HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.CU.126 W Francis St.A52-92 CASE WAD SUMMARYt SHEET
City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 6/12/92 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
DATE COMPLETE: - - - A52 -92
STAFF MEMBER: KJ
PROJECT NAME: Rov Accessory Dwelling Unit
Project Address: 126 W. Francis, Aspen, CO 81611
Legal Address:
APPLICANT: Roy Family Trust c/o Philip Asher, Trustee
Applicant Address: 660 Linton Blvd., Del Rav Beach, FL 33444
REPRESENTATIVE: Jim Wilson for JJ Wilson Bld. Consultants Inc.
Representative Address /Phone: 47 Original Lane
Basalt. CO 81621 927 -9845
FEES: PLANNING $ waived # APPS RECEIVED 1
ENGINEER $ # PLATS RECEIVED 5
HOUSING $
ENV. HEALTH $
TOTAL $ waived
PAID:(YES) NO AMOUNT: $ -0- NO. OF COPIES RECEIVED 1/5
TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP:. X 2 STEP:
P &Z Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
Planning Director Approval: Paid:
Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Date:
REFERRALS:
X City Attorney Mtn Bell School District
City Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn NatGas
N( Housing Dir. Holy Cross State HwyDept(GW)
Aspen Water Fire Marshall State HwyDept(GJ)
City Electric '/ Bldg Inspector
Envir.Hlth. Roaring Fork Other 7VNIIJ(7'
Aspen Con.S.D. Energy Center Clean Air Board
DATE REFERRED: INITIALS: 7
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: /Z/ZL(q Z INITIAL: 5 At/
City Atty City Engineer Zoning Env. Health
Housing Other: 0J-AL—
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
WITH M/I-AIN
IAN° Use APPLICATION FORM ..Y • I IcC
1) Pwject Name aDV Fi AAULV/ tlL,U6T \JoLLMStAi t--/ A. 37 V
2) Project Location /Lev Lit.' F DA Cr ; Ea,t, PLY YL OF
LOT L ANd7 ALL. ChAoiar.env LFzC°. (7G 'r7r NL 4 -575 -
(indicate
d
(indicate street address, lot & hloc number, legal description where .
apprgprl ate)
3) Present Zonirvj 4) Lot Size 4 99:::::0 8F
5) Applicant's Name, Address & Phone if QC1 5QInn. CV t2 ' r C/a PWU e A ,
7TZuSrees /440 L M&m k aLVD • DEL. W. *cy, ?Lou ►-t FL- 3S (4tn)391 -ay ?
6) Representative's Name, Address & Phone S 11 CU ^ -AA.J. FOT.
\An L-t&SL Cc t.S )MC_ • y7 oCLG -lti aAL. c.4
co ?1 6 a1 9z- 7- 92) 1 2 1 S
7) Type of Application (please check all that apply) :
X _ Conditional Use anal SPA _ Conceptual Historic Dev_
_
Special Review Final SPA Final Historic ley-
8040 Glceernhine Conceptual POD Minor Historic Dev_
Stream Margin _ Final FUD Historic Demolition
Mountain View Plane Subdivision Historic Designation
Candominitmazation' Text/Map Amendment ' GM2S Allotment
_ lot Split/lot Line ' - QQS Exemption - .
Adjustment
8) Description of Existing Uses '(nuber and type of existing structures;
approximate sq_ ft.; number of bedrooms; any pin: us approvals granted to the
PropertY) -
a • a . - - /spa- • a am _ s s ■
Rro3 s ; y an rac:AAS
9) Dk scription of Development Application
U/.1.11 w D Lt_ C'r f/P er) FOAL` 'FCC lS77MSS-
f? AF-1.fl L , •
10) (lave you attached the following?
Response to Attactmr nt 2, Minim= SubnissiOn Contents
Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Contents
--
Response to Attaclmesnt 4, Review Standards for Your Application
James J. Wilson
Building Consultants, Inc.
0047 Original La.
Basalt, Colorado 81621
(303) 927 -9845
June 22, 1992
Planning and Zoning Commission
c/o Planning Office
City of Aspen
130 Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Conditional use application , 126 W. Francis St.
Distinguished Members of the Commision:
I am writing this conditional use application on behalf of the Roy Family
Trust, current owners of a single family dwelling located at 126 W.
Francis St. The conditional use requested by the Roy Family Trust is an
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). We are familiar with the established
review standards which are applied by the Commision. Our intention is to
justify an ADU conditional use within those standards and guidelines, and
the general spirit and intent of city regulations. The Roy Family Trust is
attracted by the incentives offered for creating an ADU and feels that
additional affordable housing would be mutually beneficial for the City of
Aspen.
Specifically, a 424 s.f. studio ADU is proposed for integration into an
existing West End, Victorian -style residence. Plans are provided for the
existing residence as well as the proposed ADU. Some limited remodeling
will be necessary to convert a portion of the principle residence into an
ADU that either meets or exceeds minimum standards. It will likely
become evident in this review process that there are a number of
"problems" associated with this property. Pitkin County District Court
Judge T. Peter Craven has recently ordered that there are obligations on
both the Trust and the City to bring the property Into compliance. This
application is not expected to be a panacea for all those woes, but simply
an initial step to remedy alleged wrongful acts of the past in good faith.
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 22, 1992
Page Two
It is the owners' intention to systematically remedy all "problems" in
their appropriate forum. It should go without saying that this conditional
use application should be evaluated solely on the merits of the proposed
ADU, without regard to other "problems" that affect this property.
City of Aspen Ordinance 47, Series of 1988 and Ordinance 1, Series of
1990, establishes the ADU use as consistent with the purpose, goals,
objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Numerous benefits are intended by Ordinances 47 and 1, but developing a
sense of community in existing neighborhoods appears to be a primary
concern. Providing an ADU in the exclusive West End will certainly
promote the long- standing community goal of insuring a socially and
economically balanced community. An ADU at this location provides the
opportunity for a full -time local resident to dwell within the splendor of
Aspen's most beautiful and convenient neighborhood.
The residence has been identified on the Inventory of Historic Sites and
Structures and is in an historically significant neighborhood. A recent
second story addition was designed by locally renowned preservation
architect, Welton Anderson. Integrating the ADU into the existing
structure will maintain the character of the sensitive neighborhood and
maintain natural scenic views.
On -site parking cannot be provided due to the limited size of the lot.
There is a possibility that the neighborhood may be exposed to the impact
of one additional car parked on the street. On- street parking has been a
long standing tradition in this neighborhood and appears to be status quo.
There are no requirements for on -site parking for a studio or one bedroom
ADU, and Sec. 5 510(A)(1) of the Land Use Regulations contained in the
Aspen Municipal Code expressly exempts a studio ADU from on -site
parking requirements.
Despite the possibility that an occupant of this ADU might own an
automobile, the location is convenient for walking, biking, rollerblading,
or skiing to virtually anywhere in town. Public transportation is also
available just a few blocks away. This proposed ADU is located on a major
•
�.. . —00
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 22, 1992
Page Three
pedestrian thoroughfare, thereby dissuading the use of automobiles which
reduces traffic and pollutants.
