Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout186 1 °e v As Pn'o6 of PLO - If r re at ir' le , e) 1 e I S ) ? P inAl P sh ir c- es m nie,o7S 64(o -pith.14 Lol a, 6 lock- ie - 46 ,. 0 1, L o /6 840, 5 - - 4� ), /1 tend 2.7 1 8 /de,_ 4- H Ctic . ea r6onda le Co >port/win a pPt a / 1 �oUn o/ O4r6oNdale. apDLid 1 , Se 0 17-on /9 / - /t77 cite- ,< s e Izo 7 503, / q jow,-,. , (N UBCi 1 6 . . A &t S • P / a r t i - Ze �r .. /e rt c { 6 u /6 a ,nl "'/, Z Z A/C l - recta / E. 7402 - nas .U, Le/4 r - rJr"t".1 e 1e4wa�-y • ooroiiouo "°•do .a "o a'$ :° ' ,$ '' Ili A° w 044 i « t1 'x 4 0 881V U pW fl N Imo• 1 3 A N Q �'0 �y q 0OA O « p Lai 40 7 [s .7 U /1• �i t 'lq--:Ei , 14 8 vl - V 1 ji 1 ' 4 1 g ui ' W . 1" v-5-5 ` w ° M U t� 8 4' � , [ 5 ' °� . A L' � V (� to . Z H 0 a a 8 • « _tag g �'�y 1 a 9 . $ • y p C�� o . « tl 0 1 G 8 It M US •r7 f" N N ' 0 • U P � 'J . U u 4 U M 4 . IU 4 N VYY V _ o a ' o zvM Vs; ' a p3 a W • 134 M A O U w 7E .. q p �� `°`-, `� ur N 1 ... � ro • W . i -1 W x � flhiij; w 0 0 a3N t � � � ' 3 a '8 „ d � � i I. j I b 61, 1 1 1 ! 1 1 il' fig I 11 11111 . 11! Kit ffilipls141 : f I III 1111 1 1 li ft Ii ! . . 6 Is. 1 it i Illiiiiii Igi 11 la zati hi it mils 0: 8 c" SENDER: • Compete Items 1 and r additional services. I els�h to receive the • Compete Items 3, 4a, b. foil services (for an • P card to AM your name and a roes on the reverse of this form so that we can return this extra fee): u . • Mach thi form to the front of the mellpece, or on the back if epees does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address pe mit . u • Wdte IRetum Receipt Requested' on the mailplece below the amide number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery { •7he Return Receipt will show to whom the amide was delivered and the date g delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number P 164 023 836 4b. Service Typepatum Receipt Buffalo Ranch ITL ❑ Registered {t1 Certified P.O. Box 221 (ar ❑Express��Ma�ll ""lxf, ❑Insured ldale, 00 81623 ❑ Ret 1 R441101 tandse ❑ COD 7. D e o 1Selivery:,, 10 $ 5. Received By: (Print Name) 8. a $eels I ress�U' my If requested 1 an fe 8(Spald) ,, . j / g S. Signature ` ':;6 cat) dir PS Form • 1, December -1994 — Domestic Return Receipt a: t : : :; , 11:1p2 . 1:::1 1:::: . 1 . 7;1 1 % .• 1 . 1 . 7: :. 1 . 7:! �� : : .. :: i: . t:::, :• r.::,,:::: UNn`TDSTAtES'1 L " ;. :1, ci Pdsiage &Fee Folligi is Mail s Paid USPS Permit No. G•10 • Print your name, address, and ZIP Code in this box • Garfield County Building & Planning 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 S1 X11 ` ,i _�'�i i� "�� t • t' MAR 0 5 1998 i 06 A „1,,,,11,11„11 11 „il;;;(0I,;,JGII,1,1 I„ 1. 1 SENDER: I also wish to receive the 1 • Complete Items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. 1 • Complete items 3, and 4a & b. following services (for an extra E • Print your name and address on the revert& of this form so that we can fee): p return this card to you. ID • Attach this form to the front of the maliplece, or on the back If space 1. Addressee's Address does not permit. r m article Write "Return Receipt Requested" on the maeplece below the article number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery C • The Return Receipt will show to who the article was delivered and the date g delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. ig 3. Article Addressed, to: 4a. rticle Number 1 (. 4-,- k-� 2 - / fv567 I 4b. Service Type W /O , , Ji� , l 0 Registered ❑ Insured q� Y T`-Y/ Certified ❑ COD ,�a s � ,� 1-/‘.0/ Ex Mall R rn R e for I / J ° G_/ ,_/ (�� Mer etu ceipt G 7. Da of Del'I f i u 1 g K 5. S it :ture I. ddr: - eel 8. Addressee Address (Only if requested > and fee is paid) 2 C 6. ht ` Sig ature (Agen 1 e- PS Form 36 11, December 1991 au.s.OPO: DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE [ 11 , dr_ Official Business PENALTY FOR PRIVATE Immall USE TO AVOID PAYMENT U.S. MAIL OF POSTAGE, $300 Print your name, address and ZIP Code here • • TOWN OF CARBONDALE 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale. CO 81623 G t ►►,,► 1,,, u, n„ r,►,► ..nn.►,u►,,,,u„►„r►n,n,r,nr,u,► • SENDER: n. Complete items 1 end /or 2 for additional services. I also wish t0 receive the • Complete items 3, and 4a & b. following services (for an extra 9! • Print your name and address on the revered of this form so that we can fee): Y return this card to you. i • Attach this form to the front of the mallplece, or on the back if space 1. ❑ Addressee's Address I does not permit. I • W • Write e Receipt Requested" on the icle below the article El aer. 2. Restricted Delivery , The R • The Return Receieipt t will show show to whom article was the article was deliveered and d the B e date g delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. 3. Article Addrefised to: p 4a. Article Number G .( day / Zaf r u�✓ Y 0' Y /r O ,5'/f (� / . n _ ' 4b. Service Type l•t� l ❑ Registered ❑ Insured to CC .2cl� x ' ; "' 12 / Certified COD 1 c 9 �S /u yC 1--6 (1 -->C4.- l El Mail J Re ha Receipt for 3 p - LEC /()_ 8 ( / 7. Date gj,Del' ery • G tj ture (A ` — S. Addres -e's Addr: ss (Only if requested . ri .. % and fe is paid) c f�Signa ur.. Agent) 1 PS Form 3811, December 1991 *us. GPO: 1992- 323'402 DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I DENVER PEED I I It s� 3 ] a 26 Official Business PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID PAYMENT U.S. MAIL OF POSTAGE, $300 • Print your name, address and ZIP Code here • • TOWN OF CARBONDALE 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale. CO 81623 o� II,,I, „ IIdL�,, 6LJL ,,I�III,,.,II„L„1„�II,,,11„Ihi • n. SENDER: Complete items 1 and /or 2 for additional services. I also wish to receive the • Complete items 3, and 4a & b. fOIIOWing services ((or an extra At • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can feel: Y return this card to you. • Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space 1. D Addressee's Address 1 does not permit. Writee R n Receipt t on the mailpiece befowthe a n d he date. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery The flet Receipt will show tc whom the article was daliveretl end the date delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. 1 3. Article Addressed to: 4�j Article Number � - — �� j f U lD .S�,Y 4b. Service Type 6 3 ❑ Insured � g 9 ecJ � /� /'✓GCS^ `Ca • 1 .<1 44 G COD / , 22 e tj a l th Rurn e !�¢i�i o /(/ MeterchanRdise ceipt for Os^� < %Datex 32 t it 1.:' v U .9. S 6 9 � � urea (Add essee) ? ' dress (Only if requested x \ /24 ..t r P rift ..; pc 6. Signature 1 ent I PS form 3811, December 1991 ou.s. GPO:lsaz- 323-402 DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT UNITED STATES POSTAL traVICE f\ I 11. 1 I" / Official Business , -' �� �: 1 PENALTY-FOR PRIVATE .. .• spa• I q , _LSE TO AVOIDPAYMEt4T U. MAIL 1 <� _ OF PQSTAGE 5300 Print your name, address and ZIP Code here TOWN OF CARBONDALE 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale, CO 81623 II„1,,,,1IJI,,,,61„1L„I,II6„ JI„L,d „JI„JI „161 4 SENDER: q • Complete Items 1 and /or 2 for additional services. I also wish to receive the 1 u • Complete items 3. and 4a & b. following services (for an extra • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can fee): return this card to you. • Attach this form to the front of the mailplece, or on the bac& if space 1. ❑ Addressee's Address does not permit. Write "Return Receipt Requester on the mailplece below the article number. 2 ❑ Restricted Delivery E. • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. si 8 3. Article Addressed to: 4 y R � Article Number z�aa sGy E7�6 -L b S 4b. Service Type n n ❑ Registered ❑ Insured N / (P // W k ' e 'KiCerrified ❑ COD 1 1 .%�� W� / 'J � / l��'cx ❑Express Mall ❑ Return Receipt for If Merchandise i if 7. D t of elivgty/ Signature (Addressee) 8. dressee's Addre s (Only if requested Y and fee is paid) e cc 6, g rr ( tl V�'Y'/ PS Form 387�ecember 1991 n u.s.GPO:10r2— sza -4o2 DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT" UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE II II . I , Official Business PENALTY FOR PRIVATE nilalmiwn USE TO AVOID PAYMENT U.S. MAIL OF POSTAGE, $300 Print your name, address and ZIP Code here TOWN OF CARBONDALE 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale. CO 81623 n... nlei e,t,h.r ENDER: I also wish to receive the •q 4 • • Complete items 1 end/or 2 for additional services. , • Complete items 3, and 4a & b. • following services (for an extra • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can feel: return this card to you. • Attach this form to the front of'the mailplece, or on the back if space 1. ❑ Addressee's Address W do not permit. Write "Return Receipt Requested" on the mallplece below the article number. • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery e delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. la 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. A le N bar � as - 4b. Service Type 1 ( /� • ❑ Registered ❑ Insured _ vJ „ (J c 2 <? t—et cp Certified ❑ COD ,' j ❑ Express Mall Return Receipt for / Merchandise 7. Date of Deliver Z ��� 3 7 %i? s at 5. Signature (Addressee) 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested Y �,t .4/ , and fee is paid) 0 yr 6. Signature (Agent) 1 F'S Form 3611, December 1991 *U,s. GPO:taaz -32 &443 DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 1 I 1111 T Official Business I PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID PAYMENT U.S TO AVOID OF POSTAGE, 5300 Print your name, address and ZIP Code here • • TOWN OF CARBONDALE 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale, CO 81623 4 SENDER: y • Complete items 1 andJor 2 for additional services. • I also wish t0 receive the • Complete items 3, and 4a & b: • following feel: services (for an extra St • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this card to you. • Attach this form to the front of the meilpiece, or on the back if space 1. ❑Addressee's Address dose not permit. r Write "Return Receipt Requested" on the mailpiece below the article number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery L• • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the data g delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. if 3c2icle Addresse ;: niftze. ria. Article Num /be C 4b. Service Type m CC a X x sz, t�jl...) • ❑ Registered ❑ Insured N 1 / / �z ( r i + ✓ fl Certified ❑ COD ,� press Ma W iselitj Exll Return n dc K ,� / Merchandise for • 7. D � a of Delivery •� 5. S'gnatur:,•- • • res • ::) 8. Addressee's A dress (Only if requested cca and fee is paid) v —.3 ¢ • . ignatur: • gent) 'PS Form 3811, December 1991 RU.S.OPO: 323 -402 DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV,LCf ^ ,..' ( y • I I I I11 OffIclel Business l`F PENALTY ID AYM h USEiOA O EN MAIL T - U _'.., POSTAGE, $300 .S. ".. / q& ,1 -OF POSTAGE, Print your name, address and ZIP Code here • • TOWN OF CARBONDALE 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale, CO 81623 1111 1.1.. 1r, n,„.r,r,.n„Ir,rra,ar„r„nriati nniu(1.1 SENDER: 1 also wish to receive the Complete items 1 and /or 2 for additional cervices. • 1 • Complete items 3, and 4a & b. following services (for an extra • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can feel: N return this card to you. • Attach this form to the front of the mailpiace, or on the back If space 1. ❑ Addressee's Address does not permit. r 1 • Write "Return Receipt Requested" on the mailpiace below the article number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery !! • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the dote g delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. icle Number 1 . -C./ 4 b. Service Type "`o7 8 S- - 4 ❑ Registered • • 17 to IP Certified LI 2 70 73 S. 4 °'9 i70D ❑ E xpress M 74 . � i • • ..,_ f 4k � 0 G 7. Date of Deliver ` 711 x R ^%� Cp O UbZ Z/ A m z r a- 6. Si ture ( Addressee) S: Addressee''s A : a • M- •ue fed / — L,., . 1 and tee is aiddl. �0 6. ig A._. ai 2- PS .,ur - , December 1991 *US. GPO: 1ss2-323402 DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE , 188 #8 DENVER, kII . 1 &DC 22 50./ Official Business PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID PAYMENT U.S.MAII. OF POSTAGE, $300 Print your name, address and ZIP Code here TOWN OF CARBONDALE 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale. CO 81623 11,11 .,IL1L1hr1,L111 SENDER: Complete items 1 end /or 2 for additional services. • I also wish to receive the t1 m • Complete items 3, and 4a & b. following services (for an extra • Print your name and address on the reve •1se of this form so that we can feel' return this card to you. • • Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space 1. ❑ Addressee's Address I does not permit. 1 • Write "Return Receipt Re quested" on the mailpiece below the article number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. CC 3. Article Addressed to: 4 Article Number I p. %45-0 .:5-G 3 4b. $e vide Type G § r S ❑ R is 2- ns ured 1 u /a E � s: , rn Receipt for g 0 ' r�irw� �-CJ OOlrZ Z------- 7r a: t .f Deli•: ,." 8 Q r 5. Si n tur Addressee a "� A Z c O C 8. Ad. 6.::. . :. (0, 4 if requested ,e • Aa A) and , i> , ' s. Sign re ( / 9 . b orm 3811, December 1991 tru.a. GPO: 1692 -323402 DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE • 159 #8 DENVER: 0 PG 22:50 Official Business PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID PAYMENT U.S. MAIL OF POSTAGE, $300 Print your name, address and ZIP Code here • • TOWN OF CAFEi1ONOALE 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale, CO 81623 P 240 880 567 Receipt for Certified Mail r No Insurance Coverage Provided war va s, Do not use for International Mail (See Rever. ,1 net .aa stoe6 ri `.L. 6 B WO ,ind Lilo-Coy p ' a s Subbed Feo Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee A to Return Receipt Showing in to Wnorn rn & Dat a 0 rev P. Vine! g a s _ reea L. CO Poslmark.d N op CI a i P 240 880 561 Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided OWED Do not use for International Mail POSTAL rr :<a (See Reverse) Costae. $ Cott dme Fee Spec a D. very Fau Apse elect Del yery Fee Wm React Dt Delve p to ▪ Seto to Whom &Date te De rveretl C s AdOmss - T TOTAL Postag / Fees 0 I "�., 8 Postm o p. ? ,+�. y, �. ; \ / ;. 0 a P 240 880 523 IV Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail Malt r (See Reverse) A ir Vila 1 .(!I/ ., (ate Postage $ Certaied Fee Special Deliver Ice Restricted Delivery Fec A r_ Date, re°Y 011.1. c Date, eoo Rec nr ndoiess TDTAI Post NI o & Fees It .FIylli 0 Postmark 0 ate r <1 0 . h E C)J / u_ 1 P 240 880 564 Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided IMMSTATIS Do not use for International Mail (See Reverse) w ws r G rio it Uuinmv rei Resu¢ Dcnm +t- Fm W Return rn Snowing Snow9 pr R wnnm ft u:er.. Doirvomd c Dale, Hen Ad m t Hew and Adr l TOTAL Po•.ra9kW ria F ces 0 Postmark or 4a i I a. a P 240 880 563 Receipt for 111 :- Certified Mail . No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail [fP� (See Reverse) / L 2 i i 0) T VVF N.� vp.l Si c L- TOTAt lost! ran 0 Rosin, ir k (Fr Dn LL CO P 240 880 518 Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided STATES UNIVED Do not use for International Mail _ (See Reverse) i Cere `. i ��= sn'riai DLL Fut ResVNrle1 Delve y Fee ii11Yr I � SOi� ' 7 &f ees dream Poslnr, k4 la(P if CO " Li- ce; n P 240 880 522 IP Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided .o! €`;EM1 Do not use for International Mail (See Reverse) !r te L'. —M. / / cr,med r o� so c ■ Dr I f u. Rnspirred Dehvmy Fi x: u., g m to Rehr r Wh on Rac Sr vi m to wi�, r1 u. Do:��erm r Ft Re c Dat tl.r� w Add sr. „w m wnnn Dare an d AdIt%te s O C Postmark or )att CO 'y CI J E G cO Crr•. P 240 880 565 Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided WOW Do not use for International Mail proavi:<r (See Reverse) WES Postage $ Certified Fee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee W R o Whom Receipt Showing pp &Date te Delivered Return Receipt Snowing C Date, and Addressew' duress Posta c (���'��¢ }'�)�i � d FFees TAl g ! /.V� \ Y! 0 Postrnark or galty 10 - 0 1.K 2 u_ ` - ^ n t� P 240 880 521 Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail POSTAL uwr (See Reverse) NW 1'uxrayv � W Arnim Itrn'ip Shown] snoing m m. w�ofle r nro on „t a c r j � NM Postmark or Dale •,._) aA • r . 7 U- V) _ To: Mark Chain From: HERB KLEIN 2 -27 -98 I:55pm p. 2 of 2 .o BUILDING PERMIT NOTICE OF APPEAL MAILING LIST 1. Buffalo Ranch, LLC P.O. Box 221 Carbondale, CO 81623 Attention: Jeffrey Parker 2. Frank A. Randall and Stan Rains 2620 West Main Street Littleton, CO 80120 -191 1 3. Charles & Nancy Peloso • 995 Golden Crest Avenue Newbury Park, CA 91320 -581 4. Ival Ray Thomas Floyd R. Williams Fred 0. Williams 5638 South Skyline Drive Evergreen, CO 80439 -541 5. Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 -336 6. Brian P. Schwarz 202 Euclid Avenue Carbondale, CO 81623 -212 7. Eleanor K. and Stanley J. Robers 1611 West Philip Avenue North Platte, NE 69101 -597 8. Carbondale Corporation 1873 S Bellaire Street, Suite 1700 Denver, CO 80222 -436 9. Carbondale Corporation Retirement Trust 1873 S Bellaire Street, Suite 1700 Denver, CO 80222 -436 Z 216 586 530 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not se fo I mati,I Mail See reverse 4 It 6. 1.- 0 ha 0, tO inia -,n- 56M -, -1 L) Post Office, State, & ZIP Code PA/VreinJ l F3 o4 9 —SLI Pastor U $ • Certified Fee 1, 35 Special Delivery Fee Restricted Deaver/ Fee Return Pealµ Showing to i . When & Dab Dehisce( b 8l TOTAL P �& Feet-- $ �. ' 11 Postmark 1� 1998 / c,cv5 Z 216 586 534 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mall No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use for Intemational Mail (See reverse) tlo SIA.'r> __-• TitjR (LAlL9r I P Office, State, & ZIP P u 1reh. 8 rzz — Postage $ , 3O Certified Fee (, 6 Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee g Return Receipt Showing to 1 I 0 Wnorn d Date Delivered • L a2'1 P o to h END • urn enWor 2 for additional service. I also wish to receive the • compfets Items 3.4e, and 4b. following services (for an I •annt y o y u o u name end WWI on the revers* of this form to .rot we care return this extra fee): • Aftao ions 10 ero front of the merpea, or on the MEIspaa doe. not 1. ❑Addressee'. Address •.me Gi mRetu mmw wum R.c$3 R. hol i to on the mdr se b 1M amidene d numths dber. ne 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery n Raoeipl wlr etas* to vmorlr tlr. Wde was ebw detv.red delivered. Consult postmaster for tee. 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number 1 �� - I,, t a i l0 58. o� 3 L 1 b. midi 1 g rj � Cti V l � , t • v i .1 O Reg . s ure d rafted dtAltk./ 1 1 at ❑ pc i ❑ In 1 'J.v,,Ue f, 6b 0 049,9,2... -- L1-3 ❑ A: Zrti:. _ �,.r ❑ Cap A f 7 . D at= slivery ' c y a 1 6. R ed By: (P f N ) 8. Add s s - r. o Iy if requested /e�cv� / 6h -' and r s 16. Sign r . or Agent) ' . . X >Q PS own 3811, December 1994 102595 -97 -B -0179 Domestic Return Receipt ,. III III PSPS � � UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mall Postage & Fees Paid Permit No. OA 0 • Print your ri mi 3 addre q �...� - ,andZlPCodeinihisbox -+ ._ HER BERT S. KLEIN PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 201 NORTH MILL STREET SUITE 203 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 ma IL,f ,NJI IlmIlm1IJ,LJJdmJ11 11,11111 Z 216 586 533 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mall No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not = for International Mall See reverse g Postage $ Certified Fee 1. 35 Special Delivery Fee in Restricted Delivery Fee :n 1. Dale g Mika! CO Post: a SENDER: - •Canq hems 1 snmor 2 for saaeonet services. I also wish to receive the senorita', hens 3, a, and 4b. following services (for an I • PNa y o y u D r u name and address on the reverse of this loan so that we can return tNe extra fee): • OIs form lo IM front 01 the ma3PNOe, or on Ihe back h space dose not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address • r ileum Reu4,i Requester on the meltpisce below the snide number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery mho Return Recent on show to whom Ihe ands was de2Niad and t date delivered. Consul: postmaster for fee. 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number f.E • k. st« r3. - 7- aid 6gb r t �q � Q �4b. SerMce Type l Li I I W t' 7 '"" Li Express Mali Insure /l. 0 Li ?Za /\) C ❑ Retum Receipt for N.vchandise 7 7- ( � `^' �'� to i (n, ^ hG1 7. Date of D ve 7 5. Received By: (Print Name) 8. Addressee's Addr is (Only If requested and fee Is paid) s PS Form 3811, December 1994 102585 -e7-9 -0179 Domestic Return Receipt UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 11 11 PS a ge & Fees Paid Permit No. G -10 • Print your name, address, and ZIP Code in this box • HERBERT S. KLEWI PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 201 NORTH MILL STREET SUITE 203 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 09 Z 216 586 532 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use for International Mail (See reverse) �st •�t• t f t 07r. T . IL _-lrr . a % c off, (� Ue ntic �st ar e, State, ZtP Code ex) se 613 1 Postage $ • 3r Certified Fee , , 36 Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee N 3 Return Receipt Showing to M a Whore & Date Delivered I • U ate. ,a , . : TOTAL P•. ge Fees t4`\ Postmark • , 'at. c Op '4Y t DER: 5r Items t end/or 2 for additional as vloes. I also wish to receive the ate Items 3, 4a, and 4b. following senAoes (for an •PAM your name end address on the nvane of this lore so that we an retum this extra fee): card to •A It this rm form to the front of the menga « e, ants back if apace does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address A •Wrxe'lfarum Receipt Requested' on the maupieoe below the article number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery •The Return Receipt will dew to whom the ankh was delivered end the date delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. I 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number ti7 S�� Z Ile c �� 53 4b. Se �.0y n �� - Registered rvloe Type }�°,!'' C � p - ,,_ nn -- I ❑ Express Mail " ❑ Insured w l . > W b I X23 — ❑ Return Receipt for Me•chandse ❑ COD t 9-I r ' 7. Date ofDelhre , 6. Received By: ( Print Name) 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested 1 and fee Is paw) h 6. Signature: ddressee or • : )• Q X / , 3 PS Form 3811, December 1994 102595- 97 -B-one B omest c - etum - ace pt UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I II II Fife er all Postage & Fees Paid IUSPS Permit No. 0-10 • Print your name, address, and ZIP Code in this box • HERBERT S. KLEIN PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 201 NORTH MILL STREET SUITE 203 ASPEN, COLORADO 61611 Z 216 586 531 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use fo In a ' : titi t, al ail See = arse i r s N r / 'r'nr ever;. 8 r ✓ � jl �1�..... • xx, ale, 8 •. e _ ' _.. Sea 4 ' HI .• � Postage $ terrified Fee I o6 Special Delivery Fee - Restricted Delivery Fee to g Return Receipt Showin, to Worn E Date.: Reiss' Recap � * T R B we° j . C__ S TOTAL P. D QRmin n Postmark • Da ,ivh G S rn F'S t e c let • anew I also wise to receive the t SENDER: additional es vkee. •o«npa• Items 3, 4s, •rrd 4b. following services (for an I .Prim yo ev name and address an the en of this loan •o that we can return this extra tee): G F Sr •M r . m ch h Il 0* loan to the front d the msllpepee •, or on the beck If epee don not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address [ • yydle•paum Receipt Asouest•d• IS mNp•a below the amide number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery •The Return Receipt will claw to whom the article was delivered and the dale S delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. 3. Article Addressed , . 4a. Article dumber I t' • r t. 2`I f: 581, 53 1 4 ` r 1 � R • ' , ♦ ' } ! 4b. SenAce Type l0`1 b ' { C 1 / • 3 � D Registered Certified TVA f ❑Express Mall ?1:1 Insured ��I n _ .. , _ _ Il c T p,,,, ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD 1esAu�n( " O r 7. Date of Nerd Cllrbl -? 5. ReceNed By: (Print Name 8. Addressee Address (Only If requested and fee is paid) 1 6. Signature: ddressee w t) = Form Ps Fo 381 , December 1 102595 -97- 13-0179 Domestic Return Receipt Z 216 586 528 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use for 1 terra lanai ,111 See vec Sent to r V., �a��c n Q C , .7 4An'ti' a lA ust, m`a ' tAtk t Pe�st Stale, 8 ZIP Codg� o i4 CJ(d tt yJ B012-0 e ✓ ✓_ 32- Posla $ t Coed Fee ) , 3 6 Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee N $j Retum Receipt Showing to Whom Si Date Delivered - 1 0 Date B Mdr [f 87 8 TOTAL 7 81[e iD (1 1 O' t +mama ate I al USf'S o- $ENDER: t .eponplata lams 1 ardor 2 for additional services. I also wish to receive the • Conpww Items $, ea and 4b. following seMces (for an I . Print t y c our me Chant and address on the reverse of ma form so Mal we Can return this extra fee): • A m sea brm to the front of the nWlpeoe, or on the back If apace does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address 1. •WMe•AYUm Receipt Requested' on the maepsos below the wade number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery ells Return Receipt will Yaw to ream the aside was delivered and the date g Bared. Consult postmaster for fee. ' 1 3. Aide Addressed to: (j Article Number 5u s ��� .: 4b. Servbe Type M _ ❑ Regietered Certified ,9.12 ,9.12 'O W I I _ •t^'` -) ❑ Express Mail ❑ insured t p nj CA., S p 190 I q I ❑ Return Receipt for Me,dlandae O COD i 7. Date of Delivery 2r. 27—Pr . b. Received By: (Pre? ame) 8. Addressee's Address (Only If requested - end lee Is paid) _ s L ontl .tk r • : • -mbar 1994 102595 -97e -0179 Domestic Retum Receipt UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE j Postage I I I I I I Flrst• g e Mall • & Fees Pald USPS Permit No. G -10 • Print your name, address, and ZIP Code in this box • HERBERT S r r t ■N• PRCJFFSSIONAi Ci ' e r iON 201 t:OR)MH MILL S > • E203 ASPEN, COLOFtALO bt511 If ll'1111 �'I��rnllf t l U'll lrl�l�l'u'1�1'1 rl'r'1'll Z 216 586 529 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mall No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use for International Mall ( (See reverse) lifi � oCJLa ti IM ,--,-t poll glice, Stet� c n Postage 1 ate, $ � I 11 ' Cer6ed Fee 1 Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee 1 , Realm & Dato D etvo to U Wlwm 8 Dale eivere U � 1 Ream oor Saa"'iM " � 1 . � --= Data,& B Mdessee's 6 TOTAL Postage & Fee 1-+•11 1 Postmark or D ate . � y b V Q t- FENDER: I also wish to receive the t : C.rnrow toms and/or 2 tor •dd rvi lonel seces. • Crimples Woe s, 4a, and 41). following services (for an • psis yoyuo form w M I r nwns and address on the reverse of this at we can return Mis extra tee): card to •A ac i h Ws form to IM front d the initiate. or maw bock s space does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address •WMe'Retum Receipt Rsquasted'on the malpNOe below the aril* number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery 6 write Return Receipt wa show 10 whom the wade was delivered and the date g dithered. Consult postmaster for fee. 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number � 62-1 e,�i,r7�.ti ` — itei , , t i e�o"2,0 `I 5 ` °`^^" ` --p R SeMce eg lstered a certified I /� J , . , , _ ^" , l .. ❑ Express Meal ❑ C insured ( U�V l�J� �% ' ❑ RNUmReoelptforMem!rendee ❑ CAD '1 -- J 7. l ellvgfy� g S. Received By: (Mint Name) 9. Addressee 's 7 Address (Only 11 requested 1 and fee is paid) I 6. Signatu • ressrie3p4yent) it PS Form 3 , mmber 1994 1o2595-97-B -0170 Domestic Return Receipt UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE _ . ` ' ' . 'FheNgSbs t _ 30F c.. ermR NT3 0:`1 0 • Print your name, degas, ' d ZIP Code inthis7l - ore HEHBEUT S. NI f IN PROF CSSION6.I C "?i o; t r 10N 201 NORTFI MILL STIrt =r SUITE 203 ASFLN, COLORr,SQ 51611 OS IL•L„IILO lII 1611 11111111 Z 216 586 T.27 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not . e for ntemati• . I Mail See reverse Sers ��J 1P a 1 Pest ¢PP (0'2 Postage $ , 9 r Certified Fee I • Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee E , Return Receipt Showing to I . 1 o OVhomn a Date DBGVered $ Dass, a k ► 8 p TOTAL £�F Iegees • $ 11 a? Postm : deer v eta CO y4 e SENDER: l • • Corklete hems 'I andor 2 for additional services. I also v4sh to receive the • Complete Items 3, 4a, and 4b. following sentices (for an i isPrint 1 r name end address on IS reverse of this form so that vro can return INs ex l , •Atlaem) to the front of the mallpleas, of on the back if space does not , ch C l 1. 0 Addressee's Address I . eri Receipt Requeetecron the melee. below the snide number. 2.0 Restricted Delivery g germ Return Recelpl will S110114 10 vAiom the antis was delivered and the date delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. 5 3. Article Addressed to: 1 ' .• i+DIO LAI-- e 4a. Article Number 7. 3 I Lo' 5z to r ic31 4b. Service Type i C ...4 0 10 : 9 1 t e- t H1)6/1-54211--Th f:1 Regleyired —`• Certified 1k2& TO - - " t C A,u,,Prerv-4-4 11 -' 2- i A " 6. Received By: (Print Mune) 8. 1 e• 11,223 0 Re El Express d er 0 insured i tu 7. Date ‘...:.• AddresseV l and fee Is ' " 0 COD A I d requested I 1 8. SignatcliAdd ee or Agent) X if .ff PS Forni4 f, December 1994 102595-91-B-0179 Domestic Retum Receipt UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE II First ivtell '1 Postage & Fees Paid I USPS Permit No. 0.10 • Print your name, address, and ZIP Code in this box • [JaiBi.KA Pk +.ol SSIONF_ C':. 201 t ::1, O n M i LL S"f 4": -r J ; ii 203 ASPEN, COLOI?AUO Z.1611 a'er..ts'+Ymw II��I,,I II ��II���IIt Idid fr Z 216 586 S35 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use for International Mall See reverse isyc •:1� ` �. • I a � (; �I�CiI irswacss Postage $ .52 Certified Fee ■EM Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt Slowing to Whom & Date Del : .. I • I d r a Ream Receipt 't ° aril 11011111.1 S TDTALP k -� Y.iThilM — Postmark �:� LL t SENCtER: •Compete hornet and/or 2 lot additional services. I also wish to receive the • Oonplete hems 3, 48, and 4b. following services (for an I O Print ymer: and address on the reverse of Vas form so that we can return this extra fee): as 'Attach u. brmtothah of orhthattwlpea , «atheachhepaadoeend 1. ❑ Addressee's Address • • W Refum Receipt Requested'on the mdpea below the anise number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery • me Return Receipt will show to whom the Male was delivered and the date g dellvsred. Consult postmaster for fee. I 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number I . Z �i S�SIo 535 • c p,, �) , � 4b. Service ype `J`'' -'t Certified 1 0 1 &1? J, 60-t is °' st I ❑ Expre Mall ❑Insured C l li ( ❑ Return Receipt for '...:teat ige ❑ COD �zmA (1 v $ 99.2.2 -(4- G 7 Date of Derive* 111) ! STA i. 6. Received By (Print Name) 8. Addressee' . sled C end Is Ply FFF$ 8. Signs Addressee or Agent) i 9 9 m 1n yJ PS Form 3811, December 1994 102595-97-8-0179 Domestic Return Receipt :I: :::6;:; :I,I. r::.I:::I...,...Ir:::ra ., €r ,a tMaH UN E ITD SYATES PS St& SERVrCE "' •i s Post Fees Pald USPS Permit No. G -10 • Print your name, address, and ZIP Code in this box • HERBERT S. KLEIN PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 201 NORTH MILL STREET SUITE 203 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 09 '°—, • • AFFIDA STATE OF COLORADO ) / ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) I, Nina W. True, being duly ss 1. I am an employee of Herb€ 2. On February 20, 1998, p,.soua.,,. LU nernert s. Kiein's request, I mailed (via certified mail, return receipt requested) a copy of the attached Public Notice to each party on the attached mailing list. The mailing list sets forth the names and mailing addresses of each party that owns real property adjacent to any of the following lots situated in Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision ( "ACRE "), Garfield County, Colorado: Block 5, Lot 3; Block 5, Lot 60; and Block 6, Lot 22. The names and mailing addresses were derived from an ownership list of ACRE, obtained from the Garfield County Assessor's office, and from information provided by Land Title Guarantee Company. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. I l l rc W • --� Nina W. True Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9t day of February, 1998, by Nina W. True. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: >" - & nr �d' JO , �, WHO f i a Notary P c_ � - Considine \BPAFF.1 • • AFFIDAVIT STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN I, Nina W. True, being duly sworn, state as follows: 1. I am an employee of Herbert S. Klein & Associates, P.C. 2. On February 20, 1998, pursuant to Herbert S. Klein's request, I mailed (via certified mail, return receipt requested) a copy of the attached Public Notice to each party on the attached mailing list. The mailing list sets forth the names and mailing addresses of each party that owns real property adjacent to any of the following lots situated in Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision ( "ACRE "), Garfield County, Colorado: Block 5, Lot 3; Block 5, Lot 60; and Block 6, Lot 22. The names and mailing addresses were derived from an ownership list of ACRE, obtained from the Garfield County Assessor's office, and from information provided by Land Title Guarantee Company. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Nina W. True Subscribed and sworn to before me this oritrt day of February, 1998, by Nina W. True. Witness my hand and official seal. s ` � ,�p,R My commission expires: (2cc itcjr ,J4D/ �. 414 / , i 'a te 'ONO Notary P `:- 'c::_ f CrJ Considine \BPAFF.1 • • PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that the Carbondale Corporation has applied to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to appeal an administrative decision of the Building Official of Garfield County to issue building permits in compliance with the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended and the 1994 Uniform Building Code, in connection with the following described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit: Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 5; Lot 60, Block 5; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, as recorded in the Garfield County Clerk & Recorders Office Practical Description: Located approximately 1.5 miles east of Carbondale. Said appeal is to request the recission of the issuance of building permits and individual sewage disposal system permits for single family dwellings on the above - described property. All persons affected by the proposed appeal are invited to appear and state their views, protests or support. If you can not appear personally at such hearing, then you are urged to state your views by letter, as the Zoning Board of Adjustment will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the Appeal. This Appeal application may be reviewed at the office of the Planning Department located at 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Garfield County Courthouse, Glenwood Springs, Colorado between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. That a scheduled public hearing on the application has been set for the 16th day of March 1998, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., at the office of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County Courthouse, Suite 301, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado Planning Department Garfield County • BUILDING PERMIT NOTICE OF APPEAL MAILING LIST 1. ' Buffalo Ranch, LLC P.O. Box 221 Carbondale, CO 81623 Attention: Jeffrey Parker 2. Frank A. Randall and Stan Rains 2620 West Main Street Littleton, CO 80120 -191 3. Charles & Nancy Peloso 995 Golden Crest Avenue Newbury Park, CA 91320 -581 4. Ival Ray Thomas Floyd R. Williams Fred O. Williams 5638 South Skyline Drive Evergreen, CO 80439 -541 5. Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 -336 6. Brian P. Schwarz 202 Euclid Avenue Carbondale, CO 81623 -212 7. Eleanor K. and Stanley J. Robers 1611 West Philip Avenue North Platte, NE 69101 -597 8. Carbondale Corporation 1873 S Bellaire Street, Suite 1700 Denver, CO 80222 -436 9. Carbondale Corporation Retirement Trust 1873 S Bellaire Street, Suite 1700 Denver, CO 80222 -436 U a p0 0bf Y o o p0 A b q>' • W A O T q s u 0.N t t x a L 'O U o 0 3 v v� , a 0 y j 4 ° ' A d � M Y / ' A� Y� � O N N -a W I O . u :".,..6.61:10 a Yom' log. '4 y b arn 1 • 4 ) a « all q ; a p 9 PfO C X '^ q o 3 T o D N w U .4'. O m u o- q r pp a f. vq ] Y A �G x �? p m 0. A � E � E� • ° » u p �O N ^' i N CO ` e- �' t0 O^ N s W ° o E Y CO 2 ° w o 41 OD Q rnf . 2 i O1 trio I i N N O J u +•' • q o L.�• R ° a Z .. Y a s S a - v d g. O p u p q' G G> Y.=..i �' q LT A uU v v n L !Mfl �' •° aq ° q p ° q O A CJ 2 W 9 y y p., 8 4 N W Q u) ��������� _y L O .0 F 7 2 S p, N V - 0 - o V' j: N i �" 'l7 i ��.�G.......... \� ° nl N 0. j -•� U },4 a p � , avv�' C �'c ° �v : "' 3 H l. p:d��i S w A w 0 C A . v c G o v w m c L n e ts m � N 6 U i 0 i a v g Y, . g ZR " RO " " .5 ° �C A s o �� o 41 a �jT W a °opy ° y a v . i q T a \ \!l:`•_. X F O 3 a L O � 'C a ^ y � � , � . qu L4 O ^ N O O� y� / O F: 0 Vl U in C7O C�R� k�. > .7 q 'C V N n ig� °� fi t$ 1 ! h j ij p J a 6 i a lAtliggil 118 11 !ial 0 "§ g I E pH"! d l p lfilt kla m n $' t w ?it 11 11 1 1 It gra ! � ni h u A I FLE 1 1 • I BOA 3/16/98 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS BFQI TFST: Administrative appeal of the Building Official's decision to issue three (3) building permits and the associated permits APPFI1T.ANT: Carbondale Corporation, Town of Carbondale I. DESCRIPTION OF THE APPEAL A. DI m.DING OFFICTAT, ACTION: On February 13, 1998, Mark Bean, Director of the Building & Planning Department and the County Building Official, approved the issuance of three (3) building permits to the Buffalo Ranch, LLC. The permits were issued for Lots 3 and 60, Block 5 and for Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, along with the applicable individual sewage disposal system permits. (See enclosed pgs. 53 ) The permits were issued for manufactured homes, 27' wide by 40' long or a total of 1080 sq. ft.. Each dwelling is three bedrooms and two baths. The Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision is located to the east of Carbondale, in area that has been the subject of debate for a number of years. (See enclosed map) The original plat was filed in 1965 and was not subject to any subdivision review, since there were no subdivision regulations in effect in Garfield County at that time. B. APPEAT, BASIS: The Carbondale Corporation and the Town of Carbondale both submitted letters appealing the issuance of the previously noted building permits. (See letters pgs.55-57_) The Carbondale Corporation's appeal is based upon Section 108.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code (UBC), which requires that all work be accessible for the required inspections. (See enclosed pg. 5$ 44 ). The Town of Carbondale cites Section 503.1 of the 1994 UBC, which requires buildings to have access to a public way. In both appeals, the lack of access is based upon the question of legal access to the Aspen Crystal River Estates, which is the subject of litigation at this time. or 4 • II. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Section 9.04 , Administrative Appeal and Interpretation reads as follows: 9.04.01 Applications: Appeals to the Zoning Board of Adjustment ( "Board ") may be taken by any person aggrieved by his inability to obtain a permit (other than a Special Use Permit), or by the decision of any administrative officer or agency based upon or made in the course of the administration or enforcement of the provisions of this Resolution. Appeals may also be taken by any officer, department, board or bureau of the County affected by the grant or refusal of a permit, other than a Special Use Permit, or by other decision of an administrative officer or agency based on, or made in the course of, the administration or enforcement of this Resolution. Appeals to the Board must be made in writing and filed with the Board within seven (7) days of the action or decision appealed and a copy shall be given by the appellant to any official or agency from which the appeal is taken. A timely appeal stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from, unless any officer or agency from whom the appeal is taken certifies tot eh Board, after the notice of appeal shall have been filed with him, that by reason of the facts stated in the certificate, a stay, in his opinion, would cause imminent peril to life and property, in which case proceedings shall not be stayed otherwise than by a restraining order which may be granted by a court of record or the Board upon proper application. No restraining order shall be issued by the Board except after notice to the officer or agency from whom the appeal is taken and only if due cause is shown. 9.04.02 Action by the Board of Adjustment: The Board shall have the powers and duties to hear and decide appeals as set forth in Section 9.05.03 of this Resolution. The concurring vote of four (4) members of the Board shall be necessary to reverse any order, requirement, decision or determination of any administrative official or agency or to decide in favor of the appellant. B. Uniform Bnildigg Code:: As noted previously, Section 108.1 states that it "shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense entailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow inspection." As a part of the issuance of the permit, the applicants were required to sign a statement acknowledging that it is their responsibility to insure that the property is accessible pursuant to Section 108.1 of the 1994 UBC. (See statement pg.(.a ) Staff was aware of the court case 97 -CV- 199 -C, in which a number of property owners in the Aspen Crystal River Estates (ACRE) are attempting to condemn access into the subdivision. Staff has taken the position that it is the court's responsibility to determine whether or not the access to ACRE is or will be sal . • valid. The applicant has acknowledged that responsibility by signing the previously noted notice. Additionally, the County Building Department was allowed to access an ACRE lot for the purpose of inspecting a structure that had been permitted by the County for a remodel. The permit is still active and will be subject to inspection requests this spring. The Town of Carbondale has cited Section 503.1 of the 1994 UBC as a basis for the denial of the building permits.. The section states "buildings shall join or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one side." Section 1001.2 defines public way as " any street, alley or similar parcel of land essentially unobstructed from the ground to the sky which is deeded, dedicated or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for public use and having a clear width of not less than 10 feet (3048 mm)." (See enclosed pg.43 a1414 ) The Aspen Crystal River Estates plat includes the following language in the dedication statement: "....and do dedicate and set apart all of the streets as shown on the accompanying plat to the public forever ". (See enclosed pg. 45 ) All of the lots subject to the appeal have access to a "public way" on at least one side. Staff believes that the applications meet the intent of the language in question. Again, whether or not the public ways shown on the ACRE plat connect with other public ways is the subject of the preciously noted litigation. C. Individual Sewage Disposal Systems: Any application for building permit requested in an area that does not have access to a central sewage treatment facility is required to make application for an individual sewage disposal system (ISDS) permit. All three of the applications included an ISDS permit application. At this time it is unknown as to whether any special design requirements will have to be incorporated into the final design. This will be determined after a percolation test is performed by the County, to establish whether or not the soil in the area of the development can meet the parameters allowed by regulation for a standard septic tank and leach field. D. Water Supply: The Town of Carbondale questions the supply of water for the proposed building permits. There is no specific requirement for the issuance of a building permit regarding the source of water for a residential structure. As a part of the final inspection, a water supply has to be in place that will allow the household water using appliances to function at the time of the inspection. A cistern has been used and are presently used as a source of water for some residential structures in the County today. To answer the question in the Town's letter; yes a cistern could be considered as a source of domestic water in the Satank area if it provided the water necessary to operate a house in the area. — 3 • l , a • N R I : 1 R co r to rc v. � " .7 T 5 w ( ro J ....'..� 1t: o rs 4 0 0 : 4 o uu n 0 ^l s $1 I f. : i ii 1 6 11 8 i In M N R a W VD co z i r o • rn r c s 14 . . . BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO A.. !cant to com•tete numbered s. ro ces ant . PERMIT NO. G/ PARCEUSCHED NO. Jell ADDRESS 1 LEGAL LOT NO. OESCR. // 3 B LOCK SUBDMSION / SA C... V $ {A /�+ ✓C - CS 44C_1 2 OWNER I.. GG /O /Ca f+.L. L L G ADDRESS " O r / : PH. 947.. gL WK PH 303 'b G 3 CONTRACTOR . il l y , ► / 6 • ADDRESS , cs 4 rol PHI g o LICENSE NO. 3 4 ARCHITECT OR DESIGNE C ADDRESS PH. LICENSE NO. 5 ENGINEER Co Itic, 014$4 HOwL. ADDRESS PH. LICENSE NO. 6 S.F OF BUILDING • JJ 0 S.F OF I.OT 32 y� cos NO. OF FLOORS ' 7 USE C F BUILDING /CGS ^,E$...k1 11 . 8 Cors won: EW OAODRION OMOVE aREMOVE • 9 DESCRIBE WORK oALTEP / TKKJ oR / E : P A, N!i ,/ 1 �// L r v / Co61C- / ✓f±' [et/u wil /4144 EA-. Girl-, YttiNwt4 rW. I �uv 6 /uh 10 GARAGE SINGLE DOUBLE CARPORT SINGLE DOUBLE DRIVEWAY PERMIT ON SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT SITE PLAN 11 VALUATION w WORE' S ADJUSTED VALL.S // $ PLAN CHECK FEE 82 0 9 PERMIT FEE o? y, 75— SPECIAL CONDITIONS: /O goy X ; ,. O - 6 4Q • DU SCHOOL IMPACT FEE NO. OF BUILDINGS ON U' 7 OF BUILDINGS NOW ON PARCEL PA:.CEL IPFAWE /.u� n .. __r. • �1� 'tl ..auta:. ��. • .4 at TOTAL = • OCC. GR. COIST. TYPE . J h' " " .(Ad CI • / E 1 E A WATER SUPPLY DATE PERMIT ISSUED —/3— •` SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL PLUMBIN'3, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONOITOaNG. SnCU. APPROVALS REOUIEO RECEIVED NOT RECUREO THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS ZONING NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS. OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. HEALTH DEPT. - I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT 1 HAVE READ N40 EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW FIRE DEPT. THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES . GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WLl BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GNE SOIL REPORT AUTHORITY TO VK%ATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING CONSTRUCTION OR THE PERFORMANCE OF SETBACKS / ; gab ILA. 1 • . ' -UCRON Del • ,4n.... FLOOD HAZARD • �, v 2S nod - !�ROSreNOO Dance . f t-1 �� /L'r I `, -P. MI I. MAF.HOME 07e10,00 WWI • DeW10twnt ..,. • • 7.1 • MtAPOIMVGm AGREEMENT PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO THE AFPUCANT AS OWNER, CONTRACTOR AND /OR THE AGENT OF THE CONTR CTOR OR OWNER TO CONSTRUCT THE STRUCTURE AS DETAILED ON PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITTED TO AND REVIEWED BY THE BUIL' INC DEPARTMENT IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT TI IE SIGNER HEREBY AGREES TO COMPLY WITH AU. BUILDING " AND LAND USE REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY GARFIELD COUNTY PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GIVEN IN 30.28.201 CRS AS AMENDED. 1 SIGNER FURTHER AGREES THAT IF THE ABOVE SAID ORDINANCES ARE NOT FULLY COMPLIED WITH IN THE LOCATION, ERECTION, CONS I "UCT1ON AND USE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STRUCTURE. THE PERMIT MAY THEN BE REVOKED BY NOTICE FROM THE COUNTY AND THA THEN AND THERE IT SHALL BECOME NULL AND VOID. THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT BASED UPON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BU' DING OFFICIAL FROM THEREAFTER REQUIRING THE CORRECTION CF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA OR FROM' REVENTING BUILDING OPERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OF THIS CODE OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR 2EGULATION OF THIS JURISDICTION. THE REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED THEREAFTER DOES 'IOT CONSTITUTE AN ACCEPTANCE OF ANY RESPONSIBILITIES OR UABILITIES BY GARFIELD COUNTY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR 1 ;CREPANCIES. THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE ITEMS AND IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONSTRUCTION RESTS SPECIFICALLY WITH THE A%'CHITECT, DESIGNER, BUILDER AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND IN SUPPORT OF THE OWNERS INTEREST. pp Gaform.003 I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE AGREEMENT ABOVE (INITIA 3 w _" 1 • f. O, y NOTICE This notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield County will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the structure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. At the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the review of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the building permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, if the applicable work has been done by the County. To do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department must be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If Garfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will not complete the fmal inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Further, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance or the permit will become void. A new building permit will have to be obtained to start or continue any work. The above statements are acknowledged by: &{alb r. - .1/ G // li,g iL__ /A'n � �? � /r/9p3 Nam D This signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject to the above statements ow ( as GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING 970 -945-8212 MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS for SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTION including NEW CONSTRUCTION MANUFACTURED HOMES ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS and MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the issuance of a permit it is important that complete information be provided. Adequate and complete information will prevent delays in the plan review process. Reviewing a plan and the discovery that required information has not been provided by the applicant may result in the delay of the permit issuance and in proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor may be required to provide this information before the plan review may proceed. This causes delays because other plans that are in line for review may be given attention before the new information may be reviewed after it has been provided to the Building Department. Please review this document to determine if you have enough information to design your project and provide adequate information to facilitate a plan review. If you do not, it may be helpful to obtain a book titled "Dwelling Construction under the Uniform Building Code ". This book is available to you through this department at our cost. Also, please consider using a design professional for assistance in your design and a construction professional for construction of your project. To provide for a more understandable plan in order to determine compliance with the building, plumbing and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following check list prior to and during design. Applicants are require to indicate appropriately and to submit the completed check list at time of application for a permit. For the placement of a manufactured home, questions numbers 1 -4 and 19 -28 are the only questions that need to be addressed: 1. Is a site plan included that indicates the distances of the proposed building or addition to property lines, other by (dings, set back easements and utility easements? Yes V 2. Does the site plan include the location of the I. S.D. S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and the distances to property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent properties), streams or water course Yes 3. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing the propertyV Yes 4. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the uniform building code or per stamped engineered design? Yes 5. Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes 6. Do the plans indicate the size and location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes 7. Do the plans include design loads as required under the Uniform Building Code for roof snow loads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot in Garfield County), floor loads and wind Toads? Yes 8. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor and roof construction? Yes 9. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes 10. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns and beams? Yes oplo 11. Does the plan indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the highest point of the building or addition measured at mid span between the ridge and the eave down to existing grade contours? Yes 12. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and model and Colorado Phase II certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes No 13. Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the Uniform Building Code Chapter 37? Yes No 14. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress/rescue windows from sleeping rooms and/or basements comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code? Yes No 15. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for all habitable rooms? Yes No 16. Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface normally used as a walking surface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub enclosures and specify safety glazing for these areas? Yes No 17. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on the plan? Yes No 18, Do you understand that if you belong to a homeowners association, it is your responsibility to obtain written permission fro the association, if required by that association, prior to submitting an application for a building permit? Yes No 19. Will this the only residential structure on the parcel? Yes No If no- Explain: 20. Have two (2 mplete sets of construction drawings been submitted with the application? Yes -9• . . 21. Is this an /plication for the placement of a manufactured home? Yes No If yes, have you specified the size of the unit (min. 20ft. x 20ft); live roof load (min. 40 #); wind design (min. wind speed of 80 mph & 15 Ib. wind load); foundation design; method of anchoring? Yes j/ 22. Have you designed or had this plan designed while considering building and other construction code requir ents? Yes No 23. Does the plan accurately indicate what you intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection b) he Garfield County Building Department? Yes No 24. Do you under and that approval for design and/or construction changes are required prior to the applicatio f these changes? Yes No 25. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review" fee from you at the time of appli tion and that you will be required to pay the "Permit Fee" as well as any "School Impact" or eptic System" fees required, at the time you pick up your building permit? Yes No 26. Are you aware that twenty four (24) hour notice is required for all inspections? Inspections will be made from Battlement Mesa to West Glenwood in the mornings and from Glenwood Springs to Carbondale in the afternoon. Morning inspections must be called in by 12:00 pan. the day before; afternoon inspections must be called in by 5:00 p.m. the day before. Failure to give twenty four (24) hour notice for inspections will delay your inspection one (1) day ? / Yes No 27. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the Uniform Building Code including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy)of the building? Yes l/ No 28. Are you aware that the person signing the Permit Application, whether the "Owner ", "Agent of the Owner ", "General Contractor ", "Contractor" or otherwise, is the party responsible for the project coptplying with the Uniform Building Code? Yes 1/ No _lb fe • I hereby acknowledge that I have read, understand and answered these questions to the best of my ability. 9.?// g signatu 11244.— CGL, date Phone: 1417 (days); 6 °% 4-1-13 -X5'1' (evenings) Project Name: Dv1M /L ,t3 I / Project Address: 14; 3 ekeic S "spu. 5i6/ £'t r (5144 Notes: • If you have answered "No" on any of the questions. you may be required to provide this information at the request of the Building Official prior to beginning the plan review process. Delays in issuing the permit are to be expected. Work may not proceed without the issuance of a permit. If it is determined by the Building Official that additional information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum compliance with the adopted codes; the application may be placed behind more recent applications for building permits in the review process and not reviewed until required information has been provided and the application rotates again to first position for review. delay in issuance of the permit or delay in proceeding with construction. PerApp02.95 Effective August 15, 1995 • ra /lsit • Illlll1Ill11 11141l1111lflflllll lhill 111 11111 1111 1111 • 518937 01/08/1998 04:07P 51049 P666 fl ALSOORF • 1 of 1R 6.00 0 0.60 GARFIELD COUNTY CO • WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, Made this 19th dq of December , 1997 ,between KOOIICICXXIXXRIIIIIREXAMI BANTA MARIE •CHAEFER of the said County of Clay and State of MISSOURI , grantor, and JEFFREY M. PARKER DOC FEE $.60 whose legal address is P.O. BOX 221 CARBONDALE, CO 11623 of the aid County of GARFIELD and Sale of COLORADO ,grantee: WITNESSETII, Thu the grantor for and In consideration of the sum of Ten dollar and other good and valuable consideration DOLLARS, the receipt and mffckncy of which Is hereby seknowledged, hat granted. bargained, Bold end conveyed, and by these presents does grant. bargain. sell, convey and confirm, unto the grantee, hie heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together wish Improvements. if any, situate. lying and being in the mid County of GARFIELD and Stale of Colorado described a follows • LOT 3 BLOCK 5 ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO GARFIELD COUNTY ASSESSORS NOt 2463- 021 -04 -003 PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY also known by street end number u: TOGETHER with ail and singular the hereditament. and appurtenance. thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the revaaion and Ions, remainder and remeindcrt. rents, knit, and profits thereof, and all the seam, right, title, interest, claim and demand what. f the grantor, either In law or equity, M, in and to the above bargained premier, with the hereditament. and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO 1101.1) the said premise* above bargained and described. with the appurtenances. unto the grantee. Me heirs and amino fo . And the grantor, for himself, his heirs, and personal representatives. does covenant. grant, bapin, and agree to and with the grantee. hie heirs and assigns, that at the time or the instating and delivery of Ihen presents, he is well raised of the premises above conveyed, km good, suw, perfect, abroiuta and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, In fee simple, and het good right, full power and lawful authority to grant. bargain, .ell and convey the same In mane( and form as alerenid. and that the same sit free and clear from ell former and other gents. bargains, saes, Tien., taus, alKsaments, team end .nurklions of whatever kind or nature mover, eactpl te, restriction., reservations and right. of way of record, or situate and in use, and rest property taxes for the year 1997, not yet due or payable. The grantor shell and will WARRANTY AND FOREVER DEFEND the shove-bargained premise' in the quiet and peaceable possealon of the ironies, hie helm and amigos, against all and every person or persona lawfully Chiming the whole or any pan thereof. The Untwist number when Include the plural, the plural the stapler, end the use of any gender shell be applicable to ell senders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor het executed this data on the data set forth above. p „r11n• ke..I�T - € 4 . 0 ° S1/3371KXRX7�ID� S A MARIE S nAEFER l_ ir. Sin of MI4 SOUR! ) � �f )u. • County or / • V //.� ) /,/�� The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of JI/ed . / 7 N by RtlD00)01XSCX)O ELINERSKFrdf6 Santa Maria Sc ❑r eler NS Q r My commlsaion dolma , ff . Witness my hand Bpd official .al. 44 1 ��t�. (- Notary P k; ICT •• n aua m,..n flit mmm.rtap,s•P. Int. Return to: Jeffrey N. Parker 11.. nu WARN/WRY Oren pw l +n.P.pkI. Ind) P.O. Box 221 a .me Carbondale, CO 81623 - al A 91N• • aR - ..= r .,.. _ ^':F r ors•:.- .:'irFF ` i"r...Tn. '43:x. +., . -(5° / „-- /- ----46 o ry � / / c 5 {O^ -- \ / .r�.�r• r0E \ \ V \ \ ` REQUIRED BULDING SET BACKS\ •C \ .... \ / \ / p 2' WIDE GRAVEL ►' gE /" a p MOVN� SOCS\O � NOTE: , ' BUILDER WILL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM SEPARATION OF 100' BETWEEN THE SEPTIC SYSTEM AND THE WELL. BELL COUNTRY HOMES PROJECT SITE PLAN P.O. BOX 229 LOT 3. BLOCK 5 NEW CASTLE. CO 8164? ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES (9 70) 984 -3500 GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO JANUARY 21. 1998 PREPARED FOR: BUFFALO RANCH. LLC _ . • .. \-:0) \ \ REQUIRED BULDING SET BACKS\ d> \ • • \ . -.. . : • ------ p v k a't .� 12' WIDE GRAVE 0' 1E `3 MOV 5�P r e NOTE: INF BUILDER WILL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM SEPARATION OF 100' BETWEEN THE SEPTIC SYSTEM AND THE WELL. BELL COUNTRY HOMES PROJECT SITE PLAN P.O. BOX 229 LOT 3. BLOCK 5 NEW CASTLE. CO 8164? ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES (9 701 984 -3500 GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO JANUARY 21. 1998 PREPARED FOR: BUFFALO RANCH. LLC / ij4. M fAl __ Il i? 6 $P " EA An A Z i m N E E' M I I e ln o I Z m _ vi III i5' • \\\\ • \ GK�/ \ \�C & \R� ` 0- -DA k p ® K > ƒ ( , - efs ) 1 1 IC ��� E 111_1 ._ \ r\ K >9 / \ \/ / > § = § .. c -I \ 0 ) \ } �. /ƒ \ z z 2 $/ \\ ' �'� / f/ - n . . ƒ \ —1 ®% / k e rJ \ _ ° a —i 7 I IS — ^ƒ A)/ i Z § > _ � _ / G 77 « ` �.j _ e h / J2 >._/, § a \ Z _\ \ 2 \ &H \ \ — i \s, \/ \ e 3 0 Zcs > » . G i 9 0 . �. . . . ��� _� / .. . - 9' ' �Y p M BATtj 11 • 0 c M 4 8 !® �� ii _ 6 s � ■ I U fl ITY II * ;1C0 i s I 1 ` _ al 1 ___ __ 4 xi o ; el 4 -i1 '0% A JO 4 M i 1 Y — 091 Y,�eo. ._ ._ •l_ . _ 13 %6 . . GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2 912 109 Bth Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No. Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81801 Phone (303) 945 -8212 This does not constitute INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL. PERMIT a building or use permit. PROPERTY Owner's Name BDffal(1 Ranh TT[` Present Address P.O. Box 221, Carbnt1dalE hone 947 -5184 System Location Lot 3, Block 5, AsPen Crystal River EStates, CarbCnrla 1e Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. SYSTEM DESIGN Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3 Required Absorption Area - See Attached Special Setback Requirements: Date Inspector FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed) Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation System Installer Septic Tank Capacity Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface Absorption Area Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements Other Date Inspector RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE •CONDITIONS: 1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter 25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. 2. This permit Is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con- nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit. 3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual sewage disposal system in a manner which involves a knowing and material variation from the terms or specification contained in the application of permit commits a Mall, Petty Offense (8500.00 fine — 6 months in jail or both). White - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT e / f INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION J DDRESS P© Sag 22! (14041 F/6a3 PHONE 997•S!&�' CONTRACTOR et [f /o IC & k 41. L in ADDRESS PO 13 4 Z z l (w 6o 9 /623 PHONE f 7 -.Iv al PERMIT REQUEST FOR ( INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4). LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY, • Near what City of Town Ci- r(p J� Size of Lot 3 2/ Lei lam, Legal Description or Address /v/ 3 RAJ< c A C r i S 1i. / , 3 r cSled ,C WASTES TYPE: (DWELLING / ( ) TRANSIENT USE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: / «1 ,Ul...411. J Number of Bedrooms 3 Number of Persons 3-1.5 ( , Garbage Grinder (• 4/Automatic Washer (&.)'Dishwasher 501 JRCE AND TYPE. OF WATER SI JPPLY: (AELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: 2 k- L S Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? rv0 A site pia l • ' r ' 1 I LI/ 1 ik I u u U Leach Field to Well: 100 feet Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet Septic System to Property Lines: 10 feet YOUR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL, SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSIJED WITHOITT A SITE PLAN, (IROI MD CONDITIONS, Depth to first Ground Water Table Percent Ground Slope 3 90 S/e —1tlb • /E OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: /) SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT f ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) VAULT ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE ( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE ( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( ) 0 fHER - DESCRIBE FINAL DISPOSAL BY: ( VABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT ( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) EVAPOTRANSPIRATION ( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE ( ) WASTEWATER POND WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? ,/' PERC'OI ATtniy 7•F,ST RFSi Ti 're - -- / v U -_ ..,� (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the Percolation Test) Minutes per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes per inch in hole NO. 3 Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole N0. Name, address and telephone of RPE who mach soil absorption tests: Name, address and telephone of RPE rest onsible for design of the system: :pplicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and riditional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the pplicant or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the snit is subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations lade, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be =presented to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the -cal department of health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further iderstand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any unit granted based upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law. BQ /J2lo 44 L ft Gad ,l 4( Pt Date / �� K'-1' /�'lw. d er 1.(; G EASE DRAWJAN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! �o • • No. 6615 DARh7ELD 00UN7Y BUfLDING, SANITA770Nand PLANNING DEPARTMENT 109 8th Street Suite 303 Glenwood Spiny, Colorado 111601 (303) 945 -8212 Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Carbcndale Job Address Nature or Work Building Permit 1lre orBuildiog Menu. Hare on Frnmdatica Owner Buffalo Ranch LLC Contractor Aa11 rYnmtry Hangs Amounto(PmnitS 405.84 Due February 13, 1998 Permit: 124.75 Plan : 81.09 Set Up Fee : 200.00 Paid $81.09 1 -23 -98 S. Archuleta Clerk _a, BUILDING PERMIT APF CATION . GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORAI p en�toco ete num spaces only. PERMIT NO. 66 (C PARCEUSCHED NO. Jos Mol¢u n 1 LEGAL I Loma Z'f - 1 BLOC( ( JsUEdv ioN 4SrE. (mi ffs To . !2 u r2 Es re t7e$ 2 OWNER3 0 co *.Jc1*k (-LC— ADDRESS •• a . 3oK VZ/ '9. +.5 .7 - gy OU 3 CONTRA:TOR3 Q[ rw ADDRESSgr.O.BCF -ZZOf As . = . r LIEN ND. 4 ARCITECT OR DESIONER 44.9.7.r Ao Ni[? ADDRESS PH LICENSE NO. 5 ENOR1EER ADDRESS FH. LICENSE NO. 6 S.F OF BtALDING / b go B.F OF I.OT Sqr 7w MEM NO. OF FLOORS t 7 USE DF BULD NG 1 ( (h ens Tr A L-- 8 Cuss OFW°IIc }(NEW oADDITION °ALTERATION o REPNR o MOVE °REMOVE 9 °"*" W . -4 goo CoDF nk4A Wfo.tC a4 A,amsd' i 4 Kkhatittcrio 10 GARAGE SINGLE DOUBLE CARPORT SINGLE DOUBLE DRNEWAY PERMIT ON SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT SITE PLAN 11 VnuNnox OFWOR[: S SPECIAL ADJUSTED.