or the berm with structural reinforcement
of the residence in order to mitigate the hazards.
Note: Staff notes that the Code prohibits development within rockfall hazard areas. However,
the legal circumstances surrounding this property do not allow the denial of development.
GENERAL SUBNUSSION (3-110):
Utilities: The Applicant should have no problems obtaining tttilit,
Water and Sewer: The applicant will need to tither get the proper state permits and drill a well
or obtain a water tap from Aspen Water. The property is located outside of the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District, and so they will either need to obtain a tap from the ACSD or
construct a septic system approved by Environmental Health_
1 IECOMIVILNDATION: Staff recommends that the following conditions be attached to
development on Lot 1, 1-lefrter Subdivision:
1. ' Prior to submission of any building permits, the Applicant shall:
A. Obtain an access permit from the County Engineer.
B. Provide a trip generation and construction trip generation study for any free market
residential structure of 5,000 sq. ft. or greater for review and approval by the County
Engineer.
2. Prior to issuancc of any building permits the applicant Shall obtain approval of art JSDS
permit from the Environmental Health Department or obtain a tap from Aspcn Consolidated
Sanitation District. The septic system must comply with all minimum horizontal setback
requirements bcmvccn its components and physical features. A qualified professional
engineer must design the system. The septic s
envelope. ystem shall be located witltirt the building
3. If the Applicant drills a well, prior to the issuance of septic or building permits the
Applicant must document to the Environmental Health Department that the well meets
setback requirements and that quantity and quality of the well water arc adequate.
4. The Applicant shall comply with the following standards for development in geologic
hazard areas:
Qevelooment on 15% or Gr
IgLr_S low
A. Adequate mechanical support shall be provided for cut slopes.
B, Adding water which may decrease slope stability shall be avoided.
C. Adding weight to the top of the slope shall be avoided.
D. Disturbed slopes must be contoured so that they can be re -vegetated.
E. Steepening of existing slopes shall be avoided.
P. Cuts, fills, grading and excavation shall be confined to tite minimum area needed
for construction.
L
G. The Applicant shall submit a drainage and erosion control plan to the County
Engineer for review and approval, prior to submittal of any building permit
applications.
H. Tile house shall be designed to preclude the accumulation of radon gas.
L The foundation for the residence shall be designed by a Colorado rtgistercd
professional engineer and approved by the County Engineer.
Developmentk valart hAreas,
The Applicant shall adhere to the following:
1. Construct a 6 foot tall wall or berm to the east-southeast side of the residence
able to withstand 600 pounds per square foot that is deemed adequate by a
Certified Professional Geologist to protect the structure from rockfall and
avalanches;
2. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, tite Applicant shall
submit a letter from a Certified Professional Geologist to a planner or toning
official in the Community Development Department that states that the design
and location of the wall or berm is adequate to protect the structure from
rockfall and avalanche hazards. The Applicant may need to build a reinforced
foundation and eliminate of doors and windows on the east-southeast side of
the residence for a height deemed adequate by a Certified Professional
Geologist to protect the structure from rockfall and avalanches if tl,e wa11 or
berm design is inadequate.
The following wildfire mitigation conditions shall be applicable to all structures on the
property:
Defensible-5-pace.•
NOTE: Actual vegetation manipulatiotl to meet these conditions may not be necessary
where the natural vegetation patterns have already fulfilled these conditions. The owner
of the property is responsible for creating and ,maintaining the defensible space as
required below.
A. Brush, debris, and non -ornamental vegetation shall be removed within a minimum
Of 10 foot perimeter around all structures. Vegetation in this area shall be at 6"
or less (i.e. mowed grass, low -growing perennials, and ornamental vegetation that
is non -woody).
B. Within 40 feet of the structures on site the outside of tree crowns shall be spaced
least 10 feet apart.
C. All branches from trees within 40 feet of the structures on site shall be pruned to a
height of 10 feet above the ground or half the height of the tree, whichever is less.
D. All branches which extend over the roof eaves shall be tr•intmed and all branches
within IS feet of the chimneys shall be removed.
E. All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed.
F. The Applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible
space vegetation requirements.
3tructitral Design and C'onstrtrcti�Rettttirements
A. Roof construction shall be Class A, non-combustible material (no wood
shake/shingics) witl, no fiat roofs (minimum pitch = 3:12).
0. All vents shall be Screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh of one quarter inch
maximum.
C. Projections at the roof line (which include but are not limited to eaves, cornices,
soffits and roofs over open decks) shall be sheathed with materials approved for
I hour firc-resistive construction.
D. Windows and Glass: Glucd openings shall be provided with closable, solid, exterior
non-flammable shutters or shall be tempered glass.
E. Exterior Walls and Siding: S iding and exterior wall construction shall have a
minimum I hoar fire -resistive rating ground level to roof line. Exterior doors
shall be noncombustible or 1 3/4" solid wood.
F. Foundations: Foundations, skirting and crawl space openings shall be fully enclosed
and constructed with materials approved for I hour fire -resistive construction on
the exterior side of the walls and shall extend from the top of grade to the
underside of tlae floor decking or walls.
Maintenance -
A. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris.
B. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable debris.
C. All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15'
from any structures.
3. Weeds and grasses within the 10' perimccer sliall be maintained to a height no
more than G inches.
Miscellaneous•
A. Firewood shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away froth
any structure.
B. Propane tanks shall be installed ;according to NFPA 48 standards and on a
contour away from the structure with standard defensible space vegetation
mitigation around any above -ground tank. Any Nvood enclosures around the
tank shall be constructed with materials approved for 2 hour firc-resistive
construction on the exterior side of the walls.
C. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris.
D. Wood fences shall not be connected to the structure.
E. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container.
F. Each structure shall have a minimum of one 10 lb. ABC fire extinguisher.
G. Addresses shall be clearly marked and visible with minimum 2" non-
combustible letters and shall be clearly visible at the primary point of access
from the public or common access road and installed oat a non-combustible post.
IT. Any outbuildings or additional buildings shall adhere to the same standards as
structures.