This proposed ADU 1s clearly consistent with community standards,
compatible with the immediate neighborhood, has minimal (if any) adverse
effects on surrounding properties, and is adequately served by public
facilities and services. The existing residence does not exactly meet all
of the dimensional requirements of the underlying R -6 zone district. The
existing residence is, by definition, a "nonconforming structure" on a
"nonconforming lot of record" and consequently subject to the development
restrictions of Sec. 9 -103 and Sec. 9 -106 of the Land Use Regulations
contained in the Aspen Municipal Code. Some work has been done on the
residence that may be contrary to those restrictions, and some minor
violations of dimensional requirements have been alleged. It appears that
the spirit and intent of the "amnesty" clause contained in Section 3 of
Ordinance 47, Series of 1988, or "Bandit Units" of Sec. 5- 510(B) of the
Land Use Regulations contained in the Aspen Municipal Code, is to excuse
indescretions of the past for improving the future of Aspen. In
consideration of that same spirit, we are requesting approval despite two
minor setback encroachments of 18" and 24 ", and the presence of an
overhang above the walk along the east yard that provides access to the
proposed ADU, but which contributes to excess site coverage.
The expressed intent of Ordinance 1, Series of 1990, is to encourage the
development of affordable housing without precluding the owners from
making profitable use of their property; and to achieve a balance between
the owners interest in a fair return on their investment, and the
community interest. The expense of of moving approximately 7 lineal feet
of wall 18 ", and 2 lineal feet of wall 24 ", to bring the existing residence
into conformance with the letter of the law upsets that balance. Removal
of the overhang would only be detrimental to the quality of the ADU as it
provides snow protection for the walkway to the ADU.
The Roy Family Trust is looking for a cost effective solution to their
"problems" and the City of Aspen is looking for affordable housing. Both
parties can gain by the approval of this ADU without compromising
r^
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 22, 1992
Page Four
established community values and standards. Nit - picking adherence to the
strict letter of the law, in this case, does not serve the public interest.
Respectfully Submitted,
mes J. Wilson
President
LT)
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jed Caswall, City Attorney
FROM: Bill Drueding, City Zoning Officer
DATE: September 15, 1992
RE: Artes -Roy
I found the September 30, 1991 memo to Sandy Stuller. This is
pretty accurate. I underlined in red the sentences I feel are
important in the enclosed copy.
Also enclosed is a C.E.O. from Tom Dunlop referencing fire places
and a letter to Jim Wilson from Kim Johnson dated July 13, 1992.
Jim Wilson and I were supposed to review the "new survey" to
determine zoning compliance under different scenarios of
compliance. This has not been done. Advise me as to the steps you
want me to take.
cc: Sandy Stuller
Diane Moore, City Planning Director
:ACC-
Li
12-6.4
11111 \
c
•
4
Aspen /Pit l ning Office
130 ; ;; ' �L
`� : :' �� it.t ■: Street
As ' :1611
(303)9.: ' :) 920 -5197
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Sandy Stuller cc;. Amy Margerum
Jed Caswall
FROM: Bill Drueding
Zoning Enforcemen - Officer
DATE: September 30, 1991
SUBJECT: 126 WEST FRANCIS / ARTES -ROY -MUELER RESIDENCE
On September 20, 1991, accompanied by members of the Building
Department, I made another physical inspection of the above -
referenced property to determine zoning compliance. This report
will not differ mach from my report of February 22, 1991
The following is a zoning summary as taken from the approved site
plan:
Lot Area 4,500 sq. ft.
Allowable FAR 2,820 sq. ft.
Total New FAR 2,814 sq. ft. (6 sq. ft. remaining)
Allowable site coverage 2,250 sq. ft.
Existing site coverage 2,091 sq. ft.
Addition 125 sq. ft.
in
New site coverage 2,216 sq. ft. Y t �
(Porch and overhangs = 315 sq. ft.
Allowed = 337 sq. ft. (difference of 22 sq. ft.)
A visual inspection indicates that the southwest corner of the
Sunroom has been expanded an additional 20 square feet. A building
jog enclosure in the front wall added 'another 4 square feet. The
enclosure of the porch added another 55 square feet of floor area.
The enclosed area on the west wall, where the patio had been,
resulted in a 48 square foot expansion. These unapproved additions
causes a net FAR increase of 120 square feet of building over the
allowable.
recycled paper
. o
C D -
The allowable site coverage has been increased by the additions and
the porch enclosure. The allowable site coverage for the 4,500
square foot lot is 50%, or 2,250 square feet measured to the
exterior walls and includes overhangs greater than 15% of the
allowable coverage.. This would allow 337.5 square feet of
overhangs. The architect, on the site plan, included the porch
overhang as part of the exempted 15%. The enclosing of the porch
causes an additional straight site coverage of approximately 80
square feet. The other additions called out in the FAR unapproved
additions added another 120 square feet of site coverage.
Additionally, the overhang on the east wall was physically
increased from 1.5 feet to 4 feet for a run of approximately 40
linear feet, or 100 square feet. After subtracting 22 square feet
remaining site coverage, the result is 250 square feet of
unapproved site coverage.
On the issue of setbacks, the front requirement total is
30 feet. The plat showed a 26 foot front yard setback and a 5 foot
6 inch rear yard setback existing on the westerly portion of the
lot, for a total of 31 feet 6 inches. The southwesterly unapproved
Sunroom addition of 3 feet to the south caused a 1 foot 6 inch
setback total encroachment. The side yard setback total for this
lot is 10 feet. The roof overhangs on the easterly elevation
appear to encroach into the setback greater than the 18 inches
permitted by the Aspen Land Use Regulations; a 2.5 foot
encroachment results from the 4 foot overhang.
The Aspen Land Use Regulations' definition of a bedroom is as
follows:
"Bedroom means that portion of a dwelling unit intended to be used
for sleeping purposes and which may contain closets, may have access
to a bathroom and which meets Uniform Building Code requirements for
light and ventilation."
ti
L �' 0 The approved plans indicate one bedroom on the first floor; the
elimination of an existing bedroom by removing the closet and
-�, A) another room labeled TV room without a closet or window egress.
l Visual inspection showed that the room that was to have a closet
3 N
2 eliminated, in fact, contained a bed, a closet and a window. I
consider this room to be a bedroom. The TV room also contained a
bed, a closet, as well as a full bath. Both of these rooms
appeared to be intended and used for sleeping purposes.
Considering these rooms as bedrooms requires an of one on-
site parking space for each bedroom. I did not observe any parking
spaces on site nor on the approved plans. Thus, there is a
violation of the Aspen Land Use Regulations for required parking,
two spaces.
Another issue is the roof enlargement in the westerly setback.
Note that the site plan does not show any roof work in that area.
2
c 0
Other elevations indicate . ange in roof line and although this
was missed, the result is , increase in a nonconforming structure
(the enlargement of th- •orti•. of the roof in the required 5 foot
setback). Please a•'ise me as o how we should further handle
this.
The two unapproved dormers on the westerly roof do not have any
/zoning impact.
