Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Land Use Case.814 W Bleeker St.A61-90
MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Drueding, Zoning Enforcement Officer FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner RE: Aspen Villas s: 2St alPUD Amendment for the Addition of Trash /Storage Shed and Enclosure of Decks DATE: November 11, 1992 SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of an insubstantial PUD amendment for a 330 s.f. shed and the enclosure of 26 decks (48 s.f. each, totaling 1,248 s.f.) for a net FAR increase of 1,578 s.f. The applicant has created one new parking space to replace one space lost to the shed, which was constructed in 1990 without a building permit. This Insubstantial PUD Amendment will allow the shed building permit to proceed and will also allow individual condo owners to process building permits for the deck enclosures on an individual basis. APPLICANT: The Aspen Villas Condominium Association, represented by Alex Topelson LOCATION: 814 W. Bleeker St. ZONING: RMF - PUD APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant requests approval to amend the Aspen Villas Condominium PUD Plan to allow 1,578 s.f. floor area expansion for the shed and deck enclosures and a 330 s.f. site coverage expansion associated with the shed. Please see Attachment "A" for the site plan and floorplans. STAFF COMMENTS: The shed was built without any valid approvals and was red - tagged by Zoning Official Bill Drueding in October of 1990. The Planning Office allowed the structure to have its exterior stucco finish applied before it became too cold to do so. This approval was granted with the full knowledge of the applicant that the PUD process might not approve the shed and the shed might have to be removed or relocated. Please see Attachment "B" for the communications regarding the exterior finish work. Staff was originally going to process the PUD amendment by Director approval utilizing the Insubstantial Amendment process when it became evident a parking space was lost adjacent to the shed. After the shed was built, the lot was re- striped and several spaces were reduced to where they no longer complied with the 8.5' minimum width required by code. This was discovered in April 1991, after the snow melted off of the parking lot. 1 �� by • I ' Since the number of parking spaces did not meet the code, staff scheduled the application before the Planning & Zoning Commission. The applicant requested tabling in order to develop an alternative parking arrangement. At that time, staff advised the applicant that another parking space would have to be identified on -site in order to maintain the 40 spaces approved with the original PUD Plan. If this was accomplished, the application could be processed as an insubstantial PUD amendment, approvable by the Planning Director rather than P &Z. In July 1992, the applicant obtained an encroachment license for 45 s.f. in the Sleeker St. r.o.w. which allows the 40th parking space to partially occupy the r.o.w. and the adjacent existing parking lot. Please refer to Attachment "C" for the encroachment license document and survey. On September 23, 1992, the applicant also submitted a revision to the original PUD amendment application to include the deck enclosure request. Please refer to Attachment Insubstantial PUD Amendment: The Planning Director may grant an amendment to an approved PUD Development Plan if an application successfully addresses the following review criteria: 1. A change in the use or character of the development. Response: The project remains a residential development. The 330 s.f. shed will allow customary storage of lawn and general maintenance equipment as well as recycling bins and mail boxes. 2. An increase by greater than three (3 %) percent in the overall coverage of structures on the land. Response: According to the application, total existing site coverage is 11,648 s.f. of residential structures. Three percent of this figure is 349 s.f. The site coverage increase caused by the shed is 330 s.f., which conforms to the 3% limit for insubstantial approval. The areas subject to the deck enclosures are already considered "site coverage" because they are underneath the second floor overhang. 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development, or the demand for public facilities. Response: No increases in trip generation are expected because of the proposed FAR expansions. Public facilities will not be affected by the proposal. 4. A reduction by greater than three (3 %) percent of the approved open space. 2 Response: The parking area which was removed because of the shed is not counted as open space for the property. The area approved for parking via the encroachment license was outside of the property line of the Villas and was thus not counted as open space for the site. The decks which are proposed for enclosure are not open space by code definition as they are not open from the ground skyward. 5. A reduction by greater than one (1 %) percent of the off - street parking and loading space. Response: The current RMF zone parking requirement based on these figures is one per bedroom, or 52 spaces. The complex is non- conforming for parking with 40 on -site spaces. There is no new generation of parking spaces with either the shed expansion or the deck enclosures. With the encroachment license in hand, the Villas are maintaining the 40 parking spaces as approved in the original PUD plan. The 48 s.f. added to each unit by enclosing the decks will expand the existing dining rooms and will not generate new parking requirements. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights -of -way for streets and easements. Response: As no new streets or easements are being proposed, this criterium does not apply. 7. An increase of greater than two (2 %) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. Response: This criterium does not apply. 8. An increase by greater than one (1 %) percent in the approved residential density of the proposed development. Response: No new dwelling units are included within this application. Other Information: Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Maximum FAR in the RMF zone is 1:1. The lot area is 81,300 s.f. The application states that the 26 units currently total approximately 25, 792 s.f. of FAR. The storage shed is 22' x 15' or 330 s.f. of FAR. The proposed 26 deck enclosures constitute additional FAR of 1,248 s.f. With the proposed The site's proposed FAR would be 27,370 s.f., well within the limits of the RMF zone district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning recommends approval of the Insubstantial PUD Amendment for the 330 s.f. utility shed and the enclosure of 26 existing decks per the application. The following 3 conditions shall apply to this approval: 1. An Amended Final Development PUD Plan shall be filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within 180 days of approval. The Plan shall indicate all structures, parking, and other site improvements. 2. Any revisions to the recorded development plan shall be processed through the Planning Office. I approve this Insubstantial PUD Amendment to the Aspen Villas for a 330 s.f. utility shed and 26 deck enclosures :t 48 s.f. ach with the conditions listed above. 