Access and Utilities:
A- Utility lines shall be buried.
6. The Applicant shall comply with the following wildlife impact mitigstiotl conditions:
A. There shall be only one kenneled dog on this property.
B. Fencing outside of the building envelope must comply Willi current Pirkrn Corntry
Fencing Guidelines.
C. The Applicant shall inst,d) an approved bear -proof trash container and all trash
shall be kept in it.
D. Native vegetation shall be maintained outside of the building envelope.
E. In order to avoid attracting bears, there shall be no fmit bearing trees or shrubs.
7. No development, including grading, landscaping, vegetation removal or disturbance, and
septic system shall occur outside of the approved building envelope except as may be
necessary to implement the wildfire mitigation measures required elsewhere in this
•
approval.
S. All terms and conditions of the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be complied with.
9. Prior to submitting any building permits, the Applicant sliall obtain approval for a scenic
overlay review.
ATi'ACFiMENTS
A. Colorado State Forest Service memo
B. Geologic Report
•
•
September 8, 1999
Herb Klein
Klein-Zimet
201 N. Mill St., Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
A7 AMMENr A
SEp 0 91999
Re- Lot 1, Hefner Subdivision 1041 Wildfire Hazard Review
Dear Herb,
`j FOREs-r
SERVICL
State Services nuild;.tg
-'?_' S. 611t Street. Root,, 416
Crand Junction. Colorado S IS01
Telephone: (970) 246-7325
Please submit this letter with any application to Pitkin County. When the county makes
the referral to me for my comments I will defer to this letter.
1 visited the site with Herb Klein the owner's agent on August 24"1. Access to Lot 1 is
via an existing road into the subdivision. This road is in good repair with not prohibitive
grades. The lot has a north aspect and is slightly sloping in the building envelope.
There are scattered large Douglas -fir on site with scattered aspen in between. The
aspen appears to be dying out in favor of the conifers. There are many
young Douglas -
fir coming up in the lot. There is also scattered chokecherry, serviceberry and Gambel
oak. The density of all the woody fuels is such that I would rate the wildfire hazard as
medium.
There is a need to mitigate the existing wildfire hazard and create a defensible space
around future structures. To accomplish that I have the following recommendations.
1) For a distance of 10 feet around all structures establish and maintain vegetation at 6
inches or less. This can be accomplished with a mowed lawn, low growing
perennials or hardscape (e.g., rock mulch, pavers, sidewalk). Woody vegetation
should not be planted here. In addition, flammable material (e,g., firewood) should
not be stored here.
2) Thin existing mature conifers so that the outside edges or tree crowns are no cioser
than 10 feet. This should be done for a distance of 40 feet around all structures.
3) The lower limbs of all conifers should be removed up to height of 10 feet or half the
total height whichever is least to eliminate ladder fuels.
4) All deadfall should be removed within 1CO feet of all structures.
Feel free to call me with any questions.
Sincerely,
A. Vince Urbina
Assistant District Forester
A71'AC MLNT B
COU-INS & AS5OaATE5
GfQLU6Tul ANo NATURAL PES"CE COH ZjLTANr3
P.O. Box 23 - 1116 MINEOTA DRIVE
5ILT, CowRAD0 81652
PHONE/FAX (970) 876-5400
bacol@rof.rtct
March 27, 2000
Glenn Hum
Davis Horn Inc.
215 S. Monarch Suite 104
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Alexander Furtotti
Quorum Properties
1875 Century Park East Suite 1 I85
Los Angeles, California 90067
RE. FUR10TT1 PROTECT, LOT 1.1-IEFN[e 500[vision,
SMDOW MOUNTNN, Prr)GN COUNTY
Gentlemen:
In reference to the question regarding rockfall protection for the conceptual structure proposed
on the captioned site, I have reviewed the follov inn, with pertinent: excerpts quoted:
1, t_ettrr from Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D., Consultin; Geologist, to Herb Klein, E•sy., doted May 9, 1980.
"Both the Colorado State University hazzlrd maps and the various hazard reaps by Bruce
Bryant of the Aspen quadranglertl indicate that snow slides and rock falls ... will not
reach the one to two acres proposed for development."
"In the most severe case, falling rocks ... could possibly reach the east side of this craft,
but they would have to cross the genrle �wale which trends to the northwest."
"The rear wall of any structure should ... be constructed of reinforced concrete to a
minimum height of four feet above grade .... Windows should also be omitted on this
cast -facing side of the house." (Emphasis add�,d,j
"As an added precaution, any landscaping done (on the slope -facing sidel of the house
should be designed so as to deflect or otherwise impede minor slides or rock falls ... .
this could be in the form of a bcrtrr or rock garden, for example, to a height orsix feet."
2. Letter fra►n Jeffrey L. Hynes. Engineering Geologist, Colorado Geological Survey, to Richard Grice,
Acpcn1F%in Planning Office, doted July 11, 1980;
n(yant, It,. 1977 Mop showing areas ofv'1Ct1t4J Potential "Colurie hazan15 in the Aspen quadrw••!:, pitidlt
COurrty, C nlorado: !!_;. Geol. .,niy Map I iF5 A; A7 n -:Itowin8 ivalattdtc arr:�+ in tltr /,- IMn Quldrnnoe, Pit :.r,unty,
(_0)0'71d0r U.S. Ceol.--mrvTy Kip 1-735 G
Pagc 2
"We have reviewed the data submitted _ . , and the general and engineering geology in
the vicinity of the tract and there appear to be no geologic hazards or constraints which
would preclude the development plan."
"If.. , the recommendations of Lincoln-DeVore and Nick lampiri5 are followed, we havc
no objection to the approval of this application,"
3. Letter foal Jeffrey L. Hynes, CnzincEring Ceologist, Colorado Geological Survey, to Richard Grice,
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, dated July 14, 1980:
"We are in agreement with the findings and recommendations of Nick Umpiris' report
on the property and if his recommendations are followed, we have no objection to the
approval of this application."