1 The second story and the remainder of the building appears to have
fr been built according to plans. Again, an exact n her verification
wovitreau're new improvement rvey. 1 =eel that my numbers are
very close, thoug
I feel that in order to bring this structure into compliance,
_ removal of the ;awed addit'ons i sa2r�Y Reopen the
porch; cut back hangs; and tai �atehe two lower
level bedrooms, or provide parking on site.
Also, althou.h not part of zonin• it was easil observed that
there a e wo una•• owed firep aces. These a• been lined ou on
th c .
Summary of Problems:
-- Southe� � sunroom corner - FAR, site coverage, setbacks.
-- Bathroom addition over patio - FAR, site coverage, fixture
fees. .
-- Front wall - FAR, site coverage, setbacks. -L-
----%-- Front door overhang - site,coverage, setbacks.
-- Porch enclosure - FAR, site coverage.
-- Easterly overhang - Site coverage, setbacks.
-- Bedroom - Parking.
--, Westerly roof enlarge!en - I' reasing nonconformity (to be
discussed) . \\
/ cic 2
Cu'w
3
c
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Bill Drueding
From: Tom Dunlop
Postmark: Sep 14,92 4:51 PM
Status: Previously read
Subject: Fireplace Regs
Message:
A single family house in the city limits of Aspen can legally have
one of the following options: One certified wood burning stove, one
gas log and unlimited gas appliances (gas log sets served by a class
B vent); or two gas logs and unlimited gas appliances. This law went
into effect as ordinance 20, series 1988, specifically in July 1988.
X
kfa
( 4/6?
Jim Wilson
3015 B Highway 82
Basalt, CO. 81621 July 13, 1992
RE: Roy Family Trust Accessory Dwelling Unit Application
Dear Jim,
Thank you for submitting the full size survey of_the 126 W. _
Francis St. It is much easier to read than the Xerox copies in
the application. Zoning Enforcement Officer Bill Drueding and I
have reviewed the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) application and
determined that the as -built drawings /survey show that the exterior
wall of the ADU's bathroom was built into a patio area. This
increased the'site's Floor Area Ratio (FAR and site coverage,
which do-- •. currentl com.1 wit ' -•
di__PncionaL rPrniirement5. It also appears by the survey that the
minimum 5' side setback is not met. The dimensions we reference
are the 4.0' setback from the pro.ert '1iC - • •- - t
bui •. n• corner wall added to e 0 :' • the wall just south
o• that corner. T is a..s up to 4.8' setback. In a••i ion, ere
are the setback encroachments for the roof overhangs which you
mention in your 2 f _..
I iscussed this information with Planning Director Diane
Moore and City Attorney Jed Caswell. We agreed that because of
these non - conformities and their inclusion into the design of the
proposed ADU, the Planning Office cannot continue to process the
application as submitted which includes the above referenced non -
conformities. There are two options available to the applicant.
First, you could submit an application showing the accessory unit
as being in compliance with the R -6 dimensional requirements. In
effect, the wall would have to be moved back to its pre - 1990( ?)
location. The other option would be to apply to the Zoning Board
of Adjustments for variances to the zone district dimensional
requirements as they have the authority to vary dimensional ,
requirements. If the variances were not granted, the application
would have to undertake the other option. Either structural
modification or recei•t of variances .• • •- eauired prior to
review •v he Planning an. oning Commission for conditional use
approval of the ADU.
Your letter stated that Ordinance 47, Series 1988 Section 3
is to "excuse indiscretions of the past ", granting amnesty for
bandit units. As a point of clarification, that section
specifically refers to legalization of bandit units in existence
a 0 3
on or prior to November 1, 1988. The as -built drawing you
submitted in the current application shows that the space proposed
as an ADU is a den, bathroom and TV room. According to Mr.
Drueding, that space would not qualify as a bandit unit as it
lacks a kitchen.
Please call me if you have any other questions regarding the
options outlined in paragraph 2 above.
Sincerely,
Kim Johnson
Planner _
cc:
Diane Moore, City Planning Director
Bill Drueding, City Zoning Enforcement Officer
Jed Caswall, City Attorney
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Gary Lyman CC Tom Parry
CC Bill Drueding CC Kim Johnson
From: Jed Caswall
Postmark: Aug 20,92 3:24 PM
Subject: Artes -Roy
Message:
Rita Farry now has copies of all inspection reports. She is in
process of preparing a letter outlining all violations and things
that need to be fixed. She will forward me the letter as soon as it
is complete. We then will go over same in detail to insure is covers
everything. If it does, Artes -Roy will then use letter as basis to
formulate a remediation plan which we will then approve, modify, etc.
I will get you letter as soon as it comes in. Let me know if you have
any questions.
-------- x--------- - - - - --
C
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Gary Lyman CC84i p,3 ;}
CC Diane Moore CC Tom Parry
BC Jed Caswall
From: Jed Caswall
Postmark: Jul 30,92 10:23 AM
Subject: Artes -Roy
Message:
I have just received the permanent mandatory injunction issued by the
court re the above -noted residence. Artes -Roy has until August 15th
to expose all covered work and have it inspected. That also means we
have to get inspecitons done by 8/15. He is required to get all
necessary permits. Actual corrective work need not be completed
during this time, just identified. I will forward copies of
injunction to Gary and Kim for reference. Please call me should you
have any questions. Judge has warned that he will not tolerate any
screwing around by anyone on this, including us here at City.
X
} ' - ,corded Book 684 Page 837
DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 91 CV 50
ORDER DISSOLVING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; ISSUING MANDATORY
INJUNCTION; RULING ON VARIOUS PENDING MOTIONS;
AND ENTERING A CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
` �,
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, M�
Plaintiff, ✓ G
EDWARD ARTES -ROY, KRISTIE ARTES -ROY, Rga6RD P. MUELLER
and THE ROY FAMILY TRUST, ,t
Defendants.
THIS MATTER, having come on for hearing by telephonic
conference on June 15, 1992, with Plaintiff, City of Aspen
(hereinafter "City ") represented by Sandra M. Stuller, Esq. and
Daniel J. Torpy, Esq. and all Defendants represented by Rita M.
Farry, Esq., it is hereby
ORDERED,
Disposition of Pending Motions
With respect to all motions pending herein:
1. The Motion to Intervene as an additional party defendant,
filed by Phillip Asher, Trustee, on behalf of the Roy Family Trust,
is hereby granted; provided, however, as represented by counsel
for the Trust, the Trust accepts the case in its present posture
and agrees that it will assert no additional defenses to the claims
herein made.
2. The counterclaim of Defendants, Edward Artes -Roy and
Kristie Artes -Roy, for abuse of process, is dismissed, with
prejudice; provided, however, that this dismissal shall not
constitute an adjudication on the merits. It is specifically
ordered, by consent of the City of Aspen, that this shall not
constitute res -udicata with respect to any issues raised or to be
raised -in the United States - District Court, District of Colorado,
'case no. 91 -C -255. The City's claim for attorneys' fees and costs
for defending against the counterclaim is preserved for hearing as
described below.
