Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 CorrespondenceGarfield County Building & Planning Memo To: Board of County Commissioners From: Mark Bean, Director Date: 11/26/02 Re: Hicks/P.C.I. LLLP SUP On August 5, 2002, the Board continued the application for the Hicks/P.C.I. LLLP Special Use Permit for a Two-family dwelling to December 2, 2002. The attached staff report identified the major issue surrounding the approval of the proposed SUP as the legal and adequate source of domestic water for the two dwellings. At that time, Mr. Hicks stated that he had a well permit for the 35 acre tract that the two-family dwelling is located, but he was unwilling to state that the well would be drilled and supply water to the residential units in the structure. At that time the Hicks and the Town of Carbondale were in the middle of litigating the issue of whether or not the Hicks had unlimited use of the Nettle Creek water from a water line that runs through his property. The Town and the Hicks reached an out of court settlement regarding this issue in early November. The Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement reached by the Town, the Hicks and P.C.I. L.L.L.P. (a limited liability limited partnership owned or controlled by the Hicks) has a number of limitations included in the agreement. A summary of these issues is as follows: • All usage will be metered at the Town's waterline and the Hicks will be allowed to use 50,000 gallons per month free of charge, with an option to use another 50,000 gallons a month at the Town's current out-of-town rates. All water will come from a % inch tap. • Any use of over 100,000 gallons in any month shall be corrected by the Hicks and water used in excess of 100,000 gallons per month will cost twice the out-of-town rate. There are provisions to cut off water use to the Hicks if water payments are not made or repairs are not completed in a timely manner. • The Town and the Hicks agreed that the total number of dwellings on the property using Town will water will be limited to six (6). Included in the six units are the two residences in the proposed two-family dwelling. No water will be extended to any other dwellings without Town approval. • Water to property may be shut off in the cases of an emergency related to the waterline or treatment plant. Additionally, all water is subject to the same restrictions imposed on other Town water users, i.e. drought restrictions. 1 • All waterlines or appurtenances installed by the Hicks shall be in accordance with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) standards. • Once the water is past the meter at the water line, the Hicks have complete control of the water use and quality. • Should the Town abandon the existing waterline and move it to the State Highway 133 right-of- way, the Hicks will still be allowed to use up to 100,000 gallons a month. They will be obligated to pay the then -applicable out-of-town rates for all of the water used on the property. Based on the water service agreement, staff can say that the Hicks will be able to provide water to the proposed two-family dwelling from the Town of Carbondale waterline. While this addresses the legal ability to provide water, it will be necessary to address some additional issues regarding physical adequacy of the supply. The following issues need to be addressed as conditions of approval: • A single family dwelling uses on average 350 gallons of water per day and the two dwellings in the proposed two-family dwelling will use an average of 700 gpd. This gives an average of 21,233 gallons of water per month. Since the proposed two-family dwelling is on a separate 35 acre tract and the Hicks control the water to both properties at this time, it is appropriate for the Board to require that the Hicks guarantee a minimum of 700 gpd to the property the subject of the Special Use Permit application. • Since the water will be supplied to the two-family dwelling from a waterline that crosses over a separate property owned by the applicants, it will be necessary to have a legally described waterline easement from the 35 acre tract to the waterline serving the property. • A water sharing agreement needs to be drawn up between the Hicks and PCI that describes the rights of the 35 acre tract with the two-family dwelling to receive water from the Town of Carbondale waterline, in an amount not less than 700 gpd and guaranteed to go with the property ownership, since there is no assurance that the property will not be sold to another individual. • If the Hicks decide to store the water on site through the use of a storage tank, the water quality can be compromised. If storage is used, the water coming out of the tank needs to be treated to make sure that it continues to meet CDPHE standards for a community water supply. Based on the use of the proposed water supply from the Town of Carbondale, staff recommends that the Board approve the Special Use Permit for a two-family dwelling with the following conditions of approval: 1. All representations of the applicant in the application and during the public hearing shall be considered conditions of approval, unless modified by the County Commissioners. 2. Prior to the issuance of the Special Use permit, the following conditions shall be met: a. A water sharing agreement needs to be drawn up between the the Hicks and PCI LLLP that describes the rights of the 35 acre tract with the two-family dwelling, to receive water from the Town of Carbondale waterline, in an amount not less than 700 gpd and a quality consistent with the CDPHE community water supply water quality standards. A copy of the recorded agreement shall be presented to the Planning Department. b. A legally described waterline easement will be described between the waterline coming off of the Town of Carbondale waterline and the 35 acre tract on which the two-family dwelling is located and it will be recorded in the Garfield County Clerk and Recorders office. Also incorporated into the agreement by reference will be the Water Service and Pipeline • Page 2 Easement Agreement with the Town of Carbondale. A copy of the recorded easement shall be presented to the County Planning Department. 3. The dwelling units in the two-family dwelling shall not be conveyed separately, unless a subsequent approval of the subdivision of the structure is approved by the Board of County Commissioners as a result of complying with the applicable subdivision regulations. 4. This permit is approved based on the legal and physical supply of domestic water to the two- family dwelling being from the Town of Carbondale water supply. If the water supply for the property is converted to an on-site well at a future date, the owner of the property will submit the following information and meeting the criteria noted, to the Planning Department for review and approval, prior to disconnecting the two-family dwelling from the Town of Carbondale supply: a. That a four (4) hour pump test be performed on the well to be used; b. A well completion report demonstrating the depth of the well, the characteristics of the aquifer and the static water level; c. A written opinion of the person conducting the well test that this well should be adequate to supply water to the number of proposed lots; d. An assumption of an average or no less than 3.5 people per dwelling unit, using 100 gallons of water per person, per day; e. If the well is to shared, a legal, well sharing agreement which discusses all easements and costs associated with the operation and maintenance of the system and who will be responsible for paying these costs and how assessments will be made for these costs. g. The water quality be tested by an approved testing laboratory and meet State guidelines conceming bacteria and nitrates. 5. Once the Board makes a decision regarding the Special Use request, Staff will provide the Applicant with a signed resolution memorializing the action taken by the Board. Following the Board's approval, this office will issue the Special Use Permit to the applicant. If the Board's approval includes specific conditions of approval to be met, this office will not issue the Official Special Use Permit certificate until the applicant has satisfied all conditions of approval. The Special Use Permit approval is not finalized until this office has issued the Official Special Use Permit certificate signed by the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners. • Page 3 WATER SERVICE AND PIPELINE EASEMENT AGREEMENT The Town of Carbondale, Colorado, a Colorado Municipal Corporation, acting by and through its Board of Trustees (hereinafter the "Town"), David W. Hicks and Connie F. Hicks (hereinafter the "Hicks") and P.C.I., L.L.L.P. (a limited liability limited partnership owned or controlled by David W. Hicks and Connie F. Hicks, hereinafter "PCI") agree as follows: RECITALS a. The Town owns and operates a municipal water system which obtains water from several sources, including a pipeline which delivers water to the Town from Nettle Creek, a tributary of the Crystal River located on the northern slopes of Mount Sopris about eight miles south of the Town (hereinafter referred to as the "Town's Nettle Creek water main"). As used in this agreement, the term "Town potable water" shall refer to water diverted by the Town from Nettle Creek and its tributaries, treated at the Town's Nettle Creek water treatment plant, and delivered through the Town's Nettle Creek water main for use by customers of the Town's municipal water system. b. Along its route from Nettle Creek to Town, the Town's Nettle Creek water main traverses numerous private properties, including a property known as "the Cerise Ranch" that was at one point owned by Victor Cerise and later by his son, Flaven J. Cerise. c. On or about September 14, 1953, the Town and Victor Cerise entered into a Pipe Line Right of Way agreement, a copy of which was recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk & Recorder on February 11, 1954 in Book 275 on Page 181, Reception No. 185012 (the "1953 Agreement"). Among other things, the 1953 Agreement provided that Victor Cerise conveyed to the Town a 40 -foot wide pipeline easement. Such conveyance was made in consideration of Victor Cerise being given a right to "install a 3/4 inch water line onto said Town water line" and to receive "free domestic water for so long as the easement or right of way above described is used by the Town for water pipe lines." d. Hicks purchased the Cerise Ranch in 1993. This ownership is evidenced by a Warranty Deed from Flaven J. Cerise recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk & Recorder on July 21, 1993 in Book 869 on Page 609, Reception No. 450170, and a Personal Representative's Deed recorded in the same office and on the same date as Reception No. 450171 in Book 869 at Page 614. TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Hicks/PCI Page 2 e. As of the date of this Agreement, Hicks own most of the property formerly known as the Cerise Ranch, with the following two exceptions: (1) Hicks developed a portion of the Cerise Ranch into a six -lot subdivision known as Prince Creek Estates. This subdivision is described on a Final Plat recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk & Recorder on August 2, 1994, Reception No. 466582. (No lots within Prince Creek Estates are presently connected to the Town's water system). (2) Hicks conveyed a 35.274 acre portion of the Cerise Ranch to PCI, LLP (referred to in this Agreement as "PCI property") pursuant to a Quit Claim Deed recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk & Recorder on August 16, 2000 in Book 1202 on Page 302, Reception No. 567787. (A barn facility, which includes two integrated residences and an office, has been built on this parcel by the Hicks, which facility is presently connected to the Town's water system via underground delivery lines that extend across the Hicks and PCI properties). The property presently owned by the Hicks (the "Hicks property"), therefore, consists of the property described in the Warranty Deed referred to above in recital paragraph d., less Prince Creek Estates and the PCI property. f. The Town and the Hicks are presently litigating the scope of the Town's obligation to provide free Town potable water pursuant to the 1953 Agreement in Garfield County District Court Case No. 00CV035-A. Many issues raised by the parties in this case were determined by the Court in its Order on Cross Motions for Summary Judgment entered February 12, 2001. Remaining issues are scheduled for trial to the Court on November 18, 19, and 20, 2002. g. In order to avoid the expense associated with further litigation, the Town and the Hicks (on behalf of themselves and PCI) have mutually agreed to settle their respective claims and to clarify the terms of the easement for the Town's water main and the Town's obligation to provide free Town potable water pursuant to the 1953 Agreement. WHEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained in this Agreement, and other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is TOWN OF CARBONDALE-HicksSettlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Hicks/PCI Page 3 acknowledged, the Town and the Hicks, for themselves and on behalf of P.C.I., L.L.L.P., agree as follows: 1. 1953 AGREEMENT. This document is intended to interpret and amend the 1953 Agreement. Although the 1953 Agreement shall remain in effect, the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement shall govern in the event of any conflict between the two documents. 2. No SERVICE TO PRINCE CREEK ESTATES. The Town shall have no obligation to provide any water service to the Prince Creek Estates subdivision. 3. EASEMENT FOR NETTLE CREEK WATER MAIN. a. The Hicks and PCI hereby confirm that, by virtue of the 1953 Agreement, the Town has a permanent non-exclusive water pipeline easement within twenty feet (20') on either side of the centerline of the Town's Nettle Creek water main as now in place on the Hicks and PCI properties. The parties agree that the purpose of this water pipeline easement is for access to, and operation, maintenance, repair, replacement and enlargement of, the Town's water main as well as the right to monitor, maintain, repair and replace the existing 3/ -inch water tap and meter which delivers water to the Hicks and PCI properties subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Any repair, excavation, or replacement of the existing line shall be promptly executed in a good and workmanlike manner. No excavation shall be left open unless protected in a manner reasonably intended to prevent persons, equipment or livestock from falling into the excavation. b. To the extent that the location of the Town's Nettle Creek water main differs from the location set forth in the 1953 Agreement, the Town agrees to survey the as -built location of the pipeline at the Town's expense. A legal description of the centerline of the pipeline as determined by said survey shall be provided to the Hicks and shall be attached to and incorporated in this Agreement prior to recording. In the event of any discrepancy between the location specified in the 1953 Agreement and the as -built location, the location described in the 1953 Agreement shall be deemed amended by this Agreement. The Hicks' and/or PCI's use of the property within the easement area shall be limited to uses not inconsistent with the Town's easement rights. Hicks acknowledge that any improvements or structures they construct within or over the easement will be at their risk and Hicks further agree to remove or relocate said improvements or structures from the easement in the event that the Town needs to maintain or repair the water pipeline in a location encumbered by said improvements or structure(s). The Hicks may at their option provide an alternate method of maintenance or TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Hicks/PCI Page 4 repair in areas encumbered by an improvement or structure so long as the alternate method does not unreasonably delay the repair and the additional cost of the alternate method is borne solely by the Hicks and the Town consents to the alternate methods, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. c. Hicks & PCI are agreeing to confirm the Town's Nettle Creek water main easement in exchange for the Town agreeing to continue water service to the Hicks and PCI properties pursuant to the 1953 Agreement and the terms and conditions specified below. Except as specifically set forth in this Agreement, the Town will do nothing to unreasonably impair delivery of Town potable water to Hicks and PCI other than during situations which require maintenance of the Town's Nettle Creek water main, plant maintenance, meter installation, backflow prevention and other normal maintenance which may necessitate temporarily shutting off or altering water flow in the pipeline. 4. OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL OF PCI, LLLP. As of the date of this Agreement, the Hicks represent that they continue to own or control P.C.I., L.L.L.P., and that the Hicks have authority to bind PCI and subject the PCI property to the terms of this Agreement. The PCI property shall be entitled to continued water service from the Town, subject to the conditions in this Agreement. 5. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF WATER SERVICE. The Town shall continue to be obligated to provide domestic water service to the Hicks and PCI properties through the existing %-inch tap to the Town water main now on the Hicks property pursuant to the 1953 Agreement, subject to the following limitations and conditions: a. Usage metered. The Hicks' and PCI's usage of Town potable water usage will be measured by the Town at the existing meter location proximate to the Town's Nettle Creek water main on the Hicks property. The Town will send a monthly statement to the Hicks or their designated successor via U.S. mail. The Town will not be required to bill multiple parties, or to send separate statements to the Hicks and PCI properties or any parts thereof. b. Limited amount of water. The Town's obligation to provide Town potable water free -of -charge through the existing %-inch tap on the Hicks property shall be limited to up to 50,000 gallons free water per month, with no carry-over from month-to-month. Hicks may purchase up to an additional 50,000 gallons of water per month at the Town's out-of-town water service rates, as such rates may change from time to time (as of the date of this Agreement, the Town's current monthly out-of-town rates are as follows: $1.75 per thousand gallons for the first six thousand gallons; $2.39 per thousand gallons for the next nine thousand gallons; $3.18 per thousand gallons for any TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Hicks/PCI Page 5 amount over fifteen thousand gallons). The failure of the Town to charge for water usage in one or more instances shall not constitute a waiver of the right to do so in the future. The Town shall not unreasonably delay billing Hicks for water usage in excess of 50,000 gallons per month. c. Excess water deliveries. If Town potable water delivered through the %-inch tap and water meter to the Hicks or PCI properties exceeds 100,000 gallons in any month for any reason, the Town shall promptly notify Hicks in writing of the excess water delivery. Hicks shall then have thirty (30) calendar days to correct the situation. Said 30 -day period will be reasonably extended by the Town, upon Hicks request, in the event that weather conditions (including but not limited to such things as frozen ground, snow, etc.) prevent repair work on the Hicks system. Hicks shall pay the Town for any water delivered in excess of 100,000 gallons in any one month at a rate of twice the then - applicable out-of-town water rate. In the event of continuing excess usage after the 30 - day notice period has passed, in addition to the right to charge twice the then -applicable out-of-town water rate for water delivered in excess of 100,000 gallons per month, the Town shall have the right to immediately discontinue water service to the Hicks and PCI properties and until all past -due amounts are paid in full and the Town is notified by the Hicks that any leaks that may have existed have been repaired and that any other excess water use will be discontinued. The failure of the Town to curtail water service or to charge for any excess water usage in one or more instances shall not constitute a waiver of the right to do so in the future. d. Maximum number of units to be served with Town water. The total number of residential dwelling units that may be served with Town potable water on the Hicks and /or PCI properties pursuant to this agreement will not exceed six (6). The parties to this Agreement intend that these units shall include: (1) the original Cerise ranch house; (2) a new modular house; (3) & (4) two apartment residences in the barn facility on the PCI property; (5) and old "bunkhouse" on the Hicks property that the Hicks may rehabilitate in the future; and (6) a new home that may be built on the Hicks property in the future (which new home may, if permitted by Garfield County, include one integrated accessory dwelling unit no greater than 1,500 square fee in size which cannot be sold separately from the main residence). In addition to the foregoing residences, water service shall also be continued to the existing office in the barn, livestock corrals (subject to limitations below), and agricultural outbuildings now existing or to be replaced in the future. Hicks and PCI agree not to extend water service lines to any units in addition to or other than those described above unless the Town consents in writing prior to any such extension or change, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; provided, however, that Hicks may move or replace agricultural outbuildings and corrals without Town permission. TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Hicks/PCI Page 6 e. Types of water use. The permissible uses of water under this agreement include in-house domestic use for the six residences, barn office, and agricultural outbuildings described in the preceding paragraph, livestock watering, and limited ornamental tree and shrub irrigation, subject to the following limitations: (1) The parties acknowledge that, in the past, Town potable water was sometimes allowed to flow through livestock troughs on the Hicks or PCI properties continuously. The Hicks and PCI shall avoid this waste of Town potable water in the future. To the extent that livestock troughs on the property will be connected to Town potable water, all such troughs must be fitted with appropriate conservation mechanisms (such as heaters and float valves, or other comparable technology) designed to reasonably limit the amount of Town potable water delivered to animals on the property. Hicks shall have the discretion to choose the specific type of equipment necessary to prevent Town potable water from continuously flowing in the future. All such improvements shall be at Hicks' expense. (2) Hicks, at their own expense will also complete the installation of pumps and pipes as necessary to irrigate all lawn and garden areas on the Hicks or PCI properties with ditch water. Such installation shall be completed prior to June 1, 2003. After such date, Town potable water shall no longer be used by Hicks or PCI for lawn and garden irrigation; provided however that Hicks and PCI shall be allowed to use water from the Town system during the non irrigation season (i.e. when irrigation ditches are not running) for incidental irrigation of trees and shrubs, but not for irrigation of lawns or gardens. Hicks and PCI will also use ditch water whenever reasonably possible for livestock watering. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to limit Hicks' or PCI's use of irrigation ditch water available to them each year — rather, the Town encourages Hicks and PCI to conserve Town potable water by using ditch water for all lawful purposes whenever possible. TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Hicks/PCI Page 7 (3) Hicks and PCI's use of Town potable water shall also be subject to the following provisions relating to emergency water shutoff, water shortages, water crisis, cross connections, and backflow prevention. (a) The Town may shut off the potable water supply to the Hicks in the event of an emergency to the Nettle Creek Plant or pipeline where it becomes necessary to shut off the plant or pipeline. The Town shall use all reasonable efforts to minimize the disruption in potable water service to the Hicks during any emergency shut off situation. (b) Hicks and PCI also agree to comply with the following water conservation measures which may be requested by the Town as long as the same water conservation measures are required of all other Town water system customers. i. No Town potable water shall be used for the washing of vehicles, patios, sidewalks or paved areas. ii. No Town potable water shall be used for the filling of swimming pools or hot tubs. iii. No Town potable water shall be used for dust control. iv. No Town potable water shall be used for the watering of shrubs, trees, flowers, etc. (c) Hicks agree that the Town water system shall not be cross -connected to any other water supply and that any potable waterlines or appurtenances installed by Hicks or PCI shall be in accordance with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) standards. TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Hicks/PCI Page 8 (d) Flicks and PCI acknowledge that the Town of Carbondale may implement a backflow prevention program, to comply with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment regulations and applicable Colorado Statutes. In the event said program is implemented, Hicks acknowledges Town's right to install a backflow prevention device within the easement adjacent to the water meter. Said mechanism shall be designed so as not to impair the delivery of Town potable water to the Hicks and PCI. (e) Hicks and PCI shall not waste Town potable water. f. Town's delivery obligation ends at the meter. The Town shall deliver water through the existing meter location on the Hicks property, but the Town shall have no responsibility to ensure delivery of water or quality of water past this point to individual units on the Hicks or PCI properties, to regulate usage as between units, or to repair or maintain the delivery pipes beyond the existing 3/4 -inch tap and water meter. Although the Town shall remain obligated to provide water to the Hicks and PCI in the future in the amounts and according to the terms specified in this Agreement, Hicks and PCI assume all risk that said amounts may prove insufficient to serve all of the units and types of uses allowable under this Agreement. g. Point of delivery. Town potable water will be delivered to Hicks and PCI at a point just past the water meter. Hicks or PCI may use any method or mechanism that delivers said potable water from the point of delivery to the points of use at a pressure and volume that the Hicks deem adequate. The methods and mechanisms may include but are not limited to pumps, storage tanks, oversized pipelines, etc. Hicks and PCI accept all risk that may arise from storage of water. h. Future relocation of Town water main. The 1953 Agreement provided that the Town's obligation to provide water to the Cerise Ranch would terminate if the Town's water main was ever relocated off of the property. In consideration of the limitations in this Agreement that Hicks and PCI have agreed to with regard to their future use of Town water, the Town agrees that, should the Town's water main be relocated in the future, the Town will continue to provide water service to the Hicks and/or PCI properties if all water (up to maximum of 100,000 gallons) is paid for at then -applicable out-of-town rates and subject to continuing compliance with all other terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Hicks/PCI Page 9 6. INSPECTION. Upon reasonable notice, the Town will be entitled to enter upon the Hicks or PCI properties and any improvements upon such properties for the purpose of verifying compliance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Hicks shall be provided with no less than fourteen (14) days advance written notice via U.S. Mail and Hicks shall be given a reasonable opportunity to have a representative present for any such inspection. If underground lines are to be inspected by the Town, excavation, backfill and reasonable surface restoration shall be at the Town's expense. 7. BINDING EFFECT. The terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Town, Hicks and PCI, their successors and assigns, and shall run with title to the Hicks and PCI properties. A copy of this Agreement will be filed with the Garfield County Clerk & Recorder to provide notice to any subsequent owners of the Hicks and PCI properties of the Town's limited water delivery obligations. 8. DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND REMEDIES. In the event of a dispute arising under this agreement, the parties agree to participate in mediation. If mediation is unsuccessful, the parties agreed to participate in binding arbitration pursuant to the Uniform Arbitration Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 13-22-201 to –223. A single arbitrator shall be selected by mutual agreement of the parties to conduct the arbitration pursuant to the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association. Should the parties fail to participate in mediation, or fail to agree upon an arbitrator, upon petition of either party a single arbitrator shall be appointed by the Garfield County District Court pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-205. In the alternative, either party may seek administration by the American Arbitration Association provided that the party electing as such shall be required to pay all AAA administrative fees. In either type of arbitration, the arbitrator shall be empowered to grant both legal and equitable relief—the parties agree that water is a unique and valuable asset in the nature of real property and that, therefore, the breach by either party of the terms of this Agreement could cause irreparable harm that would warrant the issuance of preliminary or permanent injunctive relief or a decree of specific performance. The arbitrator shall also be empowered to award the substantially prevailing party in any dispute reasonable costs and attorneys' fees. Either party may request the Garfield County District Court to confirm any arbitration award as an Order of the Court pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-213 and to enforce the terms of any such award pursuant to the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Hicks/PCI Page 10 9. NOTICE. Any notice pursuant to this Agreement shall be sent by First Class U.S. Mail, effective upon mailing, to the following addresses (unless either party notifies the other of a change in address pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph, in which event notice shall be directed to the new address): Town Manager The Town of Carbondale 511 Colorado Avenue Carbondale, Colorado 81623 TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement David and Connie Hicks PCI, LLP 1051 Prince Creek Road Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town of Carbondale/Nicks/PCI Page 11 10. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be construed according to Colorado law. The sole venue for any dispute arising as to the terms of this Agreement shall be in the District Court in and for Garfield County, Colorado. The presiding judge in any such dispute shall award the substantially prevailing party reasonable costs and attorneys' fees. 11. TOWN APPROVAL. The Town represents that its Board of Trustees has approved the terms of this Agreement and authorized the Mayor to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Town. DATED: fleah. 2002. THE TOWN OF CARBONDALE a Colorado municipal corporation, By: A I IhST: Cerise, Town Clerk DID W. HICKS CONNIE F. HICKS bUOVVii 44,1,AS 67t-kt-tre. A 4;4 - t( it Michael Hassig, Mayor David Hicks, General Partner acknowledgments on following page TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement Water Service and Pipeline Easement Agreement Town ojCarbondale/Hicks/PC] Page 12 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) Acknowledged, subscribed, and sworn to before me this Say of gry/4, 2002, by Michael Hassig, duly elected Mayor of the Town of Carbondale, Colorado. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 05/15/2004 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) Acknowledged, subscribed, and sworn to before me this day of 2002, by David W. Hicks, individually and as general partner of P C I, L L PEd WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 05/15/2004 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) Acknowledged, subscribed, and sworn to before me this 2002, by Connie F. Hicks. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 05/15/2004 TOWN OF CARBONDALE-Hicks-Settlement Agreement BOCC 08/05/02 MLB PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: A request for a Special Use Permit to allow for a two-family dwelling . APPLICANT: David Hicks LOCATION: 1051 CR 111 SITE DATA: 35 Acres ACCESS: County Road 111 WATER: Town of Carbondale SEWER: ISDS EXISTING ZONING: A/R/RD RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN According to the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000, this site lies in a Medium Density Residential area which recommends 6 to less than 10 acres per dwelling unit. This property also lies within the Town of Carbondale's Urban Area of Influence. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Project Description: The applicant is proposing to convert the present employee housing on the property into a two-family dwelling so the units may be rented out in the free market in the future. The applicant has represented that the amount of vehicles accessing the site will be approximately 6 per day per unit. Staff would like to have an opportunity to respond to a letter submitted by the applicant on February 20, 2001, See Exhibit A. Within this letter, the applicant states that, "The County now claims that the multi -family portion of this structure is not allowed and has asked me to submit an application for special use to allow the continued use of the housing portion of the barn." Staff would like to respond to that by saying that the housing was always intended to be employee housing for ranch employees. As the applicant was not using the units for this purpose, he was directed to apply for a Special Use Permit to come into code compliance. 1 B. Site Description: The property in question sits on a 35 -acre parcel that was carved out from the remainder of the Flaven Cerise Ranch. It should be noted that the plat the applicant has provided as a part of this application does not depict this split. As seen in the correspondence from Steve Hackett dated March 12, 2002 (Exhibit B) and April 3, 2002 (Exhibit C), there are several uses on the applicant's property that were identified as being in violation of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. The following uses on the subject property, discussed in detail in the attached Exhibits B and C, were noted as violations: 1. Current two-family dwelling on the property originally permitted as ranch employee housing have never been used for this purpose. An affividavit was originally signed by Connie Hicks in 1998 stating that the dwelling units within the barn would be provided to individuals and his/her family who derive the majority of their income from work on the property and pay no rent, see attachment to Exhibit B. Subsequently, the applicant split the property off from the main ranch, creating a two family dwelling that was not permitted as a special use, It is Staff's understanding that the individuals who live in these units are the applicant and the applicant's father, both of which do not earn their income through agricultural means on the property. It is staff's position that one of the dwellings could be a principal dwelling and the other unit creates a two family dwelling since it is questionable that the applicant or his father could be classified as an employee of a 35 acre ranch. 