4. Letter from Jeffrey L, Hynes, Engineering Geologist, Colorado Geological Survey, to Richard Grice.
Aspen/Pitkirt Planning Office, dated December 18, 1980, written of cr twofield examinotiuns of the
property:
"On the basis of these field observations and discussions ... it is my opinion that the
building site shown on the Hefner plan is not impQcted by a significant rockfall hazard.
The hazard is not zero but the vegetation, location, and topography of the site and
vicinity all tend to make the risk associated with it very low."
"With respect to the mitigation measures presented in the Lampiris letter (item 1 above)
my feeling is tJhat either a deflection berm or structural reinforcement should be
adequate, and I see no significant advantage in using both." (Emphasis added)
In my report dated May 23. 1999, 1 noted that the property is included in a snow
avalancheJrockfail hazard zone on the aeoloVc,naps prepared by Oleander, ct al. (19742). These
are verygeneralized maps, are not as site -specific as those referred to in the Umpiris let-rer, and
were used to establish "wont case" criteria forthe site. In addition, none of the correspondence
quoted above was available for my prior analysis. Even so, I described the rockfall hazard as
"minimal," in agreement with site -specific studies by both Dr. L.ampiris and Mr. Hynes. I
recommended;
"Although the hazard to the building envelope itself is thin thought to be minimal, mitigation
in the form ofa berm or protective wall along the cast-southeactside is recommended. It would
appear that a six-foot berm of rock and compacted earth could bt: worked into the existing
topography with little diMculry." (Emphasis added)
1 further advised that:
"Ail alternative to a berm would be a rock, reinforced concrete, or other wall at Icasc siA feet
high and able to withstand an impact load of at least 6U0 pound per square foot. IF die
olmder,II,C..Comm,N.D.,andFlorloisr, GA. 1974.nnarin�rnrY,andCrr..t-I,anmviranme,it, Iandenc?lneaif, r��luyy :traly, t„rle, Carfield, Gunnison, and FSe1on Co11111icr.. Co,wadn: (:ol0r-1du CM. 5urve), fnwonnienr i(r:e �lc,� I: u. S. 23 p
?agc 3
Proposed design of the structure and landscape grading is not adequate, addition;,l orotection
in the form of reinforced foundation walls extending above final grade and elimination of doors,
uindo►Ys, and other significant opening close to grade level may be desirable:' Again specific
recommendations cannot be made Without some idea of proposed design but I should add that
any one of these options would suffice, and duplicarion, such as construction of a berm
prutecting a reinforced foundation, is not necessary.lEmphasis added)
The intent here clearly was to suggest that there are three alternatives to mitigate the ritfnor
rockfall hazard to which the site is Exposed (1) a rock -and -earth berm; (2) a six-foot rock or
concrete wall; or (3) depending on the final proposed design, reinforced foundations and
elimination of doors and windows extending some distance above grade on the east-southeast
side of the building, height to depend on aspect and extent of other mitigation measures, ifany.
Combinations of these measured were not considered necessary unless actual structure location
and design resulted in only partial protection by a single method. This is clearly in line with the
conclusion reached by Mr. Flytles (item 4).
The conceptual drawing cunveyed to me indicates a reinforced concrete wall integrated into and
protecting the entire southeast side of the structure, as well as extending past the building and
then turning west and extending far enough across the Swale to encompass the enure southwest
facade in the rockfall protection zone. The protection zone northwest of die proposed wall,
including that portion incorporated into the building foundation, eneo1Tlpa55c5 a larger area than
suggested in sketches included with both Dr. Lampiris's report of May 9. 1980, and my report
of May 28; 1999. Considering the mininial nature of the hazard in the first place, and the
previous recommendations of both Dr. Lampiris and Mr, Pynes as quoted above, so long as this
foundation/wall is constructed with an elevation difference of at least six feet on the uphill side,
with no significant openings and in such a manner as to be able to withsrand an impact load of
600 pound per square foot or more I can see no steed for additional mitigation. Specifically,
based on all the available darn, I so no reason for a berm in addition to the proposed wall, or for
eliminating windoiAs or doors from the southwest facade of the structure. As always landscaping
and final grading should be designed to divert drainage away from the strumFe, and in the
process further reduce the likelihood of an errant rock or small snow5lide front reaching it.
Since the layout conveyed to me is coirceptual, I would suggest that once actual design is further
along I be contacted to be sure that the intentions of the proposed mitigabun are being met
without unnecessary duplication and expense.
If you have any questions or require any further information, please do not
Sincerely,
Bruce A. Collins,
CPG 7016
rate to call.
Gfo�oc .
DRUCk P�
8-1: DERINI�t
m`tis 1
ATTACNENT __q_
FLOOR AREA means the sum of the gross horizontal surfaces of each floor of a building or structure. In calculating
floor area, the following rules shall apply:
I. For properties within the Rural Area and properties within the Aspen Area Urban Growth Boundary not
subject to floor area ratio restrictions through underlying zoning, the following shall apply to the calculation of floor
area:
A General: In measuring floor area, all dimensions shall be taken from the outside face of framing or other
primary wall members or from the center line of walls separating adjoining units of a building or portion
thereof. Fireplaces, elevators, stairs and similar features are included in the floor area on each floor.
B. Measurement of Total Floor Area for a Property: In measuring floor area for a property, for parcels under
twenty (20) acres in size, all structures shall be included in the calculation. For parcels over twenty acres in
size, all structures shall be included in the calculation except for agricultural buildings.
C. Roof Overhangs and Decks: The floor area of a building, or portion thereof, not provided with surrounding
exteric- walls shall include the area under the horizontal projection of rnofs or floors, when the roof or floor
exceeds five feet (6). These architectural projections are exempt for five (5') of the perimeter of each story
of the structure. This exemption cannot be used to transfer space between floors.
D. Decks, Balconies, Stairways and Similar Features: Structures that exceed thirty inches (30") above natural
or finished grade, and that are not covered by a roof or architectural projection from a building, are exempt
from floor area for up to fifteen percent (15%) of the approved floor area for the subject parcel or lot. Any
areas in excess of fifteen percent (15%) shall be counted toward floor area.
