Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.rz.Eagle's Nest Condominiums.1982 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Eagle's Nest Condominiums - Rezoning to RBO and Exemption from GMP for Employee Units Z APPROVED AS TO FORM: DATE: November 8, 1982 _ Location: Lots H and I, Block 61 - 105 West Hyman (sou East corn- ). Zoning: R-MF Applicant's Request: To convert existing space to two employee units in a newly- constructed duplex, requiring exemption from GMP and rezoning to RBO. The applicant is also requesting an exemption from the provision of parking for the employee units. Referral Comments: Building Department The change in occupancy level from an R-3 occupancy (duplex) to an R-1 occupancy (apartment house, i .e. , occupied by three or more families living independently) requires all construction to be 1 hour fire resistant throughout. Light and ventilation will have to be increased in each of the bedrooms and smoke detectors will have to be installed in each of the sleeping areas. Engineering Department 1. The addition of 2 units of 1 bedroom each will require 2 more off-street parking spaces. 2. A railroad tie cribbing and step structure is located on the Garmisch Street right-of-way and requires an encroachment license. Housing Office The County Housing Authority survey indicated the need for employee housing was initially in the low and moderate income range. The City Housing Office requests that these units be rented in the "moderate" category. City Attorney's Office No comments received. Planning Office Review: If this building was in a proposal stage rather than already built, many factors would be under consideration beyond those we have discussed. However, the building is completed and the bulk is already in existence. RBO zoning would permit a multi-family structure with an allowable FAR of 1 .25:1 . This structure's FAR will be 1 . 16: 1 . Each basement unit presently has a bedroom and bath and the proposal is to add a kitchen to each unit. In light of the fact that this is presently a duplex with an allowable FAR of well under 1 : 1 , it is a nonconforming structure. By allowing the conversion of the basement units to employee housing, the structure becomes a multi-family structure with an allowable FAR of 1 : 1 and the potential for the .25 bonus through RBO rezoning, and thus becomes a conforming structure. • • Memo: Eagle' s Nest Condominiums Page Two November P - 1082 The trade-off involved in this proposal is that while a multi- family structure has more impact on the neighborhood, the addition of two deed-restricted employee rental units helps to meet our employee housing shortfall . The two proposed units are 885 square feet and 652 square feet. The Housing Guidelines set a maximum size of 800 square feet for a one bedroom unit and the applicant has agreed to rent the larger unit based on 800 square feet, with no charge for the additional 85 feet. The units will be further restricted against future condominiumization and will remain rental units. Section 24-10.9 of the Municipal Code presents review criteria for consideration of a site or area to be included within a Resi- dential Bonus Overlay District. One of the primary points is the appropriateness for the neighborhood considering architectural design, bulk and density. Obviously, in light of the neighborhood objection to this structure's bulk, we would require substantial size reduction if this building was at the proposal stage. Since it ts completely built and preceeded the new Floor Area Ratio regula- tions, the bulk issue is not something that can be altered. The applicant points out that deed restricted employee rental space is a goal of the City and this location aids in the geographic disbursal of that housing form. Furthermore, multi-family condominium structures stand to the north and south and there are duplexes in the neighborhood which have had previous RBO attachments. We therefore conclude that rezoning to RBO in this location would be appropriate provided that the applicant can meet the parking requirements of the Code and the legal requirements to deed restrict the new units and to abide by the limits of the Building Code. After completing a site visit, it is the opinion of the Planning Office that these employee units would be assets to the City's inventory of employee rental housing. The change from duplex classification to multi-family disallows the stacked parking arrangement which presently exists on the site. The Planning and Zoning Commission did not feel that the provision of parking _ spaces should be waived. If their action is upheld, four additional —spaces would be required. After a discussion with the owner as to the current use of the structure, the Planning Office feels it is a reasonable request to waive the provision of parking spaces for the employee units and to allow the condominiumization documents to reflect the willingness of the Green Family Trust to provide additional spaces at the request of subsequent buyers of the free market units. The tearing up of lawn and landscaping -at-this point seems unnecessary, especially since if the employee units are exempted from the parking requirement, the function of the remainder of the building is as a duplex. Planning and Zoning Action: Approval for rezoning the duplex called the Eagle's Nest Condo- miniums to RBO and exempting the two proposed employee rental units from the Growth Management Plan and deed restricting them to the "moderate" income category under the following conditions: 1. That the applicant, provide four additional offstreet parking spaces. 