2- e Moore, City Planning Director Date ATTACHMENTS: "A "- Site Plan and Shed Details "B "- 10/11/90 Letter From Staff Authorizing Exterior Completion "C "- Encroachment License and Survey "D "- 9/23/92 Letter and Drawings Requesting Deck Enclosures as Amendment to PUD Application jtkvj /Villas.insub.dirmemo 4 TOPELSON TOPELSON III ` SEP 2 3 199/ Sept. 23 1992 Kim Johnson City of Aspen Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen CO 81611 RE: Amendment to the insubstantial PUD amendment A61 -90 Dear Kim: The West Bleeker Place Homeowners Ass. (a.k.a. The Aspen Villas Homeowners Association) would like to enclose the existing overhang next to the dinning areas in each of the 26 units (see enclosed plan), the increase in area enclosed is 48 SF per unit, although no increase in Site coverage will happen. The existing SF per unit are as follows: basement 448 SF First floor 4 4 8 Second floor 544 Total 1,440 x 26 units 37,440 SF Add 48 x 26 " 1,248 Total 1,488 x 26 " 38,688 This enclosure will happen over the existing decks and under the existing bedrooms overhang allowing the neighbors to have a more usable dinning room. This letter forms a continuation of our current Aspen Villas PUD amendment file A61 -90 and I represent the Aspen Villas Association as a member of the Board a position I have held for the last 4 years. Thank you fo ur help and please do not hesitate in calling me for any clarific ion ) Sincer y ano. Alex • sels$ 5300 DTC Parkway, Suite 400 Englewood, Colorado 80111 (303) 770 -5599 - p 4 • 33 CASE]LD SUMMARY SHEET • City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED:10 /10/90 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. DATE COMPLETE: A61 -90 STAFF MEMBER: RJ PROJECT NAME: Aspen Villas Condominiums MffffMr. PUD Amendment004Lre tres5) Project Address: 814 West Sleeker Street. Aspen. Co Legal Address: APPLICANT: Aspen Villas Condominium Applicant Address: 814 West Sleeker St., Aspen. Co REPRESENTATIVE: Bonnie Murry f ow" Q k , • Representative Address /Phone: 814 West Bleeker, A pen, Co 925 -3116 (920 -1647) PAID: YESXXNO AMOUNT: $203.00 NO. OF COPIES RECEIVED: 3 TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: 2 STEP: P &Z Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: NO . VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO • n7 1 Planning Di.;,,. n • • ova k. Paid: 2/ :? Insubsk • t Exemption �GL Date: REFERRALS: City Attorney Mtn. Bell School District City Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn Nat Gas Housing Dir. Holy Cross State Hwy Dept(GW) Aspen Water Fire Marshal State Hwy Dept(GJ) City Electric Building Inspecto Envir. Hlth. Roaring Fork Other ;5O1‘3i4& Aspen Con.S.D. /� Energy Center DATE REFERRED: { 11 17191 INITIALS: FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: / /// e/ INITIAL: W w _ City Atty City Engineer _ Zoning _ Env. Health Housing Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: 0 .1 -1- - - .. - ..._ a- a _ _. - i 1 1 i i ___ _. d 1 1 %. -- 1 1 ...., 1 k -t- + , 1 9 +4- , 1- ame i i El ...... . . .,...4. , ._ 1- -_ i 1,„ ,, .., i J 1 . P C ' � ,__ 42 «,1 I II � . \\\---- W Z 1 i ij\Th IS ■ I , ■ d I i i v zoi WE ST SLEEKER PLACE ASPEN VILLAS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 814 W. SLEEKER ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 DECEMBER 29, 1990 KIM JOHNSON PLANNER ASPEN / PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, CO. 81611 RE: PUD AMENDMENT FOR STORAGE /RECYCLE /TRASH SHED THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE MAJORITY OF THE UNIT OWNERS ENDORSE THE APPLICATION FOR THE ABOVE AMENDMENT AS PRESENTED. THUS THE ASSOCIATION CONSENSUS BACKS THE APPLICATION AS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED. PLEASE PROCESS THIS AMENDMENT FOR APPROVAL. THANK YOU AND PLEASE ADVISE ME IF THERE IS ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU NEED AT THIS TIME. SINCERELY, ASP AS CONDOMIN i' ASSOCIATION / to e GARY R. ICHTE eLTER PRESIDE T YOU MAY CONTACT ME AT : 220 N. LARKIN JOLIET, ILLINOIS 60435 815 729 -4650 OR 814 W. BLEEKER B -1 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303 920 -2753 WE. THE UNDERSIGNED. DO HEREBY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ASPEN VILLAS REVIEW THE PLANS FOR THE SUITABILITY OF THE STRUCTURE FOR THE MAILBOXES, TRASH /RECYCLING, AND MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT. IT IS OUR OPINION THAT THIS STRUCTURE SEVERELY DAMAGES THE GREEN SPACE /PARK APPEARANCE OF THE ENTRY INTO OUR COMMUNITY. IT 1S OUR OPINION THAT IT IS HIGHLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE COMMUNITY OF THE ASPEN VILLAS AND MIGHT HAVE SERIOUS FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES. IT IS OUR OPINION THAT THE BOARD AND THE OWNERS HAVE NOT HAD THE CHANCE TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE. IT IS OUR OPINION THAT ITS SI2E AND DESIGN IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE NATURE OF THE COMMUNITY. THEREFORE, WE REQUEST THAT THE BOARD URGENTLY REVIEW THE ISSUE BEFORE FURTHER MONEY IS SPENT ON THIS STRUCTURE. Camay f �� ► i If .- - --O Cr' YZ7SS Cr7 -• e M-3 F3 Attachment "D" WEST SLEEKER PLACE 814 WEST BLEEKER JUL 2 6991 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 July 25, 1991 Aspen /Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena St. Aspen, Co. 81611 Attn: Kim Johnson Dear Kim, As the Association /City Liaison Officer, I have been asked to write to you on behalf of the Board of the West Bleaker Place (aka Aspen Villas) Homeowners Association, regarding your letter of July 10, 1991. The Board of the Association met last evening regarding your letter, the facts of the situation, and what appears to be the beginning of a process that could be considerably more complicated and expensive than originally contemplated. The Board felt that this matter must be brought to the attention of the Association since there is the possibility that the Owners may become liable for a sizeable new assessment. Since we have just finished a renovation project that required a very large levy on our Owners, the Board did not want to take another, possibly costly, action without the consent of the Association. We therefor are requesting that you table this once again so that we may receive input from our Association and also to have the survey work, that you have requested, completed. Thank you for your cooperation, Sincerely C Richard A. Co n Attachment "C" Aspen /Pit , t ning Office lti i, 130 treet As• _'._ :1611 (303) 9 i 920 -5197 Paul and Bonnie Murry 814 West Bleeker Unit C -5 Aspen, CO. 81611 July 10, 1991 RE: Aspen Villas Property Line Dear Paul and Bonnie, Regarding the site visit that Bill Drueding and I made yesterday to the Villas, I wanted to follow up with directions on what the Planning Office needs in order to finish the PUD amendment. The drawing which you submitted yesterday did not definitively pinpoint the property line along W. Sleeker. At the site, no one could verify the location of the corner pins as I had requested several weeks ago. This must be accomplished by a registered surveyor as there is too much speculation as to the actual locations of the corners and property line. The apparent distance from the back of curb to an assumed corner pin /property line is approximately 17 feet, but the site plan you provided indicates 11 feet. We have already tabled this item at two Planning Commission meetings. Staff agrees to table this case once more to Tuesday, August 6. In order to resolve the question of whether to process this item as an insubstantial or full PUD amendment, I must have a survey of the W. Sleeker property line (and stakes in the ground) absolutely no later than Friday, July 26. As mentioned, this information shall be provided by a registered surveyor. The resulting site plan must indicate clearly the old parking layout and the location of the additional (40th) parking space. A written description of the changes must accompany the drawings. ; Please submit two copies of all information. If I do not receive the information by the deadline I will bring the case to the Planning Commission on August 6. The staff recommendation will be for denial to keep the trash /storage shed based on the loss of a parking space. Sincerely, 1 Kim J son Planner •• . *. mcyded paper /I ,• . , , •--.�11"" / / r '�- --"►.— -. . i \ , .-' —• • [`�== .� • ,.. r. ....„ / 4. , fr.- fa , • • . p 1 ? j , IL L,. ,f /4 i - *. itc:t‘e. i V , , , w ill19 /. t, •r: ! +' 1 ' . , 0 r�tlt t� .. . ` ,1 .. . / • in � + '� - • - � `T� ` 1 AM., I i /1'. • , rii * I I . ' ‘.: I \ 15 IthOti " AI' ; ii - J..- . . 6 s i.`• ...• •:. ' + 4,, . .4,,,„,,1 . -11, ,, ', I i‘f NCIVIAY �. _ = , i „s,uc + 4.- t 101ert N G• . � , f i - . - . , ' . - • '‘ \ 4*- I t , / , f I B 5 --it • - j ` 11 , . FL AY • A E40 11.1. I, 4 .a— � ; + ! \ ■ (..,+.1q4 - 'rte • ter. r - r ear I ! E ` / , • t *r- Pact 7 1iQ r,�". .. , J, ,. I .10- at • •.,,.' _ . - . 1 . . - .. , 6. ., ., ,_ _ . -- • t . ' • 1 c 3 MEP ' , . . r ,., , 1- .•71, • I. ° 114 %1 1 • i 111 '' MIMI B 6 vi / 1 . . '. k.