Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ec.214 E Bleeker St. Lot Split 0077.2005THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0077.2005.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBER 2737 - 073 -40 -002 PROJECT ADDRESS 214 E. Bleeker St. PLANNER Ben Gagnon CASE DESCRIPTION Lot Split REPRESENTATIVE Lenny Oates DATE OF FINAL ACTION 12/12/05 CLOSED BY Amy DeVault ORDINANCE No. 54 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION LOT SPLIT AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C. requesting approval of a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split of the property to be known as Lot A and Lot B of the Brumder Lot Split, located at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.030A(2), the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for the property to be described as Lots A and B of the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for Lots A and B of the property to be known and described as the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption plat that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. The plat shall indicate that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots, nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Furthermore, the proposed Lot Split Plat shall clearly label the proposed lot line that separates Lot A from Lot B and show all easements of record. 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots in conformance with the R -6 Zone District regulations and shall include the following plat notes: a. Upon redevelopment, all structures on these two (2) lots shall comply with the R -6 Zone District provisions, as may be amended from time to time, with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. Upon redevelopment, all encroachments into Public Right of Way shall be removed or properly licensed. b. Maximum potential build -out for the two (2) parcels created by lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single family home. Only one unit is allowable on Lot B. c. The future development of Lots A and B shall be subject to Chapter 26.415, Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmarks Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District. d. The future development of Lots A and B shall not be permitted to utilize the 500 square footage bonus pursuant to Section 26.420.020 (B) 1(c). e. Any setback nonconformity(s) created by the new lot line shall be eliminated upon redevelopment or further development of the applicable lot(s). f. Vehicular access to either lot shall be from the alley only. g. Upon redevelopment, the applicant shall construct sidewalk, curb and gutters according to the specifications of the City Engineer. h. Both lots are required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470. 040 B(1). 3. Both lots shall comply with the applicable development regulations prior to applying for building permits, including those regulations related to Residential Design Standards, Accessory Dwelling Units, and GMQS Exemptions. 4. The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing any trees from the site for which a tree removal permit is required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. Any tree to remain on -site during the development of Lots A and B shall have its drip line fenced off prior to, and throughout construction. Tree Removal Mitigation may be required for removal of trees pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 13.20. 5. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed. All sanitation- related improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. The existing sewer line may be used to service one of the new residences if it is inspected and determined to be satisfactory by the Aspen Sanitation District. If the existing service line is not used for the proposed development it must be abandoned and removed. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Upon redevelopment of the new lots, the applicant shall abandon the existing water service line prior to receiving new water taps. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement.of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof Section 5• A public hearing was opened on the 9`h and 23'J day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12th day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. #ch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: ,Z Kathryn S. I h, City Clerk Approved as to form: orces er, City Attorney vote on this 10th day of April, 2006. ORDINANCE No. 53 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLAT VACATION AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C., requesting approval of a Plat Vacation regarding the property at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; said plat based upon Ordinance No.29, Series of 1998; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.080C, the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for a Plat Vacation, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Plat Vacation regarding the property located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Plat Vacation proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plat Vacation proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Plat Vacation for the property located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: The applicant shall submit and record a plat vacation that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. Section 2: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: A public hearing was held on the 9`h and 23d day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12th day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S och, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: Kathryn S. Mch, City Clerk Approved as to form: orces er, City Attorney Helen 14alinn Klan erud, Mayor vote on this 10th day of April, 2006. 7 ManNerud. Mayor MEMORANDUM A LL� TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner I THROUGH: Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development RE: 214 E. Sleeker Plat Vacation and Lot Split: 2nd Reading of Ordinance 53 and 54. Series of 2005 DATE: April 10, 2006 SUMMARY: Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C, representing William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, owner of 214 E. Bleeker St, is requesting a plat vacation, a lot split and a subdivision exemption. A public hearing on the plat vacation (Ordinance 53) and a public hearing on the lot split (Ordinance 54) were held on January 9, and were continued to January 23, when City Council voted 3 -2 to deny both requests. On February 13, Council unanimously approved a Motion to Reconsider both Ordinance 53 and 54, and public hearings were scheduled for April 10. Staff has scheduled two public hearings because the requested Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption in Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2005 could not legally be granted without first approving the Plat Vacation request in Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005. However, staff is proposing that both public hearings be opened together, as the substance of the two applications both relate to 214 E. Bleeker St. The first public hearing is for the Plat Vacation request. The criteria for review states that City Council City Council may approve a plat vacation if good cause is demonstrated. Staff is continuing to recommend approval, based on mutual mistakes by applicant and staff during a previous application for a Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption at 214 E. Sleeker St., and during the review and approval of Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998. The second public hearing is for the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split application, which may only be granted if Council has first approved the Plat Vacation request. Staff believes the lot split application meets all relevant standards and is recommending approval. APPLICANT: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. LOCATION: 214 E. Bleeker St. ZONING: R -6 REVIEW PROCEDURE: Criteria for Plat Vacation are noted in 26.480.080 (C), stating that City Council may approve a plat vacation if good cause is demonstrated. Review criteria and Staff Findings for Plat Vacation have been included as Exhibit "A." The required conditions for a Lot Split are listed at 26.480.030 A(2); and review standards for a Subdivision Exemption are outlined at 26.480.050. Review criteria and Staff Findings for Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption have been included as Exhibit `B." BACKGROUND: In 1998, the City Council approved a Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption for a parcel made up of four (4) original townsite lots at 214 E. Bleeker (Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998). The application was made and approvals rendered based on a 1996 survey of the property showing the total parcel size to be 11,963 square feet. The current request for a vacation of the 1998 plat is based on the argument that the City has a long- standing policy of legally recognizing original townsite lots as 3,000 square feet in size, regardless of actual surveys on the ground, making the parcel 12,000 square feet in size. The City Attorney's Office has confirmed this long- standing policy. If the Brumder parcel were legally recognized as 12,000 square feet in size, it would have allowed the applicant to proceed under a traditional Lot Split rather than a Historic Landmark Lot Split. A traditional lot split would have allowed for substantially more FAR (see chart below). The case planner for the 1998 Brumder application, Amy Guthrie, does not recall any discussions regarding whether the 1996 survey of the Brumder parcel or the townsite record was the correct legal basis to determine the size of the parcel. In addition, there is no written record in the case file showing that this issue was discussed or debated. The only document in the Brumder case record that shows a lot size other than 11,963 square feet is the original 1996 survey, which shows both the 12,000 square feet "record," and the 11,963 square feet "pro- rated." All subsequent documents in the 1996 and 1998 case file specified the lot size at 11,963 square feet. At the January 9 and January 2' ) public hearings on the requested Plat Vacation and Lot Split, staff stated that a "mutual mistake" was made regarding the 1998 approval of a Historic Landmark Lot Split for 214 E. Bleeker Street. Staff based this assessment on informal interviews with Community Development Department staff, none of whom were aware until recently that it had long been the City's policy to legally recognize townsite lots as 3,000 square feet in size, regardless of actual surveys on the ground. However, staff did not submit any formal statements from the planning staff. In preparation for the April 10 hearing on the plat vacation, staff has included a formal statement from the planner for the 1998 Historic Landmark Lot Split, Amy Guthrie, as follows: "When the original application for this parcel was reviewed in 1996, I was not aware that original townsite lots are to be interpreted as being 3,000 square feet in size, even if the survey does not indicate those exact dimensions. I do not recall whether or not the applicant asked if they could apply for a traditional Lot Split rather than a Historic Landmark Lot Split in 1996. If they did, I feel confident that I would have said they were not eligible based on my understanding of the code at that time." In addition, the applicant has submitted six affidavits for the April 10 hearing, which are enclosed in this information packet. The affidavits are from three former employees of the City Engineer's Office, one is from the Deputy Pitkin County Assessor and two are from private sector surveyors who have been working in Aspen for many years. The gist of the affidavits reflects a longstanding practice of calculating townsite lots at 3,000 square feet, based on the 30'X100' lots prescribed in the 1959 Official Map of the City of Aspen. The applicant has also submitted a copy of Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1959, adopting the Official Map of the City of Aspen, as well as records of the Pitkin County Assessor showing the parcel to be 12,000 square feet. At this time, staff is maintaining its finding that a "mutual mistake" was made regarding the 1998 Brumder case. The applicant may have erred in not fully investigating the rights of the property owner, and the City may have erred in not encoding the position of the City regarding the proper legal use of the "record" regarding the lot size of original townsite lots, or otherwise making that position common knowledge among staff and applicants. In summary, staff is recommending approval of Ordinance 53 and Ordinance 54, as well as initiating a code amendment process to insert appropriate language to the Land Use Code reflecting the legal use of the "record" lot size for original townsite lots. The net result of vacating the existing 1998 plat and approving the lot split request is an increase of allowable FAR on both Lot A and Lot B. Under the proposed lot split, each lot size would be 6,000 square feet, allowing a future addition of approximately 1,300 square feet to the existing historic structure on Lot B; and either a single - family home up to 3,240 square feet, or two (2) detached dwelling units totaling up to 3,240 square feet, or a duplex up to 3,600 square feet on Lot A, according to the current Land Use Code, as follows: Existing Ord. No. 29 (1998) Proposed Ordinance Lot A 2,344 3,240 3,600 FAR Single - family or 2 detached -- duplex Lot B 1,913 + eligible for 500 s.f. bonus 3,240 FAR The applicant has agreed to forego any square footage bonus that may be applicable in this case, pursuant to Section 26.420, and this restriction is included as a condition of approval. Regarding the proposed lot split and subdivision exemption, staff finds that the application meets the criteria. Any future addition to the Historic Landmark on Lot B must proceed under the review procedures pursuant to Section 26.415. In addition, staff and the applicant have agreed to a condition requiring that any future development on Lot A, the vacant lot, must also undergo review procedures pursuant to Section 26.415. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed the proposal for a plat vacation and recommends that the City Council find that good cause has been demonstrated to approve this plat vacation for 214 E. Bleeker St. Staff has reviewed the proposals for a Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption and recommends that the City Council find that the criteria and review standards have been met to approve the Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption applications for 214 E. Bleeker St. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005, upon second reading." "I move to approve Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2005, upon second reading." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Review criteria and Staff Findings for Plat Vacation. Exhibit B: Review criteria and Staff Findings for Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption. Exhibit C: Statement of Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer. Exhibit D: Letters from applicant's representative; affidavits; Ordinance 6, Series of 1959, adopting Official Map of City of Aspen; and records of the Pitkin County Assessor. ORDINANCE No. 53 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLAT VACATION AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C., requesting approval of a Plat Vacation regarding the property at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; said plat based upon Ordinance No.29, Series of 1998; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.0800, the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for a Plat Vacation, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Plat Vacation regarding the property located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Plat Vacation proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plat Vacation proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Plat Vacation for the property located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: The applicant shall submit and record a plat vacation that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. Section 2• This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4• A public hearing was held on the 9°i and 23`d day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12th day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor vote on this 10th day of April, 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ORDINANCE No. $4 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION LOT SPLIT AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C. requesting approval of a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split of the property to be known as Lot A and Lot B of the Brumder Lot Split, located at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.030A(2), the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for the property to be described as Lots A and B of the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for Lots A and B of the property to be known and described as the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption plat that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. The plat shall indicate that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots, nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Furthermore, the proposed Lot Split Plat shall clearly label the proposed lot line that separates Lot A from Lot B and show all easements of record. 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots in conformance with the R -6 Zone District regulations and shall include the following plat notes: a. Upon redevelopment, all structures on these two (2) lots shall comply with the R -6 Zone District provisions, as may be amended from time to time, with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. Upon redevelopment, all encroachments into Public Right of Way shall be removed or properly licensed. b. Maximum potential build -out for the two (2) parcels created by lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single family home. Only one unit is allowable on Lot B. c. The future development of Lots A and B shall be subject to Chapter 26.415, Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmarks Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District. d. The future development of Lots A and B shall not be permitted to utilize the 500 square footage bonus pursuant to Section 26.420.020 (B) 1(c). e. Any setback nonconformity(s) created by the new lot line shall be eliminated upon redevelopment or further development of the applicable lot(s). f. Vehicular access to either lot shall be from the alley only. g. Upon redevelopment, the applicant shall construct sidewalk, curb and gutters according to the specifications of the City Engineer. h. Both lots are required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470. 040 B(1). 3. Both lots shall comply with the applicable development regulations prior to applying for building permits, including those regulations related to Residential Design Standards, Accessory Dwelling Units, and GMQS Exemptions. 4. The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing any trees from the site for which a tree removal permit is required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. Any tree to remain on -site during the development of Lots A and B shall have its drip line fenced off prior to, and throughout construction. Tree Removal Mitigation may be required for removal of trees pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 13.20. 5. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed. All sanitation - related improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. The existing sewer line may be used to service one of the new residences if it is inspected and determined to be satisfactory by the Aspen Sanitation District. If the existing service line is not used for the proposed development it must be abandoned and removed. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Upon redevelopment of the new lots, the applicant shall abandon the existing water service line prior to receiving new water taps. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: A public hearing was opened on the 9d' and 23rd day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12`x' day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor vote on this 10th day of April, 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Exhibit A Review Criteria & Staff Findings Plat Vacation 26.480.080 (c) Vacation of an approved plat or any other document recorded in conjunction with a plat shall be considered a plat amendment, and shall only be approved by the City Council if good cause is demonstrated. Staff Finding: The plat under consideration for vacation was recorded based upon City Council approval of Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998, granting an Historic Landmark Lot Split and a Subdivision Exemption for 214 E. Bleeker St. Ordinance No. 29 created Lot A, a 6,000 square foot lot, with allowable FAR of 2,344 square feet; and Lot B, a 5,963 square foot lot, with allowable FAR of 1,913 square feet (plus a possible 500 square foot bonus to be granted by the Historic Preservation Commission). Lot A was, and continues to be, vacant. Lot B contains a historic structure. Staff finds that there is good cause for this plat vacation request, based on mutual mistakes made by applicant and staff during the review and approval of the Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption application, and Ordinance No. 29 Series of 1998. During review and approval, an assumption was made that lots located in the original townsite had to be surveyed to determine their legal size. In fact, the City of Aspen has traditionally interpreted all original townsite lots to be 3,000 square feet in size, despite the fact that some may measure slightly more or less due to the movement of monuments over time. In this case, the 1998 survey showed the amalgamation of the lots in question at 11,963 square feet, which limited the applicant's right to a Historical Landmark Lot Split, and not a regular Lot Split. If the correct interpretation was made at the time -- that the amalgamation of lots legally measured 12,000 square feet -- the applicant would have been allowed to file for a regular Lot Split. Since 1998, there has been a minor remodeling of the historic structure on Lot B, and no development on Lot A, which remains vacant. Exhibit B Review Criteria & Staff Findings Lot split — 214 E. Bleeker St. 26.4$0.030 A (2) The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single - family dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where all of the following conditions are met: a. The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969. This restriction shall not apply to properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Staff Finding: This condition does not apply to 214 E. Sleeker St., as it is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. (This proposal meets the conditions stated above regardless of its historic status.) b. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470.070(B). Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposal meets these conditions. This proposal would create 2 lots, both of which would conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Future development will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470.070 (B), and is a condition contained in the proposed Ordinance. c. The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this Chapter or a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.470.040 (C) (])(a). Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal meets this condition. In the case that City Council has vacated the 1998 plat as requested, the property meets this condition. d. A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this Chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this Title, must be submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. A t Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal meets this requirement, which appears as a condition in the proposed Ordinance. e. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the once of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal meets this requirement, which appears as a condition in the proposed Ordinance. f In the case where an existing single- family dwelling occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application. for a lot split. Staff Finding: Staff finds this condition is not applicable to this application, as the existing residence on Lot B is a Historic Structure, subject to Chapter 26.415. g. Maximum potential huildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may he composed of a duplex and a single family home. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal meets this requirement, which appears as a condition in the proposed Ordinance. Further, the condition states that only one dwelling unit is allowable on Lot B. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud EYHi3(� C THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 214 E. Sleeker Street, Brumder DATE: January 27, 2006 With regard to my past history as the caseload planner on the Brumder Lot Split, I can offer the following information. When the original application for this parcel was reviewed in 1996, I was not aware that original townsite lots are to be interpreted as being 3,000 square feet in size even if the survey does not indicate those exact dimensions. I do not recall whether or not the applicant asked if they could apply for a traditional Lot Split rather than a Historic Landmark Lot Split in 1996. If they did, I feel confident that I would have said they were not eligible based on my understanding of the code at that time. February 27, 2006 VIA HAND DELIVERY Honorable Helen Kalin Klanderud and Members of the City Council c/o City of Aspen Community Development Dept. ATTN: Ben Gagnon 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Reconsidered Ordinance Nos. 53, Series of 2005 & 54, Series of 2005 Dear Mayor Klanderud and Members of the City Council: As you are aware, subsequent to the denial of the Brumder Trust request for the adoption of Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005 (Withdrawal of the Brumder Historic Lot Split Plat), Mayor Klanderud suggested a reconsideration of the denial which was moved by Councilman De Vilbiss, seconded by Councilman Torre and passed four to one. Since the Motion for Reconsideration we have done additional research in connection with the treatment of the Brumder property and as to the position of the City of Aspen with respect to the treatment of parcels within the original City and Townsite. Attached to this letter are the following: 1. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor John M. Howorth, President of Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. 2. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor James F. Reser, President and Principal of Aspen Surveys, Inc. 3. Affidavit of Former City Engineer Nick Adeh. 4. Affidavit of Former City Engineer Jay Hammond. 5. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor Louis H. Buettner. 