$ PLAN CHECI; FEE S�, Q - PERMIT Fi / T SPEC CONDIT10NS:/ 33 ,�/ ( p . O 4o9�i v 0 SCHOOL IMF ACT FEE NO. OF BUILDINGS ON US' OF BUILDINGS NOW ON ,• /-� PARCEL PML :E • TOTAL ' J ~* OCC. GR. IAf CO4ST. TYPE r sa NOTICE WATER SUE' LY DATE PERMIT ISSUED ? -/ s ^ - F SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REOUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL PLUMBING, HEATING, SPECIAL A R[ws[o R[C[NED Nor R[ountro VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. I THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS ZONING NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS. OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. HEALTH DEI F. HEREBY Y THAT I CO ND READ A E7 THIS MW O AND KNOW TO THE SAME TO BE E AND TRUE O CORRECT. ALL PRCMSIO ROVISgNS OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES FIRE DEPT. GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPUED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE SOIL REPOR AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF MIY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW RP LAysia _ T/R/UCI._ ION OR THE PERFORMANCE i CE OF SETBACKS CONSTRUC �7 Ifo ( 0800 I/ a /4IfT FLOODFWZi RD W / Softy. , Conesetoror I M understood algs 0 uld no rt mf ApproNd A Plannung DspartmentArgrc.W.M OTHER . , • 0 0 . AGREEMENT • c? - 1)3 ERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT AS OWNER, CONTRACTOI'. AND /OR THE AGENT OF THE CONTRACTOR OR OWNER TC ONSTRUCT THE STRUCTURE AS DETAILED ON PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITTED TO AND REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1 CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT THE SIGNER HEREBY AC 'EES TO COMPLY WITH ALL BUILDING CODES AND LAND USE EGULATIONS ADOPTED BY GARFIELD COUNTY PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GO.. -N IN 30.26.201 CRS AS AMENDED. 1'1E SIGNER FURTHER GREES THAT IF THE ABOVE SAID ORDINANCES ARE NOT FULLY COMPLIED WITI IN THE LOCATION, ERECTION, CONSI.IUCTION AND USE OF HE ABOVE DESCRIBED STRUCTURE. THE PERMIT MAY THEN BE REVOKED BY 1OTICE FROM THE COUNTY AND THA' THEN AND THERE IT HALL BECOME NULL AND VOID. HE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT BASED UPON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHE ". DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BUT' DING OFFICIAL FROM HEREAFTER REQUIRING THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIE!' ATIONS AND OTHER DA1A OR FROM ' '?EVENTING BUILDING PERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OF THIS C_ OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR ? EGULATION OF THIS JRISDICTION. HE REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND INSPECTI( NS CONDUCTED THEREAFTER DOES '10T CONSTITUTE AN CCEPTANCE OF ANY RESPONSIBILITIES OR UABILITIES BY GARFIELD COUNTY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR V'3CREPANCIES. THE . ESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE ITEMS AND IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONBTRUCT'ON RESTS SPECIFICALLY WITH THE A' CHITECT, DESIGNER, UILDER AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND IN 6'JPPORT OF THE OWNERS INTEREST. f arfonm.003 I HEREBY ACKNO EDGh-T 1 HAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE AGREEMENT ABOVE IINITIAI. L 1 W P 1 pot F 0 / a3 -,S1 or o lp .. • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building and Planning Department February 11, 1998 Buffalo Ranch L.L.C. c/o Jeff Parker P.O. Box 221 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Building Permit applications Dear Mr. Parker: Please consider this letter to be a written summary of our phone conversation on February 10, 1998, regarding three (3) building permit applications requested by the Buffalo Ranch L.L.C.. As I noted, the applications have been reviewed and approved by the Building and Planning Department, and are ready for you to pick up and pay the remaining fees. As I noted in the conversation, I would encourage you not to pay the remaining fees and pick up the permits, until you are convinced that there is no other alternative available. At a minimum, I would suggest waiting until after the March 18t meeting in Carbondale to discuss the issues revolving around the Te -Ke -Ki and Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivisions. Your permits will need to be paid for and issued within 90 days of this letter, which should give everyone ample opportunity to try and come to an agreement that will satisfy all of the interested parties. If you chose to pick up the permits before there is any resolution of these issues, you will be required to sign the statement that I faxed down to you yesterday. A copy of the statement is enclosed for your review. Basically, the statement is acknowledging that the County Building Department is not responsible for gaining legal access to the property for inspection purposes. If access is not available, it may result in the invalidation of the building permits. If there is any difference in your understanding of our conversation, please let me know. Sincerely, ale Mar�Director Building & Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945. 8212/285 -7972 Glenwood S t, Springs, Colorado 81601 r e 2 3 NOTICE This notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield County will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the structure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. At the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the review of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the building permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, lithe applicable work has been done by the County. To do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department must be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If Garfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will not complete the final inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible • pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Further, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance or the permit will become void. A new building permit will have to be obtained to start or continue any work. The above statements are acknowledged by: . This signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject to the above statements • • i S. GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS for SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTION including NEW CONSTRUCTION MANUFACTURED HOMES ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS and MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the issuance of a permit it is important that complete information be provided. . Adequate and complete information will prevent delays in the plan review process. Reviewing a plan and the discovery that required information has not been provided by the applicant may result in the delay of the permit issuance and in proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor may be required to provide this information before the plan review may proceed. This causes delays because other plans that are in line for review may be given attention before the new information may be reviewed after it has been provided to the Building Department. Please review this document to determine if you have enough information to design your project and provide adequate information to facilitate a plan review. If you do not, it may be helpful to obtain a book titled "Dwelling construction under the Uniform Building Code. This book is available to you through this department at our cost. Also, please consider using a design professional for assistance in your design and a construction professional for construction of your project. To provide for a more understandable plan in order to determine compliance with the building, plumbing and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following check list prior to and during design. Applicants are required to indicate appropriately and to submit completed check list at time of application for a permit: For the placement of a manufactured home, questions numbers 1-4 and 19 -28 are the only questions that need to be addressed: 4 . 1. Is a site plan included that indicates the distance of the proposed building or addition to property lines, other buildings, set back easements and utility easements? Yes No m Not necessary for this project (2) 2. Does the site plan include the location of the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and the distances to property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent properties) , streams or watercourses? Yes 2C No m Not necessary for this project (2) 3. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing the property? Yes )C No o Not necessary for this project (2) 4. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the uniform building code or per stamped engineered design? Yes ) No m Not necessary for this project (2) 5. Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes No (+) Not necessary for this project (2) 6. Do the plans indicate the size an location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project (2) 7. Do the plans include design loads as required under the Uniform Building code for roof snow loads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot in Garfield County) floor loads and wind loads? Yes No m Not necessary for this project (2) 8. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor and roof construction? Yes No (() Not necessary for this project (2) 9. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes No (n Not necessary for this project m 10. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns and beams? Yes No m Not necessary for this project (2) IS It 11. Does the plan indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the highest point of the building or addition measured at mid span between the ridge and the eave down to existing grade contours? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project m 12. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and model and Colorado Phase II certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project m 13. Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the Uniform Building Code Chapter 37? Yes No m Not necessary for this project (2) ' 4. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress /rescue windows from sleeping rooms and /or basements comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code? Yes No ))) Not necessary for this project (2) 15. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural Tight and ventilation for all habitable rooms? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project (2) 16. Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface normally used as a walking s' irface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub enclosures at id specify safety glazing for these areas? Yes No o) Not necessary for this project a) 17. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on the plan? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project (2) 18 Do you understand that if you belong to a homeowners association, it is your responsibility to obtain written permission from that association, if required by that association, prior to submitting an application for a building permit? Yes No 0) Not necessary for this project (2) 19. Will this be the only residential structure on the parcel? Yes C No If No- Explain e. 20. Have two (2) complete sets of constructions drawings been submitted with the application? Yes _pi__ No m Not nece5 sary for this project m 21. Is this an application for the placement c a manufactured home? Yes X No If yes, have you specified the size of t'ie unit (min. 20ft x 20ft); live roof load (min.40#); wind design (min. wind speed ' f 80 mph & 15 Ib. wind load); foundation design; method of anchoring? Yes )C No u) Not nece• sary for this project m 2 Z. Have you designed or had this plan desig ied while considering building and other construction code requirements? Yes )C No (3) 3. Does the plan accurately indicate what yo intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by the Garfield Buildin 'Department? Yes 2( No (7) ; 4. Do you understand that approval for lesign and /or construction changes are required prior to the application of these changes? Yes XC No (3) 25. Do you understand that the Building Dc partment will collect a "Plan Revievd' fee from you at the time of application( and tl at you will be required to pay the "Permit Fee" as well as any "School impact" or "Septic system " fees required, at the time ydu pick up your building permit? Yes X No P) 26. Are you aware that twenty four (24) hoer notice is required for all inspections? Inspections will be made from Battlement Mesa to West Glenwood in the mornings and from Glenwood Springs to Carbondale In the afternoon. Morning inspections must be called In by 12:00 p.m. the day before; afternoon inspections must be called in by 5:00 p.m. the day before . Failure to give 24 hour notice for inspections will delay your inspection one (1) day. Yes X No 27. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the Uniform Building Code including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the building? Yes X No _. _ 4_ • • 28. Are yo" t aware that the person signing the Permit Application whether the "Owner ", "Agent of the Owner", "General Contractor ", "Contractor" or otherwise, signing the application is the party responsible for the project complying with the Uniform Codes" Yes No rn I hereby acknowledge that I have read, understand and answered these questions accurately to the best of my ability. 61a' g.,^4-4-1— f/43/13 sign ure j4',, t✓ ft,,-k•r hate Lk_ date • Phone: 44 - ( � 3 ° "' (evenings) Project Name: 6 , (Ale r L 4% 1 /� Project Address: 4uf 22 6/ ��c ` �r�S�"� R r tSirr4S Notes: (1) If you have an -wered "No" on any of these questions ) m may be required to provide this Information at the request of the Building Official prior t • beginning the plan review process. Deb ya In Issuing the permf art to be expected. Work may not proceed wthout the Issuance 'f the permit. (2) If yoti have answered "Not necessary for this project" on any of the questions and it Is determined by the Building Official that the Information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum compliance wkh the adopted codes, please expect the following: A. The application may be placed behind nore recent applications for building permits in the review process and not reviewed until required information has b• en provided and the application rotates again to first position for reNew. B. Delay in Issuance of the permit. C. Delay In proceeding with construction. (3) 11 you answered "No" to this question the circumstance ;described in the question could result In a "Stop Work Order" being issued or a "Certificate of Occupancy' not being Issued. PerApp02.95 Effective August 15, 1995 of • WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made this A,Z day of Jan JC.rj ,19 q8 ben J 4 PA R k E R A / A JJZ. f,/l � Pwr'lfcc LD of the • County of Oar CI Ifi and State of C 0 to 11. 40 , &fantods) and 5JJ {6(o RancL, 1_ LC • whose legal address is WD" C Ag60PDA4E,CD gi 23 Poaox zzi, /� of the County of 6c rT -/ I and Sate of Co / O r'O , penitent: WITNESS that the grantor(s), for and in consideration of the sum of 'rte OOL(2ro ascd O lour 9 OO4 CLHQ valaahk Colesiderth ry» DOLLARS. the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged. has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents do ex grant. bargain, sell, convey and confirm. unto the grantee(s), r/s heirs and assigns forever, g11 the real property. together with i mprovements, if any. situate. lying and being in the County of 6. 47e. State of Colorado, 1.. described 01 ,z..z UIOLk 6 Asp, CryrlA( ,C1veg.. Cs rA7c also known by street and number as:.;/ /A assessors acheduk or parcel number. A ZME3 -021 - -04 ,2 TOGETHER with all and singular the henditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining the reversion and reversions. remainder and reaaindea, nets, issues and profits thereof, and all the auto right, title, interat. claim and demand whatsoever of the (rentals), either in law or equity, of. in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditament' and appurtenances; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premiss above barpined and described, with the appurtenance, unto the grantee(s), heirs and assigns forever. The grantor(s), for /n„ set f His heirs and personal representatives. do covenant. grant. bargain and agree to and with the grantee(s), 7A..ir heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents. n.y ° r 4 well seized of the premises above conveyed, hare. good. sure, perfect. absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple. and ha vr. good right, full power and authority to grant, bargain. sell and convey the same in manna and forma aforesaid. and that the same are free and clear from all Conner and oho grants. hatpins. sales. liens, taxes. assessments. encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except New. • The grantor(%) shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable posses- sion of the gnntecys). ITa heirs and assigns. against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any pan thereof. �y�� IN WI ' Lyps the &fantods) ha $ executed this deed on the date set forth abom PARIt ea AI[ JFFPPfa l WRI Pss1.F °AIDYAP y STATE OF COLORADO •M O (/$o.. ‘03 is, a ' County of Gat (-V&A al el l " �� $) / f I l i 0 _ y / The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 7 4 day of j .k l R f+CO �' q 4 • ^y atcP ter A k4 JeFr4'rev Wh.. th Par Lct �`• nness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 0611'L (' . L . 4f . /.4 e. 'If in Denver. men "('tv and ". / , Public 0100103 VERY GO rLE QPE .----- l TOWARCK. SOUTH rHE SOUTH EQUIR D BUILDING SET BACKS I Ewsn+c �m I \ fur 1 Pa i • SEPTIC SYSTEM II I \ - \ P RW C C 1 / 40 2n4gibee . `0 2- • 7 WIDE GRAVEL DRIVE 67. 41 SNOWMP RIVE N NOTE: BUILDER WILL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM SEPARATION OF 100' BETWEEN THE SEPTIC SYSTEM AND THE WELL. BELL COUNTR ( HOMES PROJECT SITE PLAN P.O. BOX 229 LOT22. BLOCK 6 NEW CASTLE. CO 81647 ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES (970) 984 -350E GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO JANUARY 21. 1'.198 PREPARED FOR BUFFALO RANCH. LLC a. lip t 6 . 1 1 1 I c L 1§ I NrD in xo 1Si 73 d 1 II i CI I I I I .. ' • X2& g wea ) 0.r \ \�\ \ y 1 2 ) c- 0 3 q p « > a � 0 r \ \ • • -- — \ @ 7 7 - ‹0 q �� 7 (\\ 0\\\ § ; r - g \ p/ / / \fJ . % ji 0 \ 0 ƒ/ � \ � � Z ,w w / – / - 0- I v ~ \ c-, /~ / c r \ \\ ••• � �'� 2_ 00 + / \ ? ) a \\ \ � ® r f ey Fri 1/4.S\ \= e e k Ho, I I § - n // \ / . > c -n CP \� ƒ / / �s \ 00 /2 �� � • rn \ Z \/ 2 2 \ >a \ \ \ \/ 0 9 3 0 > > A / 0 0 _ . 33 • - - -. • I • ! . I . I . . . . . 0, , .., --- : • t a ) 2 • E " • DI OS An • ? 1 lt K BATH a i e l 1 I r! a l Oo1 C•b e 1 . *.iIS .J . 5.* 101 8 . • - 3 i • — '— i 4 I 1 ' •• 1:1_L . dt 'fl 6 • 1 uTury • .,--t - I liodp. 'V — — . 1 i -- • 0 a i r > - -, 1 Z S. it . 8 I E - \ i .c. t y, 5 1 0 . 0 o r 4 1 o Ei I i s, I ...._, ., e ---- I a t . 4 . 1— -- i 1 0,i Wind., 13' • 6- C I — 1, —4, I . • V a . • . .. —. . — . . . o GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2 913 109 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No. Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81801 Phone (303) 945 -8212 This does not constitute INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT a building or use permit. PROPERTY Owner's Name Buffalo Ranch LW Present Address P.O. BCOc 221 Car) da1P Phone 947 -5184 System Location Lot 22, Slat 6, Aspen Crystal. River Estates, Carbondale Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. SYSTEM DESIGN Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3 Required Absorption Area - See Attached Special Setback Requirements: Date Inspector FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed) Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation System installer Septic Tank Capacity Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface Absorption Area Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements Other Date Inspector RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE CONDITIONS: 1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter 25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. 2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully compiled with County zoning and building requirements. Con- nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shell automatically be s violation or a requirement of the permit and cause for both regal action and revocation of the permit. 3. Any person who constructs, alters, or Installs an individual sewage disposal system In a manner which involves a knowing and material variation from the terms or specifications contained In the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine — 8 months in (ail or both). White - APPLICANT Yellow- DEPARTMENT 5. . i . INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION t . R .30 tFtrAci,C•4.uc i LLL V DRESS Po. ZZ( C�Ieat>m)O,9Le iQ /4 Z'3 PHONE 9f7 - -Cre e CONTRACTOR - Bu EF1co &t,tX,(t (-LC— ADDRESS ?D,BG% Z2( C4eeo1o4c.u= PHONE 9 V7 - -r &t' PERMIT REQUEST FOR (X) NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4). LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY ! ; Near what City of Town 44;t0oit1DJK -t- Size of Lot 39, lot d Legal Description or Address l.ot zZ , 3t,tok, A, asn#s Ca2YSTAt ,Zit) F.2 asta reS WASTES TYPE: (4 DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: ,Pr en f=.v e . M. Number of Bedrooms 3 Number of Persons 3 ( Grinder (4 Automatic Washer (L) Dishwasher ,SOI IRCE AND TYPE. OF WATER SIMPLY (54, WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: Z nt tc-sS Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? kir') A site plan is required to be svhmittef.lhttt indicrtes the following MINIMUM distances: Leach Field to Well: 100 feet Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet Septic System to Property Lines: 10 feet t o : I t l 1 ' i ■ Li : ti IP ; i WITHOUT A SITE PLAN CiROI IND CONDITIONS Depth to first Ground Water Table Percent Ground Slope -1/6% ,. 36 . • / • lE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: 4 SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT ( ) VAULT ( 4 VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE ( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE ( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE FINAL DISPOSAL BY: (4 ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT ( ) EVAPOTRANSPIRATION ( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER ( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) WASTEWATER POND ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? FRRCOT.ATION TEST RF.SI I1 IS. (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the Percolation Test) Minutes per inch in hole No. I Minutes per inch in hole NO. 3 Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. _ Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: Name, address and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system: Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations made, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to be true and correct to the hest of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further understand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based upon said ap ication and in legal action for perjury as provided by law. Signed Date / /Z %e l/G / PLEASE DRAW ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! f • +7 -ter No. 6616 • GARFZRL.D COUNTY BUILDING, SANITA77O141 and PL LNIVING DEPARTMENT 109 Mk Sheet Site 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado x1601 . (303)945 -8212 Mt Job Address t 60, Black 5, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Carb nda1P Name of Work Building Permit U.e of Bu lding Manu. Bare 011 FOundatian Owner Buffalo Ranch LSC Contractor Pell country Btees AmouotorPeamits 405.84 Date February 13, 1998 Permit: 124.75 Plan : 81.09 Set Up Fee : 200.00 Paid $81.09 1 -23 -98 S. Archuleta • Cck -t.3! • BUILDING PER'AITAPPLICATION • 'Amino COUNTY // , COLORADO Applicant to complete numbered spaces orl�. PERMIT NO. _ �7/‘ P ARCEUSCHED NO. Jai Mosta 1 LEGAL LOT NO. BLOCK BUBDM,SION ,t / n ,. / DEBCR. I 60 I s I fl y m c t V sla i K'.c 'eai, cs 2 DWN jJ ER 1 x &.- .L LF_t DR ADESSr�ryry/r>pp g, 2.,,,f / CL-16. N f . { ( 1 - I J PH 94 3 s/6'(., 4 - PI it 3 CONTRACTOR j t to U+t e...i .< ADDRESS Po g , 22't Nu..(A cri L met E i LICENSE NO. 4 ARCHRECTOR DESIONER c4- L4k51 kaki.: ADDRESS PH. LICENSE NO. 5 ENGINEER Co /4, Wcj //O M4 ADDRESS PH. LICENSE NO. /, b$O S.14. 3/ C ro S. g/ ! H T NO. OF FLOORS ) /J. / 6 S.F OF BUILDING l_ J1 S.FOFI.O HEKT 7 USE CF BUILDING Re S N/�O...I/4l - • 8 C1Aa OF VOX EdIEW oAD)RIO / N oALLTERATION o REPAIR o MOVE oREMOVE cu 9 Daee/ARE S c i V ( 1 L A4A,.4tIincd N 9 1 14 /b� ea, O t,rw4..en.rA �oL•+i'K�r 10 GARAGE SINGLE DOUBLE CARPORT SINGLE DOUBLE / • • DRIVEWAY PERMIT ON SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMR SITE PLAN -....■, t • 11 WAww i:N or WORE: S / ADJUSTED VALS PLAN CHECF FEE 5) 0 9 I PERMIT FEE ...9/2 if, 7..r SPECIAL CONDITKKJS: /0 60 IL X 6 . ° 6 SCHOOL NMI ACT FEE NO. OF BUILDINGS ON USE OF BUILDINGS NOW ON /�/.� A. f` PARCEL Q PARCEL ' O TOTAL FEE//in: i OCC. GR. 3 CONST. TYPE ,y�Y / R t ft p NOTICE WATER SUFPLY DATE PERMIT ISSUED � 3 X 90 VENTILAT E PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUM G, HEATING, Sot= Mvnovue ReDURFO RECEIVED Not RIMMED VENTILATING OR AIR CONDTKKJING. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS ZOMNG NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS, OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. HEALTH DEFT. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATP01 AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES FIRE DEPT. GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO ONE SOIL REPOR T AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REG II RUCT OR THE PERFORMANCE OF SETBACKS CONSTRUC N... B.J",1,,"JANs KXJ K L. o // /(' Signature of OO,xlee. W.g,i* .or nOTead and • - • .. nnodU .. FLOOD HAZARD • I Z �', NU MAF. HOIAE 2 00, 0 0 Building De IApprove/8 9 ' Romney • APpoveWet OTHER • ' , 0 d AGREEMENT / PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT AS OWNER, CONTRACTOR AND /OR THE AGENT OF THE CONTRACTOR Or OWNER TO CONSTRUCT THE STRUCTURE AS DETAILED ON PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITTED TO AND REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT THE SIGNER HEREBY ACREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL BUILDING CODES AI LAND USE REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY GARFIELD COUNTY PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GIVEN IN 30.28.201 CRS AS AMENDED. THE SIGNHR FURTHER AGREES THAT IF THE ABOVE SAID ORDINANCES ARE NOT FULLY COMPLIED WITH IN THE LOCATION, ERECTION, CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STRUCTURE. THE PERMIT MAY THEN BE REVOKED BY NOTICE FROM THE COUNTY AND THAT THEN A'ID THERE IT SHALL BECOME NULL AND VOID. THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT BASED UPON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BUILDING OrrICIAL FROM THEREAFTER REQUIRING THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA OR FROM PREVENT!' G BUILDING OPERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OF THIS CODE OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR REGULAI "JN OF THIS JURISDICTION. THE REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND INSPECTIr CONDUCTED THEREAFTER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ACCEPTANCE OF ANY RESPONSIBILITIES OR LIABILITIES BY GARFIELD COU 'TY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR DISCREPANCIES. THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE ITEMS AND IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONSTRUCT 'N RESTS SPECIFICALLY WITH THE ARCHITECT, DESIGNER, BUILDER AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND IN S !PPORT OF THE OWNERS INTEREST. p Garlorm.003 1 HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDER: TAND THE AGREEMENT ABOVE (INITIAL i] I _I po( m 81to9 / a3 -98 a 29- • • loo 7 NOTICE This notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield County will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the structure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. At the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the review of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the building permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, if the applicable work has been done by the County. To do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department must be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If Garfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will not complete the final inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Further, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance or the permit will become void. A new building permit will have to be obtained to start or continue any work. The above statements are acknowledged by: N. e bate This signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject to the above statements 442 • r GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS for SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTION including NEW CONSTRUCTION MANUFACTURED HOMES ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS and MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the issuance of a permit it is important that complete information be provided. Adequate and complete information will prevent delays in the plan review process. Reviewing a plan and the discovery that required information has not been provided by the applicant may result in the delay of the permit issuance and in proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor may be required to provide this information before the plan review may proceed. This causes delays because other plans that are in line for review may be given attention before the new information may be reviewed after it has been provided to the Building Department. Please review this document to determine if you have enough information to design your project and provide adequate information to facilitate a plan review. If you do not, it may be helpful to obtain a book titled "Dwelling construction under the Uniform Building Code. This book is available to you through this department at our cost. Also, please consider using a design professional for assistance in your design and a construction professional for construction of your project. To provide for a more understandable plan in order to determine compliance with the building, plumbing and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following check list prior to and during design. Applicants are required to indicate appropriately and to submit completed check list at time of application for a permit: For the placement of a manufactured home, questions numbers 1 -4 and 19 -28 are the only questions that need to be addressed: e Ike • 1. Is a site plan included that indicates the distance of the proposed building or addition to property lines, other buildings, set back easements and utility easements? Yes X No ((, Not necessary for this project (2) 2. Does the site plan include the location of the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and the distances to property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent properties) , streams or water courses? Yes )c No (u Not necessary for this project (2) • 3. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing the property? Yes )C No (Q Not necessary for this project m 4. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the uniform building code or per stamped engineered design? Yes _2S1_ No (,) Not necessary for this project m 5. Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes No (() Not necessary for this project a) 6. Do the plans indicate the size an location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes No (n Not necessary for this project (2) 7. Do the plans include design loads as required under the Uniform Building code for roof snow loads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot in Garfield County) floor loads and wind loads? Yes No (() Not necessary for this project a) 8. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor and roof construction? Yes No (n Not necessary for this project (2) 9. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes No (n Not necessary for this project m 10. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns and beams? Yes No (() Not necessary for this project (2) ......_..... 1 I. Does the plan indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the highest point of the building or addition measured at mid span between the ridge and the eave down to existing grade contours? Yes No ( I ) Not necessary for this project m 12. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and model and Colorado Phase II certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes No (I) Not necessary for this project (2) 13. Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the Uniform Building Code Chapter 37? Yes No (I) Not necessary for this project m 14. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress /rescue windows from sleeping rooms and /or basements comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code? Yes No ( 1 ) Not necessary for this project 15. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for all habitable rooms? Yes No _ (o Not necessary for this project (2) 16. Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface normally used as a walking surface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower ddors and tub enclosures and specify safety glazing for these areas? Yes No (,) Not necessary for this project (2) 17. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on tin plan? Yes No ( I ) Not necessary for this project (2) 18 Do you understand that if you belong to a homeowners association, it is your responsibility to obtain ' /ritien permission from that association, if required by that association, prior to s('bmitting an application for a building permit? Yes No _ _ -t) Not necessary for this project (2) 19. Will this be the only re, ide ntial structure on the parcel? Yes n No _ _ If No- Explain 20. Have two (2) complete sets of constructions drawings been submitted with the application? Yes X No „) Not necer ;ary for this project (2) 21. Is this an application for the placement or a manufactured home? Yes X No If yes, have you specked the size of the unit (min. 20ft x 20ft); live roof load (min.40#); wind design (min. wind speed cf 80 mph & 15 Ib. wind load); foundation design; method of anchoring? Yes IC No c , ) Not necessary for this project m 22. Have you designed or had this plat) designed while considering building and other construction code requirements? Yes X No n, 23. Does the plan accurately indicate what yo' I intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by the Garfield Building Department? Yes 2C. No (3) 24. Do you understand that approved for design and/or construction changes are required prior to the application cif these changes? Yes X. No rn 25. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review' fee from you at the time of applicatio) i and that you will be required to pay the "Permit Fee" as well as any "School impact" or "Septic system " fees required, at the time ydu pick up yoi r building permit's Yes )C No (3) 26. Are you aware that twenty four P.4) hour notice is required for all inspections? Inspections v ill bit made front Battlement Mesa to West Glenwood In the mornings ant. from Glenwood Springs to Carbondale In the afternoon. Morning inspections must be c:dled in by 12:00 p.m. the day before; afternoon Inspections must be called in I'y 5:00 p.m. the day before . Failure to give 24 hour notice for inspections will delay your Inspection one (1) day. Yes ?c No 27. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the Uniform Building Code including npprov"d on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and oc' :upanc of the building? Yes No (3) ISO 28. Are you aware that the person signing the Permit Application whether the "Owner ", "Agent of the Owner, "General Contractor", "Contractor" or otherwise, signing the application is the party responsible for the project complying with the Uniform Codes ". Yes )C No rn I hereby acknowledge that I have read. understand and answered these questions accurately to the best of my ability. $JM RW.LI— ZL Cam, /23/48 • signat a )44 Rrkr/ kr 6LL date Phone: 9q 7 - rig t l (days); 1 3 ° j) s 9 3 4 1 9 1 4 (evenings) Project Name: f$frfic% ie2-4-L 1 4 a Project Address: Laic) al/L -S As a del ��r 64/4" 5 Nctes: (1) 0 you have answered "No" on any of these questions you may be required to provide this information at the request of the Building Official prior to beginning the plan review process. Delays In issuing the permit are to be expected. Work may not proceed without the Issuance of the permit. (2) If yoU have answered Net necessary for this project" on any of the questions and k Is determined by the Building Official that the information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum compliance with the adopted codes, please expect the following: A. The application may be placed behind more recent applications for building permits In the review process and not reviewed until required information has been provided and the application rotates again to first poskion for review. 8. Delay in Issuance of the permit. C. Delay in proceeding with consul 'ion. (3) If you answered "No" to this question the ckca stances described in the question could result in a "Stop Work Order" being Issued or a "Certificate of Occupancy' not being i •ued. PerApp02.95 Effective August 15, 1995 afro 4 V e • WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made this .22.) day of JAR Q .r9 , 19 Rp between .1 fie l l'. PAIC (CE R- of the • County of Gs.r il..li and State of oho ro' " , grantor(s) and /S ff to 4 • 14 - 1 .• P L C whose legal address is Fie Pr Po (S 721, Ccr6 w(a(t r CO 8y12 3 of the County of Cc r lxeel and State of C O , grantee(s): WITNESS that the grantor(:). for and in consideration of the sum of Tut d Dl tan Cod{ o1 , acS CL4i4 vaLL(Q bk. CoKsec(p ra h OVS DOLLARS. theeceipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, MS granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents do gram. bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the grantee(s), . ja heirs and assigns forever, all the real property. together with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the County of Co r(it State of Colorado, described as follows: 0 4 6'0 ei0 .k 5 A spe -1", Cr giver C 4+e.s also known by street and number as: N/A assessor's schedule or parcel number. A y!3- o 21- 0 '/ - 060 TOGETHER with all and singular the heneditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, the reversion and reversions. remainder and remainder, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, into est, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor(s). either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the bereditammu and appurtenances; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances. unto the grantee(:), heirs and assigns forever. The grantor(s), for Him self /14 heirs and personal representative, do covenant. grant, bargain and agree to and with the grantee(n ile heirs and assigns. that at the time of the enseating and delivery of these presents. //e is well seized of the premises above conveyed. hat good, sure. perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance. in law, in fee simple. and ha S good right. full power and 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, Inc, . assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except ,(/ate The grantors) shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above barpined premises in the quiet and peaceable posses- sion of the grantee(sk n I$ heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. IN WITNESS W EREOntMs) has executed this deed on the date set forth above. eey W. PAeter— gi p. ............:•, ��t� STATE OF COLORADO f 2 { CINDY \ Ir i ss. i HU GB County of Gar C\tLOk %, \ DENNEY `1, 4444 r The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this aNa day of tl �� `'•••• • " r O Q,- . 19 cpa, . • by J t,E'{•re W W. POA k.14/ Vj "...:w% 2 l Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 111 pc • , •'. ' WIDE GRAVEL DRIVE 0 V / V . 0� ` GENTLE Ifli t?....: 4,‘ \ q i / `/ \ \ • / PROPOSED SEPJ IC SYSI M ` \ l / \ \ \ \ \ STEEP opE STEEP \ RI_QURED BUILDIIJG SET BACKS- , 7 \ S. \ \ \ / \P\O O L / NOTE: N, BUILDER WILL MAINTAIN A MINIMI r1 SEPARATION OF I00' BETWEEN THE SEPTIC Sl STEM AND THE WELL. BELL COUNTRY HOMES PRO.IECT SITE PLAN P.O. BOX 229 LOT 60. BLOCK 5 NEW CASTLE. CO 81647 ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES (9701 984 -3500 GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO JANUARY 21. 1998 PREPARED FOR BUFFALO RANCH. LLC ...J...J. .V ... .. - �-. .-.r • i p N e ri 8 t 5 n wlg 8 E IV 13 Zj 3i X I I I N -is D I hihk l CD rn iii I H Ii l _ -qt. • 1 \:.:.. 0 • • § � . \ & /R ° o , . 9 . � i I a 2 { J . \ / \ . 1 H $ ® \ ( —�� ilKqZ e rn Q q 2 0 Ai/\ , 70r \\ , > >_Z ) \ \/ ,6R1 \\ ] f • 0 / I \ Z 2 . . � � .. \ 0 . � [ \ e / • _ 7 > Z . � / i0 /\ § \/ # / \ \ \ \ \$ rn/ § m n7 n 0 k rn 9 \ z ri \ ƒ / � Iz § \ � \ \ k • �� 7 . || _ 0 o Z \ 2 § & ` y \ c \\ \ Q 0 >H 7 \� $ >9 / 9 »\ \ 71 / G / 0 a \ _ . • — — • • • • — I • : n.1 !o u 4 M BATH o I ...... I.P. I ow.Go..a� .t I . 4! is r. J __ G Wm ■ • O ' I X i �� =� O I 3 33 111 1 1 O P 0 Ca I i X ! i i — .,,, z p ! N s _ I a 0.1. wn<o. —t i . • J'•6' 17'-6 ■ 4 i GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2 914 • 109 8th Street Suits 903 Assessor's Parcel No. Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81801 Phone (303) 945 -8212 This does not constitute INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT a building or use permit. PROPERTY Owner's Name Buffalo Ranch LtC Present Address P.O. BOX 221 Carinnrialn Phone 947 -5184 System Location lot 60, Block 5, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Cattcndale Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. SYSTEM DESIGN Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3 Required Absorption Area - See Attached Special Setback Requirements: Date Inspector FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed) Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation System Installer Septic Tank Capacity Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface Absorption Area Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements Other • Date Inspector RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE •CONDITIONS: 1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter 25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. 2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully compiled with County zoning and building requirements. Con - nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit. 3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual sewage disposal system in • manner which involves a knowing and material variation from the terms or specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class I. Potty Offense (8500.00 fine —8 months In )ail or both), I `5,111.1. ( Whits •APPLICANT VNbw- DEPARTMENT n/ INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION OWNER ...---- ...13jr /jo ah-tci LL ADDRESS 6c� z4 20-41, 2GrGex..me / G . (� ./6z3 PHONE ''/4 7 - sin /S CONTRACTOR v4"¢c 17 / `1 // ADDRESS ?a6oc z.Z) � &4ovp�ktc_ PA? PHONE 91 /7- - S1451 PERMIT REQUEST FOR ((JrNEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4). LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY: Near what City of Town e, e6p Size of Lot 3 /, 3'D 5 a . Legal Description or Address IS ice, i3 /t-Ls , , Cr r S-/ml / 64 WASTES TYPE: (DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: 2 /0l m 1 Numb r of Bedrooms 3 Number of Persons 3 ((arbage Grinder (v) Automatic asher (v) tishwasher SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SI IPPI.Y: (WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: , idcS Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? 4/0 A site plan is required to be submitted that indirptes the following MINIMUM distances: Leach Field to Well: 100 feet Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet Septic System to Property Lines: 10 feet YOUR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT A SITE PLAN, GROI JND CONDITIONS Depth to first Ground Water Table Percent Ground Slope /07 f �•, fit•. ,. , TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: ( / SEPTIC TANK ( A'?RATION PLANT ( ) VAULT ( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE ( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE ; ,.,-.. 0 E t , ( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( t OTHER - DESCRIBE I FINAL DISPOSAL BY: (1/ ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR Pl r ( ) EVAPOTRANSPIRATION ,. ( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER ( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) WASTEWATER POND ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE _ WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCI IARGED I'IRE( TLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? 4 PERCOLATION TEST RES( II.TS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the Percolation Test) Minutes per inch in Dole No 1 Minutes per inch in hole NO. 3 Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: Name, address and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system: Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations made, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. 1 further understand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law. atiffjo Signed �� "��%'w` ---' Date 0 4 PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY! (r� � Yi rt A l i 53 ` I LAW OFFICES OF falb 11 8 1% Q 8 ' HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P. i, ( i 201 NORTH MILL STREET HERBERT S. KLEIN SUITE 203 TELLURIDE OFFICE: MILLARD J. ZIMET' ASPEN. COLORADO 81811 P.O. BOX 215 MICHELE NELSON' (970) 82 5-8780 300 WEST COLORADO AVENUE THOMAS G. KENNEDY° TELECOPIER (970) V1839n SUITE 2B FP_ TELLURIDE, COLORADO 81435 (970) 728-5151 OF COUNSEL: v TELECOPIER (970) 7283089 JACQUELINE L. GARDNER * 4110 admitted in New Yaea RIDGWAY OFFICE: 'alsoatd ut GliMni, and Haxaii 122 VILLAGE SQUARE WEST * Yea admdted in MayWf RIDGWAY, CO 81432 (970)8283888 TELECOPIER (970) 8283977 February 17, 1998 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED also VIA FACSIMILE: 945 -7785 Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean, Director Garfield County Building & Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Appeal of Issuance of Building Permits Dear Sirs: This law firm represents the Carbondale Corporation, a Colorado corporation ( I am writing, on behalf of CC, to appeal the issuance of three building permits to Buffalo Ranch, LLC (the "LLC"), pertaining to three lots owned by that LLC in the Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision ("ACRE"). It is our understanding that Mr. Jeff Parker is a principal in this LLC and recently conveyed the lots to the LLC for the purpose of developing them with pre- manufactured homes. The lots in question are: Block 5, Lot 3; Block 5, Lot 60; and Block 6, Lot 22. I was informed that these permits were issued on February 13, 1998. CC is the owner of The Big Four Ranch, located in Garfield County, and is also the owner of 81 of the 141 lots within ACRE. In addition, several of CC's lots within ACRE abut the lots in question. The basis of this appeal is that the LLC cannot demonstrate that it has legal access to its lots and that such access is mandated by the UBC. As you may know, a court case is now pending (97 -CV- 199 -C) in which certain plaintiffs who own lots in ACRE (alleging claims on their own behalf and on behalf of all other owners of lots in ACRE) are attempting to condemn access to their lots and have alleged that there is no other access in ACRE. This case is in its early stages, and will undoubtedly take many more months to resolve. So at this time in order to access the LLC's _S5 Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean February 17, 1998 Page 2 lots, Mr. Parker (and his builders and contractors) would have to commit trespass because neither the LLC nor Mr. Parker have a current legally enforceable right of access to the lots in question. Likewise, the County would not have the right to access these lots in order to undertake necessary inspections. If the County has any question concerning the LLC's access rights, just ask Mr. Parker to produce a title insurance policy which insures access. Section 108.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code mandates that all work on the lots in question must be accessible in order for required inspections to take place. Without successful inspections the buildings cannot be lawfully occupied. The permittee is obligated to ensure that such access is available. These are not debatable requirements. Although the building department is aware that access is not presently available and has disclosed these requirements in writing to the LLC and Mr. Parker, also advising Mr. Parker that his construction may not be lawfully occupied unless access was available for the purpose of inspections, the permits were issued. Disclosing these legal requirements to Mr. Parker does not make the issuance of the permits legal nor does it shift to the LLC the County's liability for its failure to enforce basic health and safety laws. Section 8.01 of the Garfield County Zoning Regulations states that the Building Official "...shall not issue any permit unless the plans for the proposed erection, construction ... fully conform to all provisions of this Resolution and all provisions of the Building Code affecting the subject property." This is also a requirement of State statutes. See 30 -28 -205, CRS 1997. The issuance of the permits is contrary to the clear wording of the UBC and unlawful. Issuing permits for work that cannot be inspected invites non - compliance with health and safety laws and assures that substantial monies will be expended on the construction of houses that cannot be lawfully occupied. To say that the County is protected because the construction cannot obtain a certificate of occupancy without a final inspection and therefore cannot be lawfully occupied, is absurd when the County is not able to inspect the construction to detect an unlawful occupancy. This position also ignores the necessary inspections during construction that must take place to satisfy the UBC. The issuance of these permits will set a very dangerous precedent and could completely emasculate the County's ability to enforce its building and zoning code. If people can obtain a building permit to build something that cannot be inspected, the potential for abuse is unlimited. From a public safety point of —SL- Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean February 17, 1998 Page 3 view, the dangers of this situation are obvious. Emergency services are not able to reach the scene of fire or accident. Septic systems (or the absence of them) are not inspected. Water supplies may not exist. Especially in ACRE, with its 141 lots, numerous structures could be built by trespassers without any County inspections. What the building department is doing here is a throwback to the days before building and zoning regulations were first promulgated in Colorado, unlawful and, quite frankly, shocking in light of the significant public discussion concerning growth in our region. The LLC and Mr. Parker will not be harmed by the rescission of the building permits, because at this time there is no legal way for the LLC or Mr. Parker to get to their lots to commence construction; they can't legally use these permits -- rather, the only way they can use them is to trespass. And, likewise, the only way the County could inspect the construction is by its trespass. Accordingly, CC respectfully requests that the Zoning Board of Adjustment rescind these building permits. Please inform me of the date that the pubic hearing will take place on this appeal. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding any of the foregoing. Very truly yours, HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: He bert S. Klein cc: Garfield County Board of County Commissioners Don DeFord, Esq. Carbondale Town Trustees Mark Chain, Carbondale Planning Director Robert Emerson, Esq. Carbondale Town Attorney Terry Considine egg Town of Carbondale - � � • 511 Colorado Avenue (970) 963 -2733 /. Carbondale, CO 81623 FAX (970) 963 -9140 \ .1 :. 1 .. 1:11 r �_.. � �� .(Y ' 4159a Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustmen 2 % Mark Bean, Director Garfield County Building & Planning Department GA: Glenwood od Springs, CO G lewod Sping, CO 81601 RE: Appeal of issuance of building permits Dear Mark: On behalf of the Town of Carbondale, I wish to appeal the issuance of three building permits issued to Buffalo Ranch, LLC in the name of Jeff Parker. These three building permits are for lots within Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision (ACRE). The lots in question are: Block 5, Lot 60: Block 6, Lot 22; Block 5, Lot 3. ACRE lies within Carbondale's three mile area as defined in CRS 31 -12 -105 (e). The town is currently formulating a new Comprehensive Plan and is investigating all issues related to the development (and non - development) of private lands within this three mile area. This planning process commenced in June, 1997 and will not be completed for a few more months. The basis for this appeal is that Mr. Parker cannot demonstrate legal access to the sites in question. It is the town's understanding that Mr. Parker has a revocable license to cross the railroad right -of -way currently owned by Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority. After inspecting the county assessors maps, it appears that Mr. Parker has no way to get from the railroad right -of -way to ACRE without trespassing. Currently there is a case pending (97- CV- 199 -C) in which plaintiffs that own lots in ACRE are attempting to condemn access to their lots. The County Planner Director has also indicated to me that he is not certain whether Mr. Parker has legal access to his lots. This would appear to be confirmed by notice signed by Mr. Parker which is provided to applicants for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with "uncertain legal access" (Notice attached). Section 503.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code states "buildings shall join or have access to a public wav or vard on not less than one side. Required yards shall be permanently maintained" (attached). It appears that Mr. Parker does not have access to this right -of -way within ACRE adjoining his lot and therefore the issuance of a building permit according to the 1994 Uniform Building Code should not have been granted. The notice regarding building permits with uncertain legal access states that "if Garfield County is not allowed access to the property, the County will not complete the final `S• County Letter February 20, 1998 Page two inspection and the building can not be lawfully occupied ". This appears to acknowledge that the County may not be able to inspect construction or in this case the installation of manufactured homes. More important, it also invites people to occupy buildings that have not been inspected and have not received a certificate of occupancy. We feel that this is irresponsible. Our primary concern with the issuance of these building permits is that they may negate much of the planning work that has occurred over the last two years for our three mile area before there is an opportunity to complete it. Finally, the ACRE area has uncertain water supply and wastewater treatment issues. It is our understanding that the County would even allow a cistern as a water supply for these building permits. This seems contrary to the County's regulations on insuring adequate water supplies within present subdivisions as well as other areas in the County. For example, would the County allow a cistem to be a legal water source in the Satank area? The Town in no way wishes to hurt its relationship with the County and hope that this appeal does not do this. We are simply trying to preserve the integrity of our Comprehensive Plan process and hope that it can run its course without undue complications. Please contact me if you need any additional information. Sincerely, Mark Chain Planning Director cc: Don DeFord, Esq. Carbondale Board of Trustees Robert Emerson, Esq. Herbert S. Klein 4 V .I' . NOTICE This notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield County will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the structure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. At the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the review of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the building permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, if the applicable work has been done by the County. To do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department must be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If Garfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will not complete the final inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Further, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance or the permit will become void. A new building permit will have to be obtained to start or continue any work. The above statements are acknowledged by: /111./N, .2l1 N ate This signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject to the above statements it SlAievr _ �( 11 '� t �o County nf G a r C t.0k � J' � ` . ..... . .. •47.19 gi • tip' " r 501 -503.3 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE Chapter 5 • GENERAL BUILDING LIMITATIONS 1 . SECTION 501 — SCOPE { Buildings and structures shall comply with the location on property, area, height and other provi- — sions of this chapter. For additional limitations or allowances for special uses or occupancies, see the following: SECTION SUBJECT 402 Atria 403 High -rise office buildings and Group R, Division 1 Occupancies • 404 Malls 311.9 Open parking structures 307 Group H, Division 6 Occupancies . 412 Aviation control towers • • 414 Agricultural buildings 3111 Membrane structures SECTION 502 — PREMISES IDENTIFICATION • Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new buildings in such a position as to be - �` plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. SECTION 503 — LOCATION ON PROPERTY /� 503.1 General. Buildings shall adjoin or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one \I !� side. Required yards shall be permanently maintained. For the purpose of this section, the center tine of an adjoining public way shall be considered an • adjacent property line. (See also Section 1203.4.) 503.2 Fire Resistance of Walls. 503.2.1 General. Exterior walls shall have fire resistance and opening protection as set forth in (_ Table 5 -A and in accordance with such additional provisions as are set forth in Chapter 6. Distance shall be measured at right angles from the property line. The above provisions shall not apply to walls at right angles to the property line. 1 Projections beyond the exterior wall shall comply with Section 705 and shall not extend beyond: 1. A point one third the distance to the property line from an assumed vertical plane located where fire- resistive protection of openings is first required due to location on property; or #` 2. More than 12 inches (305 mm) into areas where openings are prohibited. 503.2.2 Area of openings. When openings in exterior walls are required to be protected due to distance from property line. the sum of the area of such openings shall not exceed 50 percent of the total area of the wall in each story. 503.3 Buildings on Same Property and Buildings Containing Courts. For the purposes of de- termining the required wall and opening protection and roof- covering requirements, buildings on the same property and court walls of buildings over one story in height shall be assumed to have a property line between them. 1-84 t • SaraL l OP 107.6-108.5.2 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. official The building -_ fd d by the original permittee n except written application not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment. . SECTION 108 — INSPECTIONS • 108.1 General. All construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspec- a tion by the building official and all such construction or work shall remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes until approved by the building official. In addition, certain types of con- struction shall have continuous inspection as specified in Section 1701.5. a ' Approval as a result of an inspection shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the ili provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction. Inspections presuming to give au- thority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid. It shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense en- tailed in the removal or replacement of any material requ to allow inspection. ` A survey of the lot may be required by the building official to verify that the structure is located in �,�accordance with the approved plans. • 108.2 Inspection Record Card. Work requiring a permit shall not be commenced until the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder shall have posted or otherwise made available an inspection record card such as to allow the building official to conveniently make the required entries thereon regarding inspection of the work. This card shall be maintained available by the permit holder until • final approval has been granted by the building official. t 1083 Inspection Requests. It shall be the duty of the person doing the work authorized by a per - mit to notify the building official that such work is ready for inspection. The building official may require that every request for inspection be filed at least one working day before such inspection is desired. Such request may be in writing or by telephone at the option of the building official. n It shall be the duty of the person requesting any inspections required by this code to provide ac- cess to and means for inspection of such work. 108.4 Approval Required. Work shall not be done beyond the point indicated in each successive t inspection without first obtaining the approval of the building official. The building official. upon notification. shall make the requested inspections and shall either indicate that portion of the con- - struction is satisfactory as completed. or shall notify the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder wherein the same fails to comply with this code. Any portions which do not comply shall be i corrected and such portion shall not be covered or concealed until authorized by the building offi- cial. There shall be a final inspection and approval of all buildings and structures when completed and i 1:1 ready for occupancy and use. 108.5 Required Inspections. 1 1085.1 General. Reinforcing steel or structural framework of any part of any building or struc- ture shall not be covered or concealed without first obtaining the approval of the building official. The building official. upon notification. shall make the inspections set forth in the following sub- sections. 'I,; 1085.2 Foundation inspection. To be made after excavations for footings are complete and any required reinforcing steel is in place. For concrete foundations. any required forms shall be in place 1-8 PZ l 501-503.3 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 19f Chapter 5 GENERAL BUILDING LIMITATIONS • • . to SECTION 501 —SCOPE an ) r re, •5 Buildings and structures shall comply with the location on property, area, height and other provi- sions of this chapter. For additional limitations or allowances for special uses or occupancies, see the following: SECTION SUBJECT St 1 402 Atria 403 High -rise office buildings and Group R, 51 Division 1 Occupancies 5 , 404 Malls 311.9 Open parking structures =' 307 Group H. Division 6 Occupancies t' 412 Aviation control towers _ p ' 4 14 Agricultural buildings I, �.�..� 3111 Membrane structures 5 ( �.����� l i l "T. __ ` SECTION 502 — PREMISES IDENTIFICATION r. •:, Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. . i. SECTION 503 — LOCATION ON PROPERTY 503.1 General. Buildings shall adjoin or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one side. Required yards shall be permanently maintained. For the purpose of this section, the center line of an adjoining public way shall be considered an i adjacent property line. (See also Section 1203.4.) 503.2 Fire Resistance of Walls. 503.2.1 General. Exterior walls shall have fire resistance and opening protection as set forth in Table 5 - and in accordance with such additional provisions as are set forth in Chapter 6. Distance shall be measured at right angles from the property line. The above provisions shall not apply to walls at right angles to the property line. III Projections beyond the exterior wall shall comply with Section 705 and shall not extend beyond: 1. A point one third the distance to the property line from an assumed vertical plane located where fire- resistive protection of openings is first required due to location on property: or 2. More than 12 inches (305 mm) into areas where openings are prohibited. ■ 503.2.2 Area of openings. When openings in exterior walls sre required to be protected due to distance from property line. the sum of the area of such openings shall not exceed 50 percent of the total area of the wall in each story. 503.3 Buildings on Same Property and Buildings Containing Courts. For the purposes of de ■ tennining the required wall and opening protection and roof- covering requirements, buildings on the same property and court walls of buildings over one story in height shall be assumed to have a property line between them. -I 1-84 a � . c. 1001-1001.2 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1 I Chapter 10 I MEANS OF EGRESS j i SECTION 1001 — GENERAL j 1001.1 Scope and Standards of Quality. Every building or portion thereof shall be provided with exits as required by this chapter. { The standards listed below labeled a "U.B.C. standard" are also listed in Chapter 35, Part II, and are part of this code. The other standards listed below are recognized standards and as such are not adopted as part of this code (see Sections 3502 and 3503). it 4 1. Power doors. a 1.1 U.B.C. Standard 10 -1, Power - operated Exit Doors 1.2 U.B.C. Standard 7 -8, Horizontal Sliding Fire Doors Used in an Exit i 2. Stairway numbering system. { ' U.B.C. Standard 10 -2, Stairway Identification I bi 3. Hardware. : i U.B.C. Standard 10-4, Panic Hardware i 100L2 Definitions. For the purpose of this chapter, certain terms are defined as follows: BALCONY, EXTERIOR EXIT, is a landing or porch projecting from the wall of a building, i and which serves as a required exit. The long side shall be at least 50 percent open, and the open area above the guardrail shall be so distributed as to prevent the accumulation of smoke or toxic gases. EXIT is a continuous and unobstructed means of egress to a public way and shall include inter- - i vening aisles, doors, doorways. gates, corridors, exterior exit balconies, ramps, stairways, pressur- ized enclosures, horizontal exits, exit passageways, exit courts and yards. EXIT COURT is a yard or court providing access to a public way for one or more required exits. .1 EXIT PASSAGEWAY is an enclosed exit connecting a required exit or exit court with a public I way. I t 1 EXTERIOR STAIRWAY is a stairway that is open on two adjacent sides, except for required E. structural columns and open -type handrails and guardrails. The adjoining open areas shall be either yards, courts or public ways; the other two sides may be enclosed by the exterior walls of the build- I ing. HORIZONTAL EXIT is an exit from one building into another building on approximately the : same level, or through or around a wall constructed as required for a two -hour occupancy separation } and which completely divides a Floor into two or more separate areas so as to establish an area of I if - refuge affording safety from fire or smoke coming from the area from which escape is made. • '. I INTERIOR STAIRWAY is any stairway not meeting the definition of an exterior stairway. = . MULTITHEATER COMPLEX is a building or portion thereof containing two or more motion picture auditoriums which are served by a common lobby. l i PANIC HARDWARE is a door - latching assembly incorporating an unlatching device, the acti- vating portion of which extends across at least one half the width of the door leaf on which it is in- 1I stalled. I t PRIVATE STAIRWAY is a stairway serving one tenant only. • PUBLIC WAY is any street. alley or similar parcel of land essentially unobstructed from the ground to the sky which is deeded. dedicated or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public -� for public use and having a clear width of not less than 10 feet (3048 mm). -. i. 1-172 „ „. i. . MAR 1 6 1998 . TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment — Garfield County Courthouse C#■FiFiE1.0 COUNTY 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, Colorado FROM: Fred 0. Williams 5638 South Skyline Drive Evergreen, CO 80439 DATE: March 11, 1998 SUBJECT: Application to Appeal Administrative Decision to Issue Building Permits filed by Carbondale Corporation Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 5; Lot 60, Block 5; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates Dear Sirs: Carbondale Corporation should not be granted the appeal to rescind the decision to issue building permits and individual sewage disposal permits as that would infringe on my rights to use my property as the Zoning Board has approved previously. The above described property was purchased with the ultimate goal to build a single - family dwelling on this site. The property was zoned for that purpose when it was purchased. I still intend to eventually accomplish this goal; therefore, 1 strenuously object to any decision to take away my rights to obtain the necessary permits to use the property as it was designated by the Zoning Board when the property was purchased. Thank you for your consideration. .