- 44 B 1 • • • L , 1 • r �' I } Had W. �. ` r r L OGIJrrrT C - rracr uarz-r ! . t+;xt�rr �' I . , 4' 1 i , i a : I / l ' 1 1 \ . • • • ........ . Ci t ' . i • ' ' I 1 X: tb• b•4� PIP . . i l.iwr: H o f -,t .. 1 I. i • . ' f ' li?fJ�i�Ii.C+P ' ( ( , TADS rA - N T F.o.,Qs ei r� � • { _ ,- mo wL,... . r . t 1 * '' t ` r 4- 5 t rp ' ' tiiiiii‘ 2. *JO' - 411 ._ . ~� -` — r — . � C dr.}, ec lzTrawlt,l Z z 15E DR, � YK ' •an _ .. .10 1'04E1 ■ `„, .•• A 1 G , ', �ti `� , �• y �� \ \ � i 1 7 2 4 J , . 1. ' Y • � \ _ - 4 rM • : , . ;* ' .:::. .. at - I ' A 2 : 1 1 I a i @tutsah�ra . r te : 1 ',\ 1 I .\ ‘ ',t, 4#' • • t 9 d 1 ..... .-4.__, . .. A' MI ...... _ it__ __ , . , . , , .,‘ _ I tom- I . , — — ,,,, -f' - • x.1,b Ic A , , ( '1~K= ' .,.f + '. , . app 11.,1(..-v. \ % I . , ' r . 't ila .J \ L + 1 . . Is -• A. S , \ . , , , , ; lir ,,, 1/ ..i- \ :., \ .1 \ . • i ice' � ' \ \ \ `,. \ , \ L ' \ , ' ' //:, 1 ' . • '''' . . ' . . / i ■ . 1 ' 1 I . 1 ' , ' 1 i ill, .,; %.L. •, - ++ - + t�v. v • ' Iv • 1 . .. NEW .G..N•1 X:a .�T440 e ' i, • �- : a �i+r. _ + • T o% w r -, •, t � i ,' - . i v�.rt L_ r r .o 4 . / `;,/,,- . ,. _ . / • ;•i r .,, 1� ,!.!•.•,:' , _ I ► [/►� � e��/ j''��� ( r�w.��y� (�y�j F L j . •: L , .r j: a F , ,. .. _ .... i • .. . , . .2.- 4.'. 4±•+r'.• "d t • Ci'• 1 ..0 ■7 M .. _ _ -....L.--...... .�......•. -.__ - - _ - ;,, I I , '. \ t t . vc� 1 i � . y y ` 1't 1r' ll i•t I. j =! %. .A \ 7 P...:..,1LC'X! far 10. 04. 1' �I 1 1 � - ='r �� j 111;11111 1 I ' ' 1 , / ,f . { • , r •• G7 _• " , ' I 1 1 .1 7 17 f eX rr i '',' �- �/ s , .... • V. I 1 , �,5:.70 �.+1'L + (_ L U61T r' J r49' r '_ / , , � I1 I [t���� . {• P - - Q � t } \ � T M fj /. • • f � / III � , � n I t { sq � . 'i/ -- • . • y ; e7.. a w• hT L ! /1 l : "� t � I1 1 ' i . rte•. �. ' j �.. Q � f .. : \f � `j .f ! ' i . 1 . •..`.. r 1 t : ` f r i 1' i . r J �� � � ' ` atmG ,3 foLei�tAfctrf�. .r ,_,.• , tauc�c t i. {' C,rct. fyl. G / . 1 I 4 , IW. I t•4 • r 1 f , / /f , ' '. 1 ''1 r 1 •r te •• 0 • .h.,lil ii , h � 1 �r 1 �, , 1 i ' � f, � ' \`•.`" � 1�.` 1 lr y � ;. • Pcowroc�{ 1 it t / i r r` } ,/7/1/''''' , .,� r . , a X 11; , r J �/ •,,,,,•••.--::....,,.. • . �' y j ( / � / {� / 1��� , • .11 f 1 J / '. y y ` 1 • t - - ri - 1 1INC2�`7 �71 1�3 . .... ,. N \ ' 'tj h Q i row- I i 1A°1' GN y,.y 3 LnNtf `� I. ` � N. J ` ; tia��.. 1G�2. — , .^' ` _ LC �f, � }o.�+N fr :` , �� ' \' ece A I / — t �. � j ti t ,, j ' 1 . • 1 i ( - r a j • • ,� �` ; t . ; . I i) 3 1 . 4 ca.ceN;;G. \ 14 + 1 1 ... 1:44.1E. 14 •. y am, " t 4 \ rni �:'. \1 '11 - • 0 . - - 1_ ta;r�, Q = � - • _ t.. ( '; • }''14 �'' 1 ( , • ; 11,0 f.t�rlT -"' � � 1. Lam t 4 • • f' � �— o ■ 1 • . It.g.c., t i., 1 C2T-17' .40 ' . - • ' a . ...I. . % RON YrAF1 1 2: J i ► I w> tS' , - f ,/ Y - - -- -„k . ter — r • 1 l Z : L . f '` � . . f Mr' 4 lot 1 ¢ rw'r Q S 0 r .. � > i( - -i - , - 1- -: -, , . ir iz 0 t /! /' sYL1.1,. Fo .QE INIC _ .r . • j ( • 1 '3 A. '$login ='•-,-- .; ;y • 1---- -4 12‘t, I2 Xld ,; .,r2;.-- F!• ie- . � . i t. 1 t N • �. Fi1Cf1`t� ( . atria! ` , -..... . . ! ,, r. s l tr� = - - Tai • ' f , '$ 101.tWirKIr1ar 't .• - F 1 1 .-.;•-•::r . • _ ' • ' 1',' • . '` 1 C.fzAPN"f�L t o - Go. . -_. 1 E 2 I t .,_ i .. •' � ` t kD• U .4-, . ad t 1 0 -Q" � , , , _,, . �. ' .::._ z� , I • � : I . -- . ' .. k - r c2. G. I Off. 14;!" I ` L Ho N�Y ' � 1 R•�P ~-' ;� Q G. t Q ,'f . - 1• . ..ors r act.) 1:07 1'/ 1 1 `� IyOE* , f ' • J . ?(j 1 1 •;I•I,,. i . i1t- O'hc'S 7 Pr GT' t y E5 ..+ i rti i • 1I , 1r r11��t1S ! ` ,1 t Xt f �• • ` - ` • ITQr... 1Qerof ,.�..... w► ...� - 1 ,w• f 1 '--... -. • . -/ " i 47. G. 1 0? f • !- cr,cxxa ,�►ru� _40, �jc>�twfaatas .� •�.. ,,�.;, ; -- Ki,,•cuG '!1 tit- 147NYMI..10 x., T.O.C.' - 1 lo - .Q►;ra'' Gk,=r. Gt r : as.azr. " =ta �t'p ...-----.7 .. � T1M : , F�N,It0�1'.•fy'!i N ... ei,f ccancG. • GL11KC7 ' D a. G,. like °4 ' C7, ki,rel d "cam . , tiroly ' teml _ . . 1._ .---\ Al!TAb1-44 ENT "A" 1 1 I I L . 1 , ii ■•■■Ir .... I i ■ r r I I . i ..---- ! 1 1 1 . • us, 4 , 1 L L q ___ t .. _., --:%: - 04; i; C S .' • • ...S 1.1 ..■4 ...4■TI - ci. ' a 4 . ' I 1 .4.44■4I 1 118 1 1 1 0 1 i 1 1:4 1 1 1 1 ) 1 ' ) 4 ,_. I ' — el— ) sp c t 4_ J 1- 1_, . ii 0.,,.rilov -- al .--4.- - 1 0 - NiN' ---4. • .-.... 1 . . \ -■ 1 . 1 r F LL.._.= i .__ - . \--..__T- _1 _ 1 , n a i .---i -- i 1 "C - i i __ r L I _. il el, 1 " • al 1 LI -1- _.„,/ ,.... , r i _ 1 g SS) 1 ,....--.Z44'1 I ...... c4.■ 1 Al S .41 .....) 1 1 1 1 _ i i ;--- ---; IT r TRASF' ECOURE P1.16‘1 - ) 1/4 _ u wow l 4 kt41111 ' — tom —;r � �� 44 4I woo... r bow i A e .); ' oes iii 4. 1, k ENCOURE ELEVATION , .0 ger • 4 '-0" V' 4(46 Pax LINIES BEYOND d• e _ , xv \ i i - -- i Ski iS 1 7 ------ NAI „N.-- ( 4 SIDE MI-OVATION - . ) 1/4-1'-0- Aspen / Pitkin Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen, Co. 81611 Attachment "B" (303) 920 -5090 Bonnie Murry Aspen Villa Condominiums 814 W. Bleeker St. Aspen, Co. 81611 October 11, 1990 RE: Request to complete weather - related work on dumpster shed. Dear Bonnie, I have received your October 10 letter requesting permission to finish the Dryvit stucco finish on the dumpster shed. The Planning Office has also logged in your PUD Amendment application and I have forwarded a copy to Engineering for their review. As you and I discussed a couple of days ago, the Planning and Zoning staff will consent to allow the exterior stucco work to proceed at the Condominium Association's risk until such time as the amendment process is complete. We understand that a narrow temperature window exists for the stuccoing process to be completed. As your letter states, if the amendment is not approved the structure must be removed. Please be advised that only the Dryvit process is allowed to continue under this agreement. Other work must remain on hold until the PUD Amendment is approved by the Planning Director. I expect this to occur in approximately three or four weeks. I will forward a copy of this letter to the Building Department so they are aware of what work will be occurring during the next couple of weeks. Thank you for responding with a thorough application. I shall try to process it as quickly as possible. If you have any questions about the agreement or the amendment process please call me at 920 -5090. Sincerely, Kim c-nson Planner cc: Bill Drueding, Zoning Officer Gary Lyman, Building Official ,rr■� 44 6509 07/07/92 10:52 Fiec $ ,00 BK 682 PG 748 Silvia Davis, Fitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 4 5. Licensee shall at all times during the term hereof, carry public liability insurance for the benefit of the City with limits of not less than those specified by Section 24-10-114, - C.R.S., as may be amended from time to time, naming the City as co- insured. Licensee shall maintain said coverage in full force and effect during the term of this License and shall furnish the City with a copy of such coverage or a certificate evidencing such coverage. All insurance policies maintained pursuant to this agreement shall contain the following endorsement: It is hereby understood and agreed that this insurance policy may not be cancelled by the surety until thirty (30) days after receipt by the City, by registered mail, of a written notice of such intention to cancel or not to renew.' The licensee shall show proof of this insurance to the City before this agreement is filed. 6. Licensee shall save, defend and hold harmless against any and all claims for damages, costs and expenses, to persons or property that may arise out of, or be occasioned by the use, occupancy and maintenance of said property by Licensee, or from any act or omission of any representative, agent, customer and /or employee of Licensee. 7. This license may be terminated by Licensee at any time and for any reason on thirty (30) days written notice of Licen- see's intent to cancel. This license may be terminated by Aspen at any time and for any reason by resolution duly passed by the City Council of the City of Aspen. Upon termination Licensee shall, at Licensee's expense, remove any improvements or en- croachments from said property. The property shall be restored to a condition satisfactory to Aspen. 