2. That the applicant obtain an encroachment license for the existing encroachment into the Garmisch Street right-of-way. Memo: Eagle' s Nest Condominiums Page Three November 8, 1982 3. That the applicant execute the Statement of Subdivision Exception and the Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions through the City Attorney's Office. 4. That the applicant meet the requirements for occupancy of the units as indicated by the Building Department in their memo • dated April 29, 1982. Council Motion: Since all concerns relative to the subdivision exception were taken care of at first reading, the only action necessary at this time can be accomplished by the following motion: "I move to adopt Ordinance No. 39 on second reading. " f • • • • A T K L'. sv: 5 c 2 M.4 i, R ri Poi T • • 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Department FROM: Stan Steven, Building Inspector DATE: April 29, 1982 RE: Review of Request - Rezoning to Residental Bonus Overlay and Exemption from GRIP for .Employee Units for Eagle 's Nest Condominiums , Sec. 1202(b) Group R, Division 1 occupancies more than two stories in height or having more than 3000 square feet area above the first story , shall be not less than 1 hour fire-resistive construction throughout . Sec. 420 defines story; "the finished floor level directly above a basement or unused under-floor space is more than 6 feet above grade as defined herein for more than 50 percent of the total perimeter-. . . . such basement or unused under-floor space shall be - - - considered as a story. " Since 127. 9 feet of a total of 244 .-5 feet of perimeter of the building (greater than 50%) .meet the above definition, the building is considered as a 3 story building . . Therefore, in order to convert from an R-3 occupancy (duplex) to an R-1 occupancy (apartment house ie : occupied by three or more families living independently) as required in Section 1202(b) , all construction shall be 1 hour fire-resistant throughout . In addition, light and ventillation will have to be increased in each of the bedrooms to meet Sec. 1205(a) , and smoke detectors will have to be installed in each of the sleeping areas. cc : Patsy Newbury Ztrect Pozpcn Co:orado 012311 303/935.5973 • • • 4 • -m RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM 11 C.F.HOECKEL B.B.8 L.CO. ORDNIANCE NO. 39 (Series of 1982) AN ORDINANCE REZONING FROM RMF TO RMF/RESIDENTIAL BONUS OVERLAY (RBO) THE DUPLEX LOCATED ON LOTS H AND I, BLOCK 61 , FOR THE PROVI- SION OF TWO EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS IN THE MODERATE INCOME RENTAL CATEGORY } WHEREAS, the Green Family Trust, the owner of real property more specifically described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference, has applied to rezone said property from RMF to RMF/RBO, and WHEREAS, the purpose of the Residential Bonus Overlay Dis- trict (RBO) as outlined in Section 24-10. 1 of the Municipal Code "is to provide for present and future housing needs of the commun- ity by authorizing the development of bona fide low, moderate and middle income housing free from speculative investment influence and for primary residential use by local residents", and WHEREAS, the intent is further stated to allow an increased residential density to promote such housing, and WHEREAS, the structure meets the requirement of being a "pure" residential project, and • WHEREAS , the change in occupancy level from an R-3 occupancy ,5 (duplex) to an R-1 occupancy (multi-family) will require addi- tional safety modifications in the structure , and- WHEREAS, the duplex located on Lots H and I, Block 61 , is x\ completed and the rezoning to RBO will not increase its bulk, and WHEREAS, the City Housing Office has recommended that the employee units be rented in the moderate income category, and WHEREAS, the units will remain as rental units and will not be sold, and • WHEREAS, with changes in the floor area ratios, the structure is now non-conforming and this RBO will have the effect of making it a conforming structure, and y • • RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM M C.F.HOECKEL 8.B.&L.CO. WHEREAS, the owner, the Green Family Trust , is willing to • amend the condominiumization documents to commit to the provision • for additional parking spaces if required, and WHEREAS, a railroad tie cribbing and step structure is located on the Garmisch Street right-of-way and requires an encroachment license. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 • That a Residential Bonus Overlay be applied to the duplex at a ' 105 West Hyman (Lots H and I, Block 61 ) for the purpose of provid- ing two one-bedroom employee units to be rented in the moderate income level with the following conditions: • 1 . The applicant modify the condominiumization documentsY to -a= e +-e - nt_. .a.