1
r o
3. The following pending motions, by reason of the mandatory
injunction entered herein, are deemed moot:
a. (Artes - Roys') Motion. for Relief from Temporary
Restraining Order to Fix Leaks in Roof (3/13/91).
b. (Artes - Roys') Motion for Relief from Temporary
Restraining Order to Replace Furnace.
c. (Mueller's) Motion for Enlargement of Time to
Respond to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories and Request for
Production of Documents (3/13/92).
d. (Artes - Roys') Motion for Reconsideration of Order
Granting, in Part, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (3/14/92).
e. (City's) Motion for Clerk's Entry of Default
(3/26/92).
f. (City's) Motion for Imposition of Sanctions
Pursuant to Rule 16 for Failure to Provide Court Ordered Discovery
(3/30/92).
g. (City's) Motion for Imposition of Sanctions Against
Reinhard Mueller for Failure to Provide Court Ordered Discovery
(4/21/92).
h. (City's) Preliminary Motions (4/27/92).
i. ( Artes- Roys') Motion for Leave to File Amended
Answers, Pursuant to C.R.Civ.P. 15 (5/15/92).
Provided however, that the Defendants may seek the relief
requested in the motions described in paragraphs (a) and (b) above
pursuant to the procedures established below for implementation of
the mandatory injunction.
4. Those who remain as Defendants in this case are Edward
Artes - Roy, Kristie Artes -Roy, Reinhard P. Mueller and the Roy
Family Trust.
Mandatory Injunction
1. The Preliminary Injunction issued April 30, 1991 is
hereby dissolved and in its stead, this mandatory injunction hereby
issues, whereby the Defendants are hereby ordered to undertake any
and all work, building, or construction necessary to bring the real
property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
herein.by reference, into compliance with any and all ordinances of
the City of Aspen, Colorado. This Mandatory Injunction binds all
the Defendants, their heirs, successors and assigns, and all
persons and entities within the language of Rule 65(d) C.R.C.P.
2
2. Implementation of this injunction shall be as follows:
a. The Plaintiff shall have forty -five (45) days from
June 30, 1992, within which to require Defendants, at their
expense, to expose covered work to determine the existence of any
hidden defects, which shall be corrected in accordance with this
order. Within this 45 day period, Plaintiff's inspectors shall
inspect and identify any additional violations of applicable City
ordinances to be corrected. The actual correction of the added
defects may take place after the 45 day period.
•
b. Defendants shall submit fees and prepare and
present all necessary plans and applications for permits to the
City for approval of all work, including corrective work, and
obtain permits therefor, to bring the property in compliance with
applicable City ordinances.
c. The City's officials shall review said plans and
applications submitted.
d. Upon approval, the City's officials shall issue all
necessary permits for the work provided thereunder.
e. Defendants shall call, and permit access, for all
required inspections by building officials of the City. All work
shall be done in accordance with the plans submitted. The building
officials shall inspect all work performed.
f. The chief building official shall issue a
certificate of occupancy upon a determination that the work
conforms to the plans provided and permits issued, and complies
with all applicable codes and ordinances.
3. The property shall not be used or occupied until a
certificate of occupancy is issued; provided, however, that
nothing herein shall be deemed to prevent the building official
from issuing a temporary certificate of occupancy, pursuant to
U.B.C. § 307(d).
4. The City shall, within two (2) business days of the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy, execute and record a
satisfaction of this judgment.
5. A certified copy of this Order may be recorded in the
records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, which, until the
filing of a satisfaction of judgment as provided above, shall be
constructive notice of this order to all persons who may
subsequently acquire any right, title, interest, or estate in and
tothe• real property described in Exhibit A.
6. If any party violates any of its obligations under this
order, the injured party may seek remedies of contempt.
3
C 0
Vacation of Trial; Case Management Order
The trial to the Court set for three (3) days in Aspen
beginning on October 21, 1992 (8:30. a.m.) is vacated. In lieu
thereof, the Court will, at the same date, place and time, hear all
parties' pending claims for attorneys' fees and costs. In
anticipation of this hearing, it is hereby ordered,
1. The Court's case management order of March 9, 1992 is
vacated.
2. In order to determine the need for expert witnesses, all
parties shall, on or before September 30, 1992, file and serve on
all other parties, documentation of hourly rates, hours billed, and
necessity of expenditures made. Any and all objections thereto
shall be filed and served on or before October 14, 1992.
3. Witness and exhibit lists shall be filed and served as
follows:
a. Claimants - by August 28, 1992.
b. Response - by September 18, 1992.
• c. Reply - by October 2, 1992.
Dated this of July, 1992 rt and
4
P - er Cra -�='
Judge, District -..
PtTwN
DISTRICT COU RT OS COUNT Y
COLORADO
sPc►J
Certified to ` be a full, true and correct copy of the
original In my custody. 1— a-9 — 1 Z
Dated r 5 Cent
` wJ eputy
BY
•
•
air C 0;3
•
�,,./ �.✓ Exhibit A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The following- described property situate in Pitkin County,
Colorado, described as:
The Easterly one -half of Lot L and all of Lot M, except
the following two parcels:
"Rear Parcel" A parcel of Land being part of Lot M,
Block 55, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Said
parcel is being more fully described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the East line of said Lot M,
whence the Northeast corner of said Lot M bears North
14 °50'49" East 0.86 feet;
thence South 14 °50'49" West 36.99 feet along said East
line of Lot M;
thence North 76 °52'43" West 1.84 feet along a board
fence;
thence North 15 ° 18'19" East 18.53 feet, along said
board fence;
thence North 14 ° 47'57" East 18.50 feet along said board
fence;
thence South 75 °57'28" East 1.71 feet along said board
fence to the point of beginning.
"Front Parcel" A parcel of Land being part of Lot M,
Block 55, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Said
parcel is more fully described as follows:
Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Lot M, thence
along the South line of said Lot M, North 75 °09'11"
West 1.32 feet to the point of intersection with a
board fence;
thence North 16 °23'05" East 28.64 feet along said board
fence;
thence, leaving said board fence, South 75 °09'11" East
0.55 feet to the point of intersection with the East
line of said Lot M;
thence along said East line of said Lot M, South
14 °50'49" West 28.63 feet to the point of beginning.
All in Block 55, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin
County, Colorado.
Also known as 126 West Francis Street, City of Aspen, Colorado.
•
•
Aspen /Pit < ; ' ing Office
130 ` • ' I treet
Asp • _ r 611
(303) 921 � ' : _ , t '920-5197
Jim Wilson
3015 B Highway 82
Basalt, CO. 81621 July 22, 1992
RE: Roy Family Trust Accessory Dwelling Unit Application
Dear Jim,
Thank you for submitting the full size survey of the 126 W.
Francis St. It is much easier to read than the xerox copies in
the application. Zoning Enforcement Officer Bill Drueding and I
have reviewed the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) application and
determined that the as -built drawings /survey show that the exterior
wall of the ADU's bathroom was built into a patio area. This
increased the site's Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and site coverage,
which does not currently comply with the R -6 zone district
dimensional requirements. It also appears by the survey that the
minimum 5' side setback is not met. The dimensions we reference
are the 4.0' setback from the property line to the northwest
building corner wall added to the 0.8' jog in the wall just south
of that corner. This adds up to 4.8' setback. In addition, there
are the setback encroachments for the roof overhangs which you
mention in your June 22, 1992 letter.