0 8. This license is subject to all state laws, the provisions of the Charter of the City of Aspen as it now exists or may hereafter be amended, and the ordinances of the City of Aspen now in effect or those which may hereafter be adopted. 1 9. Nothing herein shall be construed so as to prevent Aspen from granting such additional licenses or property interests in or affecting said property as it deems necessary. 10. The conditions hereof imposed on the granted license of encroachment shall constitute covenants running with the land, and binding upon Licensee, their heirs, successors and assigns. 11. In any legal action to enforce the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its reason- able attorney's fees. #346509 07 '7/92 10:52 Rec $15.00 ELF; 1 2 PG 749 Silvia Day', " Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc ;'_u0 s 12. If the structure for which this license was issued is removed for any reason, Licensee may not rebuild in the same location without obtaining another encroachment license prior to building. No existing encroachment shall be enlarged without obtaining an additional license prior to construction. 13. The licensee waives any and all claims against the City of Aspen for loss or damage to the improvements constructed within the encroachment area. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties executed this agreement at Aspen the day and year first written. CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO By John ennett, Mayor ATTEST: izi/ KATHRYN . KOCH, City Clerk 60 / LA : icen STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this / '� day of ; D .r� o .ti ke' , 19.1-1---' by PQIJ I PI") ci Licensee. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. `` � ti 0 ,,,, , commission expires: 3— 94— /� `, 7 . e� . a y ��.�� � -. : No ry Publ ,; �(4 C !, i`` ti, Address .... ,,,, e sp /6/91/ ENCRAGREEMENT.KEEP -0 OVERHEAD UIILI7Y LINE 'd pr r i EXIST. CULVERTS 0 DECIDUOUS TREF EVERGREEN TREE Trash Shed I rs-ii- , h r I . I 1t. /*b a . I; ) .37 N o� 4 ti ' ' ���� Bui /d .. enter ^ ,� M ��' OY� p, c1 h L Q, 2 Sipe � ;;■' 7,3.. �� b h Proposed Easement MEMORANDUM To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer OffE Date: October 20, 1993 Re: Aspen Villas Insubstantial Plat Amendment Having reviewed the above referenced plat amendment, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. The plat amendment must be drawn in ink on 24 "x36" mylar. The Pitkin County Clerk & Recorder will not accept "sticky back" or other adhesives on the mylar. Two copies of the mylar are required. 2. The title must be: Amendment No. 1 to Aspen Villas Subdivision Final Plat & Final Development Plan. 3. Add a note: (This note is best entered underneath the plat title, but it may be added along with the existing notes.) This plat amends the final plat and final development plan on file at the Office of the Pitkin County Clerk at Book 4, Pages 519 & 520. Note that the Aspen Villas Condominium Plat is on file at Book 4, Pages 536 -541. 4. Add a note: This plat amendment was prepared and approved solely for the purpose of documenting the encroachment license for the relocated parking space and documenting the revised FAR. cc: Bob Gish, Public Works Director M93.245 C #11464,4647' h P n TOPELSON & TOPELSON S EP 2 3 19. 1 `I Sept. 23 1992 Kim Johnson City of Aspen Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen CO 81611 • RE: Amendment to the insubstantial . PUD amendment- A61 -90 Dear Kim: The West Bleeker Place Homeowners Ass. (a.k.a. The Aspen Villas Homeowners Association) would like to enclose the existing overhang next to the dinning areas in each of the 26 units (see enclosed plan), the increase in area enclosed is 48 SF per unit, although no increase in Site coverage will happen. The existing SF per unit are as follows: basement 448 SF First floor 4 4 8 Second floor 5 44 Total 1,440 x 26 units 37,440 SF Add 48 x 26 " 1,248 Total 1,488 x 26 " 38,688 This enclosure will happen over the existing decks and under the existing bedrooms overhang allowing the neighbors to have a more usable dinning room. This letter forms a continuation of our current Aspen Villas PUD amendment file A61 -90 and I represent the Aspen Villas Association as a member of the Board a position I have held for the last 4 years. Thank you for your help and please do not hesitate in calling me for any clarification Sincerely ' -:i"- t `E (- Al ex pel son ili‘ ....■•■■■■ ......m■ Aroomow. ........■.-rw alillyim — .....■..... .....1.■ .4411•1....– •••••••■■■•....... =a. ramos■ ...mar ..... Th .... 11 ? 1 • ..... 1 ' fik I . I ■ —I . I . . ,-,, . . ,• . •• = E , • . ,, • - , • , ■ 6 0 : : q . i • 1 ' ■ — 1 . • i: li _ , • t t • ...1 ----') P -1. . ' I I: ■ . i . g . -, . • . i . . 1 P, . 4 i • . ' 1 .. ; I 1 I ' I Ii.d; •, ti _ , : IA. . 1 . • , • 7 , . , 44 ■ ■ • I 7 . 4 I . . A. .: . : .. 0 I 4 t 1 i I i • , 1 ...1 II 1 . 1 b s , , • „, ___. • ._...-- A — -- _ ......_ _... — ...-. ...., — ___..... . —.1 I • -- — — -.... ... :,,,,, 4 1 , I . ' 1 ,114 : iliI c k loll ia l \ i I t a c . . . . , . , • . . „ , . __. . . ip .,_ ...... . . . . .••0, • ....a...,....A./...,-...ra....i.............:,..x..v............. ,.......................... wen............................••••■••• — . 1 : . . . • --I It I ..■.......... I f 1p.. 1 'I ■ , „ Jii. MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Chuck Roth BC Kim Johnson From: Kim Johnson Postmark: Jan 27,92 3:36 PM Subject: Aspen Villas Encroachment referral comments Message: The Planning Office has no problem with the proposed encroachment license for the partial parking space. It should be designed to include any turning room necessary to enter the parking space. Planning agrees with Engineering that the bike trail easment should be corrected whenever an Aspen Villas plat amendment takes place. X 3 MEMORANDUM • To: City Attorney Streets Department a I 6 N Water Department !) Parks Department Planning Office v._! Zoning Office Building Department Police Department From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer Cle Date: January 15, 1992 Re: Encroachment License for Aspen Villas Attached is an application for encroachment licensing for a strip of land 2.5' wide by 18' long to be used to furnish a full sized parking strip that is needed in order to meet previous parking requirements. The applicants constructed a shed on their property which deleted a parking space, and this strip of land is needed in order to provide the full sized parking space. In the applicants' letter, they discuss a trail that is outside of its easement. It appears from the record that the applicant both dedicated the easement and constructed the trail. The engineering department recommends that the easement be corrected with an as- built easement on the next plat amendment that is prepared for this parcel. We do not believe that it is necessary to take any action concerning the trail at this time. The engineering department has no objections to granting this encroachment license. The right -of -way width is 75'. No right - of -way uses such as street pavements or pedestrian areas are obstructed. Generally, this type and size of encroachment would only be of concern in an alley where there is only a 20' wide right -of -way. I have scheduled this item for the consent agenda of February 10. Please return your comments to me, or CEO me, by January 31 in order to provide time to prepare the packet memo. Thank you. cc: Bob Gish, Public Works Director cr /KM92.21 WEST BLEEKER P L A C E 814 WEST BLEEKER ASPEN , COLORADO 81 6 1 1 December 13, 1991 City Engineering Dept. City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Co. 81611 ATT: Jim Gibbard Dear Mr. Gibbard, I am submitting this "Letter of Application" for an encroachment license on behalf of the Homeowners Association of "West Bleeker Place" also known as "The Aspen Villas ", at 814 W. Bleeker Ave., Aspen, Co. The Association is the only property owner that abuts . the property that is the subject of this encroachment. The purpose of this encroachment request is to allow the Association to continue to be in compliance with it's PUD parking commitment. The current non - compliance is the result of the construction of a structure in the parking area for