6. Affidavit of Deputy Pitkin County Assessor Larry Fite, which is submitted for the purpose of demonstrating the Historical Treatment, generally of lots within the Original Townsite of Aspen and as well certain matters relating specifically to the four Brumder Lots which were subsequently subdivided into two parcels by the Brumder Historic Lot Split which we are now seeking to withdraw. Hopefully you will find these submittals to be informative. C: \LMO Data & Forms\Data \Chents\Brumder Trust \ltr to Klanderud and Council 2.22.06.doc LEnL L Ab "J OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PILAZA BUILDING 533F HOPKINSAVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO. BIB!!. LEONARD M. OATES TELEPHONE (970) 920 -0900 RICHARD A KNEZEVICH FACSIMILE (970) 920 -1121 TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL Ino c�iokglaw.com JOHNT. KELLY MARIA MORROW February 27, 2006 VIA HAND DELIVERY Honorable Helen Kalin Klanderud and Members of the City Council c/o City of Aspen Community Development Dept. ATTN: Ben Gagnon 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Reconsidered Ordinance Nos. 53, Series of 2005 & 54, Series of 2005 Dear Mayor Klanderud and Members of the City Council: As you are aware, subsequent to the denial of the Brumder Trust request for the adoption of Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005 (Withdrawal of the Brumder Historic Lot Split Plat), Mayor Klanderud suggested a reconsideration of the denial which was moved by Councilman De Vilbiss, seconded by Councilman Torre and passed four to one. Since the Motion for Reconsideration we have done additional research in connection with the treatment of the Brumder property and as to the position of the City of Aspen with respect to the treatment of parcels within the original City and Townsite. Attached to this letter are the following: 1. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor John M. Howorth, President of Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. 2. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor James F. Reser, President and Principal of Aspen Surveys, Inc. 3. Affidavit of Former City Engineer Nick Adeh. 4. Affidavit of Former City Engineer Jay Hammond. 5. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor Louis H. Buettner. 6. Affidavit of Deputy Pitkin County Assessor Larry Fite, which is submitted for the purpose of demonstrating the Historical Treatment, generally of lots within the Original Townsite of Aspen and as well certain matters relating specifically to the four Brumder Lots which were subsequently subdivided into two parcels by the Brumder Historic Lot Split which we are now seeking to withdraw. Hopefully you will find these submittals to be informative. C: \LMO Data & Forms\Data \Chents\Brumder Trust \ltr to Klanderud and Council 2.22.06.doc The statement was made by Councilman Johnson (to my understanding) that he believed that each of the Original Townsite Lots should be treated based upon measured dimensions. We believe that this would result in potentially unfair or overly advantageous treatment of Original Townsite Lots depending upon the measurement. We believe it is the best policy to follow the current policy of treating all such lots as constituting 3,000 square feet, which was the intention of those who laid out the Original Townsite and which has been followed at all times since then. If there is confusion regarding this policy then certainly the City Council should give consideration to adoption of some form of legislation which makes this absolutely clear so that the error which we believed occurred in connection with the submission of the original Brumder Historic Lot Split does not occur in the future. Additionally, Councilman Johnson made a statement at the January 23, 2006 meeting that he did not believe that it was the obligation of the City of Aspen Community Development Department to advise property owners as to how to maximize development rights upon their property. We believe that Councilman Johnson fails to understand the Community Development Department's Pre - Application Conference process. In this process a property owner requests a meeting with a Staff Planner. In that meeting the property owner explains to the Staff Planner what the property owner would like to see occur with respect to his or her property. The Staff Planner then reviews the Code provisions either at or subsequent to the meeting and advises the property owner as to the appropriate code sections which the property owner needs to follow in order to solicit the development approval which is available to the property by the underlying zoning. In order to do so, the Staff Planner must determine and advise the Property Owner as to whether or not under the existing provisions of the City of Aspen Land Use Code the result desired by the property owner is attainable. That is the nature of the process and by necessity requires the Staff Planner to advise the property owner what the property owner's practical expectations might be in connection with the- development and/or redevelopment of his or her property. Any other approach to the process would be somewhat akin to "Where's Waldo." It would be unfair and unduly burdensome upon property owners within the City of Aspen to expect the property owner to ferret out the information which the property owner needs in order to proceed. The cooperative process as between the property owner and the community development department general works quite well. Another approach without such cooperation would lead to significant criticism of the City in the treatment of its landowners. If the City Council is in need of any further supplementatioh please feel free to contact me. i There is also attached to Mr. Buettner's Affidavit a copy of the 1959 Official Plat of the City of Aspen which is and remains its Official Plat. Because of the size of this document and the expense we have included it in the initial cover to Mayor Klanderud and are requesting that either she or Ben Gagnon bring the 1959 Official Map of the City of Aspen to the City Council meeting. This Official Map is approved by Ordinance adopted in 1959 which has not been amended and remains in effect as of the date of this writing. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. Leonard M. Oates LMO/bab CALMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust \ltr to Klanderud and Council 2.22.06.doc LAW OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFI=SSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR. ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 E. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO. 81511 LEONARD M. GATES RICHARD A KNEZEVICH TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL' JOHN T. KELLY MARIA MORROW March 8, 2006 Honorable Helen Kalin Klanderud and Members of the City Council c/o City of Aspen Community Development Dept. ATTN: Ben Gagnon 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Brumder Request for Withdrawal of Historic Lot Split Dear Mayor Klander ad and Members of the City Council: TELEPHONE (970) 920 -1700 FACSIMILE (970) 9241121 Iwu @.k,]aw =c VIA HAND DELIVERY Subsequent to my last correspondence including surveyor affidavits and the affidavits of others knowledgeable in the premises we were able to locate the following: 1. The Plat of the Aspen Townsite (not however to scale because of machine reproductions), per certified copy by B. Clark Wheeler, U.S. Deputy Surveyor, dated March 19, 1880 by which the Aspen Town and Land Company conveys lots within the original Townsite of Aspen. Although the Plat does not contain lot, dimensions for Main Street stated at 100 feet, all individual regularly dimensioned rectangular lots are 30 feet by 100 feet scaling of the comparative dimension. 2. The original survey plat of the Town of Aspen prepared by H. Pfeiffer, C.E. prepared under authority of Byron E. Shear. This map was prepared at a time when Aspen was part of Gunnison County before the split off which created Pitkin County. This map is recorded in Book V at Page 112 of the records of Gunnison County Colorado. It is submitted to you for the proposition that lots in the original townsite are 30 x 100. You can see that that is noted below Mr. Pfeiffer's field notes of the Town of Aspen. We have highlighted that lot size statement in the copy provided to you. Very Truly Yours, OATES EZEVICH & By— Leonard K4. da cc: Tom Fitzgerald LMO/bab C:\LMO Data & Fonns\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust \ltr to Klanderud and Council 3.2.06.doc ARTZ, P.C. OF COUNSEL: JOHN T. KELLY MARIA MORROW January 19, 2006 Ben Gagnon, Staff Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Inc@ok9law corn VIA HANES DELIVERED Re: Affidavits to Supplement Record in Brumder Trust Applications for Withdrawal of Historic Lot Split and Request for Lot Split Dear Ben: After hearing the comments from the some of the members of Council in connection with the applications which we submitted on behalf of the Brumder Trust, you will please find enclosed herewith two affidavits. One Affidavit is from Thomas B. Fitzgerald, the Trustee of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust and the other is from Mitch Haas in connection with the application. These are submitted to supplement the record to demonstrate innocent lack of knowledge of both the Trustee and the then Staff Planner who handled this application. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. By Z^✓ Leonard M. Oates Encl. LMO/bab C: \LMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Bruinder Trust\Ltr to Gagnon 1.18.06.doc LAW OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 53.9 E. HOPKINS AVENUE LEONARD S ASPEN. COLORADO. 81611 K RICHARD A KNEZEVICH NEZIE TELEPHONE (9701920 -1700 TED D. GARDC- NSWARTZ FACSIMILE (970) 920 -1121 DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL: JOHN T. KELLY MARIA MORROW January 19, 2006 Ben Gagnon, Staff Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Inc@ok9law corn VIA HANES DELIVERED Re: Affidavits to Supplement Record in Brumder Trust Applications for Withdrawal of Historic Lot Split and Request for Lot Split Dear Ben: After hearing the comments from the some of the members of Council in connection with the applications which we submitted on behalf of the Brumder Trust, you will please find enclosed herewith two affidavits. One Affidavit is from Thomas B. Fitzgerald, the Trustee of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust and the other is from Mitch Haas in connection with the application. These are submitted to supplement the record to demonstrate innocent lack of knowledge of both the Trustee and the then Staff Planner who handled this application. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. By Z^✓ Leonard M. Oates Encl. LMO/bab C: \LMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Bruinder Trust\Ltr to Gagnon 1.18.06.doc AFFIDAVIT OF MITCH HAAS THE UNDERSIGNED, Mitch Haas, being first duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: 1. My name is Mitch Haas. 2. In 1998 I was employed by the City of Aspen as a Staff Planner with the City of Aspen Community Development Department. 3. Although I have no recollection thereof, I have been told that I was the staff planner who processed the application of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust for the historic lot split for the property at 214 E. Bleeker, Aspen, Colorado. 4. In 1998, to the best of my knowledge, I was unaware of any policy of the City of Aspen which provided for the treatment of regular original City and Townsite of Aspen Lots as being 3,000 square feet regardless of the survey measured size thereof. 5. To the best of my knowledge I never had any discussion with Gretchen Greenwood in connection with the measurement or treatment of original City and Townsite of Aspen Lots. Affiant sayeth further not. Dated: Janjary 41 2006 Mitch STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) D Subscribed and sworn before me this t day of January, 2006 by Mitch Haas. AFFIDAVIT OF THOMAS B. FITZGERALD THE UNDERSIGNED, Thomas B. Fitzgerald, being first duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: 1. My name is Thomas B. Fitzgerald. 2. I am and at all times since 1995 have been the acting Trustee of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust. 3. The William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust (and its predecessors in interest related to the Brumder Family) have been the owners of the property at 215 W. Bleeker which is the subject of the Brumder Historic Lot Split at all times since 1949. 4. That sometime in 1995 the Trust determined that it might want to remodel the historic home situated on the Trust property. 5. At the time that that decision was made, I was referred, I cannot recall by whom, to Gretchen Greenwood and Associates, Inc. with whom I met in the Spring of 1995. I dealt exclusively with Gretchen Greenwood of that firm at all times. 6. I was advised by Gretchen Greenwood at that time that in order to maximize the developability and value from the Trust's property that such could be accomplished only through the historic lot split provisions of the Aspen City Code ( "Code "). Attached hereto is Exhibit A is the summary of development of 214 E. Bleeker prepared at that time by Gretchen Greenwood and given to me. 7. I did not have any discussion at that time with Gretchen Greenwood or with any official the City of Aspen Community Development Department with respect to whether or not Gretchen Greenwood was accurate in her summary or whether there was available any alternative development scenario such as a non - historic lot split as permitted by the Code. 8. I was not at that time aware, that it was the position of the City of Aspen that all rectangular regular lots located within the original City and Townsite of Aspen were treated as being 3,000 square feet and was not so apprised of that position until I was advised by my counsel, Leonard M. Oates of Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. that such was the case in late 2005. 9. To the best of my knowledge Gretchen Greenwood did not engage the services of legal counsel for legal analysis of the developability of the property. I did not have legal counsel in connection with the historic lot split application for the Trust's property. I felt that based upon the assertion of Gretchen Greenwood that the only available course of action was the one that she recommended; therefore, I did not feel the need to engage legal counsel. 10. Based solely upon the advice of Gretchen Greenwood that proceeding with an historic lot split would be beneficial and would be the only way by which the property could be divided, I authorized Gretchen Greenwood to process an historic lot split application which resulted in the current historic lot split being completed. 11. I recently (on January 12, 2006) had a telephone conversation with Gretchen Greenwood in which I attempted to elicit from her whether or not she had investigated the availability of a straight lot split. In that telephone conversation she asserted to me that she believed and still believes that the only way which the Trust's property could have been divided was by means of an historic lot split under the Code and that the information which I had received through Mr. Oates as to the treatment of original City and Townsite Lots was incorrect. 12. I specifically asked Gretchen Greenwood whether or not prior to the time the application for the historic lot split was filed or at any time during the process, she had had conversation with anyone in the City of Aspen Community Development Department in connection with how original Townsite Lots in the City and Townsite of Aspen are treated and she did not answer the question. 13. It was my belief that from my conversation with Gretchen Greenwood that she would not be cooperative with me in connection with the pending applications. 14. Had I known at the time the historic lot split application was filed that I could have filed for a non - historic lot split, I would not have filed an application for an historic lot split, there being no incentive for me to take that course. My understanding was that this was the only avenue by which the split of the property could be pursued. Affiant sayeth further not. January , 2006. Thomas B. Fitzgerald STATE OF ILLINOIS ) )SS. COUNTY OF COOK ) OFFICIAL SEAL MICAH M GIBBS NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF ILLINOIS MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:10127/06 Subscribed and sworn before me this day of January, 2006 by Thomas B. Fitzgerald. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 1 G - 2 4 - Notary AFFIDAVIT OF NICK ADEH THE UNDERSIGNED, Nick Adeh, being first duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows, 1. He is a Colorado professional engineer, License No. 30499 and has been so licensed since !99 S . 2. He is currently employed by Sopris Engineering. 3. That for the periods, approximately to fib. 0, 2M6, inclusive, that he was employed by the ity of Aspen in the Engineering Department as City Engineer. 4. One of his duties in the employ of the City of Aspen was to review maps of the City and surveys of the properties in the City of Aspen. 5. That during his employment, it was his understanding that the Official Map of the City of Aspen prepared in 1959 by George E. Buchanan set Original Townsite City Blocks consisting of eighteen lots in each block (9 on each side of an alley) and that such blocks measured at 270 feet. There are instances where blocks are slightly longer or slightly shorter than 270 feet. Monuments based upon that spacing were set pursuant to the 1959 Official Map. The 1959 Official Map was intended to be based on the 1890 survey notes of Frank D. Howe who was the City Engineer for the City of Aspen in 1890. A copy of the 1959 Official Map is in the City Engineer's Office and available for public inspection. 6. The Howe field notes recognize Lots within the City of Aspen each were intended to be 30 feet by 100. 7. In connection with the placement of such monuments by G. E. Buchanan, he is aware, in some instances monuments were placed slightly further or slightly less apart than 270 feet. 8. In each case when performing surveys in accordance with proper survey practice, a surveyor should make field survey measurements of the actual measured distance between monuments and those should be prorated across the distance between monuments by dividing by all nine Lots on each side of the block. The survey should show both recorded and measured distances. 9. The 1959 Official Survey shows Block 72 to be 270 feet in length. 10. To the best of my knowledge the 1959 Official Plat remains the official plat of the original City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. 11. Survey measurements notwithstanding, to my knowledge, it has always been the position of the City of Aspen Engineering Office to consider all lots not intersected by Townsite Lines within the original City and Townsite of Aspen to be, 30 feet by 100 feet and calculated at 3,000 square feet in size. AFFIANT SAYETH FURTHER NOT. r Dated Fe%. 2 , 2006 Nick Adeh STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) I.w Subscribed and sworn before me this Z3 day February, 2006 by Nick Adeh. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 01-13-0-4 Notary COURTNEY E. SMALL My cu ;'.� _ 01/1312007 AFFIDAVIT OF JAY HAM 40ND THE UNDERSIGNED, Jay Hammond, being first duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows, 1. He is a Colorado professional engineer, License No. L(poig and has been so licensed since 19 g S . 2. He is currently employed by the engineering/survey firm of Schmueser Gordon Meyer. 3. That for the periods, approximately i 9 b q to 0$9 , inclusive, that he was employed by the City of Aspen in the Engineering Department as City Engineer. 4. Actual survey measurements notwithstanding, during my tenure as an employee of the City of Aspen, to my knowledge, it was always the position of the City of Aspen Engineering Office and Planning/Community Development Department to consider all lots not intersected by Townsite Lines within the original City and Townsite of Aspen to be, 30 feet by 100 feet and considered 3,000 square feet in size. AFFIANT SAYETH FURTHER NOT. Dated Z3, , 2006 J mon STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn before me this CQ3 day February, 2006 by Jay Hammond. Witness my hand and My commission expire v.w AFFIDAVIT OF LOUIS H. BUETTNER THE UNDERSIGNED, Louis H. Buettner, being first duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows, 1. He is a Colorado licensed surveyor, License No. 13166 and has been so licensed since 1975. 2. He is currently the principal of Louis H. Buettner Surveying. 3. That for the periods, approximately May 1, 1971 to May 1, 1983, inclusive, that he was employed by the City of Aspen in the Engineering Department. 4. That among other duties, his primary duty when in the employ of the City of Aspen, was to perform surveys. 5. That during his employment, it was his understanding that the Official Map of the City of Aspen prepared in 1959 by George E. Buchanan set Original Townsite City Blocks consisting of eighteen lots in each block (9 on each side of an alley) and that such blocks measured at 270 feet. There are instances where blocks are slightly longer or slightly shorter than 270 feet. Monuments based upon that spacing were set pursuant to the 1959 Official Map. The 1959 Official Map was intended to be based on the 1890 survey notes of Frank D. Howe who was the City Engineer for the City of Aspen in 1890. A copy of the Official Map is attached hereto as Exhibit "A ". 6. The Official Map was approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen by Ordinance 6, Series of 1959, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit `B." 7. The Howe field notes recognize Lots within the City of Aspen each were intended to be 30 feet by 100. 8. In connection with the placement of such monuments by G. E. Buchanan in some instances monuments were placed slightly further or slightly less apart than 270 feet. 9. In each case when performing surveys in accordance with proper survey practice, a surveyor should make field survey measurements of the actual measured distance between monuments and those should be prorated across the distance between monuments by dividing by all nine lots on each side of the block. The survey should show both recorded and measured distances. 10. The 1959 Official Survey shows Block 72 to be 270 feet in length. 11. To the best of my knowledge the 1959 Official Plat remains the official plat of the original City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. 12. Survey measurements notwithstanding, to my knowledge, it has always been the position of the City of Aspen Engineering Office to consider all lots not intersected by Townsite Lines within the original City and Townsite of Aspen to be, 30 feet by 100 feet and calculated at 3,000 square feet in size. AFFLANT SAYETH FURTHER NOT. ff 11. , • STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn before me this -74 day February, 2006 by Louis H. Buettner. Witness my hand and official seal My commission expires: 007 � � y Public ,.CPRY PEA KIMBERLY KNOX x� 9V 1 1 d ORDINANCE NO. �_• (Series of 1 59 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING A MAP ENTITLED 'OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO," AS THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN: PROVIDING FOR DEDICATION OF ALL STREETS AND ALLEYS, EXCEPT SUCH STREETS AND ALLEYS HERETOFORE VACATED: AND PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF SAID MAP, FIELD NOTES, AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLATS WITH THE CLERK AND RECORDER FOR PITKIN COUNTY. WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, has heretofore authorized the prepara- tion of a map of the original townsite of the City of Aspen, East Aspen Addition and Block 98, Hallam Addition annexed to said City, based upon the original survey notes as amended by the City Engineer, Frank D. Howe, and dated June 7, 1890, in order that adequate en- gineering information shall be available to the inhabitants of the said City and to the corporate authorities; WHEREAS, said map has been completed by the City Engineer with all City boundary lines, lots, blocks and all streets and alleys, shown thereon, together with survey monuments identified thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: SECTION 1: That the map entitled, 'Official Map of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, State of Colorado" as prepared by G. E. Buchanan, as City Engineer for the City of Aspen, shall be and is hereby accepted as the official map of said City of Aspen, Pitkin County, State of Colorado. SECTION 2: That all streets and alleys as the same appear upon said map shall be and are hereby dedicated to the public ex- cept such streets and alleys as have heretofore been vacated by Ordinance or Resolution of the said City Council for the City of Aspen. SECTION 3: That upon the effective date of this Ordinance the City Engineer shall file said original map as adopted by Sec- tion 1 of this Ordinance with the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County, State of Colorado, togetherrAith all field mtes relating thereto and all supplemental plats and notes identifying location of survey monuments or natural monuments shown upon said map and that thereafter said map, field notes, supplemental plats and iden- tifying information shall be available for use of the general public. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of Aspen, Colorado, at i regular meeting held at said City of Aspen, on this 2nd days f be , A. D. 1959. 1y FINALLY passed, adopted and approved on this day of 'i �� z �.E,nzL, 1959. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY -CLERK STATE OF COLORADO ss.' COUNTY OF PITKIN I. ETHEL M. FROST, as City Clerk of the City of Aspen, Colorado, do hereby certify that that above and foregoing Ordinance was introduced, read in full and passed first reading at the regular meeting of the City Council held 1959, and published in The Aspen Times, a weekly newspaper of general circulation pub- lished at the City of Aspen, Colorado, in its issue of 1959, and was finally adopted and approved on 1959, and was ordered published as Ordinance No. f Series of 17 5 of said City, as provided by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto $et my hand and the seal of the City of Aspen, Colorado, this Z " day of A. D. 1959. City-Clerk n AFFIDAVIT OF LARRY FITE The undersigned, Larry Fite, being first duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows: 1. He is the Deputy Pitkin County Assessor. 2. That upon the request of Leonard M. Oates, Attorney at Law, he was requested to research the records of the Pitkin County Assessor's Office relating to Lots N, O, P & Q, Block 72, City and Townsite of Aspen, assessed to the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust. 3. That the Assessor's records concerning the subject property in the Assesor's Office date back only until 1985. 4. That attached hereto as Exhibits A & B are residential property appraisal records from the Pitkin County Assessor's Office reflecting the subject property to be 12,000 square feet in size. 5. He believes that prior records which have since been destroyed dating back prior to 1985 would reflect the size of the subject property to be 12,000 square feet. 6. That as of December 12, 1998 the records of the Pitkin County Assessor's Office were modified to reflect the filing of the subdivision of the subject property into Lots A & B of the Brumder Historic Lot Split. At that time, the land size of property which was subdivided into two parcels was reflected on the Pitkin County Assessor's Office as 12,000 square feet as shown on Exhibit C hereto. AFFIANT SAYETH FURTHER NOT. STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn before me this �3o? day February, 2006 by Larry Fite. Witness my hand and official qseal�.7pm My commission expires: r tary Pu li r""ptARV PG "'b w Amy i YN. aka 6 -ax 9 z Ed r e1) a x ova i r? O a � V o XI � �? a N a z 6 Q O' 6 �F Z W 0 W m� d z J in U N d Q x 3 n l � h �I a`c W, 2 y � e L7 I sio 10> co i e u p� W 3 n l � h �I a`c W, L7 co CA m r 67 , Co (I• m n v r _ tv r• In m u P, nramr• � = ° � <� nti no- s a ZN VI LL V 7 1 °V r= x z S SW i•. U0. o u2 p rn o a ... Y 1f1 J N i H C) f 7 7_ LL • H H 3 0 « i � CLn U) ii :7 - s H T (n W 0 ti '-u RJ W WLL=? c V 7] �j:D .d in J a s y a x x 4 Y v 4 n r ru J u I M i ESQ u W 0 �U 6 P�l�a a 0 H n V o r � N CL d O CL Z 1 d w m a d io � O O g< I » 1» I+ s W _ z � � 3 c7 co IK @ a o_ cry rl I » 1» I+ s W u-) ..mr• @NQr• c '0, � 3 s� a N ; N 1 1- G uG 2 V Z co N U w Y-n oa s Q T ti s Ln @ in 6_ a Ln 7 7 L 9 m ° c � C 4^ 0 � � { M ,rat @ r• C O ti Q U U C ti r. ci .i C,: i M J s r C'n oN a N 1 1- G uG 2 V Z co N U w Y-n oa s Q ti s Ln in 6_ Ln 7 7 L ^J • Fa Q 1D C 4^ 0 L Q w C O ti Q U U C ti r. i M J L ? 