2. The barn on the property was being used for storage space and assembly work for Prince Creek Construction. Additionally, heavy construction equipment was also being stored on the property. The applicant did not have a permit for these uses. Staff has inspected the property and determined that the uses noted previously are no longer existing on the property. 3. There are several non -conforming uses on the adjacent parcel also owned by the Hicks that will not be discussed as a part of this hearing but are listed within the correspondence by Steve Hackett. These uses are being properly permited. III. REFERRALS: A. Town of Carbondale: Mark Chain, Planning Director, has responded to this application with several concerns regarding this application and has recommended that the Board of County Commissioners deny the application based on the following issues (See Exhibit D): 1. The improvement location certificate provided within the application does not correctly depict the existing conditions of the property; 2. The water source the applicant is representing is pending litigation; 3. The design of the use does not minimize impact on adjacent landowners. Mark Hamilton, legal counsel from the Town of Carbondale, has also submitted a letter explaining the legal issues and concerns behind the pending water litigation. 2 The issues that are raised within his letter and subsequent attachments are discussed more thoroughly in Section IV(D) in the body of this report. See Exhibit E. IV. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Conditional and Special Uses: Special Uses are subject to the standards set forth in Section 5.03 of the Zoning Resolution. This section states that (1) Utilities adequate to provide water and sanitation service based on accepted engineering standards and approved by the Board of County Commissioners shall either be in place or shall be constructed in conjunction with the proposed use; These issues are dealt with in subsequent sections of this report. (2) Street improvements adequate to accommodate traffic volume generated by the proposed use and to provide safe, convenient access to the use shall either be in place or shall be constructed in conjunction with the proposed use; The traffic generated from this use will be minimal, as the only traffic will be for maintenance purposes. The current condition of County Road 101 should satisfy this requirement. (3) Design of the proposed use is organized to minimize impact on and from adjacent uses of land through installation of screen fences or landscape materials on the periphery of the lot and by location of intensively utilized areas, access points, lighting and signs in such a manner as to protect established neighborhood character; The two family dwelling is constructed as a part of a barn type structure and gives the appearance of a ranch or farm related building. There are no other mitigation measures that would minimize the impacts to the neighborhood. B. Access: The proposed access is a shared access way with neighboring property owners off of CR 111. C. Water: The applicant has represented that the proposed water service on the property is from the Town of Carbondale. It should be noted that this water source is currently in litigation and has not been resolved. The applicant and the Town of Carbondale are set to go to trial concerning water usage in late November of this year. As seen in Mark Hamilton's letter, Exhibit E, the original agreement for water usage on the property was a limitation of a 3/4 inch pipe. In a deposition of Mr. Hicks on November 8, 2001 the Town of Carbondale became aware that the waterline serving the Hick's property consists of a variety of pipe sizes ranging from 1 inch to 2 inches in diameter. Paul Bussone and Scott Fifer of Resource Engineering in their letter dated December 6, 2001 (Please see attachment to 3 Exhibit E), have stated that by increasing the sizes of the water delivery system Mr. Hicks has increased the deliverable flow rate by three fold over what would otherwise be available if the system consisted of a % inch diameter pipeline as originally contemplated in the Town's 1953 agreement. It is questionable if Mr. Hicks would be able to physically serve all the uses presently on the property if he was limited and held to a N inch tap. The matter is further complicated by the fact that the parcel these units are on has been split off from the historic Flaven Cerise Ranch. The water source therefore, pending litigation, is not secure from future shut -offs from the present or future owner of the property or the Town of Carbondale. The applicant could resolve this issue very easily, by drilling an exempt domestic well on a 35 acre tract. An exempt domestic well is allowed to serve up to three (3) dwelling units. If the applicant were to decide to obtain an exempt domestic well, it would be necessary to have the well drilled and the following information being provided: 1) That a four hour pump test be performed on the well to be used; 2) A well completion report demonstrating the depth of the well, the characteristics of the aquifer and the static water level; 3) The results of the four hour pump test indicating the pumping rate in gallons per minute and information showing down draw and recharge; 4) A written opinion of the person conducting the well test that this well should be adequate to supply to the number of proposed lots; 5) An assumption of an average or no less than 3 5 people per dwelling unit, using 100 gallons of water per person, per day; 6) The water quality be tested by an approved laboratory and meet State guidelines concerning bacteria, nitrates and suspended solids; D. Sewer: Sewer service for this use is proposed to be through an existing ISDS system, originally designed for the structure. The sewage needs and design capacity will not change for this proposal. V. SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. 2. That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting. 3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed conditional use permit is in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. 4 4. That the application is in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended. VL RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends APPROVAL, of the applied for Special Use Permit, with the following conditions: 1. That all representations of the applicant, either within the application or stated at the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners, shall be considered conditions of approval. 2. No separate fee title will be allowed for either dwelling individually, unless the property is subdivided through the applicable subdivision regulations at the time of conversion. 3. Any new construction will have to meet the Garfield County Building Code requirements for the type of construction. 4. Prior to final approval of the Special Use Permit, the applicant shall either provide a final ruling from the District Court that the proposed second dwelling can legally use domestic water from the Town of Carbondale or the applicant will drill an exempt domestic well and provide the following documentation: 1) That a four hour pump test be performed on the well to be used; 2) A well completion report demonstrating the depth of the well, the characteristics of the aquifer and the static water level; 3) The results of the four hour pump test indicating the pumping rate in gallons per minute and information showing down draw and recharge; 4) A written opinion of the person conducting the well test that this well should be adequate to supply to the number of proposed lots; 5) An assumption of an average or no less than 3.5 people per dwelling unit, using 100 gallons of water per person, per day; 6) The water quality be tested by an approved laboratory and meet State guidelines concerning bacteria, nitrates and suspended solids; 5. All conditions of approval must be met within one year of the date of approval of the application. If conditions are not met within one year, the approval will be void. 5 August 1, 2002 TOWN OF CAKBONDALE 511 Colorado Avenue Carbondale, CO 81623 Mark Bean Director, Building and Planning, Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601 Dear Mark, RECEIVED AUG 0 5 1001 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING Thank you for referring the Hicks Special Use permit applications to the Town of Carbondale for our review. You indicated that the Conditional Use permit application that was previously scheduled for County review is not taking place at this time. You have also indicated that the Special Use permit application submitted by the Hicks family is the same as was previously submitted this past spring. Please contact me as soon as possible if these two statements are not accurate. In terms of the application itself, what is now known as the Hicks property and was formerly the Victor and Flaven Cerise Ranch is within the Town of Carbondale's three-mile area plan. The subject site is not within our proposed "potential annexation area" a/k/a "urban growth boundary". Below are the Town's comments from a planning perspective. Special Use permit for conversion of multi -family ranch employee housing to housing for "non -ranch" employees. 1. Application materials. The improvement location certificate provided does not meet the criteria specified in Section 9.03.01(2). The "vicinity map" does not show the location and use of buildings and structures on adjacent lots and the names of owners of record of such Tots. The improvement location certificate for the subject property itself is of such a scale as to be almost unusable. Moreover, the map does not disclose the fact that the subject site is a 35 -acre parcel subdivided off from the original Cerise Ranch property. Second, the applicant's letter according to Section 9.03.01(3) is supposed to explain in detail the nature and (970) 963-2733 Fax: (970) 963-9140 character of the special use requested. The Town of Carbondale does not think that the letter accomplishes this purpose. The letter states: "the County now claims that the multi -family portion of this structure is not allowed and has asked me to submit an application for special use to allow the continued use of the housing portion of the barn... but I am willing to apply for a Special Use permit to convert these multi -family units to house persons other than ranch employees if that will help eliminate problems that the County feels have been created by their issuing a permit and C.O. for the structure" (emphasis added). This portion of the applicant's letter blames the County for the present situation. In fact, the applicant signed an affidavit dated August 25, 1998 stating that the residential structure to be built is an employee dwelling unit(s) and will not be used for residential occupancy for any person and/or family that is not employed on the property. It is our understanding that at least until April of 2002, David and Connie Hicks have occupied one unit and David Hicks' father has inhabited the other dwelling unit in the "barn". Neither of these families are ranch employees and in fact earn their living through Prince Creek Construction — a construction company owned and operated by David Hicks. We assume that the main ranch house is rented out. Therefore, the applicants themselves created this situation and were not truthful in their original request for a building permit. They created the situation, not the County. 2. Concerns regarding special use requirements. a. Utilities adequate to provide water...based on accepted engineering standards — Section 5.03(1). Applicants have simply submitted an order on cross motion for summary judgment from Judge Ossola. The Town is currently in litigation with Mr. Hicks regarding the scope of the Town's water service obligations. The original agreement between the Town of Carbondale and the Cerise's only requires that the Town provide one %" service line. The Town intends to have their attorney advise the County on this issue. From a planning standpoint, the applicant has not provided any background proving that the water source meets accepted engineering standards. The Town has a number of concerns in this area. First, water is intended to be provided from a %" service line extending from a Town main. The Town of Carbondale standards require a %" service line for one single family detached dwelling unit. A 1" or greater line is required for two units or more. Without the permission of the Town, Mr. Hicks connected these dwelling units to the existing %" service line cited in the summary judgment that already provides water for a modular unit, the main ranch house, stock watering, and support of a home -office that was at least until recently the office and partial contractor's yard for Prince Creek Construction. The Town would like to examine the documents provided by Mr. Hicks regarding accepted engineering standards which would show that such a 3/" line can adequately serve all uses. Second, it is our understanding that the structure under review for the special use permit is on a separately conveyable 35 -acre parcel which has been split off from the historic Flaven Cerise Ranch. This water source is therefore not secure from future shut -offs from the present or future owner of the historic Flaven Cerise Ranch or the Town of Carbondale. Third, the applicant has in the past and may in the future subdivide 35 -acre parcels from the original holdings without review. Are all these future parcels to be guaranteed a water source from the Town of Carbondale from the same 3A" pipe? Will the next application be for a full subdivision with 2 -acre parcels with once again the guaranteed water source being the single 3/4" service line from the Town? Where does this logic stop? b. Design of the proposed use organized to minimize impact on and from adjacent uses — Section 5.03(3). The Town takes the stance that these now free-market units may have had a very different design and even location on the property if the Hicks' had been more forthcoming with their original permit application. Placing the units in the same structure has added unnecessary bulk to the supposed ranch structure (barn) in that area of Prince Creek. While we have no problem with substantial ranch structures, the resulting barn and two apartments seem out of character for the Prince Creek area, especially given their location to the adjacent property to the North. Mr. Hicks has plenty of room on his ranch for free-market units that would not have a visual or other impact on anybody else but the Hicks family. The Town of Carbondale recommendation on Special Use application. The Town of Carbondale respectfully requests that the County deny the issuance of this Special Use permit. The applicant has not proven through generally accepted engineering standards that the existing 3/4' water service line from the Town of Carbondale can adequately serve these uses as well as the other residential uses and stock watering provided on the site. In addition, this parcel has been subdivided from the historic Flaven Cerise Ranch and the Town is not aware of any documents which guarantee a water source if such parcels are subdivided from the original ranch property itself. That burden is Mr. Hicks' to prove and the proof has not been provided. The Town is especially disturbed at the misguidance given in the affidavit signed in August of 1998. It is clear to the Town that the property was never used for the type of housing originally intended and that is a blatant disregard of County regulations. Sweeping such matters under the carpet would not set a good example for the other law-abiding citizens of Garfield County. Sincerely, /2/ CY( (� Mark Chain Planning Director MC/cgf cc: Mark Hamilton, Esq. August 1, 2002 Mark Bean Director, Building and Planning, Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601 Dear Mark, Thank you for referring the Hicks Special Use permit applications to the Town of Carbondale for our review. You indicated that the Conditional Use permit application that was previously scheduled for County review is not taking place at this time. You have also indicated that the Special Use permit application submitted by the Hicks family is the same as was previously submitted this past spring. Please contact me as soon as possible if these two statements are not accurate. In terms of the application itself, what is now known as the Hicks property and was formerly the Victor and Flaven Cerise Ranch is within the Town of Carbondale's three-mile area plan. The subject site is not within our proposed "potential annexation area" a/k/a "urban growth boundary". Below are the Town's comments from a planning perspective. Special Use permit for conversion of multi -family ranch employee housing to housing for "non -ranch" employees. 