�:.� Sf 1 TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment Garfield County Courthouse MAR 1 3 1998 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, Colorado OAE4 cLD COUNTY FROM: Iva' R. Thomas 3822 West 99th Avenue Westminster, CO 80030 DATE: March 11, 1998 SUBJECT: Application to Appeal Administrative Decision to Issue Building Permits filed by Carbondale Corporation Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 5; Lot 60, Block 5; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates Dear Sirs: The above described property was purchased with the ultimate goal to build a single - family dwelling on this site. The property was zoned for that purpose when it was purchased. I still intend to eventually accomplish this goal; therefore, I strenuously object to any decision to take away my rights to obtain the necessary permits to use the property as it was designated by the Zoning Board when the property was purchased. Carbondale Corporation should not be granted the appeal to rescind the decision to issue building permits and individual sewage disposal permits as that would infringe on my rights to use my property as the Zoning Board has approved previously. Thank you for your consideration. —Cfrtn, upx7;11xl z;, c /i Brian P. Schwarz 202 Euclid MAR 1 3 1993 Carbondale CO 81623 Wk & Fax 970 - 963 -0767 Hm 970 - 963 -0728 March 10, 1998 Concerning ACRE (Aspen Crystal River Estates), and appeal to Zoning Board of Adjustments ek n� V Dear Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment Members I have owned a lot (block 5 lot 68) in ACRE since 1982. I would like to express my concern over these appeals and the possible decision that you could make as a result of these appeals. Two important points to keep in mind is that this subdivision (ACRE) is Grand Fathered and has been in existence since 1965. The second point is that there are two lawsuits before the courts right now, one is for historic access through John Nieslaniks ranch complex and the second is a condemnation suit that was filed to show the Nieslaniks that there is an alternative to going through the center of Johns complex. The suits that are before the courts were filed as result of the many failed attempts to negotiate a solution. This is clearly an impasse between two parties that believe they're right and the other is wrong. This long standing disagreement is the only reason we have asked a judge to decide who in fact is right or wrong. With this in mind I believe if you were to revoke these building permits this in large would only serve Considine and his corporation. The same corporation that owns almost 70% of all the lots in both subdivisions plus more than 2000 acres that nearly surround ACRE, this is the same corporation that has been actively working to acquire even more lots and surrounding land, and this is the same corporation that has offered to buy my three quarter of an acre lot for $1,250.00, and offered to buy Donna Nystroms house and acre of land for $10,000.00. These offers were referred to by Mr Considine as generous offers. Finally this is the same corporation that has made threats to at least one prior land owner that if he held out and does not sell to the corporation then he will simply lose his property. In 1986 Mr Considine was proclaimed as a savior to the east mesa, for eliminating the threat of large scale development. He can still be that savior if he chooses, because he very effectively put an end to the threat of large scale development on the east mesa. Or did he? If he decides not to develop then he can reduce the number of buildable lots by over 75% when you consider that most , if not, all of the individually owned lots in Te Ke Ki are too small to build on with out combining several lots together. My view of this in 1986 was that this was a great accomplishment. However, as time passed it became clear to me and many other lot owners who did nett wish to sell to Mr Considine that this was not enough for Considine and his corporation. I believe this latest push for access has, and will even further reveal a side of Mr Considine and his corporate associates that only a few well informed people have known about until now. Considines threat now is that if we gain access then he will not only develop what he can in both the subdivisions but he will also develop his 2000 acre ranch. Surely he didn't actually believe that he was going to buy every last owner out with his so called generous offer. I would just as soon donate my land to the American Indian than let Mr Considine have it for $1,250.00, and I can tell you with certainty that I am not the only lot owner that feels the same way. Surely he didn't believe that the remaining lot owners would just sit back and let him run his Cattle MOO -vers cattle drives across our land then simply take our land through a little known law called Adverse Possession. Being a Harvard Law School Graduate such as Mr Considine, he of all people should know that just because someone has less property than others does not mean they have less property rights. I don't agree with the type of buildings that Mr Parker wants to put up there but I do believe he should be able to build on his own land. Even if we were to loose in court which I believe is highly unlikely, I suppose that if Mr Parker or myself or any other remaining lot owner had the resources to ferry building materials and inspectors up to our lots by helicopter than we should be allowed to do so. There ate after all, public roads and electricity with in ACRE. Last but not least, there have been several concerns raised by the Town of Carbondale, County Commissioners and affected land owners. Those concerns being water, waste water, visual impact and impact on surrounding agricultural operations. If there is a way to discourage high impact dwellings and encourage environmentally sound buildings that incorporate low profile, low impact, solar energy, latest septic tank designs, water conservation methods such as low flow toilets, showers, faucets, and xerascaping than I am all ears. If this is possible than I think this is where your energy should be focused. It should not be focused on denying any one the right to build. The technology is available for these types of dwellings and I see no reason other than neighboring land owners attitudes towards us gaining access that we couldn't fit in with minimum impact on the land and surrounding ranchers. Our gaining access doesn't have to be put on the Agricultural Dooms Day terms that neighboring land owners want to put this on. I can't help but still hope that after all the dust settles and the tempers cool that maybe, just maybe, they will reconsider there threat of large scale development. All we are asking is that our property rights finally be recognized. We realize this probably is not a very popular stance to take but it is the right stance. We know you are under a lot of pressure to revoke the permits, maybe even more pressure than we realize, but please remember that the right decision is not always easy and in this case may not be very popular. Sigcerely /LtA�ti Brian Schwarz L I - \---,____ - � c - \ - ''s, � $/ •L ••mil __ - 1� ,,. f " ,,- 'tip (� rl '� lam- N f { .. 1 1 i y ,' G l , 1 / is,- ' i ` 1 _ regime j .-c 100 - S . q ( � ® cl]Tlllillrrn M I1 1lllrnlRlu 1 1 , ` , I II 1 : u - ! i ll HLlTSl1A9 _ • l�R� 111111Cfll l 11111•] J1 C. Mrrrill" 1 ` i l_ lTII _ _ ci� , I r) 4 T 111E tvtlt 111111 I t�i11.111.1_21.1.J. 771 - 17T jS1l .... T `/� 11 Rl1li1111111 ma /I // � " ,111 a 711 rnlQlf]1f1121 6f11T1nlinrrmAIEl = - Illtdil C t1 CC C / 1 YMYi1YR! • t Y Grit• C i t Y S ,AMYt1\dleACt \tlil C l f' I 9 ,< ` S 1 tuff\ r . Vi • '/' .4,. 4 I ` \ ORO. Y....... Y • ai. G.. es �CC Att ott. ✓ l I r "11 999 ,/,/,/111 , f , \• I rr° / • 4' i u A I • - � _ �— .S • III _ F I T r East Mesa r q. Ownership Patterns �w i • 1 East Mesa Ownership Patterns '� ` r 1 . �' 1 Coffman r , " Considine t Mid- Continent •s" _ - � - � � � ' ' Nieslanik i • _ : -� - - J s r u I Distance to Town Boundary w cuw,r [ J Two -Mile Boundary j it �I Three -Mile Boundary 32 111 I' ''e r ! Stream b j i 1 uuR 200' Contour Lines 1TiTlIrlli . . 4, ;, \ • State Highway i.(lalli t Existing Subdivisions ils l l lirull_ui_iu. iu 9.ul_i�ri_n _ r A, Existing Roads a�a /' USGS Quad Sections / ; \.. int -fi j1➢ } ® Town Boundary 4 • • i _ ly - . r Data Sources: Topography digitized from USGS 7.5 Minulc Quadrangles, Subdivision locations from Garfield County GIS System, 1998 lZ a _ �1 } ) } . Boundary lines interpolated from Garfield County Assessor . "' 1 fi e , ) t '± Maps. 1998 ' '' {� i " "� �t t - ,` ' *4, Note: Boundary lines are approximate. For precise definition, t "•' ♦ s refer to recorded documents. IV- 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Fcc' rIROCK I ^ = aooa NCREEK ir.,,w�l L151UDI0. • GARFIELD COUNTY • COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 109 8th Street Suite 300 P.O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602-0640 Phone 945 -9150 August 15, 1984 Mr. Tibor Gartner 23378 Shingle Creek Road Golden, Co 80401 Re: Aspen Crystal River Estates Dear Mr. Gartner: This letter is being written in response to your request that the County Attorney's Office put something in writing to you in regards to Garfield County's issuance of a building permit on property which you may own in the above subdivision. It is my understanding that in June, 1984, you made a request to Garfield County for issuance of a building permit and that request was refused. The property which you own was platted in 1965 as part of the above subdivision. Although the plat contains a purported dedication of the public ways contained thereon, said dedication has never been accepted by the Board of County Commissioners. In addition, this subdivision has no central water system nor central sewer system. Although the County has recently determined that the Te Ke Ki Drive access is available as to the development Te Ke Ki of Aspen Units 1 and 2, there is no connection by means of dedicated public roadways from those developments to that of Aspen Crystal River Estates. For the above reasons, it is most appropriate for Garfield County to deny a building permit in the above development. As a regulatory basis for this denial I would cite you Section 202(c) and 305(b) of the Uniform Building Code of 1982. In addition, Sections 8.01, 5.01.05, 5.04.03 and 5.04.05 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended, are also applicable. I hope this answers any question you may have. Very truly yours, EARL G. RHODES Garfield County Attorney EGR:mls cc: Mark Bean, County Planner Board of County Commissioners bxaibit 3 2 a ana Po N 3 fb °< na< 00wafwv_ ne f0 < . a 09 a.„ u ... .m n,�1 n°vo an r >• to -0 0 a NQ 5' c Pi ° y ° Y r i 6 E. 2.%n L 2,a ? 0"rt ° w E. n "'o n y° < 6 ° a.• ` 0. w ° ' o• n c ° a mx °' a o a c rry c ' 9 0 5''R'a wtii33 m 5 n r h o = 17 a n c, 2 T .>. a c a a W O2 C ' 5 d < O O p 9 . a ' '^ a n p S � � n W ° _ �. rt 6 "n rt fi w p ^ w L 7' . m w f� ^ w -• n ^ •. O. v v c O > r n -Pp � . 4 a n ono o F • n '0 0 • r i < � ° ' s a vw�v � r '" � a + `° �'�B rr»o"� 7 a ° P, -o 2 ?' :" o ....0 3 " •0 N w of n' o n n' v g a o ° 5 . o, E E ry 'c ' E o" v. 0 0 [o a w E w g v ` 5' . " ry _ . � F � , � , a • a >F� ^ "< Q E ' ti ic'o'n Yf N., nnO a no 3 G. rt n a n 0 a n ^ r a ° �. o - a 6 n ..c mThoo O , F .,,• 0 '2 n 2 . p O n. e E. rr o '^ F w n E 0" mL,0 o rv w°E g o ,o n 3 . 5. xl a n 9 X 5. = • "- • n L", F < >• < 4a'^'6' o=° .Rrvx S F •O - ry n m > a - 5rt s 11 F5 > „ Fp, o _ oo ..... _g ° N n orv A En n =. 5-3 c 7. F a 7 . F M. a � ' S. CO ry . n ° < v° 3 O °° ^ u . • o > w w w " > a n c CO g yy ry o rv'< n. > a3 n a o' co c v o o n n - _ <a v pc o o v' n oo i n ,c ai n n w t 5 w , W � >. E c a d H S n = w n � n' t °- = n a O 3 n _ 0`... n �+9 n cn S n o 0 3 c o w , m > 3 S' S' ^ a o ° Irv' < 2 E' 2 -• m'c n 7. c n`nry nS 2.< 553 8 6^g• '2 2. c y r, ay o C.'a y E n- n °w re; < a T re > .u. c n 5 n c w e . a n n n• 'O E. ❑ >''G > >. p O. N F a n c " _ la. a ?° °. 'n a ry E. � . a� a � w " .< n y> n n -n o 6 0 9 c ^ 0 S c .< Q ' � O c 5' O io o n n> a0 � o'"m ' a� n . r�w 5 : 0I - w> q' 0 5c o g • oo c o ° o o a w . a t" p `°. » r� n< > a,0 '! n w n ? ..,, ac n O w n n to 5 3 2 w w ° Ss `G n ° a- 3° u u a n uo -n, .°, n o a w - , n n ^ > o: A a c n T .< >Rg a> n a wap� >vaa 5 9 , Y. $ � - g O • n v w R rae n o 5 ^ ... T ° m w ro Ss w v° > . n i o > F n a o H 9 et; CD o m 0 ' Ro n j.,81Vto°'w r 3 ,o_ �.0n , < -. ' ❑R , ° y a F , a a ° - ° E.. Q> a E o n ❑ n a O o n o ' N O Y o n• n o O o ! '- E^ _5. tl E E ' n N g � . n a C °' <, - w ' f5 na Ec y.; n n <=' o' F R 2•E w °,. ' F > 9 woN�S >. �. ? a E ^v °fin ° 5 _ co • _ , °g 3 O a O w' v o IS . o E Z' '7'. ? 3 F a -• c 2 c 5•'2 a 2 n `.' is ' n �' o ° ^, a0 n w A • ra > a ? E No 5 '-' 0 E- a 0 2 • -. n n i w- n Op S n o Lw H one n n a gr 5 0 5 t 9 c i 5 g 2' 0 s if w e S Q n a P a n 0 2 C 2. n a n 0 N n S ^ 0 0 ;2 2 ra c to n n 3 5 N w a n r d . . o W 3 p � > >. °, ' p yno 3.a v E'. : a .. ��� ag a g 0 n E m ,• ^ . it' c W g .D ° 0 > I n 'p •O P n c n E •O E ?. r ^ o p 0 a O _ - w 2 . _.. n Z. 1 C. S rs e v T 3 5 yyv o a ° c y a? a' ?> w o c Vn o °' 3 s aa ° io 19 la G.gn <no00 . crR E�'.nv °v 0o a a Y .... N n w `. .. ° e, ' a ;s p > n n o _ n n w o' n S ; q 2 R' n w ' c - n osy , •.;;a S.awo..aa a Rrono n _ -h v 0. a g 0 0 .0 9-, a 0 i 0. 0 0. ° n. n �z o g 0 c< is a , e, g . C D 0 e S n 0 ^ c l e - 3o�5 G - o ,NO S ' c o, a. g no E S --, o no0tx ag o 3a Z C' ; 0 E '" v -r r,R o- rt a' 0-. 5 n w^ an w . n g. 3 5 . 5 8 c 5' - ' v,o n - g. c. 0 n, cn cr0 ? n' ; ` ; 1 S .w _.< w g et . o c O.? ..< - \ a a n O n >° 5i w 0. c> ^r 0 a° x'ti 's c' v. s o c o n o S 0 n c a . - � F . E. a S• A co oo • 0 3 7. 7 S . o_ o � � x 6 3 0 5' T v _ rt R. ° . o ' n rT ° . $ � w 'w S a 'R n a ° ^ o • °x'ay x'0. 0 Ro> .Q w w E. E.> • a 5' w .O'o c . o o a n n v a 0 r1 o O R n n �' 3 . C' . r4 c o a° g' a n ° n ' 5. n 5 n > ' ' R n . °," c' ' a ° c N .o n o a ° w ' n00 n n o 5' > °w no 0- io�..,n N n o r 0 " N � m w n w fl o nnaa `<w 'o Q n ^G ann a a c'' ^ � � aS' �� �_a < w 'o w_cd • 0 a . o n O C E N c ' <' = a o ?. g. m , > , a n n •< n 'O > n O tr, Fr w n v n 0.a vn N.'. o• °,>„ o t r w a o 2 w n a5 'o o t - E. E • ° n O_ -. a c N H , v, b ao O ^ 2, O. a C n v7 7. a. n ? w n . O .18 o > > n o ' n a c < po a E, 5 n a o E. E H a w N 0- o-sn n E+ ,R w c n s c o Po _a. E o n w e : E° 7 16 w S n w t a 0 n, mow n 0 r. N.0-• >o 0" -I $Ea ° � CO ^ w a . n .,� > 5. goo- E n E a 'T _ is o O. n _ >' 0 n 0 P. ° E a ❑ • 500 E ' G O F n a. O K PD . IR v, a0 a S. . 7 . . > N . > . so c o, �v ao ca rv occ m a 0 . n w a n Sc' ° S' .^ . '� Q . o > > a .,, 00 .n 0 0 ,.yam c° a a R < a .< F _'. n c ?: ro c. gi n o . 5 n^ ....-4 a = �" o_ °, 0 w c. a < no x• E o_ a », S .. N EXh %b -win- -%> U s- s 5' ° n °, owe n wa c 3 R <v o g. q i o .a ti, `�' N w M p C 3 n T 5 a n < n E. o. 5 . o ? . 7 . E. 3 c � rn Ell . `�n 3 O 0 y . 3 . ° • o . i5 a . . 0 " C' O R E• n p n N n N •O^ 0 o a n n v n b , Y p c n . o ry • •p w n m O • n N w 14 O a. g ,F " ` 'O rt 0 y a a • 5 E 9 t ° '- N N' n a b O C a< O. g w o C w^ p :-.. • o' p w° 5 o •-< E. .0 c o o 0 0 0. 0 ry n a ° a c ° w 2 . s a ^ a a' . ` �, ' • w �, j O 5. a -^gn^0 n •Rna as iac ?-o n5 P7 ° y o • n ryvO s^ 3 37 n 6 n n L'• O' n •0 O : ` < ^ t 0 O w H •°-n 7 0 • W 7 C R a. o o 0 • . P p 0-'< a 0 R c n O . 0. 5 n 'G p n n T O p fD . o < <E ._ . a. .. ^ R 5 5' � ^ .;on ncc0 on 0 0 > c. 7.= 5 • '- n o < Ito o . c o V . a n • R � rv vao o 5 S. 0 O • 0 3 Z • n0° G. ry °D f° �v. .y9 a n, TO N a R P& o�. 3 ?•-� � � � D � R. n *E cn'2, s '< w p ° + E� ' ' 5.o T w a T w n N o • ° ..,aa g O 0 ° '�� ° vP`....c< ' O'o� a ` � G � pt Ep 'nn. �N V. v n Q0 O n 0^ca ^ cc �' v �'S ' v '�oca R�rt >oc� E1a w -v Z p T E n o 5 w p N _ w a G' O c no R v '< o 1 n m o o "' v '<. S o o ° R ' E' o, 0 ° o a 3 _. g- -.< D N o n i ^ 0 ' •a x' V° ry ^ o E °O n a o . " < `� ^, ^, 'g ° a w 7 & � O N E. o o o o r a E. n R ^ ' N o w e v o c g '° a K fD a° 5- s °l a E. 2 H' m N a ' c , E. c E o .0 f t); E. E e °' 7 5. R o, X c 3 , c c . 5 �+, 0 . a w R a ea a. Q c. a "" r n • ... w 7 n a�•ow� g p a ` w w n rvw 7' FO w e ° c a o n ' 77 Z c ° ^ ° 5 - n 'O �p o o `° TO = •b a o w n E. R'i a a. 7'.i..0, 5 0 w - o w C XI r• n p. 6 K yw � p C n � 'tn o C p o ° fi r B E. 0 E E. Z C H G °c N^ .eB ° c g v.� 5.!.oy w a o n z O_ cr .Q r7 0 ` 0 0 2 ° o n �' E n 1 r n c P pN� ^ E. 0- o o Z n a a n T . .E .c Q n n ' w T 0 ^ c r N T . c v v o o E. $, - v. C5. a E. ., n My w ft 0 0 5'� "0 :6 F ' ^ 7 H ' FF o $ ^ ? n 7 N ^ .p o n n .. ry f a °a g ? w 'a w 'N 5 . 0 0- • 'o J a ° Oa -c a pe. a o . a 5 . aF�}3 LIJA2c'niec g0°g5: °v 7 0 . 0 o A . - � orv�.< p 3 a .Tn O v R•aa cy w a0 c E. E. Caa Y To 0. < no. w T �v ^ °' 5 + o E , n o �. =55.0 ,� X �i � � ^ .. ° , v „ � o. 0 - 0 E s r- •-!<- •-!<- w 'R m a P. ° � � w& 2 O = E' "7 . o c 5 ' c . s c a o w e c o a° 0 ^ �' g 1 _ 6 ,, , n -p w o c? E r,•• o 2 an W8 t na°.°Tg' c E. Pi: wv 2 �+�' c ' o .E4 P i ^'"Ti ° ^ 3 ° 0 q 9 w n ^ 5 D n o v a a a v n" n n n T w n ' o "O ,� , G C E � w R :< n, E., Z C R P a o p' w N N ki 5 N ' • 6 5 '1 n . O � p^ C. F n _. _ ,.. p O a o o 0 - .3 a 0 v v �' S F Q w? v, E . O o G N � •, o w C o ° - ° o 7 n ' `° ° n !c a a c a ' ;.<'^ og 5 ^acv aoh �F ao m °., arc ^o . •' a 0 _ 5 n � ,oc n M K.0 t o w -, v a n n a 0- w a c E. Rn ^ . v < O ° 7 H a O �u .....2 c • ^ n p o , < E. w E o. G p • C' ( ^ ] 0 0- n p 0 o p , t 0 a ^ n d•p w n o o'< ^ ' oo. ^ a.. � . E. P w < R .„ ^ � tl0 E „TC P' i'. 0 n ° c ° •-. ° ^ n ' a ^ ^ ' ? C �. � Q' � v 0 ^ T 00 0 1 LII 5. n rvv B ^^c ! 5 c aF'ro c ° v1, g o , e � �`05C c, °a T° ° .°. a w a 5'• vw r2 T -' 1L• , 07o E. n , 2- 2, n we n a v i o E ms ' , g p P n Na I maw R.^ < c C RKE� c 5 'n �. ° o " w 5 to , o ^ ao° ° E'$ , o p •p a . v . � .po�O '° _ � , 0 o . T n n?:y ti- CL ' $b a 5 ' - ° ° c a °2w ow`- C0 1. 0 '�' a '<wo a 0 a O O ^ ^ ° a W S 2 '� w 2 ' ,n o . n c O t E. C c c �^ to ti' G Q N rt H. P. S fD O T E = o a ` , c . n rn o w E•0 o o 0 0 c ^ a .. F. n N pC ', n w c Afro v. n s o • 0 6 2 M n -^ •o . a . r7 c .. r, w . c �' ry w 9- E . 2 c N p o ^. 7^ . Pn a T n = v Y w u ' o k . a* 1• e c, 0 ,, -, �w ° o n 3 CT , g yc � ...•0 ry . � o ° n o w c � 3w =m° a Pt w w° ° P ' 2 io O R C �n 5' C ....y ^ O C^ M H n T n vn C -go 7 T .. Q , j E .v R 7. 0 a. 0 • o 0 !� p `< n v L'. y n p - v . • y f10 ^� n g- ' I C ^' 7' co p n O N 6� Q ` W ,.,-• S v� R A ". A wn^ H 'O ^ O 7 o' 0 0 a •7• O • OT+ n n E �. 5 ' , O a •p ^ , ^ ` < ° a 1 t o � e C O Ig or ° ,� 0 ^' °< 6 O 6 Q l ^ ^ + T G O T , ' �0 n n p a co Q w' 3 < 3 po w 2 v°cn '< g. ^ E 'c .5^.T ca. . <^ ° ., 2 7 w w am 0" E. c 0 M 0 N 5 EE++ a � v w O o D• o^ Cr ° 9 w n S 5') °cO. p. w' T ro 5 c n ,q 5 ' a ? 'n 3 ° a c 2 ' 6 n w " ° n a ^ c N g 2 . c:'v � '^ 0 ' 8 a ,E . n n o i`<o:o al; E+ • 5 c� < v 0 ,ro a S g �a 5:w . Fr a go o � � cn n � c °o ° .<-on 05' a .< 0a .' p5 s- • LN DISTRICT COURT, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO _ _ __ C Case 97 -CV -199 -C FIRST AMENDED PETITION FOR CONDEMNATION OF RIGHT OF WAY' DONNA NYSTROM and JOHN NYSTROM, on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated persons who own access- restricted property in the Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision (ACRE) of Garfield County, Colorado, Plaintiffs, -vs- PAUL R. NIESLANIK and CELIA NIESLANIK Defendants. Plaintiffs, by their attorney, George M. Allen, state: Parties,_Imisdiction and Venue 1. This action arises from denial of access on behalf of the named Plaintiffs to their Aspen Crystal River Estates (ACRE) property over the historic public right of way, known variously as the "White Hill Road," Garfield County Road 101, "Crown Road," and "Roberts Road," or the Road to the Roberts Place, which road is shown on Exhibit 1 to Case No. 96- CV -89, presently on file in this Court, and from the closures which have taken place from time to time of that road, the result of which has been the blocking of access to Plaintiffs' property (and the property of other, similarly situated persons, in the Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision (ACRE)) by Defendant and from the need arising therefrom for this Court to enter, as necessary, a Declaratory Judgment establishing a right of way by condemnation across the land of Defendant, along the route shown on Exhibit A attached to the initial Complaint in this action, and, to the extent necessary, Temporary Restraining 1 The initial pleading in this action was styled as a "Complaint ". Defendants objected to that terminology, preferring the statutory term "Petition." In deference to their objection, this document is therefore styled a Petition for Condemnation. C s 151, I ll~4 flGt)e rt 01, BfAV*WI 'Lb 0MUNW 1 1 uif MOTQD WRINOS,<39LQRADQ t eri sij a is w a full, Inn end aortal Dopy of the n iHl k my c u lolly h ` /`9 G W `7 G gy�pp-- Clerk Deputy Order(s), Preliminary and Permanent Injunction(s) and other Declaratory Relief, to obtain a precise metes and bounds description of the access route and to secure access to Plaintiffs and other, similarly situated persons, access to their ACRE properties.' 2. The parties are as follows: A. Plaintiffs Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom are husband and wife. They own the following described real property: Block 6, Lot 16, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Garfield County, Colorado Plaintiffs have owned the property at issue since 1980. Donna Nystrom resided on the property from 1977 to 1981. Donna Nystrom's former husband, Tony Fotopulos, resided on the property until 1986. The Nystrom Aspen Crystal River Estates property lies within the Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision (ACRE), a plat of which, as recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County on June 30, 1965 in the Plat Book of Garfield under Reception No. 230545 on July 1, 1965. B. Defendants Paul Nieslanik and Celia Nieslanik are, or at relevant times to this litigation, have been, the owner of all or part of the following described real property, Government Lot 8, Section 2, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado 3. Jurisdiction of this Court is founded on Article VI, Section 9(1) of the Constitution of the State of Colorado, vesting matters of general jurisdiction in the District Courts of the State and on Rule 57 of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure and Colorado's Enactment of the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act. This Court has jurisdiction of the class action elements of this litigation pursuant to Rule 23 of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. The condemnation remedy sought by 2 Plaintiff's have not been able, to date, to obtain authorization from Defendants to have a surveyor enter the Defendants' property for the purpose of staking and surveying the precise access route to be used for transiting Defendants property from the Garfield County road nearest to the Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision. The requested route runs east from the Carbondale cemetery to the ACRE subdivision. The estimated maximum length of the requested condemned right of way is 300 to 450 feet. Thus the total area sought to be condemned for right of way is on an order of 45,000 square feet, or about one acre, assuming an ultimate right of way of 4S0 feet in length by 100 feet in width. 2 Plaintiffs is specifically provided for by Article II, Section 14 of the Constitution of the State of Colorado and by C.R.S. 1973 ' 38 -1 -101, et seq.. 4. Venue is founded in Garfield County on the basis of the location of all real property at issue in this litigation in Garfield County. General Averments ESTARI.ISHMENT OF THE WHITE Hlld. ROAD 5. There has existed, since at least the year 1890, a road, known generally as the "White Hill Road," running from what is now Garfield County Road 101, at point A on Exhibit 1 to the Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89, through the Nieslanik ranches, to point B on Exhibit 1 in that action. The White Hill Road has been a public right of way and thoroughfare for traffic of all types, including persons on foot, horseback and in motor vehicles, on a continuous basis since 1890. THE HOMESTEADERS 6. From a period 1890 through 1944, homesteads were patented on lands lying in and beyond the present ACRE subdivision. Those homestead patents were issued on the basis of the homesteaders having proved -up, to the satisfaction of competent officials and agencies of the government of the United States, that they were actually residing on and improving the homestead parcels and had a means of viable access to the parcels in order to continue to reside on and improve them. The exclusive means of public access to the homestead parcels from Carbondale, Glenwood Springs and the world beyond Glenwood Springs was via the White Hill Road, which was used continuously as a public highway and thoroughfare from a point no later than 1890 through the acquisition of property by the Nieslaniks from the Blanes in 1961. 7. The homestead patent records maintained by the United States Bureau of Land Management at Glenwood Springs, Colorado show the following information, all of which confirms occupancy of lands beyond ACRE (and therefore continuing public use by the referenced homesteaders of the White Hill Road to access their homesteads from Carbondale, Glenwood Springs and beyond): A. J .eon E. Roberts: S1 /2 NE1 /4, N1/2 SE1 /4 and SW1 /4 Section 1, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, containing 320 acres, recorded August 12, 1926 at Book 112, page 447 of the records of Garfield County, Colorado, based on occupancy on 3 January 10, 1917; B. Sylvan Johnston NW 1/4 Section 1, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, Lots 1 and 2, Section 2 Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, evidenced in Tax Record 9, Certificate No. 68; Lot 9 (patented on December 31, 1938, indicating occupancy on January 10, 1930 per BLM homestead records); SE 1/4 NW 1/4; NE 1/4 SW yW Section 2, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado; improvements on homestead shown at Tax Record 9, page 58, certificate No. 69; Lots 14, 15, 16, Section 35; Lot 24, Section 36; of Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado; Lots 3, 4; South 2 NW 1/4 Section 1; Lots 1, 2, 9 SE 1/4 NE 1/4, NE 1/4 SE 1/4; of Section 2 of Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian (patent on homestead); Improvements on the Johnston Homestead were filed for patent on December 31, 1938, indicating that the improvements were constructed in the preceding five years. The Bureau of Land Management records for the Johnston land indicate occupancy on January 10, 1917 and indicate Sylvan Johnston was on the land as from 1930. C. Jacob Scheffel: Homestead patented in 1894 (and shown on the 1890 map attached to the Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); Mr. Scheffel owned Lots 12, 19 and 20; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 2, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian; Recorded at Book 12, page 346 of the records of Garfield County; D. George Alcorn: Homestead patented in 1892; Lots 10, 13 and 14 of Section 2, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, recorded at Book 12, page 141 of the records of Garfield County; THE MAPS 8. As shown by the maps attached to the Initial Complaint in Case No. 96 -CV -89 as Exhibits 3 -A through 3 -J, the White Hill Road has been continuously mapped as being in existence as a public right of way as early as 1890 and has been so documented in separate maps as follows: A. January 25. 1890: United States Surveyor General's Map, based on field notes filed in the Denver office of the Surveyor General (Exhibit 3 -A to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96 -CV- 89); B. January 15. 1891: United States General Land Office Map (certified on January 15, 1891) (Exhibit 3 -B to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); C. 1937: U.S. Department of Agriculture Holy Cross National Forest Map (Exhibit 3 -C 4 to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); D. 1959: U.S. Department of Agriculture White River National Forest Map ( Exhibit 3 -D to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); E. 1961: U.S. Department of Interior Carbondale Quadrangle USGS Map (also authored by State of Colorado Department of Natural Resources), a 15 minute series topographic map for the Carbondale Quadrangle of Garfield County, No. 71 (Exhibit 3 -E to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); F. 1961: Carbondale Quadrangle U.S.G.S. 15 minute series topographic map (not to be confused with "E" above (original located at offices of Garfield County Historical Society) (Exhibit 3 -F to Case No. 96- CV -89); G. August 24, 1970: U.S. Department of Agriculture White River National Forest East Half (Colorado); (Exhibit 3 -G to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); H. 1975: U.S.G.S. Map No. 9108 -E3 -CF -050 -5 of Garfield County, Colorado (Exhibit 3 -H to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); I. 1987: Photorevision of Carbondale Quadrangle 7.5 minute series topographic map published by U.S.G.S. (Exhibit 3 -1 to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); J. December 12, 1995: Garfield County Assessor's Map (Exhibit 3 -J to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89) THE AERIAI, PHOTOGRAPHS 9. The existence of the White Hill Road as a public right of way is further evidenced by aerial photographs, attached hereto as follows: A. July 31, 1970: Air Photo Surveys, Inc., Fruita, Colorado, photo 174 -140 (Exhibit 4 -A to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); B. May 8. 1974: Air Photo Surveys, Inc., Fruita, Colorado, stereo -optic paired photos, showing tractors using White Hill Road (photo 221 -147) (Exhibit 4 -13 to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); C. 1978: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, stereo -optic paired photos AR -34 and AR -35 (Exhibits 4 -C to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); 5 • D. 1990 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, stereo -optic paired photos X -60.2 and X -61 (Exhibits 4 -D to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); E. 1996: Leif Anderson aerial photograph shot May 29, 1996; (Exhibit 4 -E to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); THE SIJRFACF PHOTOGRAPHS 10. Surface photography carried out May 23, 1996, also shot by Leif Anderson, attached as Exhibits 5 -A through 5 -C to the Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV- 89further confirm the continued existence and viability of the White Hill Road. PRE -1921 RIGHT OF WAY 11. As a consequence of C.R.S. 1973 ' 43 -1 -202, the White hill Road is a statutory public right of way. That statute provides: 43 -1 -202. Public Highways or roads, All roads and highways which are on May 4, 1921, by law open to public traffic shall be public highways within the meaning of this part 2. The homestead data and the maps document the fact the White Hill Road was utilized as public highway for access from Carbondale to the homesteads prior to the May 4, 1921 operative date of the above- quoted statute. The homestead data further confirms continuing use of the White Hill Road as the exclusive public highway access to the homestead parcels after 1921. CONTINJ JOI JS I JSF4 NO ABANDONMENT 12. While predecessors in title to the Nieslaniks purported to create, by a July 3, 1931 private deed recorded in Book 168 at pages 163 -165 of the records of Garfield County, a writing representing the White Hill Road to be a private road, that deed served only to confirm the actual existence of the White Hill Road in 1931. The purported "privatization" clause of the 1931 deed was of no consequence due to Colorado law, including the statute quoted in paragraph 11 above, which has provided continuously throughout the 20th Century that public highways and rights of way can be abandoned only by formal action of either the State of Colorado or County governments. Both before and after the 1931 "privatization deed," the White Hill Road was used and recognized as a public highway (viz„ the homestead patents based on public access to homesteads via the White Hill Road.) At no point has the White Hill Road ever been formally abandoned or relinquished as a public road by the government of the State of Colorado or by Garfield County. As a consequence, the 6 • White Hill Road continues to be a public right of way. NO NIESI.ANIK OWNERSHIP OF THE. WHITE HILT. ROAD 13. The Blanc to Nieslanik Deed, recorded October 4, 1961, did not convey any part of the White Hill Road to the Nieslaniks. The metes and bounds language of that deed, excerpted in paragraph 2 -B above, uses the east line of the White Hill Road (recognized in that deed as being "in place, constructed and travelled ") as the western boundary of the relevant part of the property conveyed by the Blanes to the Nieslaniks. While the White Hill Road traverses the Nieslanik Ranch, running in a generally southeasterly direction, the Nieslanik defendants do not now have, and have never had, ownership of the White Hill Road. I JNLAWFI JI . INTERFERENCE AND OBSTRI JCTION 14. From time to time since their acquisition of property from the Blanes in 1961, the defendants, together with others acting in concert with them, have unlawfully installed gates (which gates have been closed and locked from time to time) and have otherwise blocked or obstructed the free passage of the public, including Plaintiff's and the class of similarly situated persons represented by Plaintiffs, over the White Hill Road. Exhibit 5 -C to the Initial Complaint in Case No. 96 -CV -89 is a photograph of such a gate. At other times, including more recent years in which they have operated commercial cattle moving and rodeo entertainments on their ranch, the Nieslaniks have opened the White Hill Road to the public, in a manner consistent with its character as a public highway. CIVIL CONSPIRACY 15. The conduct of the defendants, acting in concert with others, in obstructing access to Plaintiffs and the Class they represent has constituted an unlawful Civil Conspiracy within the meaning of Colorado law. The purpose and effect of that unlawful civil conspiracy has been to deprive Plaintiffs and the class they represent of the full use and enjoyment of their rights of passage over the White Hill Road, and to thus deprive them of the full use and enjoyment of their rights of ownership of their ACRE properties. The motive for the civil conspiracy has been to blight and depress the value of properties within ACRE, so as to make possible a strategy of acquisition of those properties by the Doe defendants at distressed prices. CLASS ACTION ELEMENTS OF THE CASE. 16. Defendants have been engaged for a number of years in a pattern and practice of interference in and obstruction of lawful use, by Plaintiffs and the class they represent, of the White 7 • Hill Road as the exclusive means of public access to and enjoyment of lots within ACRE owned by Plaintiffs and the class they represent. 17. The persons making up the proposed class to be represented by Plaintiffs are as follows: All landowners of lots within ACRE whose access to public rights of way is restricted or obstructed by the conduct of Defendants, as alleged above. The class does not include the so- called Considine interests, as they purport to have public access via the Considine ranches, which lie between ACRE and other public roads of Garfield County other than the White Hill Road. 18. This action should be certified and maintained as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(b) of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. 19. A class action under Rule 23(b) is the superior method of adjudicating the rights of' Plaintiffs and other persons similarly situated for the following reason, enumerated in Rule 23(b)(1): Prosecution of separate actions by the persons affected would create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications, with attendant risks enumerated in Rule 23(b)(1)(A). 20. The parties opposing the class, the Defendants above - named, have engaged in a generic pattern of obstruction of the rights of Plaintiffs and the class to enjoy the full panoply of rights of ownership of their ACRE properties, making the declaratory relief sought in this action on behalf of the named plaintiffs, Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom, appropriate to protect the interests of the entire class proposed herein. 21. The named Plaintiffs, Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom, are suitable parties to fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class. Plaintiffs have engaged counsel experienced in the handling of class action matters and the personal circumstances of the Plaintiffs, Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom, as ACRE landowners and Garfield County residents, make Plaintiffs precisely the type of persons meant to be protected by provisions of Colorado law guaranteeing free movement of persons and commerce across the public highways and thoroughfares of the State of Colorado. 8 PRE - FILING MEETINGS WITH DEFENDANTS TO ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE ACCESS 22. On two separate occasions prior to commencement of this action, Plaintiffs and/or their representatives met with Defendants and/or their representatives to attempt to resolve the issues of access without need of litigation 23. On the first occasion Plaintiff Donna Nystrom, her attorney George M. Allen and another person met in Grand Junction with Thomas LaCroix, then acting as attorney for defendants. The purpose of that meeting was to negotiate access without need for further litigation. Mr. LaCroix stated he had no authority to agree to access or a negotiated price for access. 24. On the second occasion, in ear -iy i99 Donna Nystrom, Jeff Parker and Fletcher Anderson met with Paul Nieslanik at Paul Nieslanik' s home near Carbondale. At that meeting, which had been arranged between counsel for the parties (with Mr. LaCroix representing Defendants and George M. Allen representing Plaintiffs), it was expected by Plaintiffs that there would be negotiation of a settlement for access, with agreement on an amount to be paid by Plaintiffs to Defendants for access across the route selected in this litigation. Paul Nieslanik announced at that meeting that he had made an agreement with a third party, one Terry Considine, not to agree to any access to be granted to Plaintiffs. Therefore that meeting also failed to produce agreement on either an access route across Defendants' property or an amount to be paid for access. First Claim for Relief (Condemnation of Right of Way) 25. Paragraphs I through 24 above are incorporated herein by reference. 26. Notwithstanding the averments and claims set forth above, it may be determined that there is no presently extant public right of way available to Plaintiffs to reach their Aspen Crystal River Estates property from other public highways. In that event, they are entitled to condemnation of a public right of way across the land of Defendants described in paragraph 2 b above. 27. This Court should order the condemnation of a public right of way, across certain land owned by Defendants Paul Nieslanik and Celia Nieslanik, described in paragraph 2 b above, to reach Aspen Crystal River Estates by way of the route running from A to B on Exhibit A attached to this Complaint. 9 That right of way should have the following characteristics: a. No less than 100 feet in width. b. Construction Standard: to the Construction and Grade standard presently in effect for County Roads (e.g., roads owned and maintained by the County) in Garfield County; . c. Exact metes and bounds description to be determined in further proceedings in this litigation after survey and engineering study. 28. The Court should determine the amount to be paid to Defendants for the access corridor sought herein. Second Claim for Relief (Damages) 29. Paragraphs 1 through 24 above are incorporated herein by reference. 30. Plaintiffs and the class they represent have been damaged by the unlawful conduct of the defendants, as described above. Plaintiffs and the class they represent should be awarded damages in an amount sufficient to compensate them for the unlawful deprivation of their rights of access to their ACRE property. Prayer for Relief WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that judgment be entered on their behalf and against Defendants as follows: A. For Declaratory Judgment of Condemnation of a right of way according to a route (and defined by a legal description) to be determined in this action and consistent with the proposed right of way defined by Exhibit Ato this First Amended Petition for Condemnation of Right of Way. B. For such other and further relief as the Court deems appropriate, including Plaintiffs' costs of this action. [Signature Block On Following Page] 10 Respectfplly submitted, � % � A A1w Geo'ge 7 Allen, No. 2080 Box 66, 145 Payson Street Naturita CO 81422 Telephone: 970 - 865 -2800 Facsimile: 970 - 865 -2808 E -Mail: aln @csn.net Counsel for Plaintiffs • 11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have at Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this t th day of November, 1997, served the document(s) described below on the person(s) whose names and addresses are shown below by the means of service shown below. Document(s) Served: FIRST AMENDED PETITION FOR CONDEMNATION OF RIGHT OF WAY Means of Service (x) facsimile or (x) hand delivery () U.S. mail, postage prepaid () courier Counsel Served Lawrence R. Green, Esq. 818 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs CO 81601 970 - 945 -6546 1;44/0 5. Wis-rRow. (print • e) • u. 1 c:\acre \033.cp1 12 f M PHIL ALLEN PHONE NO. 8189548624 Jan. 23 1998 11:30RN P1 ": 1' LAW OFFICES GEORGE M. ALLEN ADMITTED N COLORADO AND UTAH - Pon OFFICE Pox 66 145 PAYSON STREET NATURITA, COLOMDO 91422 TELEPH ON E1970465.2100 FACSIMILE: 9704654909 EMAIL ALN9>CSN.NET POST OFFICE SO% 1091 TELLURIDE, COLORADO 91435 TELEPHONE: 970.726.3126 FACSIMILEt 970.7264263 PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL By facsimile: 970- 945 -7785 January 23, 1998 Donald K. DeFord, Esq. Garfield County Attorney 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 Re: Aspen Crystal River Estates Dear Don: I am writing to you in confidence, as this involves a matter both in litigation and presently subject to settlement negotiations with one of the parties to the litigation. Due to the sensitivity of the negotiations, I ask that you discuss this letter and the matters dealt with herein with the Commissioners as a litigation matter. I believe the Colorado Sunshine Law permits you and the Commissioners to deal with litigation (or potential litigation) other than in public meetings. This confirms our telephone conversation of last week and requests that the Garfield County Commissioners decline to take any action or schedule any meeting, whether with Terry Considine, Mr. Considine's legal counsel, or with any other party, with regard to the pending access dispute to Aspen Crystal River Estates. 1 shall review briefly the reasons for this request: Page 1 of 4 Exhibit 4 PA- i o f- 4 FROM : PHIL ALLEN PHONE NO. : 8189548624 Jan. 23 1998 11:31AM P2 1. The contemplated settlement would have minimal impact on the County. At most it would only open a few (less than a dozen) lots to development; 2. Public meetings to discuss this issue would be likely to have the effect of causing other owners of somewhat dormant properties (now embraced in a potential uncertified class in a proposed class action suit) to seek enlargement of the scope of any proposed settlement, to the detriment of the settling parties and would thus Jeopardize the settlement. 3. Actions of numerous public sector parties in Garfield County, including the Commissioners and private parties with whom they have dealt, including Mr. Considine, his employees, the Sheriff, the District Attorney and others, implicate 42 U.S.C. §1983. The specific actions which implicate Section 1983 include the following; the long - standing posture of Garfield County, expressed in 1980's litigation, against development of the ACRE properties; undertakings by Mr. Considine and entities with which he is associated to purchase ACRE (and Ti- ki -ki) lots on the representation the lots either have no access or cannot be developed; taking into custody of Kevin Massey, a 20 year old student at Union College, the Seventh Day Adventist college where he is enrolled (whom 1 personally interviewed in Lincoln, Nebraska in November, 1997), an employee of a contractor of one of my clients. while Mr. Massey was on the Nystrom property, holding of Mr. Massey under threat of force for several hours, summoning of the Garfield County Sheriff, arrest of Mr. Massey and filing of trespass charges against Mr. Massey (since dropped); consideration of kidnap charges against the person who held and restrained Mr. Massey and foregoing of such charges as part of some sort of ad hoc District Attorney's decision to attempt to spare the responsible party or parties for the wrongs to Mr. Massey from potential felony kidnap filings; specific written requests by Mr. Considine to the District Attorney to prosecute trespass cases, in apparent aid of Mr. Considine's real estate investment goals; written advice by the District Attorney that he will not further prosecute trespass cases and wants parties to defer to the civil court proceedings; statement made in mid -1997 by Paul Nieslanik (a party to pending litigation) that he would not negotiate access with ACRE owners because he had agreed with Mr. Considine that he would not do so; blocking of the White Hill Road by means of locked gates by John Nieslanik and members of his family; participation by the Garfield County sheriff's personnel in abetting the Mocking of the White Hill Road during the summers of 1996 and 1997; filing of trespass charges against my client, Brian Schwarz, at the specific written request of Mr. Considine; failure of any party to provide even a scintilla of evidence that the White Hill Road was, at any time since its construction in the 1890's, formally vacated as public right of way by either Garfield County or the State of Colorado (a point agreed by John Nieslanik's attorney, Natty Shulman); failure of either the private parties or public officials to give due consideration to and effect to the Federal Anti- Inclosure Act of 1885 (43 U.S.C. § §1061 -1065) (the vitality of which has been affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Page 2 of 4 exhibit � if , FROM : FHIL ELLEN PHONE NO. : 8189548624 Jan. 23 1998 11:31AM P3 Justice Rehnquist's opinion in Leo Sheep Co. v. United States, 440 U.S. 668, 59 L.Ed.2d 677, 99 S.Ct. 1403 (1979)), by which blocking of access to public lands is prohibited; failure of any private or public party to produce any documentation of any kind or nature to controvert the massive documentation in the initial filing in Garfield County District Court Case 96 -CV -89 that the White Hill Road is a public right of way and has been since Colorado legislation in 1921 established all then- extant rights of way as public rights of way (Harry Shulman has made vague oral statements that he has evidence some other road was the historic road; the extensive exhibits filed with the initial complaint in 96 -CV -89 establish by unrohutted aerial photograph and historic mapping that the White Hill Road is the historic public access and has been for more than a century); the irresistible conclusion that private parties have acted in concerted fashion (conspired within the technical meaning of section 1983 and cases applying it) with public officials to block the White Hill Road, force the public and ACRE owners to take some other route to reach properties they own and harass them with trespass filings and physical force. 4. No action taken or considered by the Commissioners will be seen by any objective observer as being undertaken on a clean slate, devoid of prior history. As we understand it, the Commissioners and County staff have been entreated to enact restrictive legislation to down -zone ACRE so as to limit or prevent development of their properties by my clients. Of course, any citizen has a right to appear in any public meeting and exercise rights of free speech. We do not seek to limit that. But a citizen who has a long history of active and concerted involvement with numerous public sector officials to impede public access across an historic right of way, so as to promote a land acquisition undertaking, who obtains further cooperative consideration by the Commissioners, is involving the Commissioners in much more than merely listening to an entreaty. The setting aside of specific calendar One for consideration of specific plans for further restriction of development is consistent with and will be considered to be a part of a pattern of violation of rights secured under 42 U.S.C. ¢1983. The very net of granting special time for consideration of such plans is an act in furtherance of a concerted plan to violate my client's rights. S. If special consideration of plans or requests for of restrictions on my clients' ACRE properties remains on the calendar of the Garfield County Commissioners for their February 2, 1998 meeting, as presently scheduled, 1 have full 'authorization for invocation of their remedies under section 1983. Unless I am physically unable to make a filing (something which has not taken place since my initial licensure to practice on October 3, 1967), such a filing would be in place prior to the February 2, 1998 Commissioners' meeting. Conclusion At the time we filed Case 96- CV -89, we provided copies of the case and its voluminous Page 3 of 4 Exhibit_, fl - FROM : PHIL ALLEN PHONE NO. : 8189548624 Jan. 23 1998 11:32AM P4 , • • exhibits to your office, the District Attorney's office and the County Sheritl's office and requested immediate review and protection of the rights of the ACRE owners. We think the wise course would have been immediate engagement of outside counsel for independent research and evaluation. That did not happen and my clients' exercise of their civil tights received no protection from the Sheriff, the District Attorney or other Garfield County officials. Instead, the Sheriff and then District Attorney engaged in a pattern of winging it and taking the side of large landowners who wanted access impeded. The ACRE owners were harassed and intimidated In their attempted exercise of constitutionally and statutorily protected rights of free passage to and from their own land and the public land lying beyond it. No one has come forward with any credible documentary evidence the court filing they made was incorrect in any way. Even entertaining action by the Garfield County Commissioners to legislate further restriction will be an act fraught with peril. There is a civil litigation process. The new District Attorney has wisely declined to act further and has commended all concerned to remit to that process. There is a reasonable chance of amicable settlement of that litigation in a fashion which will have minimal impact on the County or its citizens. By this letter, we respectfully commend the actions of the District Attorney to the Commissioners. We submit that their wise course is to remove any calendar consideration of any matter relating to ACRE and allow the civil courts to resolve pending disputes. That would still leave any citizen free to come and stand up and make his pitch. But there would not be any taint of privately arranged special consideration. The Commissioners' wisp response to any entreaty would be that the matter Is in the Courts and that they will await the resolution of the judicial process. As there is no emergency requiring legislation, we see no reason for the Commissioners' taking up this matter at this time except to hinder and impede the ACRE owners. For the reasons outlined above, we submit any action along those lines would be unlawful. Please advise me of the status of this matter at your earliest opportunity. ;ts ver George . Allen c: \acre \046.1tr Page 4 of 4 Exhibit G FROM 'HERBERT S. KL.EIN & ASSOC TO I 303 945 2597 1998,03 -1S 15:40 *S23 P.02/03 AFFIDASTIT OF ANDREW MoGRBQOR State of Colorado ) se. County of Garfield ) The undersigned, Andrew McGregor, after first being duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: 1. I am presently employed by the City of Glenwood Springs as its Community Development Director and have held that position since December, 1997. . Between 1992 and December of 1997 I was employed as the City Planner by the City of Glenwood Springs planning department. In the capacity of Director, I am responsible for administration and oversight of the planning, building and recreation departments of the City of Glenwood Springs. In my capacity as City Planner, I was responsible for zoning matters and was directly involved the review of building permit applications. 2. Prior to my employment with the City of Glenwood Springs, I was the County Planner for Garfield County. In that capacity, I worked under the direction of Mark Bean. I was employed by Garfield County in that capacity for approximately 20 months between 1990 and 1992. 3. During my employment with the Garfield County Planning Office, it was their consistent policy to deny building permit applications in the Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision because of a lack of access. This position was consistent with the Uniform Building Code in effect at that time which required that access be available to property for which building and septic system permits were sought. The purpose for access is to insure that inspections can be made of the work allowed by the permit. Furthermore, there are numerous practical reasons why access should be required including, without limitation, provision for emergency services, utilities, construction related access needs and other reasons. 4. I am not aware of any instance, other than the recent issuance of building permits to Buffalo Ranch, LLC, where Garfield County has issued building permits to a property owner who could not demonstrate access to his property. 5. In my capacity as the Community Development Director for the City of Glenwood Springs, I am the official responsible for oversight and administration of the Building Department. The City of Glenwood Springs has adopted the 1994 version of the Uniform Building Code ( "UBC "). It is my understanding that Garfield County is presently using this same Building Code. It is my opinion that Sections 108.1 and 108.3 of the UBC require that access be lir la 2. FROM, SHERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOC TO 1 303 945 2597 1999103 -16 16191 *1523 P.03/03 demonstrated as being available to a property prior to the issuance of a building permit for such property. i do not believe that these provisions are subject to interpretations which could allow the issuance of a building permit to be conditioned upon an applicant proving access at a future time. It is contrary to the provisions of the DEC to issue a building permit where access is not demonstrated in the hope that at some time in the future, the improvements built pursuant to the permit could be inspected. 6. I am also Familiar with the requirements for individual sewage disposal system permits and am of the opinion that access must also be demonstrated prior to the issuance of an ISDS permit in order to conduct inspections of these systems. The issuance of a permit for construction of a septic system where access cannot be demonstrated violates State regulations. I am not aware of any situation where Garfield County has issued such a permit where access was not available, except, in the case of the issuance of such permits to Buffalo Ranch, LLC. FURTHER the affiant sayeth not. Andrew McGregor STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 16th day of March, 1998, by Andrew McGregor as Community Development Director of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Witness my hand and official seal. My- commission expires! 3- i v ? 0 0 a ..tary Pus 1c -2- Exhtbi�..,,, 112 r . a PATRICK & STOWELL, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION www.waterlaw.com KEVIN L. PATRICK 205 SOUTH MILL BRIAN L. STOWELL SUITE 300 SCOTT C. MILLER March 13, 1998 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TOM KINNEY KRISTIN L. HOWSE (970) 9204028 FAX (970) 925-6847 Garfield County Board of Adjustment c/o Garfield County Building and Planning Department 109 8th Street, Ste. 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: ISDS Permit for Buffalo Ranch, LLC Dear Garfield County Board of Adjustment: This letter is written in regards to the issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System ( "ISDS ") permits for Buffalo Ranch, LLC for use on Lot 3, Block 5, Lot 60, Block 5, and Lot 22, Block 6 of Aspen Crystal River Estates ("ACRE"). These permits were issued contrary to the ISDS Act, C.R.S. §25 -10 -101, et.seq. and the Colorado Department of Health regulations promulgated thereunder, and should thus be revoked as ultra vires. Pursuant to the mandate of the ISDS Act, the Department of Health has developed regulations for minimum standards for location, construction, performance, installation, alteration and use of individual sewage disposal systems within the State. C.R.S. §25 -10 -104 (1). These regulations establish the minimum standards and constitute the basis for the adoption of detailed ISDS rules and regulations by a County. The County's regulations and standards cannot fall below or waive these State guidelines. 5 CCR 1003 -6 §IL B. If the County's rules and standards are less stringent than the statute and regulations, then the County's rules have no effect and the State statute and regulations control. 5 CCR 1003 -6 §H.C.5. In issuing the above - referenced permits, the County violated the minimum application and permit review requirements and procedures mandated by the ISDS Act and State Regulations. An application must contain "information, data, plans, specifications, statements and commitments as required by the County to carry out the ISDS Act " 5 CCR 1003 -6 §IV.B. The information provided was wholly inadequate for the County to make a permit determination in conformance with the ISDS Act. A cursory map was attached to the application showing sparse, if any, detail as to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable buildings, location of potable wells, soil percolation test holes, and soil profiles, as called for by the application form. Nor were any percolation tests conducted. Without percolation testing there is no information or analysis whatsoever of the site's soil conditions and the appropriateness of an ISDS at that location. Eildbitiar PATRICK & STOWELL, P.C. Garfield County Board of Adjustment March 13, 1998 Page 2 State Regulations mandate that the County's review of the application include "1) inspection of the premises, unless previously inspected; 2) evaluation of soil where percolation tests are required; 3) determination as to the suitability of the site and the proposed design based upon verification of the groundwater table, suitable soil, depth of the bedrock, ground slope and pertinent physical features." 5 CCR 1003 -6 §IV.B. The County's review fell far short of this State requirement. Even without considering the other factors, the County review fails on the evaluation of soil, since the application required percolation tests which were never performed. A permit can only be issued by the County if the proposed system is determined to be in compliance with the ISDS Act and its regulations. 5 CCR 1003 -6 §LE. With the lack of required information and review, it is impossible for the County to have "determined" these proposed ISDSs were in conformance with the ISDS State guidelines and thus, the permits are issued contrary to law. Additionally, the State regulations clearly contemplate that plans and specifications for a proposed ISDS are submitted at the application stage, prior to permit issuance, since "any change in plans or specifications after the permit has been issued invalidates the permit unless written approval is secured [from the County] for such changes." 5 CCR 1003 -6 §IV.A.4. This requirement was also not met and violates the minimum standards of the statute and regulations. The ISDS Act and Regulations discourage issuance of ISDS permits in subdivided areas with a density of more than 2 dwelling units per acre. C.R.S. §25 -10 -110; 5 CCR 1003 -6 §IV.K. In fact, the statute and regulations provide for a public hearing to consider prohibiting permits in these situations. js], A public hearing would have allowed affected property owners to voice their concerns with the potential proliferation of ISDSs in this area. Yet, Garfield County conducted no such hearing and has set dangerous precedent by issuing these permits without any public input and before considering the long -term ramifications of issuing ISDS permits in the ACRE subdivision. Before issuing ISDS permits in this potentially dense subdivision, the County, with public input, needs to consider the appropriateness of consolidation with a regional wastewater facility (only two miles away) and the complete prohibition of ISDSs in this area. Finally, ISDS Permits were erroneously issued because the owner cannot provide for access to the sites for the County inspector "to conduct required tests, take samples, monitor compliance, and make inspections," as required by State regulations. 5 CCR 1003 -6 §IV.G. Without access, the ISDS guidelines cannot be met and the County cannot issue permits. PATRICK & STOWELL, P.C. Garfield County Board of Adjustment March 13, 1998 Page 3 In light of the foregoing, it was error for the County to issue permits in this instance. In so doing, the County failed to adhere to its own ISDS rules and violates the minimum application and review standards of the ISDS Act and regulations. We request the County's decision to issue the ISDS permits be reversed as contrary to law. Moreover, without valid ISDS permits, the ISDS Act prohibits issuance of building permits. C.R.S. §25 -10- 111(1). Since the lot owner does not have a valid, legal ISDS permit, issuance of a building permit is also prohibited. Very truly yours, PATRICK & STOWELL, P.C. A Professio al Corporation ` By: / 'Scott C. Miller SCM:tlo F:\DATA\LTRS \431 ALGC.02 Cerftic*lt of Copy of Record STATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield I, Mildred Alsdorf, County Clerk and Recorder in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct ra of WARPENTY DEED as the same appears upon the records of my office. RECEPTION 257302 BOOK 441 Given under my hand and official seal this 12 t h day of PAGE 409 MARCH ,A.D. 1998, 9:55 o'clockA M Mildred Alsdorf / Deputy mfw Co unty Clerk and Recorder ei eka;t.4• +A 4t., keste. Set .,)'b4G< di se fa,o,ded at,:_AI10 I rams `Alb c i�' ldar�ii $7 3, 73 �Bgsk Mi. ` "'' .f P ► k09 Rknpsa /40-..:: tom:. . .. �t. � 1 � '. • RUMP" ` l l P hDs DEED,'Idade this 1 L/ 4npf Pebruhr9 , ; ' I 1073 stelae kOBEMT 0.'tM1311' p k ed 4 ", R. O.'SEWELL and ROggSRT GSCA* flWBLL " '" 60 l et the 0004 !I'pitkih ' the ISM el . s^+ [ , Coloado, Of the ant art. sae GARFIELD COMPANY eI rl " a Limited Partnership, f of the Gents of Ataphhbe dad Ebb of belebdo, the Wend pets wmteaeRTe, That the Odd bard it the first Ntk for add In eoeddiMioi 1t GM and a< TEN DOLLARS AND OTHER GOOD Mb VALUABLE CONSIDERATION anagsRR to We um art; of the first part S band paid H be laid Intl of tha bead art, MI Hake ebneer b bath/ unhlad and aelnawledaed, 6a granted, batpdeW, told and eoarned. add by these aaenb dues fiaat burin sell, convey sad confirm, t e tha add NS of the mum shot, hi' MW dud mama tone, all Os dofowW awaxewI lets Or urn* of taad, Okl a trIng sad Was ti the . . kti oomy of Garfield sad gab of Colorado *wits 0 ' Township 8Bouth, Range S8 West, 6th P.M. Section It Pik of Lot Et Lot 4, except that part owned by Mid - Continent f# Coal and Coke Company, MkeEkNNkt swianan NNksWk. • TOGETHER with all and tinnier the hereditament& and apartenansN thet4o beteadblt, or In inella appertaining, and the reversion and ro ersione, tmulndm and temalnden, refits, letut and Stab tbar•ds and as the estate, right, title, Interest, claim and demand whatsoever of be mild party of Us tint part, either la tow or equity, of, In and to the above bargained premises with Us beredlamnta and appurtenants. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bupalned and described, with the appurtenance', unto the mild party of the second part, fib heirs and assigns forcer. And the said arty of the first part, for himself, his tabs, executon, and admidetraten, don covenant, Rant Wahl, end agree to and with the said arty of the second art his ben and suing, that at the time of the euealing end delivery of these presents, he is well seised of the premise& above conveyed, as of good, sore, perfect, absolute and adefuaible estate of Inheritance, In law, in fee ample, sod bat good right, full power and awful authority to grant, bargain, all and cony the same In mamas yid for* an atoreuld, and that the same are bit and dun from all former and other grants, bargain, Wes, Its s, bum, assessment' and numbnnat of whatever bad or matte .avers except 1973 general property taxes, easements and rights of Way of a public or private nature, prior oil, gas and other mineral reservations and exceptions of record, U. 6. Patent reservations and exceptions, Restrictive or Protective Covenants of record and govern rules and regula- tione, and hereby reserving to first paYtty his heirs and assigns, an ecsem over, t p �1tt crgssand along existing or developed roadways s a l d the 4boeaVainginitl l{IrrsP& yewaaable aeaeesin of the meld party of the mend art hit hairs &ri nden. against as and mei7 arson or arsons lawfully **Mg or to clam be whoa or an ant thereof, the said party of the flat part stall end will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND. The singular number shall Include the plural, the plural the angular, and Drs sae of any finder Oahe applicable to at, genders. He winless wUERBOF. be mi4 arty of the first part bar Want art his hand dud soli the do and fur i nt .bon written. Rolkff t Vewan o e to R 6ewe . O. an ldE tontl . . f. .icr:Grern)1..?a.G..L. 2 UCsl F A 1e ei l /414 STATE OF d O A Conti of San Diego -{� The foregoing Instrument war acknowledged before me the cP /J..7 day ad February 1973 ,by Robe ;t O. Sewell, a.k.a. R. O. Sewell and Robert Oscar Sewell. My commission npir.6 i4 /9 . 19 Wino" my hand ad um* tut OFFICIAL REAL ! ,,, ���.. ��� �� e a n � Rc Geraldine M. Defy .-- ( NOTARY' PUBLIC • CALIFORNIA tt k.g4 PRiNOIPAL OFFICA IN n., ONO* COW rY •��_ Na OSSA, w mini F e Ira Aptll llv 1974 uwtibm)trytalnw o.venael.,r—turL I . !Exhtbt k Certificate of Copy of Record STATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield I, Mildred Alsdorf, County Clerk and Recorder in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct COPY of WARRENTV DRFF) as the same appears upon the records of my office. RECEPTION 228809 BOOK 364 Given under my hand and official seal this 12th day of PAGE T09 MARCH , A.D. 19ga, 9.40 o'clock A M Mildred Alsdorf Deputy mfw County Clerk and Recorder Milt e mar . ae the s � .. . rH. AWi �.A ryni. .. el'14 14424a w a R2SSO9 et_ p,jt, J.flbV l* 2g*- 196...E tD ok 964 LG a " Aspen Ne..,�,,.9 .9. .