use as a Storage /Recycle /Trash /Mail center during the recent remodeling of the entire complex. Upon completion of the project the Association re- striped the parking lot and it became evident that the square footage neccessary to fulfill the requirement for 40 parking spaces was short by 2 feet, 2 inches in width and 18 feet in length. A small flower - planted strip of ground adjacent to this parking area is of sufficient size to bring the parking area into conformance and the Association was prepared to sacrifice this area in order to maintain conformance. The Association had begun to process a PUD Amendment for the new shed and, while doing the survey work required for the amendment, two discrepancies were uncovered. First, it was discovered that the small parcel described above was beyond the Association's property line. Second, the Association discovered that the City bike path running between the Aspen Villas and the Villas of Aspen, that serves as a connection between Bleeker St. and Hallam St. does not lie within the 10 foot easement that was granted to the City in the original PUD filing. After consultation with the Planning Office and the Engineering Dept. it was determined that a mutual Encroachment License approach would be the most effective method of resolving the problem. The rationale for the City to consider granting this License is the benefit it would receive by bringing it's bike trail into legal conformance within it's current alignment. Some 680 square feet of the path encroaches on the Association's property. The Association, in return for permission to use the designated 45 square feet needed to maintain conformance with the original PUD, would grant the City permission to use the Association's land for the maintenance of the bike path on it's current alignment. This permission would be in the form of a License similar in terms and conditions with that granted to the Association by the City. The License granted to the City would be revocable only in the event that the City, for some reason, revokes the License granted to the Association and places the Association in a posture of nonconformance with the terms of the parking element of the PUD. Enclosed with this letter you will find a completed, signed Encroachment Agreement, as well as the required copies of a survey, (in the size required to fit the Council's packet as well as a large size survey plat) that was prepared by a Colorado registered land surveyor . that shows the area of the encroachment, the boundary of the property (The Aspen Villas) that abuts the encroachment, the existing structures, improvements, landscaping features, curbs, gutters and sidewalks etc. in the area of the encroachment. r . The survey shows the boundary of the encroachment and includes the bearings and dimensions with sufficient detail to permit the legal definition of the encroachment. On the survey you will also find the Surveyor's certificate, signature and seal. as well as the date of preparation, the scale and a true north arrow. There are no utility lines in, on or over the encroachment area. Enclosed you will find a check in the amount of $300.00 for the application fee. We have included this check so that there will be no delays in processing this application. However, the Association is requesting that the fees required for an "Encroachment License" be waived or "traded off" due to the unique circumstances of this situation. If there is any additional information required, please contact me at 925 -2811. Thank you for your consideration, Yours truly, Richard A. Cohen for the Association tt t Vitl 1 1 ‘ % — VA t t 9.S C %‘ ci s$ T.I. m W ■ 1 CO 1 t -1 AI la A t { C N S S e \ \P \ \ \\ L- .48 6i \II pc c., E v , o 3 �; • o — - t .S'86 • 'l ' -.1.00i/N ' 2 :14 p 4.11 t -' P u M) * kJ � x ` , of W h ' tp x M..- y r .l" .% '.. A O ° 9 ir. - g. el Y' 3. yyy C p E N c Q Lj N 3 s N + u o th S in W 6 CP N L C °' Y 4 a _J 1 _ a,♦ Juxuaso3 Jfa! oPNf .01 -- J p al aP ,0! *Pas — ---- s9 ozz G. ca ti c, WEST B.KER PLACE 814 WEST B L E E K E R ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 7 60 t , ) August 12, 1991 ff ,, p� Mayor John Bennett and the City Council City of Aspen 130 South Galena St. Aspen, Co. 81611 Dear Mr. Mayor and the City Council, I am writing this as the representative of the "West Bleeker Place" ( aka Aspen Villas ) Home Owners Association. We have been working with the Planning ^ Office processing a PUD Amendment for the addition of a V`)1 Storage /Recycle /Trash /Mail shed within our Condominium complex. What should have been a simple "insubstantial' process has become greatly complicated due, I believe, to a complaint to the Planning Office from a past owner who did not agree with the majority of the owners who supported the addition. The Planning Office has now taken the position that this application needs a more complicated and expensive "two- step" review process. The Planning Office, during their investigations, discovered that the Association had incorrectly striped the parking spaces and that the square footage of the parking area was less than what is needed for the 40 spaces that were required by the original PUD plat. The shortage amounts to 2 feet, 2 inches in width and 18 feet in length. There is currently a small flower planted strip of ground adjacent to the parking area that is of the size (2.2 x 18= 39.60 sq.ft.) needed to conform to the PUD that we felt could be sacrificed for this additional parking area if it became absolutely neccessary. While doing the survey work that the Planning Office required from us, it was discovered that there were several mapping errors on the original plat and on subsequent maps that were produced from the original. It became evident that the strip of land that we were willing to turn to asphalt was really part of the City's land and that we could not use it for this purpose. The survey also brought to light the fact that the City bike path that runs between our complex and the Villas of Aspen complex and serves as the connection between Sleeker St. and Hallam, does not lie within the 10 foot easement that was granted to the City. Some 680 square feet of this path encroaches on our property. It is obvious that the people who built the path did not wish to destroy the foliage and cottonwood trees that line the brook that runs between the two complexes and that they built the path in the most practical and esthetic manner possible. The Homeowners of West Sleeker Place have no problems with the current alignment of this path. It is an attractive and convenient section of the City's bike path system. We are proposing that the City and the Homeowners Association each execute a "License to Encroach" that would allow the Association to use the City -owned land adjacent to our parking area to meet our parking requirement and the City to continue to use that portion of the path that encroaches on the Association property. I hope that this request meets with your approval and that we are able to complete this process in short order. Respectfully submitted, Richard A. Cohen, for the Aspen Villas Homeowners Association. MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner RE: Aspen Villas PUD Amendment for Addition of Trash /storage Shed DATE: August 6, 1991 SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends denial of the PUD amendment because the loss of a parking space in a multi - family complex which is already non - conforming in required parking spaces. The request is to approve a 330 s.f. shed which was built without proper building permits or Planning approval. APPLICANT: The Aspen Villas Condominium Association, represented by Bonnie and Paul Murry LOCATION: 814 W. Bleeker St. ZONING: RMF - PUD PROCESS: This PUD amendment is considered substantial because of the loss of one parking space, which represents over 2% reduction in on -site parking. This requires processing under the Final PUD review. The Final PUD Plan approval requires a recommendation by the Planning Commission and approval by City Council. APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant requests approval to amend the Aspen Villas Condominium PUD Plan to allow 