Because of the above listed non - conformities and their
inclusion into the design of the proposed ADU, the Planning Office
cannot continue to process the application as submitted. There are
two options available to the applicant. First, you could submit
an application showing the accessory unit portion of the structure
as being in compliance with the R -6 dimensional requirements. In
effect, the non - conforming wall would have to be moved back to its
pre -1990 construction location. The other option would be to apply
to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for a variance to the zone
district dimensional requirements. If a variance was not granted,
the application would have to undertake the other option. Either
structural modification or receipt of variances would be required
prior to review by the Planning and Zoning Commission for
conditional use approval of the ADU.
Your letter stated that Ordinance 47 (Series 1988) Section 3
is to "excuse indiscretions of the past ", granting amnesty for
bandit units. As a point of clarification, that section
specifically refers to legalization of bandit units in existence
1
3 : recycled paper
^1
on or prior to November 1, 1988. The as -built drawing you
submitted in the current application shows that the space propos4d
as an ADU is a den, bathroom and TV room. According to Mt.
Drueding, that space would not qualify as a bandit unit as it lacks
a kitchen.
Please call me if you have any other questions regarding the
options outlined in paragraph 2 above.
Sincerely,
l
im • nson
Planner
cc:
Diane Moore, City Planning Director
Bill Drueding, City Zoning Enforcement Officer
Jed Caswall, City Attorney
2
3
r
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Kim Johnson CC Diane Moore
From: Jed Caswell
Postmark: Jul 06,92 10:46 AM
Subject: Artes -Roy
Message:
We need to talk re the above application for ADU. Sandy is a little
worried about how we will handle. If the ADU can be legalized thru
the approval process, then we should do so. The court's order is not
intended to prevent Artes -Roy from getting such approvals as he can
under code to legalize the previously illegal construction i.e., he
need not tear out the wall if he would be allowed to get ADU had he
properly processed the thing in the first place.
X
s
Aspen /Pit t''- ; . ning Office
130 ": Street
. :1611
Asp•..,•_
(303) 9 - �:) 920- 5197 /
M E M O R A N D U M 0 /
irVV r oon
TO: Sandy Stuller cc: Amy Margerum
Jed Caswall
FROM: Bill Drueding
Zoning Enforcemen Officer
DATE: September 30, 1991
SUBJECT: 126 WEST FRANCIS / ARTES- ROY - MUELER RESIDENCE
On September 20, 1991, accompanied by members of the Building
Department, I made another physical inspection of the above -
referenced property to determine zoning compliance. This report
will not differ much from my report of February 22, 1991
The following is a zoning summary as taken from the approved site
plan:
Lot Area 4,500 sq. ft.
Allowable FAR 2,820 sq. ft.
Total New FAR 2,814 sq. ft. (6 sq. ft. remaining)
Allowable site coverage 2,250 sq. ft.
Existing site coverage 2,091 sq. ft.
Addition 125 sq. ft.
New site coverage 2,216 sq. ft.
(Porch and overhangs = 315 sq. ft.
Allowed = 337 sq. ft. (difference of 22 sq. ft.)
A visual inspection indicates that the southwest corner of the
Sunroom has been expanded an additional 20 square feet. A building
jog enclosure in the front wall added another 4 square feet. The
enclosure of the porch added another 55 square feet of floor area.
The enclosed area on the west wall, where the patio had been,
resulted in a 48 square foot expansion. These unapproved additions
causes a net FAR increase of 120 square feet of building over the
allowable.
..
� *� recycled paper
• - ,.
The allowable site coverage has been increased by the additions and
the porch enclosure. The allowable site coverage for the 4,500
square foot lot is 50 %, or 2,250 square feet measured to the
exterior walls and includes overhangs greater than 15% of the
allowable coverage. This would allow 337.5 square feet of
overhangs. The architect, on the site plan, included the porch
overhang as part of the exempted 15 %. The enclosing of the porch
causes an additional straight site coverage of approximately 80
square feet. The other additions called out in the FAR unapproved
additions added another 120 square feet of site coverage.
Additionally, the overhang on the east wall was physically
increased from 1.5 feet to 4 feet for a run of approximately 40
linear feet, or 100 square feet. After subtracting 22 square feet
remaining site coverage, the result is 250 square feet of
unapproved site coverage.
On the issue of setbacks, the front and rear requirement total is
30 feet. The plat showed a 26 foot front yard setback and a 5 foot
6 inch rear yard setback existing on the westerly portion of the
lot, for a total of 31 feet 6 inches. The southwesterly unapproved
Sunroom addition of 3 feet to the south caused a 1 foot 6 inch
setback total encroachment. The side yard setback total for this
lot is 10 feet. The roof overhangs on the easterly elevation
appear to encroach into the setback greater than the 18 inches
permitted by the Aspen Land Use Regulations; a 2.5 foot
encroachment results from the 4 foot overhang.
The Aspen Land Use Regulations' definition of a bedroom is as
follows:
"Bedroom means that portion of a dwelling unit intended to be used
for sleeping purposes and which may contain closets, may have access
to a bathroom and which meets Uniform Building Code requirements for
light and ventilation."
The approved plans indicate one bedroom on the first floor; the
elimination of an existing bedroom by removing the closet and
another room labeled TV room without a closet or window egress.
Visual inspection showed that the room that was to have a closet
eliminated, in fact, contained a bed, a closet and a window. I
consider this room to be a bedroom. The TV room also contained a
bed, a closet, as well as a full bath. Both of these rooms
appeared to be intended and used for sleeping purposes.
Considering these rooms as bedrooms requires an,addition of one on-
site parking space for each bedroom. I did not observe any parking
spaces on site nor on the approved plans. Thus, there is a
violation of the Aspen Land Use Regulations for required parking,
two spaces.
Another issue is the roof enlargement in the westerly setback.
Note that the site plan does not show any roof work in that area.
2
•
LAND USE REGULATIONS
§ 5 -510
conditional use. The off- street parking requirements and other dimensional
requirements which shall apply to the use shall be those of the zone district in
which the use is a permitted or conditional use, but shall be calculated on the
basis of the land area and development of the entire parcel.
B. Proposed use allowed in all zone districts. When a parcel of land contains more than
one underlying zone district and the proposed use is allowed in all of the respective
zone districts, then:
1. The use shall 1* developed by comparing each dimensional and parking requirement
of the respective zone districts and applying the more restrictive of each requirements.
These requirements shall, however, be calculated based on the land area and .
development of the entire parcel.
2. The only exception shall be when the area of the parcel which is designated with
the zone district which permits the higher density cbtlstitutes more than seventy -
five (75) percent of the entire land area of the parcel. In this case, the use shall be
developed using the dimensional requirements and off-street parking requirements
of the zone district permitting the higher density, which shall be calculated on
the basis of the land area and development of the entire parcel.
Sec. 5-509. Miscellaneous provisions.
A. Fuel storage tanks. All fuel storage tanks shall be completely buried beneath the
surface of the ground.
B. Lights. Any light used to illuminated parking areas or for any other purpose shall be
so arranged as to reflect the light away from nearby residential properties and vision of
passing motorists.
Sec. 5 -510. Accessory dwelling units.