@,.49..06 t1,....Rantdet Page 09 C ` 'Cafe bath, hind. this ' 'L tid day Of February In they.at of out toed el. !Mound nine hundred aid sixty -five betwau R: A, Cof'FNAN• and FLO N, corn AN argils ..... ceunt,, Gabfield / and enM d tblmado, of the tint part, and " REX A, COFFMAN and JoANN G, torrkAN * • , ufthe, `• ) '. C.nhtfbt hati and 64u of botondo, of theaenn41 paw. . ' . ' - ;: , " " WITNESPRTg,That the said part iss of the first Part, for and In eonalderitlen of the of TEN DOLLARS AND OTHER GOOD AND VALIIUABLE CONSIDERATION W 4403 9 to the said part leg of the first pat In hand p.ld by th.uld pink. of lho wend putt, !hm receipt' whereof le . hereby confused Mel aehhowledged, ha VG enotod, baltillfla fold and tonteybd, gild by these onset do grant, bargain, .ell, coney and tannin unto the said pities of the second port, their Fein and psalm forever, nn In tenancy In common but Infant tenancy, all lho following described Iota ` or panels of land, etude, tying and being In the • " .. Q.uny if • f`ar f ie ld dnd stns. a ` 0e2end.to4dt1 t `: 44" 17,2, tat, l8.and es t'.t' l{tig if J'ou R ei as h Mast 4%. z ,�, of Sixth Pa °Ntf Lof ltii sett ib '91y 4 T oknahip 7 SbuthitRanfe 87 , West of the bilIttth Pi 1111•L01te 21, 22 and 2 3 Section 96 Township :'1 South, Range 88. West of the Sixth P," M,; Lots 1 and 2, Section 1, . Township 8 South, Range 88 West of. the : Sixth P4'• Mit`; consisting of 301,248 aore6; more ,or lees, ,, ^; EXCEPTING the ; folioo4i l aecj•ib• tract or 14hd, to Witt 'r .•„ ! , , r , p d d A tract o? land pitudted•in Lot 3G, ' Township 7 South, Range 88 est of the 6th Principal Meridian, more fully described +•. as followbt " Beginning ::dt -a point -on the North rline'of said Lot •%> 23'whence/ the witness corner for the South Quarter Corner of said Section 36 bears S. 69 °45 E. 961.91 feet; thence S. 89 °10 W, 483,91 feet along the North line of said Lot 23 to the Northwest Corner of, said Lot . 23, thence South 707.62 feet along the West line of said Lot 23 to the Southwest Corner of said Lot 234 thence Sr S9 °24'40° E. 661,35 feet along the South line of, said Lot 23; thence North 692.72 feet% thence, Si 68 W, 31,76 feet; thence 5, 82 °301. W. 52.93 feet; thence !NU 79 ° 3.0 W, 97.63 feet; thence North 90.13 feet to the North line of said Lot 23; the point Of beginning, Containing 10.51 acres, more or less. Togetler with any ^and all water and water rights, ditoheS'Anil ditch rihhte belonging to or used Upon; or in connection with the above described r p operty, Also 'Prather with 134 shares of stock in the North Thompson - Four Mils Mineral and Land Corporation, and ail grazing rights and privileges represented fkhereby,' 4 ' m4+' Also together with the tight to graze 84 head of battle upon the Public domain ae granted by the Bureau of Land Management, p fi r ; 'EXCLI irebetVa bf'1; gotd'aNd eassmehts t righte- •r ,l. ofswa}k b£ rdoord fof ponde highifeytoy pi teNeel telephone, telegraphy ';' and power iinos, " . , 9 it 4 9, 4, >.: 5 Il e e Ili 1 4 c �:� i nl \i„.1„,-; I€ jt 0 t I U e c } �'. ] :1 v- i. t i �: c l fo 11 .E I O Es, -.1 'y t 3 AS b i 1 , 4 f f + 4 1 _ k i E ill t t .: qtr ., J ' ' : . , t t mouton ow, end olnpolgt t11 htpolt.m.eh u(d th lllibk betdanypt�nd or in .nyw4. v ki�yy �+ 'tj f omit and Horn% lhsi.of red , Jy i': .11 st ffh 11d Lit {id t 4 Hues F � Hales 9f lha Hest part, Nthet Id a o ' ; in bt .dultf le std .e bi t%*tbhtishaa 4 frith tilt hrfedll4drbntd and app°n.Nne.. "ar t a t n r 'l Na 4OriN&.tbtttl i 1 Sift X .a water, eMadt4i.ew , f ditrnn!,teenswars , s a v r e c , 1,, t +3 tw ! � tc ' NV G , C t • ) A 4' )I' . ✓u5 ' .i' �,: " ' �i • J 4= v k ' t i l t a a >• ti d �': f r , � ar s h: ° � Rw � awt X S , , v .. e. ., , r k1 a 3 4 , : y 4, t i t o 4 / - 4* "� , -, q 1 K clv, t , , . v tf ., t x , , + .. . S rty d e " ii 1 '` i a1 i< ' c . ' ,, . ,+ A a r f t f "' v �� t ' tc >p ' { X � , Exhibit i0 1 0 .eff ., 1.# as k .a ni m b a F Y'� 1 ' v h e ° s it, t D } I f b t. c-p ” rz o 1' 44' ' ! : • �r:•KtV , C � E f r S t � { 3 + • - aook 364 • r a, • y ' k 'C •` f1'rt k� a s ! r SI�v s'd!! :4 HA" Oh 48 TO U ., l ..4.1.1•-• ,. Y a� 11,1 ° S ► p ; t int ` i t % to the - :•• r?' . • I/ «Id piIttn of Um Ieoond pin, :b Ind Wldii - loan! And a nld pail bet the fan/ p to 1 , themw�ae t e1 k e :lesion idd edddnliw dd 6i�i ML to„ , a . � 1'410449 411'4 Aies of d l W o n d 1 M�p re , , ' la i it �d n4 6i ` 1 b k u nb, t 1-1 Jr hkd dl 15Y' 'dd" 1S, sat** •• s ,. WI In ddwlbll • it l k14,Y, i toe ; slid I&U r, �lt f tl! 16 fly ad 1*bM sot �y " . ` ^. 4104 ia nll end eb n4H! 1Nmi In SM is tto rlutd ltd 151 k�1 t l`,' „ a 41 loan end other ;mutt. 66691 575 has a15fft ,n l id pelf i, , . 4 ilia diirlrnle5ld'15913 a . dn ew ,e A ks ►d b! i • l l , -, Ioem� excep 1965 td ee' z r *sr r„,r y,.'Ft7' .Yu ' r�(! ! ^ r ; r I r `y, �' • rF 9 k 1� 1 /4,i, t °rI r '+r° • h' '',,,0:1:' � rte zt ' a3 s5 '� � • rid ebI Iben baM % pnmine In the 4� MA dneuili poi '..: f ": 'pf S . at t ai p*d tbdil'.. 3 ° Senn end iulln,I ill and ir'4l beset dtpmoM IaWulb did Ild 51d 5 f ' a M 'Yee eS tbllane d64 151U l n a i t de r tAekiut4At1 ell i{ wtht l i e6 W wind's ft th Wi t 8 { E • r • Ylnl ddeE OA t 8 le Spy P'f�� y ': . h " „•` >fi> ' : -s] G am 3 L''' a r J P, ry , r filmed, eull an d Ddlnred In tbl Preen e< i 3 !j t6L"A ” ei:t ,�P ..:.S d •• .u r n 5.2 fE -r�,5A+} g t t i g 1 t a " " y ' 6 1 :. fr' Mi yR:} 4 ,t ) P t" ry "Kf t 1. 1n &L 1 k MATE OF COLOII +`.. " s„ ` � ` p N n m . r rl Wittleeelfl N/t deS Sd kl dde ti r d a p , de df i .. a Sb, (��4Id Ai, cotrKAu End tLp ` t i,'tbt.Attt ;.t� - ^je 1bb>t Isi . ' @ . Won ..A, c 4 a1 .4 v ,1! , Wlt , , t.„- hnndlhdbttl&In.J { 5 ,. w aJa n .• �p � i 4 rj d rr . . 1 , L Vi a, ' ` t t sk` n b 0 ; f� M, ! 1 ��i. �� r ., � � !P $ 5 Z� :4 S / ��N S a` � p y �E �Y • F • . i l d L, #. i / m '.` a y , ^ � 1 „ L a t . - .. :•„ k-, ? . a , : , �. t ;p4k , �kd ` ' arg kSi v�M, , S ldk ,1 p . . Y h , `� K�tl t TJ 1 n .4t 4 � y M w . K air >. v R^ M k , ms a A 1 t,i ° r E 't + , r F 8 u W x st 1 Y` .-4 , . n - " 7a p 'L 4 C. a '' F Ft : `"I "' ', C fi g' rr, y', c ? �dv "r « 5 �� i w " '3•1:' r 9 ha v'` sjN,, t $• ar '' a1 Y i " 1 4 1 �Mf Y 1? ,_ r � 4 • } _ rA x -N '''' 41 4. a 'Y � fS1. . . ° '^ " s \t"V. "4* 'P - i tc . t d 4 ,• • 4 st i"' k 1 ` y . 1 7 et ,' � ` r j d r�V;i a a r � r ' 3\ r" 1 F o p' a L T .. G ; r y\ { 111 a -o aAty `ig � \i"r' ` 5 i "J 1,',w P t *4, � T a ''• .t ° '�'k L "n \ Z i ri.a ,"-.*''''''C'" +d ^ i3 ¢ ti w'• 4ry ; e ,r ( �_ . ' r O 't ; . ; u � � . r u y rte , A,.itr a \ k' ♦ y' l { r a '','.1,4•.:;;;. fa�, Jw � Nor i` { P \ 1 '131 r ! 1 t y . � t 8 5 .. . , "4 a :, p ^� � q eL i � �a ki i r'8 � . k'/ h � h ��.. i i i A ' � r� Y a r + t p . s " y. ` ' + k 3 ' , ; .i -• , j�ti JV a n +, (,' A A R u 'F '11-:"' :, �:^g�li • ( ..' ,' I of � � `i s ` J " $ � V 1 0" . fi r n .,;•A Vii 12,A ' , (A : at " h ,../ � , , 5 ' , a ) §}} 30* t5 t C - t r , r" e� rp . t'L?,0 , e " + r P h „ i a l }{ o i ' ( P i = ra , ^ { ‘,4,, .. 1 C " I. u . t t �f Y � t 4 , 1 `•• s l � ` '.(. a _i� a d t fi t) ,J • 'l, >ri •1 r 4a: — .t - . ; .S ' r �t ", r+,S'r +, ) t'. ,.. :..ta r 'eF II . - ..& - 1 ' 'r v ; i Exhib ■ o ! ,r '5 P -) rd M $ 4 Cetriva of Copy of Record STATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield I, Mildred Alsdorf, County Clerk and Recorder in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct COPY of WARRENTY DRED as the same appears upon the records of my office. RECEPTION 246144 BOOK 409 Given under my hand and official seal this 1 2 t h day of PAGE 491 _ MARCH ,A.D.199R, 9:45 o'clockA M _._. Mildred Alsdorf AlF Deputy mf w County Clerk and Recorder t o . w f r 1 i Jf 1 rr1 y t d- : ,. , gYf.V �f ' IfiGY i >, ( �1 t V r SfM15• 4N i fi ,Cuts. 1 N e � 1 ! �mdpaf ittoy ' i � 2 ��uu ...p lo., � ` H 09 - .. . t P 11 um N 24614 ) Ilk 1i�i' Re � - R1s itf 1191 # ', IIk , J y i T1 fM: I '.i { ' 4 - I r t i ,' ' s. r d(} II' II • ' Tam PjD FA*$6I•r 4& ,Fabbrua ;1 � J 1 II - JI (f 7 ils14 /v 'I : • , a 70 Ikw oaf :a; ;t wive lt d k, *A , g. ) "C 'wino Oe Sewell ell eTl,f:a; tl sowoll 4 1 '' , ' 1. ,; i f ' , , spa oeny 9$1 1 garitold 1 M pgk aa�^ I ■ 4 . , :k f 1';1 i Oohado.ottheMtpsnowa ' p „l ., I 1' 4 • f Sarfiti id Companyy, a 1lmitod.PlirtnerahiP ' I . - ! dew • r txwgat AraPahoa, amPhm o} 0091144W the pemdwnl WJTN6a96TR.Thatth. mid put of the 4 ITpi Wit. torryld lr.onW P1 OMW.WW . Fourteen thousand four hundred eighty two L 00/100 .• – POLLA98. to the wild Putt of W first W{ Is bed Mid le ion mid party of tits mould pa, the receipt Alma 1* Mfobr , , - r •.Mud pod elpwlodiod. be. pw*J. Mrnlwdr p• 4 and 05T, sp4 by One prmats dove rah Mriraa sell, poem end snflm, Mm the Wd Metz et Woo Woad.wq% Idip hell. pM /Min t.rp pU the te1Owla; deerdbed lot s or pared is of hunt - NewtfbI7ta; be* toton: tauaty of Serfield and Elam et Nero, meth _ . e y of Lot 9, 9 4 Lot .10, 8 if of Lot 11, N l e Of Lot 12, and N> NN Of Lot 13, Section 6, Township 8 South, Rengo 87 - Wast, P. Mr • TOORTHER with all and singular the b rediismMla end nppntsinow wmwi 41114140141, or In notwln the slab opt, d , Interest, end and demand whatsoever .4 the ..14 put, of the Rot pert, .RAu in 1.w . or equity, of. lo end to the above baganed pact•* with the beredlt.ment..nd appurtenances TO HAYS AND TO HOLD the wild prtml.m shun bargained and dn.dbed, with the appow.aaae, onto the aid party of thn emend put, Ma bin and amity totem. Axel the mid pub of the tint putter himull, hie bin, . .cmotom, and .dWobtnton, does eoewip pant, balding wad ling to gad with the nth party m the weed wint bh bim sad weld., that se the time e< OM pn4Iag wad deliver, of them praam.be le wit mired of the pmmlrm atom omnyel w of good, ware, petmtr sbsal.to wad Ioddeesible estate of laberitenm• In 1 14 fm unplu and has good dint, toll paws and held auOwrlq to pant. barphh sell and pees the tame In wow, and form ea efoeeeld, end Oat the use are Cm wad der from all tonnes and other ;rots. bards. Wm. Bah ten • eswieemente and eneumbwmres of whatever Mod a Mtueaonet., except general property taxes for 1970, easements and rights of way of a public or private nature, and Restrictive Covenants of record, and prior mineral reservations of record, and hereby reserving to the grantor, his heirs and along existing roadways a on i t s he above described p and roperty, and the above b.. ehed Monism In ion plot sod pmesable pomemhn of the add p. of the .mond pet, Ids helm and midges apdadt W and amp person or pomp lawfully diming orb Claim the whole or any part thereof, the mid party of the don pet shall NA will WARRANT RED FOREVER DEPEND. The sh r$ number .ball (Wade the plant, Oa plead the dopier, and the ne el any girder shad M .ppRmble to eR geodes. Re WITNRaF WHEREOF, the said prig of the flit pert bee bensato .4 ble hand aw esa the dayand yea drat above pittm. / (' • h'd �. `.� ROBERT 0. SEWELL, a.k.a. ROBERT- OSCAR- .SEWELL- -and (SEALJ R. O. Sewell 'J * a ........._...._._..._......_... ..... (SEAL] srATR onfoititilagIA } es. owns owns O of .Stow garb 5 lb. f.insblx lwtnmwt w4,4 acknowledged Wore me this A'c day of Fcpruary 11 70 .N"E0.8En'0:t1 , a.k.a. ROBERT OSCAR SEWELL and R. O. N N i4r 'if m'` .rte .Wiens oq hand wad official mi. y , i t°' I NCI.Pt OwKt tits ftlew •1°d;rr r.. wt o a No. 112*. woman one,-..., MYeresw. mr.N. —anon yaw W i Co. 1b .H. e..t Iind. Now, p.l.r... -sues y +'t 51 l •dw►11 • E x ii ���� � B il. • ' r Cerfniutc of Copy of Record • STATE 01' COLORADO County of Garfield 1, Mildred Alsdorf, County Clerk and Recorder in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct COpy of w4RBFKTY DPED as the same appears upon the records of my office. RECEPTION 253241 BOOK 429 Given under my hand and official seal this 12 t h day of PAGE 233 MARCH ,A.D.19 9.50 o'clockA M • Mildred Alsdorf # Deputy County Clerk and Recorder m f w j1 JO Recorded at 8.100 o'clock A. M., AP,t;.a„L...) 4......19.72 gook 429 Reception No ....253241... Ella...S.tephena RxamePage 233 • FILING STAMP March IBIS DEED, Made this H2O day of RZWIMMIX 1972 , between ROBERT 0. SEWELL, a.k.a. STAN WEOY[ITIp RI R. 0. SEWELL and ROBERT OSCAR SEWELL " 1 1972 of the County of Garfield and State of p /r Colorado, of the first part, and GARFIELD COMPANY, a Limited Partnership • of the County of Arapahoe and State of Colorado, of the second part: \Y ITN}: SSETII, That the said party of the first part, for and In consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS AND OTIIER VALUABLE CONSIDERATION nactatta; to the said party of the first part in hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof Is hereby confessed and acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the Bald party of the second part, his heirs and assigns forever, all the following described lot 8 or parcel l3 of land, situate, lying and being In the County of Garfield and State of Colorado, to wit Township 8 South, Range 88 West, 6th P.M. Section 1: N 3/4 of the 5 1/2 NE 1/4 E 3/4 of Lot 3 E 3/4 of the SE 1/4 NW 1/4 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditament, and appurtenances thereto belonging, or In anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions. remainder and remainders, rents, Issues and profit. thereof; and all the estate, right, tille, Interest claim and demand whatsoever of the said party of the fiat part, either in law o r equity, of In and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditament* and appurtenances. 10 11 AYH . %ND TO II01.9 the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the said part of the secon1 port his heirs and assigns forever. And the Said party of the first part, for himself, his heir,, executes, and ednllnis4ntora, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the said party of the second part, Ms heirs end assigns, that at the time of the enscaling and delivery of these presents, he is well aelred of the premises above cmm eyed. as of good sure, perfect, absolute and Indefeasible estate of inheritance, In law, in fee simple, and hoe good tight full power and lawful authority to grant. bargain, ,ell and convey the same In manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same arc free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sale,, liens, taxes, t .sesnments and encumbrance, of whatever kind or nature poorer, except 1972 general property axes, easements and rights of way of a public or private nature, pr: r oil, gas and other mineral reservations and exceptions of record, U.1. patent reservations and exceptions and Restrictive or Protective Covenants of record, and hereby reserving to first party, his heirs and assigns, an easement over, across and along existing or develope roadwayston the above described property, and the abm'e bargained prenlisea in the quiet and peaceable possession of the said party of the second part, his heirs and ns•igrn agaimt n11 and every person or persona lawfully claiming or to claim the whole or any pail thereof, the ,aid party of the Ma amt eh at and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND. The singular number shall include the pinto!, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITH ISS WIIEHFAD', the said party of the first part has hereunto met his hand and seal the day and year fine above written . Robert b Se Sewell UII [SEAL] I Robert O Sewell, a.k.a. R. e and [SF.AL7 11 CALIFORNIA [SEA1.7 l STATE OFXXISSEKIIIY. o' County of San Diego .•`: altvo The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day oflc G 1972 .by ROBERT 0. SEWELL, a.k.a. R. 0. SEWELL and ROBERT OSCAR SEWELL. sty mmmislon expires , 19 Wltneu any band and 6ffIh111( seal , N Polite • No el :. \. w'.tl(n.tetl' nC1:n. e, Hot ,em'hi,llr curl . II. all o,.l l' ubmbinr Co.. 1021 Soul 5t 't, nm,en ('nloeu :u Exhibit I D 8 ' is_ q • Cerraicste of Copy of Record STATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield I, Mildred Alsdorf, County Clerk and Recorder in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct Cnpv of WARRENTY DEED as the same appears upon the records of my office. RECEPTION 245064 BOOK 406 Given under my hand and official seal this 1 21- h day of PAGE 350 MARCH ,A.D.1998, 9: 45 o'clock A M Mildred Alsdorf t Deputy ID f County Clerk and Recorder i qµ � ♦a >., 1. F....' }'(i r .. S+, 1'...rt Ytf�. 1 kt ' 4 L! ,9 Lit ' f* '`w+r1tW' -trei :'la.. 4 .11 v 1t'' - it'.` . ' is i f 61 .' { ,, d ° 1 ' 1s 1-, f 1.• } + "LS , 1" ' � "� . 5` � ct 4 rig - '1 .e - rn i ti °' i t ° ? 3 d a , V 42/' . 1 i $$ . i A * , F 11 � i 2`S {{ t ' f) 1Y •1t } t f ) 3 +ill �` air i 6 , Si, < • �'tf ; 1° R'u if V t T 5 ' � ) , ' i{ / li t ' + ' i x w , ib '4, r °M 4* 3 , f F ie 7) " ' x I<,' 1l..a.� c..! 4+ V � +r x d, E t i8�` Y r r +7 eF' ai! *4 I + d e e "'Sa sC ,�wy �' 5 y f h 1 � y Jl�.J 3 N's'F �1. 1� 5 �.a M i � /1 9 Y 't 'II gy, s '${p II i. h % ,; Y V o k i � * A' '4 zh t "� r e n � , A i ' Y o, , t i . , fi U V K 4;45 �", i ri ' i'" 'i'S'4'>' 9 1". 4 1w Y 1 P, k, 7'r '�"�' 5 1$ -- t.zrr. 67f,r`r *. X 1 ,1„ - --tir 4 ("4, 1 u 3. + 11 411 r e nr, tM tolfq 4u.ligl jot pmA K "l`k poee9°51411 of gill. .14 ;. 1 91IVVWa4a, p 9 AFt , v�tJ 4 r e > t yi r a 1 1 ° of +B f '!7 Wee ,.3 i' , rt 1t y„;f, ` r rM1 • t . ' A % t i r. ¢ . c 'h i k0 .� 4'3y n 11 4 s ' 4 4 n i $ . 5 T ` o � `. ) ,t ' y 4 / ' )11, Ai, 4. 7, d a h3 t #r, t11,$•„4,1,14,1:4,`,,,\J"'',7" dlY q : "'t' .rfi i it � . N l/4 }£ f y 1 4 i '` Yn 1 :CI 111. R ;lit 1 T�I' fk 5 a ` ` 0 r I 4 ' , 1 k .*11'�, „1` ii W '4 n 1 N- e. a n ilt �Ywi [ya ;A ,'1 'i +t, F , 't g, ` s r a;w '1' - 1 x 5 f9' 3 ' - ' r ' I L '" ��`�' -it!' . k ^ ,. zi ' t} 6F N ryryJ , !po tan ( of P4'49 at y i �"� 1 I ''° t 0 k wa •F$ Pot ; t t I P1nt 1 1 ' • 4.1 s TPrI ^1R� 2 A ter4 `1 Y =t al/ .5•w'Nli �e"1i1^1 1 : 7 nl li th+ 9NIMQA15 T9qM hrgn WA Vro91q Wain! rn9 +p We ..t.w naht5 onemt } hill !14 4 **4 ll+taaangl Pt t,4 Prig . 9h* ,qut, hn1 ^_� I, " + "iy; 4 J. w nW4 el # lAe.Pp1t9 1 7 9 math 1 0,4 1 � Pw1 Y' PI* R M III • 1 To N 7Q P%yR Iq PP*911$TI 00, Inn .4, - a `c' o r h 'i ' h ! LQs rhllni a [151��', RS POrti x; t9A+Ri. i r �' with �* l5 4 1 left 1 o t: pi n Mwp4W to IW ? - th OP u14 von 914,4** 1•t! OW IM mom, 009 it • no on of WP Minn! all 4.UnrP I . of thee Pryrlt o no to " TAN Ia19A (4 on pee11., Ppef ILA74 P� T P4 of IPA na , b* 010110 IW . . t , 1 M1W..Ibt. MMk 91 NM*" 1411X, IQ $14 01014,1114 1 •. poi wit i?q Mr? w4I Sul plthoti}f .1 to , S r R►+F *PIN MN it Wile ,t4 t PPAPb4 P,e1 MR Ip1 VO rti 1M1. 111119![ it t r gm 011041;414 ; 4##I Part l4tW tt 4i tf vA9 k nom ms sOo c! . p fnyrolt Fi G Qf t 1toO flct land an4 ;light! 'of Nqo p F! >l 'Wi ilvato' net ref art Po¢tilet ve NV011anta of r n. ' kp>• laxa 4 @;pt 99 J+Rt 1,0994 f i iy 4 i t ✓, : TT^1 }p9. • e J . Si n h4 p}may 1 M1 I t _ 99 op p 119a slte W (, n M , • t > au P19 mp i,% ih m or Pat ilt 1 !A Iw E A N T AN 4T the * I i t *, w +W mg n ' Vt the "11 $b.ft p0�p 04 04 RW AAND R(tVa! t 1 P9 RN ivi D t W Mt1 Y 0 W fket put MP hefeAPt/ 1! ,. oth4 ' w9 eu9 the NA 411 fiv +p ri RnFeq. I 11 }F F 1 + fi l s 1- ,� "I''''n, /60-7"'`','"4 V } y R' LM x h y ; r t , y . d 't*' i - m A om i . .. a N . Rr44, A.lC, I t roA�' f. F° .11,141,'4..41'T r :•• p t f r t^3 t E r i i i 11 ik 4; • 1� ' r1� 5'O' kn r jIML) t c le T B y yam• y, n '. ''# 0 ,104 9 1P4 f tF4a; , �l� t ,. n *E at ` �, , ' f , } tS� + �d MkM .Wy r'f rt --- - ?' *pc pfioembor �� IS1tNR ; PIPc ,riTI'T 9Pa $ j,L and R. 01l.IWEL " L ,, v.'4 eI '� l�.l t t ei t r .t ' ,,,,, Cv'10...+aa4.F 4riyY.,l.r 3, i, 0" *- -- i � y�. .w,s • . •• ' - --:4 t' ; 1 wr''a ' °M " "' ^. P'tn f°yAh 3a t ` + 1 Ri d . r 3 w n C' e otiz *` �t 1 K4 +4i •` r X 1I 'i hf`q!2• %. u p ..V s + i '1 t ad 1 E r i T 1 t. „., bi,,} 't l� - _ c !� . !�.� '�i S” a s' +i8 � _ 9,, !1 ((} '_ +1 •1 } y X15 � } f� 1 F' 0 1994711E PUBLIC RECORD CORPORATION ALL R1O1ITS RESERVED 17 CR 6, 6 -94 Popo 11 finer. (A soil having a uniformity coefficient smaller than 4 would be considered "uniform" for purposes of this regulation.) Vault - a watertight, covered receptacle, which is designed to receive and store excreta or wastes either from a sewer or from a privy and is accessible for the periodic removal of its contents. Wastewater Pond - a designed pond which receives exclusively wastewater from a first stage treatment unit and which provides an additional degree of treatment. IV. Administration and Enforcement A. Permit Application Requirements and Procedures: 1. Prior to commencement of installation, alteration, or repair of a system, a written application shall be submitted to the local health department providing, as a•minimum, the information called for on the application form and a permit shall have been issued by the local health department or its designated agent having jurisdiction. 2. A permit fee not to exceed that which is allowed by 25 -10 -101 et seq. (as amended) C.R.S. shall be required of applicants for an individual sewage disposal system, payable at the time the application is received. This fee shall be based on the average cost to the local health department for processing applications during the preceding calendar year. The fee for permits issued by the Department shall not exceed the maximum allowed by 25 -10 -101 et seq. (as amended) C.R.S. 3. The local board of health may make provision for the waiver of any permit fee normally required for an individual sewage disposal system. 4. If an individual sewage disposal system permit is issued, it shall expire one ye after the date of issuance if construction has not commenced or as specified by local hoard of health regulations. Any change in plans or specifications after the permit has been issued invalidates the permit unless written approval is secured from the health officer or his /her authorized agent for such Eal lesse ria T T!or pr f,r (ten nrnr'n rir: rift ? Tin? Ie Nee 12 4 changes. 5. The local health department may issue a repair permit and an emergency use permit to the owner or occupant of property on which a system is not functioning properly. Application for a repair permit shall be made by such owner or occupant to the local health department within two business days after receiving notice from the local health department that the system is not functioning in compliance with Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. or applicable rules and regulations adopted thereunder or otherwise constitutes a nuisance or a hazard to public health. The permit shall provide for a hiireasonable period of time within which repairs shall be made. At the end of that period the system shall be inspected by the local health department to insure it is functioning properly. Concurrently with the issuance of a repair permit, the local health department may issue an emergency use permit authorizing continued use of a malfunctioning system on an emergency basis for a period not to exceed the period stated in the repair permit. Such an emergency use permit may be extended, for good cause shown, in the event repairs may not be completed in the period stated in the repair permit through no fault of the owner or occupant. 6. An individual sewage disposal system permit shall be required for expanded use of an existing system. 7. Rules and regulations of the local board of health shall include provisions regarding review by the local board of health, upon request of an applicant, of applications denied by the health officer. 0. The issuance of a permit and specifications of terms and conditions therein shall not constitute assumption or create a presumption that the local health department or its employees may be liable for the failure of any system nor act as a certification that the equipment used in the system or any component thereof used in its operation or that the system for which the permit was issued insures continuous compliance with the provision of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S., the rules and 5 CCR 1003 -6 THE CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS 1101k w (V 1994 TI IL' PUBLIC RECORD CORPORATION ALL RIGI ITS RESERVED 17 CR 6, 6 -94 Pe „n 13 regulations adopted thereunder or any terms and conditions of a permit. 9. Except as provided in these guidelines, no individual sewage disposal system permit shall be issued to any person when the subject property is located within a municipality or special district which provides public sewer service, except where such sewer service to the property is not feasible in the determination of the municipality or special district. B. Application Review: The application shall include such information, data, plans, specifications, statements, and commitments as required by the local board of health to carry out the purposes of Article 10, Title 25, C.R.S., as amended. After receiving an application for an individual sewage disposal system permit, the application shall be reviewed by the local health department and an inspection shall be made by the health officer or his /her designated representative consisting of: 1. Inspection. of the premises, unless previously inspected. 2. Evaluation of soil where percolation tests are required. • • 3. A, determination as to the suitability of the site, and of the proposed design based upon verification . of the ground water table, suitable soil, depth to features, ground slope and pertinent physical C. Additional. Evaluation: When the health officer or his /her designated agent has determined that the local health department does not have sufficient information for evaluation of an application or a system, he may require additional tests or documentation. D. Additional Hydrological, Geological, Engineering or other Information: Mme.. . Papo 14 When specific evidence suggests undesirable subsurface conditions exist, additional hydrological, geological, - engineering or other information provided by a registered professional engineer or geologist may be required to be submitted by the applicant. This requirement shall not prejudice the right of the local health department to develop its own information from its own source. E. Determination: A determination shall be made on behalf of the local health department by a sanitarian, environmental health specialist or a registered professional engineer after review of the application, site inspection, test results, and other required information, whether the proposed system is in compliance with the requirements of Article 10 of. Title 25, C.R.S. and applicable rules and regulations adopted under said section. A permit may be issued by .the health 'officer or his /her designated representative if the proposed system is.determined to be in compliance with the requirements of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. and the rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. F. Inspection Stages: Local regulations shall specify the stages of construction, installation, alteration, or repair at which time the local health department will require inspections. Before the system is placed in use the owner, the owner's agent or the systems contractor shall provide the local health department with notice that the progress of the work has been sufficiently. completed to allow inspection to determine if all work has been performed in accordance with the permit requirements and to determine compliance of the system with Article 10, Title 25, C.R.S. and the rules and regulations adopted thereunder. G. Access to Site: For the purpose of inspection and enforcing applicable rules and regulations and the terms and conditions of any permit issued, the health officer or his /her designated agent is authorized to enter upon private property at reasonable times and upon reasonable notice for the purpose of determining whether or not operating individual sewage disposal facilities and systems are 5 CCR 1003 -6 THE CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS Sr. V 0 9941110 PUULIC RECORD CORPORA77ON • Al.!. RIOT nS RESERVED 17 CR 6, 6 -94 Pogo 15 functioning in compliance with Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. and applicable rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto and the terms and conditions of any permit issued and to inspect and conduct tests in evaluating any permit application. The owner or occupant of every property having an individual sewage disposal - T f n) system shall permit the health officer' or his /her pr m j designated agent access to the property to conduct required tests, take samples, monitor compliance, and /r., make inspections. H. Department Authority to Administer and Enforce: Wherever the term local board of health, local health department, or health officer is used' 'in these guidelines, said terms shall also include'the Colorado Department of Health or its designated authority for the purposes of administering and enforcing the provisions of these guidelines as Colorado Department of Health Regulations where necessary to protect the public health and environment. I. Primary Enforcement Responsibility: The primary responsibility for enforcement of the provisions of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. and the ' regulations adopted under said Section shall lie with the local health departments or local boards of health. • 4 • In-7the event that' -'a local- healthi department- or local x If CV r . .: , board of health fails to administer and enforce theI !provisions of said section and the rules and regulations I adopted under said Article 10, the department may assume', ( n (� such functions of the local health department or board of AD 11 ( health as may be necessary to protect the public health 5 (.� i; and. environment. - (25-10-109)- .... ...• 1:11 t 3. Experimental Systems: Except for designs or types of systems which have been approved by the Division pursuant to . C.R.S., 25 -10 -107 (1), the local board of health may approve an application for a type system not otherwise provided for in • paragraphs (e) to (j) of subsection (1) of C.R.S. • 25 -10 -105 only if the system has been designed by a registered professional engineer, and only if the application provides for the timely installation of a • r. Pap lU • backup system of a type described in said paragraphs in the event of a failure of the experimental system. A local board of health shall not arbitrarily deny any person the right to consideration of an application for such a system and shall apply reasonable performance standards in determining whether to approve such an application. (25 -10 -107 (2)). K. Prohibition of Individual Sewage Disposal Systems in Unsuitable Areas: The local board of healthma conduct a public hearing, after written notice to all'affected property owners as shown in the records of the county assessor and publication of notice in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten days prior to the hearing, to consider the /� prohibition. of permits for individual. 0P,J0 g( sewage disposal systems in defined areas which contain or iv, , . are subdivided for a. density of more than two dwelling units per acre.. The local board of health may order such -, prohibition upon a finding that the construction and use of additional individual sewage disposal systems in the 6' defined area will constitute a hazard to the public f" "" health or the environment. In such a hearing, the local ' �� board of health may request affected property owners to submit engineering and geological reports concerning the defined area and provide a study of the economic • feasibility of constructing a sewage treatment works. (25 -10 -110) L. Fees: • Fees authorized in these guidelines shall be set at such amounts as are deemed necessary to cover the operational expense of the several agencies but shall not exceed the maximum amounts specified in these guidelines. M. ' Licensing of Systems Contractors and Systems Cleaners: 1. The local board of health may adopt rules and regulations which provide for the licensing of systems contractors. A fee not to exceed twenty -five dollars may be charged by the local health department for the initial license of a systems contractor; a fee not to exceed ten dollars may be charged by the local health department for a renewal of the license. Initial licensing and renewals thereof shall be for a period of not less rf ■ 5 CCR 1003 -6 THE CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS v- n, 0 1995 MC PUBLIC RECORD CORPORATION • ALL RICH ITS RL'SERVED 1 CR 4, 4 -95 Page I7 than one year. Renewals may be scheduled to coincide with the calendar. year. • The local board of health may revoke the license of a systems contractor for violation of the applicable provisions of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. of the rules and regulations adopted under said section or for other good cause shown, after a hearing conducted upon reasonable notice to the systems contractor -and at which the systems contractor may be present, with counsel, and be heard. (25 -10 -108) 2. The local board of health may adopt- rules and regulations which provide for the licensing of systems cleaners. A fee not to exceed twenty -five dollars may La charged by the local health department for the initial license of a systems • cleaner; a fee not to exceed ten dollars may be charged for the renewal of the license. Initial licensing and renewals thereof shall be for a period of not less than one year. Renewals may be scheduled to coincide with the calendar year. 3. The local board of health may revoke the license of a systems cleaner for violation of the applicable provisions of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. of the •regulations adopted under said section or for other good cause shown after a hearing conducted upon reasonable notice to the systems cleaner and at which the systems cleaner may be present, with counsel, and be heard. (25 -10 -108). N. Cease and Desist Orders: The health officer or his /her authorized representative may, issue an order to cease and desist from the use of any system which is found by the health officer not to be functioning in compliance with Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. or with applicable rules and regulations or is found to constitute a hazard to public Health, or has not otherwise received timely repairs under the provisions of C.R.S., Section 25 -10 -106 (1)(j). Such an order may be issued only after a hearing which shall be conducted by the health officer not less than 48 hours after written notice thereof is given to the owner or occupant of the property on which the system is located and at which the • owner or occupant may be present, with counsel, and be v v rl:i Pupe 18 ' • heard. The order shall require that the owner or occupant bring the system into compliance or eliminate the health hazard within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed thirty days, or thereafter cease and desist from the use of the system. A cease and desist order issued by the health officer shall. be reviewable in the district court for the county wherein the system is located and upon a petition filed not later than ten days after the order is issued. V. .Calcq]atiop of Sewage Flow and Characteristics; A. Where gallons per day and pounds of biochemical oxygen demand (DODO per day can be obtained by measurement of existing conditions, such data may be used. This allows local health officials to require installation of a meter located to measure flow into the individual sewage disposal system. B. For new facilities the following "Table of Quantities and BOD Strength of Sewage" may be used as a guide to represent average conditions. C. Maximum flow shall be considered as 150 percent of average daily flow and shall be the basis for design purposes unless otherwise established by evidence satisfactory to the health officer. D. To calculate the sewage flow for dwellings and mobile homes, use a figure of two persons per bedroom. E. In no event may the system be designed for a lesser capacity than the anticipated maximum daily sewage flow or treatment requirements of the sewage or wastes in the system. F. The local health officer or his /her designated agent may, at his /her discretion, allow reduction in design flow for proven, permanently installed water conservation devices. Reduction rates will be based on flow rate information supplied to the local health department for comparison with standard accepted rates for each fixture that utilizes water conservation devices. G. The local Health Officer or designated agent may, at their discretion, require an increase of average daily flow of up to 100 gal /person /day for large or more costly dwellings. -' 5 CCR 1003 -6 THE CODE Or COLORADO REGULATIONS r __...... .. -. - f i ,. .`uu2.2.2.1 .. &f i't b' PART III GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR SAFETY ARTICLE 9 — FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS AND WATER SUPPLY SECTION 901 — GENERAL 901.4.5 Street or road signs. When required by the chief, streets and roads shall be identified with approved signs. 901.1 Scope. Fire department access and water supply shall be in accordance with Article 9. 901.5 Obstruction and Control of Fire Apparatus Access Roads and Fire- protection Equipment. See Sections 902.2.4 For firesafety during construction, alteration or demolition of a and 1001.7. - . building, see Article 87. 901.6 Fire Protection in Recreational Vehicle, Mobile Home 901.2 Permits and Plans. and Manufactured Housing Parks, Sales Lots and Storage • Lots. Recreational vehicle, mobile home and manufactured 901.2.1 Permits. A permit is required to use or operate fire hy- housing parks, sales lots and storage lots shall provide and main - drants or valves intended for fire- suppression purposes which are tain fire hydrants and access roads in accordance with Sections i installed on water systems and accessible to public highways, 902 and 903. alleys or private ways open to or generally used by the public. See Section 105, Permit f.1. EXCEPTION: Recreational vehicle parks located in remote areas shall be provided with protection and access roadways as required by EXCEPTION: A permit is not required for persons employed and the chief. authorized by the water company which supplies the system to use or operate fire hydrants or valves. SECTION 902 — FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS 901.2.2 Plans. 902.1 General. Fire department access roads shall be provided 901.2.2.1 Fire apparatus access. Plans for fire apparatus access and maintained in accordance with Sections 901 and 902. roads shall be submitted to the fire department for review and ap- 902.2 Fire Apparatus Access Roads. proval prior to construction. 902.2.1 Required access. Fire apparatus access roads shall be 901.2.2.2 Fire hydrant systems. Plans and specifications for provided in a th Sections 901 and 902.2 for every fire hydrant systems shall be submitted to the fire department for (adlity, building or portion wi of a building hereafter co nstructed or review and approval prior to construction. moved into or within the jurtsdiction when any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the 9013 Timing of Installation. When fire protection, including building is located more than 150 feet (45 720 mm) from fire fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection, apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the is required to be installed, such protection shall be installed and exterior of the building or facility. See also Sectiori 902.3 for per - made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. sonnel access to buildings. EXCEPTION: When alternate methods of protection, as EXCEPTIONS: I. When buildings are completely protected with approved, are provided, the requirements of Section 901.3 may be an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the provisions of Sections modified or waived. 902.2.1 and 902.2.2 may be modified by the chief. 901.4 Required Marking of Fire Apparatus Access Roads, 2. When access roads cannot be installed due to location on property, Addresses and Fire Equipment. topography, waterways, nonnegotiable grades or other similar condi- tions, the chief is authorized to require additional fire protection as spe- 901.4.1 General. Marking of fire apparatus access roads, cified in Section 1001.9. addresses and fire protection equipment shall be in accordance 3. When there are not more than two Group R, Division 3, or Group with addresses a n 901.4. 11 Occupancies, the requirements of Sections 902.2.1 and 902.2.2 may be modified by the chief. 901.4.2 Fire apparatus access roads. When required by the More than one fire apparatus road shall be provided when it is chief, approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided determined by the chief that access by a single road might be im- and maintained for fire apparatus access roads to identify such paired by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic condi- roads and prohibit the obstruction thereof or both. tions or other factors that could limit access. 901.43 Fire - protection equipment and fire hydrants. Fire- For high -piled combustible storage, see Section 8102.6.1. Protection equipment and fire hydrants shall be clearly identified For required access during construction, alteration or demoli- in an approved manner to prevent obstruction by parking and other tion of a building, see Section 8704.2. obstructions. - 902.2.2 Specifications. When required by the chief, hydrant locations shall be 902.2.2.1 Dimensions. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an • identified by the installation of reflective markers. unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (6096 mm) and an un- See also Section 1001.7. obstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (4115 • Inm) 901.4.4 Premises identification. Approved numbers or ad- PP EXCEPTION: Vertical clearance may be reduced, provided such I dresses shall be rovided for all new and existing buildings in such p B g reduction does not impair access by fire apparatus and approved signs a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road are installed and maintained indicating the established vertical clear - fronting the property. ante when approved. 1 -27 • t lZ C. •a Chapter 5 Se GENERAL BUILDING LIMITATIONS o- as 1. Chapter 5 provides general provisions that are applicable to The building in the center would not have access and thus wo ty all buildings. These include requirements for exterior wall and be in violation of the code. This access requirement would a opening protection; allowable floor areas and increases, includ- prohibit a building which extends from property line to prope ing area separation walls; increases for open spaces and for the line from being divided by an area separation wall in sucl use of automatic sprinkler systems; and allowable height of manner as to completely isolate the back portion. See Figi buildings and increases. Other miscellaneous topics addressed 503 -1 for examples of these two situations. in Chapter 5 are premises identification, mezzanines and guard- Because the open space between a street front lot line and ce rails. ter line of the street is available to property on both sides of I In addition to general provisions set forth in Chapter 5, there street, the code provides that the center line of the street shall are several special uses and occupancies which need to be assumed to be the property line. As the code refers to "pub addressed. These special provisions are found in both Chapters way," this would also be applicable to an alley or other approp 3 and 4 with a cross - reference to the special uses and occupan- ate open spaces which the building official may determine is m cies being presented in Section 501. sonably likely to remain unobstructed through the years. 503.2 Fire Resistance of Walls. The roles for exterior wall a SECTION 502 — PREMISES IDENTIFICATION opening protection based upon proximity to the property line a In this section, which first appeared in the 1982 edition, the U.B.C. intends that buildings be provided with plainly visible and legible address numbers posted on the building or in such a I place on the property that the building may be identified by emergency services such as fire, medical and police. The pri- R- mary concern is that responding fue- suppression forces may lo- cate the building without going through a lengthy search proce- t dure. In furthering the concept, the code intends that the • �� NO ���$ L approved street numbers be placed on a sign readily visible from S ACCESS $ to the street fronting on the property if a sign on the building would R • % rc not be visible from the street. . m u AREA SEPARATION WALL o (9. SECTION 503 — LOCATION ON PROPERTY YARD l i 503.1 General. The Uniform Building Code, as far as exterior R---I I wall protection is concerned, operates on the philosophy that an owner can have no control over what occurs on adjacent proper- CASE A ty, and therefore the locations of buildings on the owner's prop- erty must be regulated relative to the property line. In fact, the I location of all buildings and structures on a given piece of prop- R „ erty are located with relation to the real property lines as well as ...... assumed or imaginary property lines between buildings. The use R 1 of assumed property lines will be discussed later. '� AREA I R NO ACCESS „ SEPARATION t"' The property line concept provides a convenient means of FOR THIS o WALL W protecting one building from another insofar as exposure is con- BUILDING „ F cerned. Exposure is the potential for heat to be transmitted from m one building to another under fire conditions in the exposing o building) Radiation is the primary means of heat transfer. R " e9i von 503 be with a requirement that Ve building BUILDING EXTENDS TO 1 ¢o �hh�•• •Bye �1, a�& rw� ALL PROPERTY LINES ,,, me, t10o , vet tb44A a t�O 1* re de CASE 8 f I gait* " et0 the properb 1100 pre. The access requirement precludes the concept of surrounding ACCESS REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDINGS one building by another where the surrounded building is sepa- rated from the surrounding building with area separation walls. Figure 503-1 € /6 viisearvi/rA2 Map 5 summarizes the location and buildout Fiscal impacts. When agricultural _or other percentage for all subdivisions located in open space areas are platted for residential unincorporated Garfield County. Analyses of development, the assessed valuation of the the average improved lot prices reflect the same property increases. Unfortunately, if the regional differentiation as rental and mortgage subdivision fails to develop, the tax revenue is prices shown in Table 17. Generally speaking, never fully realized. Furthermore, if the . areas nearest to, and east of, Glenwood Springs subdivision ever reaches full occupancy, the are dramatically higher priced when compared demand for water, emergency services and to the western portion of the County.':" schools will increase. <<Assuming the County was unable or failed to require the developer to The "Index to Subdivisions" at the bottom of make on or off -site improvements, the cost of Map 5 shows that lot vacancy rates range in these services will fall on the County. the area of 40 percent for most of the County, with subdivisions near Silt and Rifle having Environmental impacts. Environmental issues vacancy rates over 50 percent. The failure to are also intensified by premature subdivisions. buildout previously approved subdivisions These„ subdivision$ itas` well as many raises several issues that are explored in detail subdivisions recently approved, do not provide below. comprehensive water and sewer systems. Individual lot owners drill individual wells and 5.3 Premature Subdivisions install ISD systems. County staff do not have the ability to monitor these systems effectively. As shown on Map 5, the County has approved The proliferation of individual wells, ISD a large number of subdivisions that have failed systems, the lack of adequate roads, wildlife to reach buildout - referred to as "premature habitat loss, as well as poor site selection and subdivisions." ?Premature subdivisions are inferior design contribute to the environmental commonly defined as lands that where platted issues associated with these subdivisions. some time ago, often sold into multiple ownership, are largely undeveloped and, in Land Use impactq. Land use impacts also some cases, do not meet contemporary become apparent following premature planning, zoning and building standards. subdivisions. The premature commitment of an area to residential development often causes The lack of development is the primary future development, based on a real demand for distinguishable characteristic of premature housing of a particular type, to "leapfrog' the subdivisions in Garfield County. Because the prematurely platted and poorly designed subdivisions were platted before any need for subdivision. This process leaves pockets of immediate buildout, only a few residences are vacant land that may not be suitable for constructed. In truth, most of these development at a later time. subdivisions were divided and sold purely as a speculative land investment. The consequences The primary danger related to premature of this process can be grouped into three subdivisions is the mistaken notion that categories: fiscal, environmental and land use. subdivision proliferation is a sign of economic These impacts, discussed below, were reviewed development. The percentage of vacant lots in detail by a 1986 study conducted by the summarized on Map 5 clearly shows the failure American Planning Association and The of these projects to build out. Furthermore, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. fiscal and environmental impacts associated with public services, traffic generation and 11 -18 inadequate water and sewer systems will have from 300 to 400 units annually. a dramatic impact on the entire County. • Third, the estimates of need for new 5.4 Population Growth and Housing units to serve future employment are Demand well below the current levels of housing construction occurring for Primary opportunities and stimuli for growth local residents. Furthermore, new within the County include recreation- related units do not appear to consider real estate sales and construction that occur deficiencies that exist to currently both within the County and in neighboring serve the local population. -The data Pitkin and Eagle Counties. -• In addition, shows that building activity is not economic development ,.within larger keeping pace with current employment communities has also increased the need for and population growth. In addition, additional housing units within the County. the units being built often do not meet the demands at the low end of the price A precise estimate of housing needs is difficult spectrum. to quantify due to the inability to predict energy costs, tourism demand and local government 5.5 Affordability regulations that all affect regional demand and production of housing. However, the Garfield The affordability of housing for residents within County Housing Research Report, prepared in the County is a function of three interrelated September of 1990 by the Garfield County factors: land values, construction costs and Housing Authority, does provide several average household income. Land values have important conclusions regarding future housing shown a gradual increase over the last 10 years. needs in the County. Data collected by the Garfield County Board of Realtors show that the average unimproved • First, Garfield, Pitkin and Eagle residential lot sold for approximately $45,000 Counties have shown significant in 1991. Due to the widely fluctuating land growth in a period of relative economic costs between the eastern and western portions lag for Colorado as a state. In Garfield of the County, an average cost of land is quite County, county-wide employment deceiving. Construction costs are estimated at levels have returned to the levels approximately $50 to $100 per square foot for achieved at the time of the energy an average wood -framed residential unit. The boom and, with growth in the two 1990 U.S. Census estimated that the average adjacent counties, the current annual household income within the County residential base shows no excess was approximately $29,176 in 1989 dollars. capacity. A more accurate portrayal of the affordability • Second, the housing data suggest that situation and the diversity in the County's real if current employment trends continue, estate market is based on the average sale price the demand for new housing to serve for single - family units for specific geographic the local population wishing to locate regions within the County. Sales records from in all three counties will continue to the Board of Realtors for 1991 and 1993 allow rise. By conservative estimates, the for a breakdown based on the following demand for new units in Garfield regional definitions: County (both incorporated and unincorporated), are expected to range 11 -19 AFFIDAVIT STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) The undersigned, Bentley Henderson, after first being duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows: 1. I am presently employed by the Town of Carbondale, Colorado as its Chief Building Official. I have been employed in this capacity since March, 1994. From the period of July, 1991 until March, 1994, I was employed as a building inspector by the Town of Carbondale. 2. I am familiar with the 1994 edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). In my capacity as the Chief Building Official for Carbondale, I am the official responsible for oversight and administration of issuance of building permits and enforcement of the UBC within the Town of Carbondale. 3. I have reviewed the provisions of the UBC in connection with the appeal filed by the Town of Carbondale of Garfield County's issuance of building permits for Lots 3 and 60, Block 5, and Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision. Based upon my review of the subdivision plat for this subdivision and other information provided to me in connection with this matter, it is my opinion that the issuance of these three building permits is in violation of the provisions of the UBC. Specifically, Section 503.1 and the definition of "public way" in Section 1001.2 of the UBC require that any building must have access to a public way. A public way is a street that has been deeded, dedicated, or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for public use. The illustrative commentary to the UBC states that the objection of the access requirement of Section 503 is to provide a method by which the fire department may gain access to the property to fight a fire. 4. Based on the information that I have reviewed in connection with this subdivision, it is my conclusion that legal access to the subdivision does not exist and that the building permits in question were issued in violation of the provisions of the UBC. Further affiant sayeth naught. Bentley nde on The foregoing was subscribed and sworn to before me this // Aay of March, 1998 by Bentley Henderson. Witness my hand and official seal. Z e. / ,-ko � Notary Public / / 0' • 11 �� My commission expires: o —� Z ed i ' 0 yo' 4a vi ) 031698- townTenderson affidavit-It 5• - - - r . 9.01.03 Inspection: The Building Official or his designated representative is hereby empowered to inspect any building, structure or tract of land concerning which he has reasonable cause to believe that a use exists, or construction or alteration work is being or has been performed, in violation of the applicable provisions of this Resolution. If a violation exists, the County _ ' . Commissioners or their designated representative shall direct that such remedial action be taken as will . result in full compliance with the applicable provisions of this Resolution...._ 4 9.01.04 Bggords: All permits, including applications, and inspection records shall be kept on file in the office of the Building Official as a public record. 9.01.05 Expiration: A permit shall be valid for a period of one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of issuance thereof unless construction or use has commenced thereunder; and if construction or use has not commenced within this specified period, the permit shall expire. The County Commissioners may extend the expiration date of any permit. ,701.06 Compliance with Conditions of Permits: Upon being advised of an alleged violation / of any permit issued by or on behalf of the County Commissioners, the County Commissioners may establish a time for consideration of the alleged violation, upon not less than three (3) days' notice to the party engaging in activity under such permit, and to the owner of the property which is the subject of the permit, at which hearing the County Commissioners may consider whether a violation of the conditions of the permit has occurred. If the County Commissioners determine that a violation has occurred, the Board may suspend the permit until such violation can be corrected or until measure can be takeniaprevent a recurrence of such violation, or, if the violation is determined to be continuing or - likely to recur and t o endanger thesafety or_welfare of the residents or property of residents within the county, the County Commissioners may terminate the subject permit. (A. 81 -145) 9.01.07 Tgnpggy Permits: Any per it granted under the authority of these regulations may be limited in time as the Board deems necessary in order to protect the uses of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the public. (A. 81 -263) 9.02 PERMIT - CONDITIONAL USE 9.02.01 Apnlicatinn: All conditional use permit applications shall be filed by the owner or owners of the subject lot with the Planning Director on a form provided by the Planning Director for this purpose and shall consist of all information required of an application for a permit and subject to all administrative procedures thereof plus the following: Supporting information, plans, letters of approval from responsible agencies and other information to satisfy requirements listed under Conditional and Special Uses in the Supplementary Regulations. (A. 79 -132) 9.02.02 Action by the Planning Director: The Planning Director shall utilize services of the Environmental Health Officer, the Building Official and Planning Department and other County and 108 = ii !II __� - l i�i ij,i1 • cal ;I -ta s _ i 1 ; t I A ___,...........___ : nIII i :li3i iS i i Et; ti _ III ? i to -K " s I. ry }r p a 1 4.4•1.,. e l} i C- I; , T cii iti,„, I ill C I to -- = / 1 ' t < NI ti4 } d 1■ �: f At / 7 Cr Pp j� lati � ii .�° iii r > U iv:a I ii ma{ 4 , Iu ti i w i 0 v r dit II i III ON mIllipit v,,, fi - •\., i mg • • 1 a l 3 /a: , - ,. / roi CD o l N '� 4- 41 b,4f,.i „iii1 -CI, ,,� { 3 1 "�, IN 4 h 1 ... , - - .' , 1 . . _";2.... ia x ry r ft!,,, 7 +. ..- • r $ t tr .,�i . -- i as' 7 „ ; ..,, ] .. 7/.a✓ 1 , .v n5 1Y J` • y . YI�y j - f • r, PY. Jii(F 4x 4 4 u - r c,,, 1, t 4 .,u_ Ila +Nr. Try • • � .7 w .':• 'i`k'G✓n. ),+n .'. �."LS3. .raha •ii:x' --_ I 1 • t -r k 4 = , • ' e. , ' - -. /4 4 4 .'. '.a } _ V.= r �n dN 'w 'i YS .y ty 4',�i - . .:. 411.1MIVS 118 Y I do s ! a ■ a Ni- /6e, • • STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss County of Garfield ) At a special meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment for Garfield County, Colorado, held in the Commissioners' Meeting Room, Garfield County Courthouse, in Glenwood Springs on Monday , the 16th of March A.D. 19 98 , there were present: Leo Jammaron , Board Chairman Brad Jordan , Board Member Peter Cabrinha , Board Member Harold Raymond , Board Member Steve Boat , Board Member Josh Marks , Attorney when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit: RESOLUTION NO. ZBOA 98 -1 A RESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH THE DENIAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OF THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS TO THE BUFFALO RANCH LLC. WHEREAS, the Carbondale Corporation and the Town of Carbondale filed appeals with the Zoning Board of Adjustment of Garfield County regarding the issuance of building permits for Lots 3 and 60, Block 5 and Lot 22, Block 6 of the Aspen - Crystal River Estates to the Buffalo Ranch LLC; and WHEREAS, based on the material submitted by the appellants and the testimony, evidence and arguments proffered at the hearing, this Board finds as follows: 1. That proper publication and public notice was provided as required by law for the hearings before the Zoning Board of Adjustment; and. 2. That the hearing before the Zoning Board of Adjustment was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that hearing; and. 3. That the Carbondale Corporation and the Town of Carbondale are aggrieved parties and have the right to be heard by the Board, consistent with Section 9.04 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1984, as amended NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Zoning Board of Adjustment that the appeal of the administrative actions by the Garfield County Building Official to issue building permits for Lots 3 and 60, Block 5, and Lot 22, Block 6 of the Aspen - Crystal River Estates is denied for the following reasons: 1. That proper publication and public notice was provided as required by law for the hearings before the Zoning Board of Adjustment; and. 2. That the hearing before the Zoning Board of Adjustment was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that hearing; and. 3 Section 108.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code requires that the building site be accessible for the purpose of performing the required inspections. The same section states that it is the duty of the applicant to cause the work to be accessible and the applicant has acknowledged that responsibility by signing a statement at the time of issuance of the building permits. Furthermore, the Board believes that this Section requires accessibility at the time of inspection, but not at the time of issuance for a building permit. 4 Section 503.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code requires that buildings adjoin or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one side. This section deals with the placement of a structure on a lot, not the legal access to a lot and the building permits in question meet this requirement. Therefore Section 503.1 does not mandate that an applicant for a building permit demonstrate that he or she has legal access to the subject lot as a precondition to the issuance of a building permit. The site plans that accompany the building permit applications comply with Section 503.1, as they indicate that the proposed structures adjoin a yard or a public way on at least one side. Dated this day of , A.D. 19 ATTEST: GARFIELD COUNTY ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO ‘79q a&e-- - N04 , c2Z-n t „,,,, a _ w Clerk of the Board Chairman 1 • • • Upon motion duly made and seconded the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the following vote: , Aye , Aye , Aye , Aye , Aye STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss County of Garfield ) I, , ex- officio Clerk of the Zoning Board of Adjustment of Garfield County, do hereby certify that the annexed and foregoing Resolution is truly copied from the Records of the Proceeding of the Zoning Board of Adjustment for said Garfield County, now in the office. Clerk of the Zoning Board of Adjustment • • ‘ \ lill I , ,, 1 4,.. 1 f ' -- "- — / - '- 4 ,---,---c 5:,\H- \ \ n / \ n . f y r i T / _ 100 � ,x � .. i F e L•••Y•l,•Y \IY..a1tY. }..• f \ sa..., , � b// �r / f u•uon•ircSI• S. 'iiannsu t .: _ . ;,1• •.. 1� v '1 f / L.ti� f a••• uaii i a.�.. I '-- j i:::n• **ono it I. • •F a uoau••aa aF :ove•o- a n A� �r �•., +., o- 1 = to - - j ' 1 , S A ..,.10.. = ' - � .•• e m i i ._ e I ... .. a r �, j6� ® East Mesa . Ownership Patterns /. r t / I a• � ��� i ^ 5 East Mesa Ownership Patterns Coffman Considine Mid- Continent IiI II Nieslanik ' -, Distance to Town Boundary = " c"F' 4,2 [ Two -Mile Boundary 32 Three -Mile Boundary 1 •_ ,, " «.� Stream te 200' Contour Lines ran n ' ♦ Al State Highway - • •19•x••1••••. '.. •.•• :re: Existing Subdivisions _ ........ %••• 4. : ; :::. 7 / Existing Roads • u•••b� . f — , � 11 � n ' USGS Quad Sections +n..sa l �.. ' Q BLM r 11B1 Town Boundary ms=s I . ' ,, F 1 I , " JYala Sources ' ' a 3 , i a a Topography digitized from 11SGS 7.5 Minute Quadrangles, ` } ° + Subdivision locations Boni Garfield County GIS System, 1998. �.. ' M aps, 19 lines interpolated from Garfield County Assessor ` r •�,.- ' '+. �.. Maps, 1998. a t _ ri 0 - +! ;1 - r ° S Note: Boundary lines are approximate. For precise definition, ..� refer to recorded documents. 5. 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Fec' 1IROCK 1 • = 3000' Ci CREEK 615TUDI0.. • • 9.01.03 Jrtspectioa: The Building Official or his designated representative is hereby empowered to inspect any building, structure or tract of land concerning which he has reasonable cause to believe that a use exists, or construction or alteration work is being or has been performed, in violation of the applicable provisions of this Resolution. If a violation exists, the County Commissioners or their designated representative shall direct that such remedial action be taken as w�l ' result in full compliance with the applicable provisions of this Resolution. _ .. 9.01.04 Baja: All permits, including applications, and inspection records shall be kept on file in the office of the Building Official as a public record. 9.01.05 Expiration: A permit shall be valid for a period of one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of issuance thereof unless construction or use has commenced thereunder; and if construction or use has not commenced within this specified period, the permit shall expire. The County Commissioners may extend the expiration date of any permit. 