E. Crawl Space: Crawl spaces shall be exempt from the calculation of floor area, even if exposed above
natural grade, so long as the height of the crawl space does not exceed five feet six inches (56").
F. Attic Space: That portion of attic space where the distance between the floor and ceiling exceeds five feet
six inches (5'6") in height shall count as floor area.
0 0 ATTACHMENT 10
PITKIN COUNTY PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PROJECT: Arapahoe Ridge, LLC Scenic Overlay Review
LOCATION: Lot 1, Hefner Subdivision (PID#2735-123-05-001)
APPLICANT: Arapahoe Ridge, LLC.
REPRESENTATIVE: Glenn Horn PHONE/FAX: 925-6587/925-5180
DATE: October 12, 2001 PLANNER/PHONE: Tamara Pregl, 920-5103
Type of Application: Scenic Overlay Review
Description of Project/Development: The Applicant is requesting Scenic Overlay Review approval for the
construction of a single-family residence.
Areas in which the Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested:
Land Use Code Sections to be addressed in letter of request (application):
Section 3-60-040: Scenic Overlay Review
Section 5-90: Scenic Overlay Review Submittal Requirements
Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: County Attorney, Zoning, Maroon/Castle Creek Caucus,
Land Management, City of Aspen
Review by: Hearing Officer. Public Hearing? Yes. A public notice sign shall be posted on the property at least
15 days prior to the hearing pursuant to Section 4-90 of the Land Use Code. The Applicant shall mail notices to
all adjacent property owners at least 30 days prior to the hearing with the return address of the Community
Development Department (a copy of notice shall be obtained from the Community Development
Department). The names and addresses shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than 60 days prior to the date of the public hearing.
What fee is the applicant requested to submit: $1,110 (please make check out to "Pitkin County Treasurer').
Planning Office (deposit) $1,110 (additional hrs are billed at a rate of $185/hr); Housing ($160)
Number of copies of the application and maps to be submitted: 8
Please submit: A list of adjacent property owners and 2 copies of the `Agreement To Pay' form (do not include
with each packet copy.)
For a complete application, please include the following in each packet:
1. Summary letter explaining the request and addressing all Land Use Code standards listed above.
2. Parcel description, including description and vicinity map.
3. Consent from property owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (if applicable).
4. Proof of ownership (from a title company or attorney licensed in the State of Colorado).
5. Photos of the site as seen from pubic viewplanes (highway 82).
6. Photo simulations.
7. Scaled elevation drawings; floor plans if available.
8. Copy of this pre-app form.
9. Copies of previous approvals or applicable documentation
NOTE: This pre -application conference summary is advisory in nature and not binding on the County. The information provided in this
summary is based on current zoning standards and staffs interpretations based upon representations of the applicant. Additional
information may be required upon complete review of the application.
CERTIFICATION
1, DAVID W. He Bp IDE. A REGISTERED IAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE
DF COIORADO. HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT .All PREP1AREDFROnp�R� F6
A FIELD SUIIYEY PpEFOpPEO UNDERH.Y SUPERVISION IN"j,"a_./ /
199— ANO 13 TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF ANOWLEOGE AND
BELIEF. THIS CERTIFICATION 13 VOID UNLESS WET STAMPED ON AN
ORIGINAL SLUEPR INI.
SIGNED THIS/F DAY OF ARNA 1993.
0— C);;� /21%j
V I .BRIDE RLS 1.11V
/
LOT 1
"PRIVATE"
UTILITY EASEMENT
RESERVED FOR LOT 2
45.000 SOFT. •/-
30' "IA I'ATE" Ib \ •,C /
LITY
]AN3E33ETNREETOI SOUTH
CC
CURVE DELTA ANDRE RADIUS ARC TANGENT CNOpO C1,,0 BEARING
C 1 89.33'23' 57.49' B9. B6' 57 OS' 80. 99' N 14.46'I I'E
ATT
SCALE
I INCH - 20 FEET
0 IO 20 30 M
CONTOUR INTERVAL 13 1 FOOT
LEGEND d NOTES
• FOUND ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION LOT CORNEA W. 5 REBAR
WITH YELLOW CAP 2376
SWp1V13ON PLAT WAS THE SOLE SOLACE OF RECORD
I IEORMAT ION
ELEVATIONS RE BASED ON KAYO 1929 ON NGS STATION
ASPEN AZIMUTH' OF ?•9/3.SG
i \
X'\�/�1" I ) �I ICI 1 \ \{ \ \\\
SEi .�,�Q\\\\--_---
7 04--— \ \ _ — — — — \ — --- ` \ —
.`.t��:
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
�j LOT AREAS:
"'DYE THE.0,F LINE
I..— SOFT.. -I- LOT 1. HEFNER SUBDIVISION
•/-
BELOW THE ROAD CONTOUR LINE
34.989 SD.FT. •/- P I TK I N COUNTY. COLORADO
PREPARED 8Y
ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS. INC.
Z10 S. GALENA STREET
L0. BOX 2506
ASPEN. COLO. 81611
PHONE/FAX 13011 925.3616
JOB NO 13207 JU E 14. 19"
•
HEFNER
ATrACHMENT z
al'
5LIB10/V/5/0IV
I ,
DIK let Ar /G 447 ,
AK 102 AT ro /OS /IG LO
+Sj/J707')
\rN 7 .if7G e2• ZWOO, N Tl7G/
J /L`r!>L a-5a •Lw_w (! 1/•/6il oo r S
oo'
ZVI9/[. am 'rAO. 5 42'i 303 AA,
6R /10 Ar /6 15 / / f4eeM. Nl �^• �wc . !'
/ti / •r//vA>n- f�t r1 •IT t1'f!' P�CGO
wae•N • ho / [..e MGAi
LOT 1
/ 3D' •rA'/rAT[' � /.1! 4 JOs • AcwCi �
e..a.Iiwr
/ /*y / 1ND ITpRY ,y yl•!a•e!'G / I0. 6141-
.l i'� �,4 �/ /✓/LA'nH�o •4a.61'�[Ac: of1!