330 s.f. floor area expansion and a 330 s.f. site coverage expansion for a trash /storage shed which was built in the parking area of the complex. Please see Attachment "A" for site plan and structural information for the shed. STAFF COMMENTS: The proposed shed has already been built at the location requested. It was built without any valid approvals and was red - tagged by Zoning Official Bill Drueding in October of 1990. The Planning Office allowed the structure to have its exterior stucco finish applied before it became too cold to do so. This approval was granted with the full knowledge of the applicant that the PUD process might not approve the shed and it would be required to be removed or relocated. Please see Attachment "B" for the communications regarding the exterior finish work. Staff was originally going to process the PUD amendment by Director approval utilizing the Insubstantial Amendment process when it became evident a parking space was lost adjacent to the shed. After the shed was built, the lot was restriped and several spaces were reduced to where they no longer complied with the 8.5' minimum width required by code. This was discovered in April, after the snow melted off of the parking lot. Since the parking spaces did not meet the code, staff scheduled the application before the P &Z for May 7. The applicant requested tabling for the first time in order to develop an alternative parking arrangement. At that time, staff advised the applicant that another parking space would be identified on -site in order to maintain the 40 spaces approved with the original PUD Plan. If one space could be located somewhere else on the property, the PUD Amendment could be processed as Insubstantial via the Planning Director's sign -off. The applicant was unable to meet the deadline for that meeting and requested tabling, to which staff had no objection. It was tabled to June 4. The applicant requested another tabling and one was scheduled for July 16. At a meeting including the applicant and the Planning Director, staff requested a lot survey indicating precisely where another space could be located. The drawing which was submitted was not satisfactory in that it was simply a tracing of the original PUD plan. It showed the proposed new parking space, but staff was concerned that because the property line was not marked on the ground, it could not be verified that the space would be on the Villas Property. Therefore, the July 16 hearing had to be tabled once again. The applicant agreed to have an official survey prepared by a registered surveyor. A letter recapping staff's findings and requests is attached ( "C "). UPDATE: On July 26, the deadline to produce the valid survey, staff received a letter from Richard Cohen requesting that the item be tabled again. Please see Attachment "D ". He stated that additional time was necessary to get input from the homeowner's association and to complete the survey work. In a conversation that day with staff, Mr. Cohen revealed that he wanted to table the item at P &Z in order to go directly to City Council with an alternative proposal regarding the parking space. He did not want the Planning staff to spend more time on the case, for which hours would be charged to the Villas project. When asked what the alternative proposal involved, he would not offer any information. He only wanted to talk directly to Council. Parking: The original PUD contained 26 units of two bedrooms each. The current RMF zone parking requirement based on these figures is one per bedroom, or 52 spaces. Even with the original 40 spaces, the complex is non - conforming for parking. The current condition provides room for 39 legal spaces. Pursuant to the PUD Amendment criteria contained in Section 7 -907 A, the loss of this parking space represents more than 1% of the off - street parking and is considered a substantial amendment. Therefore, the proposal must be approved according to the Final PUD approval process (recommendation by P &Z, final approval by City Council). P .. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The application states that the 26 units total approximately 25, 792 s.f. of FAR. The storage shed is 22' x 15' or 330 s.f. of FAR. The increase represents an increase of .013 %. Maximum FAR in the RMF zone is 1:1 The lot area is 81,300 s.f., so the shed does not create a problem regarding FAR. Site Coverage: Site coverage increases can occur as "insubstantial" as long as cumulative increases not exceed 3% of the site coverage (original approval.) Total existing site coverage is 11,648 s.f. of residential structures. Three percent of this figure is 349 s.f. The site coverage resulting from the current proposal is 330 s.f., which does not require official approval from P &Z or City Council. Without resolution of this matter, Planning staff will request that the Building Department issue an order to demolish the structure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning recommends denial of the 330 s.f. shed based on the loss of one parking space in a multi - family complex which is already non - conforming for parking. The Planning Cmmission could forward to City Council a recommendation for approval or denial. Staff feels that the applicant has not fully explored other options to replace the lost space on the site. If one can be located, the request will be processed as an insubstantial amendment to the PUD. ATTACHMENTS: "A "- Site Plan and Shed Details "B "- 10/11/90 Letter From Staff Authorizing Exterior Completion "C "- 7/10/91 Letter from Staff Describing Survey Requirements "D "- 7/25/91 Letter from Richard Cohen Requesting Additional Tabling jtkvj /Villas.memo Attachment "D" WEST BLEEKER PLACE 81 4 WEST BLEEKER ( ; \ 26 1991` i ASPEN, COLORADO 816110 July 25, 1991 Aspen /Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena St. Aspen, Co. 81611 Attn: Kim Johnson Dear Kim, As the Association /City Liaison Officer, I have been asked to write to you on behalf of the Board of the West Bleeker Place (aka Aspen Villas) Homeowners Association, regarding your letter of July 10, 1991. The Board of the Association met last evening regarding your letter, the facts of the situation, and what appears to be the beginning of a process that could be considerably more complicated and expensive than originally contemplated. The Board felt that this matter must be brought to the attention of the Association since there is the possibility that the Owners may become liable for a sizeable new assessment. Since we have just finished a renovation project that required a very large levy on our Owners, the Board did not want to take another, possibly costly, action without the consent of the Association. We therefor are requesting that you table this once again so that we may receive input from our Association and also to have the survey work, that you have requested, completed. Thank you for your cooperation, Sincerely \ Richard A. Co n • MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Kim Johnson, Planning DATE: July 16, 1991 RE: Aspen Villas - PUD Amendment for Trash /Storage Shed, Request to Table to August 6, 1991 Staff requests one final tabling of this item in order for the applicant to obtain a valid survey of the W. Sleeker property line. The issue before staff is whether or not a required parking space can be added to the parking lot along that frontage. If enough area is available on site for an added space, staff will process the request as an insubstantial PUD amendment which will not require action by the Commission. Attachment "C" Aspen /Pit r ; ; . • ning Office 130 ' • treet AsI :1611 (303) 9 / -� 920 -5197 Paul and Bonnie Murry 814 West Bleeker Unit C -5 Aspen, CO. 81611 July 10, 1991 RE: Aspen Villas Property Line Dear Paul and Bonnie, Regarding the site visit that Bill Drueding and I made yesterday to the Villas, I wanted to follow up with directions on what the Planning Office needs in order to finish the PUD amendment. The drawing which you submitted yesterday did not definitively pinpoint the property line along W. Sleeker. At the site, no one could verify the location of the corner pins as I had requested several weeks ago. This must be accomplished by a registered surveyor as there is too much speculation as to the actual locations of the corners and property line. The apparent distance from the back of curb to an assumed corner pin /property line is approximately 17 feet, but the site plan you provided indicates 11 feet. We have already tabled this item at two Planning Commission meetings. Staff agrees to table this case once more to Tuesday, August 6. In order to resolve the question of whether to process this item as an insubstantial or full PUD amendment, I must have a survey of the W. Bleeker property line (and stakes in the ground) absolutely no later than Friday, July 26. As mentioned, this information shall be provided by a registered surveyor. The resulting site plan must indicate clearly the old parking layout and the location of the additional (40th) parking space. A written description of the changes must accompany the drawings. = Please submit two copies of all information. If I do not receive the information by the deadline I will bring the case to the Planning Commission on August 6. The staff recommendation will he for denial to keep the trash /storage shed based on the loss of a parking space. Sincerely, Kim J .