__prov-ide two additional parking spaces -if- -1((,_; . -a -of half the duplex requests them. 2. The applicant obtain an encroachment license 4-'fdr; the f � .4 1' existing encroachment into the Garmisch Street right-of-way. 3. The applicant execute the Statement of Subdivision Excep- tion and the Declaration of Covenants Restrictions and Conditions through the City Attorney 's Office. 4. The applicant meets the requirements for occupancy of the units to R-1 occupancy standards. Section 2 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or por- tion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconsti- tutional • by- any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining por- tions thereof. 2 • • RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM N C.F.HOECNEL B.B.a L.CD. Section 3 A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the /3 day of , 1982, at 5: 00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, 15 days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its regular meeting held 7 . 1982. / H • an Edel, Mayor ATTEST: _44 .■ Kathryn Sr/ Koch City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of , 1982. Herman Edel, Mayor • ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 3 • - MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Eagle's Nest Condominiums - Rezoning to RBO and Exemption from GMP for Employee Units // DATE: August 9, 1982 APPROVED AS TO FORM: -; ,f Location: Lots H and I, Block 61 - 105 West Hyman (southe.s corner) Zoning: R-MF Applicant' s Request: To convert existing space to two employee units in a newly- constructed duplex, requiring exemption from GMP and rezoning to RBO. The applicant is also requesting an exemption from the provision of parking for the employee units. Referral Comments: Building Department The change in occupancy level from an R-3 occupancy (duplex) to an R-1 occupancy (apartment house, i .e. , occupied by three or more families living independently) requires all construction to be 1 hour fire resistant throughout. Light and ventilation will have to be increased in each of the bedrooms and smoke detectors will have to be installed in each of the sleeping areas. Engineering Department 1 . The addition of 2 units of 1 bedroom each will require 2 more off-street parking spaces. 2. A railroad tie cribbing and step structure is located on the Garmisch Street right-of-way and requires an encroachment license. Housing Office The County Housing Authority survey indicated the need for employee housing was initially in the low and moderate income range. The City Housing Office requests that these units be rented in the "moderate" category. City Attorney' s Office No comments received. Planning Office Review: If this building was in a proposal stage rather than already built, many factors would be under consideration beyond those we have discussed. However, the building is completed and the bulk is already in existence. RBO zoning would permit a multi-family structure with an allowable FAR of 1 .25:1 . This structure's FAR will be 1 . 16: 1 . Each basement unit presently has a bedroom and bath and the proposal is to add a kitchen to each unit. In light of the fact that this is presently a duplex with an allowable FAR of well under 1 : 1 , it is a nonconforming structure. By allowing the conversion of the basement units to employee housing, the structure becomes a multi-family structure with an allowable FAR of 1 : 1 and the potential for the .25 bonus through RBO rezoning, and thus becomes a conforming structure. Memo: Eagle's Nest Condominiums Page Two August 9, 1982 The trade-off involved in this proposal is that while a multi- family structure has more impact on the neighborhood, the addition of two deed-restricted employee rental units helps to meet our employee housing shortfall ., The two proposed units are 885 square feet and 652 square feet. The Housing Guidelines set a maximum size of 800 square feet for a one bedroom unit and the applicant has agreed to rent the larger unit based on 800 square feet, with no charge for the additional 85 feet. The units will be further restricted against future condominiumization and will remain rental units. Section 24-10.9 of the Municipal Code presents review criteria for consideration of a site or area to be included within a Resi- dential Bonus Overlay District. One of the primary points is the appropriateness for the neighborhood considering architectural design, bulk and density. Obviously, in light of the neighborhood objection to this structure's bulk, we would require substantial size reduction if this building was at the proposal stage. Since it is completely built and preceeded the new Floor Area Ratio regula- tions, the bulk issue is not something that can be altered. The applicant points out that deed restricted employee rental space is a goal of the City and this location aids in the geographic disbursal of that housing form. Furthermore, multi-family condominium structures stand to the north and south and there are duplexes in the neighborhood which have had previous RBO attachments. We therefore conclude that rezoning to RBO in this location would be appropriate provided that the applicant can meet the parking requirements of the Code and the legal requirements to deed restrict the new units and to abide by the limits of the Building Code. After completing a site visit, it is the opinion of the Planning Office that these