1. Application materials. The improvement location certificate provided does not meet the criteria specified in Section 9.03.01(2). The "vicinity map" does not show the location and use of buildings and structures on adjacent lots and the names of owners of record of such lots. The improvement location certificate for the subject property itself is of such a scale as to be almost unusable. Moreover, the map does not disclose the fact that the subject site is a 35 -acre parcel subdivided off from the original Cerise Ranch property. Second, the applicant's letter according to Section 9.03.01(3) is supposed to explain in detail the nature and character of the special use requested. The Town of Carbondale does not think that the letter accomplishes this purpose. The letter states: "the County now claims that the multi -family portion of this structure is not allowed and has asked me to submit an application for special use to allow the continued use of the housing portion of the barn... but I am willing to apply for a Special Use permit to convert these multi -family units to house persons other than ranch employees if that will help eliminate problems that the County feels have been created by their issuing a permit and C.O. for the structure" (emphasis added). This portion of the applicant's letter blames the County for the present situation. In fact, the applicant signed an affidavit dated August 25, 1998 stating that the residential structure to be built is an employee dwelling unit(s) and will not be used for residential occupancy for any person and/or family that is not employed on the property. It is our understanding that at least until April of 2002, David and Connie Hicks have occupied one unit and David Hicks' father has inhabited the other dwelling unit in the "barn". Neither of these families are ranch employees and in fact earn their living through Prince Creek Construction — a construction company owned and operated by David Hicks. We assume that the main ranch house is rented out. Therefore, the applicants themselves created this situation and were not truthful in their original request for a building permit. They created the situation, not the County. 2. Concerns regarding special use requirements. a. Utilities adequate to provide water...based on accepted engineering standards — Section 5.03(1). Applicants have simply submitted an order on cross motion for summary judgment from Judge Ossola. The Town is currently in litigation with Mr. Hicks regarding the scope of the Town's water service obligations. The original agreement between the Town of Carbondale and the Cerise's only requires that the Town provide one %" service line. The Town intends to have their attorney advise the County on this issue. From a planning standpoint, the applicant has not provided any background proving that the water source meets accepted engineering standards. The Town has a number of concerns in this area. First, water is intended to be provided from a %" service line extending from a Town main. The Town of Carbondale standards require a 3/" service line for one single family detached dwelling unit. A 1" or greater line is required for two units or more. Without the permission of the Town, Mr. Hicks connected these dwelling units to the existing 3/a" service line cited in the summary judgment that already provides water for a modular unit, the main ranch house, stock watering, and support of a home -office that was at least until recently the office and partial contractor's yard for Prince Creek Construction. The Town would like to examine the documents provided by Mr. Hicks regarding accepted engineering standards which would show that such a 3/" line can adequately serve all uses. Second, it is our understanding that the structure under review for the special use permit is on a separately conveyable 35 -acre parcel which has been split off from the historic Flaven Cerise Ranch. This water source is therefore not secure from future shut -offs from the present or future owner of the historic Flaven Cerise Ranch or the Town of Carbondale. Third, the applicant has in the past and may in the future subdivide 35 -acre parcels from the original holdings without review. Are all these future parcels to be guaranteed a water source from the Town of Carbondale from the same 3/" pipe? Will the next application be for a full subdivision with 2 -acre parcels with once again the guaranteed water source being the single %" service line from the Town? Where does this logic stop? b. Design of the proposed use organized to minimize impact on and from adjacent uses — Section 5.03(3). The Town takes the stance that these now free-market units may have had a very different design and even location on the property if the Hicks' had been more forthcoming with their original permit application. Placing the units in the same structure has added unnecessary bulk to the supposed ranch structure (barn) in that area of Prince Creek. While we have no problem with substantial ranch structures, the resulting barn and two apartments seem out of character for the Prince Creek area, especially given their location to the adjacent property to the North. Mr. Hicks has plenty of room on his ranch for free-market units that would not have a visual or other impact on anybody else but the Hicks family. The Town of Carbondale recommendation on Special Use application. The Town of Carbondale respectfully requests that the County deny the issuance of this Special Use permit. The applicant has not proven through generally accepted engineering standards that the existing 3/" water service line from the Town of Carbondale can adequately serve these uses as well as the other residential uses and stock watering provided on the site. In addition, this parcel has been subdivided from the historic Flaven Cerise Ranch and the Town is not aware of any documents which guarantee a water source if such parcels are subdivided from the original ranch property itself. That burden is Mr. Hicks' to prove and the proof has not been provided. The Town is especially disturbed at the misguidance given in the affidavit signed in August of 1998. It is clear to the Town that the property was never used for the type of housing originally intended and that is a blatant disregard of County regulations. Sweeping such matters under the carpet would not set a good example for the other law-abiding citizens of Garfield County. Sincerely, Mark Chain Planning Director MC/cgf cc: Mark Hamilton, Esq. 1111111111111111111111111111 ►aril 111111 HEM 619914 01/31/2003 01 59P 81432 P665 M ALSDORF '15 1 of 7 R 36.00 D 0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO WARRANTY DEED GRANTORS DAVID W. HICKS and CONNIE F. HICKS, whose legal address is 1051 County Road 111, Carbondale, Colorado 81623, County of Garfield, State of Colorado, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid hereby sell and convey to DAVID W. HICKS, whose legal address is 1051 County Road 111, Carbondale, Colorado 81623, County of Garfield, State of Colorado, the following real property in the County of Garfield, and State of Colorado, to wit: All of the real property described on Exhibit "A" hereto. Together with an easement for drainage, access, irrigation and utility purposes described and depicted on plat of Prince Creek Estates filed as Reception No. 466582 of the records of Garfield County, Colorado, which easement extends from Prince Creek Road in an easterly direction to the easterly boundaries of the real property described on Exhibit A hereto. Together also with an easement for utilities, including an underground water pipeline extending over, across and under the lands described on Exhibit "B" hereto, and an easement for underground water pipeline and utilities over, across and under the land described in Exhibit "B-1" hereto. Subject to an easement for roadway access and utilities over and across that portion of the above-described lands and more particularly described on Exhibit "C" hereto, which easement is appurtenant to those lands more particularly described on Exhibit "D" hereto and those lands described in deed recorded as Reception No. 567787 of said records, also known by street and number as (Vacant Land), with all its appurtenances, and warrant the title to the same, subject to taxes for 2003 due in 2004; all recorded covenants, conditions, restrictions, encumbrances, and all existing easements whether or not of record. .rn 6o Oev/olW kOcks 13/7 1„,„0/ 4),,,e sit /O/ 61,enwood ,5o,,,teCAf!/66l 1 0 1111111111111111111111111111111111111..1111111111111111 619914 01/31/2003 01 59P B1432 P666 M RLSDORF 2 of 7 R 36.00 D 0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO Signed this :3C41 day of January, 2003. Cts ! kL i.. m t David W. Hicks Zj14.; f Connie F. Hicks 4 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this -3th day of January, 2003 by David W. Hicks and Connie F. Hicks. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary Public C My commission expires: O '} k(1\ My Commission Expires 04/191200; 111111111111111111111111111111111 I6.I1II 1111111111111 619914 01/31/2003 01 59P 81432 P667 M ALSDORF 3 of 7 R 36.00 D 0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO EXHIBIT A TO WARRANTY DEED A tract of land situated in Sections 10,11,14 and 15, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.N. being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point whence a Garfield County Surveyor Brass Cap set as a witness corner for the Section Corner common to said Sections 10,11,14 and 15 bears S 46°26'42" W 635.26 feet; thence N 00°00'58" W 863.89 feet; thence West 12.56 feet; thence N 07°26'10" E 136.48 feet; thence N 24°06'58" E 83.25 feet; thence N 37°31'19" E 216.81 feet; thence S 80°51'42" E 36.92 feet; thence S 64°23'19" E 385.52 feet; thence South 129.55 feet; thence East 194.95 feet; thence S 04°21'54" E 400.80 feet; thence N East 434.67 feet; thence S 04°42'01" E 84.42 feet; thence S 88°16'12" W 193.70 feet; thence 5 00°35'01" E 430.80 feet; thence S 89°35'12" W 748.91 feet; thence S 30°17'23" W 142.58 feet; thence S 38°25'59" W 371.83 feet; thence S 09°29'08" W 163.04 feet; thence S 06°09'31" W 74.87 feet; thence S 19°44'01" W 164.17 feet; thence West 816.99 feet; thence N 00°00'02" W 371.95 feet; thence N 65°58'36" E 1014.29 feet to the Point of Beginning having an area of 35.648 Acres. 1111111 IIIJI 111111 111111111111111 11111III 111111111 I11I 619914 01/31/2003 01 59P B1432 P668 M RLSDORF 4 of 7 R 36.00 D 0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO EXHIBIT B TO WARRANTY DEED A tract of land situated in Sections 10 and 11, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point whence a Garfield County Surveyor Brass Cap set as a witness corner for the Section Corner common to said Sections 10,11,14 and 15 bears 5 01°51'16" W 1302.18 feet; thence S 00°00'58" E 30.00 feet; thence West 404.33 feet; thence N 08°13'51" E 30.31 feet; thence East 399.98 feet to the Point of Beginning 111011101113 10111 11110111IIL6AI 1111111111111 619914 01/31/2003 01 59P 61432 P669 M ALSDORF 5 of 7 R 36.00 D 0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO EXHIBIT B-1 TO WARRANTY DEED A tract of land situated in Section 11,Township 8 South, Range 88 west of the 6C° P.M. being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point whence a Garfield County Surveyor Brass Cap set as a witness corner for the Section Corner common to said Sections 10,11,14 and 15 bears S 19°28'09" W 1380.55 feet; thence S 00°00'29" E 30.00 feet; thence 5 89°59'02" W 418.00 feet; thence N 00°00'58" W 30.00 feet; thence N 89°59'02" E 418.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. 111111111111111111111111111111111 Iliuii 1111111111111111 619914 01/31/2003 01:59P 61432 P670 M ALSDORF 8 of 7 R 36.00 D 0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO EXHIBIT C TO WARRANTY DEED A tract of land situated in Section 11, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point whence a Garfield County Surveyor Brass Cap set as a witness corner for the Section Corner common to said Sections 10,11,14 and 15 bears S 19°28'09" W 1380.55 feet; thence N 85°02'11" E 64.59 feet; thence along a curve to the left with an arc length of 49.64 feet, a radius of 40.00 feet, a central angle of 71°06'10", a chord bearing of N 49°29'06" E, a chord length of 46.51 feet, thence N 13°56'01" E 214.39 feet; thence along a curve to the left with an arc length of 53.53 feet, a radius of 39.52 feet, a central angle of 77°36'27", a chord bearing of N 24°52'13" W, a chord length of 49.53 feet, thence N 63°40'25" W 25.76 feet; thence N 37°31'19" E 30.58 feet; thence S 63°40'25" E 19.82 feet; thence along a curve to the right with an arc length of 94.17 feet, a radius of 69.52 feet, a central angle of 77°36'27", a chord bearing of 5 24°52'13" E, a chord length of 87.13 feet, thence S 13°56'01" W 84.23 feet; thence S 87°22'48" E 68.66 feet; thence N 79°29'44" E 61.48 feet; thence along a curve to the right with an arc length of 134.52 feet, a radius of 238.88 feet, a central angle of 32°15'51", a chord bearing of S 84°22'20" E, a chord length of 132.75 feet, thence S 59°05'23" E 122.79 feet; thence along a curve to the left with an arc length of 21.58 feet, a radius of 40.00 feet, a central angle of 30°54'37", a chord bearing of S 74°32'42" E, a chord length of 21.32 feet, thence East 202.99 feet; thence S 04°21'54" E 30.09 feet; thence West 205.28 feet; thence along a curve to the right with an arc length of 37.76 feet, a radius of 70.00 feet, a central angle of 30°54'37", a chord bearing of N 74°32'42" W, a chord length of 37.31 feet, thence N 59°05'23" W 120.31 feet; thence along a curve to the left with an arc length of 115.30 feet, a radius of 208.88 feet, a central angle of 31°37'40", a chord bearing of N 84°41'26" W, a chord length of 113.84 feet, thence S 79°29'44" W 64.93 feet; thence N 87°22'48" W 78.11 feet; thence S 13°56'01" W 99.56 feet; thence along a curve to the right with an arc length of 86.87 feet, a radius of 70.00 feet, a central angle of 71°06'10", a chord bearing of S 49°29'06" W, a chord length of 81.40 feet, thence S 85°02'11" W 67.19 feet; thence N 00°00'38" W 30.11 feet to the Point of Beginning. 11110111111111111 10111 11110111 I IIIA1111111111111111 619914 01/31/2003 01 59P B1432 P671 M ALSDORF 7 of 7 R 36.00 D 0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO EXHIBIT D TO WARRANTY DEED A tract of land situated in Sections 10,11,14 and 15, Township 8 South, Range 88 West of the 6" P.M. being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point whence a Garfield County Surveyor Brass Cap set as a witness corner for the Section Corner common to said Sections 10,11,14 and 15 bears 5 46°26'42" W 635.26 feet; thence S 65°58'36" W 1014.29 feet; thence S 00°00'02" E 371.95 feet; thence East 816.99 feet; thence S 06°49'52" W 262.42 feet; thence S 10°40'54" E 81.39 feet; thence S 04°47'35" W 96.90 feet; thence S 89°26'33" W 22.43 feet; thence N 00°32'41" W 1.55 feet; thence N 89°56'14" W 414.40 feet; thence N 76°43'41" W 216.82 feet; thence N 74°16'08" W 150.54 feet; thence 5 26°06'11" W 165.95 feet; thence S 06°23'46" W 81.76 feet; thence S 08°02'38" E 46.48 feet; thence N 85°23'05" W 103.47 feet; thence N 03°59'34" E 85.50 feet; thence N 89°31'17" W 347.46 feet; thence S 88°51'28" W 44.63 feet; thence N 00°15'32" E 147.87 feet; thence N 14°48'49" E 117.54 feet; thence N 05°44'43" E 200.65 feet; thence N 06°43'41" W 324.88 feet; thence N 05°18'13" W 94.94 feet; thence N 00°24'08" E 505.09 feet; thence East 1065.77 feet; thence N 00°00'58" W 790.75 feet; thence East 418.00 feet; thence S 00°00'58" E 863.89 feet to the Point of Beginning having an area of 38.586 Acres. To: Mark Bean 05/28/03 From: David Hicks 230-0197 Recorded pipeline easement documents for special use permit. RECEIVED MAY 28 2003 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING .3 DIM Emmi JN Q 0 moocr —ID CO —D..0 SNC MMIC w ��0U. `1u —gym 11 Ca �N9 (0O m �mrc N (0 am°•„ o 0 QUIT CLAIM DEED IE F. HICKS, as joint tenants, whose address and quit claims to DAVID W. HICKS and CO 0 0 V1 " o o.. v 74 A 0W o b G"n g m w 3 v too cc 0 Y0a 'a 0 .T- 0 0 N o N N N U L id o T0 R' o c, -0.0 §iog?a o p cu with all its appurtenances. 0 0 N w 0 -Z4 1 0 0 Q 0 ) O N :; w 0 CO U 0 Qa E o wo )v w itIO C O 4 Witness my hand and official seal. �n 0 9 8 P. n0 u o u m xca ¢ 0. o E b T 23 d at4'O�C7 EXHIBIT A TO QUIT CLAIM DEED 41 N 4 $ H 0.0 CO '0 $ w N 0 0 O 0) v 43 0 y 0 H C N % ami r -i 4-1 14 (0 H •. ao d m iJ N H N • O U W m trio N 0 O O co 3 m.i . u .P. n11 m 01-4 0 m N 3 W Ofri NG1 0 >, t t U to N•rrm C F 1.4 h .� .0 W N O0 HA .0 . 14 -0 0 COO N 03 0MC° O y y W •0 U 0 N H O H>. .0 U 0 r• H H 4 W o V1 4 N U) .0 M O H W H V .3 0 MU1-1 W a U "1 l9 Ne 11 N N t O w N a NY W r1 U U H H 00 ,C N oo a m 4J 1J H '.i --.44 0 • b NA P•W:0 N..1 H x H + 0 N b a ro 4 e y1 v 0 4J 0 0 0 ) al to 0 4-1 44 N.0 00 N Orn LO V 0. 4-) N c -.1 1:4o m" 3Aca EXHIBIT B TO QUIT CLAIM DEED Parcel A 40 CO 04 0 3 3 wn U a 0: : 0 0 dl r4 in N N J:.4 0, Z N OO W .G 0 0 4)W4411) 0- a . 04J N g0 0 0 04 •• N4-4 w CNN W g n. co ( 4) w0 A 0 00 n 0 0 W M m .03 O0) r4 O sim H44 4 0 A (4 4) 0) *b W p c ri w 0) W O0 r1 4) 110 0 Z 3 N 4) y w w• 4J o ro N OJ .4 O- Male • 0) 0) 0. 0 0 0) • Dal • U CO r4 0 U e N 0) • H 0 3 roO Wom OC)ocw OmMW mO ro Oro 0 alto .0 to N,C• me C H.~4 0NO JJ.H 3 a wm3o ro A0)w 0 Oa0• 3 ••dre M • o s V) • W m 0•.4.-4 0 JJ 1--10 044 cis '4 C N 44 o O N 0 a .4 0 .4 a N W H 0 • •. ra 0)IQ U ~ G - wM ZW (ZM 0) 0 rd 11 v) 0 4` O N 3 a W 0 .0 0 3.0 aN 00 4-0 0o C 04 0 >f'd w 0 N C a0 e a U t0 : 0 0J r4 .0 y..1 a a • 0004 • 00to •C C -H > roto •• O r4 . r ONO 0 44-H •d N 44 V)M4-1 440- <11AZ- C 0 ril 0 0) I0 0 O co 0 M 3 0 04 w 0 N 4J -rrll 0 w V4 44 0 Y U 0 •• U o 0 0 a '0 >1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4J 0 0 0 0 r-1 44 0N01 CrH 0 0m 0004-4W .tiH i 6 e •4a w 44 Zr-w 4A.JZ up 44 H 44 O70 2 3114-04JNN r1 N 0 U 0 OCOto.e m41 u - COas0 ON 044 M 040 U 1404-0 O M • O 0 m C C) rH 4 C 44 0 0 r4 0 0 e 0- 0 O r .r4 0 •r1 0 0 0 0 0 c444.00) a W ,C 0 0 J -H CR rowZ 44 0r1 4) a 44ro 44 4 W 000 .• 0talr) U3 • al 4-4 W • 4j: .4 U (D 4) 0 • G 0 04 4) 0 0 000 4J O O C O C r4 0 ,H t0 0 0: 0 0 V) V) O 01Ow0 co .0 H 0N)N W o40 -H 01 0 U4-> 4 w W •• a 3 a 44014010 0 4) C O e4 •• 44 0 • - . 0 0 10 0 ON •4Je allot 4-0 e t a0 0 0i1 A N 0a Ol^ r4 a4J O Mm W 04.0 3x�w0W •-1 00a Z 0tr 44 4-3 Del z' W0 W'1Za 3 00 ti X ..C4 )4 3a o �. 