A. General provisions:
1. Accessory dwelling units shall contain not less than three hundred (300) square feet
of allowable floor area and not more than seven hundred (700) square feet of allowable
floor area. The unit shall be deed restricted, meeting the housing authority's guide-
lines for resident occupied units and shall be limited to rental periods of not less than
six (6) months in duration. Owners of the principal residence shall have the right to
place a qualified employee or employees of his or her choosing in the accessory dwelling
unit. Parking shall not be required if the unit is a studio or one - bedroom unit, but one
(1) parking space shall be provided on -site if the unit contains two (2) bedrooms and
one (1) additional space shall be required for each additional two (2) bedrooms in the
unit.
2. An attached accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to all other dimensional require-
ments of the underlying zone district.
3. A detached accessory dwelling unit shall only be permitted on parcels that have
secondary and/or alley access, excepting parcels with existing structures to be con-
- Supp. No. 2
1667
0
§ 5 -510 ASPEN CODE
verted to detached accessory dwelling units, detached garages or carports where an
accessory dwelling unit is proposed above, attached to, or contained within such
detached garage or carport. Detached arrrssory dwelling units are prohibited within
the R -15B zone district.
B. Development review standards: The review standards for a detached accessory dwelling
unit are as follows:
1. The proposed development is compatible and subordinate in character with the pri-
mary residence located on the parcel and with development located within the neigh-
borhood;
2. Where the proposed development varies from the dimensional requirements of the
underlying zone district, the planning and zoning commission shall find that such
variation is more compatible in character with the primary residence than the devel-
opment in accord with dimensional requirements. The following dimensional require-
ments may be varied:
a. Minimum front and rear yard setbacks;
b. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot;
c. Maximum allowed floor area may be exceeded up to the bonus allowed for acces-
sory dwelling units;
d. The side yard setback shall be a minimum of three (3) feet;
e. The maximum height limits for detached accessory dwelling units in the R-6 zone F ,
district may be varied on the rear one -third ('/s) of the parcel, however, the 't _
maximum height of the structure shall not exceed sixteen (16) feet. On Landmark
Designated Parcels and within an Historic Overlay District the HPC shall have
the ability to make such height variations;
f. Maximum allowable site coverage may be varied up to maximum of five (5)
percent, on Landmark Designated Parcels and within an Historic Overlay Dis-
trict the HPC shall have the ability to make such site coverage variations;
g. In the case where the proposed detached accessory dwelling unit is located on a
Landmark Designated Parcel or within an Historic Overlay District only HPC
may make dimensional variations pursuant to the standards of Section 5 -514B.
1 0
3. The planning and zoning commission and the historic preservation committee may
exempt existing nonconforming structures, being converted to a detached accessory
dwelling unit, from Section 5- 5�B.2.(a —g) provided that the nonconformity is not
increased.
4. Conditional use review shall be granted pursuant to Section 7 -304 Standards appli-
cable to all conditional uses.
C. Bandit units: Any bandit dwelling unit which can be demonstrated to have been in
existence on or prior to November 1, 1988, and which complies with the requirements of this
section may be legalized as an accessory dwelling unit, if it shall meet the health and safety
requirements of the Uniform Building Code, as determined by the chief building official.
Supp. No. 2
1668
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Kim Johnson
From: Diane Moore
Postmark: Jul 02,92 11:42 AM
Subject: Reply to: Roy ADU appl.
Reply text:
From Diane Moore:
thanks Kim and good follow -up esp. with Sandy!
Preceding message:
From Kim Johnson:
I spoke w/ Sandy Stuller and she reiterated what we discussed last
Friday: we should not accept this application because it shows the
unit to involve illegal walls (setback and site coverage excesses).
I will inform Jim Wilson in writing to this effect, and Sandy said
she would look it over before I send it. I'll send you folks copy of
the draft also.
--------x--------
FOq _ __ � TaN
M AgE
PH _ E /3 q
i�
Mess4G P
/ coos N 40 uM seR 'NON au
• , - ° Sj , I� i k re �p • Air Rouswe Asa 4e r CAL
A
GNEO 4Th .►I•• Llif ten
r oPS F S o
oR
M 4006
.dd
Another issue is the roof enlargement in the westerly setback.
Note that the site plan does not show any roof work in that area.
The two unapproved dormers on the westerly roof do not have any
zoning impact.
The second story and the remainder of the building appears to have
been built according to plans. Again, an exact number verification
would require a new improvement survey. I feel that my numbers are
very close, though.
I feel that in order to bring this structure into compliance,
removal of the unapproved additions is necessary. Reopen the
porch; cut back the overhangs; and this eliminates the two lower
level bedrooms, or provide parking on site.
Also, although not part of zoning, it was easily observed that
there are two unapproved fireplaces. These had been lined out on
the plans by the architect.
Summary of Problems:
-- Southeasterly sunroom corner - FAR, site coverage, setbacks.
-- Bathroom addition over patio - FAR, site coverage, fixture
fees.
- - Front wall- FAR, site coverage, setbacks.
-- Front door overhang - site coverage, setbacks.
- - Porch enclosure - FAR, site coverage.
-- Easterly overhang - Site coverage, setbacks.
-- Bedroom - Parking.
/cic
3
vicAz . ill Z N V - L.-IS o F V Ie-sai\viNcil `? > 1
(A(')/ (ctG / ?rOKF7 }
p � -f� PI-6H 4 5 . 2, IN :,
,t.�AN -� , LTG A- h � I `'' •
aewN o- 1M- '..#.. ..,3 7 .:
4 N ECe5s / A 2.1 r2our10 Fuze y
• E
.vc,44 6UN 1,945 �/ Gt /� y 1 G/ "���� /y�
��' 1 /• G 1 1 Q 6 ,
' 1/ ?/ ovNEC ) L1. VIZ- . lyQ runt 1 _ 'N ✓• -2,t 1 •�VG W,IZJt '� . � 10 Rae ! ) y ;
.
4
rrvAct --1141 14 t-o ( As A �, I 5 4 \\/ VAT1 ON1 °i Ei' 2 ES. e.e.owo Fwa
��� CoMPL� + N pP fArt�
NATiaJAL A• 3•Z H E- Eta/A -NON II �"Teu 69EC 4
A - 4:I Ye - v\1 C.' +' &' g•Z:I ouN0ATi rt..n.r.l 2
irk Pi9oAceo A • q , Z 1 /Z' - ec,11ON 'o' 5.22 &aatJQ e PeA. A 1NG
F or A F . 1.Ic<. 4- 5. (2 u h'2' eaF FP,AE--iING
1r , \4 9t.r7 N Era, LLI.t -e)1 r. - St.. -OC G 5 5-
<�1c)'OR II re 45,0
1
c -v v
1 ;
•
' pm r _ 1'At GC N7
) -)
0 l
- y�
Fx1�:TWG� r ,, �C}/' ut
Te5 V cii7cvea .
` '( / j ,' k Amor d::i�tr
0 �' ; . / , , ; i ; ., . YSk D MO"
& A - 4.2. i
,/, LLI . .