Cw eco� 1• M1�
• 10 .11' AO
'
^•�^oR N[wLy a 1r y'J7
J AwDe.. nA.eP[N>•
�• I fi.4e l f/LI/Y
r
i' I2 I - TWO -STORY
/ J L O T 2
9.11
I
�R !1e r[Le T.V.
l K !• 1/N h. I Oex LINE
AtI.4CPi0Yv u � , `11
she A��o i •
19,I
rt No [ x
R /f W nr I I
(5 e7. 53' 0o'G, 621.50') N e1. 50' //' G e20.71' /TEED
•I 70 ILO COR - J-N 01. 10'/1" G 2611. 17' /1EL13 S %4 GOR
`(N. e9•love•e. tGGe. 7c•7
LV
SCALE r• • 60'
LEGEND AND NOTE 5
• rouND Nu. 5 w.eAR N T.o
o .er HO s RGa.w w NTfA/ '/LlMAN e!>6' M
OIOMINr AS oeScR/6eo.
B POUND D. L. M O"S. GP.
CALL! ,ry ( / AAe Re CORD 'ROM eK "I AT
ro e1l A! Racer".- NO. /s7s IO.
L ALL! /N C I AwG RECORD /ROM TNG
MVw GA✓ O/ LAND M4 NAGe MGNr 5✓RVAY
A//wpvLO 1-19-14AI /4, /160.
OP DlAR/IGi - CI NTLRL/NC MON✓
MG NT! FOUIVo OJ NO/R1N1 AVENUE
/r /! A!!✓MLO 1I'0 ONOWN Ae S✓CH THAT
rNe /NT6Nf OF we so, CAOe MLNT pe SCRILGO
IN OR 249 A / e14 /e /0' ON EACH 6104
Ow - WGITswLY /AOPGRTV L/NG.
♦ SGf .PIRG - al"Ay CONrA- /01NT
H roWG4 ro40
2 � 6AAes cA/
e rr• xr fD RGrL1ce
� 1O3G'� 1Mf ORAL/NAL
17 1 ICED /11. eRa15 U/
T92p�
[ 1rM
SNc /1)e
W� RTI
ERA!! CAP SGT TO
RG/LACG OR10/NAL
TNG!! LOANER
MON ✓MGNT
Z
3
n
0
1
D
i
O
�NDwTN 11. GIJ
.,�
C ow/N 526r•)
--�
N oe•o4.4I-N
-ELM Lor t/
Is. 00' "ALO
5 V, cOR sec IsJ
sdr /-.!5r-
T IO! R SS N
/e -11. CA/
Of TN! GTN /M
'/GlMAI t57G-
•
N/1L✓M TAG M RKCO
00. /j
DED/CATION OF R/GHTS-Oi•WAY /OR urILIrY PURP05E5
UHLe.S Orme"-le !/LC///40, ALL Ur1L/rY !AlGMGNro, AS WALL AS ALL PUDLIC
AND /MvA7G ,116NT5.OF.WAY, 5-A, Nemeo" ARG OCD1CAr o TO TNG PER/{ VAL
use OP ALL ✓r/(IrY COMMN/GI, /L'R TNL /UR/O!G O/ /NIrALL/NG, CONlrR✓Cr1NG,
,1G/LACING, RL% -NG AND MA/NTA/N,N U DGROROUND Ur/L/r/G5 AID 0R4/1A40
INCL ✓o- /6✓T NOT LIM,reo M) w eR, Se-eR, CLCCTR/L, D•.5, rGLep,, E
AIO 1ALG ✓1-ON L/NG1, Tg6lrNlR N/rN TNL AmIrf OP 1NOAGf! A'pe !✓G / lTAL LA
rn , CONS-crloN, Re/LAcLNINI RA% /R AND "AI-re-ca. AS WeLL AS TNG R/ONr
ro RIM 11TAR/eAIN6 -R 49 ANO lU6H IN NO lV r A- TNG ✓r/L1TY COM/IN�
/{S ex6RL/se T -a"r1 NGRGIN ORAN7eD s0 A! TO /NTGR/ERG I-rH TNG Use OP
rNG R1G✓r•OP-"AV roA wQAOWAY /1APO5G5 CXCG/T 70 rNe GXreNr RLAoo AE1LY
Necess"y r0 ENJOY rNe WrANT NeRGOY MADE.
COVENANT AGA/Ndr RURTHGR avaai /SrON
/UwluAlr m SLCr/ON 1-6 (1) OA rNe P1 - COUNTY LAND Use GOOD, No /✓RTNAA
s000'V1 'ON p/ rN11 PAOA&ArY a .- ee /LRM/TrGD rN15 co -ANT ONALL RUN
WI rN rNe LAND AND /WALL De DINDINO 117N rNG suCGG aLORe AID AOf10N5
O/ AG/1N NG/NGA.
tow K 17 FA i
CERT/P/GAT/0/V OF DED/CAr1oN AND 0rY1VER3N/P
NNO ALL -I OY r ze IRelGl re TWAT Ke/rH NC/NGA AG/NG IN--ONNCR
O/ C4RrA/N LANOO IN /iT /N COUNrY, COLORADO, DGSCR/DeD AS /OLLO"-S
A �A Rcet Or LAND-L,arLO IN Lor /5, IGCT ON 12, r0!!1/V!H/P I sav-, RAIv6G
e5 ~sr Or rHG A,X-I /R/NC//qL MCR/O/AN /vRTHGR OeeCRIDao AS /OECD/✓.!