00 t 0 Dot CM 0a (4.W Nr4404 ON MN CO r1,C00 A� ro 4-4 m o0 1/40344Jo)o0AZm W 24 w 0 N 0 •• 0 0 0 0 44 0) 0 44 0 W U: 44 O W W •• 0 0 0 z 44.0 010 0411000 44 00 00 0w 0'0ta 044- W Yr Na 0A Z W- 44 44 3.4 0 0 0 44 to 44 M W 44 r 00 G 4)00.•0 a••Uo)M 0 •0� u 44 +1 C 44 0 44 m . 44 C V) 4-0 4) C 0) O 0 4J 0 01 44 0 0 O co a 0 0: . 0 0 4-O 0 )4 0 0 44 0 0 0 c--1 0 .0 4•1 '4' 0 .0 0 U r1'•3 W 31/0 W (t) .41 W V Oa W V •-• VI Parcel B f0 L w r4 0) 0 0 o CO CO O 0 40 0 04 0) ••• m 0) w PI r43 W N • 4) 00 40 0 U N 0 0 a a 0 0 m 0 al 0 • 0 W O 0 4 W 0 a) 44 W w w roc 0a) wV) W 0m w N L CO CO O N • 0 tiff W 44 V' QH ' i 10 4) 3a V) 0i.-14.) 00. CON 0 0)r1 co 44 44 0 r w 0A 015 W (0 a W •a r-1 O U 0 m 4-C a) R •• O 3 0' 444 w "'4 0 000 •W 4J0 M GO W 00H141 VrM 0 a) V)0).HH 44 W 3 14 o 04 4) 4-0 04 0 W N 0 M C4ElMI 4.1 ra aZw-310 u tm - 0 07 0 >t 1:1 UNw a,C000H0) .4 A 0 -.I : 0 a •• M 4J M 0 • 4-0 d 44 )4 0 4 N .0 .-4 0) a '•• tom 4-O 'z u 0U it 0 0 w 0 w cO 0 0 0 0) r1 44 C 0 0 CO 1 w w 4) 0 n 4-44 gi OOw moi Z 004Me-1 JA-) .-1 N ro G n'& O N O • 0 0 or+ U00a0�0mi.4Ga40 H C 15 0 • O ,G 0 r4 0 �0J a 0 N '.4 0 0 of 0 0 0 0) 'C4J 0 4J w 41 04 34 0 O1wi 4 4 4A) ~ V0) •• 3 .4 ~ to N ri f 4-3 it •4) 01 m o ••w a}4-) a) 0)ol01• 4)) N°' 0 U U 4J 0 U 0 rH CO O 0 r4 ro O O 0 0: -1P4-1•-0a W O�r N V) ii 10 0 0 0 0 4-0 1- 0 0) to 0 •.i 11-1 r4 r4 .0 o .4 0) 0 0 d co 0' 0 00 NN4-0..0m•3.-i• ro 'd 0 0 11) • o r4 440 e r- ••e A 404 0 3 0el004 0) a N rN1 M 00 4-T cti A .4 k0 tk u -44 0 w Z 3 W el w 3 0 M W O G .H Z .H H 0:0)00000-0 q0 y G 0 4 004 •a J:mm mo.i or aaW Nyy0.-10404 w CDN •0 m 64-0 it04-0 4400) N 1-1 0404 ri 4) CN 0 e 0 0e 0 W W ,OC ro 0 t0 44 1.-1 co O w 40 rel 0 co G 0 O w 0 0 Ua 0O Zal ON 4 v)rHA 0 4) 44 .H 0 0 W .4 a 44 el 44 .H .40 0 OO0 0n4-0ofa Oo) 114J 94 0 110) ON 0 m 44 00 44 44 0 014)(4-0o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4r4 0 04 .10 .0 to 0 .0 F03 m 3 A r1 44 4-D44 W W 44 0 W 44 35.648 Acres. tn QUIT CLAIM DEED DAVID W. HICKS and CONNIE F. HICKS, whose address is 1051 County Road 111, Carbondale, Colorado 81623, County of Garfield, and State of Colorado, for the consideration of One and no/100 d Avenue, Suite Colorado Limited Liability Limited Partnership, whose address is 1317 following real property, in the County of Garfield, and State of Colorado, to wit: d .f o o .t c! 9 0 :Et l 0)W 0 cd o ago ,5 'a•ov, a•ogo 4,-,;°' v co o N C U qn g > az :V. I., O N A. .5 "9 0. 0 ttb "E 0 0 03 v o c 0 � a U aci t v , o >A c U O O i7 N 0 O N Y tt b O O O O O cn Ca W 0 F 6 U M 0 O ti 0 0 cal G v A b0 -0v 0 U i t0 3x N 0 00 g 00 0 •� b W• g Q A Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 0 o$ Li m cw Q u 00 .0 sad x A 0 YG 000 b C P Id I 4) 'flmN A ri O N O- ro um 4.4 A d 0 N O N N .0 c14 li aivym N ri O 4J • Z 3 a) ., ii N H al a) m .a)0 m id N W N ar 0 0A al N O 4 0 0 m 0 • a moo•. a ro•.,mv Q N4-1 0 AW A aCO micolw A o 3 0' N 0 0 al • d m .i 0 m 00 P1 0 O 4 '- N 41 0 3 ▪ )i 0 No 0imin v a EA Vo[0 r~ -i u .0 CD 0 • 1 Mma - V dC 0 .ra) N Y 0 0HO O v W • 2 C _MEM0 4' V N 0 a) 0 44 a_).m b ro o W ai m ICIpif.0 G m 0 Neepa y u A 01 y 0 aiiJ b b 3 0 ri '4•O �vw a a 4-1 44 a -mkH ▪ ▪ a, ...4 N 3 0 al LL up (Cl• CC1)0 CO 6 aW 0 u �1°ii 0 N N - ' O la 44 !fl N b al CO J' —mm N No 34J Oal pA0 U'G CP He NWm� Um m O ¢ m - O IIMIM N • a1 d 0 0 mTO s IMMM m I a • 3 A CI r4 110M1 r) MOM I=MIOwl O M X10 N N —- LL —«0 — St �o md0 mom M a - ca 0) ID —n 0'0 00 � m 0 � N0 MIN NemM-. - ,y — 00: _ION S 4.. 0 - 10 e. QUIT CLAIM DEED for the consideration of One and no/100 Dollars, in hand paid, hereby sells and quit claims to P.C.I., L.L.L.P., a Colorado Limited Springs, Colorado 81601, County of Garfield, and State of Colorado, the following real property, in the County of Garfield, and State of Colorado, to wit: til 00 N 6 caO 1 ., 0 • 0 y N r 0 N gN" 0+• 0 yJ b v E m en MI aU �Tl I-. , monit cci o 0 0 O 3 a a `m N O '� N � U � ....U0 WF wo N y 1--1-i b n N to £' QIU V vx NC .O ��i N .0 w °.G �o 0 809y to 0 • xo00 at N 4) • 0 iii 0 413. l 0 N °' aa VO7 O y (N SA0ca iGti G 33 Ob O p ^ O Li 0 • 0 6 2 3 0•° c. y o O A ti 'w� av OD0 "ill nn c0u0°d�o • O 0.k .4 20..E2U t ) a a og t4 O xw « 3Ow 0 cH F,• v E" ! oi c n cn OU .0 with all i Witness my hand and official seal. UN 0 O My commission expires: EXHIBIT A TO QUIT CLAIM DEED c0 v 0 - N a u a) .0 a) W0 v 4-1 is 4) ax Z uu m u om,� o v a) ro v u v C•-1 C (0 vA 01 o co 0 - a) t71 O 0 .0 ..i r-1 0 v a) 3 H v a) 0 u 0 A • 01 (c; u m w C 'H r0 u 3 n5 rd C ro 0 .0 ( •0 0 •C • 0 -H ro u 0 -H • u 0 u H O N rdH 0) -H N Si al C u u Si Si C u u V al 3 0)m Si 3 a) m, H a) o o 01 r40 0 co u u 0 .0 ` 'd a) .0 u 0 0 v Si A H 0 r0 a) • al • a) '-1100.005 H 01 H ro tauw C.Cuu Si .0 —0104.0 v Ouu ro a) v = wuloW coW !loco • C Si Q.)000 0 0 u u ..i v U u u w .0 w 14 H W .0 ` N H rn N o r r •H .0 N 01 0 a) H U •- 0 .0 a) N al U •al •u u u C H H- U Uig C u ro al 44 ro uW U -w ro •`0)N uH ( be a)- m rN 4-1 0 Sl O ro a) u W a) ro u 4-1 to (0 tal a) 4 co 0 al N • W m • 3 05 O w -Ci Ob O Crn.0 alm ro v ,C v v v U O)nuwmo Oo m 03 0) co 0) >, 0 in u` W w Lel0 co u` W 0 oo w -w .0 .0 - o N �Y H H= 01 co v v 4) • - 4-1 In i.) W W m= u ro U H v O WH A m H 0:10g01= W W -� 0 0 v c m m= • 0 v= HH u) N O r u d• 0 -.i C H 14 O • W u al cominrm ou v mmH rn r O • 01 Col ti (3111-14-1- HTS -.i Hw ill 0 Um wo• Nrnm wHN1Ow- •uu w X023 C O ON ro ro Si- 0 H 0) H v W W a) - • O to N a) ` O U r- .0 }- v H a) v aV N ro N 01 '0 >1 aiioNN mw,7.m W H a) .0 aaO u Sirnrnm tri H4-1 Ca cn row 0 m H 41 r- u rd ,0 o 0 C 3 0 •o .Co 0 0 uN 1i 3 ("e ii U O m UN gONaC1 43 r W= U m aCO O 0H 00awW 01N Om coNZw 0 000=1'00 ul Crn ro r0 a)Z.Cu fa a F O U m rd 0 H 0 w a) w •- C 0 0 -H o H u a) 0 cn ro U o w2= aluaA- 4411): - H OA MON OH -H }io CH a) OA a) `'H tS ` 010 HH Ou H COO Hm u Cm4 0 2 111 ro rob U •- 4-1 U 0 4 H C •c7 0 W 0 w o 01 m 0 w 0 N 0 a) 01 to 0 u ro a) In N U 0 u U u H U H •H N O O) 0- 0 a) 00 0 01 0- o Sa H 0 C w c 0 Si A .0 u O W 0 N d C v u o H C 10 S1 H a) N H U tom ro t71 a) 0 0 r U Z u C .0 .0 a) co a) 0 0 u -H 0 m ro -H to rn III 01 H m ca -H Cr) rn r 0 H H u 0 rd •0 -H al U u W • ` .0 u 0 w a) H '0 0 o C T) 0 o 0 ro 0 co CO a) 0 4 a) 3 0 co = u •H ro Sl U) a) ro -H m C ro 'd Z v 03•H m Z ft) 0 a) .0 - 0 0 ro to W 0 u a 0 U) U 4 N H ro k 0 N 4 H H H v -H w w u u A 0 u it urn H ` 43 0 0 0) C ro H 0 0 0 rd a) A ro 0 0 •U o a) 0 a)W a) • w- u v a) v 4 u) 0 n50 2 .0 111.0 U v al v to u u k •C 0 0 m 0) •C al , s 0 m 0 to v v W01it 4-1 S+ A A u Si 0 C .0 A C -H u U v N 0) m u w ro u es u w m o v w ro u ` 0) -H u a) u - a) a) 3 0 .0 0 • a) al = ,C 0 w 0 E al Si a) u •0 0 3 0 r .0 u •d 0 A a) r0 u ro -H N 0 co „ a) v w m u H H -H U 0A --a) k C v u •`a) N 0 u u 0 k0w r= u401 wNm3ITro H F' 4-1 u a) 0 0 4) U u v 0 a) A ` r0 N • r v.0 - 001 a' `0 0 a) )n a)w,C.Cai 3 0W.C.0 01r0W u. v corm v wHw= alw •o a) 'H .4' 4 H a) 0 13 0) co a) a) U 11 a) -H a) v A J-) N m- W 0 W a' 10 H H O H M u v 3 a) 44 14 H = 011-1N (I) N `= v a) m • a• u •o 0 co rd A 0 '0 co ro ` ` m 0) H IO - a) u o a-4 w 'd ro 1n w rn H row v- u w v v - U a) L • C O ro Um v 40 u i C m u 0.) 41-1 NCO C ` a) C vm co o NW 1010 H 4.0 a •HX -H 0 w= vu Wo m= I)W uwNrrn.0 a) Cm2-u 0 = 0 a 0 w w o w W n r m r w o N . 00 4-14-1 u u m g w =M m 0 rt 4 co a v H 1D w H 0 0 . H W N • O W o NH 0 0 01 W U O W d1 H 10 u m •O F 0` 0- H U N W ul 0- m CO u W dr N N QS a) a) C 0 W 0- H 01 C„ ro v es co rn rn O N 10 H co • W H A 3 a) 0 0 0) 001 4 ro C o ra W C H 41 4 0 • a) • W ,C m • a) W w - u H 0 H u u • u o 10 > m 'Z., u 0 r > m cn 0= 0 H .0 t71 •H 0 a) .1-1a4) ,-1 00 0 w 4 0H10.= H H 0 N w k0 m W S N O N W W 0 N 4-1 W A mi U 0 N 1 01 0 0 k r 0 3 0'd o 0 u 01 H a) 4.10440:c40)w= 0440:43-0@0303,_i03a) u O Si C alm- H w 0 0 in - H w 0 W 0 m 01 w a) .0 a) ro v m x .0 0 2 uw -H C N 0 ro tTN 0 0 w ca 010 01n44 u CHH 10 u 01 r0. 0 0 C(4000 .0 O C- co U 4- 0 0- 00 al cd a) a) •H 0 a) $.4u -H ro-uu1 rt• --1 01CC•.di-SHi 1fl rON 01N 0•a-fioHMm r,.0u-1 04 rd 0 Q -t4441 0 u 0) 01 u U W 01 0 O 'd r0 o to 01O 0 'd 10 0 0 • a) 4 0 0 a) a) 0 a) a) a) a) a) v a) v 1) C 0 a) H al a) m 0 C a) r H ft a) m Si w H a) •H a) .0 4 a) .0 ,C a) .0 v .0 FW3 CO 0)10H0 0 0 kA)o cor0 roH co al SiA1n 10 0Nw 3 0 0 uw UuW u0 -IS 43 3 PC/ PARC! - / Utility Easement — PCI Pmce/ PARC _ l_ A �ltiln:,c L.. ::•;mc�rf l I 1 / ccess and Utility Easement PARCEL 8 PAPC/ / B CO141 J 1 DISTANCE 165. 95' 81. 76' 46. 48' 103. 47' L85. 50' 147. 87' 117. 54' 200. 65' 324. 88' 94, 94' 505. 09' 12. 56' 136. 48' 83, 25' 216. 81' 36. 92' In V1 NP NP 434. 67' 84. 42' 193. 70' 142. 58' 371. 83' 163. 04' 74. 87' 164. 17' N a.P M .. N CO 96. 90' 216. 57' 150, 79' 44. 63' 1s NON c'0 WNO co 3 3 .. Y oi'1 :n NN S 08'02' 38' E N 85'23'05' M W W M M in VI.. in 00 ZZ N 14'48'49' E N 05'44'43' E N 06'43'41' W N 05' 18' 13' W W 3 O O ao NO 00 0P ZZ IN 07'26'10' E 'N 24'06'58' E N 37'31' 19' E S 80'51' 42' E W W 0 O 00 00 0o OP VIZ N 90' 00' 00' E S 04'42'01'E 3 3 N Nn Cob NNMOO-.0.. NNNNN 3 3 N O inm NNOYYY ' 3 3 N 0 ii, <u.o o&' V)NN 3 W N N ob S 04'47'35' M N 76'43'41' M 3 3 N N N. N am NW 2 C N J ..Nntw.o-WP.i J J J J J J J J �rN J J J J CO VVINrm.. -"-. J J J _J J J NNNNNNNNVNMN J J N J J N J J N J J N J J PO J J nm J J L b e J l7 t7 J S 0471'54 E 400.80' O • o (n • cor. 1� 40 e !1 N t COh Q i N 00'00'58" W 20 5 0075101" E 430.80' m £!7 863.89' srs• .B/ N 00'00'58" W 790.75' J_ '3' -6?- .,3�.o•'p ., 27 0 'S 0 2 Q N Yx v 927 ce cu 22 O0 co 2 ° 3h 371.95' $ 00'00'02" E 477 L28 627 M 3 eoo W cO m CD in 10 0co cto 0N7 . 0t0 0 O • O 0 ..: 01 .-- 0 0' 0 CU ' 0 0w` O �o) G 0 0w7ro ^ 0 ce 0« 0,0_ occo— w, 0n ce ° O z fri• Nw707 ws 001 o 0�mn3 N ' ^vW`vo° -° '45 .;yW m�uoNw vc0;rn UCN ^'• •-cmxrn"N•tiap pm o 6 ^y. ,a2 0) c. 7 u 0p O p4`O h7 C^pN roti 0- •... grin Ci) 0 Nb ' 7«- O7OON4O.kwWm�033° o., N�o oy .--1 ?o ca �o ��O�n2d' °c�mro :hp o;o,o^m^,W e �3m�Wo p0oSb2NPoW v0N .IOm7Q'mi Oe I0oyaGnhumryO7O cyOcC 0t.U. U��«Ob,=v011 � o o cn3=c.,: Nh �mOb*O�OOw Lr 7h7p h cp vO Coi (n �h��3"""• WNMw000a Oy 0Cnc 0O"Or'ON0°I^00.7 ,..,6-4 v1 Op7j 011:, �,c�rn u^ °,`I c03 v c0`'NN a� o..:OInW` X03 c7 �.v. oN ^ Ev1 co�NNs2n"�s2�`o 7 c E2� mN :..7. y0'..'r.� ,� N on N4- 0 o 03 oc_o u^ro:..-vo o o co,,.. u•� urn . u• co �'� ��vul aa'iONwtOly 40_ ,t1 of °vh«�« w«01:10 o� ^�O o � y4 'Cc«W`2 1.41°) O^h. 34 o :0-.,`m c^moo 3^ h0 QyJ V^"�O^i c ° � . m m3 o, ;,.2 coa m � 4 0 `"; yN yx rn al v/rn o y, y o v OUmuM cx by vW0 a0i Ow Ai O°"'Ww O��Nry .... `� 0 .� (0 0. •.. l (,1 0 U 0 C ti co 0 ° C" 00 «:1'^� CNNcooin 70 0 0 o CeO^ 000N r7 C� ° I` ° .2.2' � uN• �W • y:1'3 «NW70 m co s. OI cl --Nco O x'00• OS -. -0.4, t�bw d'•a•1^^7 °10�o �2m �y��ry �PONh •-* c, o 0 •«31n nei ati HARTERT & WILSON 210 TENTH STREET GLENW000 SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 TELEPHONE (970) 928-9665 FACSIMILE (970) 928-9680 7 Garfield County Attorney's Office Attention: Carolyn Dahlgren 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ATTORNEYS AT LAW July 16, 2002 RE: Hicks/Prince Creek Construction, Inc. Land Use Issues Dear Ms. Dahlgren: ecci GERALD D. HARTERT RONALD M. WILSON I received and have reviewed with my clients your letter of July 8, 2002 and the stated facts and suggested resolutions of all outstanding land use issues identified in your letter are acceptable to the Hicks and Prince Creek Construction. I do wish to emphasize, however, that the Hicks, by proceeding with the pending special use permit procedures are not abandoning their contention that the present use and occupancy of the barn residential units is in compliance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. Enclosed are the two completed, signed and witnessed Employee Housing Affidavits. Further, I am informed by the Hicks that it is their intention to have the existing single wide mobile home removed from the property this week. Please advise whether this response to your letter is sufficient to the purpose or whether you wish a more formal settlement agreement prior to the scheduled hearing on the special use permit application. Thank you very much for your assistance. GDH/pc xc: David and Connie Hicks Yours very truly, lwt Tie Agricultural Employee Affidavit Garfield County BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT I, °- ek v � 1/1) • l7 �S , state that the residential structure described below will be occupied solely as an agricultural employee dwelling unit provided to an individual and related family member who is/are employed in an agricultural use, including farms, garden, greenhouse, nursery, orchard, ranch, small animal farm for production of poultry, fish, forbearing or other small animals, as prescribed in Garfield County Zoning Resolution Section 3.02.01 and in Section 2.02.02 Agricultural Land, on the property at which the dwelling is located and further, pays no rent. It is agreed that proof of employment, in the form of Internal Revenue Service Forms W-2 or 1099 for each person employed as described above will be submitted to the Garfield County Building and Planning Department upon request by the county. It is agreed that this property will not be sold to another party without representing that the agricultural employee dwelling structure is for agricultural employees only and may not be used for any other purpose. Property and Building Description: Address 10 S f 1/ 1 Rd Co y—AoCLIC} cc Assessors Parcel Number 7.4/ (03 - 11-3 - p © — 093 Building Description 2 00 1 Oak M®0 wl &r Building Square Feet Habitable(1 0 Building Permit Number -3-7-1-1,--/ ISDS (Septic) Permit Number 77" Owner 9L 1 J 4 x c- %S, 1 . (Signature) Owner Address (OS 1 11 1 Rot Cir®n a� cr) '�tn p Witness 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970).,285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 Tuesday, April 30, 2002 Kim Schlagel Senior Planner Garfield County Building and Planning Department Subject: 1051 County Road 11, Carbondale (Applications by Mr. Hicks re: Conditional and Special Use Premits) Dear Ms. Schalagel, Conflicting schedules have intervened with group consensus of a desire to meet with Mr. Hicks to discuss his intentions prior to any formal submittal of concerns to the county. However, it has been brought to my attention that written notification of concerns to Garfield County requires submittal by this date, April 30, 2002. Our property is included in Prince Creek Estates, Lot 6, developed by Mr. Hicks. We have ranch access easements on the north and south sides of our property. This alone could be considered an issue of privacy. Nevertheless, we entered into a'contract with this knowledge of ranch maintenance and built our home. The impact of construction traffic on the north easement has not caused us consideration for relocation. Should the quality of our property be impacted by the new conditions, we may assume a new position. With Mr. Hicks' proposed Special Use Permit, I believe the concern shakes out to the impact on the neighborhood where quality of life and zoning are concerned. With the population of the property allowing for six or more dwellings, does this constitute a ranch or a sub -division? As well, who will oversee the limitations of a "home occupation?" All of which are being accessed by a ranch easement through the properties of five homeowners. We do not desire to be at odds with our neighbor. Matters of residents' aside, we are looking to the county for a reasonable settlement of the established guidelines for this property. I think Dr. Heinemann covered the issues most thoroughly. I write to support and validate all of our concerns. Thank you for your time. Regards, Deborah Evans Prince Creek Estates, Lot 6 Homeowner nay ur uc uc:cup LLORLF CORP. 408 730 1441 p.2 Dr. Klaus Heinemann 1178 Maraschino Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94087 Phone: 408-730-9136 Fax: 408-730-1441 E-mail: kwheinemann@eloret.com Tuesday, May 07, 2002 Kim Schlagel Senior Planner Garfield County Building and Planning Department 109 8°i Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 7-04.- 47v _ ?sit 3470 Subject: 1051 County Road 111, Carbondale (Applications by Mr. Hicks re. Conditional and Special Use Permits) Dear Ms. Schlagel, We purchased our property (937 Prince Creek Road, "Lot 1 of Prince Creek Estates, County Road 111") from Mr. Hicks in the fall of 1998. There is a right-of-way easement for a drive-way/road in favor of Mr. Hick's property intersecting the southern part of our lot. In order to get a better understanding of the impact of that access road on the enjoyment of our property, we required, as part of the purchasing contract, a contractual statement by Mr. Hicks what his intentions were with regard to the adjacent land he owned, which is not part of the Prince Creek Homeowners Association. The following passage was included as Item #3 in our contract (Counterproposal dated 7/14/98, signed by both parties): "Seller has no plans for changing the use of Seller's ranch other than to build a new home on the ranch for the personal use of Seller's family." In October of that same year, less than three months later, construction of the huge bam/office space/two- unit apartment complex had started. In the ensuing years, Mr. Flicks located, or expanded — whichever the case may be, his construction company activities at that location to a degree that the traffic on his access road is no longer "insignificant" but has started to impact the peace and enjoyment from our property. We kept quiet about this matter, because the situation had not become alarming, and good neighborly relations were more important to us than exposing ourselves to an unfriendly situation. Whereby it is my understanding that Mr. Hicks has meanwhile relocated the offices of his construction business to an appropriate location in Glenwood Springs, he apparently continues to use his property at 1051 County Road 111 as a staging/storage area for that business, and the associated truck traffic has remained. Fa VI uc uc:Cip tLUKtI UUKI'. 