employee units would be assets to the City's inventory of employee rental housing. The change from duplex classification to multi-family disallows the stacked parking arrangement which presently exists on the site. The Planning and Zoning Commission did not feel that the provision of parking spaces should be waived. If their action is upheld, four additional spaces would be required. After a discussion with the owner as to the current use of the structure, the Planning Office feels it is a reasonable request to waive the provision of parking spaces for the employee units and to allow the condominiumization documents to reflect the willingness of the Green Family Trust to provide additional spaces at the request of subsequent buyers of the free market units. The tearing up of lawn and landscaping at this point seems unnecessary, especially since if the employee units are exempted from the parking requirement, the function of the remainder of the building is as a duplex. Planning and Zoning Action: Approval for rezoning the duplex called the Eagle's Nest Condo- miniums to RBO and exempting the two proposed employee rental units from the Growth Management Plan and deed restricting them to the "moderate" income category under the following conditions: 1 . That the applicant provide four additional offstreet parking spaces. 2. That the applicant obtain an encroachment license for the existing encroachment into the Garmisch Street right-of-way. Memo: Eagle' s Nest Condominiums Page Three August 9, 1982 3. That the applicant execute the Statement of Subdivision Exception and the Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions through the City Attorney's Office. 4. That the applicant meet the requirements for occupancy of the units as indicated by the Building Department in their memo dated April 29, 1982. Council Action: If Council concurs with the action of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the appropriate motion is: "I move to read Ordinance No. S t and to exempt the two proposed employee rental units from the Growth Management Plan and deed restricting them to the "moderate" income category under the following conditions: 1 . That the applicant provide four additional offstreet parking spaces. 2. That the applicant obtain an encroachment license for the existing encroachment into the Garmisch Street right-of-way. 3. That the applicant execute the Statement of Subdivision Exception and the Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions through the City Attorney's Office. 4.. That the applicant meet the requirements for occupancy of the units as indicated by the Building Department in their memo dated April 29, 1982. " "I move to adopt Ordinance No. 3 9 . " If you agree with the Planning Office recommendation concerning parking spaces, the motion is: "I move to read Ordinance No.0 1 and to exempt the two proposed employee rental units from the Growth Management Plan and deed restricting them to the "moderate" income category and to further exempt the employee units from the provision of parking under the following conditions: 1 . The condominiumization documents reflect that if subsequent buyers of either free market unit desire an additional parking space, the Green Family Trust commits to provide them. 2. That the applicant obtain an encroachment license for the existing encroachment into the Garmisch Street right-of-way. 3. That the applicant execute the Statement of Subdivision Exception and the Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions through the City Attorney' s Office. 4. That the applicant meet the requirements for occupancy of the units as indicated by the Building Department in their memo dated April 29, 1982. " "I move to adopt Ordinance No. / . " ASPENOPITKII REGIONAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Department FROM: Stan Steven, Building Inspector 1` DATE: April 29, 1982 RE: Review of Request - Rezoning to Residental Bonus Overlay and Exemption from GMP for Employee Units for Eagle ' s Nest Condominiums . Sec. 1202(b) Group R, Division 1 occupancies more than two stories in height or having more than 3000 square feet area above the first story, shall be not less than 1 hour fire-resistive construction throughout . Sec. 420 defines story; "the finished floor level directly above a basement or unused under-floor space is more than 6 feet above grade as defined herein for more than 50 percent of the total perimeter. . . . such basement or unused under-floor space shall be considered as a story. " Since 127. 9 feet of a total of 244 . 