3 J 7. a '9 2 p H o m w r v, w o p v w d 0 j h -v . j yy tr • -_l O N WLL; Ii=? •= Q O ~ Q W L' • Y ��' .• ] F- 1- i CL S s r C'n c e Y << > :a Qi 1 ` i `°F 1 u < z > z , ,t S 4 s W , j� €s` ju g ;•• tip � z •< �z+ ®Ib 6 s� IM =emu � 1 s1 s r C'n j e III § ) § \ co /§ LU UJI ; § § § 8 § \ III LU ■�c § &§ a � � B k \k �E !§ (k !u k §_ E !s 2 \ IL %( S \4 k) q §� 10 o� !rte 4n r0111W7 ,�0 b62 §R8§� §`� )� §k' e�� !�»§ °K§ §§2�� §�§■`:�2 \�` ~! W.Cgo zm§,�; %$2 § ; ;7 ;§!� ,�. , , �§ © §s§$ �§a |� W B� ; §. 7�2 Wro§)k §|k §x k■ Lw �§Lu )g � r < u§ �& §§ S2■ &|W2 ! z $9k) �SIH � #" � §§§ O§ a. Lu /lz \ mss « « 000 ))!° ( z |) J2 !\ �\ ! 2\ 2F ( %(§2) . L ;k2 § k ) §§§ ) | • kB ! | ■E�j; )aka!! ,� ! ' ail ;X. 2 2 j e III § ) § \ co /§ LU UJI ; § § § 8 § \ III LU ■�c § &§ a � � B k \k �E !§ (k !u k §_ E !s 2 \ IL %( S \4 k) q §� 10 o� !rte 4n r0111W7 ,�0 b62 §R8§� §`� )� §k' e�� !�»§ °K§ §§2�� §�§■`:�2 \�` ~! W.Cgo zm§,�; %$2 § ; ;7 ;§!� ,�. , , �§ © §s§$ �§a |� W B� ; §. 7�2 Wro§)k §|k §x k■ Lw �§Lu )g � r < u§ �& §§ S2■ &|W2 ! z $9k) �SIH � #" � §§§ O§ a. Lu /lz \ mss « « 000 ))!° ( z |) J2 !\ �\ ! 2\ 2F AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN M. HOWORTH The undersigned, John M. Howorth, being first duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: 1. He is a Colorado licensed surveyor, License No. S�_ 2. He is the President and principal owner of Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. 3. He has been surveying real property in the Aspen area since approximately Z4 `{* 4. In connection with the survey of lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen, as a part of local surveying protocol that he sets forth on surveys the record and measured dimensions of such lots. 5. The record dimensions of all regularly sized lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen is 3,000 square feet per the 1959 Official Map of the City of Aspen prepared by G.E. Buchanan. 6. Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. prepared the plat for the Brumder Historic Lot Split in the 1990s. 7. He was not aware at the time the Historic Lot Split Plat was prepared that for land use purposes the City of Aspen has traditionally treated all such lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen as being their record dimensions, regardless of minor discrepancies in the measured dimensions. 8. He did not advise Gretchen Greenwood that all such lots would be treated by the City of Aspen as containing 3,000 square feet when Aspen Survey Engineers arranged for survey work for the Brumder Historic Lot Split Plat prepared between 1996 and 1998; and, had he known such was the case he would have so advised her. AFFIANT SAYETH FURTHER NOT. Dated: February M 2006 TE OF COL&"O!"' 1Y , " )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn before me this day of February, 2006 by John M. Howorth. P My Commission EXON OC; •• •••.(� Witness my hand **efiRMal13%a2007 211* My commission expires: LEON, +.:D M. FROM : RLPINE SURVEYS INC r''9NE NO. : 9709252688 FF-Ta, 17 2006 04:32PM P2 AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES F. RESER The undersigned, James F. Reser, being first duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: o 11 He is a.Colorado licensed surveyor, License No. 2. He is the President and principal owner Of Alpine Surveys, Inc. 3. He has been surveying real property in the Aspen area since approximately 19 4, In connection with the survey of lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen, as a part of local surveying protocol that he sets forth on smveys the record and measured dimensions of such lots. 5. That the record dimensions of most regularly sized lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen is generally 3,000 square feet per the 1959 Official Map of the City of Aspen prepared by O.E. Buchanan based on Blocks 270 feet in length. Some Blocks shown on the 1959 Official Plat to be slightly more than 270 feet and some slightly less. 6, Such minor variances notwithstanding, he is aware that for Engineering Department land use purposes the City of Aspen has traditionally treated all such lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen as being 3,000 square feet, regardless of minor discrepancies in the meastued dimensions, AFFIANT SAYETH FURTHER NOT. Dated: February 2006 James :;K "ser STATE OF COLORADO )ss. COUNTY OF PTTKIN ) Subscribed and sworn before me this 0' dAy of February, 2006 by .Tames F. Reser. Witness my hand k"XQMfi6Rr6 aa e�01 W)'A My commission ex �I vkm— b.e 13, �1 O/:M /1 / 1 \ I Notary Public',, a� r i BIC V � ,'a£ Y r �jr r 1E �� r y � i m Y .. � x- one' MY� j5 I Alt 7 �1 �¢i!e �. p 3� �'r s rr A e if j4 p u� y i zs A6, I �� G, t 2 F� Jt7sE ')i ` R E SJr3 Y a� r i BIC V � ,'a£ Y r �jr r 1E �� r y � i m r- „- --- -- 4-11 � Z, Z/ ti2LV (fe'l 'e- /-,c ,ago, III ►%K i�f�- � 1i9�� fly ��f•xi'. y�cz, - -/c Z� i Im oviginaQ SwJey b� Pfe��r L MEMORANDUM A TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner &AM THROUGH: Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development RE: 214 E. Bleeker Plat Vacation and Lot Split: Continued from 1.9.06 2 "d Reading of Ordinance 53 and 54. Series of 2005 DATE: January 23, 2006 SUMMARY: Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C, representing William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, owner of 214 E. Sleeker St, is requesting a plat vacation, a lot split and a subdivision exemption. Staff has scheduled two public hearings because the requested Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption in Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2005 could not legally be granted without first approving the Plat Vacation request in Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005. However, staff is proposing that both public hearings be opened together, as the substance of the two applications both relate to 214 E. Sleeker St. The first public hearing is for the Plat Vacation request. The criteria for review states that City Council City Council may approve a plat vacation if good cause is demonstrated. Staff is continuing to recommend approval, based on mutual mistakes by applicant and staff during a previous application for a Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption at 214 E. Bleeker St., and during the review and approval of Ordinance No. 29. Series of 1998. The second public hearing is for the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split application, which may only be granted if Council has first approved the Plat Vacation request. Staff believes the lot split application meets all relevant standards and is recommending approval. ADDITIONAL RESEARCH: At the January 9 public hearings on the requested Plat Vacation and Lot Split, staff stated that a "mutual mistake" was made regarding the 1998 approval of a Historic Lot Split for 214 E. Bleeker Street. Staff based this assessment on the fact that neither the applicant nor City staff was aware that the applicant was entitled to the lot size of record (12,000 square feet) rather than the 11,963 square feet calculated by a survey of the property. If the case had proceeded on the basis that the lot size was 12,000 square feet, the applicant would have been eligible for a regular Lot Split, allowing for substantially more FAR on each lot. During the January 9 public hearing, Council asked staff to conduct further research to gather more information on the matter. In the recollection of the City Attorney's Office, spanning at least 15 years, the City has taken the position that original townsite lots legally consist of 3,000 square feet each, regardless of actual measurements on the ground, and property owners are entitled to that full amount as they proceed through land use review. Additional research shows that in a 2003 case involving the Charthouse, the City Attorney's Office found that the Applicant was able to proceed based on the "record" of lot size rather than a survey showing slightly less square footage than was allowed for a Lot Split. In the Charthouse case, the staff memo states the following: "In reviewing the application, a question arose as to whether the parcel legally contains the 12,000 square feet needed to execute a Lot Split in the L /TR Zone District. The survey that the applicant submitted shows that the Surveyor calculated the lot area as 11,979 square feet. However, the applicant is arguing that the property was intended to be 12,000 square feet because it is comprised of four (4) lots in the Eames Addition. And according to the 1959 Official Map of the City and Townsite of Aspen, the lots were supposed to be 3,000 square feet each. Thus, the applicant is further arguing that in 1959, the property should have been 12,000 square feet and there have been no recorded actions since 1959 that should have altered the size of the property. Therefore, the proposed lots to be created through the lot split would be in conformance with the minimum lot size in the L /TR Zone District, which is 6,000 square feet. Staff has reviewed the Applicant's argument with the City Attorney's Office and is felt that the Applicants argument is legally appropriate." Regarding the Brumder case, staff has since determined that as part of the original 1996 application, and the subsequent 1998 re- application, the applicant conducted a survey of the property. The 1996 survey indicates that the property consisted of four original townsite lots, measuring 12,000 square feet, according to the "record." The survey also showed the lots on the ground measured 11,963 square feet "prorated." (Please see Exhibit A.) These terms — "record" and "prorated" — were intended to note the difference between the original townsite plat "record," and the actual amount of square footage measured on -site, which was "prorated" over the assemblage of four lots, according to a representative of the surveying firm. The only document in the Brumder case record that shows a lot size other than 11,963 square feet is the original 1996 survey, which shows both the 12,000 square feet "record," and the 11,963 square feet "pro- rated." All subsequent documents specify the lot size at 11,96' ) square feet. The Brumder case record does not include any discussion, debate or argument regarding lot size. The case record shows that the original 1996 Brumder application (please see Exhibit B) states the lot size to be 11,963 square feet, and requests a Historic Lot Split. It appears the applicant's representative used the "prorated" lot size of 11,963 square feet from the 1996 survey, and drafted an application according to the land use review options that lot size allowed -- namely a Historic Lot Split. Based on recent discussions with City planners, it is clear that applications involving original townsite plats have routinely calculated lot size based on the 3,000 square -feet per lot "record" -- but without the staff s awareness that this approach was the legal position of the City of Aspen. It is likely that when the application for the Brumder Historic Lot Split was filed in 1996, it was not common knowledge among staff that the applicant was entitled to a 12,000 square -foot lot size, versus the 11,963 shown on the survey. It is important to note that current City staff can not recall a case prior to the Charthouse (2003) that included a question regarding the lot size of "record" versus the actual surveyed lot size. At this time, staff is maintaining its original finding that a "mutual mistake" was made regarding the 1996 Brumder case. The applicant may have erred in not fully investigating the rights of the property owner, and the City may have erred in not encoding the position of the City regarding the proper legal use the "record" regarding the lot size of original townsite lots, or otherwise making that position common knowledge among staff and applicants. In summary, staff is recommending approval of Ordinance 53 and Ordinance 54, as well as initiating a code amendment process to insert appropriate language to the Land Use Code reflecting the legal use of the "record" lot size for original townsite lots. The net result of vacating the existing 1998 plat and approving the lot split request is an increase of allowable FAR on both Lot A and Lot B. Under the proposed lot split, each lot size would be 6,000 square feet, allowing a future addition of approximately 1.300 square feet to the existing historic structure on Lot B; and either a single - family home up to 3,240 square feet, or two (2) detached dwelling units totaling up to 3,240 square feet, or a duplex up to 3,600 square feet on Lot A, according to the current Land Use Code, as follows: Existing Ord. No. 29 (1998) Proposed Ordinance Lot A 2,344 3,240* 3,600* FAR Single- family or 2 detached -- duplex Lot B 1,913 +eligible for 500 s.f. bonus 3,240* FAR * Lots A + B would be eligible for a total of 500 s.f. in bonus FAR via HPC. APPLICANT: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. LOCATION: 214 E. Bleeker St. ZONING: R -6 REVIEW PROCEDURE: Criteria for Plat Vacation are noted in 26.480.080 (C), stating that City Council may approve a plat vacation if good cause is demonstrated. The required conditions for a Lot Split are listed at 26.480.030 A(2); and review standards for a Subdivision Exemption are outlined at 26.480.050. STAFF COMMENTS: Review criteria and Staff Findings for Plat Vacation have been included as Exhibit "A Review criteria and Staff Findings for Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption have been included as Exhibit `B." RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed the proposal for a plat vacation and recommends that the City Council find that good cause has been demonstrated to approve this plat vacation for 214 E. Bleeker St. Staff has reviewed the proposals for a Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption and recommends that the City Council find that the criteria and review standards have been met to approve the Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption applications for 214 E. Sleeker St. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005, upon second reading." `9 move to approve Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2005, upon second reading." ORDINANCE No. 54 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION LOT SPLIT AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C. requesting approval of a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split of the property to be known as Lot A and Lot B of the Brumder Lot Split, located at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.030A(2), the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for the property to be described as Lots A and B of the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED- BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for Lots A and B of the property to be known and described as the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption plat that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. The plat shall indicate that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots, nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Furthermore, the proposed Lot Split Plat shall clearly label the proposed lot line that separates Lot A from Lot B and show all easements of record. 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots in conformance with the R -6 Zone District regulations and shall include the following plat notes: a. Upon redevelopment, all structures on these two (2) lots shall comply with the R -6 Zone District provisions, as may be amended from time to time, with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. Upon redevelopment, all encroachments into Public Right of Way shall be removed or properly licensed. b. Maximum potential build -out for the two (2) parcels created by lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single family home. Only one unit is allowable on Lot B. c. The future development of Lots A and B shall be subject to Chapter 26.415, Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmarks Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District. d. Any setback nonconformity(s) created by the new lot line shall be eliminated upon redevelopment or further development of the applicable lot(s). e. Vehicular access to either lot shall be from the alley only. f Upon redevelopment, the applicant shall construct sidewalk, curb and gutters according to the specifications of the City Engineer. g. Both lots are required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470. 040 B(1). 3. Both lots shall comply with the applicable development regulations prior to applying for building permits, including those regulations related to Residential Design Standards, Accessory Dwelling Units, and GMQS Exemptions. 4. The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing any trees from the site for which a tree removal permit is required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. Any tree to remain on -site during the development of Lots A and B shall have its drip line fenced off prior to, and throughout construction. Tree Removal Mitigation may be required for removal of trees pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 13.20. 5. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed. All sanitation- related improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. The existing sewer line may be used to service one of the new residences if it is inspected and determined to be satisfactory by the Aspen Sanitation District. If the existing service line is not used for the proposed development it must be abandoned and removed. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Upon redevelopment of the new lots, the applicant shall abandon the existing water service line prior to receiving new water taps. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: A public hearing was opened on the 9 °i and 23d day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12d' day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor vote on this 23rd day of January, 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ORDINANCE No. 53 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLAT VACATION AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C., requesting approval of a Plat Vacation regarding the property at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; said plat based upon Ordinance No.29, Series of 1998; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.080C, the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for a Plat Vacation, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Plat Vacation regarding the property located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Plat Vacation proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plat Vacation proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Plat Vacation for the property located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit and record a plat vacation that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. Section 2: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: A public hearing was held on the 9`" and 23"' day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12th day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor vote on this 23rd day of January, 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor e- ` IiaFtki A �il �! i !.! a °_ • _ n R� T 0 c 14 C� r� a z o o R �i 7� RM 1 Ex6;1r1- LC Brumder Residence 214 East Bleeker Aspen, Colorado Partial Demolition Conceptual Development Historic Lot Split presented by Gretchen Greenwood and Associates, Inc. 520 Walnut Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 970 925 4502 ATTACHMENT LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name &IZ4Odcr Rg- s/deMe (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning A-& • Applicant's name, 4. Lot size /// 9%3 -yq • 79' Biumdur 19wlda L &nd 7. Type of application (check all that apply): _ Conditional Use y Conceptual SPA v"04 Conceptual HPC _ Special Review — Final SPA Final HPC T 8040 Greenline _ Conceptual PUD _ Minor HPC Stream Margin _ Final PUD _ _ Relocation HPC _ Subdivision _ Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark _ GMQS allotment _ GMQS exemption _ ✓ Demo/Partial Demo View Plane _ Condominiumization_ Design Review _ Lot Split/Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment l�fl- �'1lL9,1c Lo7A �j f 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous apQrovals granted to the propertyAi/ /G�JY /G/1 Resle *we = /,5553 s__X 3 BtLlioo^J A�tSSoru/3/rLe l�i�t dingy = '3z& s2. Ow. ru✓ 'e""A'-MAn, 10. Have you completed and attached the following? _✓ Attachment 1- Land use application form r/ Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form ✓ Response to Attachment 3 ✓ Response to Attachments 4 and 5 LEONARD M. OATES RICHARD A KNEZEVICH TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL JOHN KELLY MARIA MORROW LAW OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH &,, GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 E HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO. 81611 January 19, 2006 Ben Gagnon, Staff Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 TELEPHONE (970) 92D -1700 FACSIMILE (970) 920 -1121 Imo@okgl..om VIA HAND DELIVERED Re: Affidavits to Supplement Record in Brumder Trust Applications for Withdrawal of Historic Lot Split and Request for Lot Split Dear Ben: After hearing the comments from the some of the members of Council in connection with the applications which we submitted on behalf of the Brumder Trust, you will please find enclosed herewith two affidavits. One Affidavit is from Thomas B. Fitzgerald, the Trustee of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust and the other is from Mitch Haas in connection with the application. These are submitted to supplement the record to demonstrate innocent lack of knowledge of both the Trustee and the then Staff Planner who handled this application. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. t�t�CJ/ By _ t CJ/ 614- Leonard M. Oates Encl. LMO/bab C:\LMOData & Forms\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust\Ltr to Gagnon 1.18.06.doc AFFIDAVIT OF THOMAS B. FITZGERALD THE UNDERSIGNED, Thomas B. Fitzgerald, being first duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: 1. My name is Thomas B. Fitzgerald. 2. I am and at all times since 1995 have been the acting Trustee of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust. 3. The William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust (and its predecessors in interest related to the Brumder Family) have been the owners of the property at 215 W. Bleeker which is the subject of the Brumder Historic Lot Split at all times since 1949. 4. That sometime in 1995 the Trust determined that it might want to remodel the historic home situated on the Trust property. 5. At the time that that decision was made, I was referred, I cannot recall by whom, to Gretchen Greenwood and Associates, Inc. with whom I met in the Spring of 1995. 1 dealt exclusively with Gretchen Greenwood of that firm at all times. 6. I was advised by Gretchen Greenwood at that time that in order to maximize the developability and value from the Trust's property that such could be accomplished only through the historic lot split provisions of the Aspen City Code ( "Code "). Attached hereto is Exhibit A is the summary of development of 214 E. Bleeker prepared at that time by Gretchen Greenwood and given to me. 7. I did not have any discussion at that time with Gretchen Greenwood or with any official the City of Aspen Community Development Department with respect to whether or not Gretchen Greenwood was accurate in her summary or whether there was available any alternative development scenario such as a non - historic lot split as permitted by the Code. 8. I was not at that time aware, that it was the position of the City of Aspen that all rectangular regular lots located within the original City and Townsite of Aspen were treated as being 3,000 square feet and was not so apprised of that position until I was advised by my counsel, Leonard M. Oates of Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. that such was the case in late 2005. 9. To the best of my knowledge Gretchen Greenwood did not engage the services of legal counsel for legal analysis of the developability of the property. I did not have legal counsel in connection with the historic lot split application for the Trust's property. I felt that based upon the assertion of Gretchen Greenwood that the only available course of action was the one that she recommended; therefore, I did not feel the need to engage legal counsel. 10. Based solely upon the advice of Gretchen Greenwood that proceeding with an historic lot split would be beneficial and would be the only way by which the property could be divided, I authorized Gretchen Greenwood to process an historic lot split application which resulted in the current historic lot split being completed. 11. I recently (on January 12, 2006) had a telephone conversation with Gretchen Greenwood in which I attempted to elicit from her whether or not she had investigated the availability of a straight lot split. In that telephone conversation she asserted to me that she believed and still believes that the only way which the Trust's property could have been divided was by means of an historic lot split under the Code and that the information which I had received through Mr. Oates as to the treatment of original City and Townsite Lots was incorrect. 12. 1 specifically asked Gretchen Greenwood whether or not prior to the time the application for the historic lot split was filed or at any time during the process, she had had conversation with anyone in the City of Aspen Community Development Department in connection with how original Townsite Lots in the City and Townsite of Aspen are treated and she did not answer the question. 13. It was my belief that from my conversation with Gretchen Greenwood that she would not be cooperative with me in connection with the pending applications. 14. Had I known at the time the historic lot split application was filed that I could have filed for a non - historic lot split, I would not have filed an application for an historic lot split, there being no incentive for me to take that course. My understanding was that this was the only avenue by which the split of the property could be pursued. Affiant sayeth further not. January i �- , 2006. �j ., Is Thomas B. Fitzgerald STATE OF ILLINOIS ) )SS. COUNTY OF COOK ) OFFICIAL SEAL MICAH M GIBBS NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF ILLINOIS MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:10127I06 Subscribed and sworn before me this day of January, 2006 by Thomas B. Fitzgerald. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public AFFIDAVIT OF MITCH HAAS THE UNDERSIGNED, Mitch Haas, being first duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: 1. My name is Mitch Haas. 2. In 1998 I was employed by the City of Aspen as a Staff Planner with the City of Aspen Community Development Department. 3. Although I have no recollection thereof, I have been told that I was the staff planner who processed the application of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust for the historic lot split for the property at 214 E. Bleeker, Aspen, Colorado. 4. In 1998, to the best of my knowledge, I was unaware of any policy of the City of Aspen which provided for the treatment of regular original City and Townsite of Aspen Lots as being 3,000 square feet regardless of the survey measured size thereof. 