6L6/NN/NG Ar A 6UIfGAU OP LAND MANAOGMfNr eAA.S CAI srAM/LO AS TNG
N/rNC!! fo`iNCA /OR rIE 50✓rN ONE OUAATGA CORNGAI O/ 6A/D SGCr/ON /2,
A//ROYGD /LDRUARV JI, Iijo C4-ss CA/ 5Gr r0 Re/LACG TNG ORIGINAL 26-x
/1'X 10' - W/rN455 CORNeR MONUMGNr AS Oe SCA/OGD /N DK 241 AT A6 e14
AS fd Cd PrION NO, Is7310), WNGNCG 4 6URCAV O/ 44NO MANAGCMG/NT DAA55
CAP smmM &G A5 A eIGC1AL PURPOSE MONUMCN7, APPROVED /GDR✓ARY 14, lido
(6w As CAP ser rO AC.-44CG TNG OR1G/NAL /754 UNA//ROVO4 9VRAA✓ O/ LAND
MANAGGMGNT DRAS9 CA/ AS oC5CA/DLO / OK 24'1 Ar PG G74 AS RGCG/r/ON
NO. /!75/OJ DGq s s77.56's6^G. 7'r O7.• TM!/✓CG 567•s7'e0•A✓. /0e.1!' TO
LING 2 - 1 0/ TIG HOME STAKE CLAIM, M S No As /, AND rNe T UC /01N1 oP
DGG/NN/NG
7 4 51t•C'Do-W 31/7.' ro "'m MOAT GAfr[RLY fo,1NeR a rNe IRO/GRTY AXfCR/eGo
11 AK Ie2 Ir PG /63
A. ACCe Pr/oN NO. --446I �
TNG NCG I 16•SO.00'W 501.14- ALONG TNe 5O✓THGRLY DOUIOAAy O/ TNG PRO/GRTY
066L910ED 1N SAID OK /62 AT M /e3 ro TNG !LV/TNe4lTLRLY DOUND4AY OP TNG /w0/CRrY
OG1C-Alk- /N DK /IS Ar /O 447 A5 RGCGPr/ON NO. /oG259:
rNeNCe 5 31-4e'00-w 225.51' ALONG TNG DOUNOARIEe OF rNe IRO/GRr1C5 OGXR/DLO
11 1- ew -5 AT /O 447, DK /AG Ar /O 91 AS RCC&P-- NO roT3/D AND 9K 1163
Ar /6 5/6 AS RLCG/r- NO. IOOS/O r0 A LOANER O/ rM! /ROPGArY OGSCR/DCD 1N
SAID DK /65 AT P*T 5/G 1
rHGHCG 5 0"57.00'G 75.76' rO rNG sourHe4[r CORIGR OP 7AVG IRO/GATY GCSCR/O!o
IN SAID DK If,
Ar R3 5/G AND TIC NOATHGALY 5ouNDARv 0/ TNG IRO/l RTy
DG6CAIDGO IN OR !12 4r AS Ss AS RGCC/r/ON NO. 225456 3
-&NCG CAST /0.00' m TIe NORTIe,#,ir cDANG/f OP 1NG /AO/6RrY OGSCR/DGD
/N SAID tM 192 AT
rIeNCE S 00. Irso-G. I27/S' ALONG TNG ao-DARY Or TNG IRO/GRTY OGlcR/OGD /N
SA/O DR 312 Ar PO -46;
rHe NCL s ol-w-o0•W. //700' ALONG TNG DOUNOAIfY O/ rNe IRO/6RrY Oe3CAlDGO
11 SAID OK 512 41 AG 56 i
TIGNCG 5 al.m. 0o-G. 96.04' ALONG TNG DO✓NO44Y OP TNG PRO/GRrY OGSCR/DGO
/N !A/O 6K !12 AT PG 56 TO rIe SOUTHGALY L/NC OA SAID Se CT/ON 11:
TIGNCG N 61•Sp'/1'G .20.71' 4401YG TNG SOUTNCRLY L/Ne OP 5A/O SGCr/ON 1`2
rO THE SOU TN ONE O✓ARrCA CORNER OA SAID SCOT/ON /21
]HENCE N 00.01'41-W. I.. 06' ALONG TNG EASTERLY Lr/Ye OP rHe sOUTHWGSr
ONE OUARrGR O/ S41D 54C7/0N 12 TO L/Ne 2-3 OP THG H00e5r4KG CLAIM
M 5 NO. 121, ,
rHe NCC N 01.17'00• IY. G01.5' ALONG LING 2-3 O/ rIe NOMeSrAKe CL4/M
M-5. NO. 4211 TO TIC TRUE P01IY7 OP DG GINNING . -
CONrA/NING 1042 ACRGB MORE O/1 4.655.
MAVC DY TIG SG PR~Nr5 "10 OUT PLATTED AN.O S/✓.00/VIDEO TNG "Me
/Nr0 LOrS AS SHOIVN ON THIS PLAT UNOER TNG "AMC AND 5rYLG OP
HG/NGR SUDD/V/510N AND OO NERGeY D&DICAre r0 file PUDLIC ALL
A/0J✓r1 O-WAY ANO CASGMGNTS 6NOWN He/1GON '.0A PUDL/G 11
6'e EXCEPT
rHb6C Oe NOTED AS '�RI ✓ATE- WI/CAI ARC AGSEA✓GO FOR TNG DENC//T
Of LOT / ANolo^ LJr 2.
Ex CC ✓TLC rH/5 DAY Of A /16_ -
Af rH HGPNGA
91 re OP COLORADO I N3
COUNTY OF //TKIN f
TNC PORe.-G INSrRUMGNT /VAS ACRNOWLGOGGD DG/ORC MG rH/5
DAY OF - p , /76- , DY KE1TH HGPNG'/f 43 O--eR OP TNG ADOVG•
DescRlDeD RG4L PAOPGArY.
W/TNG lS MY NANO AND O' "C/A' S&AL "`" '�•'
MY COMM 11110N Gx PIRGS - NOTARY /UDL/C
ADDRG55
SURVEYOR'S CERT/F/GATE
I, GGRAAO H PEl MAN, RGG/STG AGO LAND 50AVG YOA, 00 HGIfeDY
CG'Rr/PY TNAT r NA✓T_ PAG PARED TH/5 PLAT OP NG/NGR JU!!O/✓/3/ON,
rN4r TNG LOC4r- OA' THG O✓rsIOG DOUNOARY, ROADS AND ormAR PGATUReS
ARE ACCUR4rE4Y AND CORRECTLY SNOWN He Re ON, 7IH4r rHe SAME ARG
DA5G0 ON P/GLD 5u'.t ✓e YS AID TH4r rNe PLArrec 51re AND A04.05
CONFORM TO THOSE STAKED ON TNG GROUND.