- son Planner 46 recycled paper . ATTAcHmEt'• 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1) Project Aspen Villas Condominiums 2) Project Location 814 West Sleeker Street • . • .'• gtats of enlnrado (indica _ street •. t. , lot & block number, legal dnr-r where apprcprir.:.e) 3) Present Zoning °I/14F .tj 4) Lot Size 81 .300 sq_ feet 5) Applicant's Name, Ad ress & Fhone # Aspen Villas Condominium Association 814 West R1Peker Aspen. Colorado 81611 6) Repr Name, Address & Phone # Mrs. Rnnn i e Murry 814 West Bleeker Unit C -5 Aspen, Co. 81611 925 -3116 7) Type of Application (please dlecgc all that apply): Conditional Use _ Conceptual SPA Conceptual Historic Dev. Special Review _ Final SPA Laid( , n Final Historic D2v_ 8040 GYe�enline / X 1 � u � Minor Historic Day_ Stream Margin `l Final FUD N / � ' _ Historic Demolition _ Fkxmtain View Plane Subdivision _ Historic Designation • QDrdominiumization _ Text/Map Amendment _ QS Allotrmmt Iot Split /Iat Line Adjustment • motion 8) Description of Existir g Uses (number and type of existing stye approximate sq_ ft_; number of bedrooms; any previous approvals granted to the ProPertY) The existing use consists of 26 condominium units with two bedrooms per unit (total 52 bedrooms) contained within five buildings. Total square footage of all units including front and rear decks 9) priptinon of Development Application is 15,481 square feet. Dc I� W�ZW 1 / 1/14 ws ejrv/A-7 io 10) have you attached the folla ing? _a__ Response to Attachment 2, Minimum Submission Contents Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Contents _ Besponse to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Your Application ATTACHMENT 2 Minimum Submission Contents for All Development Applications 1. The applicant for this Insubstantial Amendment to an Approved PUD is The Aspen Villas Condominiums, authorized by the Aspen Villas Condominium Association, Inc. Board of Directors. Attached please find Exhibit A, a letter from the Board authorizing Bonnie Murry, a unit owner, to act as a representative on behalf of the applicant. 2. The street address of the applicant is 814 West Bleeker, Aspen, Colorado 81611. The legal description is Aspen Villas Condominium, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. 3. The ownership of the involved parcel is that of the Aspen Villas Condominium Association, Inc. as outlined by the Condominium Declaration For Aspen Villas Condominium made the 4th day of November, 1975. This Declaration is Document Number 179088 Recorded November 5, 1975 Book 305, Page 51. Attached as Exhibit B, is a list of unit owners who comprise the membership of the Aspen Villas Condominium Association, Inc. 4. Exhibit C attached is a vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 5. Our proposed amendment to the PUD is to build one multi - purpose structure to house following: a. a dumpster ( 4 yard as opposed to our current 2 yard which frequently overflows and causes debris to blow unto neighboring parcels b. three recycling bins of 36" diameter to enable us to institute on -site recycling c. storage of all our gardening and lawn maintenance equipment d. storage of snow removal equipment e. provide a stand for our mailboxes which would enable us to move them from their current location at the entrance to our complex, thus providing us with the potential of additional visitor parking When we submitted plans for our current renovation, we received approval to build one shed to house a small dumpster and our tools, as was configured by the project architect. Please refer to Exhibit D. This shed was approximately 125 square feet, and in actuality, was smaller in square footage than the various sheds which were built over the years, and were demolished as part of our renovation. Subsequent to receiving our permit in May of this year, many of our unit owners became interested in an on -site recycling program. Attachment 2, continued Upon checking with B.F.I., we were given minimum standards for size of shed which would be necessary for them to adequately service our project. Please see Exhibit E, a letter from B.F.I. to reinforce these standards. The current design we are seeking approval for is 264 square feet of covered storage, with an adjoining patio of 77 square feet that would serve to screen the garbage storage and also house our current mailboxes and parcel storage. Please see Exhibit F. The door to the tool and maintenance shed also opens on to the patio, thereby eliminating our past problem of blocking traffic in the lot and eliminating parking. The additional square footage needed to serve the combined needs and to add recycling DOES NOT take any additional parking spaces, or green space. The additional floor area utilizes an area of asphalt that surrounded the original shed. The Aspen Land Use Code requires 2100 square feet of land for each two bedroom condo as a dimensional requirement. For our 26 units that would result in a requirement of 54,600 square foot parcel. Our actual lot size is 81,300 square feet. The current (updated) Floor Area Ratio consists of a building footprint of 15,481 square feet (actual footprint of foundation is 11,648 square feet, and an additional 3833 square feet of rear and front entrance decks.) Given our low density in relation to the lot size, we feel the benefits of our recycling -trash storage -mail center -tool shed far outweighs the negative impact of utilizing two hundred square feet of our grounds. ATTACHMENT 3 Specific Submission Contents: Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption Approval By Planning Director 1. We wish to convert an asphalt area (not designated parking) as part of our enclosure to house mailboxes, dumpster and trash storage, three recycling bins, and storage of lawn and garden tools, plus storage of snow and ice removal equipment. The enclosure will also provide winter storage of bicycle racks. 2. Please refer to Exhibit D site plan drawing which details the area we wish to utilize for our trash, recycling center, storage, and mail center. 3. To our knowledge there have been no development approvals since the original PUD, other than the building permit which was issued on May 14, 1990 which authorized our exterior remodel project. 