5. To the best of my knowledge I never had any discussion with Gretchen Greenwood in connection with the measurement or treatment of original City and Townsite of Aspen Lots. Affiant sayeth further not. Dated r006 Mitch Aaays STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn before me this IS day of January, 2006 by Mitch Haas. Witness my hand and My commission expir MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner THROUGH: Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development RE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 214 E. Bleeker Street Plat Vacation 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005 Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2005 DATE: January 9, 2006 SUMMARY: At the request of Mayor Klanderud, I am attaching some additional background information regarding this case, in addition to the January 3 memo: • Ordinance #29 Series of 1998 • City Council Minutes of August 13, 1998 • Historic Preservation Commission minutes of May 27, 1998 Judging from the record, it is apparent that neither the applicant nor City staff understood that the applicant was entitled to a lot size of 12,000 square feet when the application for a Historic Lot Split was approved in 1998. Because the applicant and staff proceeded under the mistaken assumption that the lot size was 11,963 square feet, a regular Lot Split was not an option, and the applicant proceeded under the rules for an Historic Lot Split. Under a Historic Lot Split, the applicant was only able to obtain the FAR for use on both lots from the one "fathering parcel' of 11,963. Based on that lot size, the allowable FAR forboth parcels was 4,257 -- and was split with 1,913 square feet for the existing historic house and 2,344 square feet for a new house on the second lot. Because the applicant legally had a 12,000 square foot lot, the applicant was entitled to a regular Lot Split, which calculates FAR based on the size of each lot created by the Lot Split. Thus the 6,000 square foot lot with the existing historic house is entitled to 3,240 s.f. and the second lot is also entitled to 3,240 s.f. Continued Meeting Aspen City Council August 13, 1998 Mayor Bennett called the continued meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. with Councilmembers Vickery, Markahmas and Richards present. ORDINANCE #29, SERIES OF 1998 - Historic Lot Split Brumder 214 East Bleeker Mitch Haas, community development department, told Council this property received HPC approval for a lot split in July 1996; however, the plat was never recorded and the approvals have expired. This is identical to the original approval and was reviewed and approved by HPC in May 1998. The property is 11,963 square feet, The request is to split it two parcels; one of 5,963 square feet with the existing historic house, and 6,000 square feet. The allowable FAR for a duplex will be split between the two; 1913 on the lot with the historic house plus a potential 500 square foot bonus and 2344 square feet on the other lot. Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing. Councilman Vickery moved to adopt Ordinance #29, Series of 1998, on second reading; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Vickery, yes; Richards, yes; Markalunas, yes; Mayor Bennett, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #28, SERIES OF 1998 - Historic Designation 950 Matchless Drive Mitch Haas, community development department, told Council this site has two structures; a 963 square foot historic miner's cottage of the 1880's and a non - historic detached garage of 610 square feet. This garage will have an ADU built on it. This was reviewed and approved by l? & Z in April. HPC unanimously recommended approval of the landmark designation. Haas said this complies with 3 of the 5 standards for historic designation. This structure is in an area of 6 structures all moved to the site; 3 of these are in the inventory. This is a voluntary request for historic designation. The applicant is requesting a $2000 historic grant and a park fee waiver. Haas said the park fee waiver is justified because of the voluntary historic designation and it only applies to the bedroom in the ADU, which is a deed restricted affordable unit. Haas told Council the ADU is not mitigation for any development. Mayor Bennett opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Bennett closed the public hearing. 1 ,0-' n Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998 Page I ORDINANCE No. 29 (SERIES OF 1998) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR AN HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.88.030(A)(2) and (5) and 26.72.010(G) of the Municipal Code, an Historic Landmark Lot Split is a subdivision exemption subject to review and approval by City Council after obtaining a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission (hereinafter HPC); and WHEREAS, the applicant, W.G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Gretchen Greenwood, has requested to split a 11,963 square foot parcel to create one single - family residential lot of 5,963 square feet and another of 6,000 square feet; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.72.010(G) of the Municipal Code, the HPC reviewed the request at a properly noticed public hearing on May 27, 1998 and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of 7 -0; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has reviewed the application and recommended approval of the Historic Landmark Lot Split with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the subdivision exemption under the applicable provisions of Chapters 26.88 of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered those recommendations made by the Community Development Department and the Historic Preservation Commission and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Historic Landmark Lot Split, with conditions, meets or exceeds all applicable development standards of the above referenced Municipal Code sections; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to Sections 26.88.030(A)(2) and (5) and 26.72.010(G) of the Municipal Code, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified herein, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the subdivision exemption: Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998 Page 2 �\ 1. The applicant's submission is complete and sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approval; and, 2. The subdivision exemption is consistent with the purposes of subdivision as outlined in Section 26.88. 010 of the Municipal Code, which purposes include: assist in the orderly and efficient development of the City; ensure the proper distribution of development; encourage the well - planned subdivision of land by establishing standards for the design of a subdivision; improve land records and survey monuments by establishing standards for surveys and plats; coordinate the construction of public facilities with the need for public facilities; safeguard the interests of the public and the subdivider and provide consumer protection for the purchaser; and, promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the City of Aspen. Section 2: Pursuant to the findings set forth in Section 1, above, the City Council does hereby grant an Historic Landmark Lot Split subdivision exemption for 214 East Bleeker Street with the following conditions: 1. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Engineering Departments and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall. render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall: a. Meet the requirements of Section 26.88.040(D)(2)(a) of the Aspen Municipal Code; b. Contain a plat note stating that development of the new /easterly lot (Lot A) created by the lot split shall be required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c) of the Municipal Code; c. .Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be prohibited from applying for further subdivision and any development of the lots will comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application. d. The two lots created by this lot split shall have a total allowable base FAR, on both lots combined, equal to 4,257 square feet of floor area prior to consideration of potentially applicable lot area reductions (i.e., slopes, access easements, etc.). The applicant shall verify with the City Zoning Officer the total allowable FAR r� on each lot, taking into account any and all applicable lot area reductions. The t property shall be subdivided into one parcel (the westerly parcel, Lot B) of 5,963 square feet and a second parcel (the easterly parcel, Lot A) of 6,000 square feet. Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998 Page 3 Provided it is found by the Zoning Officer that no lot area reductions are required, the maximum allowable FAR on the westerly parcel (Lot B) would be 1,913 square feet of floor area (plus the potential for a 500 square foot floor area bonus if granted by the HPC), and 2,344 square feet of floor area on the easterly parcel (Lot A). The information verified by the City Zoning Officer shall be included on the plat, as a plat note. e. Contain a plat note stating that any setback nonconformities created by the new lot line shall be eliminated .upon redevelopment or further development, as may be applicable, of either of the two lots. 2. As a minimum, the subdivision exemption agreement shall include the elements outlined in Section 26.88.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code, and shall meet the recording and timing requirements described in Section 26.88.030(A)(2)(e). 3. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy on either lot, the applicant shall sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter construction agreement and pay the applicable recording fees. 4. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision- making body having the authority to do so. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5• A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 10th day of August, 1998 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBL HED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of 1998. JL� ett, Mayor v Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998 Page 4 ATTEST: KathrynS. Foch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John W cester, City Attomey FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this a day of 1998. ATTEST; Kathryn S. ch, City Clerk g:/ planning /aspen/hpc/mseOokpl it/214ebord. doc . John ennett, Mayor ASPEN-HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27,199 2) The window trim, mullions and transom windows shall match those of the existing windows. 3) The color and material of the proposed awning(s) shall be reviewed and approved by the assigned HPC monitor and Community Development staff. 4) All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings all be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision- making body having the authority to do so. Motion second by Heidi. All in favor, motion carried 7- 0. 214 E. BLEEKER - HISTORIC LOT SPLIT - PH Affidavit of posting presented - Exhibit I Sworn in were Gretchen Greenwood, architect Joan Lang, neighbor Ramona Markahmas Franz Berko Bill Light Mitch Haas, planner stated that the gross square footage is 11,963 square feet and the request is to divide one parcel of 5,963 square feet and another parcel of 6,000 square feet. The smaller parcel contains the historic structure. The 1,913 square feet of floor area would be allotted to the lot with the historic house with the potential of the 500 square foot bonus if granted at final development review by HPC. The larger parcel would have a base floor area of 2,344 square feet. There is an existing pool on the larger lot. Gretchen gave an overview of the project for the benefit of the neighbors present. The lot has a Victorian house on it and the owners have chosen to subdivide the lot. The historic lot split was adopted so that you can create two lots with two small houses on one parcel. The allowable size that you can build on the two parcels together is the size of a duplex. The idea is to preserve the Victorian house and prevent the concept of a large addition or duplex onto it. Without the lot split they could quadruple the size. With the lot split the FAR go to the vacant lot in order to preserve the small Victorian house which is presently 1,800 square feet. The new house would be deed restricted to 2400 square foot house which is consistent with the Victorians in 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 the neighborhood. The ordinance allows small houses to be in scale with each other. The Victorian would be limited to a 1900 square foot house. They have an approval to move the out building to the new lot. Bill Light, neighbor endorsed the proposal after clarifications were made. Ramona inquired about the FAR for the historic house. Mitch stated that the allowable is 1913 square feet with the potential for the 500 square foot bonus at final development. The board relayed that the proposal meets the goals on what lot splits are all about, restricting the masses. MOTION.- Roger moved to forward to City Council a recommendation to approve the historic landmark lot split for 214 E. Bleeker Street with the following conditions: A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Engineering Departments and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall. a. Meet the requirements of Section 2688.040(D)(2)(a) of the Aspen Municipal Code; b. Contain a plat note stating that development of the new /easterly lot (Lot A) created by the lot split shall be required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26100.050(A)(2)(c) of the Municipal Code; c. Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be prohibited from applying for further subdivision and any development of the lots will comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application. d. The two lots created by this lot split shall have a total allowable base FAR, on both lots combined, equal to 4,257 square feet offloor area prior to consideration ofpotentially applicable lot area reductions (i.e., slopes, access easements, etc) . The applicant shall verify with the City Zoning Officer the total allowable FAR on each lot, taking into account any and all applicable lot area reductions. The H V HISTORIC PRESERVATION CO May 27, 1998 property shall be subdivided into one parcel (the westerly parcel, Lot B) of 5,963 square feet and a second parcel (the easterly parcel, Lot A) of 6,000 square feet. Provided it is found by the Zoning Officer that no lot area reductions are required, the maximum allowable FAR on the westerly parcel (Lot B) would be 1, 913 square feet of floor area (plus the potential for a 500 square foot floor area bonus if granted by the HPC), and 2,344 square feet of floor area on the easterly parcel (Lot A). The information verified by the City Zoning Officer shall be included on the plat, as a plat note. e. Contain a plat note stating that any setback nonconformity 's created by the new lot line shall be eliminated upon redevelopment or further development, as may be applicable, of either of the two lots. 2. As a minimum, the subdivision exemption agreement shall include the elements outlined in Section 2688.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code, and shall meet the recording and timing requirements described in Section 2688.030(A)(2)(e). 3. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy on either lot, the applicant shall sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter construction agreement and pay the applicable recording fees. 4. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision - making body having the authority to do so. Motion second by Heidi. All in favor, motion carried 7 -0. 234 W. FRANCIS - CONCEPTUAL & FINAL - PH - (table Julie Ann Woods, planner stated that her research indicated that the age of the garage is 1956. The actual request conceptual and final review, partial demolition of the non - historic structure which is the garage and the variances from the rear yard, side yard and combined side -yard setbacks. Scott Lindeau, Studio B represented the owner. He relayed to the board that the garage is an assemblage of added on structures. What is there now was built in 1970. The proposal is to re -build the garage and moving it two feet closer to the main house in order to get the vehicle in the garage. Exhibit I - letter of support from Tobin's Exhibit 11 - letter of support from Allen's Y,4( MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner THROUGH: Chris Bendon ,Dictor, Community Development RE: 214 E. Bleeker Street Plat Vacation 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005 Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2005 DATE: January 3, 2006 SUMMARY: Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C, representing William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, owner of 214 E. Bleeker St, is requesting a plat vacation, a lot split and a subdivision exemption. Staff has scheduled two public hearings because the requested Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption in Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2005 could not legally be granted without first approving the Plat Vacation request in Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005. However, staff is proposing that both public hearings be opened together, as the substance of the two applications both relate to 214 E. Bleeker St. The first public hearing is for the Plat Vacation request. The criteria for review states that City Council City Council may approve a plat vacation if good cause is demonstrated. Staff is recommending approval, based on mutual mistakes by applicant and staff during a previous application for a Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption at 214 E. Bleeker St., and during the review and approval of Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998. Please see Exhibit "A." The second public hearing is for the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split application, which may only be granted if Council has first approved the Plat Vacation request. Staff believes the lot split application meets all relevant standards and is recommending approval. The net result of vacating the existing 1998 plat and approving the lot split request is an increase of allowable FAR on both Lot A and Lot B. Under the proposed lot split, each lot size would be 6,000 square feet, allowing a future addition of approximately 1,300 square feet to the existing historic structure on Lot B; and either a single - family home up to 3,240 square feet, or two (2) detached dwelling units totaling up to 3,240 square feet, or a duplex up to 3,600 square feet on Lot A, according to the current Land Use Code, as follows: Fvictina nrd Nn. 29 1199R1 PrnnnSed Ordinance Lot A 2,344 3,240* 3,600* FAR Single-family or 2 detached -- duplex Lot B 1,913 + eligible for 500 s.f. bonus 3,240* FAR * Lots A + B would be eligible for a total of 500 s.f. in bonus FAR via HPC. APPLICANT: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. LOCATION'. 214 E. Bleeker St. ZONING: R -6 REVIEW PROCEDURE: Criteria for Plat Vacation are noted in 26.480.080 (C), stating that City Council may approve a plat vacation if good cause is demonstrated. The required conditions for a Lot Split are listed at 26.480.030 A(2); and review standards for a Subdivision Exemption are outlined at 26.480.050. STAFF COMMENTS: Review criteria and Staff Findings for Plat Vacation have been included as Exhibit „A Review criteria and Staff Findings for Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption have been included as Exhibit `B." RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed the proposal for a plat vacation and recommends that the City Council find that good cause has been demonstrated to approve this plat vacation for 214 E. Bleeker St. Staff has reviewed the proposals for a Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption and recommends that the City Council find that the criteria and review standards have been met to approve the Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption applications for 214 E. Bleeker St. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: °I move to approve Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005, upon first reading." "I move to approve Ordinance No. 54, Series of 2005, upon first reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Staff Findings — Plat Vacation Request Exhibit B: Staff Findings — Subdivision Exemption Lot Split Request Exhibit C: Applicant materials ORDINANCE No. 53 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLAT VACATION AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C., requesting approval of a Plat Vacation regarding the property at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; said plat based upon Ordinance No.29, Series of 1998; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.0800, the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for a Plat Vacation, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Plat Vacation regarding the property located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Plat Vacation proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plat Vacation proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26_ of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Plat Vacation for the property located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit and record a plat vacation that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. Section 2• This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4• A public hearing was held on the 9�' day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12th day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor vote on this 9th day of January, 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ORDINANCE No. 54 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION LOT SPLIT AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C. requesting approval of a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split of the property to be known as Lot A and Lot B of the Brumder Lot Split, located at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.030A(2), the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for the property to be described as Lots A and B of the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for Lots A and B of the property to be known and described as the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption plat that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. The plat shall indicate that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots, nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Furthermore, the proposed Lot Split Plat shall clearly label the proposed lot line that separates Lot A from Lot B and show all easements of record. 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots in conformance with the R -6 Zone District regulations and shall include the following plat notes: a. Upon redevelopment, all structures on these two (2) lots shall comply with the R -6 Zone District provisions, as may be amended from time to time, with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. Upon redevelopment, all encroachments into Public Right of Way shall be removed or properly licensed. b. Maximum potential build -out for the two (2) parcels created by lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single family home. Only one unit is allowable on Lot B. c. The future development of Lots A and B shall be subject to Chapter 26.415, Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmarks Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District. d. Any setback nonconformity(s) created by the new lot line shall be eliminated upon redevelopment or further development of the applicable lot(s). e. Vehicular access to either lot shall be from the alley only. f. Upon redevelopment, the applicant shall construct sidewalk, curb and gutters according to the specifications of the City Engineer. g. Both lots are required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470. 040 B(1). 3. Both lots shall comply with the applicable development regulations prior to applying for building permits, including those regulations related to Residential Design Standards, Accessory Dwelling Units, and GMQS Exemptions. 4. The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing any trees from the site for which a tree removal permit is required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. Any tree to remain on -site during the development of Lots A and B shall have its drip line fenced off prior to, and throughout construction. Tree Removal Mitigation may be required for removal of trees pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 13.20. 5. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed. All sanitation- related improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. The existing sewer line may be used to service one of the new residences if it is inspected and determined to be satisfactory by the Aspen Sanitation District. If the existing service line is not used for the proposed development it must be abandoned and removed. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Upon redevelopment of the new lots, the applicant shall abandon the existing water service line prior to receiving new water taps. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3• This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5• A public hearing shall be held on the 9 °i day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12 'h day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor vote on this 9th day of January, 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Exhibit A Review Criteria & Staff Findings Plat Vacation 26.480.080 (c) Vacation of an approved plat or any other document recorded in conjunction with a plat shall be considered a plat amendment, and shall only be approved by the City Council if good cause is demonstrated. Staff Finding: The plat under consideration for vacation was recorded based upon City Council approval of Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998, granting an Historic Landmark Lot Split and a Subdivision Exemption for 214 E. Bleeker St. Ordinance No. 29 created Lot A, a 6,000 square foot lot, with allowable FAR of 2,344 square feet; and Lot B, a 5,963 square foot lot, with allowable FAR of 1,913 square feet (plus a possible 500 square foot bonus to be granted by the Historic Preservation Commission). Lot A was, and continues to be, vacant. Lot B contains a historic structure. Staff finds that there is good cause for this plat vacation request, based on mutual mistakes made by applicant and staff during the review and approval of the Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption application, and Ordinance No. 29 Series of 1998. During review and approval, an assumption was made that lots located in the original townsite had to be surveyed to determine their legal size. In fact, the City of Aspen has traditionally interpreted all original townsite lots to be 3,000 square feet in size, despite the fact that some may measure slightly more or less due to original survey inaccuracies. In this case, the 1998 survey showed the amalgamation of the lots in question at slightly less than 12,000 square feet, which limited the applicant's rights to a Historical Landmark Lot Split. If the correct interpretation was made at the time -- that the amalgamation of lots legally measured 12,000 square feet -- the applicant would have been allowed to file for a regular Lot Split. Since 1998, there has been a minor remodeling of the historic structure on Lot B, and no development on Lot A, which remains vacant. Exhibit B Review Criteria & Staff Findings Lot split — 214 E. Bleeker St. 26.480.030 A (2) The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single - family dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where all of the following conditions are met: a. The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969. This restriction shall not apply to properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Staff Finding: This condition does not apply to 214 E. Bleeker St., as it is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. (This proposal meets the conditions stated above regardless of its historic status.) b. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for of housing pursuant to Section 26 470.070(B). Staff Finding: Staff finds that the proposal meets these conditions. This proposal would create 2 lots, both of which would conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Future development will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470.070 (B), and is a condition contained in the proposed Ordinance. c. The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this Chapter or a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.470.040 (C)(I)(a). Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal meets this condition. In the case that City Council has vacated the 1998 plat as requested, the property meets this condition. d. A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this Chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this Title, must be submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal meets this requirement, which appears as a condition in the proposed Ordinance. e. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days. following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required, for a showing of good cause. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal meets this requirement, which appears as a condition in the proposed Ordinance. f In the case where an existing single - family dwelling occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application, for a lot split. Staff Finding: Staff finds this condition is not applicable to this application, as the existing residence on Lot B is a Historic Structure, subject to Chapter 26.415. g. Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single, family home. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposal meets this requirement, which appears as a condition in the proposed Ordinance. Further, the condition states that only one dwelling unit is allowable on Lot B. MARIA MORROW October 31, 2005 VIA HAND DELIVERED Ben Gagnon, Staff Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Pending Application for Brumder Lot Split Dear Ben: In connection with the above application we are transmitting herewith to you the revised Lot Split Plat for the requested subdivision exemption (20 copies) revised pursuant to our telephone conversation of October 25, 2005. In addition, in that letter you asked that we address the following: 26.480.050C. "Plat vacation. Vacation of an approved plat or any other document recorded in conjunction with a plat shall be considered a plat amendment, and shall only be approved by the City Council if good cause is demonstrated. " RESPONSE: In response to this section it is the applicant's position that the original historic lot split approved pursuant to 26.480(A)(4) [this is the New Code citation], for which vacation is requested, was applied for, analyzed by staff and approved based upon a mutual mistake. Specifically, that mistake was the mistaken assumption that full size credit could not be given for the lots comprising it, even though located in the original Aspen Townsite, because they did not measure to a full 3,000 square feet per lot. However, the applicant has since learned that the City interprets all original townsite lots as being 3,000 square feet, even those which might measure slightly less. Many do measure less based on survey inaccuracies. Surveyors have customarily prorated these deficiencies over the entire block. This mistake would not have been made resulting in an historic lot split pursuant to the Land Use Code if it had been known that full advantage could be taken of the lot split procedures contained in 26.480(A)(2) allowing for a straight lot split at the time the historic lot split was done because in terms of available floor area the historic lot split allows less floor area than a non - historic CALMO Data & FOnnsTataUientsTrumder Trust\Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc LAW OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 E. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO. 81611 LEONARD M. OATES TELEPHONE (970) 020 -1700 RICHARD A KNEZEVICH FACSIMILE (970) 920.1121 TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL: Imo�okglaw.com JOHN T. KELLY MARIA MORROW October 31, 2005 VIA HAND DELIVERED Ben Gagnon, Staff Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Pending Application for Brumder Lot Split Dear Ben: In connection with the above application we are transmitting herewith to you the revised Lot Split Plat for the requested subdivision exemption (20 copies) revised pursuant to our telephone conversation of October 25, 2005. In addition, in that letter you asked that we address the following: 26.480.050C. "Plat vacation. Vacation of an approved plat or any other document recorded in conjunction with a plat shall be considered a plat amendment, and shall only be approved by the City Council if good cause is demonstrated. " RESPONSE: In response to this section it is the applicant's position that the original historic lot split approved pursuant to 26.480(A)(4) [this is the New Code citation], for which vacation is requested, was applied for, analyzed by staff and approved based upon a mutual mistake. Specifically, that mistake was the mistaken assumption that full size credit could not be given for the lots comprising it, even though located in the original Aspen Townsite, because they did not measure to a full 3,000 square feet per lot. However, the applicant has since learned that the City interprets all original townsite lots as being 3,000 square feet, even those which might measure slightly less. Many do measure less based on survey inaccuracies. Surveyors have customarily prorated these deficiencies over the entire block. This mistake would not have been made resulting in an historic lot split pursuant to the Land Use Code if it had been known that full advantage could be taken of the lot split procedures contained in 26.480(A)(2) allowing for a straight lot split at the time the historic lot split was done because in terms of available floor area the historic lot split allows less floor area than a non - historic CALMO Data & FOnnsTataUientsTrumder Trust\Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc lot split. Historic lot splits are utilized in circumstances where the two lots or one of the two lots created do meet the minimum size requirements of the underlying zone district. This we believe constitutes good cause for vacation of the plat. In addition, the land use authority needs to know that other than a small remodel resulting additional square footage to the historic structure on Lot B of the historic lot split there has been no development on Lot A of the historic lot split'whatsoever. You have asked that I respond to 26.480.050 of the Code. This Code Provision addresses Review Standards for subdivision applications (including subdivision exemptions): 26.480.050 "Review Standards. A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: A. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen area comprehensive plan. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is for residential development to be located with the R -6 Zone District of the City of Aspen and is consistent with the Aspen area comprehensive plan. "b. The proposed shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the neighborhood. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is for residential purposes all other properties within the zone district and neighborhood are generally residential in nature or institutional as in the case of the Community Church, Red and Yellow Brick Schools and the Given Institute. "c. The proposes subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding areas. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is consistent with other uses and scale within the building will not adversely effect the future development of surrounding areas. Adjacent areas in close proximity which are zoned for higher intensity use would have a far more dramatic effect on the surrounding areas. et seq. "d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision does not vary from the applicable requirements of 26.480.010, "B. Suitability of land for subdivision. a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because offlooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the proposed subdivision. " CA,MO Data & Forms0ataUientsTrumder Trost\Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is situate on substantially flat land within the original townsite of Aspen and is not subject to any of the hazards referenced in the above subsection a. "b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies duplication or premature extension ofpublic facilities and unnecessary public cost. RESPONSE: The subdivision will consist of the historic structure on Lot B as the same may be enlarged and potentially two separate dwelling units on Lot A as is permitted by provisions of the Land Use Code. There is no spatial inefficiency or duplication or premature extension of public facilities or unnecessary public costs associated with this application or any approval which may occur thereunder development. "C. Improvements. The improvements set forth in Chapter 26580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. The standards maybe varied by special review (see chapter 26430 if the following conditions have been met): 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The existing neighboring developed areas and/or the goals of the community. " REPONSE: No variance is requested. Each of the subject lots meets the underlying R -6 zoning and is of the same configuration of all other lots in the original townsite. "2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variance requested, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. " RESPONSE: The Applicant is not asking for any variations. "D. Affordable Housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements chapter 26.520, Replacement housing program a subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. " RESPONSE: As noted on the Lot Split Plat the applicant understands the requirement of affordable housing mitigation upon the development of Lot A of the Lot Split at time of building permit. "E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26630. " RESPONSE: The applicant believes that the provisions of the School Land Dedication requirements are inapplicable to Lot Splits. "F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision Approval granted only to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or subdivision exemptions have been C: \LMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust\Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc obtained pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a Parcel(s) zoned affordable housing planned unit development (AH -PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals of the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney (Ord. No. 44 -1021, Section 2). " RESPONSE: The applicant believes that GMQS exemption is provided is in the Lot Split provisions of the Code under which the application has been filed. You have asked that we address the Code provision contained at 26.480(A)(4)c, which states that a lot split may not be granted for previously subdivided parcels. We believe the intent of this provision is to say that a property owner may not further subdivide a previously split lot so as to create additional density. The subject Brumder property will not have been previously split if the present historic lot split is vacated. The purpose of the limitation is to prevent increase in the density by further subdivision of properties previously lot split. This is not the case with the present application as there is the same density with the requested lot split as with the historic lot split. With the vacation of the historic lot split plat the lots just go back to original townsite lots. If you should be in need of any further supplementation of the application please feel free to contact me. This letter shall be deemed to supplement the application and materials earlier provided. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. By Leonard M. Oate , a orn y or the William G. Brumder Florida Laild Trust LMO/bab C:\LMO Data & Forms\Data \C1ients\Brumder Trust\Ltr to Gagnon 1027.05.doc ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust REPRESENTATrvE: Name: Leonard M. Oates Oates Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C: Address: 533 E. Hopkins Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 Phone #: 970- 920 -1700 Name: Brumder Lot Split Address: 21.4 E. Bleeker, Aspen CO 81611 Phone #: 970- 920 -1700 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt. ❑ Special Review ❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Development ❑ Design Review Appeal ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ Minor Historic Devt. ❑ GMQS Allotment ❑ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ❑ Historic Demolition Q GMQS Exemption ❑ Subdivision ❑ . Historic Designation ❑ ESA— 8040 Greenline, Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane Lot Split ❑ T ary em or Use p Q Other:. Plat Valuation ❑ Lot. Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) 4 City & Townsite Lots previously subdivided by an historic lot split improved with a historic structureon two of the lots The other two are occupied by a swimming pool. - PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Historic structure to be retained each lot developed by underlying R -6 zoning See attache letter explanation of application Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: S 1510 Pre - Application Conference Summary Attachment #1, Signed Fee,Agreement ❑ Response to Attachment 43, Dimensional Requirements Form ❑ Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans that are larger than 8.5" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. RETAIR FOR PERMANENT RECORD September 8, 2005 VIA HAND DELIVERY City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust Request for Plat Vacation, GMQS Exemption — Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption — Lot Split To Whom It May Concern: This letter will constitute the authorization by me as Trustee of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust for Leonard M. Oates and any member of Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. to act as my representative in filing and processing an application as specified in the caption hereof. Very Truly Yours 2 ByV W B . "" Thomas Fitzgerald, Trustee of� the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust . CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for Plat Valuation of the Brumder Historic Lot Split S26.480.080(C) Sut (hereinafter, THE PROJECT)and GMQS Review for a Lot Split S26.481 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 38 (Series of 2004) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional, costs may accrue following their hearings and /or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering, its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and /or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ 1510 which is for 6 hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit,.APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $210.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN Chris Bendon _ Community Development Director g:\support\formsNagrpayas.doc 12/16/04 APPLICANT William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust S7 Thomas B. Fitzgerald, T stee Date: .. Mailing Address: c/o Leonard M. Oates Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. 533 E. Hopkins Ave., 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 816111 f: ti';� ATTACHMENT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: Brumder Lot Split Applicant: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust Location: 214 E. Bleeker Zone District: R -6 Lot Size: 12,000 sq. feet record Lot Area: 12,000 sq. feet (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: Proposed.• Number of residential units: Existing 1 Proposed: Number of bedrooms: Existing: Proposed: Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): 0 DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing.-1200+1- Allowable.-.!L640+1- Proposed: 6900 Principal bldg. height: Existing: -*Allowable: * Proposed: * Access. bldg. height: Existing: * Allowable: * Proposed: * On -Site parking: Existing: * Required: _*Proposed.- * % Site coverage: Existing: * Required. -*Proposed.- * % Open Space: Existing. -*Required.- * Proposed. Front Setback: Existing: * Required. -*Proposed.- * Rear Setback: Existing. -*Required.- _*Proposed.- * Combined F/R: Existing. -*Required.- _*Proposed.. * Side Setback: Existing: -*Required.- _*Proposed: * Side Setback: Existing: * Required: * Proposed: * Combined Sides: Existing: _*Required.- -*Proposed: * Distance Between Existing -*Required.- * Proposed: Buildings *Per R -6 Zoning Existing non - conformities or encroachments: alley encroachment of historic shed & minor fence encroachments Variations requested: none �4e4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Prgjects Planner n - THROUGH: Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development RE: 214 E. Bleeker Streeter vvv�•Y ��, Plat Vacation 15t Reading of Ordinance No. Series of 2005 Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption I" Reading of Ordinance tLj,' Series of 2005 DATE: December 12, 2005 SUMMARY: Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C, representing William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, owner of 214 E. Bleeker St, is requesting a plat vacation, a lot split and a subdivision exemption. Staff has scheduled two public hearings because the requested Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption in Ordinance No. S , Series of 2005 could not legally be granted without first approving the Plat Vacation request in Ordinance No.5-3, Series of 2005. However, staff is proposing that both public hearings be opened together, as the substance of the two applications both relate to 214 E. Bleeker St. The first public hearing is for the Plat Vacation request. The criteria for review requires that City Council find only that good cause has been demonstrated to grant such a request. Staff is recommending approval, based on mutual mistakes by applicant and staff during a previous application for a Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption at 214 E. Bleeker St., and during the review and approval of Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998. Please see Exhibit "A." The second public hearing is for the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split application, which may only be granted if Council has first approved the Plat Vacation request. Staff believes the lot split application meets all relevant standards and is recommending approval. The net result of vacating the existing 1998 plat and approving the lot split request is an increase of allowable FAR on both Lot A and Lot B. Under the proposed lot split, each lot size would be 6,000 square feet, allowing a future addition of approximately 1,300 square feet to the existing historic structure on Lot B; and either a single - family home up to 3,240 square feet, or two (2) detached dwelling units totaling up to 3,240 square feet, or a duplex up to 3,600 square feet on Lot A, according to the current Land Use Code, as follows: Existine Ord. No. 29 (1998) Proposed Ordinance Lot A 2,344 3,240* -- 3,600* FAR Single- family or 2 detached -- duplex Lot B 1,913 + eligible for 500 s.f. bonus 3,240* FAR * Lots A + B would be eligible for a total of 500 s.f. in bonus FAR via HPC. APPLICANT: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. LOCATION: 214 E. Bleeker St: ZONING: R -6 REVIEW PROCEDURE: Criteria for Plat Vacation are noted in 26.480.080 (C), stating that City Council may approve a plat vacation if good cause is demonstrated. The required conditions for a Lot Split are listed at 26.480.030 A(2); and review standards for a Subdivision Exemption are outlined at 26.480.050. STAFF COMMENTS: Review criteria and Staff Findings for Plat Vacation have been included as Exhibit "A Review criteria and Staff Findings for Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption have been included as Exhibit `B." RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed the proposal for a plat vacation and recommends that the City Council find that good cause has been demonstrated to approve this plat vacation for 214 E. Bleeker St. Staff has reviewed the proposals for a Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption and recommends that the City Council find that the criteria and review standards have been met to approve the Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption applications for 214 E. Bleeker St. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: "I move to approve Ordinance No.63, Series of 2005, upon first reading." "I move to approve Ordinance No. 5LSeries of 2005, upon first reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Staff Findings — Plat Vacation Request Exhibit B: Staff Findings — Subdivision Exemption Lot Split Request Exhibit C: Applicant materials ORDINANCE No. b'5 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLAT VACATION AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C., requesting approval of a Plat Vacation regarding the property at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; said plat based upon Ordinance No.29, Series of 1998; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.080C, the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for a Plat Vacation, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Plat Vacation regarding the property located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Plat Vacation proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plat Vacation proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Plat Vacation for the property located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit and record a plat vacation that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. Section 2• This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4• A public hearing was held on the 0 day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12th day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor vote on this 9th day of January, 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ORDINANCE No. S `r (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION LOT SPLIT AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, O, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C. requesting approval of a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split of the property to be known as Lot A and Lot B of the Brumder Lot Split, located at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.030A(2), the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for the property to be described as Lots A and B of the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Sleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for Lots A and B of the property to be known and described as the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption plat that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. The plat shall indicate that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots, nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Furthermore, the proposed Lot Split Plat shall clearly label the proposed lot line that separates Lot A from Lot B and show all easements of record. 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots in conformance with the R -6 Zone District regulations and shall include the following plat notes: a. Upon redevelopment, all structures on these two (2) lots shall comply with the R -6 Zone District provisions, as may be amended from time to time, with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. Upon redevelopment, all encroachments into Public Right of Way shall be removed or properly licensed. b. Maximum potential build -out for the two (2) parcels created by lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single family home. Only one unit is allowable on Lot B. c. The future development of Lots A and B shall be subject to Chapter 26.415, Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmarks Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District. d. Any setback nonconformity(s) created by the new lot line shall be eliminated upon redevelopment or further development of the applicable lot(s). e. Vehicular access to either lot shall be from the alley only. f. Upon redevelopment, the applicant shall construct sidewalk, curb and gutters according to the specifications of the City Engineer. g. Both lots are required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470. 040 B(1). 3. Both lots shall comply with the applicable development regulations prior to applying for building permits, including those regulations related to Residential Design Standards, Accessory Dwelling Units, and GMQS Exemptions. 4. The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing any trees from the site for which a tree removal permit is required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. Any tree to remain on -site during the development of Lots A and B shall have its drip line fenced off prior to, and throughout construction. Tree Removal Mitigation may be required for removal of trees pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 13.20. 5. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed. All sanitation - related improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. The existing sewer line may be used to service one of the new residences if it is inspected and determined to be satisfactory by the Aspen Sanitation District. If the existing service line is not used for the proposed development it must be abandoned and removed. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Upon redevelopment of the new lots, the applicant shall abandon the existing water service line prior to receiving new water taps. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5• A public hearing shall be held on the 9 °i day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12 °i day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor vote on this day of , 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Zy C `Q V Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 1200_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, \ W� J r J W l (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, 1 waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not ' less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 200, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. t Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described�;n Section 26304.060(E)Q) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi - governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. ' nature The fore oing "Affidavit of Notice" was ac owledge before this -')) day of � , 200 5 by JO—A-� 2 PUBLC N TICE RE. BRUMDER RESIDEK E214 EAST BLEEKER STREET, PEAT VACATr N PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HE GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, December 12, 2W5, at a meeting to begin at 5 0.m. before the Aspen City Council, In the Council Chambers, City Hall 130 S. Galena St Aspen, CO, to review a proposal for a Plat Vacation, said plat based upon Ordinance No. 29, Serles of IM, granting a subdivision exemption for an bistat, landmark lot split at 214 East Bleaker Street (Lots N 0, P and Q, Block 72, City and Townshe of Aspen). For further inlormation, contact Ben Gagnon at the City of Aspen Community Development Es- part" mern in 5. Galena SL, Aspem CO (970) 423 275 (or by email at beng®ri aspen.co.us). All written correspondence related to tee applica- tion should be seat to thgabove email or physi- WITNESS MY HAND AND My commission expires: Notary ATTACHMENTS: :m aaaress. Applicant: William G. Blu der Florida Land Trust Flom an,ve,Pl Rule 6 SITE Hopkl sAved, COPYOp THE PUBLICATION Aspen, 0081611 - ,Helen Elanderad Aspen City Council or i1s, bar, PII 2 W5. (3221) P_� T ° "«a; "`m RAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) strA!i LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL AFFIDAVIT OF POSTINGS AND MAILINGS STATE OF COLORADO) ) ss: COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The undersigned, Kimberly Knox, hereby certifies as follows, the first duly sworn upon my oath: 1. On the 24th day of March, 2006, I mailed by United States mail, postage prepaid, to the addresses attached as Exhibit A, the Notices of Public Hearing attached as Exhibits B and C. 2. On the 24th day of March, 2006, I posted the signs shown in the photograph attached as Exhibit D, and the same remained so posted at all times until April 10, 2006. �. �.� �� , tom . Subscribed and sworn to before me this 24th day of March, 2006. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: l I Q on Note •y Public EXHIBIT Impression antibourrage et h s6chage rapide veIYco m AMERY® 51604 Utilisez le gabarit 51600 O-AVERY ° •/U 200 E MAIN LLC 20% 225 N MILL ST LLC ALPINE PETROLEUM LLC PO BOX 10147 225 N MILL ST 435 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AMATO JOSEPH A ASPEN COMMUNITY UNITED BERGMAN CARL R & CATHERINE M PO BOX 503 METHODIST CHURCH PO BOX 1365 HIGHLAND MILLS, NY 10930 200 E BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 BERKO MIRTE 71.165% BLU VIC LLC BRUMDER WILLIAM G FLORIDA LAND PO BOX 360 68 TRAINORS LANDING RD TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 C/O THOMAS FITZGERALD SEGERDAHL & CO 250 E WISCONSIN AVE #800 MILWAUKEE, WI 53202 CITY OF ASPEN COX SAMUEL WESLEY CROSBY CAROLYNN B & JOHN M 130 S GALENA ST PUCHKOFF JULIE ELLEN TRUSTEES ASPEN, CO 81611 117 N MONARCH ST #1 C/O ROSA GETTMAN ASPEN, CO 81611 -1439 325 S FOREST DENVER, CO 80246 DOMINGUE RON & NANCY FROST PROPERTY LLC GETTMAN ROSA 600 SEMINOLE DR 2950 E BROAD ST 325 S FOREST WINTER PARK, FL 32789 COLUMBUS, OH 43209 DENVER, CO 80246 GIORDANO MICHAEL GSW FAMILY INV LP HAYES MARY FAMILY PTNSP LTD 1411 GREEN MEADOW RD PO BOX 2038 PO BOX 497 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 -9801 WHEELING, WV 26003 ASPEN, CO 81612 HODES ALAN & DEBORAH HODGSON PHILIP R 50% INT HOGUET CONSTANCE M PO BOX 10628 212 N MONARCH ST 333 E 68TH ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10021 HOTEL JEROME INC LIGHT HOLDINGS LLLP MADDEN WALTER ROSS 37.5% C/O EVEREST CHRISTY G 73313TH ST PMB 101 300 PUPPY SMITH #203 9000 N BROADWAY BOULDER, CO 80302 ASPEN, CO 81611 OKLAHOMA CITY. OK 73114 MATTINGLY MARK & ALIXE MYRIN CUTHBERT L JR 37.5% PACE LINDA MARIE 929 CAMINO VIEJO 300 PUPPY SMITH ST #203- 101 445 N MAIN AVE SANTA BARBARA, CA 93108 ASPEN, CO 81611 SAN ANTONIO, TX 78205 PARZYBOK WILLIAM G JR TRUSTEE PEARCE FREDERICK EDWARD PENN PAUL E & SUSAN W 14023 220TH AVE NE 216 E MAIN ST 3830 E 79TH ST WOODINVILLE, WA 98072 ASPEN, CO 81611 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46260 -3457 EXHIBIT impression antrbourrage et 6 s6chage rapide averycomQ Utilisez le gabarit 51600 O -AVERY AVERY Qp 5160 PUPPY SMITH LLC QWEST CORPORATION TL393 ROCKING LAZY J PROPERTIES LLC 205 S MILL ST SUITE 301A PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 12360 ASPEN, CO 81611 1801 CALIFORNIA ST 25TH FL ASPEN, CO 81612 DENVER, CO 80202 SADLER QUAL PERS RES TRUST #5 50% 8536 N GOLF DR PARADISE VALLEY. AZ 85253 SARDY HOUSE LLC 128 EAST MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 SUTTON KERMIT S & JENNY W WHEELER SQUARE ASSOCIATES 80% 715 TENTH ST SOUTH C/0 FLEISHER CO INC NAPLES, FL 34102 200 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 SEGUIN WILLIAM L & MARILYN PO BOX 4274 ASPEN, CO 81612 PUBLIC N RE: BRUMDER RESIDENCE 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET, LOT SPLIT PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing, 2 "d Reading, will be held on Monday, April 10, 2006, at a meeting to begin at 5 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, to review a proposal for a Lot Split at 214 East Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, City and Townsite of Aspen). For further information, contact Ben Gagnon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429 -2755, (or by email at beng@ci.aspen.co.us). All written correspondence related to the application should be sent to the above e-mail or physical address. Applicant: William G. Blumder Florida Land Trust c/o Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. Third Floor, Aspen Plaza Building, 533 E. Hopkins Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 s/Helen Klanderud Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on March 26, 2006 City of Aspen Account RE: BRUMDER RESIDENCE 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET, PLAT VACATION PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing, 2 "d Reading, will be held on Monday, April 10, 2006, at a meeting to begin at 5 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, to review a proposal for a Plat Vacation, said plat based upon Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998, granting a subdivision exemption for an historic landmark lot split at 214 East Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, City and Townsite of Aspen). For further information, contact Ben Gagnon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429 -2755, (or by email at beng(oci.aspen.co.us). All written correspondence related to the application should be sent to the above e -mail or physical address. Applicant: William G. Blumder Florida Land Trust c/o Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. Third Floor, Aspen Plaza Building, 533 E. Hopkins Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 s/Helen Klanderud Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on March 26, 2006 City of Aspen Account 11 EXHIBIT -1 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTINGS AND MAILINGS STATE OF COLORADO) ) ss: COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The undersigned, Kimberly Knox, hereby certifies as follows, the first duly sworn upon my oath: 1. On the 18th day of November, 2005, I mailed by United States mail, postage prepaid, to the addresses attached as Exhibit A, the Notices of Public Hearing attached as Exhibits B and C. 2. On the 23rd day of November, 2005, I posted the signs shown in the photograph attached as Exhibit D, and the same remained so posted at all times until December 12, 2005. Z M'm Subscribed and sworn to before me this 12`h day of December, 2005. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary ublic My commission expires: i acri U r . t' 1'� C'! I Brandon EXHIBIT A 1 of 2 200 E MAIN LLC 20% 225 N MILL ST LLC ALPINE PETROLEUM LLC PO BOX 10147 225 N MILL ST 435 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AMATO JOSEPH A ASPEN COMMUNITY UNITED BERGMAN CARL R & CATHERINE M PO BOX 503 METHODIST CHURCH p0 BOX 1365 HIGHLAND MILLS, NY 10930 200 E SLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 BERKO MIRTE 71.165% BLU VIC LLC BRUMDER WILLIAM G FLORIDA LAND PO BOX 360 68 TRAINORS LANDING RD TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 C/O THOMAS FITZGERALD SEGERDAHL & CO 250 E WISCONSIN AVE #800 MILWAUKEE, WI 53202 CITY OF ASPEN COX SAMUEL W ESLEY CROSBY CAROLYNN B & JOHN M 130 S GALENA ST PUCHKOFF JULIE ELLEN TRUSTEES ASPEN, CO 81611 117 N MONARCH ST #1 C/O ROSA GETTMAN ASPEN, CO 81611 -1439 325 S FOREST DENVER, CO 80246 FROST BARN PROPERTY LLC GETTMAN ROSA GIORDANO MICHAEL 2950 E BROAD ST 325 S FOREST 0082 HILLCREST DR COLUMBUS, OH 43209 DENVER, CO 80246 BASALT, CO 81621 GSW FAMILY INV LP HAYES MARY FAMILY PTNSP LTD HODGSON PHILIP R 50% INT PO BOX 2038 PO BOX 497 212 N MONARCH ST WHEELING, WV 26003 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 HOGUET CONSTANCE M HOTEL JEROME INC LIGHT HOLDINGS LLLP 333 E 68TH ST C/O EVEREST CHRISTY G 733 13TH ST NEW YORK, NY 10021 9000 N BROADWAY BOULDER, CO 80302 OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73114 MADDEN WALTER ROSS 37.5% MYRIN CUTHBERT L JR 37.5% PACE LINDA MARIE PMB 101 300 PUPPY SMITH #203 300 PUPPY SMITH ST #203 -101 445 N MAIN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 SAN ANTONIO, TX 78205 PARZYBOK WILLIAM G JR TRUSTEE PEARCE FREDERICK EDWARD PENN PAUL E & SUSAN W 14023 220TH AVE NE 216 E MAIN ST 3830 E 79TH ST WOODINVILLE, WA 98072 ASPEN, CO 81611 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46260 -3457 PUPPY SMITH LLC OWEST CORPORATION TL393 ROAMAN HARRIET J 205 S MILL ST SUITE 301A PROPERTY TAX DEPT 250E 63RD ST ASPEN, CO 81611 1801 CALIFORNIA ST 25TH FL NEW YORK, NY 10021 DENVER, CO 80202 EXHIBIT A of 2 1%00 ROCKING LAZY J PROPERTIES LLC SADLER QUAL PERS RES TRUST #5 50% SARDY HOUSE LLC PO BOX 12360 8536 N GOLF DR 128 EAST MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81612 PARADISE VALLEY, AZ 85253 ASPEN, CO 81611 SEGUIN WILLIAM L & MARILYN PO BOX 4274 ASPEN, CO 81612 WHEELER SQUARE ASSOCIATES 80% C/0 FLEISHER CO INC 200 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 SHOAF JEFFREY S PO BOX 3123 ASPEN, CO 81612 SUTTON KERMIT S & JENNY W 715 TENTH ST SOUTH NAPLES, FL 34102 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: BRUMDER RESIDENCE 214 EAST VACATION PUBLIC HEARING BLEEKER STREET, PLAT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, December 12, 2005, at a meeting to begin at 5 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, to review a proposal for a Plat Vacation, said plat based upon Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998, granting a subdivision exemption for an historic landmark lot split at 214 East Bleeker Street (Lots N, O, P and Q, Block 72, City and Townsite of Aspen). For further information, contact Ben Gagnon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429 -2755, (or by email at beng@ci.aspen.co.us All written correspondence related to the application should be sent to the above e-mail or physical address. Applicant: William G. Blumder Florida Land Trust c/o Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. Third Floor, Aspen Plaza Building, 533 E. Hopkins Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 s/Helen Klanderud Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on November 20, 2005 City of Aspen Account �I RE: BRUMDER RESIDENCE 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET, LOT SPLIT PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, December 12, 2005, at a meeting to begin at 5 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, to review a proposal for a Lot Split at 214 East Bleeker Street (Lots N, 0, P and Q, Block 72, City and Townsite of Aspen). For further information, contact Ben Gagnon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429 -2755, (or by email at beng@ci.aspen.co.us). All written correspondence related to the application should be sent to the above e-mail or physical address. Applicant: William G. Blumder Florida Land Trust c/o Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. Third Floor, Aspen Plaza Building, 533 E. Hopkins Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 s/Helen Klanderud Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on November 20 2005 City of Aspen Account MARIA MORROW March 8, 2006 VIA HAND DELIVERY Honorable Helen Kalin Klanderud and Members of the City Council c/o City of Aspen Community Development Dept. ATTN: Ben Gagnon 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Brumder Request for Withdrawal of Historic Lot Split Dear Mayor Klanderud and Members of the City Council: Subsequent to my last correspondence including surveyor affidavits and the affidavits of others knowledgeable in the premises we were able to locate the following: 1. The Plat of the Aspen Townsite (not however to scale because of machine reproductions), per certified copy by B. Clark Wheeler, U.S. Deputy Surveyor, dated March 19, 1880 by which the Aspen Town and Land Company conveys lots within the original Townsite of Aspen. Although the Plat does not contain lot dimensions for Main Street stated at 100 feet, all individual regularly dimensioned rectangular lots are 30 feet by 100 feet scaling of the comparative dimension. 2. The original survey plat of the Town of Aspen prepared by H. Pfeiffer, C.E. prepared under authority of Byron E. Shear. This map was prepared at a time when Aspen was part of Gunnison County before the split off which created Pitkin County. This map is recorded in Book V at Page 112 of the records of Gunnison County Colorado. It is submitted to you for the proposition that lots in the original townsite are 30 x 100. You can see that that is noted below Mr. Pfeiffer's field notes of the Town of Aspen. We have highlighted that lot size statement in the copy provided to you. Very Truly Yours, OATES,,..KNEZEVICH & GARJ2fN5WARTZ, P.C. cc: Tom Fitzgerald LMO/bab Leonard C: \LMO Data & Fonns\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust \ltr to Klanderud and Council 3.2.06.doc LAW OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL. CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, PLAZA BUILDING 533 E. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO. 81611 TELEPHONE (970) 920 -1700 LEONARD M. OATES FACSIMILE (W 0) 920 -1121 RICHARD A KNEZEVICH TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY Imo @ok�lew.wm OF COUNSEL. JOHN T. KELLY MARIA MORROW March 8, 2006 VIA HAND DELIVERY Honorable Helen Kalin Klanderud and Members of the City Council c/o City of Aspen Community Development Dept. ATTN: Ben Gagnon 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Brumder Request for Withdrawal of Historic Lot Split Dear Mayor Klanderud and Members of the City Council: Subsequent to my last correspondence including surveyor affidavits and the affidavits of others knowledgeable in the premises we were able to locate the following: 1. The Plat of the Aspen Townsite (not however to scale because of machine reproductions), per certified copy by B. Clark Wheeler, U.S. Deputy Surveyor, dated March 19, 1880 by which the Aspen Town and Land Company conveys lots within the original Townsite of Aspen. Although the Plat does not contain lot dimensions for Main Street stated at 100 feet, all individual regularly dimensioned rectangular lots are 30 feet by 100 feet scaling of the comparative dimension. 2. The original survey plat of the Town of Aspen prepared by H. Pfeiffer, C.E. prepared under authority of Byron E. Shear. This map was prepared at a time when Aspen was part of Gunnison County before the split off which created Pitkin County. This map is recorded in Book V at Page 112 of the records of Gunnison County Colorado. It is submitted to you for the proposition that lots in the original townsite are 30 x 100. You can see that that is noted below Mr. Pfeiffer's field notes of the Town of Aspen. We have highlighted that lot size statement in the copy provided to you. Very Truly Yours, OATES,,..KNEZEVICH & GARJ2fN5WARTZ, P.C. cc: Tom Fitzgerald LMO/bab Leonard C: \LMO Data & Fonns\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust \ltr to Klanderud and Council 3.2.06.doc LEONARD M. OATES RICHARD A KNEZEVICH TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL. JOHNT. KELLY MARIA MORROW LAW OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 E HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO. 81611 TELEPHONE (970) 9220 -1.121 FACSIMILE (970) 920 -1121 February 27, 2006 Honorable Helen Kalin Klanderud and Members of the City Council c/o City of Aspen Community Development Dept. ATTN: Ben Gagnon 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Reconsidered Ordinance Nos. 53, Series of 2005 & 54, Series of 2005 Dear Mayor Klanderud and Members of the City Council: Imo@okylaw.wm VIA HAND DELIVERY As you are aware, subsequent to the denial of the Brumder Trust request for the adoption of Ordinance No. 53, Series of 2005 (Withdrawal of the Brumder Historic Lot Split Plat), Mayor Klanderud suggested a reconsideration of the denial which was moved by Councilman De Vilbiss, seconded by Councilman Torre and passed four to one. Since the Motion for Reconsideration we have done additional research in connection with the treatment of the Brumder property and as to the position of the City of Aspen with respect to the treatment of parcels within the original City and Townsite. Attached to this letter are the following: 1. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor John M. Howorth, President of Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. 2. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor James F. Reser, President and Principal of Aspen Surveys, Inc. 3. Affidavit of Former City Engineer Nick Adeh. 4. Affidavit of Former City Engineer Jay Hammond. 5. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor Louis H. Buettner. 6. Affidavit of Deputy Pitkin County Assessor Larry Fite, which is submitted for the purpose of demonstrating the Historical Treatment, generally of lots within the Original Townsite of Aspen and as well certain matters relating specifically to the four Brumder Lots which were subsequently subdivided into two parcels by the Brumder Historic Lot Split which we are now seeking to withdraw. Hopefully you will find these submittals to be informative. C: \LMO Data & Fonns\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust \ltr to Klanderud and Council 2.22.06.doc The statement was made by Councilman Johnson (to my understanding) that he believed that each of the Original Townsite Lots should be treated based upon measured dimensions. We believe that this would result in potentially unfair or overly advantageous treatment of Original Townsite Lots depending upon the measurement. We believe it is the best policy to follow the current policy of treating all such lots as constituting 3,000 square feet, which was the intention of those who laid out the Original Townsite and which has been followed at all times since then. If there is confusion regarding this policy then certainly the City Council should give consideration to adoption of some form of legislation which makes this absolutely clear so that the error which we believed occurred in connection with the submission of the original Brumder Historic Lot Split does not occur in the future. Additionally, Councilman Johnson made a statement at the January 23, 2006 meeting that he did not believe that it was the obligation of the City of Aspen Community Development Department to advise property owners as to how to maximize development rights upon their property. We believe that Councilman Johnson fails to understand the Community Development Department's Pre- Application Conference process. In this process a property owner requests a meeting with a Staff Planner. In that meeting the property owner explains to the Staff Planner what the property owner would like to see occur with respect to his or her property. The Staff Planner then reviews the Code provisions either at or subsequent to the meeting and advises the property owner as to the appropriate code sections which the property owner needs to follow in order to solicit the development approval which is available to the property by the underlying zoning. In order to do so, the Staff Planner must determine and advise the Property Owner as to whether or not under the existing provisions of the City of Aspen Land Use Code the result desired by the property owner is attainable. That is the nature of the process and by necessity requires the Staff Planner to advise the property owner what the property owner's practical expectations might be in connection with the development and/or redevelopment of his or her property. Any other approach to the process would be somewhat akin to "Where's Waldo." It would be unfair and unduly burdensome upon property owners within the City of Aspen to expect the property owner to ferret out the information which the property owner needs in order to proceed. The cooperative process as between the property owner and the community development department general works quite well. Another approach without such cooperation would lead to significant criticism of the City in the treatment of its landowners. If the City Council is in need of any further supplementation please feel free to contact me. There is also attached to Mr. Buettner's Affidavit a copy of the 1959 Official Plat of the City of Aspen which is and remains its Official Plat. Because of the size of this document and the expense we have included it in the initial cover to Mayor Klanderud and are requesting that either she or Ben Gagnon bring the 1959 Official Map of the City of Aspen to the City Council meeting. This Official Map is approved by Ordinance adopted in 1959 which has not been amended and remains in effect as of the date of this writing. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. By Leonard M. Oates LMO/bab C: \LMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Brutnder Trust \ltr to Klanderud and Council 2.22.06.doc MARIA MORROW October 31, 2005 VIA HAND DELIVERED Ben Gagnon, Staff Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department` ` 130 S. Galena t Aspen, CO 81611 OCT 3 1 2005 Re: Pending Application for Brumder Lot Split BliiEl' ... Dear Ben: In connection with the above application we are transmitting herewith to you the revised Lot Split Plat for the requested subdivision exemption (20 copies) revised pursuant to our telephone conversation of October 25, 2005. In addition, in that letter you asked that we address the following: 26.480.050 C. "Plat vacation. Vacation of an approved plat or any other document recorded in conjunction with a plat shall be considered a plat amendment, and shall only be approved by the City Council if good cause is demonstrated. " RESPONSE: In response to this section it is the applicant's position that the original historic lot split approved pursuant to 26.480(A)(4) [this is the New Code citation], for which vacation is requested, was applied for, analyzed by staff and approved based upon a mutual mistake. Specifically, that mistake was the mistaken assumption that full size credit could not be given for the lots comprising it, even though located in the original Aspen Townsite, because they did not measure to a full 3,000 square feet per lot. However, the applicant has since learned that the City interprets all original townsite lots as being 3,000 square feet, even those which might measure slightly less. Many do measure less based on survey inaccuracies. Surveyors have customarily prorated these deficiencies over the entire block. This mistake would not have been made resulting in an historic lot split pursuant to the Land Use Code if it had been known that full advantage could be taken of the lot split procedures contained in 26.480(A)(2) allowing for a straight lot split at the time the historic lot split was done because in terms of available floor area the historic lot split allows less floor area than a non - historic C:\LMO Data & Forms\Data \Chents\Brumder Trust \Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc LAND OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533E HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO. 61611 LEONARD M. OATES TELEPHONE (970)92D 1 700 RICHARD A KNEZEVICH FACSIMILE (970) 920.1121 TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL. hncLok9lawmm JOHN T. KELLY MARIA MORROW October 31, 2005 VIA HAND DELIVERED Ben Gagnon, Staff Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department` ` 130 S. Galena t Aspen, CO 81611 OCT 3 1 2005 Re: Pending Application for Brumder Lot Split BliiEl' ... Dear Ben: In connection with the above application we are transmitting herewith to you the revised Lot Split Plat for the requested subdivision exemption (20 copies) revised pursuant to our telephone conversation of October 25, 2005. In addition, in that letter you asked that we address the following: 26.480.050 C. "Plat vacation. Vacation of an approved plat or any other document recorded in conjunction with a plat shall be considered a plat amendment, and shall only be approved by the City Council if good cause is demonstrated. " RESPONSE: In response to this section it is the applicant's position that the original historic lot split approved pursuant to 26.480(A)(4) [this is the New Code citation], for which vacation is requested, was applied for, analyzed by staff and approved based upon a mutual mistake. Specifically, that mistake was the mistaken assumption that full size credit could not be given for the lots comprising it, even though located in the original Aspen Townsite, because they did not measure to a full 3,000 square feet per lot. However, the applicant has since learned that the City interprets all original townsite lots as being 3,000 square feet, even those which might measure slightly less. Many do measure less based on survey inaccuracies. Surveyors have customarily prorated these deficiencies over the entire block. This mistake would not have been made resulting in an historic lot split pursuant to the Land Use Code if it had been known that full advantage could be taken of the lot split procedures contained in 26.480(A)(2) allowing for a straight lot split at the time the historic lot split was done because in terms of available floor area the historic lot split allows less floor area than a non - historic C:\LMO Data & Forms\Data \Chents\Brumder Trust \Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc lot split. Historic lot splits are utilized in circumstances where the two lots or one of the two lots created do meet the minimum size requirements of the underlying zone district. This we believe constitutes good cause for vacation of the plat. In addition, the land use authority needs to know that other than a small remodel resulting additional square footage to the historic structure on Lot B of the historic lot split there has been no development on Lot A of the historic lot split whatsoever. You have asked that I respond to 26.480.050 of the Code. This Code Provision addresses Review Standards for subdivision applications (including subdivision exemptions): 26.480.050 "Review Standards. A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: A. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen area comprehensive plan. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is for residential development to be located with the R -6 Zone District of the City of Aspen and is consistent with the Aspen area comprehensive plan. "b. The proposed shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the neighborhood. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is for residential purposes all other properties within the zone district and neighborhood are generally residential in nature or institutional as in the case of the Community Church, Red and Yellow Brick Schools and the Given Institute. "c. The proposes subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding areas. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is consistent with other uses and scale within the building will not adversely effect the future development of surrounding areas. Adjacent areas in close proximity which are zoned for higher intensity use would have a far more dramatic effect on the surrounding areas. etseq V. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision does not vary from the applicable requirements of 26.480.010, "B. Suitability of land for subdivision. a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the proposed subdivision. " C:\LMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust \Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is situate on substantially flat land within the original townsite of Aspen and is not subject to any of the hazards referenced in the above subsection a. "b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public cost. RESPONSE: The subdivision will consist of the historic structure on Lot B as the same may be enlarged and potentially two separate dwelling units on Lot A as is permitted by provisions of the Land Use Code. There is no spatial inefficiency or duplication or premature extension of public facilities or unnecessary public costs associated with this application or any approval which may occur thereunder development. "C. Improvements. The improvements set forth in Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. The standards maybe varied by special review (see chapter 26430 if the following conditions have been met): 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The existing neighboring developed areas and /or the goals of the community. " REPONSE: No variance is requested. Each of the subject lots meets the underlying R -6 zoning and is of the same configuration of all other lots in the original townsite. -2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variance requested, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. " RESPONSE: The Applicant is not asking for any variations. "D. Affordable Housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements chapter 26.520, Replacement housing program a subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of chapter 26470, Growth Management Quota System. " RESPONSE: As noted on the Lot Split Plat the applicant understands the requirement of affordable housing mitigation upon the development of Lot A of the Lot Split at time of building permit. "E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. " RESPONSE: The applicant believes that the provisions of the School Land Dedication requirements are inapplicable to Lot Splits. "F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision Approval granted only to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or subdivision exemptions have been C:\LMO Data & Forms\Data\ClientsTrumder Tmst \Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc obtained pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a Parcel(s) zoned affordable housingplanned unit development (AH -PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals of the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney (Ord. No. 44 -1021, Section 2). " RESPONSE: The applicant believes that GMQS exemption is provided is in the Lot Split provisions of the Code under which the application has been filed. You have asked that we address the Code provision contained at 26.480(A)(4)c, which states that a lot split may not be granted for previously subdivided parcels. We believe the intent of this provision is to say that a property owner may not further subdivide a previously split lot so as to create additional density. The subject Brumder property will not have been previously split if the present historic lot split is vacated. The purpose of the limitation is to prevent increase in the density by further subdivision of properties previously lot split. This is not the case with the present application as there is the same density with the requested lot split as with the historic lot split. With the vacation of the historic lot split plat the lots just go back to original townsite lots. If you should be in need of any further supplementation of the application please feel free to contact me. This letter shall be deemed to supplement the application and materials earlier provided. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. By� n )t-� Leonard M. Cate , a orn y or the William G. Brumder Florida L d Trust LMO/bab C:\LMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust \Ln to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc LEONARD M. OATES RICHARD A KNEZEVICH TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL JOI-INT KELLY MARIA MORROW LAW OFFICES OF DATES, KNEZEVICH Ss GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 E. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO. 81611 DRAFT October 27, 2005 Ben Gagnon, Staff Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Pending Application for Brumder Lot Split Dear Ben: TELEPHONE (970) 920 -1700 FACSIMILE (970) 920 -1121 IrnoCftkglaw cortl VIA HAND DELIVERED In connection with the above application we are transmitting herewith to you the revised Lot Split Plat for the requested subdivision exemption (20 copies) revised pursuant to our telephone conversation of October 25, 2005. In addition, in that letter you asked that we address the following: 26.480.050 C. "Plat vacation. Vacation of an approved plat or any other document recorded in conjunction with a plat shall be considered a plat amendment, and shall only be approved by the City Council if good cause is demonstrated. " RESPONSE: In response to this section it is the applicant's position that the original historic lot split approved pursuant to 26.480(A)(4) [this is the New Code citation], for which vacation is requested, was applied for, analyzed by staff and approved based upon a mutual mistake. Specifically, that mistake was the mistaken assumption that full size credit could not be given for the lots comprising it, even though located in the original Aspen Townsite, because they did not measure to a full 3,000 square feet per lot. However, the applicant has since learned that the City interprets all original townsite lots as being 3,000 square feet, even those which might measure slightly less. Many do measure less based on survey inaccuracies. Surveyors have customarily prorated these deficiencies over the entire block. This mistake would not have been made resulting in an historic lot split pursuant to the Land Use Code if it had been known that full advantage could be taken of the lot split procedures contained in 26.480(A)(2) allowing for a straight lot split at the time the historic lot split was done because in terms of available floor area the historic lot split allows less floor area than a non - historic C: \LMO Data & Fonns\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust \Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc lot split. Historic lot splits are utilized in circumstances where the two lots or one of the two lots created do meet the minimum size requirements of the underlying zone district. This we believe constitutes good cause for vacation of the plat. In addition, the land use authority needs to know that other than a small remodel resulting additional square footage to the historic structure on Lot B of the historic lot split there has been no development on Lot A of the historic lot split whatsoever. You have asked that I respond to 26.480.050 of the Code. This Code Provision addresses Review Standards for subdivision applications (including subdivision exemptions): 26.480.050 "Review Standards. A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: A. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen area comprehensive plan. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is for residential development to be located with the R -6 Zone District of the City of Aspen and is consistent with the Aspen area comprehensive plan. "b. The proposed shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the neighborhood. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is for residential purposes all other properties within the zone district and neighborhood are generally residential in nature or institutional as in the case of the Community Church, Red and Yellow Brick Schools and the Given Institute. "c. The proposes subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding areas. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is consistent with other uses and scale within the building will not adversely effect the future development of surrounding areas. Adjacent areas in close proximity which are zoned for higher intensity use would have a far more dramatic effect on the surrounding areas. etseq "d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. " RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision does not vary from the applicable requirements of 26.480.010, "B. Suitability of land for subdivision. a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the proposed subdivision. " C: \LMO Data & Forms\Data\C1ients\Brumder Trust \Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc RESPONSE: The proposed subdivision is situate on substantially flat land within the original townsite of Aspen and is not subject to any of the hazards referenced in the above subsection a. 'A Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies duplication or premature extension ofpublic facilities and unnecessary public cost. RESPONSE: The subdivision will consist of the historic structure on Lot B as the same may be enlarged and potentially two separate dwelling units on Lot A as is permitted by provisions of the Land Use Code. There is no spatial inefficiency or duplication or premature extension of public facilities or unnecessary public costs associated with this application or any approval which may occur thereunder development. "C. Improvements. The improvements set forth in Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. The standards maybe varied by special review (see chapter 26.430 if the following conditions have been met): 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The existing neighboring developed areas and /or the goals of the community. " REPONSE: No variance is requested. Each of the subject lots meets the underlying R -6 zoning and is of the same configuration of all other lots in the original townsite. -2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variance requested, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. " RESPONSE: The Applicant is not asking for any variations. "D. Affordable Housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements chapter 26.520, Replacement housing program a subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System." RESPONSE: As noted on the Lot Split Plat the applicant understands the requirement of affordable housing mitigation upon the development of Lot A of the Lot Split at time of building permit. "E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26630. " RESPONSE: The applicant believes that the provisions of the School Land Dedication requirements are inapplicable to Lot Splits. "F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision Approval granted only to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or subdivision exemptions have been CALMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust\Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doc obtained pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a Parcel(s) zoned affordable housing planned unit development (AH -PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals of the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney (Ord. No. 44 -1021, Section 2). " RESPONSE: The applicant believes that GMQS exemption is provided is in the Lot Split provisions of the Code under which the application has been filed. You have asked that we address the Code provision contained at 26.480(A)(4)c, which states that a lot split may not be granted for previously subdivided parcels. We believe the intent of this provision is to say that a property owner may not further subdivide a previously split lot so as to create additional density. The subject Brumder property will not have been previously split if the present historic lot split is vacated. The purpose of the limitation is to prevent increase in the density by further subdivision of properties previously lot split. This is not the case with the present application as there is the same density with the requested lot split as with the historic lot split. With the vacation of the historic lot split plat the lots just go back to original townsite lots. If you should be in need of any further supplementation of the application please feel free to contact me. This letter shall be deemed to supplement the application and materials earlier provided. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. M LMO/bab Leonard M. Oates, attorney for the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust C: \LMO Data & Forms\Data \Chents\Brumder Trust \Ltr to Gagnon 10.27.05.doe LEONARD M. OATES RICHARD A KNEZEVICH TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL. JOHN T. KELLY MARIA MORROW LAW OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533E. HOPKMSAVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO, 81611 September 13, 2005 James Lindt, Senior Planner City of Aspen, Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 TELEPHONE (970) 920 -1700 FACSIMILE (970) 920 -1121 IMD@okglaw. mm VIA HAND DELIVERY Re: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust Request for Plat Vacation, GMQS Exemption — Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption — Lot Split Dear James: i AA C 0. \Z We are delivering herewith the applic ton (with attachment) and authorization for Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. to act for the Will . Brumder Florida Land Trust ( "Applicant ") Application as outlined in the pre - application conferences which you submitted to me on this matter. By way of further explanation we are requesting f the Brumder Historic Lot Split approved in 1998, the plat for which is recorded in Book 48 at Page 57. The Brumder Historic Lot Split was approved by Ordinance No. 29 Series of 1998. At the time the Historic Lot Split was done the Application was filed and processed by a local designer or architect. To the best of our knowledge there was no legal counsel involved at that time. The Brumder Historic Lot Split was applied for and processed on the assumption that because the survey measured area within the Brumder property consisting of Lots N, O, P & Q, Block 72, City and Townsite of Aspen (original townsite) was less than 12,000 square feet that the only way to obtain a lot split was to proceed with an historic lot split. There is no other reason an historic lot split would have been done. Pursuant to the Brumder Historic Lot Split FARs were allocated for simplicity at 2319 square feet for each of the two lots (Lot A and Lot B) created from the lot split, inclusive of potential bonuses. All City and Townsite Lots within the original Aspen Townsite were platted at 30 x 100 square feet, i.e. 3,000 square feet per lot. Because of the imprecise nature of surveying in the late 1800s when the Townsite was laid out some blocks are longer than others. This is dealt with by the surveyors by prorating any gain or loss as against all of the lots in the block. As a consequence in the case of the four Brumder lots the measured square footage of the lots prorated is 11,963 square feet. C: \LMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust\Ltr to Lindt 9.6.05.doc Subsequent to the Brumder Historic Lot Split we were engaged to assist the Brumder Family in connection with this matter. It seemed inappropriate that by luck of the draw (for lack of a better analogy), that the Brumders should be penalized by the difference between the record 12,000 square feet in their property and the actual measured 11,963 square feet as prorated. The result of the difference is that based upon the smaller measurement they would be only entitled to do an historic lot split and by having the benefit of the record square footage within the block would be entitled to do a straight lot split. With an historic lot split they are penalized in terms of the developable square footage on each of the resulting parcels. In the case of a straight lot split they may apply the square footage for the zone district to each of the resulting parcels. The difference is significant. The property is located within the R -6 Zone District requiring a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. Therefore, they would have two development lots; each conforming in size. Upon inquiry to City Attorney John Worcester, I was advised that he recognized and understood that there were discrepancies within the original City and Townsite, but that the City had historically treated full city lots in the original Aspen Townsite as being 3,000 square feet, regardless of minor shortages or overages such as is the case with the Brumder property. Based upon my conversation with you we held a pre - application conference with Community Development which results in the existing application. Essentially, the argument is that the Brumder Historic Lot Split was done in mistake. We think that the mistake was mutual in that it was processed by the City did not give recognition to the right to treat prorated lots as being 3,000 square feet. We assert that it would be an injustice to the Brumder Family, which has owned the property since 1948, to not permit them to avail themselves of a lot split based upon an aggregate ownership of 12,000 square feet when such right is available to any other property owner within the R -6 Zone District owning an aggregate of 12,000 square feet. While we cannot state with certainty what happened, there would have been no reason whatsoever for the Brumder interests to divide the property by historic lot split when a more beneficial result in terms of available FAR was available to them. If there is any supplementation or clarification which you need in connection with the application or this letter please feel free to contact me. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. By Leonard M. Oates Encl. LMO/bab C:\LMO Data & Forms\Data \Clients\Brumder Trust\Ltr to Lindt 9.6.05.doc CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET THE CITY OF ASPEN Attached is an Application for review of Development that requires Land Use Review pursuant to the City of Aspen Land Use Code. •Included in this package are the following attachments: Development Application Fee Policy, Fee Schedule and Agreement for Payment Form 2. Land Use Application Form 3. Dimensional Requirements Form 4. Matrix of Land Use Application Requirements/Submittal Requirements Key General Summary of Your Application Process 6. Public Hearing Notice Requirements 7. Affidavit of Notice All applications are reviewed based on the criteria established in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code. Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code is available at the City Clerk's Office on the second floor of City Hall and on the internet at www.bpcnet.com/codes/asi)en under Title 26. We strongly encourage all applicants to hold a pre - application conference with a Planner in the Community Development Department so that the requirements for submitting a complete application can be fully described. Also, depending upon the complexity of the development proposed, submitting one copy of the development application to the Case Planner to determine accuracy, insufficiencies, or redundancies can reduce the overall cost of materials and Staff time. Please recognize that review of these materials does not substitute for a complete review of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. While this application package attempts to summarize the key provisions of the Code as they apply to your type of development, it cannot possibly replicate the detail or the scope of the Code. If you have questions which are not answered by the materials in this package, we suggest that you contact the staff member assigned to your case or consult the applicable sections of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. %k-,e ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF ASPEN DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEE POLICY The City of Aspen, pursuant to Ordinance 57 (Series of 2000), has established a fee structure for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. Referral fees for other City departments reviewing the application will also be collected when necessary. One check including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required application fee. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for Administrative Approvals which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. The fee is not refundable. A deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required, as hours are likely to vary substantially from one application to another. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Several different staff members may charge their time spent on the case in addition to the case planner. Staff time is logged to the case and staff can provide a summary report of hours spent at the applicant's request. After the deposit has been expended, the applicant will be billed monthly based on actual staff hours. Applicants may accrue and be billed additional expenses for a planner's time spent on the case following any hearing or approvals, up until the applicant applies for a building permit. Current billings must be paid within 30 days or processing of the application will be suspended. If an applicant has previously failed to pay application fees as required, no new or additional applications will be accepted for processing until the outstanding fees are paid. In no case will Building Permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. When the case planner determines that the case is completed (whether approved or not approved), the case is considered closed and any remaining balance from the deposit will be refunded to the applicant. Applications which require a deposit must include an Agreement for Payment of Development Application Fees. The Agreement establishes the applicant as being responsible for payment of all costs associated with processing the application. The Agreement must be signed by the party responsible for payment and submitted with the application and fee in order for a land use case to be opened. The current complete fee schedule for land use applications is listed on the next page. ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2005 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES CATEGORY HOURS DEPOSIT FLAT FEE Major 12 2,640.00 Minor 6 1,320.00 Staff Approvals 660.00 Flat Fee 546.00 Board of Adjustment 250.00 Exempt HPC 00.00 Certificate of No Negative Effect 220.00 Minor HPC 660.00 Significant HPC <1000 sq. ft. 1320.00 Significant HPC >1000 sq. ft. 2640.00 Demolition, Partial Demolition, Relocation 2640.00 Certificate of Appropriateness (Amendment) 660.00 Appeals 660.00 Referral Fees - Environmental Health 365.00 Referral Fees - Housing Major 365.00 Minor 190.00 Referral Fees - City Engineer Major 365.00 Minor 190.00 Hourly Rate 220.00 ATTACHMENT 4 MATRIX OF LAND USE APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS For application requirements, refer to the numbers in the in second column. These numbers correspond to the key on page 9. For multiple reviews, do not duplicate information. All application materials must be complete and submitted in collated packets. Type of Review App. Submission Requirements See ke on a e 9. Process Type (See Process Description in Att.S ) Number of Required Submittal Packets 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW 1 -7 8-10,35 P &Z 10 8040 GREENLiNE EXEMPTION 1 -7 8 -10 35 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW 2 STREAM MARGIN REVIEW 1 -7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 35 P & Z OR ADMINISTRATIVE Based on Location) 2 for 0 Admin., 10 for P &Z STREAM MARGIN EXEMPTION 1-7,8,10,11, 12 35 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW 2 1IALI.AMLAKE BLUFF REVIEW 1 -7 13 14 35 P &Z 10 MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE 1-7,15,16,35 P & Z 10 CONDITIONAL USE 1 -7 9 17 P & Z 10 SPECIAL REVIEW- 1 -7, Addinosal submission Req. depend on name. of the S etid Review R. ,..t. P &Z 10 SUBDIVISION 1 -7 18 19 20 21 35 P & Z, AND CITY COUNCIL 20 EXEMPrSUBDIVISION 1 -7 18 19 20 21 35 CITY COUNCIL 10 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 1 -7 22 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW 2 LOT SPLIT 1 -7 22 CITY COUNCIL 10 CODE AMENDMENT 1-4,7,23 P & Z, AND CM COUNCIL 20 WIRELESS TELECOM. 1-7,16-, 24 25 26 2-7,35 ADMIN.OR P & Z 2 for Admin., 10 for P & Z SATELITE DISH OVER 24^ IN DIAMETER 1 -7 ADMIN. OR P & Z 2 for Admin., 10 for P & Z RES. DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCE 1 -7, 9, 28, 29, 30 P & Z OR DRAC 10 GMQS EXEMPTION- 1 -7, Additional Submimon Req. depend on nature of the Exemption Request ADMIN., OR P & Z, AND(OR CC (BASED ON EXEMPTION TYPE 2 for Admin., 10 for P & Z, 20 for P & Z and CC CONDOMJNIIIMIZATION 1,31 ADMINISTRATJE 2 PUT) 1-7,32, 33,35 CONCEPTUAL —P & Z, AND CC FINAL —P & AND CC 20 for P & Z and CC (Submit Separately for Final PUD Review) LODGE PRESERVATION PUD 1 1-7,35 P &Z,ANDCC 20 PUD AMENDMENT 1 -7 ADMIN., OR P & Z, AND/OR CC 2 for Admin., 10 for P & Z, 20 for P (BASED ON AMENDMENT TYPE &Zand CC SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA 1-7,35 CONCEPTUAL — P & Z, AND CC 20 for P & Z and CC (Submit SPA MAI,P& AND CC Separately for Final SPA) AMENDMENT TO SPA 1 -7 ADMIN., OR P & ZAND CC 2 for Admin., 20 for P & Z and CC (BASED ON SIGNIFICANCE OF AMENDMENT TEMPORARY USE 1 -7 ADMIN. OR CC (BASED ON 2 for Admin., 10 for City Council DURATION TIME ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT 1-7,9 ADMIN OR P &Z(BASED ON IF 2 for Administrative Review THE PROPOSAL MEETS REVIEW STANDARDS REZONING 1 -7 P &ZANDCC 20 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS 1-7,34 BOARD OF AD2USTMENT 9 VARIANCE * Consult with a Planner about submittal requirements. ** A pre- application conference with a Planner should be conducted prior to submitting any land use application. Please call 920 -5090 to schedule a pre - application conference. ATTACHMENT 4 -GUN 1'U- 5U13MI I I AL KEY I. Land Use Application with Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 2. The street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur. 1 A disclosure of ownership of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, wntracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. An 8 12" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 5. A site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the State of Colorado. (This requirement, or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not to warrant a survey document.) 6. A site plan depicting the layout and the project's relationship to the land surroundings. 12. Accurate elevations (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor, including basement, of all new or substantially improved structures; a verification and recordation of the actual elevation in relation to mean sea level to which any structure is constructed; a demonstration that all new construction or substantial improvements will be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of any structure to be constructed or improved; a demonstration that the structure will have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to at Icie t two (2) feet above the base flood elevation, all as certified by a registered professional engineer or architect. 13. A landscape plan that includes native vegetative screening of no less than fifty (50) percent of the development as viewed from the rear (slope) of the parcel. All vegetative screening shall be maintained in perpetuity and shall be replaced with the same at comparable material should it die. 14. Site sections drawn by a registered architect, landscape architect, or engineer shall be submitted showing all existing and proposed site elements, the top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea level. 15. Proposed elevations of the development, including any rooftop equipment and how it will be screened. proposed 16. Proposed elevations of the physical development, including any rooftop and it's equipment and how it will be screened. 