11 -"less 7He AGO.', I HA ✓e --Per MY HAND AND 5041- TH15 3AD
DAY OF ck-act , 1164
OGRARO H /eSM4N PE. ! L.s 257E
BOARD OF C041N7'Y COMMISSIONERS AP/ROVAL ANO-DEDIC.ArION
rH/1 /LAr OP IeFNeR sUDO/✓/$ION NA. se6N ACVIGWGD AND A/PAOVGO dW
rNE //1K/N COUNTY eOARD O/ COMM/111ONGRS TH/! in DAY oA AfL,L- ,/165
11 ACCOROANCG W/rN OROGR O/ 015rR/Cr CD11Ar, COUNrY OP //rK/N STATE OF
COLORADO, CIVIL 4Cr/ON NO 62 CV 3, 62 C✓ 132, 62 CV 210 1 AND sV0dZCr TO 7NE
TERM! OF THAT OADJA AS RGCOADCO 1N 600K 44 C-L1 OP TNC R-.q qDs
0/ //r N COUNTY. / i�
CNA/RMAN, //rXIN LO✓NTy ,
OP GOMM/!!/oNlR3
tI' •:
ACCEPTANCE ROR RECORD/NG
rH15 PLAT OP N6FNGA SU6D/V/I1ON 15 ACCGPrAD /0A AILING /N TAIL OFFICE
OA rNC C1CAK AND /CCoRO4A OA //TK/N COUNrV, CoLOAADO, r1/5 I5 DAY
OF AplL , /16-, /N /L4f DOOK r1 ON /AO ' 4T AS RC -o" NOS. Y7�41
T T CLC Ka COR
Existing Aspe ,-QrQlyg
AlI IvopuvG LoE��„ m m h � a� �NrG
All dimpy mu as n h rteesebeE .d
atrtlo 0.N Nae�. Ga�N:a.
JI�j I
1
t t
Ddsting Colorado Blue Spruce ryy�rn j
4 I
< I�
1
I
I e .ral ,I
Property Line
Building Envelope
Building Setback
(Landscape Envelope)
ARAPAHOE RIDGE
LLC
PRKIN COUNTY
COLORADO 61611
Site Plan
0
NORM
scaalw I* iwd• .
L-1 I
ATTACHMENT
AaWMWENT 8
Arapahoe Ridge LLC West Elevation
OATTACMW 1 Z
State of Colorado )
) ss AFFIDAVIT OF JANET RACZAK
County of Pitkin )
I, JANET RACZAK, Affiant, being of lawful age and duly sworn upon my oath, do depose and
state as follows:
On October 31, 2001, I visited the Pitkin County Assessor's Office to review the records of
adjacent land owners who were to receive the Crown land use application public notice.
2. Based on my research an updated to the most current list was provided to Davis Horn,
Incorporated on behalf of their client for use in the public noticing process and a copy of that list
is hereby submitted to the Pitkin County Community Development Office.
3. I made a good faith effort to obtain an accurate list ofthe names and addresses of the land owners
adjacent to the subject parcel (see Exhibit "A!').
FURTHER, AFFIANT SAYETH NOT.
net L. Raczak Date
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged and signed before me on 2001
by Janet L. Raczak.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: cWh/o2vo
(SEAL)
G
NOTARY PUBLIC
HEENER SIT BDIVISION, LOT I
LIST OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
Subject: 2735123 05001
Dorothy Clifton &
Audrey Rinker
810 McFarlane Aven7e
Sebastopol CA 95472
273512300011
Christopher Maridee
4215 N. Civic Center Blvd. #374
Scottsdale AZ 85251
273512446006
Billy Ray Eubank
Bonnie Jean Bradley
2901 Ferndale Place
Houston TX 77098
273512305002
1 0 0 ATT=mw 13
Account:
R011819
Account Type: 0000
Tax Year:
2001
Version:
20011232999
Parcel:
273512305001
Area ID:
008
Mill Levy:
25.935000
APR District:
Estimated Tax:
9,589.47
Status:
A
This Mill Levy
is from the most recent tax roll
,,fit t............. W�'
............... ...........
ARAPAHOE RIDGE LLC
C/O QUORUM PROPERTIES
1875 CENTURY PARK E STE 1185
LOS ANGELES, CA 90067
TOBY LN
ASPEN, 81611
Assessment Information
B:HEFNER LOT: 1
71
1,275,000 369,750
.............................. ........
0 0
1,275,000 369,750
1,400,000 40 6, 000
0 0
1,400,000 406,000
PITKIN COUNTY
A
1.030
,369,750
,406,000
L111111 10111111111111111111111111 IIIIIL ._i 11111 IIII (III
•16434 eeis�izee&Ift 3ao DAVIS gILYI
i of 2 R le,a oW» N 9.00 FITKIN tomy cc
WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED, Made this a94� day of August, 2OW,
between QUORUM PROPERTIFS, a California corporation
of the County of Los Angela and State of California,
grantor, and ARAPAHOE RIDGE LLC, a Colorado limited liability company
whose legal address is c/o Quorum Properties, 1875 Century Park East, Suite 1185, Los Angeles, CA 90067
of the County of Los Angeles and State of California, grantee:
WITNESSETII. That the grantor for and In consideration of the sum of
No monetary consideration (S-O-)----------------- __-------- —------------------------------------------------------ DOLLARS.
the receipt and sufficiency of which Is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these
presents does grant, bargain, sell, convey and cunfirm, unto the grant", its successors and assigns forever, all the real
property together with improvements. if any, situate, lying and being in the County of Pilkin
and State of Colorado described as follows:
ESTATE 1:
Lot 1, HEFNER SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat thereof filed April 15, 1985, in Plat
Book 17 at Page 11; and
ESTATE 2:
Together with a 30 foot private access easement and private utility casement as shown on
the Plat for Hefner Subdivision filed April 15, 1985, in Plat Book 17 at Page 11;
as known by street and number is: Toby Lane, Aspen, CO 81611.
TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining,
and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title,
interest claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor, either in law or equity, of, in, artd to the above bargained premises,
with the heredilaments and appurtenances.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the
grantee, its successors and assigns forever. And the grantor, for itself, its successors and assigns, does covenant, grant,
bargain, and agree to and with the grantee, it successors and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these
presents, it is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of
inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey
the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains,
sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kindor nature soever, except general real estate
taxes for 2000 and subsequent years, applicable building and zoning regulations, and those matters set forth on Exhibit
"A' attached hereto and made a pan hereof.
The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above -bargained premises in the quiet and
peaceable possession of the grantee, its successors and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming
the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any
gender shall be applicable to all genders.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor has executed this deed on the date set forth above.
QUORUM PROPERTIES, a C fornia
torpor
By
Alexander Furlotti, President i
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss. I
County of Pitkin ) I
The foreg ' was acknowledged before me this_a5y Uay of August, 2000, by Alexander
Furloui, as M PROPERTIES, a California corporation.
M�ir O Witness my hand and official seal.
Z
C
n ^
O
STATE( )f O Notary war
Na. 932A. Re 4-94 WARRANTY DEED (Fm Phaopnpidr Rt d)
b 0 0
IIIII� IIIII IIIIII IIIII III111111IIIII" III I1111IIII IIII
445434 06/28/2000 03:37P ND DRV•.. SILVI
2 of 2 it
D 0.00 N O.PITKIN COUNTY CO
EXHITIjT A TO OENERAL WARRANTY DEED
1. General real estate taxes for 2000 and subsequent i years,
including any tax, special assessment, charge or lien
imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special
taxing district.
2. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract or
remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to
penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted as
reserved in United States Patent recorded December 3, 1092,
in Book 55 at Page 35 and August 23, 1957, in Book 182 at
Page 199.
3. Easement and right of way for ditch purposes, as reserved
by Stephen Marolt in Deed to Frank Marolt, Jr., recorded
June 7, 1940, in Book 166 at Page 146.
4. Easement and right of way for ditch purposes, as reserved
by Elsie Helen Marolt in Deed to Michael Marolt, recorded
September 27, 1940, in Book 166 at Page 159.
S. Easement and right of way for pipeline purposes, as granted
by Michael Marolt to Walter B. Mille by instrument recorded
July 23, 1958, in Book 104 at Page 336.
G. Agreement between Keith Hefner, Peter Vought and the Board
of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado,
recorded August 24, 1961, in Book 412 at Page 938.
7. Resolution No. 82-29 by the Board of County Commissioners
of Pitkin County, Colorado recorded March 24, 1982, in Book
424 at Page 58.
0. Resolution No. 02-40 by the Board of County Commissioners
of Pitkin County, Colorado recorded May 10, 1982, in Book
426 at Page 262.
9. Ter -me, agreements, provisions, conditions and obligations
as contained in Stipulation and Order recorded August 3,
1983, in Book 449 at Page 649.
10. Letter recorded September 19, 1983, in Book 452 at P;19e
208.
11. Easement and right of way for constructing, maintaining,
replacing, repairing and using an underground sewer system
and related facilities purposes, as granted by Keith Hefner
to Aspen Sanitation District by instrument recorded August
21, 1984, in Book 471 at Page 838.
12. Easements as shown on the recorded April 15, 1985, Plat of said Subdivision,
in Plat Book 17 at Page 11.
All of the foregoinn Bonk, Page, and Rerertinn Nn. references
refer to the records of Pitkin County, Colorado.
ATTACFWEAU—
QUORUM
PROPERTIES
October 31, 2001
Ms. Tamara Pregl
Aspen Pitkin Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Tamara:
Re: Authorization Letter for Heffner Subdivision Lot 1
As the owner of Lot 1 Heffner Subdivision, I authorize Davis Horn Inc. to submit a land use
application on my behalf and to represent me in the land use approval process. Davis Horn is located
at 215 South Monarch Street Suite 104 in Aspen. They can be reached by phone at 925-6587.
Please call if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you.
Sincerely,
/uj' " /1"
Alexander Furlotti
Arapahoe Ridge, LLC
FWAVS ii
N:/Correspondence/Personal/Pregl. 1 0.31.01/4024.A
1875 CENTURY PARK EAST, SUITE 1185 • LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 • (310) 788-0807 FAX: (310) 788-9170
ATTACHMENT 15
ASPEN/PITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Agreement for Pa meat of Pitkin Coun Development Application Fees
PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter COUNM and
Af-K Fvf l&*J (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for
S Gen i D per (n
(hereinafter, THE PROJECT).
?. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Ordinances
No. 98-7 and 99-37 establish a fee structure for Planning applications and the
payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of
application completeness.
3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or
scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the Full
extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and
COUNTY further agree That it is in the interest of the parties for APPLICANT to
make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be
billed to APPLICANT. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining
greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the
COUNTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. COUNTY agrees it will
be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process
APPLICANT's application.
4. COUNTY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for
COUNTY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the
Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to enable the
Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to make legally
required finding's for project approval, unless current billings are paid in hill prior
to decision.
�. Therefore, APPLICANT agrecs that in consideration of the
COUN7Y's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of
application completeness, APPLICANT shall, pay an initial deposit in the amount
of S 1 110 which is for hours of staff time, and if actual recorded costs
exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings co
COUNTY to reimburse the COUNTY for the processing of the application
mentioned above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be
made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to
pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing.
PITKIN COUNTY
APPLICANT
A- ra pa.hx P- 0(5'P , L.L L
_ Ake x P-L) -ff i
Cindy Houben Print'Name
Community Development Director "p, u L"
Signature
Date: ld •30 •.2doI
Mailing Address:
1$75C&Tfur'y Park Ea5+
Svite, 1185
Los Anq et-e s, C A .
'100 0
g:NsupportAorm�\zgrpaypt.doe
05/05/00
0
1 c 5 v'�c�, t- f�u5�✓i In W// V\