4. There are no recorded documents which affect the proposed development. ATTACHMENT 4 Review Standards: Development Application for Insubstantial Amendment to Approved PUD 1. The following items do not affect our given property or request for Insubstantial Amendment to an Approved PUD: a. Our request does not change the use or character of the development. b. The proposed trash - recycling - mail -and storage shed does not result in an increase of greater than 3% in the overall coverage of structures on the land. It actually results in a less than one percent change. c. No trip generation increase shall result. By increasing our dumpster size, at certain times of the year we will be able to • cut back to every other day service by B.F.I., rather than the daily truck service now required. By providing our own recycling center we will cut down on car trips that are now made by residents to the public recycling area. d. The shed will not result in a reduction of greater than 3% of our approved open space, as a matter of fact, it is less than .01 % reduction of open space. e. This development amendment does not cause a reduction., in any off - street parking or loading space. f. Our request does not result in a reduction in required pavement widths or rights -of -way for streets or easements. Our parking lot will continue to observe the proper firecode easements. g. We have no commercial spaces, so no change is affected. h. The amendment does not change the residential density. I. Our proposed amendment does not change the character of the original PUD approval. TOPELSON TOPELSON 11■ 04 ✓e B/T0 ; !> ( a40,1 `ZQ9 a4 �M Q /'fit a s. + Jail -''e 4 1 ,15,r. \ • llq s NSSro C-' a s‘ "kb u 5 Z.A. 414 /J P d t_ el- • v"'" tet,c LtA-Ct I N d. 4 a ©& a4a► -. ,S 1 J� a v< ■1:ce Re 4. I ohs 4gt . ■ gas-Rest Ash - quo _ wIct EXHIBIT A ASPEN VILLAS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION UNIT OWNERS AS OF 4 -5 -90 .UNIT 1 UNIT OWNER OWNER CONT NAILING AD CITY STATE ZIP A -1 KING BASH 1039 MAXWELL BOULDER CO 80304 A -2 ROBERT SHALLCROSS BETTY SHALLCROSS 4 PAR CIRCLE COLUMBINE VALLEY CO 80123 A -3 VICTOR ENGLAND, JR. CATHERINE B. ENGLAND P. 0. BOX 245 QUARRYVILLE PA 17566 A -4 JOHN LEWIS JACQUELINE LARNER 1952 LEYDEN ST DENVER CO 80220 A -5 KENNETH T 1 KAREN L KURTZ XBRAKUR CUSTOM CABINETRY 18656 ROUTE 59 JOLIET IL 60435 A -6 MICHAEL E. HEISLEY 4 N 844 BURR RD. ST. CHARLES IL 60175 8 -1 GARY R. LICHTENWALTER LICHTENWALTER INSURANCE 220 N. LARKIN JOLIET IL 60435 8 -2 FREDERICK UHLER BOX 49 WASHINGTON NJ 07882 8 -3 ALEX TOPELSON 5300 DTC PARKWAY 1400 ENGLEWOOD CO 80111 8 -4 TONG LUU 814 W. SLEEKER 8-4 ASPEN CO 81611 B-5 CHARLES R. MORRIS, JR. 814 W. BLEEKER B -5 ASPEN CO 81611 8 -6 WILLIAN SCHAFFER KAREN SCHAFFER 3120 ORANGE LEAF CT $ 193 HEHPHIS TH 38115 C -1 DONA STUART 814 W. BLEEKER C -1 ASPEN CO 81611 RR C -2 SIROUS SAGHATALESLAHI BOX 8080 ASPEN CO 81612 t C -3 CARL LEE % RICHARD A. COHEN P.O. BOX 1806 ASPEN CO 81612 C -4 SANDRA WALTHER JEAN HAYTAG P. 0. BOX 8789 ASPEN CO 81612 C -5 PAUL HURRY BONITA HURRY 814 W. SLEEKER C -5 ASPEN CO 81611 D -1 LYNN T. LICHTENWALTER 814 W. SLEEKER D -1 ASPEN CO 81611 D -2 JERRY S. HOGGATT 85 DREAM COURT METAIRIE LA 70001 0 -3 KLAUS OBERHEYER BOX 7848 ASPEN CO 81612 E -1 JOSEPH AND PATRICIA HITTON DAVID FRANKLE 2121 WAGNER ROAD GLENVIEW IL •60025 E -2 CAROLYN J MAIER BOX 1417 ASPEN CO 11612 E -3 AL GROSS P. 0. BOX 9500 ASPEN CO 81617 E -4 CAROLINE MCGREGOR MACAULAY HUGH H. HACAULAY 814 W. BLEEKER E -4 ASPEN CO 81611 E-5 JOSE AND SARA T. GRINBERG SIERRA HAZAPIL 135 MEXICO D.F. MEXICO 11000 y,� E-6 SAMUEL EICHNER FUENTE DE PIRAHIDES 243 TECANACHALCO MEXICO CITY MEXICO 53950 , Count: 26 f de I EXHIBIT B o "s 4P) R .>s N ep • , Mountain View Dr . ° 9 S 'PA Re P \ 60 . Rd 40 tunnY Dt DV °. SW" S @oJ� ti SJ do^ v • y Pd .t\ A1p•n a Hunts , ' tr ' • � it S c Institute P ¢ Sin a • c Muelo x 3 R i Tent ¢ Not all streets or roads • are al /1219 D m..• ebe Hallam o named on maps. ConstructlE Lake r � of streets and roads may be ' k f Lake progress In certain areas. wiz � .. a ��- e a St 44/311r41"111144 I.i d 1 /'••.��.'�� Sr a muppMr Men RO A spen 3 �� Hospital �a • Q ' A spent ' ® � 8, o Vi l iA ! w s� Q l � . ja r i It 1 C wet 3A, a ,°4 It 1 • • 4 I A /p, Rd T4 e 4 orYeru 4b Ad 4 4 f 1 o N U \ 4 s h O i n' Aspen �5. I $ m .9.; t R Music ° ?_ EXHIBIT C o F I ® Sy tems BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES Aspen District City of Aspen Planning Department 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 October 8, 1990 Dear Sirs; Upon looking at plans for a dumpster enclosure at Aspen Villas, we at BFI are pleased that they have designed the structure to meet our minimum requirements, to in- clude recycling bins as well. Very Truly Yours/ r� � I Anthony J. 'agneur District :nager EXHIBIT E 405 AABC, SUITE E • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • (303) 925 -6505 L Ces Q i ril . o t ' 5 i a d 'S Ql w hrr", ii iii I 1 1 II I I II lI ` b . r 2 a •y ■ art-. Ltirt i : it PA Itsis ' T I I J o • 1. �i I i iI I , � r;0 d :. --1 7 _ q �.sz 4 6 0 12 E° A • •E? •P 7 ..-\ • w ( CITY OF ASPEN PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PROJECT: ' 2 , 4(;4 s ti — E ; . k^ ai Az— �' APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Pen41 /.P 2(g,i REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE: 9.7i- 3 /I 6 OWNER'S NAME: ( a-44 t . SUMMARY 1. Type of Application: f2 . PU n J 2. Describe action /type of development being requested: - - • 3. Areas is which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested: Policy Area/ Referral Agent Comments 14:1 4. Review is: (P &Z Only) (CC Only) (P &Z then to CC)e 5. Public Hearing: (YES) O) 6. Number of copies of the application to be submitted: •• 7. What fee was applicant requested to submit: //..3 = '' 8. Anticipated date of submission: ,45/2/ 9. COMMENTS /UNIQUE CONCERNS: frm.pre_app Aspen / Pitkin Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen, Co. 81611 Attachment "B" (303) 920 -5090 Bonnie Murry Aspen Villa Condominiums 814 W. Bleeker St. Aspen, Co. 81611 October 11, 1990 RE: Request to complete weather - related work on dumpster shed. Dear Bonnie, I have received your October 10 letter requesting permission to finish the Dryvit stucco finish on the dumpster shed. The Planning Office has also logged in your PUD Amendment application and I have forwarded a copy to Engineering for their review. As you and I discussed a couple of days ago, the Planning and Zoning staff will consent to allow the exterior stucco work to proceed at the Condominium Association's risk until such time as the amendment process is complete. We understand that a narrow temperature window exists for the stuccoing process to be completed. As your letter states, if the amendment is not approved the structure must be removed. Please be advised that only the Dryvit process is allowed to continue under this agreement. Other work must remain on hold until the PUD Amendment is approved by the Planning Director. I expect this to occur in approximately three or four weeks. I will forward a copy of this letter to the Building Department so they are aware of what work will be occurring during the next couple of weeks. Thank you for responding with a thorough application. I shall try to process it as quickly as possible. If you have any questions about the agreement or the amendment process please call me at 920 -5090. Sincerely, 4 Kim c-nson Planner cc: Bill Drueding, Zoning Officer Gary Lyman, Building Official :ILJ 1 0 ` ASPEN VILLAS CONDOMINIUMS 814 W. BLEEKER ST. ASPEN, COLORADO 925 -3116 October 10, 1990 Kim Johnson, Planner Aspen /Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Kim, In regards to our conversation of Tuesday, October 9th, 1990, I wish to reiterate the intentions of the Aspen Villas Construction Committee in reference to our storage/ dumpster/ recycling shed. We are fully aware that we received a red tag on the construction of this shed on 10/3/90, and do wish to comply with the City requirements in that regard. We have submitted an amendment to our PUD, and it is being processed though your reviews. We are aware that this process can require several weeks to complete. Because the exterior finish of our buildings are Dryvit stucco, we are working under temperature limitations; the finish absolutely cannot be applied in cold weather. We have sought permission from your department to do only that work on the shed that is temperature - related. Because time is of the essence , we are willing to take the risk of adding further work which we realize we may have to move, remodel, or demolish if our necessary approvals are not granted. We do appreciate your department's consideration on this matter and we are fully prepared to comply with Planning and Zoning's decisions in regard to our shed. Thanks again, ze Bonnie Murry Representative for Aspen Villas gyp. a -l- 9U