408 730 1441 p.3 I am concerned that the conditional use permit for "a home occupation" he is seeking would open up this rural/residential area as precedence for an increasing amount of commercial activity, thereby further increasing the traffic through the access road easement through our and our five neighbors' properties. Similarly, I am concemed that the special use permit, opening up the two dwelling units in his barn from housing for his own rural activity employees to two open -market rental units might potentially snowball to precedence for an increasing number of apartment buildings and/or rental units built on that property, with increased traffic on the access road through our and our neighbors' properties; Having spoken with my neighbors to the south and west of us a number of times in this regard, I am confident to state that they share these concerns and are similarly apprehensive with regard to approving the subject applications. Sincerely, Klaus Heinemann Attachment repo Vr VG UJi Tle CLUKCI LUKr. 4UU -Rill 1441 Dr. Klaus Heinemann 1178 Maraschino Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94087 Phone: 408-730-9136 Fax: 408-730-1441 E-mail: kwheinemann@eloret.com Tuesday, May 07, 2002 Kim SchlageI Fax 970-384-3470 Garfield County Building and Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Subject: 1051 County Road 111, Carbondale (Applications by Mr. Hicks re. Conditional and Special Use Permits) Dear Ms. Schlagel, My neighbor John McCarty forwarded to me a copy of Mr. Chain's letter of May 6, 2002, addressed to you. I have also been in touch with Deborah and Shane Evans and am delighted that you are also opposed to the subject applications. In an attempt to further strengthen the case, I am attaching a copy of a "Counterproposal" signed by Connie and David Hicks on 7/14/98 in conjunction with our purchase of Lot 1, Prince Creek Estates, from them. I had mentioned this document already in my letter of 4/22/2002 to you. In this document, signed just six weeks prior to the date of the affidavit Mr. Chain is referring to and of which I had been unaware, Mr. And Mrs. Hicks warrant in item #2: "Seller has no plans for changing the use of Seller's ranch other than to build a new home on the ranch for the personal use of Seller's family." On August 25 of that year, this statement was apparently already watered down to building "... employee dwelling unit(s) ...," and in October of the same year a huge barn was built, and use of his ranch for his construction business commenced. Once the precedence of two open -market rental units and a business of just a "handful" of employees has been granted, snowballing to more rental dwellings and an increase of the business activities is just the "handwriting on the wall" -- given the above track record of discrepancies between signed statements and actions on the part of Mr. Hicks. I very much appreciate your effort in de g Mr. Hicks' applications. Klaus Heinemann Attachment p.1 GLURG I laUKF"• 4lJa AJU 1441 Mason & Morse Real Estate 0304 Highway 133 Carbondale, CO 81623 Phone: (970) 963-3300, Fax: (970) 963-0879 'R[IS FORM HAS imy0Er'ANr LEGAL CONSEQUENCES AND THE PARTIES SHOULD CONSULT LSCAL AND TAx OR OT1/ER COUNSEL BEFORE &GNI/4G . - COUNTERPROPOSAL RE; Proposed contract to buy and sell the tbllowitg described mil estate in she County of Garfield . Calorodo, 10 wit Lot 1, Prince Creek Estates July 14 l9 98 keawaasNo 937 County Road 111 Carbondale CO Smtc dated July 13 Connie F. Hicks David W. Hicks Shccr. mW Jan Michael Heinemann Sneer Address 19 98 between City 01623 Zip Buwr. . The uMersigmd atopen to proposed eumract, subject to the following amendments: 1. The purchase price shall be $525,000.00 with down payment and/or new loan amount adjusted accordingly. 2. Section 21 ."ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS" Number 5 and 6 are hereby deleted. 3. Seller has no plans for changing the use of Seller's ranch other than to build a new home on the ranch for the personal use of Seller's family. . Seller will provide Buyer within 10 days of acceptance hereof, all information and documents currently in the possession of Seller that would be of interest to Buyer, regarding the construction of improvements and maps of the area, if any. 5. With regard to the Homeowners Association for Prince Creek Estates, the intent'in the Protective Covenants is to minimize negative impact to views as a result of new ' construction on vacant lots. Any new construction for Prince Creek. Estates is subject to approval by the Architectural Review Committee of Prince Creek Estates. Seller is currently a member of the Romeowners'Aasociation for Prince'Creek Estates; but will -no - longer be a member upon the closing of this transaction, and therefore will have no authority to approve or disapprove plans submitted for the development of Lots 5 or 6 in Prince Creek Estates, unless such plans are submitted prior to closing hereunder. Upon closing hereunder, Buyer will become a member of the Homeowner's Association for Prince Creek Estates and as such will have an opportunity to participate in .the approval / disapproval process for all plans submitted to the Architectural Review - Committee with regard to Lots 5 and 6, prince Creek Estates. All oilier terms and conditions shall remain the same. This counterproposal shall expire unless accepted in writing, by Buyer and Seller. as evWuuc by their nigtamrua below, std the olToriug pany to this douwnntz receives mace of •tell accaptame on or before Jul,/ 15 199B If accepted, the propowd contract,. its amended hereby, shall became a conlma between Sdkr and Buyer. SELLER Connie F. Hicks SELLER 401/ David W. Hicks BAYER DATE %/v'i /• DATE, DATE 4/4_4z0,±3 Jan Micha&2' Heinemann The primed pardons or this form, except StalicizedXdillerenuaredl addwons,!lave been approved by the Colorado Real Estate Commissbn. No.CP40.1 a4. COUNTERPROPOSAL aearFASTe Forms, Box 4700, Frtsco,CO 80443; Version 5.51, CReaWFAfTt, 1998: Reps LCOCOL223154 - Completed by -Nancy Emerson. CRO. CRS. GRI. Broker Associate. Masons Morse Reel Estate 07/14'961238:37 Pagel oft March 20, 2002 Mark Chain Carbondale Planning Department 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale CO, 81623 Re: David Hicks Dear Mark, I am forwarding these applications to your office so that the Town of Carbondale may have some input regarding the newly proposed uses on Mr. Hicks property. The application has been deemed technically compliant and a public hearing has been scheduled for May 13, 2002 for both of the applications. Please provide any comments you may have by April 26th or sooner. Thank you for your input on this application. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, ctaej Kim Schlagel Senior Planner February 28, 2002 Mr. David Hicks and PCI, LLC C/O Prince Creek Construction 1317 Grand Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Hicks, Please refer to our previous correspondence, as well as a concerning various zoning violations on property owned 2463-113-00-075 and 2463-104-00-076, located at 1051 County. Garfield County BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT Code Compliance Office shackett(a garfield-county,com letter from Kim Schlagel, dated January 24, 2002, by you and PCI, LLC, known as assessors parcels County Road 111 in unincorporated Garfield As of this date more than a year has passed without action from you to correct these violations. It continues to be a violation of CRS 30-28-124 & 124.5, Garfield County zoning regulations, to occupy the modular home on your property as a free market rental unit without a Special Use Permit for an accessory dwelling. The same laws are being violated by occupancy of the barn apartments without a Special Use Permit for a two family dwelling. You are hereby given notice, pursuant to the above statutes, that you must completely correct the violations within thirty (30) days of the date this notice is received. Please be advised that violation of the above statutes is a misdemeanor crime punishable by a fine of not more than $100.00 or imprisonment for not more than ten days, or both, and that each day that the violation continues is deemed to be a separate offense. If you have not responded within thirty days of this notice we will schedule a hearing, during a regular meeting of the Garfield County Board of Commissioners, during which this matter will be reviewed with them and a request made that it be referred to the county attorney for legal action against you. If you have any questions regarding what actions are required to achieve compliance, or you wish to report compliance action taken, please contact this office in writing at the address below, or by e-mail at the address above. Sincerely, Compliance Officer 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970)384-3470 March 19, 2002 Mr. David Hicks 1051 CR 111 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Conditional and Special Use Permits Dear Mr. Hicks, BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT The purpose of this letter is to inform you that your requests for a conditional and special use permit will be heard before the Board of County Commissioners at 1:15 p.m., on Monday, May 13, 2002, in the Garfield County Courthouse, Commissioners Hearing Room, Suite 301, 109 8th St., Glenwood Springs. Prior to the hearing you will receive a staff report and an agenda which will indicate the approximate order your hearing will take place. The applicant is responsible for the publication, posting, and mailing of all notices and shall present proof of publication and mailing at or before the hearing. Notice for both of the hearings shall be given as follows: (1) Notice by publication, including the name of the applicant, description of the subject lot, a description of the proposed use and nature of the hearing, and the date, time and place for the hearing shall be given once in a newspaper of general circulation in that portion of the County in which the subject property is located at least thirty (30) but not more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of such hearing, and proof of publication shall be presented at hearing by the applicant. (2) Notice by mail, containing information as described under paragraph (1) above, shall be mailed to all owners of record as shown in the County Assessor's Office of lots within two hundred feet (200') of the subject lot and to all owners of mineral interest in the subject property at least thirty (30) but not more than sixty (60) days prior to such hearing time by certified return receipt mail, and receipts shall be presented at the hearing by the applicant. The site shall be posted such that the notice is clearly and conspicuously visible from a public right-of-way, with notice signs provided by the Planning Department. The posting must take place at least thirty (30) but not more than sixty (60) days prior to the hearing date and is the sole responsibility of the applicant to post the notice, and ensure that if remains posted until and during the date of the hearing. (3) 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 Failure to complete the above stated noticing requirements will require re -noticing for a future hearing. It is your responsibility to ensure the legal description you provided to this office, included in this notice, is accurate. If you have any questions about the public notice process, please contact this office. Sincerely, 1)441418eitae Kim Schlagel Senior Planner • April 9, 2002 'RECEIVED APR 1 1 282 Mark Bean Garfield County Building and Planning 109 8th Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Bunkhouse remodel, 1051 County Road 111. Dear Mark: We were issued a permit last July to remodel the bunkhouse on our ranch. We did some interior tear -out of existing walls, insulation and decayed flooring, stopping in October when the weather prevented further work. Please see the enclosed letter from engineer Kerry Kaman regarding this work. We did not get to pour a foundation or move the structure because the interior work took longer than we expected. This is our official notice that we are again resuming work on the remodel and expect to be pouring the foundation in about a month. Mr. Steve Hackett came out last week and stated that since we didn't move the bunkhouse last fall we owed 1/2 of the original permit fee because the permit has expired. There was apparently some confusion in the interpretation of "starting work" on the structure. Please clarify the county's position on "starting work" and whether or not the permit has expired. If you feel this is correct, please send me an invoice for 'A of the building permit fee and I will pay it. I do feel that some clarification is necessary for us to understand why I need to pay more for the same permit. If you have any other questions please feel free to call me at work at 970-945-4545. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Connie Hicks RE: Bunkhouse remodel, 1051 County Road 111. Page 1 of 1 April 17, 2002 Mrs. Connie Hicks 1051 County Road 111 Carbondale, CO 81623 BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT Code Compliance Office shackett(a Barfield-county.com Mrs. Hicks, Regarding your letter of April 9, 2002, questioning the interpretation of "starting work" on a building permit. You indicated in the letter that there was an enclosed letter from an engineer however, there was no enclosure received. I have enclosed a copy of Uniform Building Code section 106.4.4 Expiration. The "building or work" authorized by the permit was "remodel and relocate existing log bunkhouse". We would not issue a permit for "interior tearing out of existing walls, insulation and decayed flooring". That work can be done without a permit. Provisions of section 106.4.4 state that the permit "shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days". The balance of section 106.4.4, concerning permit fees is self explanatory. We write letters, as a courtesy to permit holders, notifying them that their permit is expiring and giving them the opportunity to either call for an inspection to continue the permits validation or to request an extension of time, per the instructions and conditions in the above referenced code section. Letters were sent to you advising that permits 7744, for placement of a modular home and 8058, to remodel and relocate the log bunkhouse, were about to expire and granting you 30 days to respond. Those letters, in addition to notifying you of impending expiration, also referred by quotation, to the above code sections. They were mailed to you on March 5, 2002. No response to them has been received. It is required that a payment of one half of the original fee on permit #8058 be made in order for it to be renewed. It is required that a full permit fee be paid to renew permit #7744, for the placement of the modular home. Our records indicate that the last inspection done on it was on October 20, 2000. It has not had a final inspection or a certificate of occupancy issued and is not legal to occupy. I regret that we are not able to send you an invoice as you requested. Our front office can assist you in getting the permits renewed. Sincere y, Steve Hacke , Complian5e Officer ec: MB CE DD 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that David Hicks has applied to the Board of County Commissioners, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to request a special use permit, in connection with the following described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit: Legal Description: see attached Practical Description: 1051 County Road 111 The special use permit would allow the applicant to change the status of existing employee housing on the property to free market rental units. All persons affected by the proposed special use permit 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 Board of County Commissioners will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property owners, and others affected, in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the free market rental use. The 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. A public hearing on the application has been scheduled for the 13th day of May, 2002, at 1:15 p.m., in the County Commissioners Chambers, Garfield County Courthouse, Suite 301, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Planning Department Garfield County PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that David Hicks has applied to the Board of County Commissioners, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to request a conditional use permit, in connection with the following described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit: Legal Description: see attached Practical Description: 1051 County Road 111 The conditional use permit would allow the applicant to use a portion of an existing barn on the property as the location for a home occupation. All persons affected by the proposed conditional use permit 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 Board of County Commissioners will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property owners, and others affected, in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for the home occupation use. The 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. A public hearing on the application has been scheduled for the 13th day of May, 2002, at 1:15 p.m., in the County Commissioners Chambers, Garfield County Courthouse, Suite 301, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Planning Department Garfield County March 18, 2002 Mr. David Hicks 1051 CR 111 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Hicks: BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT This letter is in response to your Special Use Permit to change the status of the current employee housing on your property, as submitted to Garfield County. As a result of additional information received, Staff has completed a Technical Compliance review of your application, and has found it to be in Technical Compliance. This means that all the information required for staff to review the application has been submitted. Garfield County now has sixty (60) days to place your application on the public hearing agenda. I will be sending you another letter shortly explaining the public notice requirements for this application, and also the pertinent forms to assist you in the process. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ilfrt 414 Kim Schlagel Senior Planner 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 March 13, 2002 Kim Schlagel Garfield County Building and Planning 109 8th St. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Information on Special Use Permit Dear Kim, 'RECEIVED MAR 1 5 2002 The amount of vehicles accessing the site on a daily basis will be an average of 6 per day per unit, making 12 vehicle trips per day. This amount will not change whether these units are free market or rented to employees. The size of the existing barn is 52 ft. by 122 ft.. The size of the 2 apartments makes up about 1/5 of the size of the entire structure or 52 ft by 24 ft. each, with the apartments being stacked one on top of another. The waste water amount approved in the building permit was for 6 bedrooms. We have a total of 4 bedrooms. The calculated amount of water used per bedroom is 75 gallons per person per day, with 2 people in each bedroom, or 600 gallons of water per day for the 4 bedrooms. This figure was obtained from Bob Pennington of Gamba Engineering. The septic was designed, approved, and constructed for 6 bedrooms (or 900 gallons a day). We hope to put in a small office in the future and use the remaining septic allowance for that. Please see the attached sheets for a vicinity map, Garfield County Assessor's map, and list of all adjoining property owners and their addresses. Thank you, David and Connie Hicks 6., A I f*SrA,i;lt • 6572 g _PO ,INDA: Segments of USGS QUAD SHEETS Carbondale, Colo. N3922.5 -W10707.5/7.5 (1961) Mount Sopris, Colo. 39107 -C2 -TF -024 (1961) (Photo Revised 1987) Depicting Portion of T. 8 S., R. 88 W., 6th P.M. Location of Hicks (Cerise) Ranch in Relation to Carbondale, Colo, palcont 8, Green, P.C. Ocl. 2001) Prince Creek • Hicks Exhibit No. H-22 Civil No. 00 CV 35, District Court, Garfield County, CO Adjoining Property Owners to 35 acre parcel: Parcel # 2463-103-00-052 Perry Sopris Ranch Partnership Ltd. 163 County Road 118 Carbondale, CO 81623 Parcel # 2463-104-00-053 Cold Mountain Ranch LLLP 4239 Hwy 133 Carbondale, CO 81623 Parcel # 2463-113-00-075 David & Connie Hicks 1051 County Rd 111 Carbondale, CO 81623 Parcel #2463-104-00-044 Carolyn McVoy and John A. Weiss P.O. Box 1238 Carbondale, CO 81623 Parcel #2463-101-00-012 Four Bar Ranch Co., Inc. P.O. Box 686 Carbondale, CO 81623 Parcel # 2463-113-01-004 John & Stella Miemicki ' 950 Cowen Dr. Carbondale, CO 81623 January 24, 2002 Mr. David Hicks 1051 CR 111 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Permit Applications Dear Mr. Hicks: BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT I am writing this letter to inform you that the Planning Department has not received a response to the letter I sent you dated November 5, 2001 regarding your Conditional and Special Use applications. There were several items listed in the letter required for submission to meet the technical compliance requirements for both the Conditional and Special Use applications. You have not made an effort to submit these items. Furthermore, it has come to my attention that the Planning Department has been working with you for over a year to meet Garfield County Regulations in terms of uses on your property. As the uses on your property are STILL in direct violation of County Regulations, this application will be forwarded to Garfield County Code Enforcement along with the County Attorney's office. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kim Schlagel Senior Planner Cc: Mark Bean, Planning Director Steve Hackett, Code Enforcement Don DeFord, County Attorney 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 November 5, 2001 Mr. David Hicks 1051 CR 111 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Special Use Permit Dear Mr. Hicks: BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT I am writing this letter to inform you that the Planning Department needs additional information in order to process your Special Use Permit application to change the status of the employee housing on your property. Your timeliness in providing this information will expedite our ability to place your application the public hearing agenda. The following items need to be resolved as soon as possible: • We need to know the amount of vehicles accessing the site on a daily, weekly, and/or monthly basis, and the size of any existing or proposed structures that will be utilized in conjunction with the proposed use. • In your application you have identified that the Town of Carbondale will be supplying the domestic water for the proposed use, but you have not indicated any plans for waste water. Please indicate the expected amount of waste water that will be generated from this use and the type of waste water treatment that will be used. • Please provide a vicinity map, showing the slope of your property. A U.S.G.S 1:24,000 scale quadrangle map will suffice for this. • You must obtain a copy of the appropriate portion of a Garfield County Assessor's Map showing all public and private landowners adjacent to your property. Include a list of all property owners and their addresses. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions pertaining to these requirements. Sincerely, ScNaj aej Kim Schlagel Senior Planner 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 November 17, 2000 Mr. David Hicks 1051 County Road 111 Carbondale, Co 81623 Dear Mr. Hicks, Building & Planning Department Thanks for your fax of 11/9/00 and the review of the current situation by Mr. Hartert. We do not agree with the interpretations presented in his review but, that is not an important matter at this time.. The fact is that if you are granted a special use permit for a two family dwelling for the barn, you will have accomplished the objective of "free market units". There are no other restrictions about the occupancy of a legally permitted two family dwelling. A conditional use permit for a home occupation will continue to be required if you maintain the Prince Creek Construction office in that building. The assembly of building components in the shop of the barn is not a legal use and must be discontinued. The log bunkhouse restoration for employee housing is allowed, provided that plans and a permit application are submitted for approval, the building is rebuilt to current Uniform Building Code standards and that an employee housing affidavit is filed with this office. We would require that a registered professional engineer certify to us that the already existing components of the log bunk house meet current UBC requirements. Please advise us concerning how you wish to proceed. Yours truly, Compliance Official 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945-8212/285-7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Town of Carbondale 511 Colorado Avenue Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 963-2733 FAX (970) 963-9140 RECEIVED AUG 0 3 2000 August 2, 2000 Mark Bean Garfield County Planning Department 109 8fi' Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mark: I am writing this inquiry at the request of the Carbondale Board of Trustees. As you may be aware, the Town of Carbondale is presently involved in a lawsuit with Mr. David Hicks regarding the use of town water free of charge on his property south of Carbondale. In our lawsuit, we have argued that the Hicks' have been using Town water in amounts and ways not authorized by the agreement between the parties. The Town recently completed an inspection of the property and noted that a barn had been constructed on the Hicks' property. The barn contains two three-bedroom apartments with two bathrooms each. We were advised that the Hicks family lives in one apartment and that their relativeslive in the other apartment. The barn also contains office space with full bathroom facilities, including a shower, which could be utilized as an additional apartment. Mr. Hicks advised us that additional office space is being constructed in the back of the barn. One Large bay (in the barn) appeared to be a work area where employees were painting a construction trailer. There was no indication of ongoing agricultural activity in the barn. We also noticed that a travel trailer (approximately 20' in length) was hooked into the Town's water system and being used for living quarters. A motor home was also parked on the site and it appeared to be hooked into the Town's water system. Mr. Hicks told us that the water supply for the barn and these other trailers, etc, is from the Town's system. None of these connections were ever authorized or approved by the Town. We also noted that a site was being prepared for a modular home. Mr. Hicks advised us that he plans to connect the modular home to the Town's water system. Finally Mr. Hicks told us that he plans to construct one additional single family dwelling for his family and connect it to the Town's water system. Mark Bean Letter August 2, 2000 Page two The Town would like to be advised as to whether these ongoing uses of the Hicks' property are permissible pursuant to current Garfield County building and zoning regulations. Please investigate this matter and let us know your findings. If you need any further information, please call me at 963-2733. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, John Hier Town Manager Jh/sc c:john/letter/mark bean.doc N CO Certificate of Occupancy 0 0 ny IRS ,t-4 W A o nnU a TS '1:3int as al a u C a 0 V o co m 1 a 1 U 2 5 0 81623 Locality 8 8- 4§ 4§ ei el H O 40 PI to i g x o ▪ U N CQ O bA O °s" 4 pi 6 m U 01 }2Q� 01 ry o' CA W 2 to to Y N^ 1 A 110 'q O 0 e e r. 4 O O • O b V V a .YO o w e c o S 0 4 . im tit Ti Teie L • o O �▪ a. W ^ I1 Ise 0 O CI• h- al ▪ erle� ▪ U $ eg v O 0 T03. 7 a E • CLQ u • d•00 o• u 0 0 01 O C Nt E 5 1°U V 41 U u w a a o E Ue"a � d m 0 0 •a 0 z 0) 0 N 2 J 2 cc a) CC c 0 ui 0 U a INSPECTIONS U) L 2W WLLC5 co 6 N W 0 Z 0) C C .Z H Cl "as L 01. d k m: c —5 0 a)E E. 0 00 00 C 0 ro 0 0 `. r -G WLLLL DCC 00O (continue on back) November 17, 2000 Mr. David Hicks 1051 County Road 111 Carbondale, Co 81623 Dear Mr. Hicks, Garfield County Building & Planning Department Thanks for your fax of 11/9/00 and the review of the current situation by Mr. Hartert. We do not agree with the interpretations presented in his review but, that is not an important matter at this time.. The fact is that if you are granted a special use permit for a two family dwelling for the barn, you will have accomplished the objective of "free market units". There are no other restrictions about the occupancy of a legally permitted two family dwelling. A conditional use permit for a home occupation will continue to be required if you maintain the Prince Creek Construction office in that building. The assembly of building components in the shop of the barn is not a legal use and must be discontinued. The log bunkhouse restoration for employee housing is allowed, provided that plans and a permit application are submitted for approval, the building is rebuilt to current Uniform Building Code standards and that an employee housing affidavit is filed with this office. We would require that a registered professional engineer certify to us that the alread existing_components.ofthe log bunk house meet current UBC requirements Please advise us concerm g how you wish to proceed. Yours truly, fr/IrAtd,,, .teve . et Compliance 1 ficial 41E 1<11/14 1/14K I bk5 C ae_s -t-e) P g va)ed e tip '02 //owie„ owLyed ho-ttx“-- )14-s bd..#14 rie L r bre- K_ l JN oeiz t, i) L yvt B i/I 3 109 8th Street, Suite 303 N 945-8212/285-7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 February 20, 2001 To Whom It May Concern: I am applying for a Special Use Permit to convert the multi -family portion of my barn from housing for ranch employees into housing for persons other than ranch employees. I built a large barn, office, and multi -family (restricted to employees only) structure on my ranch in 1998-1999. The Certificate of Occupancy was issued on August 19th, 1999. The county now claims that the multi -family portion of this structure is not allowed and has asked me to submit an application for special use to allow the continued use of the housing portion of the bam. My attorney has advised me that since the permit and C.O. for this structure have been issued that no further permits are needed as long as the units are used to house ranch employees, but I am willing to apply for a special use permit to convert these multi -family units to house persons other than ranch employees if that will help eliminate problems that the county feels have been created by their issuing a permit and C.O. for this structure. Therefore, I am applying for the special use permit to change the status of the employee housing to allow them to be occupied by persons other than ranch employees. If this application is denied then I, upon my attorney's urging, am not admitting that a special use permit is necessary for the continued use of the facilities by ranch employees. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, CV‘<g figet David Hicks BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT April 16, 2002 Mr. David Hicks 1051 CR 111 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Conditional and Special Use Permits Dear Mr. Hicks: I am writing this letter to inform you that it is been the historic practice of the Board of County Commissioners to deny land use applications for a property while code violations concurrently exist on the site. The Planning Department is taking the position, therefore, to recommend denial of your current applications at this time. It has come to our attention that Steve Hackett, Code Enforcement Officer, has repeatedly tried to work with you on these issues. The Planning Department continues to encourage you to work with Staff to eliminate the present violations of Garfield County Code on your property. Please see the attached memo for a listing of these violations along with copies of relevant correspondence. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions pertaining to these requirements. Sincerely, Kim Schlagel Senior Planner 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 4-4-02 Code Violations David Hicks 1051 County Road 111 Carbondale Parcel 2463 104 00 076 Two dwelling units in the barn built as "employee housing" are occupied by owners. SUP for two family dwelling required. Home occupation of storage and assembly work for Prince Creek Construction Company not allowed. Parcel 2463 113 00 075 Modular home occupied with no final inspection and no C. 0. Permit 7744 expired. Single wide mobile home was to be removed when replaced by modular. Still on the property and appears to be occupied. Permit 8058 to remodel log bunkhouse expired. Copies of pertinent information and letters attached. The special inspector shall be employed by the owner, the engineer or architect of record, or an agent of the owner, but not the contractor or any other person responsible for the work. When structural observation is required by Section 1702, the inspection program shall name the individuals or firms who are to perform structural observation and describe the stages of construc- tion at which structural observation is to occur. The inspection program shall include samples - inspection reports and provide. time limits for submissiotc:4freports.. -.. i . . 106.4 Pnce ermits Issua, 106.4.1 Issuance. The application, plans, specifications, computations and other. data filed by an • applicant for a permit shall be reviewed by the building official. Such plans may be reviewed by other departments of this jurisdiction to verify compliance with any applicable laws under their ju- risdiction: If the building official fords that the work described in an application for a permit and the plans; speoificatit,ns andetherdata filed therewith conform to the requirement,, tthrscode and other pertinent taws tit ordinanes,cand that the fees specified in Section 107 have been paid, tiie building official shall issue a penmt therefor. to the applicant. When the building official issues the pennit where plans are rei}uired the bnilaintofficial shall endorse m writing or stamp the plans and specifications AppKOVED' b'aeh railed lans'and'',. �ns 11}allltr bekhariged titedi'fied or altered wi Ali P ?4 all work regulated by this code 'ghat be'don€ m abcoidadce' i the pi ro ed'prans: The building official may issue a permit for,the construction of part of a building orstructure be- fore the entire plans and specifications for the whole building or structure have been submitted or approved, provided adequate information and detailed statements have been filed complying with all pertinent requirements of this code. The holder of a partial permit shall proceed without assur- ' ance that the permit for the entire building or structure will be granted. . t t-O�� u" ; y(%e set of approved plans, specifications and computations shall be ned by the building official for a period oft " dafeiigeoftrpal thlili aide ,iinne set of approved plans and specifications shall be returned to the app can , and sai set SIAM be kept on the site of the building or work at all times during which the work authorized thereby is in progress. 