Li I N, ir _. / . , - ` . j
\g'->" MDI9Tueg in
Exl�mk16, 1 orcd
° I HOOP H OUSE
7) F A:..L Z
O N /
.-‘ L. U ca
boIE \U 1Ortiv Awrr
0 > ;
\ ' p
S. (l�f•' -�IfJ p d t
-I i ,ri Llkin \ ; nr 0 i . I .
rY , ,ism, P 4
_A relocet t�
; tr 4 � ? Z
,r:e. �(. h dew (, #1 f
Q ` Cr� 1 � ( WALK •
y I O l„
J /`
0 ox r 1
"
y y
�i° N ° O ' tr'`�/ 45 vo �N 5'i990 �. d •; Ai
) ) ii„, 0veRH-AN65= 315sF G Ci s y'TQ ecr
U I 1
t',
N I
.. -,-.7 e, ieot . nG � , , /1 � _e1�d d �:f'4'r1 - ■ s,;
JUN— 1 1 — 2 T H I _ I 1 = : 4 C G h l ' ; IT f ' I E F : P . 02
4. JW-11 - 1'992 13: ;'7 FROM ?•KGB LAW ID PI TO Frnrv. r'. !
' R is DEEM `
THIS DEED, Made this 3t:d day of April., 1992, between Reinhard P.
Mueller and his wife Christa Karin Mueller, grantors, and The Roy Family , '
Trust Under Agreerflent Dated April 14, 1988 whose legal address is c/o
walter. I,. Jacob, At.to ney, 660 Linton Boulevard, saite 200, Delray
Beach, Florida 33144 of the County of Palm each and State of Florida,
grantee: , ,
WITN1 S.SKTH, That the grantors for and in consideration of the sum ,
of TEN DOLLARS $10.00) AND OTHER CONSIDERATION the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, have granted, bargained,
sold And conveyed, and by these presents do grant, bargain, sell., convey
and confirm unto the grantee, and its heirs and assigns forever, all
the real property together with improvements, if any, situate, lying end •
being in ttto county of Vitkin and state of Colorado described as
follows:
SEE EXHIBIT "Ac' ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HF:EtEINl
$U JECT To: Reservations and exceptions as contained .
i n; Deed recorded in Book 49 at: Page 264
an known by street And number as: 126 West Francis Street, Aspen,
Colorado $1611.
TOGETHER with all and singular the heredttanents and appurtenances
thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and
reversions, remainder and Ltimainclet8, rents, issues and profit thereof,
and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever
of the grantors, either in law or equity, of, in and to tho above
bargained premise$, with the heredltaments and appurtenances.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and
described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantees, and its hails and
assigns 'turc3Ver. And the grantors, :or themselves, their heirs, einl
bars, nal representatives, do covenant, grant, bargain, and agreo to and
with the grantee; and its heirs and assigns, that at the time of tie?
enseiinq and delivery of they presents, they are well seized or the
premises above Conveyed, have good, sure, perfect, absolute and
indefensible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and have good
right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and
convey the saute in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are
free and clear frem all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens,
taxee, assossments, encumbrances and restrictions c at whatever kind or
nature soever, except taxes for the current year and burdens of special
assessment districts,
The grantors shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above-
bargained premised in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee,
and its heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons
lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular limber
shall include t:ht► plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any
Oender shall ho applicable to all genders.
IN WITNESS 41HEREOF, the grantors have executed this deed on the
I� e to n i above. f
1 \y_ Reinhard P. Mueller. Claja i
e . r `(
atua r i' ice. utL i y { r .
�,,� C : i ..,-a._� , at in Mueller J i Os Christi K
� .c; 5 , c..¢. —� y -...�..
•
'` ,tgese
STATE OF FLORIDA
ss
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
Tho foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me in the County of
Pallet fcach, State of Florida, this 3rd clay of April, 1092, by Itr.,i.nt1,Ird
P, Mnnllmr,, Chri.4ta Karin Muffler,
Gf F. I/
MY , trot . _ Witncre my hand and otfio.ta1
Rea ,` 1 1 t , ff l ,'
'{ `•+y ..�����K'� \ 4• . ...—_ t�fJtA1�• I'lihl.l. f:
% rert a3
NOTARY Pont..' , 1t rll(, M. f
my corionsSi 110"reImu) kc r , y,),N �Rl .z, -. / - `. i_ _ t\lc, : y7G�c.- e_s5:11_e Addresn
�' +.. tti ° • (lc Cc 11 " :\ t r \C I w ■ - 1:3 30 (
to43r 04 /14/92 11:5 R,ec 4 II' 1,74 t 450
c: e.. :y nmvi c: Pi tkin Cnt.v Lir.trk', Dot IHrn
JLiN..11' 1Th ^ y :L•`.3 FROM y�UE L TO RIT Rai :rfl r'. :;
/ MI
LEGAL DESCRI!TION
•
•
•
The Easterly onothulf of Lot r. and n11 of loot t4; nxeopt taro Colouind
cwu parcola:
°llertr parcel" A tjnrcel of Land bnint part of Lot M. Block 55, City nod
• fownoite of Aat'un, Colorado... Sold, parcel is boing mote fully do cril:ed
nu tollowe:
•
llogi,nnin at u pgi.ut on' the' Raat line Or aaid Lot (•1, whence the
Northeast cornerof said Lot M bears North 14'50'49" Past 0.06 E.r'et; •
thence South 14'50'49" Host 36.99'fnel. along, aaid Cart lino of Lot M;
thence North 76'52.'63" Went 1.04 font alontc n board fence:
thence North 15'Lf'19" gnat 18.53 fent, along said board fence;
thence North 14' 67'57" Cast 10.50 feet along ani,d'bodrd fence:
thence South 75 East 1.71 font aloe sold board [once to oho
point of boglnniUl3•
"i'.L9lL: fa..u.n12. A lrnt•r.01 of Land being pare, nr Lot M, block 55, City and
Towns/to of Aat\en, Colorado. Said pet 1a more fully described
follows:
ilnfinninl: nt the Southonce earner or nnid Lot: 11, thence menu the South
line or said Lot'. M, North 75'09'11" Nast 1.32 feat to tho point n(
1nteranution with n board fence;
thence North 16'23'05" goat 20.64 teet along paid board ranee:
thence, .leaving,t: aid bnnrd (once South 75'09'11" I'.ost 0.55 fort t•:, the
paint of inter tictlon with tho tact line of said t.nt (1:
Lrrenuo nlurr u
s l;d Root line of sold La1'. M. Louth 74'$0 tlouL 2.II,G3
toot to tho poirjt of begtnnina.
All In Illock 55, City',00d 'tnwnnIte of Aspen,
COUNTY Of PITK1M,
euhul&Ahu
#343555 04/14/92 11:55 Fr,c $10.00 13V 674 F'G 4151
°i. D,:cvir„ P1lY.'irr Culy Clerk. Doc $.00'
,I.mvycr Otto 1n (stpo'r)Clort
•
•
,----
d l a%N.. , t\'•.\\" •\\1
3111
i rn
—ri Pt iv .
�` - -- 1 k'&. �� > �., F 1 t „
• �R_ cSO 111
01
fi vie _t v
r z
j1 � f 1
f f
Th
U
c�,. .. P.EPfV. Y.' r4, W
L 5 9 1G+ 5+^ E 45.