01.06 Compliance with Conditions of Perrone: Upon being advised of an alleged violation / of any permit issued by or on behalf of the County Commissioners, the County Commissioners Sy / establish a time for consideration of the alleged violation, upon not less than three (3) days' notice to I / the party engaging in activity under such permit, and to the owner of the property which. is the subject 1 of the permit, at which hearing the County Commissioners may consider whether a violation of the conditions of the permit has occurred. If the County Commissioners determine that a violation has occurred, the Board may suspend the permit until such violation can be corrected or until measurcan be takeataprevent a recurrence of such viola &on, or, if the violation is determined to be continuing or likely to recur and to_ei er thesafetj ocwelfare of the residents or property of residents within the county, the County Commissioners may terminate the subject permit. (A. 81 -145) 9.01.07 P ts: Any permit granted under the authority of these regulations may be limited in time as the Board deans necessary in order to protect the uses of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of' the public. (A. 81 -263) 9.02 PERMIT - CONDITIONAL USE 9.02.01 Anplicatinp: All conditional use permit applications shall be filed by the owner or owners of the subject lot with the Planning Director on a form provided by the Planning Director for this purpose and shall consist of all information required of an application for a permit and subject to all administrative procedures thereof plus the following: Supporting information, plans, letters of approval from responsible agencies and other information to satisfy requirements listed under Conditional and Special Uses in the Supplementary Regulations. (A. 79 -132) 9.02.02 Action by the Planning Director: The Planning Director shall utilize services of the Environmental Health Officer, the Building Official and Planning Department and other County and 108 • • • �I MAR 1 6 1998 TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment —• -- - •- - - - - -- ��_� Garfield County Courthouse GARF ELD COUNTY 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, Colorado FROM: Fred 0. Williams 5638 South Skyline Drive Evergreen, CO 80439 DATE: March 11, 1998 SUBJECT: Application to Appeal Administrative Decision to Issue Building Permits filed by Carbondale Corporation Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 5; Lot 60, Block 5; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates Dear Sirs: Carbondale Corporation should not be granted the appeal to rescind the decision to issue building permits and individual sewage disposal permits as that would infringe on my rights to use my property as the Zoning Board has approved previously. The above described property was purchased with the ultimate goal to build a single - family dwelling on this site. The property was zoned for that purpose when it was purchased. I still intend to eventually accomplish this goal; therefore, I strenuously object to any decision to take away my rights to obtain the necessary permits to use the property as it was designated by the Zoning Board when the property was purchased. Thank you for your consideration. TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment' Garfield County Courthouse , MAR 1 3 1998 ' � 109 8th Street, Suite 301 1 Glenwood Springs, Colorado c-:,;; ,r -;GLD COUNTY FROM: Iva! R. Thomas 3822 West 99th Avenue Westminster, CO 80030 DATE: March 11, 1998 SUBJECT: Application to Appeal Administrative Decision to Issue Building Permits filed by Carbondale Corporation Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 5; Lot 60, Block 5; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates Dear Sirs: The above described property was purchased with the ultimate goal to build a single - family dwelling on this site. The property was zoned for that purpose when it was purchased. I still intend to eventually accomplish this goal; therefore, I strenuously object to any decision to take away my rights to obtain the necessary permits to use the property as it was designated by the Zoning Board when the property was purchased. Carbondale Corporation should not be granted the appeal to rescind the decision to issue building permits and individual sewage disposal permits as that would infringe on my rights to use my property as the Zoning Board has approved previously. Thank you for your consideration. • Brian P. Schwarz 202 Euclid MAR 1 3 1998 Carbondale CO 81623 Wk & Fax 970 - 963 -0767 Hm 970 - 963 -0728 March 10, 1998 Concerning ACRE (Aspen Crystal River Estates), and appeal to Zoning Board of Adjustments fr • ore) Dear Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment Members I have owned a lot (block 5 lot 68) in ACRE since 1982. I would like to express my concern over these appeals and the possible decision that you could make as a result of these appeals. Two important points to keep in mind is that this subdivision (ACRE) is Grand Fathered and has been in existence since 1965. The second point is that there are two lawsuits before the courts right now, one is for historic access through John Nieslaniks ranch complex and the second is a condemnation suit that was filed to show the Nieslaniks that there is an alternative to going through the center of Johns complex. The suits that are before the courts were filed as result of the many failed attempts to negotiate a solution. This is clearly an impasse between two parties that believe they're right and the other is wrong. This long standing disagreement is the only reason we have asked a judge to decide who in fact is right or wrong. With this in mind I believe if you were to revoke these building permits this in large would only serve Considine and his corporation. The same corporation that owns almost 70% of all the lots in both subdivisions plus more than 2000 acres that nearly surround ACRE, this is the same corporation that has been actively working to acquire even more lots and surrounding land, and this is the same corporation that has offered to buy my three quarter of an acre lot for $1,250.00, and offered to buy Donna Nystroms house and acre of land for $10,000.00. These offers were referred to by Mr Considine as generous offers. Finally this is the same corporation that has made threats to at least one prior land owner that if he held out and does not sell to the corporation then he will simply lose his property. In 1986 Mr Considine was proclaimed as a savior to the east mesa, for eliminating the threat of large scale development. He can still be that savior if he chooses, because he very effectively put an end to the threat of large scale development on the east mesa. Or did he? If he decides not to develop then he can reduce the number of buildable lots by over 75% when you consider that most , if not, all of the individually owned lots in Te Ke Ki are too small to build on with out combining several lots together. My view of this in 1986 was that this was a great accomplishment. However, as time passed it became clear to me and many other lot owners who did not wish to sell to Mr Considine that this was not enough for Considine and his corporation. I believe this latest push for access has, and will even further reveal a side of Mr Considine and his corporate associates that only a few well informed people have known about until now. Considines threat now is that if we gain access then he will not only develop what he can in both the subdivisions but he will also develop his 2000 acre ranch. Surely he didn't actually believe that he was going to buy every last owner out with his so called generous offer. I would just as soon donate my land to the American Indian than let Mr Considine have it for $1,250.00, and I can tell you with certainty that I am not the only lot owner that feels the same way. Surely he didn't believe that the remaining lot owners would just sit back and let him run his Cattle MOO -vers cattle drives across our land then simply take our land through a little known law called Adverse Possession. Being a Harvard Law School Graduate such as Mr Considine, he of all people should know that just because someone has less property than others does not mean they have less property rights. I don't agree with the type of buildings that Mr Parker wants to put up there but I do believe he should be able to build on his own land. Even if we were to loose in court which I believe is highly unlikely, I suppose that if Mr Parker or myself or any other remaining lot owner had the resources to ferry building materials and inspectors up to our lots by helicopter than we should be allowed to do so. There are after all, public roads and electricity with in ACRE. Last but not least, there have been several concerns raised by the Town of Carbondale, County Commissioners and affected land owners. Those concerns being water, waste water, visual impact and impact on surrounding agricultural operations. If there is a way to discourage high impact dwellings and encourage environmentally sound buildings that incorporate low profile, low impact, solar energy, latest septic tank designs, water conservation methods such as low flow toilets, showers, faucets, and xerascaping than I am all ears. if this is possible than I think this is where your energy should be focused. It should not be focused on denying any one the right to build. The technology is available for these types of dwellings and I see no reason other than neighboring land owners attitudes towards us gaining access that we couldn't fit in with minimum impact on the land and surrounding ranchers. Our gaining access doesn't have to be put on the Agricultural Donors Day terms that neighboring land owners want to put this on. I can't help but still hope that after all the dust settles and the tempers cool that maybe, just maybe, they will reconsider there threat of large scale development. All we are asking is that our property rights finally be recognized. We realize this probably is not a very popular stance to take but it is the right stance. We know you are under a lot of pressure to revoke the permits, maybe even more pressure than we realize, but please remember that the right decision is not always easy and in this case may not be very popular. Sigcerely Brian Schwarz r•: MAR-12-98 THU 10 :14 PM JEFFREY W PARKER 970 963 1434 P.01 _■ 1 • • SS X . FAX COVER SHEET To: a 04,6,,, k 4rk go„,, Fax ) '4(M -0 � J \ ji � s- v"'�/Y From: 'r. {-j' 1" Subject: (L' J . # Pages(inc. cover): 1 If Problem call: 947 -5184 Comments: M 1� < ' -jY� S Pk4e-r) J alp °v.-.), Orrrv'1, - 7 1 ".G.L S P.O. Box 221, Carbondale, 00 81623 • ph /tax: (970) 947 -5154 • Email: 71773.1761.Compu$erve.com MAR -12 -98 THU 10:15 PM JEFFREY W PARKER 970 963 1434 P.02 • • Jeffrey W. Parker Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustments cto Mark Bean, Garfield County Planning Dept. 109 8th st., Glenwood Springs, Co 81601 Thursday, March 12, 1998 Dear Board of Adjustments: I am a member of the Buffalo Ranch LLC, and I am unable to attend the meeting on March 16th. The LLC's attorney, John Siebert, will be present at the hearing. However, I would like to inform you of my position as follows: 1. The Uniform Building Code Section 503.1 states "Buildings shall join or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one side ". The Buffalo Ranch LLC buildings have a yard on all four sides. They are in compliance. According to the phone conversation that I had with an Engineer from the Company that publishes the Uniform Building Code, Section 503.1 has to do with not surrounding a building with other building(s). The building must have at least one side open. The U.B.C. engineer also explained to me that there are no UBC mandates concerning access to a public road. The UBC engineer claimed it is up to the landowner to get their access Independent of the UBC, like a construction loan. 2. There are well permits and septic permits for the above building lots. They are mandated by the County and State standard of 100 feet distance between well and septic. There is Holy Cross electricity to the Tots. 3. Independent of the Consldines, there can only be 50 additional homes built in the Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision, Involving about 35 acres. It Is my understanding that there can be 0 homes built in Te Ke Ki_subdivision without support from the Consldines. There can only be a large number of homes In the two subdivisions if the Considines want it that way. 4. Buffalo Ranch LLC has offered and continues to offer to put Its properties Into conservation easement, if the Considines will do the same with their East Mesa properties. So far, the Considines have shown little interest in thls offer. My private conversations with the Considines have led me to believe that they will probably develop their East Mesa property regardless. However, if the Consldines want, they can limit growth on the East Mesa, and I will support them. ely, / J eff Parker P.O. Box 221, Carbondale, CO 81623 • ph /fax: (970) 947.5184 • Emall: 71773.1761®Compueorve.com MAR -12 -98 THU 10:15 PM JEFFREY W PARKER 970 963 1434 P.03 Mar-05-96 09:34P Elk n Landscape and Alp 970-963-0767 P.04 — ... --• Imo 0 • • ini CY/1ANNx1 S1A71SMAn sr Scpta„dar 1K rAYlt • Wigwam, eapeNM.r il, 1092 THE DENVER P0Sr F. GRMAN SPENCER W1 W AM DEAN SINGIBTON, Daman fdA.r DONALD Limn /Wisher CHUCK OMEN RYAN H.RIRREN RA , for e/drc Width/ Are Executive Vice Rpyeri and (kneed Manger NTL WISTEAGAARD RICHARD MOON , twat raw Senior Me Aeddeei. AMSbwNaUm and Over.WM • KOIKIneDONAID, VPAd'eikliv IRAtOI DUCK P4've es RRAAAII H. MOUSY nuts mama VP Avow stars Dia ]meows&, Saga f4da JAMS BAMAAx, VP ha RENCWIOIM, 1WMr.*g Considine as a neighbor • TERRY Considine, Republikan himself considerable legal head- contender for the U.S. Senate aches by concocting a settlement. from Colorado, portrays himself But the more gentlemanly er- as a defender of the little guy and tenement would have been for a champion of private property Considine to let his neighbors rights. But his behavior toward build and maintain a road his neighbors in the Roaring pork through his ranch — at their own valley disrupts this self- portrait. expense. In 1986, Considine, a real -es- Additionally, new, ritzy housing tote developer and property man- developments in the valley — lo- ager, purchased a 2,000 -acre Bated between Glenwood Springs • ranch in the scenic Roaring Fork and Aspen — are driving up local valley. At the time, about 500 of real-estate prices, so the people his neighbors were embroiled In a who sold to Considine may have lawsuit against the ranch's previ- lost the opportunity to profit from ous owner because, among other the land boom. Vet Considine, it things, they did not have road ac- he choses to sell, is wetl-posi- can to their property..., .Cloned to make a handsome sum . r— Considine Inherited this legal from those same parcels. trouble when he bought his ranch. Considine insists that he plans At least one neighbor had asked to use his Roaring Fork property Considine for an easement as working ranch, but apparent - through his land to the other ly the place works better as a tax property. Instead, Consldlne of- shelter than as a beef producer. tered the landowners *575 or Considine's personal Income tax 81,250 for their parcels, depend- returns show that in a four-year Ing on the plot's size. The offer period he took a 8.7 million agri- was far leas than what the owners cultural loss on the ranch, for originally had pald. Stile, about which he originally paid about $3 375 of the neighbors agreed to the million. deal. That fact smacks of a double Considine says that he gave his standard, coming from a candi- neighbors an inexpensive way to date who preaches fiscal respoo- settle their lawsuit and that the sibility in government and fair - arrangement was legal and even nets In tax poky. generous given the quandary the And finelly, Considine's private landowners faced. in fact, since deeds clash with his public state - the neighboring properties are ments about the need for the U.S. small and lack basic amenities Forest Service to respect a prop- such as sewer and water hook- arty owner's request for access to ups, there is a question whether develop his land inside a wilder- Garfield County would Id the nese area. Even though that par - owners develop the lots In any ticular Forest Service controver- case, according to Consldlne. The sy seems resolved since the candidate believes the controver- property owner has agreed to sy to be a case of no good deed consider a land swap with Uncle going unpunished. • Sam Considine's viewpoint on the However, the 125 landowners mat should stick In voters' who didn't accept Considine's minds. The candiod'teletting appears to deal have et right to be upset, for adamantly support `-- certain aspects of the situation vale property owners have rea- smack of heavy-handedness and seeable accese to their land --- hypocrisy on Considine's part. unless that access is through land For one thing, Consldlne saved he owns. • MAR -12 -96 THU 10:16 PM JEFFREY W PARKER 970 963 1434 P.04 • • The following is a letter from an Attorney who represented the lot owners of Te Ke Ki And A.C.R.E in their suit for access in the 80's. Although the Attorney represented the lot owners who were trying to obtain access over land owned by the Considines, He wrote the lot owners that Mr Considine was paying him $30,000 for handling the sale of their lots to Mr. Considine. The Attorney, Mr. Young, was later disbarred. -12 -98 THU 10:16 PM JEFFREY W PARKER 970 963 1434 P.¢6 , • • • {� ....1 RICHARD E. 'MUM v ��. -. ATt9RNLY AIfH [o11NIMOR AT LAW a11UTf,• .14 RROOKS SCna. IS f1,Ttt tr.f m n mot vim. 001414A IM MOOS ANKA KAM Oaf • .a41Y. November 5, 1986 TO: Lot Owner of Aspen Crystal River Estate and Te Ke Ki of Aspen Divisions: On October 30, 1986, the Mount Sopris Metropolitan District Steering Committee met and discussed at length the offers that have been made to the owners of the Aspen Crystal River Estate lots. To bring you up to date since our last letter to you of i -- October 9, 1986, the individual making the offer on the lots has identified himself. He is Mr. Terry Considine, a Denver business man with a background in communications and polities. 8e, j through his agent, has made offers on the 137 Aspen Crystal River s Estate lots for a price of $1,250.00 per lot. These are really not offers rather, they are free options Which can, within a cer- tain time frame, be accepted by Mr. Considine. He has also made offers to owners of the unplatted lands between the subdivisions. He has not made any offers on any of the Te Ke Ki lots. It in our understanding that Mr. Considine has purchased the pro- perty known as Cro .:••• •= fore, if he does purchase any o _ s q!I_, Crystal - River - Estate_ _ . , . ill have access l ••• Al throu•h 1 = - . .• o / • e n though Mr. Considine has professed no intention of dove loping any of the property he s acquiring, and I be Mr. ' Considine to be a very honest, decent and honorable perso it II may very well be that the property he is acquiring could become major development at some time in the future and the lots that h- is offering to purchase now in 1986 for approximately 301 of t price that the owners paid for them some twelve to aixteen y - -- i ts- could become very valuable in the future. • = of the members of the Steering Co.• f*" ed to make any recomm = • -• . 1 • . - ee would be proper or fair for the -- - :state lots. To a person, those who own lots in Aspen Crystal River Estates indicated that they intend to keep them and certainly not sell them for what they believe to be a low price. The Steering Committee also felt very strongly that without there being a reasonable offer put forth to the owners of the Te Ke Ki lots, that the attempts to obtain access had to continue. .0..-0 . ��..v010e 0.0.0u0u0010.Y i 0,00.001x0,0 Nla`.�•_�.. - eN' 1 • -rrxw" ,0' lainad 0 J a W E ry N^ E. S W t7. a M% q n 3 j b E w •o Q N ..�' a^ a n P IJ `< `< 0, ' , ^ A n .to w a N c •< _ ^ O c c' 21 9. 0 a n on. @ �pf G n N' O P. O R a " I -..,<< et W 0 ti"1 Q O '-i .. n H 3 n `^ a • .� 0. a 3 C 5 a . a o, N N _ 2 6-3 k' o !$ c g. n-� ? a c n -x ^ P. � o- .y c a c 5 v n `,'`,� H 5. io n E ry ..ii c io co E. �e . ° o ° o D n - • o tl � p 0 , g- 3 a . `< o O ^ ' o'C 7 . • gn to n E. 9 -. w n y r 9- ' t O a' w a E , R 5 . n o ••n n E ^ + w a p v. 2- w w c o a ^ 0 0 coo ` ^ . 'o y ^ a a k tF O • a a f0 1 9 ` R•no a' F � •O S E > ' o�n �5: . ^ a e `° n9 . " o e o ry t o v n 'r w • O, P E n 5. n' ` ? ." 0 ° - rig' n w .1 'n' a n n ' °- n w o n io 5' a = o E io ^ �`' 0 o ' IR a v ^ " ^ n < � . F a ^ '< .b - g 0 , ° ' ti 3 •^� o a rt o a 3 - 0.n g 'a' d' ao c a - 0 a . - o n. c _ ` _c E . < . , 1 as a w E w c o w as n H'o E. c 0.o co 3, 0-7J n i : * w = a a E F w ` •y aI a n. "' o . o a 'R CD ED r3 ? £ v o n ^ < a ^ -, ^ w n • v s In 3 ^ r-� C '� C a F n ^. a ..' 4 C w c c ° . < .°7 w !]'c. a D. p_.° re'` o E' 5.- w p ° a ' o g' - O g a o .rT D o n n •-' Cr a R J ti . R •'1' S.. 3' $ 0 '. H ..3 v a o n ^I El n 5 , ^ O N ., $ , a^ re a 3 a .. o p,+ ..,, a° -" D c w C. 5• "R ` c n • 6 a a n O n rv.. i ^ ac o � n <�. .. vo o " o <'ov arro so of ri wa <w 9. 0 a' a ro ' _ w n ' w 9i •ry F o a - ° o ^ �' rt a- a - to ° a .� .. a °o $ H a a b ^. F i.' a r iu a < . " o ' C rt • o n- R'R o � 3 ag.� n m f y °' H t < q � �w�rv a a >> o c o' 3 Pi.' o• n'R a a. .- w c . ry ^ a n d rv °- CO -n a E '. r or., ▪ g' o a ° .0 0 E4." wa a • co o n. Z aa, v'0 oo •r^ a ,'R a sh... �� a^ R. •- "*.`0",=-'"'-' 3 • o ° u p c -.' O o c o �' ^ ` o Y' n. '+' ^< ^ G o' n-. .. n N w_ n a n S y 0 n w a '-' 3• •2 •R 5. n < n n .p w n oa - a' >• O a Y '• R c P. o . H ' a z 'o r. ' 3 0 . E a ' & o a o w -' R' c o ro v es ` ? n_ �' a s E °' w g g � . ' ii a c o o •R o a o Q w c. " o R e • < � v. g cc E. n 5 c w E. n' w o 0- a n o 2 co E. °' < .E5 ` za ^. a 0°° a3 z3,°- w a y £' 4 �,w n6 . : Er sa� < � < o 0 ° O co N'o . o T ,<o 9 • R F �a� ° � " � 0a _n0- o6 _a 3 w n ^ .N o •o^ 5" a- °o ry CO c w ' c •g- n o < v.. c -n c o - w <_ n • 3 a F 0 a Gl oo w o a o •< F = Y 3 • w- a � . c .2, ^ ., R n � a o. n s. n ¢ °` o� ^ O -n ,c, n °' O rn..,a n is e-ga Er p n n R g o:-- - .1. -mot.. V I ri E g, 81 a°'e g n c`^ �+ S " 2 '11 N.'c ng s & 5_' ,- , a• • 5 gr 3 n a. °, V n n , . rr F , a -o, . oo ^b 0o %'o E-0. 5 aRan 2 aa' • - g- $.< a, a ., �' H a a 0 3 a ° ^ w Za ' . . ?: ^ o na ^c a^�5. n6 E c - a E'• n0 g ,^ n o m 5. a a o 9- E °%7 ` c o. a � ' 0 ' o g ^•• � ,� ^ °L. o na E'•< o� o 5' O�.o rt 6 - o v m 0 , ,_ , n3 na' `eo 30 nog .,' v d g n 0 .., s a es o . ncc °• 3a K 3 n vi F . aacc crca.<a Pa.a° 5R • '.0S a ca, ° , aq 3 n p. °n ^9 al t • a m rs a a n g o • R a <^ 5' L n n n w e4 a^ nER- ^ ..< A o 0 a rs 5 g a° cc '� o • o P.00 2 = n 5 o' R a 0 A R o' g R' ` a g o• °' y a n o v ; n c7; ° ?- n n 5'0 �. 2 's 0' o F , . o c ` < , a n n . n C. a n w R E. ' n o E �G aa .. Q - `" c n ^ + `ro E ° _ •O c o g A c'r• 6' n.agy t 2. ^ n v c.< c V . 0 n_ 7'rs a n ? 2 ^ S2 % o f . o , = O R E S. - 2n v 10 4 it . 3 n F. 5.5 0 a < o O R a s . c °. r n a r$ o • < . c a oo Pry R•5'o p rss -n 1 o n Fe R' 'ac o c n p v. o -•a n 3 o w w r... o • � . o a a • o g 3 n R 3 g a F, O N n a a r" n n •S'° go" u`' •5- c ° ° a' n -^ o' .< a w o g 5. a », n n o "n x n n ry ,° s$ a °' �^ o c o ° ' r ^ o w' n' • a n 'R o >r a co n . 'r n a ,c1 >• o n... _ 'R 'R •< a < _. ., ao o c o a w a. .R o c a. $, K • nb' a _a n o g ' c . g ^. aa •2 a5' '•.< E = n." n R. .--0 v n y 3 V o `o .: oo co 42 ^ y o , 0 0 S•u. ^ . " Et. c n n c ' a • a ^ O n a' a o. 0 H . g h 6-a-2 E. °' o* a $i R a 7. a 8' L-1 ^ I c' a' ° Z a ^ ° : c < � 'p �. 5n A so E � •S E aw m` ...< S S a 00 ^ a Q S o R 0. E. o a n v' cc a a' '^ a S ate^' ;,..„ a n °°°' R w � o' . ,, a o`a R a•n � o o a �° 2..a ° V 2 Po C D I g '- 1 $ ° E E a o - . Re F ' a ° ? Fr ° c . n ° H w' a g a . a a 5 : n Ea co g ^6.' l< o c c a� ^ ^ E NR cr a -. o.0 ° P .E 5 R 4. 2 cc 5 a .w. n ., A . g ' g ° o nto a s a:.. n 3 a . 0 0 ^ O. " C K' W �'' • n g 7 n P. a a Z R o c. ° ,0 , n a' • R O i< E ° a t, i 5 O' o. v, ,^ N _ to p 'p N W f N t .� . < E rn ° F R 2 0• A 2 < ' V • 6 �' V (Z B'O M :18 . E 7 £ 0 C f^ n O n ^ n 3 .nao .-.Q. E . ° 5 . ` �Z3ois °�c �isn aro w N oc. w, " ° o Pb n a V.. a" 00 0 F .n " a. N ° 0 O S O n Cr n `q V O 0.° n n n ° ,,< °, W L". O ' ° n w q� O n N 0 `F E N O N fro c e G vR g E v Fo 0 9 2' 0. 4 rt O . + F, N � . N . w ' w B c w �. j n p n ° Gi R o 5 2 v 0":(n Y a v rv." n �. 22 0. 5 n M f° c)°' 3 . g; 7 . 2- E ?: a s T RI °C • • a- n a� 0 c 7 a. ° n • ° ,o o E..7 • °' o N . o w • `° ' v P'2' : ,w n 0 s .n, >] •< 5:,$. a s b E 5 T o n o a n e 0 o ,< °' -: w v. n _ ^ 4 R v 2 00 o '.° 'Pt - _ €0 n O 0 3 7, O E � ' . v . G w 'O 3 R W ° ry 0 - ° 3 0 0 O 0 Op ur �. n E . ^ n n O < n N a s N Z ii 0 ' <�w ' - 0000n rv 3n'cO -R0 0.E'° . n`E n,nna v O. 0 ° , ,E0 c n 3 ? m ° ry o ° wc o ° ca v 0�rn � � 0 W 2 a & -, sm 3 ^, 5 C �•< � � `�. �^ En �_ry E---n- E oo g NaN . E w so a. ^ 0 < N7 0 oo n _I • . a n P. - g105.-,n n r i ° v ° R • N F n s , S 5* 5- v 0 O = S F O s m c e' o S a G y 4 w 6 C: ° n a ry ' C V s' rn a {O w . 3 Z 0 c no° .0 n• <E ^ 05-^ G . - ? a nc SI: ••• 0 3 a a n o n n w ° n3 O Y °'s e S ba n coo^ ,,,0-02, ; ^no O3 a ' 0 `cO o . $.-<` y^ v0 noo a 5 Z 3 t. a n c n ° -. 5 w " m ry a 0 S 3 a Z 'O ' s nG. o..1 w0. c.s 5,O a�3 -- n aw � t y - 5- 0 N n. _ 5° Q F E00 c a5a -5.0r5 ory - e '. rv Z N • E . ° ^. ^ . v < n H'%kc , R$n ?Eff2: ^R 7'n a ' � O c ° °00 "mh < n a 3 '< O R n w n n 5 ° 7i -, O 'Swc co- o° 31 2 000 r a a c • m n . "' a 0 0 S c v 0 7 n o °" io ° o o'O. n o s a o o a<< N •< c. n ii T m a 0 3 g a 0.'R , < . ' g , 1 0 c Q a t".. pd n a �`. � g row � � " k' R 0 0 2 c a o S . �° n c n E c Ni,, b ° 0 °° o f a �. n 0. Z IT c _ � , N ''< ° o n ❑. no " O o ve n �' s o v. w 5' a 0 n -I r. 0 0 5 N ° G' .... E 0- 0.g c n c c 3 n n w s a c. ° ca E ° < cE. ° a o 0 . 0 ^ ^ 0 a. cl. yS. n -.-0 w n CI ° c n 'o ' n o .� ' 0.o �}'in C ^ ,R c i d �� °o5 0 . O v 0 ° O c 3 a '+ o n .,� s a a nom N w 0 n n ?°° g . 0. ° 000. nu NN 8 °,n- LIsa R c c• o ^0, °O a-< O. C. n 0 . 0 3 7 n c c . 7" 'w aE r s . 00 QDO S bo o- os 0- ''R I gc "" an t lo '2 - 5 :°aK %� m 0 -1 w a E d 7. ,^. n 0 . ° c 0n E ^ ' N n C A O c N 0 f� ?: ° o H a n a o m O ry ry m E R a 0c P. n 7 0 g 5 � . 0' c p,w ° °0 . O ° °H W W nO n ... ° ° n '<` ° L"O n ° n n° (o o a y ry 0 a d o^ g c ^ o ' K. 0 0 a 7 c 0- g. 5. 2'p = S ?, o o ,. 2 • Q 2 e " a i O ry i .00 R n 5 a E R a o c N c Y .0 $. o 5 fn ° o c -° O °<g V E 0 P - , O r9 . ° o n R n C . a o A. w . R F 0. w 2+' -. E ' ` - • s o `r po. o m _ N ta o o O `0 a P' 0 a 0 n a Po w > 0 n '- 0 0 0 0 ry rv n S . S R• n n S Y R e- n c a a R » 0 .- O 5 2 `o ` ° o ' g n o o a o 0 0 9 I 1 00 <. w� nn 9 R a � ` ro� a g a o � R8O =�0a an N.2c °a�� n ., , 0 ,N ,R o . 3 co � ° °g� nyH aavq -• - ° n -- 5 � g 0 EE m o o n o 5. ... -1 w 0 n53: r iUi w c a 0g 0 trv o <g$^ " , 'R c K' 95 - , I-7 T • w' °' �i < s N '^'� o w q m n ° n ° ' ° fO CL 10 A. n - o n <� n v a o ' a E �, ° n A E Fo c - _, a 0 O c^ ° � n n a . < nm y n s • t ' o- . ° O > an n �, • 6 0 S ° a -0 0 w 0 - H a 5' 5 �� g �wo�ws. n � 0 a 5.w n^ . naa n o w u , ,., 0S 7. aa i ca3 • < cs, C nv • �c ^n o. 2 - 5. aa0 ^n°.• -• ` _ a , n o ° 5n >D ° 0 '2 3 3 n -.0 ° v ?. o E n n c 0. 00 a s 0 E w 0. n n K • 03° S. <a wO G 0 n ❑° s R. , ° o n 'R 0 < R E .n 0 R ' co nrvc.o £ ^ 0 0 �aaa� � � E °^� � R p ` o a m 0 5 ? F Y o c (a4 20' ; O' � A a N C , `n' N O n R n ' " ! o a Q - F O • Q n0. M- ?: Et 0.v �, 3 n w NC' p.� .s a'^ ° 2 N w p. to ° - -' .. ry 0 N 35 , 3 5 : 7 . U'Ou O.n is c ` a. ^ 0 ` <S " c n 9• i,b g n 9. E- N R• 3.3 n 0 �a 0a ° � c0 5 �e+ ' O ,w N Ha hwn0.. ° c a". . °`^ . $ °3'� ^ o. r°.f 0° o a O R' o �' S 5 G S• 00 o$� 0..Q O .5o a..< T • ° n 0. o? 3, ^ , a °w pj a . a "„ Exiibit o- • DISTRICT COURT, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO -- - CRTC LN Case 97 -CV -199 -C FIRST AMENDED PETITION FOR CONDEMNATION OF RIGHT OF WAY' DONNA NYSTROM and JOHN NYSTROM, on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated persons who own access- restricted property in the Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision (ACRE) of Garfield County, Colorado, Plaintiffs, -vs- PAUL R. NIESLANIK and CELIA NIESLANIK Defendants. Plaintiffs, by their attorney, George M. Allen, state: Parties. Jurisdiction and Venue 1. This action arises from denial of access on behalf of the named Plaintiffs to their Aspen Crystal River Estates (ACRE) property over the historic public right of way, known variously as the "White Hill Road," Garfield County Road 101, "Crown Road," and "Roberts Road," or the Road to the Roberts Place, which road is shown on Exhibit 1 to Case No. 96- CV -89, presently on file in this Court, and from the closures which have taken place from time to time of that road, the result of which has been the blocking of access to Plaintiffs' property (and the property of other, similarly situated persons, in the Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision (ACRE)) by Defendant and from the need arising therefrom for this Court to enter, as necessary, a Declaratory Judgment establishing a right of way by condemnation across the land of Defendant, along the route shown on Exhibit A attached to the initial Complaint in this action, and, to the extent necessary, Temporary Restraining 1 The initial pleading in this action was styled as a "Complaint ". Defendants objected to that terminology, preferring the statutory term "Petition." In deference to their objection, this document Is therefore styled a Petition for Condemnation. oromilimm Co ier0igGoolituS 1 duttmcitiospflostos, COLORADO caroled He N p Adl, two one eeriestt eepy of the c ielnat le my Bust ± `Rg e i:• 11 sit, r�I� ` DOW), Order(s), Preliminary and Permanent Injunction(s) and other Declaratory Relief, to obtain a precise metes and bounds description of the access route and to secure access to Plaintiffs and other, similarly situated persons, access to their ACRE properties.' 2. The parties are as follows: A. Plaintiffs Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom are husband and wife. They own the following described real property: Block 6, Lot 16, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Garfield County, Colorado Plaintiffs have owned the property at issue since 1980. Donna Nystrom resided on the property from 1977 to 1981. Donna Nystrom's former husband, Tony Fotopulos, resided on the property until 1986. The Nystrom Aspen Crystal River Estates property lies within the Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision (ACRE), a plat of which, as recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County on June 30, 1965 in the Plat Book of Garfield under Reception No. 230545 on July 1, 1965. B. Defendants Paul Nieslanik and Celia Nieslanik are, or at relevant times to this litigation, have been, the owner of all or part of the following described real property, Government Lot 8, Section 2, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado 3. Jurisdiction of this Court is founded on Article VI, Section 9(1) of the Constitution of the State of Colorado, vesting matters of general jurisdiction in the District Courts of the State and on Rule 57 of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure and Colorado's Enactment of the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act. This Court has jurisdiction of the class action elements of this litigation pursuant to Rule 23 of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. The condemnation remedy sought by 2 Plaintiffs have not been able, to date, to obtain authorization from Defendants to have a surveyor enter the Defendants' property for the purpose of staling and surveying the precise access route to be used for transiting Defendants property from the Garfield County road nearest to the Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision. The requested route runs east from the Carbondale cemetery to the ACRE subdivision. The estimated minimum length of the requested condemned right of way is 300 to 4S0 feet Thus the total area sought to be condemned for right of way is on an order of 45,000 square feet, or about one acre, assuming an ultimate right of way of 450 feet in length by 100 feet in width. 2 �_.._ • • Plaintiffs is specifically provided for by Article II, Section 14 of the Constitution of the State of Colorado and by C.R.S. 1973 ' 38 -1 -101, et seq.. 4. Venue is founded in Garfield County on the basis of the location of all real property at issue in this litigation in Garfield County. General Averments ESTABLISHMENT OF THE WHITE HIT .1, ROAD 5. There has existed, since at least the year 1890, a road, known generally as the "White Hill Road," running from what is now Garfield County Road 101, at point A on Exhibit 1 to the Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89, through the Nieslanik ranches, to point B on Exhibit 1 in that action. The White Hill Road has been a public right of way and thoroughfare for traffic of all types, including persons on foot, horseback and in motor vehicles, on a continuous basis since 1890. THE. HOMESTEADERS 6. From a period 1890 through 1944, homesteads were patented on lands lying in and beyond the present ACRE subdivision. Those homestead patents were issued on the basis of the homesteaders having proved -up, to the satisfaction of competent officials and agencies of the government of the United States, that they were actually residing on and improving the homestead parcels and had a means of viable access to the parcels in order to continue to reside on and improve them. The exclusive means of public access to the homestead parcels from Carbondale, Glenwood Springs and the world beyond Glenwood Springs was via the White Hill Road, which was used continuously as a public highway and thoroughfare from a point no later than 1890 through the acquisition of property by the Nieslaniks from the Blancs in 1961. 7. The homestead patent records maintained by the United States Bureau of Land Management at Glenwood Springs, Colorado show the following information, all of which confirms occupancy of lands beyond ACRE (and therefore continuing public use by the referenced homesteaders of the White Hill Road to access their homesteads from Carbondale, Glenwood Springs and beyond): A. Leon E. Roberts: S1/2 NE1 /4, N1/2 SE1 /4 and SW1 /4 Section 1, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, containing 320 acres, recorded August 12, 1926 at Book 112, page 447 of the records of Garfield County, Colorado, based on occupancy on 3 • January 10, 1917; B. Sylvan Johnston NW 1/4 Section 1, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, Lots 1 and 2, Section 2 Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, evidenced in Tax Record 9, Certificate No. 68; Lot 9 (patented on December 31, 1938, indicating occupancy on January 10, 1930 per BLM homestead records); SE 1/4 NW 1/4; NE 1/4 SW $ Section 2, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado; improvements on homestead shown at Tax Record 9, page 58, certificate No. 69; Lots 14, 15, 16, Section 35; Lot 24, Section 36; of Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the • Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado; Lots 3, 4; South 2 NW 1/4 Section 1; Lots 1, 2, 9 SE 1/4 NE 1/4, NE 1/4 SE 1/4; of' Section 2 of Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian (patent on homestead); Improvements on the Johnston Homestead were filed for patent on December 31, 1938, indicating that the improvements were constructed in the preceding five years. The Bureau of Land Management records for the Johnston land indicate occupancy on January 10, 1917 and indicate Sylvan Johnston was on the land as from 1930. C. Jacob Scheffel: Homestead patented in 1894 (and shown on the 1890 map attached to the Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); Mr. Scheffel owned Lots 12, 19 and 20; SE 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 2, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian; Recorded at Book 12, page 346 of the records of Garfield County; D. George Alcorn: Homestead patented in 1892; Lots 10, 13 and 14 of Section 2, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, recorded at Book 12, page 141 of the records of Garfield County; THF. MAPS 8. As shown by the maps attached to the Initial Complaint in Case No. 96 -CV -89 as Exhibits 3 -A through 3 -J, the White Hill Road has been continuously mapped as being in existence as a public right of way as early as 1890 and has been so documented in separate maps as follows: A January 25. 1890: United States Surveyor General's Map, based on field notes filed in the Denver office of the Surveyor General (Exhibit 3 -A to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96 -CV- 89); B. January 15 1891: United States General Land Office Map (certified on January 15, 1891) (Exhibit 3 -B to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); C. 1937: U.S. Department of Agriculture Holy Cross National Forest Map (Exhibit 3 -C 4 • • to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); D. 1959: U.S. Department of Agriculture White River National Forest Map ( Exhibit 3 -D to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); E. 1961: U.S. Department of Interior Carbondale Quadrangle USGS Map (also authored by State of Colorado Department of Natural Resources), a 15 minute series topographic map for the Carbondale Quadrangle of Garfield County, No. 71 (Exhibit 3 -E to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); F. jam: Carbondale Quadrangle U.S.G.S. 15 minute series topographic map (not to be confused with "E" above (original located at offices of Garfield County Historical Society) (Exhibit 3 -F to Case No. 96- CV -89); G. My st 24, 1970: U.S. Department of Agriculture White River National Forest East Half (Colorado); (Exhibit 3 -G to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); H. 1975: U.S.G.S. Map No. 9108 -E3 -CF -050 -5 of Garfield County, Colorado (Exhibit 3 -H to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); I. 1987: Photorevision of Carbondale Quadrangle 7.5 minute series topographic map published by U.S.G.S. (Exhibit 3 -I to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); J. December 12, 1995: Garfield County Assessor's Map (Exhibit 3 -J to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89) THE AF,RIAT, PHOTOORAPRS 9. The existence of the White Hill Road as a public right of way is further evidenced by aerial photographs, attached hereto as follows: A. July 31, 1970: Air Photo Surveys, Inc., Fruita, Colorado, photo 174 -140 (Exhibit 4-A to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); B. May 8, 1974: Air Photo Surveys, Inc., Fruita, Colorado, stereo -optic paired photos, showing tractors using White Hill Road (photo 221 -147) (Exhibit 4 -B to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); C. 1978: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, stereo -optic paired photos AR -34 and AR -35 (Exhibits 4 -C to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); 5 • • • D. 1990 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, stereo -optic paired photos X -60.2 and X -61 (Exhibits 4 -D to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); E. 1996: Leif Anderson aerial photograph shot May 29, 1996; (Exhibit 4 -E to Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV -89); THE SIJRFACR PHOTOGRAPHS 10. Surface photography carried out May 23, 1996, also shot by Leif Anderson, attached as Exhibits 5 -A through 5 -C to the Initial Complaint in Case No. 96- CV- 89further confirm the continued existence and viability of the White Hill Road. PRE -1921 RIGHT OF WAY 11. As a consequence of C.R.S. 1973 ' 43 -1 -202, the White Hill Road is a statutory public right of way. That statute provides: 43 -1 -202 Public Highways or roads All roads and highways which are on May 4, 1921, by law open to public traffic shall be public highways within the meaning of this part 2. The homestead data and the maps document the fact the White Hill Road was utilized as public highway for access from Carbondale to the homesteads prior to the May 4, 1921 operative date of the above- quoted statute. The homestead data further confirms continuing use of the White Hill Road as the exclusive public highway access to the homestead parcels after 1921. CONTTNTJOIJS JSE_ NO ABANDONMENT 12. While predecessors in title to the Nieslaniks purported to create, by a July 3, 1931 private deed recorded in Book 168 at pages 163 -165 of the records of Garfield County, a writing representing the White Hill Road to be a private road, that deed served only to confirm the actual existence of the White Hill Road in 1931. The purported "privatization" clause of the 1931 deed was of no consequence due to Colorado law, including the statute quoted in paragraph 11 above, which has provided continuously throughout the 20th Century that public highways and rights of way can be abandoned only by formal action of either the State of Colorado or County governments. Both before and after the 1931 "privatization deed," the White Hill Road was used and recognized as a public highway ( iz., the homestead patents based on public access to homesteads via the White Hill Road.) At no point has the White Hill Road ever been formally abandoned or rel as a public road by the government of the State of Colorado or by Garfield County. As a consequence, the 6 • • White Hill Road continues to be a public right of way. NO NJF,SJ,ANIK OWNERSHIP OF THE WHITE HJT.J, ROAD 13. The Blanc to Nieslanik Deed, recorded October 4, 1961, did not convey any part of the White Hill Road to the Nieslaniks. The metes and bounds language of that deed, excerpted in paragraph 2 -B above, uses the east line of the White Hill Road (recognized in that deed as being "in place, constructed and travelled ") as the western boundary of the relevant part of the property conveyed by the Blancs to the Nieslaniks. While the White Hill Road traverses the Nieslanik Ranch, running in a generally southeasterly direction, the Nieslanik defendants do not now have, and have never had, ownership of the White Hill Road. IJNI AWN JJ, INTERFERENCE AND OBSTRTJCTION 14. From time to time since their acquisition of property from the Blancs in 1961, the defendants, together with others acting in concert with them, have unlawfully installed gates (which gates have been closed and locked from time to time) and have otherwise blocked or obstructed the free passage of the public, including Plaintiffs and the class of similarly situated persons represented by Plaintiffs, over the White Hill Road. Exhibit 5 -C to the Initial Complaint in Case No. 96 -CV -89 is a photograph of such a gate. At other times, including more recent years in which they have operated commercial cattle moving and rodeo entertainments on their ranch, the Nieslaniks have opened the White Hill Road to the public, in a manner consistent with its character as a public highway. CIVIL CONSPIRACY 15. The conduct of the defendants, acting in concert with others, in obstructing access to Plaintiff and the Class they represent has constituted an unlawful Civil Conspiracy within the meaning of Colorado law. The purpose and effect of that unlawful civil conspiracy has been to deprive Plaintiffs and the class they represent of the full use and enjoyment of their rights of passage over the White Hi l Road, and to thus deprive them of the full use and enjoyment of their rights of ownership of their ACRE properties. The motive for the civil conspiracy has been to blight and depress the value of properties within ACRE, so as to make possible a strategy of acquisition of those properties by the Doe defendants at distressed prices. CLASS ACTION ELEMENTS OF THE CASE, 16. Defendants have been engaged for a number of years in a pattern and practice of interference in and obstruction of lawful use, by Plaintiffs and the class they represent, of the White 7 • • Hill Road as the exclusive means of public access to and enjoyment of lots within ACRE owned by Plaintiffs and the class they represent. 17. The persons making up the proposed class to be represented by Plaintiffs are as follows: All landowners of lots within ACRE whose access to public rights of way is restricted or obstructed by the conduct of Defendants, as alleged above. The class does not include the so- called Considine interests, as they purport to have public access via the Considine ranches, which lie between ACRE and other public roads of Garfield County other than the White Hill Road. 18. This action should be certified and maintained as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(b) of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. 19. A class action under Rule 23(b) is the superior method of adjudicating the rights of Plaintiffs and other persons similarly situated for the following reason, enumerated in Rule 23(b)(1): Prosecution of separate actions by the persons affected would create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications, with attendant risks enumerated in Rule 23(b)(1XA)• 20. The parties opposing the class, the Defendants above - named, have engaged in a generic pattern of obstruction of the rights of Plaintiffs and the Isis to enjoy the full panoply of rights of ownership of their ACRE properties, making the declaratory relief sought in this action on behalf of the named plaintiffs, Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom, appropriate to protect the interests of the entire class proposed herein. 21. The named Plaintiffs, Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom, are suitable parties to fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class. Plaintiffs have engaged counsel experienced in the handling of elnss action matters and the personal circumstances of the Plaintiffs, Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom, as ACRE landowners and Garfield County residents, make Plaintiffs precisely the type of persons meant to be protected by provisions of Colorado law guaranteeing free movement of persons and commerce across the public highways and thoroughfares of the State of Colorado. 8 • • • PRE - FILING MEETINGS WITH DEFENDANTS TO ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE ACCESS 22. On two separate occasions prior to commencement of this action, Plaintiffs and/or their representatives met with Defendants and/or their representatives to attempt to resolve the issues of access without need of litigation. 23. On the first occasion Plaintiff Donna Nystrom, her attorney George M. Allen and another person met in Grand Junction with Thomas LaCroix, then acting as attorney for defendants. The purpose of that meeting was to negotiate access without need for further litigation. Mr. LaCroix stated he had no authority to agree to access or a negotiated price for access. 24. On the second occasion, in ear -iy 1,993Donna Nystrom, Jeff Parker and Fletcher Anderson met with Paul Nieslanik at Paul Nieslanik' s home near Carbondale. At that meeting, which had been arranged between counsel for the parties (with Mr. LaCroix representing Defendants and George M. Allen representing Plaintiffs), it was expected by Plaintiffs that there would be negotiation of a settlement for access, with agreement on an amount to be paid by Plaintiffs to Defendants for access across the route selected in this litigation. Paul Nieslanik announced at that meeting that he had made an agreement with a third party, one Terry Considine, not to agree to any access to be granted to Plaintiffs. Therefore that meeting also failed to produce agreement on either an access route across Defendants' property or an amount to be paid for access. First Claim for Relief (Condemnation of Right of Way) 25. -Paragraphs I through 24 above are incorporated herein by reference. 26. Notwithstanding the averments and claims set forth above, it may be determined that there is no presently extant public right of way available to Plaintiffs to reach their Aspen Crystal River Estates property from other public highways. In that event, they are entitled to condemnation of a public right of way across the land of Defendants described in paragraph 2 b above. 27. This Court should order the condemnation of a public right of way, across certain land owned by Defendants Paul Nieslanik and _ Celia Nieslanik, described in paragraph 2 b above, to reach Aspen Crystal River Estates by way of the route running from A to B on Exhibit A attached to this Complaint. 9 • • Hill Road as the exclusive means of public access to and enjoyment of lots within ACRE owned by Plaintiffs and the class they represent. 17. The persons making up the proposed class to be represented by Plaintiffs are as follows: All landowners of lots within ACRE whose access to public rights of way is restricted or obstructed by the conduct of Defendants, as alleged above. The class does not include the so -called Considine interests, as they purport to have public access via the Considine ranches, which lie between ACRE and other public roads of Garfield County other than the White Hill Road. 18. This action should be certified and maintained as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(b) of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. 19. A class action under Rule 23(b) is the superior method of adjudicating the rights of Plaintiffs and other persons similarly situated for the following reason, enumerated in Rule 23(b)(1): Prosecution of separate actions by the persons affected would create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications, with attendant risks enumerated in Rule 23(b)(1)(A). 20. The parties opposing the class, the Defendants above - named, have engaged in a generic pattern of obstruction of the rights of Plaintiffs and the class to enjoy the full panoply of rights of ownership of their ACRE properties, making the declaratory relief sought in this action on behalf of the named plaintiffs, Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom, appropriate to protect the interests of the entire class proposed herein. 21. The named Plaintiffs, Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom, are suitable parties to fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class. Plaintiffs have engaged counsel experienced in the handling of class action matters and the personal circumstances of the Plaintiff's, Donna Nystrom and John Nystrom, as ACRE landowners and Garfield County residents, make Plaintiffs precisely the type of persons meant to be protected by provisions of Colorado law guaranteeing free movement of persons and commerce across the public highways and thoroughfares of the State of Colorado. 8 • • • That right of way should have the following characteristics: a. No less than 100 feet in width. b. Construction Standard: to the Construction and Grade standard presently in effect for County Roads (e.g., roads owned and maintained by the County) in Garfield County; . c. Exact metes and bounds description to be determined in further proceedings in this litigation after survey and engineering study. 28. The Court should determine the amount to be paid to Defendants for the access corridor sought herein. Second Claim for Relief (Damages) 29. Paragraphs 1 through 24 above are incorporated herein by reference. 30. Plaintiffs and the clots they represent have been damaged by the unlawful conduct of the defendants, as described above. Plaintiffs and the class they represent should be awarded damages in an amount sufficient to compensate them for the unlawful deprivation of their rights of access to their ACRE property. Prayer for Relief WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that judgment be entered on their behalf and against Defendants as follows: A. For Declaratory Judgment of Condemnation of a right of way according to a route (and defined by a legal description) to be determined in this action and consistent with the proposed right of way defined by Exhibit A to this First Amended Petition for Condemnation of Right of Way. B. For such other and further relief as the Court deems appropriate, including Plaintiffs' costs of this action. [Signature Block On Following Page] 10 • • Respecttlly submitted, L (. G6o'ge ' Allen, No. 2080 Box 66, 145 Payson Street Naturita CO 81422 Telephone: 970 - 865 -2800 Facsimile: 970 - 865 -2808 E -Mail: aln @csn.net Counsel for Plaintiffs 11 . I • • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have at Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this a_ th day of November, 1997, served the document(s) described below on the person(s) whose names and addresses are shown below by the means of service shown below. Document(s) Served: FIRST AMENDED PETITION FOR CONDEMNATION OF RIGHT OF WAY Means of Service (x) facsimile or . (x) hand delivery () U.S. mail, postage prepaid () courier Counsel Served Lawrence R. Green, Esq. 818 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs CO 81601 970 - 945 -6546 Zol{,Q 5. rJYsTRmv` (print e) c:\acre \033.cp1 12 OP 811 : Pill ALLEN PHONE NO 8189548624 Jan. 23 1998 11:30 Pi • s -3 I LAW OFFICES GEORGE M. ALLEN ADMITTED IN COLORADO AND UTAH .,. POST OFFICE BO% 66 145 PAYSON STREET NATURITA, COLORADO 61422 TELEPHONE! 970.663.2600 FACSIMILE! 970465.2606 E -MAIL, ALN*CSN.NET POST OFFICE BO% 1091 TELLURIDE. COLORADO 61435 TELEPHONE! 970.726.3126 FACSIMILE! 970.7254263 • PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL By facsimile: 970 -945 -7785 January 23, 1998 Donald K. DeFord, Esq. Garfield County Attorney 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 Re: Aspen Crystal River Estates Dear Don: 1 am writing to you in confidence, as this involves a matter both in litigation and presently subject to settlement negotiations with one of the parties to the litigation. Due to the sensitivity of the negotiations, I ask that you discuss this letter and the matters dealt with herein with the Commissioners as a litigation matter. 1 believe the Colorado Sunshine Law permits you and the Commissioners to deal with litigation (or potential litigation) other than in public meetings. This confirms our telephone conversation of last week and requests that the Garfield County Commissioners dcxlinc to take any action or schedule any meeting, whether with Terry Considine, Mr. Considine's legal counsel, or with any other party, with regard to the pending access dispute to Aspen Crystal River Estates. 1 shall review briefly the reasons for this request: Page 1 of 4 4 exhibit 1.1-anismol Lt ., FROM : PHiL ALLEN PHONE NO. : 8189548624 Jan. 23 1998 11:31AM P2 • • . The contemplated settlement would have minimal impact on the County. At most It would only open a few (less than a dozen) lots to development; 2. Public meetings to discuss this issue would be likely to have the effect of causing other owners of somewhat dormant properties (now embraced in a potential uncertified class in a proposed class action suit) to seek enlargement of the scope of any proposed settlement, to the detriment of the settling parties and would thus Jeopardize the settlement. 3. Actions of numerous public sector parties in Garfield County, including the Commissioners and private parties with whom they have dealt, including Mr. Considine, his employees, the Sheriff, the District Attorney and others, implicate 42 U.S.C. {1983. The specific actions which implicate Section 1983 include the following; the long- standing posture of Garfield County, expressed in 1980's litigation, against development of the ACRE properties; undertakings by Mr. Considine and entities with which he is associated to purchase ACRE (and Ti- ki -ki) lots on the representation the lots either have no access or cannot be developed; taking into custody of Kevin Massey, a 20 year old student at Union College. the Seventh Day Adventist college where he is enrolled (whom 1 personally interviewed in Lincoln, Nebraska in November, 1997), an employee of a contractor of one of my clients, while Mr. Massey was on the Nystrom property, holding of Mr. Massey under threat of force for several hours, summoning of the Garfield County Sheriff, arrest of Mr. Massey and filing of trespass charges against Mr. Massey (since dropped); consideration of kidnap charges against the person who held and restrained Mr. Massey and foregoing of such charges as part of some sort of ad hoc District Attorney's docision to attempt to spare the responsible party or parties for the wrongs to Mr. Massey from potential felony kidnap filings; specific written requests by Mr. Considine to the District Attorney to prosecute trespass eases, In apparent aid of Mr. Considine's real estate investment goals; written advice by the District Attorney that he will not. further prosecute trespass cases and wants parties to defer to the civil court proceedings; statement made in mid -1997 by Paul Nieslanik (a party to pending litigation) that he would not negotiate access with ACRE owners because he had agreed with Mr. Considine that he would not do so; blocking of the White Hill Road by means of locked gates by John Nieslanik and members of his family; participation by the Garfield County sheriffs personnel in abetting the blocking' of the White Hill Road during the summers of 1996 and 1997; filing of trespass charges against my client Brian Schwarz, at the specific written request of Mr. Considine; failure of any party to provide even a scintilla of evidence that the White Hill Road was, at any time since its construction in the 1890's, formally vacated as public right of way by either Garfield County or the State of Colorado (a point agreed by John Nieslanik's attorney, Harry Shulman); failure of either the private parties or public officials to give due consideration to and effect to the Federal Anti-Inclosure Act of 1885 (43 U.S.C. § §1061 -1065) (the vitality of which has been affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Page 2 of 4 Exhibit 4 FROM : PHIL ALLEN PHONE NO. : 8189548624 Jan. 23 1998 11:31AM P3 • • Justice Rehnquist's opinion in Len Sheep Co. v. United States, 440 U.S. 668, 59 L.Ed.2d 677, 99 S.Ct. 1403 (1979)), by which blocking of access to public lands is prohibited; failure of any private or public party to pmducc any documentation of any kind or nature to controvert the massive documentation in the initial filing in Garfield County District Court Case 96-CV-89 that the White Hill Road is a public right of way and has been since Colorado legislation in 1921 established all then- extant rights of way as public rights of way (Harry Shulman has made vague oral statements that he has evidence some other road was the historic road; the extensive exhibits filed with the initial complaint in 96 -CV -89 establish by unrchutted aerial photograph and historic mapping that the White Hill Road is the historic public access and has been for more than a century): the irresistible conclusion that private parties have acted in concerted fashion (conspired within the technical meaning of section 1983 and cases applying it) with public officials to block the White Hill Road, force the public and ACRE owners to take some other mute to reach properties they own and harass them with trespass filings and physical force. 4. No action taken or considered by the Commissioners will be seen by any objective observer as being undertaken on a clean slate. devoid of prior history. As we understand it, the Commissioners and County staff have been entreated to enact restrictive legislation to down -zone ACRE so as to limit or prevent development of their properties by my clients. Of course, any citizen has a right to appear in any public meeting and exercise rights of free speech. We do not seek to limit that. But a citizen who has a long history of active and concerted involvement with numerous public sector officials to impede public access across an historic right of way, so as to promote a land acquisition undertaking, who obtains further cooperative consideration by the Commissioners, is involving the Commissioners in much more than merely listening to an entreaty. The setting aside of specific calendar time for consideration of specific plans for further restriction of development is consistent with and will be considered to be a part of a pattern of violation of rights secured under 42 U.S.C. §1983. The very net of granting special time for consideration of such plans is an act in furtherance of a concerted plan to violate my client's rights. 5. If special consideration of plans or requests for of restrictions on my clients' ACRE properties remains on the calendar of the Garfield County Commissioners for their February 2, 1998 meeting, as presently scheduled, I have full 'authorization for invocation of their remedies under section 1983. Unless I ant physically unable to make a filing (something which has not taken place since my initial licensure to practice on October 3, 1967), such a filing would be in place prior to the February 2, 1998 Commissioners' meeting. Conclusion At the time we filed Case 96- CV -89, we provided copies of the case and its voluminous Page 3 of 4 Exhibit 11 3 Deli FROM : PHIL ALLEN PHONE NO. : 8189548624 Jan. 23 1998 11:32AM P4 , • • • J exhibits to your office, the District Attorney's office and the County Sheriffs office and requested immediate review and protection of the rights of the ACRE own rs. We think the wise course would have been immediate engagement of outside counsel for independent research and evaluation. That did not happen and my clients' exercise of their civil rights received no protection from the Sheriff, the District Attorney or other Garfield County officials. Instead, the Sheriff and then DLcuiet Attorney engaged in a pattern of winging it and taking the side of large landowners who wanted access impeded. The ACRE owners were harassed and intimidated in their attempted exercise of constitutionally and statutorily protected rights of free passage to and from their own land and the public land lying beyond it. No one has come forward with any credible documentary evidence the court filing they made was incorrect in any way. Even entertaining action by the Garfield County Commissioners to legislate further restriction will he an act fraught with peril. There is a civil litigation process. The new District Attorney has wisely declined to act further and has commended all concerned to remit to that process. There is a reasonable chance of amicable settlement of that litigation in a fashion which will have minimal impact on the County or its citizens. By this letter, we respectfully commend the actions of the District Attorney to the Commissioners. We submit that their wise course is to remove any calendar consideration of any matter relating to ACRE and allow the civil courts to resolve pending disputes. That would still leave any citizen free to come and stand up and make his pitch. But there would not be any taint of privately arranged special consideration. The Commissioners' wise response to any entreaty would be that the matter is in the Courts and that they will await the resolution of the judicial process. As there is no emergency requiring legislation, we see no reason for the Commissioners' taking up this matter at this time except to hinder and impede the ACRE owners. For the reasons outlined above, we submit any action along those lines would he unlawful. Please advise me of the status of this matter at your earliest opportunity. Yo r�sve George . Allen c :\acre \046.1tr Page 4 of 4 Exhibot� FROM 'HERBERT S. ICEIN 8. RSSOC TO 1 303 945 2597 1998.03 -15 1E:40 4523 P.02 /U3 • . AFFIDAVIT OF ANDREW MoGRBGOR State of Colorado ) ss. County of Garfield ) The undersigned, Andrew McGregor, after first being duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: 1. I am presently employed by the City of Glenwood Springs as its Community Development Director and have held that position since December, 1997. Between 1992 and December of 1997 I was employed as the City Planner by the City of Glenwood Springs planning department. In the capacity of Director, I am responsible for administration and oversight of the planning, building and recreation departments of the City of Glenwood Springs. In my capacity as City Planner, I was responsible for zoning matters and was directly involved the review of building permit applications. 2. Prior to my employment with the City of Glenwood Springs, I was the County Planner for Garfield County. In that capacity, I worked under the direction of Mark Bean. I was employed by Garfield County in that capacity for approximately 20 months between 1990 and 1992. 3. During my employment with the Garfield County Planning Office, it was their consistent policy to deny building permit applications in the Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision because of a lack of access. This position was consistent with the Uniform Building Code in effect at that time which required that access be available to property for which building and septic system permits were sought. The purpose for access is to insure that inspections can be made of the work allowed by the permit. Furthermore, there are numerous practical reasons why access should be required including, without limitation, provision for emergency services, utilities, construction related access needs and other reasons. 4. I am not aware of any instance, other than the recent issuance of building permits to Buffalo Ranch, LLC, where Garfield County has issued building permits to a property owner who could not demonstrate access to his property. 5. In my capacity as the Community Development Director for the City of Glenwood Springs, I am the official responsible for oversight and administration of the Building Department. The City of Glenwood Springs has adopted the 1994 version of the Uniform Building Code ( "UBC "). It is my understanding that Garfield County is presently using this same Building Code. It is my opinion that Sections 108.1 and 108.3 of the UBC require that access be Exhibi t,,; p4 1 6aF Z FROM .HERBERT S. KLEIN 6 RSSOC TO 1 303 945 2597 1998,03-16 15:41 $#523 P.03/03 • • demonstrated as being available to a property prior to the issuance of a building permit for such property. I do not believe that these provisions are subject to interpretations which could allow the issuance of a building permit to be conditioned upon an applicant proving access at a future time. It is contrary to the provisions of the CBC to issue a building permit where access is not demonstrated in the hope that at some time in the future. the improvements built pursuant to the permit could be inspected. 6. I am also familiar with the requirements for individual sewage disposal system permits and am of the opinion that access must also be demonstrated prior to the issuance of an ISDS permit in order to conduct inspections of these systems. The issuance of a permit for construction of a septic system where access cannot be demonstrated violates State regulations. I am not aware of any situation where Garfield County has issued such a permit where access was not available, except, in the case of the issuance of such permits to Buffalo Ranch, LLC. FURTHER the affiant sayeth not. Andrew McGregor STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 16th day of March, 1998, by Andrew McGregor as Community Development Director of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Witness my hand and official seal. My- commission expires: - iv - -2 oot • • -tary Pus is 7 / -2- 14AR - 1a -98 _1'HU 12:36 PM SAN EMERGENCY DEPT, FAX N0, 3034262164 P. 1 • • TO: Zoning Board of Adjustment Garfield County Courthouse 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, Colorado FROM: Fred 0. Williams 5638 South Skyline Drive Evergreen, CO 80439 DATE: March 11, 1998 SUBJECT: Application to Appeal Administrative Decision to Issue Building Permits filed by Carbondale Corporation Legal Description: Lot 3, Blook 5; Lot 60, Block 6; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates Dear Sirs; Carbondale Corporation should not be granted the appeal to rescind the decision to issue building permits and individual sewage disposal permits as that would infringe on my rights to use my property as the Zoning Board has approved previously. The above described property was purchased with the ultimate goal to build a single - family dwelling on this site. The property was zoned for that purpose when it was purchased. I still intend to eventually accomplish this goal; therefore, I strenuously object to any decision to take away my rights to obtain the necessary permits to use the property as it was designated by the Zoning Board when the property was purchased. Thank you for your consideration. Dear Sirs; • • Carbondale Corporation should not be granted the appeal to rescind the decision to issue building permits and individual sewage disposal permits as that would infringe on my rights to use my property as the Zoning Board has approved previously. The above described property was purchased with the ultimate goal to build a single - family dwelling on this site. The property was zoned for that purpose when it was purchased. I still intend to eventually accomplish this goal; therefore, I strenuously object to any decision to take away my rights to obtain the necessary permits to use the property as it was designated by the Zoning Board when the property was purchased. Thank you for your consideration. • • AFFIDAVIT STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) The undersigned, Bentley Henderson, after first being duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows: 1. I am presently employed by the Town of Carbondale, Colorado as its Chief Building Official. I have been employed in this capacity since March, 1994. From the period of July, 1991 until March, 1994, I was employed as a building inspector by the Town of Carbondale. 2. I am familiar with the 1994 edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). In my capacity as the Chief Building Official for Carbondale, I am the official responsible for oversight and administration of issuance of building permits and enforcement of the UBC within the Town of Carbondale. 3. I have reviewed the provisions of the UBC in connection with the appeal filed by the Town of Carbondale of Garfield County's issuance of building permits for Lots 3 and 60, Block 5, and Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates Subdivision. Based upon my review of the subdivision plat for this subdivision and other information provided to me in connection with this matter, it is my opinion that the issuance of these three building permits is in violation of the provisions of the UBC. Specifically, Section 503.1 and the definition of "public way" in Section 1001.2 of the UBC require that any building must have access to a public way. A public way is a street that has been deeded, dedicated, or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for public use. The illustrative commentary to the UBC states that the objection of the access requirement of Section 503 is to provide a method by which the fire department may gain access to the property to fight a fire. 4. Based on the information that I have reviewed in connection with this subdivision, it is my conclusion that legal access to the subdivision does not exist and that the building permits in question were issued in violation of the provisions of the UBC. Further affiant sayeth naught. Bentley. -nde on The foregoing was subscribed and sworn to before me this /6. Aay of March, 1998 by Bentley Henderson. Witness my hand and official seal. ; , ) • Notary Public / / o Y My commission expires: 6 —6-2- 0 0 5�lu�� 144 b10 1 � 031698- townThenderson affidavit-rjj - ,J1 ,.. p • PART III GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR SAFETY ARTICLE 9 - FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS AND WATER SUPPLY SECTION 901 — GENERAL 901.4.5 Street or road signs. When required by the chief, streets and roads shall be identified with approved signs. 901.1 Scope. Fire department access and water supply shall be in accordance with Article 9. 901.5 Obstruction and Control of Fire Apparatus Access Roads and Fire- protection Equipment. See Sections 902.2.4 For firesafety during construction, alteration or demolition of a and 1001.7. building, see Article 87. 901.6 Fire Protection in Recreational Vehicle, Mobile Home 901.2 Permits and Plans. and Manufactured Housing Parks, Sales Lots and Storage Lots. Recreational vehicle, mobile home and manufactured 901.2.1 Permits. A permit is required to use or operate fire hy- housing parks, sales lots and storage lots shall provide and main - drants or valves intended for fire- suppression purposes which are tain fire hydrants and access roads in accordance with Sections installed on water systems and accessible to public highways, 902 and 903. alleys or private ways open to or generally used by the public. See EXCEPTION: Recreational vehicle parks located in remote areas Section 105, Permit f.1. shall be provided with protection and access roadways as required by EXCEPTION: A permit is not required for persons employed and the chief. authorized by the water company which supplies the system to use or operate fire hydrants or valves. SECTION 902 — FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS • 901.2.2 Plans. 902.1 General. Fire department access roads shall be provided 901.2.2.1 Fire apparatus access. Plans for fire apparatus access and maintained in accordance with Sections 901 and 902. roads shall be submitted to the fire department for review and ap- 902.2 Fire Apparatus Access Roads. proval prior to construction. 