7. — A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 8. Plan with Existing and proposed grades at twodcot contours, with five -fcot intervals for grades over ten (10) percent. 9. Proposed elevations of the development 10. A description of proposed construction techniques to be used. H. A Plan with the 100 -year floodplain line and die high water line. 17. A sketch plan of the site showing existing and proposed features which are relevant to the review. 18. One (1) inch equals four hundred (400) feet scale city map showing the location of the proposed subdivision, all adjacent lands owned by or under option to the applicant, commonly known landmarks, and the zone district in which the proposed subdivision and adjacent properties are located. 19. A plat which reflects the layout of the lots, blocks and structures in the proposed subdivision. The plat shall be drawn at a scale of one (1) equals one hundred (100) feet or larger. Architectural scales are not acceptable. Sheet sin shall be twenty -four (24) inches by thirty -six (36) inches. If it is necessary to place the plat on more than a one (1) sliect, an index shall be included on the first sheet. A vicinity map shall also appear on the first sheet showing the subdivision as it relates to the rest of the city and the street system in the area of the proposed subdivision. The contents of the plat shall be of sufficient detail to determine whether the proposed subdivision will mect the design standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.060(9).20. Subdivision GIS Data 21. A landscape plan showing location, sin, and type of proposed landscape features. 22. A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this title indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. 23. The precise wording of any proposed amendment. 24. Site Plan or plans drawn to a scale of one (I ") inch equals ten (10') feet or one (I ") inch equals twenty (20') feet, including before and "after" photographs (simulations) specifying the location of antennas, support structures, transmission buildings and/or other accessory uses. access, parking, fences, signs, lighting, landscaped areas and all adjacent land uses within one - hundred fifty (150') fact. Such plans and drawings should demonstrate compliance with the Review Standards of this Section. 25. FAA and FCC Coordination. Statements regarding the regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). 26. Structural Integrity Report from a professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado. 27. Evidence that an effort was made to locate on an existing wireless telecommunication services facility site including coverage interterencc analysis and capacity analysis and a brief statement u to other reasons for success or no success. 28. Neighborhood block plan at 1" -50' (available from City Engineering Department) Graphically show the front portions of all existing buildings on both sides of the block and their setback from the street in feet. Identify parking and front entry for each building and locate any accessory dwelling units along the alley. (Continued on next page.) eW Indicate whether any portions of the 35. Exterior Lighting Plan. Show the houses immediately adjacent to the location, height, type and luminous subject parcel are one story (only one intensity of each above grade fixture. living level). Estimate the site illumination as measured in foot candles and include minimum, 29. Roof Plan. maximum, and average illumination. Additionally, provide comparable 30. Photographic panorama. Show examples already in the community that - elevations of all buildings on both sides of demonstrate technique, specification, and/ the block, including present condition of or light level if they exist. the subject property. Label photos and mount on a presentation board 31. A condominium subdivision exemption plat drawn with permanent ink on repradueible mylar. Sheet sin shall be twenty-four (24) inches by thirty -six (36) inches with an unencumbered margin of one and one -half (1 12) inches on the left hand side of the sheet and a one- half(12) inch margin around the other three (3) sides of the sheet pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26480.090. 32. A description and site plan of the proposed development including a statement of the objectives to be achieved by the PUD and adescription of the proposed land uses, densities, natural features. tragic and pedestrian circulation, off -street parking, open space areas, infrastructure improvements, and site drainage 33. An architectural character plan generally indicating the use, massing, scale, and orientation of the proposed buildings. 34. A written description of the variance being requested. ATTACHMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE 1. Attend pre - application conference. During this one -on -one meeting, staff will determine the review process which applies to your development proposal and will identify the materials necessary to review your application. 2. Submit Development Application. Based on your pre - application meeting, you should respond to the application package and submit the requested number of copies of the complete application and the appropriate processing fee to the Community Development Department. 3. Determination of Completeness. Within five working days of the date of your submission, staff will review the application, and will notify you in writing whether the application is complete or if additional materials are required. Please be aware that the purpose of the completeness review is to determine whether or not the information you have submitted is adequate to review the request, and not whether the information is sufficient to obtain approval. 4. Staff Review of Development Application. Once your application is detennined to be complete, it will be reviewed by the staff for compliance with the applicable standards of the Code. During the staff review stage, the application will be referred to other agencies for comments. The Planner assigned to your case or the agency may contact you if additional information is needed or if problems are identified. A memo will be written by the staff member for signature by the Community Development Director. The memo will explain whether your application complies with the Code and will list any conditions which should apply if the application is to be approved. Final approval of any Development Application which amends a recorded document, such as a plat, agreement or deed restriction, will require the applicant to prepare an amended version of that document for review and approval by staff. Staff will provide the applicant with the applicable contents for the revised plat, while the City Attorney is normally in charge of the form for recorded agreements and deed restrictions. We . suggest that you not go to the trouble or expense of preparing these documents until the staff has determined that your application is eligible for the requested amendment or exemption. 5. Board Review of Application. If a public hearing is required for the land use action that you are requesting, then the Planning Staff will schedule a hearing date for the application upon determination that the Application is complete. The hearing(s) will be scheduled before the appropriate reviewing board(s). The Applicant will be required to mail notice (one copy provided by the Community Development Department) to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property and post notice (sign available at the Community Development Department) of the public hearing on the site at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date (please see Attachment 6 for instructions). The Planning Staff will publish notice of the hearing in the paper for land use requests that require publication. The Planning Staff will then formulate a recommendation on the land use request and draft a memo to the reviewing board(s). Staff will supply the Applicant with a copy of the Planning Staff's memo approximately 5 days prior to the hearing. The public hearing(s) will take place before the appropriate review boards. Public Hearings include a presentation by the Planning Staff, a presentation by the Applicant (optional), consideration of public comment, and the reviewing board's questions and decision. 6. Issuance of Development Order. If the land use review is approved, then the Planning Staff will issue a Development Order which allows the Applicant to proceed into Building Permit Application. 7. Receipt of Building Permit. Once you have received a copy of the signed staff approval, you may proceed to building permit review. During this time, your project will be examined for its compliance with the Uniform Building Code. It will also be checked for compliance with applicable provisions of the Land Use Regulations which were not reviewed in detail during the one step review (this might include a check of floor area ratios, setbacks, parking, open space and the like). Fees for water, sewer, parks and employee housing will be collected if due. Any document required to be recorded, such as a plat, deed restriction or agreement, Aril] need to be reviewed and recorded before a Building Permit is submitted. CM ATTACHMENT PUBLIC HEARING NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Three forms of notice are required by the Aspen Land Use Regulations: publication in the newspaper, posting of the property, and mailing to surrounding landowners. Following is a summary of the notice requirements, including identification of who is responsible for completing the notice. 1. Publication - Publication of notice in a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen is to be done at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. The legal notice will be written by the Community Development Department and we will place the notice in the paper within the appropriate deadline. 2. Posting - Posting of a sign in a conspicuous place on the property is to be done fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. It is the applicant's responsibility to obtain a copy of the sign from the Community Development Department, to fill it in correctly and to bring proof to the hearing that posting took place {use attached affidavit). 3. Mailing - Mailing of notice is to be made to all owners of property within 300 feet of the subject development parcel by the applicant. It is the applicant's responsibility to obtain a copy of the notice from the Community Development Department, to mail it according to the following standards, and to bring proof to the hearing that the mailing took place (use attached affidavit). Notice to mineral Estate Owner., An Applicant for surface Development shall notify affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (3 0) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application for development. The applicant shall certify that the notice has been provided to the mineral estate owners. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of public hearing. w � s ATTACHMENT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 200 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that 1 have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of , 200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) e, r Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other, sufficient legal description of and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection'in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this day of , 200_, by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL ATTACHMENT 2 —LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust Location: street Parcel ID # REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Leonard M Oates Oates Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C. Address: 533 E. Hopkins Ave., Aspen, CO 61611 970 - 920 -1700 PROJECT: Name: Brumder Lot Split Address: 21.4E Bleaker Aspen CO 61611 Phone #: 970- 920 -1700 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt. ❑ Special Review ❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Development ❑ Design Review Appeal ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ Minor Historic Devt. ❑ GMQS Allotment ❑ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ❑ Historic Demolition ❑x GMQS Exemption ❑ Subdivision ❑ . Historic Designation ❑ ESA — 8040 Greenlnte, Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane x❑ Lot Split ❑ Temporary Use Other: Plat Valuation ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc. 4 City & Townsite Lots previously subdivided by an historic lot split improved with a historic structureon two of the lots. The other two are occupied by a swimming pool. PROPOSAL: (description of Historic structure to be retained: each lot developed by underlying R -6 zoning. See attache letter explanation of application Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: S 1510 x❑ Pre - Application Conference Summary Q Attachment #1, Signed Fee,Agreement ❑ Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form ❑ Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans that are larger than 8.5" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD September 8, 2005 VIA HAND DELIVERY City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust Request for Plat Vacation, GMQS Exemption — Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption — Lot Split To Whom It May Concern: This letter will constitute the authorization by me as Trustee of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust for Leonard M. Oates and any member of Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. to act as my representative in filing and processing an application as specified in the caption hereof. Very T //ruly Yours2 By W - Thomas Fitzgerald, Trustee of the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for (hereinafter, THE PROJECT)and GMQS Review for a Lot Split 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 38 (Series of 2004) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly - basis. APPLICANT agrees additional . costs may accrue following their hearings and /or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and /or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ 1510 which is for 6 hours. of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit,. APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $210.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN By: Chris Bendon Community Development Director g:\support\farmsNagrpayas.doc 12/16/04 APPLICANT William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust By 44, .* a sga Thomas B. Fitzgerald, T stee Date: Mailing Address: Go Leonard M. Oates Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C. 533 E. Hopkins Ave., 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 816111 RETAIN FOR PERIAWNT RECORD ATTACHMENT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: Brumder Lot Split Applicant: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust Location: 214 E. Bleeker Zone District: R -6 Lot Size: 12,000 sq feet record Lot Area: 12,000 sq. feet (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: Proposed: Number of residential units: Existing. 1 Proposed: Number of bedrooms: Existing: Proposed: Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): 0 DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: 2200 +/- Allowable: 4640 +/- Proposed: 6900 Principal bldg. height: Existing: -*Allowable: ' Proposed. " Access. bldg. height: Existing: ' Allowable: ' Proposed.• ' On -Site parking: Existing: -*Required.' " Proposed. ' % Site coverage: Existing: ' Required: -*Proposed: " % Open Space: Existing: -*Required., " Proposed. " Front Setback: Existing: _*Required.- ' Proposed. " Rear Setback: Existing: _*Required., -*Proposed., ' Combined F/R: Existing: -*Required: " Proposed: ' Side Setback: Existing: -*Required.- -*Proposed: ' Side Setback: Existing: -*Required.- " Proposed. ' Combined Sides: Existing: -*Required: ' Proposed. ' Distance Between Existing Required: " Proposed:= Buildings 'Per R -6 Zoning Existing non - conformities or encroachments: alley encroachment of historic shed & minor fence encroachments Variations requested: ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance Fidelity National Title Insurance Company AUTHORIZED AGENT: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS AVE. 310FLOOR ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970 - 925 - 1766 -PHONE 970 -925- 6527 -FAX 877 - 217 - 3158 -TOLL FREE E -MAIL ADDRESS: TITLE MATTERS: CLOSING MATTERS: Vince Higens- vince@sopris.net TJ Davis- qd @sopris.net Priscilla Prohl- priscilla @sopris.net Joy Higens - joy @sopris.net Brandi Jepson- brandi @sopris.net (Closing & Title Assistance) FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Fidelily Nallanal Title hwumn" Ca111ilany' INII \in KWTNYIAvem'.S.a 300 lnii,t A 91613.5233 0 Commitment for Title Insurance Fidelity National Title Insurance Company A Stock Company COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE FIDELPTYNATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, herein called the Company, for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedule A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate within six (6) months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Fidelity National Title Insurance Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed and these presents to be signed in facsimile under authority of its by -laws on the date shown in Schedule A. FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY By- rlrrlfLl ATTEST Pmsident Sscretary Countersigned: Authorized Signature FORM 27- 083 -66 (10/03) ALTA COMMITMENT -1966 CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS 1. The term "mortgage ", when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed or other security instrument. 2. If the Proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the Proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien or encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named Proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and Stipulations and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the Proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the Proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of die status of the title to the estate or interest or (he status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: September 12, 2005 at 8:00 AM 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owners Policy -Form 1992 Proposed Insured: (b) ALTA Loan Policy -Form 1992 Proposed Insured: (c) ALTA Loan Policy -Form 1992 Proposed Insured: Case No. PCT20100PRO Amount$ 0.00 Premium$ 0.00 Rate: Amount$ 0.00 Premium$ 0.00 Rate: Amount$ Premium$ Rate: Tax Certificate: $ 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: THE TRUSTEE OF THE WILLIAM G. BRUMDER FLORIDA LAND TRUST CREATED BY AGREEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1967 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: LOTS A AND B, BRUMDER HISTORIC LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT, according to the Plat thereof recorded January 26, 1999 in Plat Book 48 at Page 37 as Reception No. 426944. PrrKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Schedule A -PG.1 601 E. HOPK NS, ASPEN, CO. 81611 This Commitment is invalid 970 - 925 -1766 Phone /970 - 925.6527 Fax unless the Insuring 877 - 2173158 ToE Free Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to -wit: THIS COMMITMENT IS FURNISHED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, IT IS NOT A CONTRACT TO ISSUE TITLE INSURANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH. IN THE EVENT A PROPOSED INSURED IS NAMED THE COMPANY HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND /OR EXCEPTIONS AS DEEMED NECESSARY. THE RECIPIENT OF THIS INFORMATIONAL REPORT HEREBY AGREES THAT THE COMPANY HAS ISSUED THIS REPORT BY THEIR REQUEST AND ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS ACCURATE AND CORRECT, THE COMPANY SHALL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD THAT PROVE TO BE INCORRECT AND THE COMPANY IS NOT OBLIGATED TO ISSUE ANY POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE. SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 190 and 521 providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws ". 8. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of subject property recorded January 26, 1999 in Plat Book 48 at Page 37. 9. Deed of Trust from :THOMAS B. FITZGERALD, TRUSTEE OF THE WILLIAM G. BRUMDER FLORIDA LAND TRUST CREATED BY AGREEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1967 To the Public Trustee of the County of PITKIN For the use of : US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION Original Amount : $650,000.00 Dated : September 6, 2002 Recorded : October 9, 2002 Reception No. :473190 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DISCLOSURES The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B- Section 1. (2) Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS EXCEPTION WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED HEREUNDER) Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89 -2 NOTE: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospective insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family residence (including a condominium or townhouse unit) (i) of that title entitys general requirements for the deletion of an exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics or materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialmen's Liens executed by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon request, Pre - printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the Owner's policy when issued. Please contact the Company for further information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or materialmens lien coverage. NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners or loan closing under circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage ". Pursuant to Senate Bill 91 -14 (CRS 10 -11 -122) (a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing District; (b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent; (c) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: A tax Certificate will be ordered from the County Treasurer by the Company and the costs thereof charged to the proposed insured unless written instruction to the contrary are received by the company prior to the issuance of the Title Policy anticipated by this Commitment. Pursuant to House Bill 01 -1088 (CRS 10 -11 -123) If Schedule B of your commitment for an Owner's Title Policy reflects an exception for mineral interests or leases, pursuant to CRS 10 -11 -123 (HB 01- 1088), this is to advise: (a) There there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals or geothermal energy in the property and (b) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owners' permission. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B- Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT20100PRO A and B are attached. Pitkin County Title, Inc. Privacy Policy We collect nonpublic information about you from the following sources: • Information we receive from you, such as your name, address, telephone number, or social security number; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliates, or others. We receive this information from your lender, attorney, real estate broker, etc.; and Information from public records We do not disclose any nonpublic personal information about our customers or former customers to anyone, except as permitted by law. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information to provide the products or services requested by you or your lender. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that company with appropriate federal and state regulations. Fidelity National Financial Group of Companies' Privacy Statement July 1, 2001 We recognize and respect the privacy expectations of today's consumers and the requirements of applicable federal and state privacy laws. We believe that making you aware of how we use your non - public personal information ( "Personal Information "), and to whom it is disclosed, will form the basis for a relationship of trust between us and the public that we serve. This Privacy Statement provides that explanation. We reserve the right to change this Privacy Statement from time to time consistent with applicable privacy laws. In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: • From applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative; • From your transactions with, or from the services being performed by, us, our affiliates, or others; • From our internet web sites; • From the public records maintained by governmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities, or from our affiliates or others; and • From consumer or other reporting agencies. Our Policies Regarding the Protection of the Confidentiality and Security of Your Personal Information We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. We limit access to the Personal Information only to those employees who need such access in connection with providing products or services to you or for other legitimate business purposes. Our Policies and Practices Regarding the Sharing of Your Personal Information We may share your Personal Information with our affiliates, such as insurance companies, agents, and other real estate settlement service providers. We also may disclose your Personal Information: • to agents, brokers or representatives to provide you with services you have requested; • to third -party contractors or service providers who provide services or perform marketing or other functions on our behalf; and • to others with whom we enter into joint marketing agreements for products or services that we believe you may find of interest. In addition, we will disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission, when we are required by law to do so, or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. One of the important responsibilities of some of our affiliated companies is to record documents in the public domain. Such documents may contain your Personal Information. Right to Access Your Personal Information and Ability To Correct Errors Or Request Changes Or Deletion Certain states afford you the right to access your Personal Information and, under certain circumstances, to find out to whom your Personal Information has been disclosed. Also, certain states afford you the right to request correction, amendment or deletion of your Personal Information. We reserve the right, where permitted by law, to charge a reasonable fee to cover the costs incurred in responding to such requests. All requests must be made in writing to the following address: Privacy Compliance Officer Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 4050 Calle Real, Suite 220 Santa Barbara, CA 93110 Multiple Products or Services If we provide you with more than one financial product or service, you may receive more than one privacy notice from us. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you. (J rb,l,, J I3 - 1 File Edit Record Navigate Form Reports Format Tab Help Module Help Conditions Sub Permits Valuation Public Comment Customer Reguesl Attachments Main Routing Status ArcWEng Parcels Custom Fields Fees Fee Summary Actions Routing History Permit Type ® Permit# 0077.2005ASLU Address 214 E BLEEKER ST Apt /Suite City ASPEN State CO Zip 61611 Permit Information Master Permit Routing Queue aslu Applied 05/30/2005 Project Status pending Approved Description HISTORIC LOT SPLIT Issued Final Submitted LENNYOATES970- 9204700 Clock Running Days 0 Expires 09/25/2006 Owner Last Name BRUMDER FLORIDA LAN First Name WILLIAM Phone f 1 v Owner is Applicant? Applicant Last Name BRUMDER FLORIDA LAN First Name WILLIAM Phone ( ) Cost # 26415 Lender I ast Nerve First Name Enter the permit type code 250 E WISCONSIN AVE #800 MILWAUKEE W153202 250 E WISCONSIN AVE #800 .MILWAUKEE WI 53202 Record: 2 of 2