'—v V
4i
I �{ RN 1 20 g I BRICK PATIO
o REAR PARQEL. 134, 134, +`c
:
1 LF
1 f ,- • t
`'O G o,
I.
o 8; 1 39
7 _'Tr'
/ - f
' / '.--, 1
1 3 ,
n m
N
i 3 2./ ��� /
/
I l ONE STORY WOOD ' -/ 1 tr.,- ' 25
o I VIC TORN IA HOUSE / I 6
r 9
I
I
s
.' g1
-.A I I I _ c
oil Z
o O .
i I -
72
h • / - �, 6
ar
it
e fl - - J• I
J
L " .
y
1 +~ t
O
- _ Y 0 c
az) t.
J_
I g N e o e
i . - -3 at
`
J it / �
/
/ // / — 1 A
' +:? I
6.1i / I
01 � I \/ fp �I _
T' I $ 6/ . • �i.
- � ,� h
8 00 / 1
_it". ': SOS •69 8
1
Y 1 Q
V ', s,.
HI • — Q
_ ■ 4 j \ FENCE LINE
a 1 "P6 OP c h EASEMENT
I f Bic 654 , Po N5:
6. J • L . AP
t f nDnT PARCEL &C
w i
u„ -CI L LOT fi
C ,&s w/ rI cA I
i
-, 1184
J M N K :ar [non [ [ 1' } = tp: � .___' _ P r
N '7 A. 0 n1 i A a r. At , I - .�� w.. LAS
PHILLIP C. ASHER
660 Linton Blvd, Ste 200
Delray Beach, FL 33444
June 11, 1992
City of Aspen
Planning Office
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: 126 W. Francis Street
Aspen, Colorado
Dear Sir or Madam;
Please be advised that I, Phillip C. Asher, Trustee, for the Roy
Family Trust, owner of the premises, hereby authorize James J.
Wilson, 47 Original Lane, Basalt, CO 81621, Tel. (303) 927 -9845, to
act on behalf of the Trust with respect to the above premises, and
in particular, with respect to the Trust's application for approval
of an Accessory Dwelling Unit.
All communications with respect to the above application should be
directed to Mr. Wilson, and he has full authority from the Trust to
act on its behalf.
Very truly yours, 7
it
C
Y
Phillip C. Asher
Trustee
Roy Family Trust
cc: James J. Wilson
(.
-a
k (0
mm I
c MI U urN JC
2 co c o I k
N sa w` 9 -
p 1111 _ z
E I
.'.
c fi 3
'p .. V P qpq• s 4�
-ro ry :'i 1 ra� s U �o .g t ti
a r': ilk u M :.
il P� H\ ef P Pp a ° r .
O ` . . ` n c f PM —00” aN _ b / � � sl pueen� onaol� _
u e dts
C 1 ivv 4�
v p u a a � Hue•M� otos
°fit € 1 V Q �
I P FD' i� ° r 3
P _ 4F
j / m
� °� / sw =' ' lit ®�11
6 (� K PH . ._ mi ®® ( � _ _ f•'
1 U -
n
I
PoHr or O�KpM _ -_. : .
o m
1- 6 b K%w..p u no , arts W �
n
j m
�MY PY ea u > )
b a?m •
G/ A PP nYWMM j
Ott° a °
z
P PHWNp j
u
F
r It 11' '
op 's' 9°° Em
1Y >s
x _0
s
•
t ..4.
,u f
4 ,r, ' } . 44 c i 1 .17.:`.ika , m. `t'., },I i'
Atrti s i(d1 -?--
ll
7'..a C an-r...cc . S 1 Cyr -] C
`ti 1tc'_. As 1 ,' h "i)k`r;-, A LL. -'_.
}rt'.a.,.,ax ., "7";/.... ._ r7 c CD 2
. i E gip)
6 �� j12r U t c Grp LO Fr et,,,.
1;;O??. - 2 1 2.38
ii
- }.:Lein FcJic)# .m L1' -C..
2 p, N i. r'4
! .220 iv
t
N Of: A,�r t+ k4dv\ 'QA( ✓ aa,r.l ct t s c'Yn U.n,CE•s,,,
N IKAA „ E j t .k r' i
Pn / 207
/\ �. -.,
X r-
1;?PiVUrP,1, Ce $ re gi;:t. ( 7
1 .- 'VI
- Co - J ,
cov Y ( <.. 1
•
1
— 1 1 — H Li
`.4.0
Fe-OM : SAS! er.:k 6[Th41 H/A
• •
I
ep / sik, am I afar ft?f-And;
112.R
mAA, Cbis.A L C (e)
I ) \L L ern Yfriffr
1> OU..) 312.
, Co
C-T:SE CI e t.,)tiarrs /
istec
c (-At LIO Le
il-rrin 5 4--
4 cpr
? tit:4
•
'.7Ubi— 1 1 —'gym r J 1@ ?. Li IL I_: _ i1ME C_ + 3
F+ - esiri f!i4 11 ■ Pi1F
•
I£) 3 LA) At/1( "...
III (Acts
1 I1 c • { �� c• k) F - rte..
t >c I „3
'X>?v "iel hA, LQtiu ,
IQC tU 1"1 ►iY+1c.r«
1c'GUku -, M ( /4
4 'S `?p -cm 1 i , n, 66411). .
tJfv� ` t Fw } c d4c6/.1 (Ji-dAl■c :
eX g1
f , re. N n\ c %
U is '44 ■ 1 h< , Fri
'H 3 4 43
t IJ b1 — I. 1 — _ a T H I_I 1 C: =: 0 C. 0 ha '_. 1_1 19 E F.'. ". r . ty ..y
Fr m Sufi; ER:K Ai_eTR'Cut ,i;A r.! C No. _.C1] :4__ ii -Ul. H '• ..::4i1 t 1 ;i
)V 4.,,1.
! 1 �.-4r or L.CIr �` ` Y � �� ` � Ffy Y'M t t�t � 0
�'�LAGIh— ' � ` ¢,� d ti, ; • ` ,k, .
�}i (LAS- ' �A 4 r U . C ° '� jr
c.b'r" .n, E poLvi r !l\ . Firs t e ..,�,, .
r� w
tr,17,n.ea-c x!,' s, rtil-•1
5544-
,,,....---t-- "-------fr....,
r
if 1' 41 1. PQAto f'. t
.,J'1 .
x. I sekt f A 444.. S ';� ';', z,
{- gyms -}x>) , 1y. 0 ' r i f1 C,9
i' .Y\ P6 Ak C; /`.l.V.C:il;40Y -1
L'$ 1CCC)
R
0
r S �t 6a )4 1 t 'C %I ?C)1
N v 13 0 0 -T lt` I e ( ' '1 6, •1 1e4..Q.
lisf K. ' C' . . N S 2(-)
Wit41"h 0C. :20eic)q
1:' e rte ! L-.F . L -D I Nu 6 air, s i " -- 10); e--, 7, e;
iJoxot 7-; c.) . L 6)o c (f
r (ilG c),y-N.ti CU\ 1:I le
X "rr',