902.2.1 Required access. Fire apparatus access roads shall be 901.2.2.2 Fire hydrant systems. Plans and specifications for provided in accordance with Sections 901 and 902.2 for every fire hydrant systems shall be submitted to the fire department for facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or review and approval prior to construction. moved into or within the jurisdiction when any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the 9013 Timing of Installation. When fire protection, including building is located more than 150 feet (45 720 mm) from fire fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection, apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the is required to be installed, such protection shall be installed and exterior of the building or facility. See also Section 902.3 for per - made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. sonnel access to buildings. EXCEPTION: When alternate methods of protection, as EXCEPTIONS: 1. When buildings are completely protected with approved, are provided, the requirements of Section 901.3 may be an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the provisions of Sections modified or waived. 902.2.1 and 902.2.2 may be modified by the chief. 901.4 Required Marking of Fire Apparatus Access Roads, 2. When access roads cannot be installed due to location on property, Addresses end Fire protection Equipment. topography, waterways, nonnegotiable grades or other similar condi- tions, the chief is authorized to require additional fire protection as spe- 901.4.1 General. Marking of fire apparatus access roads, Gifted in Section 1001.9. addresses and fire protection equipment shall be in accordance 3. When there are not more than two Group R, Division 3, or Group with addresses a n 901.4. U Occupancies, the requirements of Sections 902.2.1 and 902.2.2 may be modified by the chief. 901.4.2 Fire apparatus access roads. When required by the More than one fire apparatus road shall be provided when it is chief, approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided determined by the chief that access by a single road might be im- and maintained for fire apparatus access roads to identify such paired by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic condi- roads and prohibit the obstruction thereof or both. tions or other factors that could limit access. . fire hydrants. Fire- For high -piled combustible storage, see Section 8102.6.1. 901.43 Fire- protection equipment and protection equipment and fire hydrants shall be clearly identified For required access during construction, alteration or demoli- in an approved manner to prevent obstruction by parking and other tion of a building, see Section 8704.2. obstructions. 902.2.2 Specifications. When required by the chief, hydrant locations shall be 902.2.2.1 Dimensions. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an • identified by the installation of reflective markers. unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (6096 mm) and an tin - See also Section 1001.7. obstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (4115 • mm). 901.4.4 Premises identification. Approved numbers or ad- EXCEPT: c m reduced, .. I dresses shall be provided for all new and existing buildings in such p B B redu does ION no impa al access clearance by Cie apparatus ay be end approved provided signs such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road are installed and maintained indicating the established vertical clear - fronting the property. ante when approved. 1 -27 • .el Chapter 5 5C GENERAL BUILDING LIMITATIONS 0- as 11. Chapter 5 provides general provisions that are applicable to The building in the center would not have access and thus wo tr all buildings. These include requirements for exterior wall and be in violation of the code. This access requ would a opening protection; allowable floor areas and increases, includ- prohibit a building which extends from property line toprope ing area separation walls; increases for open spaces and for the line from being divided by an area separation wall in sucl use of automatic sprinkler systems; and allowable height of manner as to completely isolate the back portion. See Figt buildings and increases. Other miscellaneous topics addressed 503 -1 for examples of these two situations. in Chapter 5 are premises identification, mezzanines and guard- Because the open space between a street front lot line and ct rails. ter line of the street is available to property on both sides of I In addition to general provisions set forth in Chapter 5, there street, the code provides that the center line of the street shall are several special uses and occupancies which need to be assumed to be the property line. As the code refers to "pub addressed. These special provisions are found in both Chapters " way," this would also be applicable to an alley orotherapprop 3 and 4 with a cross - reference to the special uses and occupan- ate open spaces which the building official may determine is re cies being presented in Section 501. sonably likely to remain unobstructed through the years. 503.2 Fire Resistance of Walls. The rules for exterior wall a SECTION 502 — PREMISES IDENTIFICATION opening protection based upon proximity to the property line a In this section, which first appeared in the 1982 edition, the U.B.C. intends that buildings be provided with plainly visible and legible address numbers posted on the building or in such a I place on the property that the building may be identified by emergency services such as fire, medical and police. The pri- —R_ mary concern is that responding fire-suppression forces may lo- cate the building without going through a lengthy search proce- I dure. In furthering the concept, the code intends that the � " N OO i, I approved street numbers be placed on a sign readily visible from f. ACCESS % the street fronting on the property if a sign on the building would R # i cc not be visible from the street. T co u AREA SEPARATION WALL 0 (.4l SECTION 503 — LOCATION ON PROPERTY YARD 1 It 1 503.1 General. The Uniform Building Code, as far as exterior lf --I wall protection is concerned, operates on the philosophy that an owner can have no control over what occurs on adjacent proper- CASE A ty, and therefore the locations of buildings on the owner's prop- erty must be regulated relative to the property line. In fact, the I location of all buildings and structures on a given piece of prop- R „ arty are located with relation to the real property lines as well as assumed or imaginary property lines between buildings. The use R 1 of assumed property lines will be discussed later. f% AREA I NO ACCESS 2 SEPARATION The property line concept provides a convenient means of R FOR THIS W protecting one building from another insofar as exposure is con- BUILDING WALL s cerned. Exposure is the potential for heat to be transmitted from „ N one building to another under fire conditions in the exposing o building. Radiation is the primary means of heat transfer. It Section 503 begins with a requirement that every building BUILDING EXTENDS TO ] t shall adjoin or have access t0 a public way or yard on at least one ALL PROPERTY LINES �1I side. The objective is to provide space through which the fire de- CASE B artment may gain access to the property to fight a fire. • The access requirement precludes the concept of surrounding ACCESS REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDINGS one building by another where the surrounded building is sepa- rated from the surrounding building with area separation walls. Figure 503 i E � • Map 5 summarizes the location and buildout Fiscal Impacts. When agricultural or other percentage for all subdivisions located in open space areas are platted for residential unincorporated Garfield County. Analyses of development, the assessed valuation of the the average improved lot prices reflect the same property increases. Unfortunately, if the regional differentiation as rental and mortgage subdivision fails to develop, the tax revenue is prices shown in Table 17. Generally speaking, never fully realized. Furthermore, if the areas nearest to, and east of, Glenwood Springs subdivision ever reaches full occupancy, the are dramatically higher priced when compared demand for water, emergency services and to the western portion of the County. +' schools will increase.. Assuming the County was unable or failed to require the developer to The "Index to Subdivisions" at the bottom of make on or off -site improvements, the cost of Map 5 shows that lot vacancy rates range in these services will fall on the County. the area of 40 percent for most of the County, with subdivisions near Silt and Rifle having Environmental Impacts. Environmental issues vacancy rates over 50 percent. The failure to are also intensified by premature subdivisions. buildout previously approved subdivisions These subdivisions, as well as many raises several issues that are explored in detail subdivisions recently approved, do not provide below. comprehensive water and sewer systems. Individual lot owners drill individual wells and 5.3 Premature Subdivisions install ISD systems. County staff do not have the ability to monitor these systems effectively. As shown on Map 5, the County has approved The proliferation of individual wells, ISD a large number of subdivisions that have failed systems, the lack of adequate roads, wildlife to reach buildout - referred to as "premature habitat loss, as well as poor site selection and subdivisions." Premature subdivisions are inferior design contribute to the environmental commonly defined as lands that where platted issues associated with these subdivisions. some time ago, often sold into multiple ownership, are largely undeveloped and, in Land Use Impacts. Land use impacts also some cases, do not meet contemporary become apparent following premature planning, zoning and building standards. subdivisions. The premature commitment of an area to residential development often causes The lack of development is the primary future development, based on a real demand for distinguishable characteristic of premature housing of a particular type, to "leapfrog" the subdivisions in Garfield County. Because the prematurely platted and poorly designed subdivisions were platted before any need for subdivision. This process leaves pockets of immediate buildout, only a few residences are vacant land that may not be suitable for constructed. In truth, most of these development at a later time. subdivisions were divided and sold purely as a speculative land investment. The consequences The primary danger related to premature of this process can be grouped into three subdivisions is the mistaken notion that categories: fiscal, environmental and land use. subdivision proliferation is a sign of economic These impacts, discussed below, were reviewed development. The percentage of vacant lots in detail by a 1986 study conducted by the summarized on Map 5 clearly shows the failure American Planning Association and The of these projects to build out. Furthermore, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. fiscal and environmental impacts associated with public services, traffic generation and 11 -18 ° • • inadequate water and sewer systems will have from 300 to 400 units annually. a dramatic impact on the entire County. • Third, the estimates of need for new 5.4 Population Growth and Housing units to serve future employment are Demand well below the current levels of housing construction occurring for Primary opportunities and stimuli for growth local residents. Furthermore, new within the County include recreation- related units do not appear to consider real estate sales and construction that occur deficiencies that exist to currently both within the County and in neighboring serve the local population. -The data Pitkin and Eagle Counties. - In addition, shows that building activity is not economic development ..within larger keeping pace with current employment communities has also increased the need for and population growth. In addition, additional housing units within the County. the units being built often do not meet the demands at the low end of the price A precise estimate of housing needs is difficult spectrum. to quantify due to the inability to predict energy costs, tourism demand and local government 5.5 Affordability regulations that all affect regional demand and production of housing. However, the Garfield The affordability of housing for residents within County Housing Research Report, prepared in the County is a function of three interrelated September of 1990 by the Garfield County factors: land values, construction costs and Housing Authority, does provide several average household income. Land values have important conclusions regarding future housing shown a gradual increase over the last 10 years. needs in the County. Data collected by the Garfield County Board of Realtors show that the average unimproved • First, Garfield, Pitkin and Eagle residential lot sold for approximately $45,000 Counties have shown significant in 1991. Due to the widely fluctuating land growth in a period of relative economic costs between the eastem and westem portions lag for Colorado as a state. In Garfield of the County, an average cost of land is quite County, county-wide employment deceiving. Construction costs are estimated at levels have returned to the levels approximately $50 to $100 per square foot for achieved at the time of the energy an average wood -framed residential unit. The boom and, with growth in the two 1990 U.S. Census estimated that the average adjacent counties, the current annual household income within the County residential base shows no excess was approximately $29,176 in 1989 dollars. capacity. A more accurate portrayal of the affordability • Second, the housing data suggest that situation and the diversity in the County's real if current employment trends continue, estate market is based on the average sale price the demand for new housing to serve for single - family units for specific geographic the local population wishing to locate regions within the County. Sales records from in all three counties will continue to the Board of Realtors for 1991 and 1993 allow rise. By conservative estimates, the for a breakdown based on the following demand for new units in Garfield regional definitions: County (both incorporated and unincorporated), are expected to range II -19 • GARFIELD COUNTY • COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE 109 8th Street Suite 300 P.O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602-0640 Phone 945-9150 August 15, 1984 Mr. Tibor Gartner 23378 Shingle Creek Road Golden, Co 80401 Re: Aspen Crystal River Estates Dear Mr. Gartner: This letter is being written in response to your request that the County Attorney's Office put something in writing to you in regards to Garfield County's issuance of a building permit on property which you may own in the above subdivision. It is my understanding that in June, 1984, you made a request to Garfield County for issuance of a building permit and that request was refused. The property which you own was platted in 1965 as part of the above subdivision. Although the plat contains a purported dedication of the public ways contained thereon, said dedication has never been accepted by the Board of County Commissioners. In addition, this subdivision has no central water system nor central sewer system. Although the County has recently determined that the Te Ke Ki Drive access is available as to the development Te Ke Ki of Aspen Units 1 and 2, there is no connection by means of dedicated public roadways from those developments to that of Aspen Crystal River Estates. For the above reasons, it is most appropriate for Garfield County to deny a building permit in the above development. As a regulatory basis for this denial i would cite you Section 202(c) and 305(b) of the Uniform Building Code of 1982. In addition, Sections 8.01, 5.01.05, 5.04.03 and 5.04.05 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended, are also applicable. I hope this answers any question you may have. Very truly yours, EARL G. RHODES Garfield County Attorney EGR:mls cc: Mark Bean, County Planner Board of County Commissioners tiritibit 3 ,.d C 1994711E PUBLIC itrcouO • I'OItA I ION • ALI. RIGIUS RESERVED 17 CR 6, 6 -94 Page 11 finer. (A soil having a uniformity coefficient smaller than 4 would be considered "uniform" for purposes of this regulation.) Vault - a watertight, covered receptacle, which is designed to receive and store excreta or wastes either from a sewer or from a privy and is accessible for the periodic removal of its contents. Wastewater Pond - a designed pond which receives exclusively wastewater from a first stage treatment unit and which provides an additional degree of treatment. • IV. Administration and Enforcement A. Permit Application Requirements and Procedures: 1. Prior to commencement of installation, alteration, or repair of a system, a written application shall be submitted to the local health department providing, as a minimum, the information called for on the application form and a permit shall have been issued by the local health department or its designated agent having jurisdiction. 2. A permit fee not to exceed that which is allowed by 25 -10 -101 et seq. (as amended) C.R.S. shall be required of applicants for an individual sewage disposal system, payable at the time the application is received. This fee shall be based on the average cost to the local health department for processing applications during the preceding calendar year. The fee for permits issued by the Department shall not exceed the maximum allowed by 25 -10 -101 et seq. (as amended) C.R.S. 3. The local board of health may make provision for the waiver of any permit fee normally required for an individual sewage disposal system. 4. If an individual sewage disposal system permit is issued, it shall expire one year after the date of issuance if construction has not commenced or as specified by local board of health regulations. Any change in plans or specifications after the permit has been issued invalidates the permit unless written approval is secured from the health officer or his /her authorized agent for such PAC P1Q0 12 • • r - I 4 changes. 5. The local health department may issue a repair permit and an emergency use permit to the owner or occupant of property on which a system is not functioning properly. Application for a repair permit shall be made by such owner or occupant to the local health department within two business days after receiving notice from the local health department that the system is not functioning in compliance with Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. or applicable rules and regulations adopted thereunder or otherwise constitutes a nuisance or a hazard to public health. The permit shall provide for a I flreasonable period of time within which repairs shall be made. At the end of that period the system shall be inspected by the local health department to insure it is functioning properly. Concurrently with the issuance of a repair permit, the local health department may issue an emergency use permit authorizing continued use .of a malfunctioning system on an emergency basis for a period not to exceed the period stated in the repair permit. Such an emergency use permit may be extended, for good cause shown, in the event repairs may not be completed in the period stated in the repair permit through no fault of the owner or occupant. 6. An individual sewage disposal system permit shall be required for expanded use of an existing system. 7. Rules and regulations of the local board of health shall include provisions regarding review by the local board of health, upon request of an applicant, of applications denied by the health officer. D. The issuance of a permit and specifications of terms and conditions therein shall not constitute assumption or create a presumption that the local health department or its employees may be liable for the failure of any system nor act as a certification that the equipment used in the system or any component thereof used in its operation or that the system for which the permit was issued insures continuous compliance with the provision of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S., the rules and r 5 CCR 1003 -6 THE CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS • • { 0 1994 TI1E PUBLIC RECORD CORPORATION ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 17 Cl2 6, 6 -94 Patio - regulations adopted thereunder or any terms and conditions of a permit. 9 . Except as provided in these individual sewage disposal s stem permit is pha no ll be to any person when the subject proerts located within a municipality or special district provides public sewer service, except where such sewer service to the property.is not feasible in the determination of the municipality or special district. B. Application Review: • The application shall include such information, data, plans, specifications, statements, and commitments as required by the local board of health to carry out the purposes of Article 10, Title 25, C.R.S., as amended. After receiving an application for an individual sewage disposal system permit, the application shall be reviewed by the local health department and an inspection shall be made by the health officer or his /her designated representative consisting of: 1 . Inspection- of the premises, unless previously inspected. 2. ' Evaluation of soil where percolation tests are required. 3. A, determination as to -the suitability•of the site. and of the proposed design based upon verification . of the ground water table, suitable soil, depth to bedrock, ground slope and pertinent physical features. C. Additional Evaluation: When the health officer or his /her designated agent has determined that the local health department does not have sufficient information for evaluation of an application or a system, he may require additional tests or documentation. D. Additional Hydrological, Geological, Engineering or other Information: f epe 14 • • When specific evidence suggests undesirable subsurface conditions exist, additional hydrological, geological, -• engineering or other information provided by a registered professional engineer or geologist may be required to be submitted by the applicant. This requirement shall not prejudice the right of the local health department to develop its own information from its own source. E. Determination: A determination shall be made on behalf of the local health department by a sanitarian, environmental health specialist or a registered professional engineer after review of the application, site inspection, test results, and other required information, whether the proposed system is in compliance with the requirements of Article 10 of. Title 25, C.R.S. and applicable rules and regulations adopted under said section. A permit may be issued by . -the health - officer or his /her designated representative if the proposed system is determined to be in compliance with the requirements of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. and the rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. F. Inspection Stages: Local regulations shall specify the stages of construction, installation, alteration, or repair at which time the local health department will require inspections. Before the system is placed in use the owner, the owner's agent or the systems contractor shall provide the local health department with notice that the progress of the work has been sufficiently completed to allow inspection to determine if all work has been performed in accordance with the permit requirements and to determine compliance of • the system with Article 10, Title 25, C.R.S. and the rules and regulations adopted thereunder. • G. Access to Site: For the purpose of inspection and enforcing applicable rules and regulations and the terms and conditions of any permit issued, the health officer or his /her designated agent is authorized to enter upon private property at reasonable times and upon reasonable notice for the • purpose of determining whether or not operating individual sewage disposal facilities and systems are 5 CCR 1003 -6 THE CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS • • ‘, ^ 0 1994'111' PUBLIC RECORD CORPORM'ION • 41.1, RIOT 113 RESERVED 17 C12 6, 6 -94 Pagu 15 • functioning in compliance with Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. and applicable rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto and the terms and conditions of any permit issued and to inspect and conduct tests in evaluating any permit application. The owner or occupant of every property having an individual sewage disposal m) 01 system' shall permit the health officer or his /her N"' 40( 7 designated agent access to the property' to conduct , (a ,, , required tests, take samples, monitor compliance, and A make inspections. H. Department Authority to Administer and Enforce: Wherever the term local board of health, local health department, or health officer is used' 'in these guidelines, said terms shall also include the Colorado Department of Health or its designated authority for the purposes of administering and enforcing the provisions of these guidelines as Colorado Department of Health Regulations where necessary to protect the public health and environment. I. Primary Enforcement Responsibility: The primary responsibility for enforcement of the provisions. of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. and the regulations adopted under said Section shall lie with the local health departments or local boards of health. ' 1 3 i i: In ; the r event that ' a , 1oca1 health, department or local/ , 7J . t.board of health fails to administer and enforce the, ir (I provisions of said section and the rules and regulations` A .,� is 1n i i adopted under said Article 10, the department may assume` ( ((such functions of the local health department or board of! . r 0 r e ? health as may be necessary to protect the public health (IV 1, and, environment. (25 -10 -109) -..• W I J. Experimental Systems: Except for designs or types of systems which have been approved by the Division pursuant to 'C.R.S., 25 - 10 -107 (1), the local board of health may approve an application for a type system not otherwise provided for in paragraphs (e) to (j) of subsection (1) of C.R.S. 25 -10 -105 only if the system has been designed by a registered professional engineer, and only if the application provides for the timely installation of a ` aa )/ 1 f` \ i , 'I' /x•11 i.•f .La'. Papo 1 [ • • backup system of a type described in said paragraphs in the event of a failure of the experimental system. A local board of health shall not arbitrarily deny any person the right to consideration of an application for such a system and shall apply reasonable performance standards in determining whether to approve such an application. (25 -10 -107 (2)). K. Prohibition of Individual Sewage Disposal Systems in Unsuitable Areas: The local board of health ma conduct a public hearing, after written notice to al1'affected property owners as shown in the records of the county assessor and publication of notice in a newspaper of general 0 circulation at least ten days prior to the hearing, to c Ao r .consider the prohibition. of permits for individual. nA (o erg sewage disposal systems in defined areas which contain or ��; s � .; are subdivided for a. density of more than two dwelling units per acre.. The local board of health may order such �,rl prohibition upon a finding that the construction and use of additional individual sewage disposal systems in the ).a defined area will constitute a hazard to the cr: public health or the environment. In such a hearing, the local T' board of health may request affected property owners to submit engineering and geological reports concerning the defined area and provide a study of the economic feasibility of constructing a sewage treatment works. • (25 -10 -110) L. Fees: Fees authorized in these guidelines shall be set at such amounts as are deemed necessary to cover the operational expense of the several agencies but shall not exceed the maximum amounts specified in these guidelines. M. Licensing of Systems Contractors and Systems Cleaners: 1. The local hoard of health may adopt rules and regulations which provide for the licensing of systems contractors. A fee not to exceed twenty -five dollars may be charged by the local health department for the initial license of a systems contractor; a fee not to exceed ten dollars may be charged by the local health department for a renewal of the license. Initial licensing and renewals thereof shall be for a period of not less 5 CCR 1003 -6 THE CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS VvA • 0 1995 TIM PUBLIC RECORD CORPORATION ALL RIGI PIS RI SWtVED 18 CR 4, 4 -95 rage 17 • than one . ear. Y Renewals may be scheduled to coincide with the caleendar. year. • The local board of health may revoke the license of a systems contractor for violation of the applicable provisions of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. of the rules and regulations adopted under said section or for other good cause shown, after a hearing conducted upon reasonable notice to the systems contractor -and at which the systems contractor may be present, with counsel, and be heard. (25 -10 -108) 2. The local board of health may adopt rules and regulations which provide for the licensing of systems cleaners. A fee not to exceed twenty -five dollars may ba charged by the local health department for the initial license of a systems cleaner; a fee not to exceed ten dollars may be charged for the renewal of the license. Initial licensing and renewals thereof shall be for a period of not less than one year. Renewals may be ' scheduled to coincide with the calendar year. 3. The local board of health may revoke the license of a systems cleaner for violation of the applicable • provisions of Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. of the •regulations adopted under said section or for other good cause shown after a hearing conducted upon reasonable notice to the systems cleaner and at which the systems cleaner may be present, with counsel, and be heard. (25 - 10 -108). N. Cease and Desist Orders: The health officer or his /her authorized representative may, issue an order to cease and desist from the use of any system which is found by the health officer not to be functioning in compliance with Article 10 of Title 25, C.R.S. or with applicable rules and regulations or is found to constitute a hazard to public health, or has not otherwise received timely repairs under the provisions of C.R.S., Section 25 - 10 -106 (1)(j). Such an order may be issued only after a hearing which shall be conducted 'by the health officer not less than 48 hours after written notice thereof is given to the owner or occupant of the • property on which the system is located and at which the owner or occupant may be present, with counsel, and be yns T y 4 n '° Napa 18 • • heard. The order shall require that the owner or occupant bring the system into compliance or eliminate the health hazard within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed thirty days, or thereafter cease and desist from the use of the system. A cease and desist order issued by the health officer shall be reviewable in the district court for the county wherein the system is located and upon a petition filed not later than ten days after the order is issued. V. Calculation of Sewage Flow and Characteristics; A. Where gallons per day and pounds of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD per day can be obtained by measurement of existing conditions, such data may be used. This allows local health officials to require installation of a meter located to measure flow into the individual sewage disposal system. B. For new facilities the following "Table of Quantities and B0D5.Strength of Sewage" may be used as a guide to represent average conditions. • C. Maximum flow shall be considered as 150 percent of average daily flow and shall be the basis for design purposes unless otherwise established by evidence satisfactory to the health officer. D. To calculate the sewage flow for dwellings and mobile homes, use a figure of two persons per bedroom. E. In no event may the system be designed for a lesser capacity than the anticipated maximum daily sewage flow or treatment requirements of the sewage or wastes in the system. F. The local health officer or his /her designated agent may, at his /her discretion, allow reduction in design flow for proven, permanently installed water conservation devices. Reduction rates will be based on flow rate information supplied to the local health department for comparison with standard accepted rates for each fixture that utilizes water conservation devices. G. The local Health Officer or designated agent may, at their discretion, require an increase of average daily flow of up to 100 gal /person /day for large or more costly dwellings. 5 CCR 1003 -6 TILE CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS • • BOA 3/16/98 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS • EQITRST: Administrative appeal of the Building Official's decision to issue three (3) building permits and the associated permits APPELLANT: Carbondale Corporation, Town of Carbondale DESCRIPTION OF THE APPEAL A. DI111DING OFFICIAL ACTION: On February 13, 1998, Mark Bean, Director of the Building & Planning Department and the County Building Official, approved the issuance of three (3) building permits to the Buffalo Ranch, LLC. The permits were issued for Lots 3 and 60, Block 5 and for Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, along� the applicable individual sewage disposal system permits. (See enclosed pgs. 7' 53 ) The permits were issued for manufactured homes, 27' wide by 40' long or a total of 1080 sq. ft.. Each dwelling is three bedrooms and two baths. The Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision is located to the east of Carbondale, in area that has been the subject of debate for a number of years. (See enclosed map) The original plat was filed in 1965 and was not subject to any subdivision review, since there were no subdivision regulations in effect in Garfield County at that time. B. APPEAL BASIS: The Carbondale Corporation and the Town of Carbondale both submitted letters appealing the issuance of the previously noted building permits. (See letters pgs. 55 - 57_) The Carbondale Corporation's appeal is based upon Section 108.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code (UBC), which requires that all work be accessible for the required inspections. (See enclosed pg. 5 $' 4 4 ). The Town of Carbondale cites Section 503.1 of the 1994 UBC, which requires buildings to have access to a public way. In both appeals, the lack of access is based upon the question of legal access to the Aspen Crystal River Estates, which is the subject of litigation at this time. II. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Section 9.04 , Administrative Appeal and Interpretation reads as follows: 9.04.01 Applications: Appeals to the Zoning Board of Adjustment ( "Board ") may be taken by any person aggrieved by his inability to obtain a permit (other than a Special Use Permit), or by the decision of any administrative officer or agency based upon or made in the course of the administration or enforcement of the provisions of this Resolution. Appeals may also be taken by any officer, department, board or bureau of the County affected by the grant or refusal of a permit, other than a Special Use Permit, or by other decision of an administrative officer or agency based on, or made in the course of, the administration or enforcement of this Resolution. Appeals to the Board must be made in writing and filed with the Board within seven (7) days of the action or decision appealed and a copy shall be given by the appellant to any official or agency from which the appeal is taken. A timely appeal stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from, unless any officer or agency from whom the appeal is taken certifies tot eh Board, after the notice of appeal shall have been filed with him, that by reason of the facts stated in the certificate, a stay, in his opinion, would cause imminent peril to life and property, in which case proceedings shall not be stayed otherwise than by a restraining order which may be granted by a court of record or the Board upon proper application. No restraining order shall be issued by the Board except after notice to the officer or agency from whom the appeal is taken and only if due cause is shown. 9.04.02 Action by the Board of Adjustment: The Board shall have the powers and duties to hear and decide appeals as set forth in Section 9.05.03 of this Resolution. The concurring vote of four (4) members of the Board shall be necessary to reverse any order, requirement, decision or determination of any administrative official or agency or to decide in favor of the appellant. B. I Jniform Building Code:: As noted previously, Section 108.1 states that it "shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense entailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow inspection." As a part of the issuance of the permit, the applicants were required to sign a statement acknowledging that it is their responsibility to insure that the property is accessible pursuant to Section 108.1 of the 1994 UBC. (See statement pg.(eal ) Staff was aware of the court case 97 -CV- 199 -C, in which a number of property owners in the Aspen Crystal River Estates (ACRE) are attempting to condemn access into the subdivision. Staff has taken the position that it is the court's responsibility to determine whether or not the access to ACRE is or will be I • valid. The applicant has acknowledged that responsibility by signing the previously noted notice. Additionally, the County Building Department was allowed to access an ACRE lot for the purpose of inspecting a structure that had been permitted by the County for a remodel. The permit is still active and will be subject to inspection requests this spring. The Town of Carbondale has cited Section 503.1 of the 1994 UBC as a basis for the denial of the building permits.. The section states "buildings shall join or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one side." Section 1001.2 defines public way as " any street, alley or similar parcel of land essentially unobstructed from the ground to the sky which is deeded, dedicated or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for public use and having a clear width of not less than 10 feet (3048 mm)." (See enclosed pg.43'424 ) The Aspen Crystal River Estates plat includes the following language in the dedication statement: "....and do dedicate and set apart all of the streets as shown on the accompanying plat to the public forever ". (See enclosed pg. 45 ) All of the lots subject to the appeal have access to a "public way" on at least one side. Staff believes that the applications meet the intent of the language in question. Again, whether or not the public ways shown on the ACRE plat connect with other public ways is the subject of the preciously noted litigation. C. Individual Sewage Disposal Systems: Any application for building permit requested in an area that does not have access to a central sewage treatment facility is required to make application for an individual sewage disposal system (ISDS) permit. All three of the applications included an ISDS permit application. At this time it is unknown as to whether any special design requirements will have to be incorporated into the final design. This will be determined after a percolation test is performed by the County, to establish whether or not the soil in the area of the development can meet the parameters allowed by regulation for a standard septic tank and leach field. D. Water Supply: The Town of Carbondale questions the supply of water for the proposed building permits. There is no specific requirement for the issuance of a building permit regarding the source of water for a residential structure. As a part of the final inspection, a water supply has to be in place that will allow the household water using appliances to function at the time of the inspection. A cistern has been used and are presently used as a source of water for some residential structures in the County today. To answer the question in the Town's letter; yes a cistern could be considered as a source of domestic water in the Satank area if it provided the water necessary to operate a house in the area. —3 • € a N R a co r R o' R a H r + I iiff G . nit]) CO co o �� _' '' g IN 0 . 0 O O J (:1.1. r 01 i 2 $ i F Y a y W W S r w I-4 w VD CO �O 0 rn rn .. F s ' • BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION • GARFIELD COUNTY. COLOR ADO • Applicant to complete numbered spaces only. PERMIT NO. G G/Y / PARCEUSCHED NO. Joe ADORERS x--11 �} Cr //VC C /J / L ' O � T NO. 1 BLOCK J SUBO N. /s Lw .. s /A r GSI4ICS DESCR. 2 OWNER 8Lr� /o �., k LL L. ADDRESS Po VOX _22IeIKbsel / (� PH ' e l 41. hrit' WICPHO° .9Sgfl qC 3 CONTRACTOR 87,19&f / � m /S ADDRESS Mee* e1 Al 4, PH9 &/- LICENSE NO. YV � G µ5c8 N04�3 IG 4 ARCHITECT OR DESNER /'�/ ADDRESS PH. LICENSE NO. 5 ENGINEER Co 414_, 0145•1 Motstc.S ADDRE 3S PH. LICENSE NO. L as - ISM NO. 6 S.F OF BUILDING O So 3FOFI.OT 32 Al I / / / 7 USE OF BUILDING QCsA M I . 8 CUSS Or wow y4EW °ADDITION °ALTERATION °REPAIR o MOVE °REMOVE 9 OESCRI,*woRc S4 yvol cpJ'( �.A.RV 4L4U1c/f /704,4, ot_ Gintr(MHN'C. - 1qU Li 10 GARAGE SINGLE DOUBLE CARPORT SINGLE DOUBLE / DRIVEWAY PERMIT ON SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT SITE PLAN p 11 VALUATION or WORK: S ADJUSTED VAL.S PLAN CHECK FEE p /, 0 q PERMIT FEE /0.75/, 73 O � / SPECIAL CONDITIONS./ 49 76 % X 4, �. = f0 40 . oU SCHOOL IMPACT FEE NO. OF BUILDINGS ON U "= OF BUILDINGS NOW ON PARCEL PA_.CEL R I / L CC /-� .! n .ate o 'iA. / .a�•t.. - Y a TOTAL F , 7C p r OCC. OR.$ 3 CO.IST. TYPET / i ar ',/ 7 �C 6 - - - �- ( E • A WATER SUPPLY DATE PERMIT ISSUED .2 - / 3 -98 SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL. PLUMBING, HEATING, SRECNt APPROVALS REQUIRED RECEIVED NOT REQUIRED VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS ZONING NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS, OR F CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS ' COMMENCED. HEALTH DEPT. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED 11 APPLICATION ANO KNOW . THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS Of LAWS AND ORDINANCES FIRE DEPT. GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT OOFS NOT PRESUME TO GNE SOIL REPORT AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING CONSTRUCTION OR THE PERFORMANCE OF SETBACKS +TRUCTI0N ; f.WO 12a. .LLL L i Date •• tSR • ern..w ` FLOOD HAZARD ► i �j l �►'7.- n .� /L, e nEereroatl ' ' ..i 9. P . MANUF. HOME 0.200.00 Bulks • Depenn *nt ... • to • Plane • • ant AppropWele R(r _ OTHE / SD. 0 D AGREEMENT PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO THE ArPLICANT AS OWNER, CONTRACTOR AND /OR THE AGENT OF THE CONTR CTOR OR OWNER TO CONSTRUCT THE STRUCTURE AS DETAILED 011 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITTED TO AND REVIEWED BY THE BUIL' :ING DEPARTMENT IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT TI IE SIGNER HEREBY AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL BUILDING "ODES AND LAND USE REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY GARFIELD COUNTY PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GIVEN IN 30.28.201 CRS AS AMENDED. IIIE SIGNER FURTHER AGREES THAT IF THE ABOVE SAID ORDINANCES ARE NOT FULLY COMPLIED WITH IN THE LOCATION, ERECTION, CONS 1 '1UCTION AND USE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STRUCTURE. THE PERMIT MAY THEN BE REVOKED BY NOTICE FROM THE COUNTY AND THA THEN AND THERE IT SHALL BECOME NULL AND VOID. THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT BASED UPON TLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BU ' DING OFFICIAL FROM THEREAFTER REQUIRING THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA OR FROM • REVENTING BUILDING OPERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OF THIS CODE OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR 2EGULATION OF THIS JURISDICTION. THE REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED PLANS AtID SPECIFICATIONS AND INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED THEREAFTER DOES 'ROT CONSTITUTE AN ACCEPTANCE OF ANY RESPONSIBILITIES OR UABILITIES BY GARFIELD COUNTY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR I ICREPANCIES. THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE ITEMS AND IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONSTRUCTION RESTS SPECIFICALLY WITH THE A "CHITECT, DESIGNER, BUILDER AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND IN SUPPORT OF THE OWNERS INTEREST. l 6 Garlorrn.003 I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE AGREEMENT ABOVE (INITIA - . 1 �( ¢o?81,C9 / -a3 -9 — S • ' 64116 5 (0 67 y NOTICE This notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield County will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the structure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. At the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the review of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the building permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, if the applicable work has been done by the County. To do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department must be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If Garfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will not complete the final inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Further, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance or the permit will become void. A new building permit will have to be obtained to start or continue any work. The above statements are acknowledged by: {raio n4-l.A • Nam P ate This signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject to the above statements sr (co • • • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING 970 - 945 -8212 MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS for SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTION including NEW CONSTRUCTION MANUFACTURED HOMES ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS and MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the issuance of a permit it is important that complete information be provided. Adequate and complete information will prevent delays in the plan review process. Reviewing a plan and the discovery that required information has not been provided by the applicant may result in the delay of the permit issuance and in proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor may be required to provide this information before the plan review may proceed. This causes delays because other plans that are in line for review may be given attention before the new information may be reviewed after it has been provided to the Building Department. Please review this document to determine if you have enough information to design your project and provide adequate information to facilitate a plan review. If you do not, it may be helpful to obtain a book titled "Dwelling Construction under the Uniform Building Code ". This book is available to you through this department at our cost. Also, please consider using a design professional for assistance in your design and a construction professional for construction of your project. To provide for a more understandable plan in order to determine compliance with the building, plumbing and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following check list prior to and during design. Applicants are require to indicate appropriately and to submit the completed check list at time of application for a permit. For the placement of a manufactured home, questions numbers 1 -4 and 19 -28 are the only questions that need to be addressed: ` ?er • • 1. Is a site plan included that indicates the distances of the proposed building or addition to property lines, other byiidings, set back easements and utility easements? Yes V 2. Does the site plan include the location of the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and the distances to property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent properties), streams or water course . Yes 3. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing the property? Yes Y / 4. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the uniform building code or per stamped engineered design? Yes 5. Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes 6. Do the plans indicate the size and location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes 7. Do the plans include design loads as required under the Uniform Building Code for roof snow loads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot in Garfield County), floor loads and wind loads? Yes 8. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor and roof construction? Yes 9. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes 10. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns and beams? Yes • • 11. Does the plan indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the highest point of the building or addition measured at mid span between the ridge and the eave down to existing grade contours? Yes 12. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and model and Colorado Phase II certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes No 13. Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the Uniform Building Code Chapter 37? Yes No 14. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress /rescue windows from sleeping rooms and/or basements comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code? Yes No 15. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for all habitable rooms? Yes No 16. Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface normally used as a walking surface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub enclosures and specify safety glazing for these areas? Yes No 17. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on the plan? Yes No 18. Do you understand that if you belong to a homeowners association, it is your responsibility to obtain written permission fro the association, if required by that association, prior to submitting an application for a building permit? Yes No 19. Will this the only residential structure on the parcel? Yes No If no- Explain: 20. Have two (2 mplete sets of construction drawings been submitted with the application? Yes - 9- • 21. Is this ar/plication for the placement of a manufactured home? Yes iV� No If yes, have you specified the size of the unit (min. 20ft. x 20ft); live roof load (min. 40 #); wind design (min. wind speed of 80 mph & 15 lb. wind load); foundation design; method of anchoring? Yes J/ 22. Have you designed or had this plan designed while considering building and other construction code requir ents? Yes No 23. Does the plan accurately indicate what you intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection he Garfield County Building Department? Yes by No 24. Do you under and that approval f o r design and/or construction changes are required ri u r to the applicatiot these changes? _ Yes No 25. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review" fee from you at the time of appli tion and that you will be required to pay the "Permit Fee" as well as any "School Impact" or eptic System" fees required, at the time you pick up your building permit? Yes No 26. Are you aware that twenty four (24) hour notice is required for all inspections? Inspections will be made from Battlement Mesa to West Glenwood in the mornings and from Glenwood Springs to Carbondale in the afternoon. Morning inspections must be called in by 12:00 p.m. the day before; afternoon inspections must be called in by 5:00 p.m. the day before. Failure to give twenty four (24) hour notice for inspections will delay your inspection one (1) day ? / Yes No 27. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the Uniform Building Code including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the building? Yes No 28. Are you aware that the person signing the Permit Application, whether the "Owner ", "Agent of the Owner ", "General Contractor ", "Contractor" or otherwise, is the party responsible for the project plying with the Uniform Building Code? Yes I No alb o, • • I hereby acknowledge that I have read, understand and answered these questions to the best of my ability. 3� � ��/ 9 g signatu . griar ALL ✓Yle_k ff date Phone: / ?'SY & (days); l� °3 ) r43- 591/ (evenings) Project Name: By f ish j ' it 3 j I l Project Address: L`1 3 54 4-( Is C 1 1Sf Notes: If you have answered "No" on any of the questions, you may be required to provide this information at the request of the Building Official prior to beginning the plan review process. Delays in issuing the permit are to be expected. Work may not proceed without the issuance of a permit. If it is determined by the Building Official that additional information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum compliance with the adopted codes; the application may be placed behind more recent applications for building permits in the review process and not reviewed until required information has been provided and the application rotates again to first position for review. delay in issuance of the permit or delay in proceeding with construction. PerApp02.95 Effective August 15, 1995 11111111111111111111111111111111111 11 l f ifl 11 n1 HIM] • • 5 37 01/08/1996 04:07P 61049 P666 fl RLSDORF 1 R 6.00 D 0.60 GARFIELD COUNTY CO • WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, Made this 19th dry of December , 1997 , between En ZrXXEXXEREKEKERXAIE SANTA MARIE ECBAEFER of the said County of Clay end State of MISSOURI , grantor, and JEFFREY M. PARKER DOC FEE $.60 whose kpl eddreu is P .0. BOX 221 CARBONDAI.E, CO 81623 of the said County of GARFIELD and State of COLORADO , grantee: WITNISSCTII, Thu the grantor for and in consideration of the sum of Teo dolls r• and other good and valuable consideration DOLLARS. the receipt end sufficiency of which Is hereby acknowledged, hit granted. bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does pant, bargain. sell. convey and confirm, unto the grantee, hie heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together with Improvements, if any, situate. lying and being in the said County or GARFIELD and State of Colorado described as follows: LOT 3 BLOCK 5 ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO OARFIELD COUNTY ASSESSORS NO1 2463- 021 -04 -003 PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY Jae known by street and cumber as: TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditament. sad appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders. rents, Issues end profits thereof, and all the mute, right, title. Interest, claim and demand what- soever of the grantor, either In law er equity, nL in and to the above bargained premise., with the hereditament. and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND T01101,0 the aid premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances. unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns fo . And the grantor, for himself, his heirs, and personal representatives, does covenant. grant, bugain, and egret to and with the grantee, his heirs and 'gas, that at the time of the ensaling and delivery of these presents. he is well seined 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 hwful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form u aforesaid, and that the tune are free end clear from all Conner and other grants. bargains. sales, liens, Inc., assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature eocver, except re•trictlon• , ruervationa and right• of way of record, or •itu•t• and in use, and real property tare• for the year 1997, not yet due or payable. The grantor shall and will WARRANTY AND FOREVER DEFEND the above - bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee. Ms heirs sad assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singuler number shall Include the plural. the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WIIEREOF, the grantor has executed this dead on the date sea forth above. R01181XE MIL X K97171 5 A MARIE S DAEFER A. f;'1= State of MISSOURI ) u. County of / • f///.cJ�' ) /p The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this deg er � � `( n1_ 2_' /7 N by R*IMI1Tf)SX)WdSY&*F �JW (dfl Santa Marla !Poet( ar NNNSSS Q N My commission eipirc. , 97. , 9 er . Witness my hand anofficial sal. • • j • v Notary r ic; , • — m.n.. nmwl mrvn 7auwam.w.urna� I.e. Return to: Jeffrey N. Parker n.. ulA WARIUwfr Oren See nste sphle Rwm) P.O. Box 221 1n1 Carbondale, CO 81623 at r / - - - - - ---- - --- / 0 / _ ,--- _-----____ Sao c vo0E- v .----- - \ / 5 ( ctFS __---- 1/ �3 Witc---_____% 'CO 2 6 vcve. \ \` REQUIRED BULDING SET BACKS — p \ \ / ,zo 4- / 2' WIDE GRAVEL !' +E 0 � ��1�E MG N\ NOTE. , , BUILDER WILL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM SEPARATION OF 100' BETWEEN THE SEPTIC SYSTEM AND THE WELL. BELL COUNTRY HOMES PROJECT SITE PLAN P.O. BOX 229 LOT 3. BLOCK 5 NEW CASTLE. CO 81647 ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES (9701 984 -3500 GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO JANUARY 21. 1998 PREPARED FOR: BUFFALO RANCH. LLC _i • y vim' / / i M • cac \ ' REQUIRED bULDING SET BACKS ---,\ 0) \ ) \ / • pv+a v 1/ WIDE GRAVEL r 1 E • 8 CO NOTE: el BUILDER WILL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM SEPARATION OF 100' BETWEEN THE SEPTIC SYSTEM AND THE WELL. BELL COUNTRY HOMES PROJECT SITE PLAN P.O. BOX 229 LOT 3. BLOCK 5 NEW CASTLE. CO 8164? ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES 19 701 984 -3500 GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO JANUARY 21. 1998 PREPARED FOR: BUFFALO RANCH. LLC .. 1i. 5 • r N �� N 8 $.-1 il a l 4 R N C ' o to On _I E I I � b ui in o n b; Iiii lit)--al \Z»\ • / \ // ) / \ \ /� \\ iN 00 } / ....2 ® < ( \ / u, --I 9aw9 g - - n 'c -Oa: < r\\\ A)§ // 7 » —C Z ) V60 s / 7 \/ Ri § $. \] c iiZ z \ - . \|1II k \ \ - -�} ill G\ \\ Z • E \s \\ \\ m\ % _ r m/ r& 2 ` k /? CO > +0 I, Pi \ ƒ / \ TZ { > \ � \ \ \ \ ' _Li R 0 - & ] a �0 J x 4 - / a / \ Z _ 0 \ 0 0 &H - 4 �� w \/ 0 / -3 e m > . G / 9 0 • • V ; • ) •01 E '•• • Owl 0 ..r w M BATH • a 4. izi q I e � I u Opt c.u., —a 8 } , t q �T0.JTY. ia 2 . mtnp a • � F i 9 _ O i D y XI I Z q 3 33 CO I so • O a ; p 1 F # N $ ei y 1 .---4 $ s 4. Opt Vonpuw • • • . wp tri le • • • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2912 109 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No. Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone (303) 945 This does not constitute INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT a building or use permit. PROPERTY Owner's Name Buffalo) Ranch T.TC' Present Address P.O. Box 221, Carbc ldalephone 947 -5184 System Location lot 3, Block 5, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Carbondale Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. SYSTEM DESIGN Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other Percolation Rate (minutes /inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3 Required Absorption Area - See Attached Special Setback Requirements: Date Inspector FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed) Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation System Installer Septic Tank Capacity Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface Absorption Area Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements Other Date Inspector RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE •CONDITIONS: 1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter 25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. 2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con- nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit. 3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual sewage disposal system in a manner which Involves a knowing and material variation from the terms or specif ications contained in the application of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense (5500.00 fine — 6 months In Jail or both). White - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT eta / g INDIVIDUJOSEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM AP•CATION ER igiga / / DDRESS P© 66 ax 2 2 1 Cir6o L £1623 PHONE 9y 7 - SIS J CONTRACTOR {Fa f d R G t". -L L. L C— ADDRESS PU (3 v ? [ 2 z I / (w 6o S/6Z3 PHONE 9y 7 �.rl PERMIT REQUEST FOR (NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4). LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY: Near what City of Town 6- c-60mAL Size of Lot 3 2 1 -/ / lt) Legal Description or Address Ai 3 g /e)(1.c /�s, Crc{ . 541 Rpe-P WASTES TYPE: ( (,DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: /26,C id ,...41/.1 Number of Bedrooms 3 Number of Persons 3-LI ( Garbage Grinder („A'Automatic Washer (&)' Dishwasher 5011RCE AND TYPE OF WATER SI IPPI,Y: ( jr4ELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: 2 ti.. S Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? /VC A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the following MINIMIJM distances: Leach Field to Well: 100 feet Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet Septic System to Property Lines: 10 feet YOUR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WIIJ, NOT BR ISSUED WITHOUT A SITE PLAN, (1ROINND CONDITIONS; Depth to first Ground Water Table_ Percent Ground Slope 3 7P S/ se 19 • I ' iE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: • 4" SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT VAULT PRIVY ( ) VAULT ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE ( ) NT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE ( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( ) 0 fHER - DESCRIBE FINAL DISPOSAL BY: ( VABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT ( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) EVAPOTRANSPIRATION ( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE ( ) WASTEWATER POND WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? / U PERCOLATION TEST REST it n (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the Percolation Test) Minutes per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes ----- _._per inch in hole NO. 3 Minutes ____________per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. _ Name, address and telephone of RPE who mach soil absorption tests: Name, address and telephone of RPE rest onsible for design of the system: "applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and .dditional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the pplicant or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the ;emit is subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations jade, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be _presented to be true and correct to the hest of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the Kcal department of health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further Jerstand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any emit granted based upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law. 80.112/0 Ri..„ci LL C._ fined Lad / �ll JA Rtw,I- Date 9 -EASE DRAVWAN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! 9 . • .. No. 6615 GARM&L) COUNTY BUILDING, SANITA11ON and PLANNINGDEPARTMENT 109 8th Street Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (303) 945-8212 Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Carbondale Job Address Nature of Work Building Permit Use of Building Manu. Hone Ofl Fmmdati rn Owner Buffalo Ranch LLC Contractor Pp11 (bnntry Hansa Amount of hermit 8 405.84 Date February 13, 1998 Permit: 124.75 Plan : 81.09 Set Up Fee : 200.00 Paid $81.09 1 -23 -98 S. Archuleta Clerk FO LDING PERMIT API CATION • GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORAI p licp ont to corn ete numbered spa PARCEUSCHED NO. Joe ADORED /1 c 1 L EGAL I LOT NO. Z - I BLOB( SUBDNI^.ION A Ca spe -0-> rs ro L !21 V r 2 ES rr4 S Dam. • 2 0 60 WAL 1 QAA (J ADDRESS .� 6 • oK ?..24 4 ..-"` . -1. Log., - 81' 9% erai 3 CONTRACTORtu aortal, ADDRESS'.0•Bcg z29 rASyyc = r A / LICENSE NO. 4 ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER Lo A A nti t .7 ADDRESS PH. LICENSE NO. 5 ENGINEER ADDRE 38 PH. LICENSE NO. 6 S.F OF BUILDING / D 8.F OF LOT 3/ 7 00 IlErt NO. OF FLOORS t 7 USE OP PURDING erArn A � g tuna wwlc (NEW °ADDITION °ALTERATION °REPAIR oMOVE a REMOVE 9 °'°" . go CODE MANOrflcfl nq? 4o.nc t pznnarl V c0111 itti oa 10 GARAGE SINGLE DOUBLE CARPORT SINGLE DOUBLE DRIVEWAY PERMIT ON SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT SITE PLAN MINIS 11 Wan/ Of YORK' S ADJUSTED .S PLAN CHECII FEE S/ 0 9 l PERMIT /a �( 7'( O l SPECW. conromNIS: /O8()�/ (, , 69yo_Ob SCHOOL IMF ACT FEE NO. OF BUILDINGS ON US'OF BUILDINGS NOW ON PARCEL PAI'. ^EL TOTAL ' (.73:14 OCC. OR. 4)3 � TYPE (� NOTICE WATER SUE' LY DATE PERMIT ISSUED OS -/ Aza tinie SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING, SRecw An -ovue REWIRED RECEMO Na REQUIRED VENTILATING OR NR CONDITIONING. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED LS ZONING NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS. OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK I5 SUSPENDED - OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. HEALTH OEI I. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT 1 HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE MID CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES FIRE DEPT. GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE SOILREPOR' AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW R COE OR THE PERFORMMICE Of SETBACKS CONSTRUC y7,{c✓o AL+.. l (Date) 0147? FLOOD HAL'RD Signature or , Contractor or Wloriz .` -nt MN • r • understood n• • 5.. .. ) n `ll Are4aL f' 7 MANUF.HOI'E (/IJI a `• • trading Mlenl Approaltlal� r , Planning DepeMlent Appr nvdaI �j' OTHER _ / '+° Q 0 AGREEMENT c? 1 3 ERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT AS OWNER, CONTRACTOI' AND /OR THE AGENT OF THE CONTRT CTOR OR OWNER TO ONSTRUCT THE STRUCTURE AS DETAILED ON PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITTED TO AND REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1 CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT THE SIGNER HEREBY AC !EES TO COMPLY WITH ALL BUILDING CODES AND LAND USE EGULATIONS ADOPTED BY GARFIELD COUNTY PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GIB -N IN 30.28.201 CRS AS AMENDED. 111E SIGNER FURTHER GREES THAT IF THE ABOVE SAID ORDINANCES ARE NOT FULLY COMPLIED WITI IN THE LOCATION, ERECTION, CONSI-?UCTION AND USE OF HE ABOVE DESCRIBED STRUCTURE. THE PERMIT MAY THEN BE REVOKED BY 1OTICE FROM THE COUNTY AND THA' THEN AND THERE IT HALL BECOME NULL AND VOID. HE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT BASED UPON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHF! DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BU' DING OFFICIAL FROM HEREAFTER REQUIRING THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIFI ATIONS AND OTHER DMA OR FROM I REVENTING BUILDING PERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OF THIS C IDE OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR 'LEGULATION OF THIS JRISDICTION. HE REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND INSPECTK 145 CONDUCTED THEREAFTER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN CCEPTANCE OF ANY RESPONSIBILITIES OR tJABILITIES BY GARFIELD COUI FY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR 4 THE 'ESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE ITEMS AND IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONSTRUCT DN RESTS SPECIFICALLY WITH THE A 'ICHITECT, DESIGNER, UILDER AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND IN E- OF THE OWNERS INTEREST. arlorm.003 I HEREBY ACKNO LEDGGiTHAT 1 HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE AGREEMENT ABOVE JINITIA! , 1 1 04. 1 1 p.( t oq / a3 -yY .