106.4.3 Validity. of permit. The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans, specifica- dons and computations shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or otherordinances of the jurisdiction . shall hot be valid. • The issuance of a permit based on plans, specifications and other data shall not prevent the build- ing official from thereafter requiring the correction of errors in said plans, specifications and other • data, orfrom preventing building operations being carried on thereunder when in violation of this code or of any other ordinances of this jurisdiction. Eveiypeiitiit tssueOblethhbuilding official the provisions of this code } Dine null and void if the.bmlding or work authorized by such per- 1''& * tl ejtate bfsuoh"ermit; orif the building or work autho-1e _`f sIS , or abandoned' ai'anyin nee.after-the work is commenced for a` fore such work can'be'recothmerieed; a new permit shall be fast obtained to ee therefor shall be one half the amount requited for a new permit for such work, v£ d , s°, <les have been made or will be made in the original plans and specifications'for such work; andprovided further that such suspension or abandonment has not exceeded one year. In order to renew action on a permit after expiration, the permittee shall pay a new full permit fee, . Any permittee holding an unexpired permitmay apply for an extension of the time within which work may commence under that permit when the permittee is unable to commence work within the 1-6 fS.SectttoRisupeodand�5'a fast®ru}?agga tune or at iotrbythe p&im'ittee fora period aol exceedfng 1 0 days on written• requegr. liy - W ,qm ttee-showmgThar crcumstances beyond the control of the permittee baveprevvented hction from ftce1~81truc of lOVIended diore.than once. a 106.4.5 S}uspcnsionorrevocation, The building official may, mWriting, suspend or -revoke aper - mit issued under the provisions of this code whenever the permit is issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information supplied, or in violation of any ordinance or regulation or any of the provi- sions of this code.. SECTION 107 — FEES 107.1 General. Fees shall be assessed in accordance with the provisions of this section or shall be as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the jurisdiction. - IrPie3 `'he fee fot each permit shall be as set forthm, Table 1-A. '.,Jnr Ih'+': l _�; y.•"t 44 -ti of value or valuation under any of the provtsions'of this code shall lie made b}q ih5� r ra . The value to be used in computing the building permit and building plan re - total value of all construction work for which the permit is issued, as well as all • finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning, elevators, fire -extin- guishing -systems andanyother permanent equipment. Tlr n evt; r ee """�ppw rWhen submittal doments are required by Section 106.3.2,a plan review fee shall be paid at a time of submitting the submittal docurhents for plan review. Said'plaq rnga' fAtttifatriat as `owtttll'Pabt kt1`r :r tt e' The plan review fees specified in this subsection are Separate fees from the permit fees specified in Section 107.2 and are in addition to the permit fees. When submittal documents are incomplete or cchanged so as to: require additional plan review or when the project involves deferred submittal items as defined in Section 106.3.4.2, anadditional ,plan: review fee shall berCharged at the rate. showa in Table 1-A. ,, 3a �i ai a a a s qi.,1 n m etas ts$ned this gti;',afays follot4ng� pt, i ti t , t` t , aim+ p ans and other data snbmi'ttted for review may there er be returned to time applicantor destroyed by the building official. The build- ing official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days on request by the applicant showing that circumstances beyond the control of the applicant have pre- vented action from being taken. No application shall be extended more thanonce. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan re- view fee. wk`iv(tti'oti heti rl�if. fr 107.5.1 In• vestigatiotr -Whenever any work for which a permit is required by this code has been commenced without first obtaining said permit, a'special investigation shall be made before a per- mit rr1 lie issued for such work. 1161.52[ tee.cAnirivdstigation fee, in addition to the permit fee, shall be collected whether or not a permit is then or subsequently issued. The investigation fee shall be equal to the amount of the per- mit fee required by this code. The minimum investigation fee shall be the same as the minimum fee setg%tth-ingable1 A. The payment of Such investigatioafeethallnot exemptany p'ersohfrom coin pliance'with all btheatp visions of thisr odd'not tidalahypenalty prescribed by law: ••• ' ltl1/.0rdeltta1" The building official niay militarize refunding of any fee paid hereunder which was erroneou8 y paid or collected. Brite refirtYtfitSg of to more titan O perce t gf Ifee pas8` 1-7 eCGarfield County BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT Code Compliance Office shackett(2i garfield-county.com Date:s3 ^5—D Z To: M9-1/th , A tics 0 ?vi4ses,/1/ ig- h1rn - = Co /S4.3 Dear Permit Holder, ' L Please refer to your building permit number 7 717a/issued 9 /o2 `CO A routine review of our open building permits indicates that we have not received a request for an inspection on this permit since Please be advised that building permits expire, per Uniform Building Code, section 106.4.4 and 106.4.5, 180 days after they are issued, if the work authorized by the permit has not commenced or is suspended or abandoned. The permit may be extended by written request to the building official, showing that circumstances beyond your control have caused a delay. Permits that have been expired for 180 days or less may be renewed for one half of the original permit fee. Permits that have been expired for longer than 180 days require payment of a new full permit fee. Please contact this office at your very earliest convenience, in writing, to advise about the status of your permitted work. If you have not responded within thirty days from the receipt of this notice the permit will be closed and a permanent notation will be placed in the property records at the County Assessors office that indicates that the work permitted was not inspected, is not approved and that the building or area ma: not be legally occupied. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, uildmg Insp ctor 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 �7L/ll Assessor's 061 BUILDING PERMIT CARD Job Address tSi 02 t 1\ 0 PR-en-it-ALEr G Owner \At e 1(S, DAUI D Address /1M C0111 i h NN C Tcel No. Date Contractor Address b229.7 i)(1) Setbacks: Front Rear RH LH Mob tAR. 00 ZiW9TIO/J INSPECTIONS Soils Test Footing `i-/5470 7\ S. Foundation Grout Underground Plumbing Rough Plumbing Framing Insulation Roofing Drywall Gas Piping l63 --O S4Z7h_ /(A% ovecii 7 ori thus permit -since /0 -- b Please be advised that building permits expire, per Uniform Building Code, section 106.4.4 and 106.4.5, 180 days after they are issued, if the work authorized by the permit has not commenced or is suspended or abandoned. The permit may be extended by written request to the building official, showing that circumstances beyond your control have caused a delay: Permits that have been expired for 180 days or less may be renewed for one half of the original permit fee. Permits that have been expired for longer than 180 days require payment of a new full permit fee. NOTES Phone # 963 )(a Phone # 90J5 Zoning Weatherproofing Mechanical Electrical Rough (State) Electrical Final (State) Final /Checklist Completed? Certificate Occupancy # Date Septic System # Date Final /0-26 Other 1170f —0812-02` ,ze#2erved) P.70 co, (continue on back) on Please contact this office at your very earliest convenience, in writing, to advise about the status of your permitted work If you have not responded within thirty days from the receipt of this notice the permit will be closed and a permanent notation will be placed in the property records at the County Assessors office that indicates that the work permitted was not inspected, is not approved and that the building or area may not be legally occupied. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, uildtng hnsp€ctor 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 Date: S 75= eii Cks Zeei i</ Co y/ BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT Code Compliance Office shackett(i garfield-countv.com Dear Permit Holder, Please refer to your building permit number YO81issued 7 27 -o/ A routine review of our open building permits indicates that we have not received a request for an inspection on this permit since ✓77 7'tt Please be advised that building permits expire, per Uniform Building Code, section 106.4.4 and 106.4.5, 180 days after they are issued, if the work authorized by the permit has not commenced or is suspended or abandoned. The permit may be extended by written request to the building official, showing that circumstances beyond your control have caused a delay. Permits that have been expired for 180 days or less may be renewed for one half of the original permit fee. Permits that have been expired for longer than 180 days require payment of a new full permit fee. Please contact this office at your very earliest convenience, in writing, to advise about the status of your permitted work If you have not responded within thirty days from the receipt of this notice the permit will be closed and a permanent notation will be placed in the property records at the County Assessors office that indicates that the work permitted was not inspected, is not approved and that the building or area may not be legally occupied. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Building Inspector 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 Job Addres 0 / Owner Contractor PCC.. Setbacks: Frontf .- nont Soils Test Footing Foundation Grout_ Underground Plumbing Rough Plumbing Framing_ Insulation Roofing Drywall _ Gas Piping Assessor's Parcel No. Date UILD 7IG PERMIT ARD C Rear _ /642.Address BOJ/ Cc f(j C'd1ao 7l Pho�3 ne #963-/ivpe\ Phone #96 Address _ RH LH INSPECTIONS Weatherproofing Mechanical Electrical Rough (State)__ Electrical Final (State) Final /Checklist Completed? Certificate Occupancy # Date Septic System # Date Final y Zoning Other NOTES (continue on back) Please be advised that building permits expire, per Uniform Building Code, section 106.4.4 and 106.4.5, 180 days after they are issued, if the work authorized by the permit has not commenced or is suspended or abandoned. The permit may be extended by written request to the building official, showing that circumstances beyond your control have caused a delay. Permits that have been expired for 180 days or less may be renewed for one half of the original permit fee. Permits that have been expired for longer than 180 days require payment of a new full permit fee. Please contact this office at your very earliest convenience, in writing, to advise about the status of your permitted work. tion If you have not responded within thirty days from the receipt of this notice the permit will be closed and a permanent notation will be placed in the property records at the County Assessors office that indicates that the work permitted was not inspected, is not approved and that the building or area may not be legally occupied. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 February 28, 2002 Mr. David Hicks and PCI, LLC C/O Prince Creek Construction 1317 Grand Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT Code Compliance Office shackett(a Garfield-county,com Dear Mr. Hicks, Please refer to our previous correspondence, as well as a letter from Kim Schlagel, dated January 24, 2002, concerning various zoning violations on property owned by you and PCI, LLC, known as assessors parcels 2463-113-00-075 and 2463-104-00-076, located at 1051 County Road 111 in unincorporated Garfield County. As of this date more than a year has passed without action from you to correct these violations. It continues to be a violation of CRS 30-28-124 & 124.5, Garfield County zoning regulations, to occupy the modular home on your property as a free market rental unit without a Special Use Permit for an accessory dwelling. The same laws are being violated by occupancy of the bam apartments without a Special Use Permit for a two family dwelling. You are hereby given notice, pursuant to the above statutes, that you must completely correct the violations within thirty (30) days of the date this notice is received. Please be advised that violation of the above statutes is a misdemeanor crime punishable by a fine of not more than $100.00 or imprisonment for not moi than ten days, or both, and that each day that the violation continues is deemed to be a separate offense. If you have not responded within thirty days of this notice we will schedule a hearing, during a regular meeting of the Garfield County Board of Commissioners, during which this matter will be reviewed with them and a request made that it be referred to the county attorney for legal action against you. If you have any questions regarding what actions are required to achieve compliance, or you wish to report compliance action taken, please contact this office in writing at the address below, or by e-mail at the addre above. Sincerely, Iry Steve Ha ett Compliance Officer 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT January 24, 2002 Mr. David Hicks 1051 CR 111 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Permit Applications Dear Mr. Hicks: I am writing this letter to inform you that the Planning Department has not received a response to the letter I sent you dated November 5, 2001 regarding your Conditional and Special Use applications. There were several items listed in the letter required for submission to meet the technical compliance requirements for both the Conditional and Special Use applications. You have not made an effort to submit these items. Furthermore, it has come to my attention that the Planning Department has been working with you for over a year to meet Garfield County Regulations in terms of uses on your property. As the uses on your property are STILL in direct violation of County Regulations, this application will be forwarded to Garfield County Code Enforcement along with the County Attorney's office. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, 5cki 4 Kim Schlagel Senior Planner Cc: Mark Bean, Planning Director Steve Hackett, Code Enforcement Don DeFord, County Attorney 109 8th Street, Suite 303, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 945-8212 (970) 285-7972 Fax: (970) 384-3470 November 17, 2000 Mr. David Hicks 1051 County Road 111 Carbondale, Co 81623 Building & Planning Department Dear Mr. Hicks, Thanks for your fax of 11/9/00 and the review of the current situation by Mr. Hartert. We do not agree with the interpretations presented in his review but, that is not an important matter at this time.. The fact is that if you are granted a special use permit for a two family dwelling for the barn, you will have accomplished the objective of "free market units". There are no other restrictions about the occupancy of a legally permitted two family dwelling. A conditional use permit for a home occupation will continue to be required if you maintain the Prince Creek Construction office in that building. The assembly of building components in the shop of the barn is not a legal use and must be discontinued. The log bunkhouse restoration for employee housing is allowed, provided that plans and a permit application are submitted for approval, the building is rebuilt to current Uniform Building Code standards and that an employee housing affidavit is filed with this office. We would require that a registered professional engineer certify to us that the already existing components of the log bunk house meet current UBC requirements. Please advise us concerning how you wish to proceed:. / ��i 3 bi E %.)A/G K I 04/w2 MK Nl &k Ce771 -fi � ves `ta a, cv? t� 1) 14-s bid -n - te, Ttv pr n�is /C PV ‘e' e '19- lc 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945-8212/285-7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Yours truly, Compliance Official Building & Planning Department October 24, 2000 Mr. David Hicks 1051 County Road 111 Carbondale, Co 81623 Dear Mr. Hicks, Enclosed are my responses to your recent telephone inquiry. The restoration of the log bunkhouse as a dwelling would be affected by section 7.03 (Restoration) and section 7.07 (Abandonment) of the attached county zoning regulations which are authorized by Colorado Revised Statutes 30-28-124 & 124.5. A home occupation requires that a conditional use permit be issued by the county, per section 3.02.02 of the regulations. A two family dwelling requires a special use permit, per section 3.02.03. Those regulations are attached. I have included both a conditional and special use permit application form for your convenience. Please feel free to contact Mark or me if you wish to discuss this further. Yours truly, Compliance Official 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945-8212/285-7972 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Garfield County Building &Phoning Department Planning Department October 19,2000 Mr. David Hieks 1051 County Road 111 Carbondale, Co 81623 Dear Mr. Hicks, Thank you for the opportunity to view your property with you on October 18th. A number of Garfield County zoning regulation violations were discovered during my visit. Please refer to the attached two page memo that I addressed to Mark Bean and photo copies 1 through 9, which are enclosed. The violations cited in my memo are a violation of Colorado Revised Statutes 30-28-124 & 124.5. You are hereby given notice, pursuant to the above statutes, that you must completely correct the violations within thirty (30) days of the date this notice is received. If you have any questions regarding what actions are required to achieve compliance, you may contact this office, preferably in writing, at the address below. Sincerely, Compliance Official aneC Dyer °ea 7 55 -so GO/o 109 8th Street, Suite 303 945-8212/285-7972 /-c) lee Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601