• • • . • GARFIELD COUNTY Building and Planning Department February 11, 1998 Buffalo Ranch L.L.C. c/o Jeff Parker P.O. Box 221 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Building Permit applications Dear Mr. Parker: Please consider this letter to be a written summary of our phone conversation on February 10, 1998, regarding three (3) building permit applications requested by the Buffalo Ranch L.L.C.. As I noted, the applications have been reviewed and approved by the Building and Planning Department, and are ready for you to pick up and pay the remaining fees. As I noted in the conversation, I would encourage you not to pay the remaining fees and pick up the permits, until you are convinced that there is no other alternative available. At a minimum, I would suggest waiting until after the March 18t meeting in Carbondale to discuss the issues revolving around the Te -Ke -Ki and Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivisions. Your permits will need to be paid for and issued within 90 days of this letter, which should give everyone ample opportunity to try and come to an agreement that will satisfy all of the interested parties. If you chose to pick up the permits before there is any resolution of these issues, you will be required to sign the statement that I faxed down to you yesterday. A copy of the statement is enclosed for your review. Basically, the statement is acknowledging that the County Building Department is not responsible for gaining legal access to the property for inspection purposes. If access is not available, it may result in the invalidation of the building permits. If there is any difference in your understanding of our conversation, please let me know. Sincerely, n tLipiezei Director Building & Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945-8212/285 -7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 _ e23 _ • ir NOTICE This notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield County will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the structure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. At the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the review of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the building permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, if the applicable work has been done by the County. To do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department must be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If Garfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will not complete the fmal inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Further, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance or the permit will become void. A new building permit will have to be obtained to start or continue any work. The above statements are acknowledged by: D e This signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject to the above statements • Z • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING MINIMUM API'LICATION REQUIREMENTS for SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTION including NEW CONSTRUCTION MANUFACTURED HOMES ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS and MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the issuance of a permit it is important that complete information be provided. Adequate and complete information will prevent delays in the plan review process. Reviewing a plan and the discovery that required information has not been provided by the applicant may result in the delay of the permit issuance and in proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor may be required to provide this information before the plan review may proceed. This causes delays because other plans that are in line for review may be given attention before the new information may be reviewed after it has been provided to the Building Department. Please review this document to determine if you have enough information to design your project and provide adequate information to facilitate a plan review. If you do not, it may be helpful to obtain a book titled "Dwelling construction under the Uniform Building Code. This book is available to you through this department at our cost. Also, please consider using a design professional for assistance in your design and a construction professional for construction of your project. To provide for a more understandable plan in order to determine compliance with the building, plumbing and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following check list prior to and during design. Applicants are required to indicate appropriately and to submit completed check list at time of application for a permit: For the placement of a manufactured home, questions numbers 1 -4 and 19 -28 are the only questions that need to be addressed: • 1. Is a site plan included that indicates the distance of the proposed building or addition to property lines, other buildings, set back easements and utility easements? Yes )C No (,) Not necessary for this project (2) 2. Does the site plan include the location of the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and the distances to property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent properties) , streams or watercourses? Yes C No (u Not necessary for this project (2) • 3. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing the property? Yes )C No (1) Not necessary for this project a) 4. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the uniform building code or per stamped engineered design? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project a, 5. Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes No (,) Not necessary for this project (2) 6. Do the plans indicate the size an location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes No (,) Not necessary for this project a) 7. Do the plans include design loads as required under the Uniform Building code for roof snow loads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot in Garfield County) floor loads and wind loads? Yes No (,) Not necessary for this project (2) 8. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor and roof construction? Yes No n) Not necessary for this project (2) 9. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes No 0) Not necessary for this project (2) 10. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns and beams? Yes No (,) Not necessary for this project (2) • 11. Does the plan indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the highest point of the building or addition measured at mid span between the ridge and the eave down to existing grade contours? Yes No m Not necessary for this project (2) 1?. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and model and Colorado Phase II certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes No c+, Not necessary for this project (2) 13. Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the Uniform Building Code Chapter 37? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project a) ' 4. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress /rescue windows from sleeping rooms and/or basements comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code? Yes No (u Not necessary for this project (2) 15. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for all habitable rooms? Yes No c „ Not necessary for this project a) 16. Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface normally used as a walking s' rrface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub enclosures acrd specify safety glazing for these areas? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project m 17. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on the plan? Yes No ( I ) Not necessary for this project (2) 18 Do you understand that if you belong to a homeowners association, it is your responsibility to obtain written permission from that association, if required by that association, prior to submitting an application for a building permit? Yes No ( 1 ) Not necessary for this project a) 19. Will this be the only residential structure on the parcel? Yes p No If No- Explain • • 20. Have two (2) complete sets of constructions drawings been submitted with the application? Yes No No _ (,) Not necef sary for this project (2) 21. Is this an application for the placement c a manufactured home? Yes K No If yes, have you specified the site of t'ie unit (min. 20ft x 20ft); live roof load (min.40#); wind design (min. wind speed f 80 mph & 15 Ib. wind load); foundation design; method of anchoring? Yes k No (1) not nece• sary for this project (2) 2 ?. Have you designed or had this play) desip led while considering building and other construction code requirements? Yes )C No (3) 3. Does the plan accurately indicate what yo intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by the Garfield Buildin I Department? Yes X No (3) 4. Do you understand that approval for lesign and /or construction changes are required prior to the application of these changes? Yes 'X No m 25. Do you understand that the Building Eh nartment will collect a "Plan Review' fee from you at the time of applicatioi) and tl at you will be required to pay the "Permit Fee" as well as any "School impact" or "Septic system " fees required, at the time ydu pick up your building permit? Yes � No a) 26. Are you aware that twenty four (24) hoer notice is required for all inspections? Inspections will be made from Battlement Mesa to West Glenwood in the mornings and from Glenwood Springs to Carbondale In the afternoon. Morning inspections must be called in by 12:00 p.m. the day before; afternoon inspections must be called in by 5:00 p.m. the day before . Failure to give 24 hour notice for inspections will delay your inspection one (1) day. Yes X No 27. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the Uniform Building Code including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the building? Yes X No ___ • .• 28. Are yr, r aware that the person signing the Permit Application whether the "Owner ", "Agent of the Owner ", "General Contractor", "Contractor" or otherwise, signing the application is the party responsil)le for the project complying with the Uniform Codes" Yes/ No m I hereby acknowledge that I have read, understand and answered these questions accurately to the best of my ability. 6 /Lk 1ZM-J fie 3A g sign ure ���>. t✓ �� � �� date • Phone: 24 7 '� 1 ( days); ( ° y� (evenings) Project Name: r,I' l Project Address: io/ 44 6 /4- g ipc (t)uml R1 cr 4545 Notes: (1) If you have a' -veered "No' on any of these questions y m may be required to provide this Information at the request of the Building Official priors beginning the plan review process. Deinys In Issuing the permit art to be expected. Work may not proceed without the issuance of the permit. (2) If yob have answered "Not necessary for this project" on any of the questions and k Is determined by the Building Official that the Information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum compliance with the adopted codes, please expect the following: A. The application may be placed behind nLore recent applications for building permits In the review process and not reviewed until required information has b en provided and the application rotates again to first position for review. B. Delay in issuance of the permit. C. Delay in proceeding with construction. (3) If you answered "No' to this question the circumstance ; described In the question could result In a "Stop Work Order" being issued or a "Certificate of Occupancy' not being Issued. PerApp02.95 Effective August 15, 1995 ift • • WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made this Z R„A day of Jn&vc.r t.f ,19 q8 , between J`cf PARkER AkA f p4 P t— of the • County of CA.etrtl'^ and State or C c,l0 rY'+ , grantors) and L �— C 5 vff•Io &a..& whose legal address is PO 60X 22 I, CAg6°A)DA4E,/'p �f (62 3 E t =M L of the County of 64 r fie-aN and State of Col° o , grantee(s): WITNESS. that the grantods), for and in consideration of the sum of Teu ace(2ro CLs.Gl Ot'hf+-9 00 avd valu Wok 1e6i 4Qe'L/TOy/ DOLLARS. the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, haf granted, bargained. sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant. bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the grantee(s), ,ft heirs and assigns forever, gjilt the real property. together with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the County of 6t, rCc_ k State of Colorado, described as follows: / L ol A2 6ioe,k b ASPeh ( River_ £STATE( also known by street and number as: ,(///1 assessor's schedule or parcel number. Ala I -021 -0 -0L 2 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditament, and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, 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(s), either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with to hereditaments and appurtenances; '113 HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee(s), heirs and assigns forever. The grantor(s), for 21i•• sel j al1 heirs and personal representatives. do covenant. grant. bargain and agree to and with the grantee(s). TAeir heirs and assigns. that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, ling a well seized or the premises above conveyed, have. good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and ha ve. good right, full power and 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 kind or nature soever, except Now- The grantor(s) shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable posses- sion of the granteets). Fry heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. IN WIT I , the grantor(s) ha $ executed this deed on the date set forth above. PAR le e2 AV JFFPERV W»#ff hP CAIPer2 _ y �� .G� STATE OF COLORADO r + Q 6 i ! s 1 " Ito O is in' County or Pieta' r ''1,0\ e\ � �j' l •. ...... f The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this V y day of J k } 0 . . RHQO --fog Q M 3kfc R2rear AkA Je FFre v Wk ibtc ParicW `••a Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: os&nl g9 'If in Denver. inure "Coy and". / . Pub` e3a- I • • VERY GE! •ILE OOWNSLGPE TOWAROE, FHE SOUTH 1 � EQUIRED BUILDING SET BACKS 0 EXISTING SEED CO CO ��UT PROFUSFD SEPTIC SYSTEM II _ tutt IF-1-1- \ • • I • • • 2 WIDE GRAVEL DRIVE 67 \ SwM� No pRI �E I NOTE: BUILDER WILL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM SEPARATION OF 100' BETWEEN THE SEPTIC SYSTEM AND THE WELL. BELL COUNTR ( HOMES PROJECT SITE PLAN P.O. BOX 229 LOT22. BLOCK 6 NEW CASTLE. CO 81647 ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES (9701 984 - 35000. GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO JANUARY 21. L198 PREPARED FOR: BUFFALO RANCH. LLC _31• • e - Nr .,, ti 8 1 in 1$N s-d i 1 U LII5 I i -{ P ri x L Umi A O I nl 1 . 1 PI 1 1 r I d m I n . .__ __ -3 299 • • wm&e g \ = / \ \/\ | \ &\22 cy 3 & (:_/ ® ] 2 ƒ — > / \ • ® / /| H ® \ \ / \ �, < 7 \ �\ J 0 // \ a \\\� ) 0_2J e /�o d -1 666 . § ri_ H 0£ 2 2 2 \ 2 / • 8 \ } lir / > R . § \ . •'- j 0 / / - � �� \ 29 ea ® J 0\ « 00 *Z s \\ \ / / ny n& o ( ag I i I - e 7 r I \ • ± « C � � 0 2 � . T _Li » o ® / & r-n c � -I >� in \ 2 \ \ e \ >a \ o / \ � � 4tt - I \ C0 0 CID ^ 0 2 / _ . G \ 9 0 _ 33 _ . . ., . • • n �� M8 c I .i __ill I O pt 'Ccc., . 8 - ° F e LUi E " 6 T IIT � _ 4 \— _ _ �. f pnitly { 1 _ _ = t Z A �. I O 0 5 1'w•` E a \_ .._ _ o 0 O ; o C f . V ' -. m bj I : : ;, Opt Woody.; •J'6 13 -6 yt GS • • • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2 913 109 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No. Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81801 Phone (303) 945-8212 This does not constitute INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT a building or use permit. PROPERTY Owner's Name Buffalo Ranch ITL Present Address P.O. Box 221 Carbondale Phone 947 -5184 System Location lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Carbondale Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. SYSTEM DESIGN Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3 Required Absorption Area - See Attached Special Setback Requirements: Date Inspector FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed) Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation System Installer Septic Tank Capacity Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface Absorption Area Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requirements Other Date Inspector RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE *CONDITIONS: 1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter 25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. 2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con- nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit. 3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual sewage disposal system in a manner which involves a knowing and material variation from the terms or specifications contained In the application of permit commits a Class 1. Petty Offense (5500.00 fine — 8 months in jail or both). White - APPLICANT Yellow - DEPARTMENT SS 35 el INDIVIDUAliEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APP•CATION .R . \2a te_ Qa.eu{ LUC- DRESS PO. ZZl eaeecaogt Fth PHONE 94'7 -SYSV /. ONTRACTOR 1 FAco £it -ittgt G(� ADDRESS ?b.C3( zz/ PRtt3o+1o4u-c- PHONE ??Y? -STBV PERMIT REQUEST FOR (K) NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4). LOCATION OF PROPOSF.D FACILITY; Near what City of Town (.19-0o41DO%c - tom Size of Lot 39, 7• 91 Legal Description or Address Lcit zZ , Attar, F, a5r'663 rPvfrsr 2W e2 estA rES WASTES TYPE: (,Q DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: "Oen* n era)r.r: Number of Bedrooms -3 Number of Persons ✓3 ( - Garbage Grinder (4 Automatic Washer ( `), Dishwasher SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SIMPLY (54, WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: Z in Ic-65 Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? Alf) A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the following MINIMUM distances: Leach Field to Well: 100 feet Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet Septic System to Property Lines: 10 feet YOUR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT A SITE PLAN, OROIIND CONDITIONS Depth to first Ground Water Table Percent Ground Slope f /6% 34 • • • • /E OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: /) SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT ( ) VAULT ( \) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE ( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE ( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE FINAL DISPOSAL BY: (A ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT ( ) EVAPOTRANSPIRATION ( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER ( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) WASTEWATER POND ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? PERCOLATION TEST REST MTS. (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the Percolation Test) Minutes per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes per inch in hole NO. 3 Minutes per inch in Bole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. _ Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: Name, address and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system: Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations made, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further understand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law. Signed G Date /l Z �/ e ur /Ur frevu tit- LC. PLEASE DKA all ACCUP ATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! 37 • • • No. 6616 1 GARMELO COUNTY BUILDING, SANITATION and PLANNING DEPARTMENT 109 81b Stroot Suite 303 Gkowood Springs, Colorado 81601 • (303) 945-8212 Job Address Lot 60, Block 5, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Carbondale Nature of Work Building Permit Use of Buildinit ManU. Home On Foundation own= Buffalo Ranch LLC Contractor Pell Country Homes Amount of ['emit s 405.84 Date February 13, 1998 Permit: 124.75 Plan : 81.09 Set Up Fee : 200.00 Paid $81.09 1 -23 -98 S. Archuleta Clerk -3g BUILDING PEW 4IT APPLICATION \ • 1ARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO • .4.. icent to com • ere numbered s •aces on! . PERMIT NO. S PARCEUSCHED NO. JOB ADORERS 1 LEGAL LOT NO BLOCK ( � SUBOMSION A / I / l DEAR. 6 U s I /'/ S'/L,.. C. is EA / (�I .c r ,S V g / / L r `rr 5 ` . L 2 ( / ADDRESSf ?keilaz1 (y rertg-. � at / PH ' 9/i a-s/6�WKPK!SZI.; - &ZI1L 3 CONTRACTOR &A 6 6 ADDRESSPOGO/ 22`1 N,!.!„ (afa Pligirti ?sit LICENSE NO 4 ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER d UJt5j (j, ADDRESS PH. LICENSE NO. 5 ENGINEER Cote& WL${ #e) 44 . . ADDRESS PH. LICENSE NO. // / 4' /J. i/ 6 S.F OF BUILDING //0$ S . li . S.F OF LOT 3/ 45 5, F7 . HEIGHT T NO.OF FLOORS 7 USE OF BUILDING 2 —414 • 8 CLASS O. WORM • o ADDITION °ALTERATION aREPAIR o MOVE O REMOVE • 9 { � Hwy G fi6 NO • e / Lf IMG. -,r— L. . /bk 10 GARAGE SINGLE DOUBLE CARPORT SINGLE DOUBLE DRIVEWAY PERMIT ON SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT SITE PLAN 11 VALRUTpn Of WORK: 3 �/ / ADJUSTED VAL.S PLAN CHECK FEE , • PERMIT FEE H/g r SPECIAL CONDITIONS: /0 go ^ t , . d SCHOOL IMI ACT FEE NO. OF BUILDINGS ON USE OF BUILDINGS NOW ON PARCEL PARCEL l 1 r .: 44 v Q ° ' TOTAL FEE /f f , OCC. GR. li CONST. TYPE / ' NOTICE / 1 ` a WATER SUPPLY DATE PERMIT ISSUED c7 /,3 -- 0 SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUM NG, HEATING. S.EDIU Aevncvus REOOAED RECEIVED Nor REDUeEO VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AtITHORIZED IS ZONING NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS. OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED - OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. HEALTH DEFT. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS AP AND AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS WS AND ORDINANCES FIRE DEPT. MILI GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR N07. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME 70 GIVE SOIL REPORI AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REG TNCE OF U0I B. 1 INA CONSTRUCTION OR THE PERFORMA KAJw-t, I�, (, L L / G 1i SETBACKS CONSTR /( /�_l L `.T /y.�,�,, Derv) � . G S gnature d Owls , RMta Doir 6d e{tenl C i find and derslood notice O we. FLOOD HAZARD d� 2, a l.. 1.u_ . 9 • Z� � : MANUF. HOME ` I 0 0 L Buildingg De. - enl Approve/0 . Planning. ant Approvaldel / d OTHER AGREEMENT / -- -- - - - - --- - - --- .. -- -- PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT AS OWNER, CONTRACTOR AND /OR THE AGENT OF THE CONTRACTOR Or OWNER TO CONSTRUCT THE STRUCTURE AS DETAILED ON PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITTED TO AND REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPP.RTMENT IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT THE SIGNER HEREBY ACREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL BUILDING CODES MID LAND USE REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY GARFIELD COUNTY PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GIVEN IN 30.28.201 CRS AS AMENDED. THE SIGNER FURTHER AGREES THAT IF THE ABOVE SAID ORDINANCES ARE NOT FULLY COMPLIED WITH IN THE LOCATION, ERECTION, CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STRUCTURE. THE PERMIT MAY THEN BE REVOKED BY NOTICE FROM THE COUNTY AND THAT THEN P' ID THERE IT SHALL BECOME NULL AND VOID. THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT BASED UPON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BUILDING OF rICIAL FROM THEREAFTER REQUIRING THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA OR FROM PREVENTI "G BUILDING OPERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OF THIS CODE OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR PEGULA1 4 '3N OF THIS JURISDICTION. THE REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND INSPECTI• - NS CONDUCTED THEREAFTER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ACCEPTANCE OF ANY RESPONSIBILITIES OR UABILITIES BY GARFIELD COU 'TY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR DISCREPANCIES. THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE ITEMS AND IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONSTRUC1 NN RESTS SPECIFICALLY WITH THE ARCHITECT, DESIGNER, BUILDER AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND IN 5 'PPORT OF THE OWNERS INTEREST. Garlorm.003 1 HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDER: TAND THE AGREEMENT ABOVE ;INITIAL J 4, • • . . The following items are required by Garfield County for a final inspection: 1. A final Electrical Inspection from the Colorado State Electrical Inspector; 2. Permanent address assigned by Garfield County Building Departmeh I posted where readily visible from access road; 3. A finished roof, a lockable house, complete exterior siding, exterior doors and windows installed, a complete kitchen with cabinets, a sink with hot & cold running water, non - absorbent kitchen floor coverings, counter tops and finished walls, ready for stove and refrigerator, all necessary plumbing; 4. A complete bathroom, with wash bowl, tub or shower, toilet stool, hot and cold running water, non - absorbent floors and walls finished and a privacy door; 5. All steps outside or inside over three (3) steps must have handrails, guard rails on balconies or decks over 30" high constructed to all 1994 UBC requirements; 6. Outside grading done to where water will detour away from the building; 7. Exceptions to the outside steps, decks and grading may be made upon the demonstration of . extenuating circumstances, i.e. weather, but a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until all the required items are completed and a final inspection made. • A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL THE ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. * ** *Cannot occupy or use dwelling until a Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.) is issued. Occupancy or use of dwelling without a C.O. will be considered an illegal occupancy and may be grounds for vacating premises until above conditions are met. I understand and agree to abide by the above conditions for occupancy, use and the issuance of a Cellificats of Occupancy kr the dwelling under building permit # 6 lo / A . vfikI o1C. al-- Lir Si ture L,L Date f eckv � ‘O 76 NOTICE This notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield County will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the structure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. At the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the review of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the building permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, if the applicable work has been done by the County. To do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department must be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If Garfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will not complete the final inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Further, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance or the permit will become void. A new building permit will have to be obtained to start or continue any work. The above statements are acknowledged by: N. e Hate This signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject to the above statements e �. • 4.. GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS for SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTION including NEW CONSTRUCTION MANUFACTURED HOMES ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS and MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the issuance of a permit it is important that complete information be provided. Adequate and complete information will prevent delays in the plan review process. Reviewing a plan and the discovery that required information has not been provided by the applicant may result in the delay of the permit issuance and in proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor may be required to provide this information before the plan review may proceed. This causes delays because other plans that are in line for review may be given attention before the new information may be reviewed after it has been provided to the Building Department. Please review this document to determine if you have enough information to design your project and provide adequate information to facilitate a plan review. If you do not, it may be helpful to obtain a book titled "Dwelling construction under the Uniform Building Code. This book is available to you through this department at our cost. Also, please consider using a design professional for assistance in your design and a construction professional for construction of your project. To provide for a more understandable plan in order to determine compliance with the building, plumbing and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following check list prior to and during design. Applicants are required to indicate appropriately and to submit completed check list at time of application for a permit: For the placement of a manufactured home, questions numbers 1 -4 and 19 -28 are the only questions that need to be addressed: .41 /— 1. Is a site plan included that indicates the distance of the proposed building or addition to property lines, other buildings, set back easements and utility easements? Yes X No ,)) Not necessary for this project (2) 2. Does the site plan include the location of the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and the distances to property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent properties) , streams or watercourses? Yes A. No )n Not necessary for this project (2) • 3. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing the property? Yes )C No 0) Not necessary for this project (2) 4. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the uniform building code or per stamped engineered design? Yes )C) No ro Not necessary for this project (2) 5. Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes No „) Not necessary for this project (2) 6. Do the plans indicate the size an location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project a) 7. Do the plans include design Toads as required under the Uniform Building code for roof snow loads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot in Garfield County) floor loads and wind loads? Yes No o) Not necessary for this project a) 8. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor and roof construction? Yes No ,)) Not necessary for this project (2) 9. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes No o) Not necessary for this project (2) 10. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns and beams? Yes No „) Not necessary for this project (2) y'e • L.. • 1 I. Does the plan indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the highest point of the building or addition measured at mid span between the ridge and the eave down to existing grade contours? Yes No (,) Not necessary for this project m 12. Does the plan include any stole or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and model and Colorado Phase II certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project a) 13. Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the Uniform Building Code Chapter 37? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project (2) 14. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress /rescue windows from sleeping rooms and/or basements comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project R) 15. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for all habitable rooms? Yes No 0, Not necessary for this project (2) 16. Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface normally used as a walking surface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub enclosures and specify safety glazing for these areas? Yes No o) Not necessary for this project (2) 17. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on tin plan? Yes No (1) Not necessary for this project (4 18 Do you understand that if you belong to a homeowners association, it is your responsibility to obtain ' vritten permission from that association, if required by that association, prior to submitting an application for a building permit? Yes No _ n Not necessary for this project a) 19. Will this be the only re. ide ntial structure on the parcel? Yes No — _ If No- Explain _y3_ • • 20. Have two (2) complete sets of constructions drawings been submitted with the application? Yes X No (1) Not necer ;ary for this project a, 21. Is this an application for the placement of a manufactured home? Yes )C No If yes, have you specified the size of the unit (min. 20ft x 20ft); live roof Toad (min.40#); wind design (min. wind speed of 80 mph & 15 lb. wind load); foundation design; method of anchoring? Yes K No (+( Not necessary for this project m 22. Have you designed or had this plats designed while considering building and other construction code requirements? Yes x No rn 23. Does the plan accurately indicate what yo ( intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by the Garfield Building Department? Yes 2C No (3) 24. Do you understand that approv' l for design and/or construction changes are required prior to the application of these changes? Yes )C No (3) 25. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review' fee from you at the time of applicatior ' and that you will be required to pay the "Permit Fee" as well as any "School impP ct" or "Septic system " fees required, at the time ydu pick up yoi r building permit`- Yes )C No (3) 26. Are you aware that twenty four ( ?4) hour notice is required for all inspections? Inspections v ill be made from Battlement Mesa to West Glenwood in the mornings ant. from Gienwocd Springs to Carbondale in the afternoon. Morning inspections must be celled in by 12:00 p.m. the day before; afternoon inspections must be called in I•y 5:00 p.m. the day before . Failure to give 24 hour notice for inspections will delay your inspection one (1) day. Yes 7 \c No 27. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the Uniform Building Code including npprovai on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and oc' :upancr of the building? Yes X No (D( -ay - • 28. Are you aware that the person signing the Permit Application whether the "Owner ", "Agent of the Owner", "General Contractor ", "Contractor" or otherwise, signing the application is the party responsible for the project complying with the Uniform Codes ". Yes K No (3) 1 hereby acknowledge that I have read, understand and answered these questions accurately to the best of my ability. $j %/v gp-sa_ t-L Z., • � — /23 signet a Jein 0 Rr /�tcc tLL d ate Phone: 1417 (days); f 3°) S93 - (evenings) Project Nanie: I)- i�4/10 j& L it a Project Address: Lai° (' /GG/L.S Ash"` Cv 5' P cr 6/ Notes (1) If you haw answered RJo" on any of these questions you may be required to provide this information at the request of the Building Official prior to beginning the plan review process. Delays In Issuing the permit are to be expected. Work may not proceed without the Issuance of the permit. (2) If yob have answered 14d necessary for this project" on any of the questions and it Is determined by the Building Official that Information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum compliance with the adopted codes, please expect the following: A. The application may be placed behind more recent applications for building permits in the review process and not reviewed until required information has been provided and the application rotates again to first position for review. 8. Delay In Issuance of the permit. C. Delay in proceeding with constr ■ ''ion. (3) If you answered "No" to II* question the circa stances described In the question could result In a "Stop Work Order" being Issued or a "Certificate of Occupancy' not being i ued. PerApp02.95 Effective August 15, 1995 e #56,10 WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made �tth•is .2 day of it. , 19 q we beten e {frei L). PA ( J of the • County of Go-r s,..rd and State of CLrlo rads, ,grantor(s)and LCC whose legal address is r r-v'E S Or p0 (s j rtri °'W, Co ga2 of the County of `j -r -K/e/ and State of J ^. � Co , grantee(s): WITNESS. that the grantor(s), for and in consideration of the sum of Text d DI tan C ° f l — qoost CLLILI VO juA bla.. CoiLsw•ClR.Ya h Os's DOLLARS. theieceipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted. bargained, sold and conveyed. and by these presents do grant. bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the grantee(s), :it heirs and assigns forever, all the real property, together with improvements. if any, situate, lying and being in the County of to tittle? State of Colorado. described as follows: L 04 0, 10Lk 5, A spe-w Cry slc1 givtc Es4t+cs also known by street and number as: N/A assessor's schedule or parcel number. Aga 0 21 - 0 -060 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, 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(s). either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee(s), heirs and assigns forever. The grantor(s), for Him sal ( H. a heirs and personal representatives. do covenant. grant, bargain and agree to and with the grantee(s). ;l, heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents. /le rJ well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure. perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and ha s good right. full power and 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 kind or nature soever, except 4.t.a_ The grantor(s) shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable posses- sion of the granter(s), i heirs and assigns. against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. IN WITNESS W EREOF, ntor(s) ha S' executed this deed on the date set forth above. �FQE W. PAe1Leiz- STATE OF COLORADO i 2 cwC ss. HUGH County of Gar Cnaol I . r h 0Et$ ;�O f t t C GG The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this a d ay of 1.. :••... • •; O f . 19 q �r++ \ by' J l+TcY! � W • k -e Witness my hand and oficial seal. v,,,,,, _ ■ My commission expires: j : /� llCI yy thltac+ l[.A�L4YLu� ��- !'z•utt_' -�91 II _ >12c WIDE GRAVE DRIVE � �:�•\ s � \ GENT E \ � b \ / \ \ / PROPOSED SEP1 IC SYS1 M I \ l / \ \ \ \ \ STEEP DD�N SLOPE STEEP N i DOWN SL.Of , \ REQUIRED BUILDING SET BACKS A\ , car \ \ \ \ \ � PROPROPOSED 1_ �' \ \ °./ \ / ."--- NOTE: L BUILDER WILL MAINTAIN A MINIM . M SEPARATION OF 100' BETWEEN THE SEPTIC 6" STEM AND THE WELL. BELL COUNTRY HOMES PROJECT SITE PLAN P.O. BOX 229 LOT 60. BLOCK 5 NEW CASTLE. CO 8164? ASPEN CRYSTAL RIVER ESTATES 19 ?01 984 -3500 GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO JANUARY 21. 1998 PREPARED FOR: BUFFALO RANCH. LLC ..._ _ _ w T _ . _ v 9(_) ti Nin 0 g $1-- l itilig •-•-1 1 r 1 CS I -0 1 O (f) k \ ©A LTh W ill 6. u o Z m FII l a _ - fig- _ ....... \ \\/ • e / \ / / /\ /o i »c® c ƒ /92g . w 00 -' q / > / \, V ° /- \7ws § 7 K\/ -/� \ 0 / \\ ( , ZrZ r e r / 7 f - / • \\ /\ 2 §. . N \ 0 'it '`4 111 \ 7 \ \ // ° :] 00 i 0 �\ `� 0 }7 -2 Z $ g e // 1$. R R q& \ 2 k /? 9 ƒ - / - \ ® % \ \\ ( i ® I > r i911 \ \ �� \ / \ 9 ® 3 0 / 1--S T 0 0 _ _ - - - -'§ i • • • co rv, : a M' - ? :5 f 1 . - < 1 . BATH J .0p1 C... J1{ e i 5 0 a°; _ ; 'IT T 6 _ j I 1ci WL u 0. _ o Z o - xl -_ r.. 1 , 2 �I � H '° o — t 0 _ �� o 7 . 0 W II —4 --. . U J>i. Wi.0o. • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT Permit 2 914 109 8th Street Suite 303 Assessor's Parcel No. Glenwood Springs, Colorado 31801 Phone (303) 945 -8212 This does not constitute INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT a building or use permit. PROPERTY Owner's Name Buffalo Ranch IW Present Address P.O. Boa 221, Carbondale Phone 947 -5184 System Location Lot 60, Block 5, Aspen Crystal River Estates, Carbondale Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No. SYSTEM DESIGN Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) Other Percolation Rate (minutes/inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) 3 Required Absorption Area - See Attached Special Setback Requirements: Date Inspector FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed) Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation System Installer Septic Tank Capacity Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name Septic Tank Access within 8" of surface Absorption Area Absorption Area Type and /or Manufacturer or Trade Name Adequate compliance with County and State regulations/requlrements Other Date Inspector RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE •CONDITIONS: 1. All installation must comply with all requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health Individual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter 25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. 2. This permit is valid only for connection to structures which have fully compiled with County zoning and building requirements. Con- nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit. 3. Any person who constructs, alters, or installs an individual sewage disposal system in a manner which involves a knowing and material variation from the terms or specifications contained in the application of permit commits a Class 1, Petty Offense ($500.00 line —6 months in )ail or both). White- APPLICANT Velbw - DEPARTMENT —5'llillifr • INDIVIDUALAEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLICATION OWNER ....- -- -• /S �iaJo afiwt.c.L L t a ADDRESS PO Qvn( 4 // L21 � �u��Hati(� /. Fs� PHONE qt/ 7- CONTRACTOR fgvrkll7 2P i4 C- ADDRESS PU8b ZZ' �r6°1^ 4 k1' F /A7 PHONE 91 /7 -SIP PERMIT REQUEST FOR ( /NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4). LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY Near what City of Town (—iaba Size of Lot 3 / 6 SD s • Legal Description or Address id Cb !/4S, /k r , Cr I S /7iwr 6 -,L5 WASTES TYPE: (DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE ( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON - DOMESTIC WASTES ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE n BUILDING OR SERVICE TYPE: /<�/ 4 ) Number of Bedrooms 3 Number of Persons 3 (Garbage Grinder (v) Automatic asher (y SOURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SI JPPLY: (WELL ( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK If supplied by Community Water, give name of supplier: DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM: d �c 5 Was an effort made to connect to the Community System? ✓1/o A site plan is required to be submitted that indicates the following MINIMUM distances: Leach Field to Well: 100 feet Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet Septic System to Property Lines: 10 feet YOUR INDIVIDUAL. SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITIIOIIT A SITE PLAN, GROIJND CONDITIONS; Depth to first Ground Water Table Percent Ground Slope /47" fja • TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED: ( p ' SEPTIC TANK ( A'!RATION PLANT ( ) VAULT ( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE ( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE ( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( r OTHER - DESCRIBE FINAL DISPOSAL BY: ( ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT ( ) EVAPOTRANSPIRATION ( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER ( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) WASTEWATER POND ( ) OTHER - DESCRIBE _ WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCI IARGED IrIREt TLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? WO PERCOLATION TEST REST 11.TS: (To be ce'npleted by Registered Professional Engineer, if the Engineer does the Percolation Test) Minutes per inch in I iole No. 1 Minutes per inch in hole NO. 3 Minutes per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes per inch in hole NO. _ Name, address and telephone of RPE who made soil absorption tests: Name, address and telephone of RPE responsible for design of the system: Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations made, information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to be true and correct to the hest of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. 1 further understand that any falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law. avriojo c4". 42- • Signed Date 0z / I k PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPERTY!! • hr (� e 53 w , e Wi MPA®®' • 1 ,c 1 L ._.- - / CD c \ 1 11.1 II / c : 1 H ' JJ 1 ./ J 1 L M1J i • , t a�a.a W / IV 1 PS Ifa. lealilifl man " —I- i 01 II s u ' 4 II II II E II -- ,, eC as II, I v: till' 11 ■ --1 1, , ,;\:" ..3. it.,.\ i., , , .... 4, v. II L L� 1 l CA I jam. �.4 y. _ TG C!'tli y iv % ' \ 4 W u I ! . i, }. y L •7 i. ' 3"9 1 '� 1!:1! �� 5 i{ ; :` t 'it , � i[ V' I[ll" �l 1 1 1 i j , i� ' . i ii'!1� ej - Tom. -. Ili Is 7 ig _ a V 1. (ia _ I oil �� 4 ., • t • LAW OFFICES OF [,- f ' HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.0 f 9 . 8 �� 3 (�J 201 NORTH MILL STREET y SUITE 203 HERBERT S. KLEIN TELLURIDE OFFICE: MILLARD J. ZIMET' ASPEN COLORADO 81611 P.O. BOX 215 MICHELE NELSON8 (970) 925.8700 300 WEST COLORADO AVENUE THOMAS G. KENNEDY° TELECOPIER (970) 825 -3977 SUITE 28 TELLURIDE. COLORADO 81035 (970) 728-5151 OF COUNSEL' TELECOPIER (970) 728-3069 JACQUELINE L. GARDNER 1150 a6ni8N in New York RIDGWAY OFFICE: 8 al10 admi8M in Calil4rma ark] Hawaii 122 VILLAGE SQUARE WEST * also admine0 in Maryland RIDGWAY. CO 81432 (970) 826-3888 TELECOPIER (970) 826.3977 February 17, 1998 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED also VIA FACSIMILE: 945 -7785 Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean, Director Garfield County Building & Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Appeal of Issuance of Building Permits Dear Sirs: This law firm represents the Carbondale Corporation, a Colorado corporation ("CC"). I am writing, on behalf of CC, to appeal the issuance of three building permits to Buffalo Ranch, LLC (the IILLC pertaining to three lots owned by that LLC in the Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision ("ACRE"). It is our understanding that Mr. Jeff Parker is a principal in this LLC and recently conveyed the lots to the LLC for the purpose of developing them with pre- manufactured homes. The lots in question are: Block 5, Lot 3; Block 5, Lot 60; and Block 6, Lot 22. I was informed that these permits were issued on February 13, 1998. CC is the owner of The Big Four Ranch, located in Garfield County, and is also the owner of 81 of the 141 lots within ACRE. In addition, several of CC's lots within ACRE abut the lots in question. The basis of this appeal is that the LLC cannot demonstrate that it has legal access to its lots and that such access is mandated by the UBC. As you may know, a court case is now pending (97 -CV- 199 -C) in which certain plaintiffs who own lots in ACRE (alleging claims on their own behalf and on behalf of all other owners of lots in ACRE) are attempting to condemn access to their lots and have alleged that there is no other access in ACRE. This case is in its early stages, and will undoubtedly take many more months to resolve. So at this time in order to access the LLC's _Ss a„ • • Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean February 17, 1998 Page 2 lots, Mr. Parker (and his builders and contractors) would have to commit trespass because neither the LLC nor Mr. Parker have a current legally enforceable right of access to the lots in question. Likewise, the County would not have the right to access these lots in order to undertake necessary inspections. If the County has any question concerning the LLC's access rights, just ask Mr. Parker to produce a title insurance policy which insures access. Section 108.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code mandates that all work on the lots in question must be accessible in order for required inspections to take place. Without successful inspections the buildings cannot be lawfully occupied. The permittee is obligated to ensure that such access is available. These are not debatable requirements. Although the building department is aware that access is not presently available and has disclosed these requirements in writing to the LLC and Mr. Parker, also advising Mr. Parker that his construction may not be lawfully occupied unless access was available for the purpose of inspections, the permits were issued. Disclosing these legal requirements to Mr. Parker does not make the issuance of the permits legal nor does it shift to the LLC the County's liability for its failure to enforce basic health and safety laws. Section 8.01 of the Garfield County Zoning Regulations states that the Building Official "...shall not issue any permit unless the plans for the proposed erection, construction ... fully conform to all provisions of this Resolution and all provisions of the Building Code affecting the subject property." This is also a requirement of State statutes. See 30 -28 -205, CRS 1997. The issuance of the permits is contrary to the clear wording of the UBC and unlawful. Issuing permits for work that cannot be inspected invites non - compliance with health and safety laws and assures that substantial monies will be expended on the construction of houses that cannot be lawfully occupied. To say that the County is protected because the construction cannot obtain a certificate of occupancy without a final inspection and therefore cannot be lawfully occupied, is absurd when the County is not able to inspect the construction to detect an unlawful occupancy. This position also ignores the necessary inspections during construction that must take place to satisfy the UBC. The issuance of these permits will set a very dangerous precedent and could completely emasculate the County's ability to enforce its building and zoning code. If people can obtain a building permit to build something that cannot be inspected, the potential for abuse is unlimited. From a public safety point of esig • • Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean February 17, 1998 Page 3 view, the dangers of this situation are obvious. Emergency services are not able to reach the scene of fire or accident. Septic systems (or the absence of them) are not inspected. Water supplies may not exist. Especially in ACRE, with its 141 lots, numerous structures could be built by trespassers without any County inspections. What the building department is doing here is a throwback to the days before building and zoning regulations were first promulgated in Colorado, unlawful and, quite frankly, shocking in light of the significant public discussion concerning growth in our region. The LLC and Mr. Parker will not be harmed by the rescission of the building permits, because at this time there is no legal way for the LLC or Mr. Parker to get to their lots to commence construction; they can't legally use these permits -- rather, the only way they can use them is to trespass. And, likewise, the only way the County could inspect the construction is by its trespass. Accordingly, CC respectfully requests that the Zoning Board of Adjustment rescind these building permits. Please inform me of the date that the pubic hearing will take place on this appeal. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding any of the foregoing. Very truly yours, HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. B : ��/Z Hefber' t S. Klein cc: Garfield County Board of County Commissioners Don DeFord, Esq. Carbondale Town Trustees Mark Chain, Carbondale Planning Director Robert Emerson, Esq. Carbondale Town Attorney Terry Considine egg PSIS sit Ceafa.• • Town of Carbondale 511 Colorado Avenue (970) 963 -2733 Carbondale, CO 81623 FAX (970) 963 -9140 (� February? 1992 f ■ » #5 4 199B Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment % Mark Bean, Director Garfield County Building & Planning Department 109 8t Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Appeal of issuance of building permits Dear Mark: On behalf of the Town of Carbondale, I wish to appeal the issuance of three building permits issued to Buffalo Ranch, LLC in the name of Jeff Parker. These three building permits are for lots within Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision (ACRE). The lots in question are: Block 5, Lot 60: Block 6, Lot 22; Block 5, Lot 3. ACRE lies within Carbondale's three mile area as defined in CRS 31 -12 -105 (e). The town is currently formulating a new Comprehensive Plan and is investigating all issues related to the development (and non - development) of private lands within this three mile area. This planning process commenced in June, 1997 and will not be completed for a few more months. The basis for this appeal is that Mr. Parker cannot demonstrate legal access to the sites in question. It is the town's understanding that Mr. Parker has a revocable license to cross the railroad right -of -way currently owned by Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority. After inspecting the county assessors maps, it appears that Mr. Parker has no way to get from the railroad right -of -way to ACRE without trespassing. Currently there is a case pending (97 -CV- 199 -C) in which plaintiffs that own lots in ACRE are attempting to condemn access to their lots. The County Planner Director has also indicated to me that he is not certain whether Mr. Parker has legal access to his lots. This would appear to be confirmed by notice signed by Mr. Parker which is provided to applicants for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with "uncertain legal access" (Notice attached). Section 503.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code states "buildings shall join or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one side. Required yards shall be permanently maintained" (attached). It appears that Mr. Parker does not have access to this right -of -way within ACRE adjoining his lot and therefore the issuance of a building permit according to the 1994 Uniform Building Code should not have been granted. The notice regarding building permits with uncertain legal access states that "if Garfield County is not allowed access to the property, the County will not complete the final ct • • • County Letter February 20, 1998 Page two inspection and the building can not be lawfully occupied ". This appears to acknowledge that the County may not be able to inspect construction or in this case the installation of manufactured homes. More important, it also invites people to occupy buildings that have not been inspected and have not received a certificate of occupancy. We feel that this is irresponsible. Our primary concern with the issuance of these building permits is that they may negate much of the planning work that has occurred over the last two years for our three mile area before there is an opportunity to complete it. Finally, the ACRE area has uncertain water supply and wastewater treatment issues. It is our understanding that the County would even allow a cistern as a water supply for these building permits. This seems contrary to the County's regulations on insuring adequate water supplies within present subdivisions as well as other areas in the County. For example, would the County allow a cistern to be a legal water source in the Satanic area? The Town in no way wishes to hurt its relationship with the County and hope that this appeal does not do this. We are simply trying to preserve the integrity of our Comprehensive Plan process and hope that it can run its course without undue complications. Please contact me if you need any additional information. Sincerely, Mark Chain Planning Director cc: Don DeFord, Esq. Carbondale Board of Trustees Robert Emerson, Esq. Herbert S. Klein -91 44z � � /6 • • I NOTICE This notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield , County will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the structure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield • County Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. At the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the review of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the building permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, if the applicable work has been done by the County. To do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department must be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If Garfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will not complete the final inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Further, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance or the permit will become void. A new building permit will ' have to be obtained to start or continue any work. The above statements are acknowledged by: •i�%l �' \ 2 /� ,, v / e N e rate This signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject 1 to the above statements 40 ' I f Q � 11 CountYof G ar ��ta s ^ . ... o ieqeb • \ 501 -503.3 • 1994FORM BUILDING CODE • Chapter 5 GENERAL BUILDING LIMITATIONS i SECTION 501 — SCOPE Buildings and structures shall comply with the location on property, area, height and other provi- -- sions of this chapter. For additional limitations or allowances for special uses or occupancies, see the following: SECTION SUBJECT 402 Atria 403 High -rise office buildings and Group R, Division 1 Occupancies 404 Malls 311.9 Open parking structures - { 307 Group H, Division 6 Occupancies i . 412 Aviation control towers 414 Agricultural buildings 3111 Membrane structures SECTION 502 — PREMISES IDENTIFICATION • Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new buildings in such a position as to be .. - plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. t SECTION 503 — LOCATION ON PROPERTY 503.1 General. Buildings shall adjoin or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one sp side. Required yards shall be permanently maintained. For the purpose of this section, the center line of an adjoining public way shall be considered an adjacent property line. (See also Section 1203.4.) 503.2 Fire Resistance of Walls. )) 503.2.1 General. Exterior walls shall have fire resistance and opening protection as set forth in R Table 5 -A and in accordance with such additional provisions as are set forth in Chapter 6. Distance - shall be measured at right angles from the property line. The above provisions shall not apply to walls at right angles to the property line. Projections beyond the exterior wall shall comply with Section 705 and shall not extend beyond: 1. A point one third the distance to the property line from an assumed vertical plane located where fire- resistive protection of openings is first required due to location on property; or f 2. More than 12 inches (305 mm) into areas where openings are prohibited. 503.2.2 Area of openings. When openings in exterior walls are required to be protected due to distance from property line, the sum of the area of such openings shall not exceed 50 percent of the total area of the wall in each story. 503.3 Buildings on Same Property and Buildings Containing Courts. For the purposes of de- termining the required wall and opening protection and roof- covering requirements, buildings on the same property and court walls of buildings over one story in height shall be assumed to have a property line between them. 1-84 ; Ins tff • • 107.6- 108.5.2 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. on The building official - filed e by the original permi o authorize t e e not la rthan 180 days after except the date of fee payment.n application SECTION 108 — INSPECTIONS 108.1 General. All construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspec- -.' tion by the building official and all such construction or work shall remain accessible and exposed le 7 for inspection purposes until approved by the building official. In addition, certain types of con- struction shall have continuous inspection as specified in Section 1701.5. t *sJ Ap p roval as a t n ha be ru to be a th ions ofa this code resul or of an of other inspectio ordinances sll not of the j ed Ins pecti approval ons presuming of violation to give of au- e provi `I� thority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid. It shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense en- tailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow inspection. ` A survey of the lot may be required by the building official to verify that the structure is located in �i ccordance with the approved plans. • 108.2 Inspection Record Card. Work requiring a permit shall not be commenced until the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder shall have posted or otherwise made available an inspection record card such as to allow the building official to conveniently make the required entries thereon regarding inspection of the work. This card shall be maintained available by the permit holder until final approval has been granted by the building official. 108.3 Inspection Requests. It shall be the duty of the person doing the work authorized by a per- ` mit to notify the building official that such work is ready for inspection. The building official may require that every request for inspection be filed at least one working day before such inspection is desired. Such request may be in writing or by telephone at the option of the building official. II It shall be the duty of the person requesting any inspections required by this code to provide ac- wi cess to and means for inspection of such work. I 108.4 Approval Required. Work shall not be done beyond the point indicated in each successive - inspection without first obtaining the approval of the building official. The building official, upon notification. shall make the requested inspections and shall either indicate that portion of the con - struction is satisfactory as completed, or shall notify the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder wherein the same fails to comply with this code. Any portions which do not comply shall be I corrected and such portion shall not be covered or concealed until authorized by the building offi- cial. There shall be a final inspection and approval of all buildings and structures when completed and -1: i ready for occupancy and use. •+ 108.5 Required Inspections. 108.5.1 General. Reinforcing steel or structural framework of any part of any building or struc- ture shall not be covered or concealed without first obtaining the approval of the building official. f 4 i The building official. upon notification, shall make the inspections set forth in the following sub - :1 sections. :.� 1085.2 Foundation inspection. To be made after excavations for footings are complete and any required reinforcing steel is in place. For concrete foundations, any required forms shall be in place 1-8 n; ■ 501-503.3 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 199 Chapter 5 • GENERAL BUILDING LIMITATIONS Ih r SECTION 501 — SCOPE .. . an - Buildings and structures shall comply with the location on property, area, height and other provi tet sions of this chapter. For additional limitations or allowances for special uses or occupancies, see the following: SECTION SUBJECT Sti 402 Atria 403 High -rise office buildings and Group R, St . _ . Division 1 Occupancies 404 Malls c, c, awl 311.9 Open parking structures 1T4 307 Group H, Division 6 Occupancies I'• 412 Aviation control towers . p' 414 Agricultural buildings l ` �,_�, 3111 Membrane structures 5 SECTION 502 — PREMISES IDENTIFICATION t , plainly visible and legible r from theast be buildings or road fronting theprtoperty,tn such a position as to be 5 u 4 SECTION 503 — LOCATION ON PROPERTY 503.1 General. Buildings shall adjoin or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one i side. Required yards shall be permanently maintained. i For the purpose of this section, the center line of an adjoining public way shall be considered an adjacent property line. (See also Section 1203.4.) 503.2 Fire Resistance of Walls. 503.2.1 General. Exterior walls shall have fire resistance and opening protection as set forth in Table 5 -A and in accordance with such additional provisions as are set forth in Chapter 6. Distance shall be measured at right angles from the property line. The above provisions shall not apply to walls at right angles to the property line. Projections beyond the exterior wall shall comply with Section 705 and shall not extend beyond: 1. A point one third the distance to the property line from an assumed vertical plane located where fire- resistive protection of openings is first required due to location on property: or 2. More than 12 inches (305 mm) into areas where openings are prohibited. 503.2.2 Area of openings. When openings in exterior walls are required to be protected due to distance from property line. the sum of the area of such openings shall not exceed 50 percent of the total area of the wall in each story. 503.3 Buildings on Same Property and Buildings Containing Courts. For the purposes of de- ll termining the required wall and opening protection and roof- covering requirements, buildings on the same property and court walls of buildings over one story in height shall be assumed to have a property line between them. ' 1-84 I i , 1 1001- 1001.2 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE i I l! Chapter 10 1 MEANS OF EGRESS ; } SECTION 1001 — GENERAL 1001.1 Scope and Standards of Quality. Every building or portion thereof shall be provided with exits as required by this chapter. ( t { The standards listed below labeled a "U.B.C. standard" are also listed in Chapter 35, Part II, and i I are part of this code. The other standards listed below are recognized standards and as such are not adopted as part of this code (see Sections 3502 and 3503). 4 1. Power doors. k 1.1 U.B.C. Standard 10 -1, Power - operated Exit Doors 1 1.2 U.B.C. Standard 7 -8, Horizontal Sliding Fire Doors Used in an Exit 2. Stairway numbering system. �77 U.B.C. Standard 10-2, Stairway Identification 1 . 3. Hardware. . � J t U.B.C. Standard 10 -4, Panic Hardware d 1001.2 Definitions. For the purpose of this chapter, certain terms are defined as follows: i "? BALCONY, EXTERIOR EXIT, is a landing or porch projecting from the wall of a building, and which serves as a required exit. The long side shall be at least 50 percent open, and the open area above the guardrail shall be so distributed as to prevent the accumulation of smoke or toxic gases. EXIT is a continuous and unobstructed means of egress to a public way and shall include inter- _ vening aisles, doors, doorways, gates, corridors, exterior exit balconies, ramps, stairways, pressur- ized enclosures, horizontal exits, exit passageways, exit courts and yards. "� EXIT COURT is a yard or court providing access to a public way for one or more required exits. 7 EXIT PASSAGEWAY is an enclosed exit connecting a required exit or exit court with a public way. EXTERIOR STAIRWAY is a stairway that is open on two adjacent sides, except for required { structural columns and open -type handrails and guardrails. The adjoining open areas shall be either r l IS yards, courts or public ways; the other two sides may be enclosed by the exterior walls of the build- HORIZONTAL EXIT is an exit from one building into another building on approximately the same same level, or through or around a wall constructed as required fora two-hour occupancy separation and which completely divides a floor into two or more separate areas so as to establish an area of )1» refuge affording safety from fire or smoke coming from the area from which escape is made. INTERIOR STAIRWAY is any stairway not meeting the definition of an exterior stairway. MULTITHEATER COMPLEX isabuildin or building portion thereof containing two or more motion • 1 picture auditoriums which are served by a common lobby. PANIC HARDWARE is a door-latching assembly incorporating an unlatching device, the acti- vating portion of which extends across at least one half the width of the door leaf on which it is in- '11 stalled. 1 i i PRIVATE STAIRWAY is a stairway serving one tenant only. H PUBLIC WAY is any street. alley or similar parcel of land essentially unobstructed from the I � ground to the sky which is deeded, dedicated or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for public use and having a clear width of not less than 10 feet (3048 mm). 1 -172 t: lt •„:. „? .. • •••. . ' ' •;. 4 ' 'i . ' ' ' ' - v s 46 ' ., 4'4,4: • , • • '1 . , • • i F ' 4 ..f• ..$, t 4 ' ..4 ,I. ••• • •I r .. i, . '. ■ • - , , _ „,.. ., . .4 ; it , i . C fir \ . . . l 4 / 1 ‘'' , , ' " * 4' ,, ' „%,, ' # • , tr, . , - ').. - .?4,1/4f,t 6 b4:•4‘...2 ) „.• -2 ey ....,....., ..-...‘,..,,, t. .4 , ,, 4 4 x - . 4 . -,'' 4 , 4 41•1°, ', 1.111r, r - p. -,,, . , „ . . i. 1 t..41 r A...,,,...- 0 .,.A...i t ty7.-. , ..„....,?, „ 4 , i ^' ' . -. .. . IlL A k i • • d . I^l e g ir P f 7 " .. 17 tr . 4 : d ic? 7‘ "--' 1 .^. 111 1 . * I ' 7.‘ : • : ' l ij 4. t A reak I"), dd- d» r :4 " 4.1,- "Cp. 4 , ' ‘■•••• • . • . i t ' , ,. , , . , • d i ' A - 'LI - .. ' • ' k A ) i _., • ..„;. 0 • Al 3 $it ' • ; 1: kr A 4- *• • 4 ., - T• I " A . 4 : ' ' ; 4 4 . 1 , i . ,ti i'' •• A -4 , -, . 14 1 d t ir e A d4d 2 - 44‘:.4. $ ' 1 ..v ;VC .," t• .4 P ' I ' : r ' fp 12 I, Its* • 0.,0. 4. (kw 4 ., „ i 4. i,. I. I ..t ' ‘.,• ,‘S 1 411S011$1100,4 .-111 • Pia* 10 C ir ,, 1st %get ' *4944 - • tr 4 • ,, • ` -,20•••ibrib lo or to ,,cee st 0 , . i4 4-147 ...170, e- a vz. itc, ,o, ,r.... ,.. . ). ,.... ,f ....3. As awn Wan gat ,-- w 1 ....> ji,` . • 4 " •• Jarda Or te-•y( .:'• .',..; •• 0 S S tbSt Ognet01144 ,„ \j ,sithir. ., . 4 1 , A , ,., , a s „ Att. a,,, • yi, - . .,. ii est . m . oat la Ss the SU); c ;..,.. &■A: .k, cfcf .:.• - an " ''„, H _ ' •.-t., AM i i ,t'sk, f•!'•.744 4 . 1 , /sot 4 , > ego se' ,fot gins *r -"O . \ • ' e.' ' ....., i.,rt , : ..t4 ., . 7,- % ea Orrth MK fe a 41 111114111.04 8 A ' 'fr s 's ." "-'', • r-" 231-‘ 1 4'.,,. ,Sre. - , ! .■1/4" .1/4; ' hroarlfartfe all$0,tott rtigtUsit,ten 1 1 Plasli alibi Sfit40 AMP ow „if,\o, • i' - ',.•;,, " 1 T 114Cret Ord aorf WO t i s si * .1"al it c ''' v , r,., • Them els' agailli W. W a. aal.flas larta,,44 - A b 4' eilm" t ‘ , 1 4 1 r ' '. ''' ±. ' IloottOte,31 :g„ fl t .•ea ste ^ ''` . ;•-, It. ' 4 i ;la A k b . o y ' ..... I o fl o ne`ico, lent, Mal fon, . ' , , % x . • ? ,„,.;, 4,,i ,It • A ' riti • an, re• .I ocrtwit. isteso ha; *C' - - 4 VV. ' . a% 1'1' - sv` 0 1304 " f *w r" Stt M. sr 4 ,113.70 fent ) e t -• - t c t ` t ','' C?, .. " J Alt): yrt. e , 4 w eye oat, ' 222006 tent ..- ._ v i 1„.. 4 z, 0. sr> 4,•,,,ele, Tire's? 4 ‘; A , . - . 110110 Mob Or Cle 20.. .4 11 .t. 2 IN" OP 1110 _____ f _ a tekli dr '' r ip..., y ,s, 4;! t -‘. en; :0 lea seal SW IPS _ te b. "I", Limig al e —A n.:Artrx 11 0-..- . ..r ,'' rei dojoroby maiects 4.4 se. MI** arres_ ,. ...4 2TA SO Yob' 1 27 .4. 4^ SVA' 2 l ot A, • , tries as 4r. tramby mina thos.I. ono log , at ,., .4.E, r , c ‘ts' ' PE ni .,- 1 ` !!! ,.. ' aal nbt"e" ' t "trltilt," I!" i ..r.v...rv...::, ,.:‘,. i „iel...t. tor, the radertiroot boos on Ora bee*. ma* • , / - • - ' •3. ,, •-• MR r • , . ... i . i , i ti.. A ,. sun cc 1 t . 4,. ,..4,, ... : foL n :',.. - -. ' '' :I -I '''.'” ' • ' 1 * '''t ▪ • : , ‘,.. , 1,f , S- .i ..,.. -. ,•• count a , 'e ' # s • # -cootpur•D 's '., .... 16 - frisiseass footrest to• otleadodelfkbotent no i. ci-• ▪ 3 l , • - . - i. r 1 ;."'•*:.$ ;i no, ‘• • ••, . , . , . - - '. SIP ••;- I — t • e. $4,-, - , . , • , ,.,... AP - , ' • . - " - 1 ,. ! fe,,St . d 4 _ • 'tie .. . :f i i A • - e 2 d i' °S. -d• ' i t • dd at ? t " ^ ., " . • . . 1 211 t io .4 .. I. ..,";-, , • • 1, t r 't •I'l .- rs , .,A,...... i %. , ,,.. r el. lis 1 •,`41 ."1 • ..- ' ' • • ' ' e ; tat 4 •...,' r 4- " _ . y 5 .0 il.,.,et ,.... • 4,4 .k .? I • ' • . ' IP.. . , 1 4, p •' 1 4,4 ''' • • • A f " 47. ‘ d t e7 ' .2 d 'i. : 7 1.4 • , 4 ell e J 7d* 1 • • LAW OFFICES ROBERT B. EMERSON. P 86 SOUTH THIRD STREET CARBONDALE COLORADO 61623 (970) 963 -3700 ROBERT B EMERSON FAX (970) 963-0905 MAR 0 3 1998 tlN ji February 27, 1998 c•, t, ,�,.,,: uUuw • Mr. Mark L. Bean Director Garfield County Building & Planning Dept. 109 Eighth Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Appeal of Buffalo Ranch, LLC, Building Permits Dear Mark: Mark Chain has asked me to respond on behalf of the Town of Carbondale to your letter to him of February 25, 1998. The Town of Carbondale disagrees with your interpreta- tion of certain sections of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution relating to this adminis- trative appeal. In your letter, you indicate that there is a requirement to publish and mail notice of a public hearing to consider the appeal. I presume that you are relying on §9:05:04 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution in making this determination. However, we read this section to allow for a public hearing on a request for a variance, but not that a public hearing with notice is required for an appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment from action taken by an administrative officer. In fact, even with a variance request, a public hearing is not mandatory, but may be required at the discretion of the Board. Since this matter involves an appeal from an administrative decision and not a variance, we believe that pursuant to §9:04:02 and §9:05:03, the matter is heard by the Board of Adjustment without the requirement that the hearing be a public hearing where notice is required to be mailed to neighboring property owners and published. Even if §9:05:04 were read to apply to an appeal of an administrative decision, we are not aware that the Board has directed that a public hearing be required with notice. • • Mr. Mark L. Bean February 27, 1998 Page 2 If you believe that there are other provisions of the County regulations that require a public hearing with notice for an appeal of an administrative decision, please let me know. Otherwise, the Town does not intend to provide the notice you have requested. Sincerely, Robert B. Emerson RBE /jc cc: Mark Chain Don DeFord Josh Marks FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION TO (303) 628 -3368 • • ,1772t1 iZ ' PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that the Town of Carbondale has applied to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to appeal an administrative decision of the Building Official of Garfield County to issue building permits in compliance with the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended and the 1994 Uniform Building Code, in connection with the following described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit: Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 5; Lot 60, Block 5; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, as recorded in the Garfield County Clerk & Recorders Office Practical Description: Located approximately 1.5 miles east of Carbondale. Said appeal is to request the recission of the issuance of building permits and individual sewage disposal system permits for single family dwellings on the above - described property. All persons affected by the proposed appeal are invited to appear and state their views, protests or support. If you can not appear personally at such hearing, then you are urged to state your views by letter, as the Zoning Board of Adjustment will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the Appeal. This Appeal application may be reviewed at the office of the Planning Department located at 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Garfield County Courthouse, Glenwood Springs, Colorado between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. That a scheduled public hearing on the application has been set for the 16th day of March 1998, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., at the office of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County Courthouse, Suite 301, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado Planning Department Garfield County Bill to: Town of Carbondale c/o Mark Chain 511 Colorado Avenue Carbondale, CO 81623 Cry 745> — 2/ .8 • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building and Planning Department February 25, 1998 Town of Carbondale c/o Mark Chain 511 Colorado Avenue Carbondale, Colorado 81623 RE: Appeal of Buffalo Ranch LLC building permits issuance Dear Mark: By this letter, I am acknowledging the receipt of Town of Carbondale's appeal of the issuance of building permits to the Buffalo Ranch LLC, in a timely manner. Since Town is the appellant, it will be your responsibility to publish notice and notify all of the property owners within 200 ft. of the properties in question of the public hearing to consider the appeal. Enclosed with this letter is a public notice form that will have to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the Carbondale area, at least fifteen (15 days prior to the date of the hearing. As you requested, a copy of the notice was faxed to the Glenwood Post for publication, with your office noted as the responsible party for billing. The same notice will have to sent by certified return receipt mail to the owners of the property in question and all owners of property within two hundred (200) ft. of the properties in question, at least five (5) days prior to the hearing. It will be your responsibility to make sure that all notice is published and mailed in a timely manner and provide the proof of publication and the return receipts from the mailing. If you have any questions about this letter or the attachment, you may call this office or the County Attorney's office and we will try to respond in a reasonable time. Sincerely, Mark L. Bean, Director Building & Planning Department enclosures 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945- 8212/285 -7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • • PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that the Town of Carbondale has applied to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to appeal an administrative decision of the Building Official of Garfield County to issue building permits in compliance with the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended and the 1994 Uniform Building Code, in connection with the following described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit: Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 5; Lot 60, Block 5; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, as recorded in the Garfield County Clerk & Recorders Office Practical Description: Located approximately 1.5 miles east of Carbondale. Said appeal is to request the recission of the issuance of building pennits and individual sewage disposal system permits for single family dwellings on the above - described property. All persons affected by the proposed appeal are invited to appear and state their views, protests or support. If you can not appear personally at such hearing, then you are urged to state your views by letter, as the Zoning Board of Adjustment will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the Appeal. This Appeal application may be reviewed at the office of the Planning Department located at 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Garfield County Courthouse, Glenwood Springs, Colorado between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. That a scheduled public hearing on the application has been set for the 16th day of March 1998, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., at the office of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County Courthouse, Suite 301, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado Planning Department Garfield County • • s' ° "` x It • Town of Carbondal• � ` r 511 Colorado Avenue (970) 963 -2733 Carbondale, CO 81623 FAX (970) 963 -9140 lA Febniary20 199R { 7 L . -..� KB 2A 199 B E Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment % Mark Bean, Director Garfield County Building & Planning Department 109 8' Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Appeal of issuance of building permits Dear Mark: On behalf of the Town of Carbondale, I wish to appeal the issuance of three building permits issued to Buffalo Ranch, LLC in the name of Jeff Parker. These three building permits are for lots within Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision (ACRE). The lots in question are: Block 5, Lot 60: Block 6, Lot 22; Block 5, Lot 3. ACRE lies within Carbondale's three mile area as defined in CRS 31 -12 -105 (e). The town is currently formulating a new Comprehensive Plan and is investigating all issues related to the development (and non - development) of private lands within this three mile area. This planning process commenced in June, 1997 and will not be completed for a few more months. The basis for this appeal is that Mr. Parker cannot demonstrate legal access to the sites in question. It is the town's understanding that Mr. Parker has a revocable license to cross the railroad right -of -way currently owned by Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority. After inspecting the county assessors maps, it appears that Mr. Parker has no way to get from the railroad right -of -way to ACRE without trespassing. Currently there is a case pending (97- CV- 199 -C) in which plaintiffs that own lots in ACRE are attempting to condemn access to their lots. The County Planner Director has also indicated to me that he is not certain whether Mr. Parker has legal access to his lots. This would appear to be confirmed by notice signed by Mr. Parker which is provided to applicants for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with "uncertain legal access" (Notice attached). Section 503.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code states "buildings shall join or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one side. Required yards shall be permanently maintained" (attached). It appears that Mr. Parker does not have access to this right -of -way within ACRE adjoining his lot and therefore the issuance of a building permit according to the 1994 Uniform Building Code should not have been granted. The notice regarding building permits with uncertain legal access states that "if Garfield County is not allowed access to the property, the County will not complete the final • • County Letter February 20, 1998 Page two inspection and the building can not be lawfully occupied ". This appears to acknowledge that the County may not be able to inspect construction or in this case the installation of manufactured homes. More important, it also invites people to occupy buildings that have not been inspected and have not received a certificate of occupancy. We feel that this is irresponsible. Our primary concern with the issuance of these building permits is that they may negate much of the planning work that has occurred over the last two years for our three mile area before there is an opportunity to complete it. Finally, the ACRE area has uncertain water supply and wastewater treatment issues. It is our understanding that the County would even allow a cistern as a water supply for these building permits. This seems contrary to the County's regulations on insuring adequate water supplies within present subdivisions as well as other areas in the County. For example, would the County allow a cistern to be a legal water source in the Satank area? The Town in no way wishes to hurt its relationship with the County and hope that this appeal does not do this. We are simply trying to preserve the integrity of our Comprehensive Plan process and hope that it can run its course without undue complications. Please contact me if you need any additional information. Sincerely, Mark Chain Planning Director cc: Don DeFord, Esq. Carbondale Board of Trustees Robert Emerson, Esq. Herbert S. Klein NOTICE mit This notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield I, County will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the structure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. At the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the review of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the building permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, if the applicable work has been done by the County. To do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department must be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If 1\\\ Garfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will not complete the final inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Further, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance ce p or the permit will become void. A ne w building p ermit will have to be obtained to start or continue any work. I The above statements are acknowledged by: 2/0e N e ate This signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject to the above statements 51AICyr ......,... -- 1 " V Oe;t ) n Gar �r J 1 C G # •••.... f O . R • ' 501 -503.3 • 1994111ORM BUILDING CODE Chapter 5 GENERAL BUILDING LIMITATIONS SECTION 501 — SCOPE i Buildings and structures shall comply with the location on property, area, height and other provi- - sions of this chapter. For additional limitations or allowances for special uses or occupancies, see the following: SECTION SUBJECT 402 Atria 403 High -rise office buildings and Group R, Division 1 Occupancies 404 Malls 311.9 Open parking structures 307 Group H, Division 6 Occupancies j . 412 Aviation control towers I l 414 Agricultural buildings 3111 Membrane structures SECTION 502 — PREMISES IDENTIFICATION Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. I SECTION 503 — LOCATION ON PROPERTY 7 503.1 General. Buildings shall adjoin or have access to a public way or yard on not less than one ,�YJ�/ side. Required yards shall be permanently maintained. For the purpose of this section, the center line of an adjoining public way shall be considered an adjacent property line. (See also Section 1203.4.) 503.2 Fire Resistance of Walls. 503.2.1 General. Exterior walls shall have fire resistance and opening protection as set forth in 1, Table 5 -A and in accordance with such additional provisions as are set forth in Chapter 6. Distance shall be measured at right angles from the property line. The above provisions shall not apply to walls at right angles to the property line. • Projections beyond the exterior wall shall comply with Section 705 and shall not extend beyond: 1. A point one third the distance to the property line from an assumed vertical plane located where fire- resistive protection of openings is first required due to location on property; or t 2. More than 12 inches (305 mm) into areas where openings are prohibited. 503.2.2 Area of openings. When openings in exterior walls are required to be protected due to distance from property line, the sum of the area of such openings shall not exceed 50 percent of the „- total area of the wall in each story. 503.3 Buildings on Same Property and Buildings Containing Courts. For the purposes of de- termining the required wall and opening protection and roof - covering requirements, buildings on the same property and court walls of buildings over one story in height shall be assumed to have a property line between them. 1 -84 I i i FEB.20.1998 2:16PM TOWN OF CARBONDALE NO.841 P.1 ` "ID • I ry \o fp Town of Carbondale � 5I1 Colorado Avenue (970) 963 -2733 Carbondale, CO 81623 FAX (970) 963-9140 s1 4 FrhruOn 1048 site Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment % Mark Bean, Director Garfield County Building & Planning Department 109 8 Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Appeal of issuance of building permits Dear Mark: On behalf of the Town of Carbondale, I wish to appeal the issuance of three building permits issued to Buffalo Ranch, LLC in the name of Jeff Parker. These three building permits are for lots within Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision (ACRE). The lots in question are: Block 5, Lot 60: Block 6, Lot 22; Block 5, Lot 3. ACRE lies within Carbondale's three mile area as defined in CRS 31 -12 -105 (e). The town is currently formulating a new Comprehensive Plan and is investigating all issues related to the development (and non - development) of private lands within this three mile area. This planning process commenced in June, 1997 and win not be completed for a few more months. The basis for this appeal is that Mr. Parker cannot demonstrate legal access to the sites in question. It is the town's understanding that Mr. Parker has a revocable license to cross the railroad right -of -way currently owned by Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority. After inspecting the county assessors maps, it appears that Mr. Parker has no way to get from the railroad right -of -way to ACRE without trespassing. Currently there is a case pending (97- CV- 199 -C) in which plaintiffs that own lots in ACRE are attempting to condemn access to their lots. The County Planner Director has also indicated to me that he is not certain whether Mr. Parker has legal access to his lots. This would appear to be confirmed by notice signed by Mr. Parker which is provided to applicants for building permits for structures located in subdivisions with `uncertain legal access" (Notice attached). Section 503.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code states "buildings shall join or have grass to a nublic wav or vard on not less than one side. Required yards shall be permanently maintained" (attached). It appears that Mr. Parker does not have access to this right -of -way within ACRE adjoining his lot and therefore the issuance of a building permit according to the 1994 Uniform Building Code should not have been granted. The notice regarding building permits with uncertain legal access states that "if Garfield County is not allowed access to the property, the County will not complete the final FEB.20.1998 2 :16PM TOWN OF CARBONDALE NO.841 P.2 • • County Letter February 20, 1998 Page two inspection and the building can not be lawfully occupied ". This appears to acknowledge that the County may not be able to inspect construction or in this case the installation of manufactured homes. More important, it also invites people to occupy buildings that have not been inspected and have not received a certificate of occupancy. We feel that this is irresponsible. Our primary concern with the issuance of these building permits is that they may negate much of the planning work that has occurred over the last two years for our three mile area before there is an opportunity to complete it. Finally, the ACRE area has uncertain water supply and wastewater treatment issues. It is our understanding that the County would even allow a cistern as a water supply for these building permits. This seems contrary to the County's regulations on insuring adequate water supplies within present subdivisions as well as other areas in the County. For example, would the County allow a cistern to be a legal water source in the Satanic area? The Town in no way wishes to hurt its relationship with the County and hope that this appeal does not do this. We are simply trying to preserve the integrity of our Comprehensive Plan process and hope that it can run its course without undue complications. Please contact me if you need any additional information. Sincerely, 171x.# I C 1 Mark Chain Planning Director cc: Don DeFord, Esq. Carbondale Board of Trustees Robert Emerson, Esq. Herbert S. Klein FEB.20.1998 2 :17PM TOWN OF CARBONDALE 0 NO 841 / 4 3 pew �/�` • . I • I NOTICE 'his notice is provided to the applicant(s) for building permits for ■ tructures located in subdivisions with uncertain legal access. Garfield I 'ounty will issue a building permit for any legally created lot and the tructure can be located on the lot in conformance with the Garfield ;ounty Zoning Resolution and Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. tt the time of submission of a building permit application, a fee for the eview of the plans will be charged and at the time of issuance of the i wilding permit, a fee will be charged. All fees are not refundable, if the pplicable work has been done by the County. 'o do inspections of work, the Garfield County Building Department oust be able to access the property where the structure is being built. If Jarfield County is not allowed to access the property, the County will Lot complete the final inspection and the building cannot be lawfully occupied. It is your responsibility to insure that all work is accessible pursuant to Section 108.01 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. :urther, work pursuant to this permit must commence within 180 days of issuance or the permit will become void. A new building permit will Lave to be obtained to start or continue any work. 1 1 The above statements are acknowledged by: !' Ng e ate 'his signed statement will be attached to the building permit(s) subject 3 the above statements 1 1Ul t yr w....• -•- I� J 'aces s O �,,,mot GarTnslol ..•"�Pe' ..,oa . • • Update on Procurement of Engineering Analysis for Lots 11 thru 15, Block 8, Rifle Village South Amended Plat - 20 February, 1998 At the time of writing this report, no progress had been made toward procuring the engineering services the Board has requested in the above - referenced matter. Chronologically, it breaks down like this: 11 Due to previous work that has been performed by local engineering and geotechnical firms, CTL/Thompson and, to a lesser degree, Hepworth - Pawlak have perceived conflicts. CTL has worked directly for the developer of these lots and HP has been approached to do work for a neighbor who claims to have suffered injury from the developer's work. I have discussed these perceived conflicts with Jim Leuthauser of the County Attorney's Office who advises there may be conflicts. Gamba submitted floodplain information for the project so he obviously would have a conflict. 2] I discussed the situation and nature of work with Yancey Nichol at Sopris Engineering, who reviewed the file and has acknowledged the scope of work would likely cost between $2500 and $3000. Nichol would be willing and capable of performing the work if the limit of $1500 was increased by the Board. 3] Discussed with Michael Erion of Wright Water Engineers the scope of the services, who advised the firm would not likely be interested. 4] Attempted to contact Jim Langford and was advised he is out of town until early March. 5] Yesterday, I discussed the nature of the project with Debbie Duley of SGM, who advised that the work probably could not be performed for the $1500 allotted. She was going to discuss it with Gordon and Meyer, yet I have not heard from her. 6] Tried to discuss with Steve Pawlak the nature of the work and his potential conflict, but he was out of town. I have not heard from him. FEB. 20.1998 2 :17PM TOWN OF CARBONDALE NO.841 P.4 r_ • • • • 501-5033 . 1994 UM BUILDING CODE Chapter 5 • GENERAL BUILDING LIMITATIONS • • i SECTION 601 — SCOPE f Buildings and structures shall comply wirh the location on property, area, height and otter provi- -. ' sions of dila chapter. For additional limitations or allowances for special uses or occupancies. see the following: SECTION SUBJECT 402 Atria 403 High -rise office buildings and Group R, Division 1 Occupancies 404 Malls , 311.9 Open parking structures 307 Group H, Division 6 Occupancies t {1 • 412 Aviation control towers I • 414 Agricultural buildings r 3111 Membrane strictures i SECTION 602 — PREMISES IDENTIFICATION . Approved numbers or addresses shall W provided for all new buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting t progeny. � ••:.? * 1:. -.' 3 - • SECTION 503 — LOCATION ON PROPERTY 503.1 GeneraL Buildings shall adjoin or have access to a public way or yard on not kss than one side. Requited yards shall be petmanondy maintained. r v For the purpose of this section, the center line of an adjoining public way shall be considered an adjacent property line. (See also Section 1203.4.) 503.2 Fin Resistance of Walla 503.2.1 GenetaL Exterior walls shall have fire resistance and opening protection as set forth in ( Table 5-A and in accordance with such additional provisions as are set forth in Chapter 6. Distance shall be meastued at right angles from the property IS. The above provisions shall not apply to walls at right angles to the property Une. 1 Projections beyond the exterior wall shall comply with Section 705 and shall not extend beyond: 1. A point one third the distance to the property line from an assumed vertical plane located . where fie-resistive protection of openings is first required due to location on property: or I. • 2. More than 12 Inches (305 mm) into areas where openings are prohibited. 503.2.2 Ana of openings. When openings in exterior walls are required to be protected due to 1 . distance from property line, the sum of the area of such openings shall not exceed 50 percent of the total area of the wall in each story. 5033 Buildings on Same Property and BuBdings Containing Courts. For the purposes of de- tennining the required wall and opening protection and roof - covering requirements, buildings on • the same propeny and court walls of buildings over one story in height shall be assumed to have a property line between them. 1.404 i I $ENDER: i .Complete items 1 an or eddidonel services. I al to receive the . Compete hems 3,4 al1_Imo foil services (for an • Pdra your name and a son the reverse of thh form so that we can return tNe extra e): o a ro yyoou. e p Mls form to the front of the mellpfoce, or on the back h specs does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address e s Wrhe• Retum Receipt Requested' on Ills mdA M piece belowiarticlenumber. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery eTM Return Receipt will Mow to whom the article was delivered and the date delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. 3. Article Addressed to: 4e. le " Npmber PC tea' 'tee CA CoRp • PR7 . ? �0 NeRbe +- 5 �. km.. an.servit»T, S 9/ /J �t I, J'We/ ❑ Rapist co � ,�,Certifled 13 Expr : :: a€ ❑ Insured 1 • S "? ❑ Retun R IpttOr�t,$dta •,._ ID COD //c • gib f 7. Date of Delivery 3 , .§ 5. Received By (Print Name) 8. Addressee's Abp4es4 (Onty I requested C K and fee Is pale F $ 1 6. SXna re: (A,dd/e�s s or nf) W PS Form 3811, December 1994 102595- 97 -B -on9 Domestic Return Receipt UNITED STATES POS ERVICE 111111 First - Class Mail Postage & Fees Paid LISPS Permit No. 0.10 • Print your name, address, and ZIP Code in this box • . ,t . Ai'- pet„,a. hi. /09 363 I l`1� C, 8/6 o/ • GARFIELD COUNTY Building and Planning Department February 19, 1998 Retum Receipt No. P 164 023 837 Carbondale Corporation c/o Herbert S. Klein 201 North Mill Street Suite 203 Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Appeal of Buffalo Ranch LLC building permits issuance Dear Mr. Klein: By this letter, I am acknowledging the receipt of your client's appeal of the issuance of building permits to the Buffalo Ranch LLC, in a timely manner. Since you are the appellant, it will be your responsibility to publish notice and notify all of the property owners within 200 ft. of the properties in question of the public hearing to consider the appeal. Enclosed with this letter is a public notice form that will have to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the Carbondale area, at least fifteen (15 days prior to the date of the hearing. As you requested, a copy of the notice was faxed to the Glenwood Post for publication, with your office noted as the responsible party for billing. The same notice will have to sent by certified return receipt mail to the owners of the property in question and all owners of property within two hundred (200) ft. of the properties in question, at least five (5) days prior to the hearing. It will be your responsibility to make sure that all notice is published and mailed in a timely manner and provide the proof of publication and the return receipts from the mailing. If you have any questions about this letter or the attachment, you may call this office or the County Attorney's office and we will try to respond in a reasonable time. Sincerely, Mark L. Bean, Director Building & Planning Department enclosures 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945 - 8212/285 -7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • • PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that the Carbondale Corporation has applied to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to appeal an administrative decision of the Building Official of Garfield County to issue building permits in compliance with the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended and the 1994 Uniform Building Code, in connection with the following described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit: Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 5; Lot 60, Block 5; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, as recorded in the Garfield County Clerk & Recorders Office Practical Description: Located approximately 1.5 miles east of Carbondale. Said appeal is to request the recission of the issuance of building permits and individual sewage disposal system permits for single family dwellings on the above - described property. All persons affected by the proposed appeal are invited to appear and state their views, protests or support. If you can not appear personally at such hearing, then you are urged to state your views by letter, as the Zoning Board of Adjustment will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the Appeal. This Appeal application may be reviewed at the office of the Planning Department located at 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Garfield County Courthouse, Glenwood Springs, Colorado between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. That a scheduled public hearing on the application has been set for the 16th day of March 1998, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., at the office of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County Courthouse, Suite 301, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado Planning Department Garfield County Publish one (1) time - February 24, 1998 Bill to: Carbondale Corporation c/o Herbert S. Klein 210 N. Mill St., Suite 203 Aspen, CO 81611 % SENDER: • Comp hems 9, acklitional services. foil services receive (for an • Print your to form name end es on the revers* of this fo so that we can return this extra ee): card you. • � this loan t0 the front M the maltplece, or on the back 1 *pace does not 1. El Addressee's Address 5 • Wrlte Rerum Receipt R pues ted' onthertallpecabebwtheanldenurnb•c 2.❑RestdctedDelivery •The Return Receipt vdtl Mow 10 whom the arllde was delivered end the date delivered. Consult postmaster for fee. I 3. Aricle Addressed to: 4a. ArlI a Number Re-}y v pn �'ece,e4— u r�I ��an� L�� P Ito 40a383Q & X as ( b. Service Type �/ G ❑ Regl toted . et *Certified Ca Le ' o 4, ai ❑ E 4 G ❑ Insured ❑ Retu eseipt Inle se ❑ COD 7. Delp�f DeiIfl� t 6. Received By: (Print Nenre) 8. AddressiOs eriOnty H requested and teals peld)0? FFFf 1 6. Signatur • (Addressee or Agent) X aiI4' Ps For Decem 1994 102595-97 -8-0179 Domestic Return Receipt UNITED STATES POS ERVICE Per First-Class Mall a O. Q. O Pald & Fees 111111 USPs • Print your name, address, and ZIP Code In this box • �,/ggC(e Co at; Wies4 -Pfeil A 1 'CR g f S-irt-e ( )3 C feo ksupt& SeR.njs, Co , 8/47,0 4 ,1;\\ A • �o�2K 1 a . ' " f r 1 CO \\S: yy 9� 1`(x ��.j 1 I I11I1111IIIII11II111111IIIIIIl 11IIf \ V • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building and Planning Department February 19, 1998 Return Receipt No. P 164 023 838 Buffalo Ranch LLC P. O. Box 221 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Appeal of Building Permit Issuance Gentlemen: Enclosed with this letter is a copy of another appeal of the issuance of building permit numbers 6614, 6615 and 6616, for properties owned by the Buffalo Ranch LLC. By this letter, you are put on notice that the appeal filed by the Town of Carbondale is timely and based upon Section 9.04.01 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, "... stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed... ". An appeal of the issuance of the previously noted building permits will be subject to a public hearing before the Garfield County Board of Adjustment, at the same hearing previously noticed for the Carbondale Corporation. Notice of this hearing will also be sent to you by the appellant, by certified return receipt mail. This notice will identify the date, time and place of the hearing. It would be appropriate for you to be present at the hearing. If you have any other questions regarding this action, please call or write to this office and I will attempt to answer your questions. Sincerely, 71 44 Mark L. Bean, Director Building & Planning Department enclosure 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945- 8212/285 -7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building and Planning MEMORADUM TO: GARFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS FROM: STELLA ARCHULETt4fi2 > DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 1998 ��� //////�� RE: SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING The Garfield County Building & Planning Department has scheduled a special Board of Adjustment meeting scheduled for Monday, March 16, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Garfield County Courthouse, Room 301, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado (orginally, the date was set for March 12, but due to prior commitments by the County Attorney, the meeting had to be changed). The purpose of the meeting is the appeal of the issuance of building and septic permits to Buffalo Ranch LLC (copies attached). You will receive further information when the staff report is completed. Please plan on being at this special meeting. It will prove to be informative for all of us. As always, I appreciate your consideration and cooperation. Thanks. 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945- 8212/285 -7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • • PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that the Carbondale Corporation has applied to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to appeal an administrative decision of the Building Official of Garfield County to issue building permits in compliance with the Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended and the 1994 Uniform Building Code, in connection with the following described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit: Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 5; Lot 60, Block 5; Lot 22, Block 6, Aspen Crystal River Estates, as recorded in the Garfield County Clerk & Recorders Office Practical Description: Located approximately 1.5 miles east of Carbondale. Said appeal is to request the recission of the issuance of building permits and individual sewage disposal system permits for single family dwellings on the above - described property. All persons affected by the proposed appeal are invited to appear and state their views, protests or support. If you can not appear personally at such hearing, then you are urged to state your views by letter, as the Zoning Board of Adjustment will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the Appeal. This Appeal application may be reviewed at the office of the Planning Department located at 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Garfield County Courthouse, Glenwood Springs, Colorado between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. That a scheduled public hearing on the application has been set for the 16th day of March 1998, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., at the office of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Garfield County Courthouse, Suite 301, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado Planning Department Garfield County Ttif, "41 LAW OFFICES OF qQ I • HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.0 vw Q s 201 NORTH MILL STREET o.Y HERBERT S. KLEIN SUITE 203 �.- (4 =1�iJ k/ TELLURIDE OFFICE: ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 MILLARD J. ZIMET• P.O. BOX 215 MICHELE NELSON° (910) 925 -8700 300 WEST COLORADO AVENUE THOMAS G. KENNEDY' SUITE (970) 925 -3977 SUITE 2B TELLURIDE, COLORADO 81435 (970) 728-5151 OF COUNSEL' TELECOPIER (970) 728 -3069 JACQUELINE L. GARDNER • also admined in New York RIDGWAY OFFICE: ° also admitted in Calilorn is and Hawaii 122 VILLAGE SQUARE WEST °i also °Omitted In Maryland RIDO WAY, CO 81432 (970) 626-3888 TELECOPIER (970) 626 -3977 February 17, 1998 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED also VIA FACSIMILE: 945 -7785 Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean, Director Garfield County Building & Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Appeal of Issuance of Building Permits Dear Sirs: This law firm represents the Carbondale Corporation, a Colorado corporation ("CC "). I am writing, on behalf of CC, to appeal the issuance of three building permits to Buffalo Ranch, LLC (the "LLC"), pertaining to three lots owned by that LLC in the Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision ("ACRE"). It is our understanding that Mr. Jeff Parker is a principal in this LLC and recently conveyed the lots to the LLC for the purpose of developing them with pre- manufactured homes. The lots in question are: Block 5, Lot 3; Block 5, Lot 60; and Block 6, Lot 22. I was informed that these permits were issued on February 13, 1998. CC is the owner of The Big Four Ranch, located in Garfield County, and is also the owner of 81 of the 141 lots within ACRE. In addition, several of CC's lots within ACRE abut the lots in question. The basis of this appeal is that the LLC cannot demonstrate that it has legal access to its lots and that such access is mandated by the UBC. As you may know, a court case is now pending (97 -CV- 199 -C) in which certain plaintiffs who own lots in ACRE (alleging claims on their own behalf and on behalf of all other owners of lots in ACRE) are attempting to condemn access to their lots and have alleged that there is no other access in ACRE. This case is in its early stages, and will undoubtedly take many more months to resolve. So at this time in order to access the LLC's • • Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean February 17, 1998 Page 2 lots, Mr. Parker (and his builders and contractors) would have to commit trespass because neither the LLC nor Mr. Parker have a current legally enforceable right of access to the lots in question. Likewise, the County would not have the right to access these lots in order to undertake necessary inspections. If the County has any question concerning the LLC's access rights, just ask Mr. Parker to produce a title insurance policy which insures access. Section 108.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code mandates that all work on the lots in question must be accessible in order for required inspections to take place. Without successful inspections the buildings cannot be lawfully occupied. The permittee is obligated to ensure that such access is available. These are not debatable requirements. Although the building department is aware that access is not presently available and has disclosed these requirements in writing to the LLC and Mr. Parker, also advising Mr. Parker that his construction may not be lawfully occupied unless access was available for the purpose of inspections, the permits were issued. Disclosing these legal requirements to Mr. Parker does not make the issuance of the permits legal nor does it shift to the LLC the County's liability for its failure to enforce basic health and safety laws. Section 8.01 of the Garfield County Zoning Regulations states that the Building Official "...shall not issue any permit unless the plans for the proposed erection, construction ... fully conform to all provisions of this Resolution and all provisions of the Building Code affecting the subject property." This is also a requirement of State statutes. See 30 -28 -205, CRS 1997. The issuance of the permits is contrary to the clear wording of the UBC and unlawful. Issuing permits for work that cannot be inspected invites non - compliance with health and safety laws and assures that substantial monies will be expended on the construction of houses that cannot be lawfully occupied. To say that the County is protected because the construction cannot obtain a certificate of occupancy without a final inspection and therefore cannot be lawfully occupied, is absurd when the County is not able to inspect the construction to detect an unlawful occupancy. This position also ignores the necessary inspections during construction that must take place to satisfy the UBC. The issuance of these permits will set a very dangerous precedent and could completely emasculate the County's ability to enforce its building and zoning code. If people can obtain a building permit to build something that cannot be inspected, the potential for abuse is unlimited. From a public safety point of A' 4 • • Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean February 17, 1998 Page 3 view, the dangers of this situation are obvious. Emergency services are not able to reach the scene of fire or accident. Septic systems (or the absence of them) are not inspected. Water supplies may not exist. Especially in ACRE, with its 141 lots, numerous structures could be built by trespassers without any County inspections. What the building department is doing here is a throwback to the days before building and zoning regulations were first promulgated in Colorado, unlawful and, quite frankly, shocking in light of the significant public discussion concerning growth in our region. The LLC and Mr. Parker will not be harmed by the rescission of the building permits, because at this time there is no legal way for the LLC or Mr. Parker to get to their lots to commence construction; they can't legally use these permits -- rather, the only way they can use them is to trespass. And, likewise, the only way the County could inspect the construction is by its trespass. Accordingly, CC respectfully requests that the Zoning Board of Adjustment rescind these building permits. Please inform me of the date that the pubic hearing will take place on this appeal. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding any of the foregoing. Very truly yours, HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: He I bert S. Klein cc: Garfield County Board of County Commissioners Don DeFord, Esq. Carbondale Town Trustees Mark Chain, Carbondale Planning Director Robert Emerson, Esq. Carbondale Town Attorney Terry Considine F 8HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOC TO 1 • 970 946 7786 1998.02 -17 10104 8290 P.01/04 • LAN OFFICES OF HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P. C. 201 NORTH MILL STREET SUITE 2D3 HERBERT R. IQJEM ASDCN, OOICRA10 61611 7iF[i OFFM'O: ICZARO 0. 2?r? (970) 925 -6700 P.O. 90E 215 SIGNS G. WIGS FA% 1970) 92S-3177 3001198P OOLOBADO AVENDE aIIC71Q'E =Lace SUITE 29 LURID% COURADO 31435 (970) 726 - Sisi FAX (970) 72134069 * taw hatted in New YOrk `aLe atlnittM in Maryland way 01171n81 a ada0 acinittecl in California and Hawaii 122 SWAM WARE saqp =GAY, OOIRPRDD 51132 (970) 626 -)DOS FAR (970) 626 - 3977 LETTER OF FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL Date: February 17, 1998 Fax No.: 945 -7785 PLEASE DELIVER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO: Name: Mr. Mark Bean Don Deford, Esq. From: Herbert S. Klein, Reg. Re: Appeal of Issuance of Building Permits Transmitting and /or Messages: - Letter dated 2/17/98 to Mark Bean Total Number of Pages: 3 (plus one for this cover sheet). If you do not receive all of the pages, please call (970) 925 -8700 as soon as possible. If you are not the intended addressee of this document we regret the inconvenience caused you by ite receipt. We ask that you telephone us, collect, to make arrangements for its disposition. Because this document may contain privileged or confidential information intended only for the addressee, we must request that you take such steps as may be necessary to insure that this transmission is either destroyed or returned to us at our expense. Thank you for your assistance. FROM (HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOC TO 970 945 7785 1998.02-17 10105 1*290 P.02/04 • • LAW OFFICES OF HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 201 NORTH MILL STREET HERBERT S. KLEIN SUITE 203 TELLURIDE OF170E1 MILLARD J. ZIMET' ASPEN COLORADO mat 1 P.O. BOX 215 MICHELE NELSON' (970) 2255700 300 WEST COLORADO AVENUE THOMAS 0. KENNEDY° TEtECOPIER (370) 0264077 SUITE 2e TELLURIDE. COLORADO S1AS6 1670) 728 OF COUNSEL: TlI.E00°I!R (P70)72E JACQUELINE L. GARDNER 'a"OatlmIIN0 m Nino 70k RIDGWAY OFFICE "also aSn4e6 w. CalllomS and Small 122 VILLAGE SQUARE WEST °YLM 6RNAM 16 MarytW RIDRWAY, 00 SUM (970) 6282336 TELEOOPIER (570) 82 69977 February 17, 1998 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED also VIA FACSIMILE: 945 -7785 Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean, Director Garfield County Building & Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Anneal of Isuance of Building Permits Dear Sirs: This law firm represents the Carbondale Corporation, a Colorado corporation ( "CC "). I am writing, on behalf of CC, to appeal the issuance of three building permits to Buffalo Ranch, LLC (the "LLC") , pertaining to three lots owned by that LLC in the Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision ( "ACRE "). It is our understanding that Mr. Jeff Parker is a principal in this LLC and recently conveyed the lots to the LLC for the purpose of developing them with pre- manufactured homes. The lots in question are: Block 5, Lot 3; Block 5, Lot 60; and Block 6, Lot 22. I was informed that these permits were issued on February 13, 1998. CC is the owner of The Big Four Ranch, located in Garfield County, and is also the owner of 81 of the 141 lots within ACRE. In addition, several of CC's lots within ACRE abut the lots in question. The basis of this appeal is that the LLC cannot demonstrate that it has legal access to its lots and that such access is mandated by the UBC. As you may know, a court case is now pending (97 -CV- 199 -C) in which certain plaintiffs who own lots in ACRE (alleging claims on their own behalf and on behalf of all other owners of lots in ACRE) are attempting to condemn access to their lots and have alleged that there is no other access in ACRE. This case is in its early stages, and will undoubtedly take many more months to resolve. So at this time in order to access the LLC's t _ FROM :HERBERT S. KLEIN 8 ASSOC TO t 970 946 7786 1998.02-17 10:0S #290 P.03/04 • • Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean February 17, 1998 Page 2 lots, Mr. Parker (and his builders and contractors) would have to commit trespass because neither the LLC nor Mr. Parker have a current legally enforceable right of access to the lots in question. Likewise, the County would not have the right to access these lots in order to undertake necessary inspections. If the County has any question concerning the LLC's access rights, just ask Mr. Parker to produce a title insurance policy which insures access. Section 108.1 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code mandates that all work on the lots in question must be accessible in order for required inspections to take place. Without successful inspections the buildings cannot be lawfully occupied. The permittee is obligated to ensure that such access is available. These are not debatable requirements. Although the building department is aware that access is not presently available and has disclosed these requirements in writing to the LLC and Mr. Parker, also advising Mr. Parker that his construction may not be lawfully occupied unless access was available for the purpose of inspections, the permits were issued. Disclosing these legal requirements to Mr. Parker does not make the issuance of the permits legal nor does it shift to the LLC the County's liability for its failure to enforce basic health and safety laws. Section 8.01 of the Garfield County Zoning Regulations states that the Building Official "...shall not issue any permit unless the plans for the proposed erection, construction ... fully conform to all provisions of this Resolution and all provisions of the Building Code affecting the subject property." This is also a requirement of State statutes. See 30 -28 -205, CRS 1997. The issuance of the permits is contrary to the clear wording of the MSC and unlawful. Issuing permits for work that cannot be inspected invites non - compliance with health and safety laws and assures that substantial monies will be expended on the construction of houses that cannot be lawfully occupied. To say that the County is protected because the construction cannot obtain a certificate of occupancy without a final inspection and therefore cannot be lawfully occupied, is absurd when the County is not able to inspect the construction to detect an unlawful occupancy. This position also ignores the necessary inspections during construction that must take place to satisfy the DEC. The issuance of these permits will set a very dangerous precedent and could completely emasculate the County's ability to enforce its building and zoning code. If ,people can obtain a building permit to build something that cannot be inspected, the potential for abuse is unlimited. From a public safety point of i 'FROM :HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOC TO : 970 945 7785 1998,02 -17 10 :06 #290 P.04/04 • • Garfield County Zoning Board of Adjustment c/o Mark Bean February 17, 1998 Page 3 view, the dangers of this situation are obvious. Emergency services are not able to reach the scene of fire or accident. Septic systems (or the absence of them) are not inspected. Water supplies may not exist. Especially in ACRE, with its 141 lots, numerous structures could be built by trespassers without any County inspections. What the building department is doing here is a throwback to the days before building and zoning regulations were first promulgated in Colorado, unlawful and, quite frankly, shocking in light of the significant public discussion concerning growth in our region. The LLC and Mr. Parker will not be harmed by the rescission of the building permits, because at this time there is no legal way for the LLC or Mr. Parker to get to their lots to commence construction; they can't legally use these permits -- rather, the only way they can use them is to trespass. And, likewise, the only way the County could inspect the construction is by its trespass. Accordingly, CC respectfully requests that the Zoning Board of Adjustment rescind these building permits. Please inform me of the date that the pubic hearing will take place on this appeal. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding any of the foregoing. Very truly yours, HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: Hefbert S. Klein cc: Garfield County Board of County Commissioners Don DeFord, Esq. Carbondale Town Trustees Mark Chain, Carbondale Planning Director Robert Emerson, Esq. Carbondale Town Attorney Terry Considine 1 , Garfield County Building and Planning 109 8th St.. Suite 903 Glennood Syringe. CO USA 61601 Tel (970) 945 -8212 Fax (970) 946 7786 FAX SHEET PATE: TIME: 91C TO: // /GGAA.O 2/� d i FROM: �/d�Ir' )6"69/1/ TEL: TEL: 4 FAX: 92-r- 61 FAX: SUBJECT: te4!n9Ld Ave', fQ�/Y # OF PAGES: CC: A MESSAGE FOR YOU... pav 0A Cwt G Ar e c oes_Gd%o et ti s 5,44z- upon/ ESI. /SS'' p r, l�sveo SALs 0 g g� zt /.5Eth€fl W • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building and Planning Department February 13, 1998 VIA FACSIMTL,F AND HARD COPY VIA MATT. Herbert S. Klein Herbert S. Klein & Associates, P. C. 201 North Mill Street Suite 203 Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Buffalo Ranch, LLC building permits Dear Herb: Per your request, I am notifying you of the issuance of three (3) building permits to the Buffalo Ranch, LLC, for single family dwellings in the Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision in Garfield County, Colorado. Sincerely, Mark L. Bean, Director Building & Planning Department xc: Don DeFord, County Attorney 109 8th Street, Suite 303 . 945 - 8212/285 -7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • • k , • Itt LAW OFFICES OF HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C 0 ) 1998 201 NORTH MILL STREET SUITE 203 +» HERBERT S. KLEIN ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 $ : MILLARD J. ZIMEP (970) 925 -8700 P.O. BOX 215 MICHKLE BE[SON FAX (970) 925 -3977 300 WEST COLORADO MeV 714CM19u G. KE SUITE 2B TELLURIDE, COLORADO 81935 (970) 728 -5151 FAX (970) 728 -3069 also adnitted in New York ° also admitted in Maryland RIDGiAY OFFICE: b aled admitted in California and Hawaii 122 VILLAGE SQUARE WEST RIDGWAY, COLORADO 81432 (970) 626 -3888 FAX (970) 626 -3977 February 5, 1998 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mark Bean Garfield County Building & Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Building Permit Applications of Buffalo Ranch, LLC Dear Mark: It is my understanding that Jeffrey Parker, through his entity Buffalo Ranch, LLC, has applied for building permit applications in respect of three lots owned by that LLC in the Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivision. The Lots in question are: (a) Block 5, Lot 3; (b) Block 5, Lot 60; and (c) Block 6, Lot 22. Please accept this letter as constituting the formal request of my clients, Carbondale Corporation and Terry Considine, that I receive immediate notice in the event that these applications are granted. My clients are adjacent landowners and do not believe that, at this time, the issuance of these permits will comply with the UBC and other applicable law. As you know, the Garfield County Code provides that an appeal of the issuance of building permits must be filed within seven days after the issuance. My clients intend to file such an appeal if the permits are granted, and desire to have notice of the issuance so that they may timely file such an appeal. I suggest that you provide me with notice by all of the following methods: by facsimile to me at 925 -3977, by leaving a phone message for me at 925 -8700, and by mailing a notice to me at the above Aspen address. • • Mark Bean February 5, 1998 Page 2 Thank you in advance for your consideration in this regard, and please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding any of the foregoing. Very truly yours, HERBERT S. KLEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: Herbert S. Klein cc: Don Deford Terry Considine • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building and Planning Department February 11, 1998 Buffalo Ranch L.L.C. c/o Jeff Parker P.O. Box 221 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Building Permit applications Dear Mr. Parker: Please consider this letter to be a written summary of our phone conversation on February 10, 1998, regarding three (3) building permit applications requested by the Buffalo Ranch L.L.C.. As I noted, the applications have been reviewed and approved by the Building and Planning Department, and are ready for you to pick up and pay the remaining fees. As I noted in the conversation, I would encourage you not to pay the remaining fees and pick up the permits, until you are convinced that there is no other altemative available. At a minimum, I would suggest waiting until after the March 18t meeting in Carbondale to discuss the issues revolving around the Te -Ke -Ki and Aspen Crystal River Estates subdivisions. Your permits will need to be paid for and issued within 90 days of this letter, which should give everyone ample opportunity to try and come to an agreement that will satisfy all of the interested parties. If you chose to pick up the permits before there is any resolution of these issues, you will be required to sign the statement that I faxed down to you yesterday. A copy of the statement is enclosed for your review. Basically, the statement is acknowledging that the County Building Department is not responsible for gaining legal access to the property for inspection purposes. If access is not available, it may result in the invalidation of the building permits. If there is any difference in your understanding of our conversation, please let me know. Sincerely, i Mark . Bean, Director Building & Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945- 8212/285 -7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • 1 es Bell Country Homes, Inc. B ELL Post Office Box 229 / New Castle, Colorado 81647 � (970) 984 -3500 • Fax: (970) 984 -0733 COUNTRY Toll free 1-800-378-5508 HOMES January 23, 1998 Mr. Don Owens Garfield County Building and Planning 109 8th Street Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Subject: Design Roof Loads For Homes Sold By Bell Country Dear Mr. Owens: This letter is intended to certify that all manufactured homes ordered by Bell Country Homes, for placement in Garfield County, will have a minimum design roof load of 40 psf. The homes will also be ordered to meet the 80mph and 15 lb wind load. The manufacturers that we are presently working with include Golden West Homes, Atlantic Homes and Cavco Homes. All models ordered, weather UBC or HUD code will meet the above mentioned minimum criteria. Please keep this letter on file for future reference. If you have any questions please call. Respectfully Submitted, BELL COUNTRY HOMES Fred R. Cameron Construction Manager cc: Deanna Baker - Sales Manager - - - - -- ta A . , St eII rbon le i 3 AV Rd �KP `,, Si k W K K It it I h 1000“. A _ a 1( s as — _ __. \ . fi _ II 1 101 , - A # 41 1 \ 4 i n [ LIZ1_ i �� 111 � ., , i , ,..,‘„ 15 N. J t xC ` \ - _ BASE MAP, VICINITY of TE -KE -KI & _— ,,__-,- - ASPEN CRYSTAL r' r� -: - RIVER ESTATES ch at I' a r t i oklit �. `� ' -_ SUBDIVISIONS •� LEGEND �� _ - — C _ TM of CARBONOAEF • C_ . -Jl SUBDIVISIONS • �� 31 E ] BEN / / US Or Slab MOM _. / , V Vi1 Pond Real � J Gravel Rood iii I�w" f\✓/1 � Unimproved Road / / /— r . - +-4 .— -- " _ , �,.._,_ _., � / ,, f /� it Berard& Strom _,- L Y_. Intumllllnl Slnam f r , ' _ 41/4 ,Ind I Ni %oMOat % , � , , G , 2, ,` f e . Te - Q ` O ; Off ;;;, 1 1 NI . r i P < 41,.Rt • ��o �� OW' �mny E ` •1 :Ste, ° °�, `,`���■ 1 a 4„%% =r1 4 t r i 1 6 ! 11( MAP 700327 I) Colon.* 73.73 7.5 eaL0ao quad ..a. UMer) 2) Ilot. ma Ia1 .r . 000 IIHQ. lad Monw.mmr Surla. Mano3.m.e1 5mluf .S "___ _____,_____ )) 4anlna two u.e 4 Cnlp Lrarm..l lm. (nO) 4) wide bony r.W1 1 rl.nnin1 Bwawm Id. (OO) . -- 114 •• It . Ned IMww4Uw NM NSW CII e l 4 wt . 1444I Mat. ll.. .q ..41w „ b e t nth el Oa •r M. b W w�nnx�xMM W W 44041 b St- Ow a.14 mw.. tl4.m. IN .II to M6:41 Soo WW1 May. PC M.M. NS SCAM ANao COUNTY LOCATION( NAG ` (II 81X. hadvanip A.Lu r..) ��� i mn wa Ml.naJ - 1 ! ? d* MIM , r cyl fll ri ii s. I Iota I xa.m.nv.M.n Garfield County_ ..w.. RY... RI. a .w 111.11 w m ___ _ -- _ - -_ ..wNp 11w.. WINO 501 -503.3 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1994 ! Chapter 5 - GENERAL BUILDING LIMITATIONS N the . SECTION 501 — SCOPE and rovi- i Buildings and structures shall comply with the location on property, area, height and other p ter i sions of this chapter. For additional limitations or allowances for special uses or occupancies, see the following: SECTION SUBJECT 402 Atria 50? 403 High -rise office buildings and Group R, 503 _. Division 1 Occupancies 503 404 Malls a 311.9 Open parking structures 50: .1:11 307 Group H. Division 6 Occupancies firs' 412 Aviation control towers p 414 Agricultural buildings loc _l 3111 Membrane structures 50. fin — .. - - h -, - SECTION 502 — PREMISES IDENTIFICATION tau Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new buildings in such a position as to be 50. plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. . col uo SECTION 503 — LOCATION ON PROPERTY °t 503.1 General Buildings shall , adjoin or have access to a public way or yard on not less considered than one 50 side. Required yrds shall be permanently maintained. fir For the purpose of this section the cent line of an adjoining public way shall be an adjacent property line. (See also Section 1203.4.) c` 503.2 Fire Resistance of Walls. qu 503.2.1 General. Exterior walls shall have fire resistance and opening protection as set forth in Table 5 -A and in accordance with such additional provisions as are set forth in Chapter 6. Distance shall be measured at right angles from the property line. The above provisions shall not apply to walls at right angles to the property line. bt Projections beyond the exterior wall shall comply with Section 705 and shall not extend beyond: 1. A point one third the distance to the property line from an assumed vertical plane located where fire- resistive protection of openings is first required due to location on property; or `I 2. More than 12 inches (305 mm) into areas where openings are prohibited. I» d tane from prop li the When um o ti the area of exterior uch openiings are required to be shall not exceed 50 percent of the II total area of the wall in each stor i 503.3 Buildings on Same Property and Buildings Containing Courts. For the purposes of de- termining the required wall and opening protection and roof - covering requirements, buildings on the same property and court walls of buildings over o story in height shall be assumed to have a property line between them. -i I 1-84 • 107.6 - 108.5.2 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. The filed by the original not authorize not later than 180 days after the date of feet en application payment. SECTION 108 — INSPECTIONS 108.1 General. All construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspec- 1 tion by the building official and all such construction or work shall remain accessible and exposed Il for inspection purposes until approved by the building official. In addition, certain types of con- - struction shall have continuous inspection as specified in Section 1701.5. .' Approval as a result of an inspection shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the 1l provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction. Inspections presuming to give au- thority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid. It shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense en- tailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow inspection. A survey of the lot may be required by the building official to verify that the structure is located in accordance with the approved plans. 108.2 Inspection Record Card. Work requiring a permit shall not be commenced until the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder shall have posted or otherwise made available an inspection record card such as to allow the building official to conveniently make the required entries thereon regarding inspection of the work. This card shall be maintained available by the permit holder until final approval has been granted by the building official. • 108.3 Inspection Requests. It shall be the duty of the person doing the work authorized by a per- : to notify the building official that such work is ready for inspection. The building official may require that every request for inspection be filed at least one working day before such inspection is desired. Such request may be in writing or by telephone at the option of the building official. il It shall be the duty of the person requesting any inspections required by this code to provide ac- - cess to and means for inspection of such work. 108.4 Approval Required. Work shall not be done beyond the point indicated in each successive inspection without first obtaining the approval of the building official. The building official, upon notification, shall make the requested inspections and shall either indicate that portion of the con- -" struction is satisfactory as completed, or shall notify the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder wherein the same fails to comply with this code. Any portions which do not comply shall be corrected and such portion shall not be covered or concealed until authorized by the building offi- cial L. There shall be a final inspection and approval of all buildings and structures when completed and ready for occupancy and use. 108.5 Required Inspections. 1 108.5.1 General. Reinforcing steel or structural framework of any part of any building or struc- "r ture shall not be covered or concealed without first obtaining the approval of the building official. The building official, upon notification, shall make the inspections set forth in the following sub- , . sections. 108.5.2 Foundation inspection. To be made after excavations for footings are complete and any required reinforcing steel is in place. For concrete foundations, any required forms shall be in place 1-8 I 1001- 1001.2 1994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE I Chapter 10 MEANS OF EGRESS SECTION 1001 — GENERAL 1001.1 Scope and Standards of Quality. Every building or portion thereof shall be provided with exits as required by this chapter. The standards listed below labeled a "U.B.C. standard" are also listed in Chapter 35, Part 11, and i I are part of this code. The other standards listed below are recognized standards and as such are not adopted as part of this code (see Sections 3502 and 3503). 1. Power doors. ■ j 1.1 U.B.C. Standard 10 -1, Power - operated Exit Doors 1.2 U.B.C. Standard 7 -8, Horizontal Sliding Fire Doors Used in an Exit 2. Stairway numbering system. U.B.C. Standard 10 -2, Stairway Identification 1 3. Hardware. U.B.C. Standard 10 -4, Panic Hardware 1001.2 Definitions. For the purpose of this chapter, certain terms are defined as follows: BALCONY, EXTERIOR EXIT, is a landing or porch projecting from the wall of a building, and which serves as a required exit. The long side shall be at least 50 percent open, and the open area above the guardrail shall be so distributed as to prevent the accumulation of smoke or toxic gases. EXIT is a continuous and unobstructed means of egress to a public way and shall include inter- vening aisles, doors, doorways, gates, corridors, exterior exit balconies, ramps, stairways, pressur- ized enclosures, horizontal exits, exit passageways, exit courts and yards. • EXIT COURT is a yard or court providing access to a public way for one or more required exits. = EXIT PASSAGEWAY is an enclosed exit connecting a required exit or exit court with a public way. s I EXTERIOR STAIRWAY is a stairway that is open on two adjacent sides, except for required ss structural columns and open -type handrails and guardrails. The adjoining open areas shall be either IMM yards, courts or public ways; the other two sides may be enclosed by the exterior walls of the build- ing. v HORIZONTAL EXIT is an exit from one building into another building on approximately the same level, or through or around a wall constructed as required for a two -hour occupancy separation and which completely divides a floor into two or more separate areas so as to establish an area of refuge affording safety from fire or smoke coming from the area from which escape is made. 1111 I INTERIOR STAIRWAY is any stairway not meeting the definition of an exterior stairway. MULTITHEATER COMPLEX is a building or portion thereof containing two or more motion '-'" picture auditoriums which are served by a common lobby. PANIC HARDWARE is a door - latching assembly incorporating an unlatching device, the acti- vating portion of which extends across at least one half the width of the door leaf on which it is in- stalled. i PRIVATE STAIRWAY is a stairway serving one tenant only. PUBLIC WAY is any street, alley or similar parcel of land essentially unobstructed from the ground to the sky which is deeded, dedicated or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public — 1 for public use and having a clear width of not less than 10 feet (3048 mm). 1 -172 7 . • ir i • •