5 feet of perimeter of the building (greater than 500) meet the above definition, the building is considered as a 3 story building . Therefore, in order to convert from an R-3 occupancy (duplex) to an R-1 occupancy (apartment house ie: occupied by three or more families living independently) as required in Section 1202(b) , all construction shall be 1 hour fire-resistant throughout . In addition, light and ventillation will have to be increased in each of the bedrooms to meet Sec. 1205(a) , and smoke detectors will have to be installed in each of the sleeping areas. cc : Patsy Newbury 506 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/925-5973 JU11N TIU1\IA- KELLY ATTORNEY AT LAW POST OFFICE BOX 1 109 TELEPHONE 1 17 SOUTH SPRING S TIRE ET (3031 9251216 ASPEN. COLORADO 8161 1 April 9 , 1982 Aspen City Council Planning Commission Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office Paul Taddune , City Attorney Jim Hamilton, Pitkin County Housing Director Re : Request for Rezoning (RBO) Request for Exemption from Growth Management Plan Lots H & I , Block 61 City and Townsite of Aspen Ladies and Gentlemen : I represent the Green Family Trust which is the owner of Lots H & I , Block 61 , City and Townsite of Aspen. The property is presently improved with a recently con- structed duplex which has been legally condominiumized into what is known as the "Eagles Nest Condominiums" . The purpose of this application is to obtain permission to add a "middle income" unit in the basement of each of the existing condominium units. In order to permit the construction of the units , two separate approvals , which I believe may be processed simultaneously, must be granted. The two approvals are dealt with below. 1. Rezoning . Application is hereby made pursuant to the provisions of Article X of the Aspen Municipal Code , which provides for Residential Bonus Overlay Districts. This article was added to the Code by Ordinance No. 16 , 1980 . The purpose of the RBO Ordinance is set forth in Section 24-10-1 : " . . . to provide for the present and future housing needs of the community by authorizing the development of bona fide low, moderate and middle income housing free from speculative investment influence and for primary residential use by local residents . " It is submitted by the applicant that this project complies with the provisions of the Article and that as such the property should be rezoned from R-MF to Residential Bonus Overlay District, based on the following : April 9 , 182 Page 2 Section 24-10. 5 , Area and Bulk Requirements. Initially it should be noted that adding of the subject units will in no way increase the area and bulk of the constructed project. All additional improvements shall be constructed within the basement of the existing unit. The approximate floor area ratio will be 1. 16 : 1, well within the 1. 25 : 1 allowed by the Code . All square footage of the new units (652 square feet and 885 square feet, respectively) shall be deducted from the existing approved free market condominium units. Accordingly, there will be no changes in area or bulk from the existing structure. Section 24-10. 7 , Application. (a) Section 24-10. 7 permits an application for designation of the site as a housing overlay district may be made at any time during the year. (b) The final condominium plat as approved and recorded is attached hereto. This map accurately depicts all improvements external and internal situate on the property. All that will be necessary to complete the project is the addition of a kitchen and partitions in the basement of each unit. The total number of additional dwelling units proposed is two. Both units would be for rental purposes and would remain appurtenant to and a part of the existing condominiums. In other words, no further condominiumization of these units is presently contemplated by the applicant. The size and specifications of the units are as follows : Type of Unit Rental Guideline Rent 1 - 885 +- sq. ft. $ . 75 per foot $600. 00 per 1 bedroom, 1 bath month* 1 - 652 +- sq. ft. $ . 75 per foot $490 . 00 per 1 bedroom, 1 bath month * Note that the guidelines set a maximum size of 800 square feet for a one bedroom. Accordingly, rent is based on 800 square feet, with no change for the additional 85 feet. April 9 , 1982 Page 3 The owner/developer of the subject property is the Green Family Trust. The recently completed duplex, which will require only minor alterations to convert the basements into middle income rental units, is of the highest quality, and I believe the construction and interior work will be far superior to other employee units in Aspen or Pitkin County. The contractor who built the improvements is Mr. Joe Zanin of Aspen, a long time local contractor . As stated previously, each unit is one bedroom and one bath and all that is necessary is a partition and a kitchen to be added to each unit, which Mr. Zanin will complete . Section 24-10. 9 , Review criterion. Much of criterion (a) is of little relevance to this application in view of the fact that the improvements are already in existence. As stated previously, there will be no external changes necessary to create the two additional units requested. I would add, however , that the existing structure has multi-family condominium structures to the north and south and that there are at least two lodges in the neighborhood. To the west and in the next block are duplexes which have received RBO designation. The project will also achieve the following other purposes included in the review criterion : 1. It complies with most of the planning and development statement of purposes as set forth in Section 24-8 . 1 of the Municipal Code. 2 . The deed restrictions of the units to be added for middle income housing obviously address a major goal of the City with respect to the addition of employee housing. 3 . The architectural design maximizes construction quality and unit size. 4 . Because the project integrates within a single building, deed restricted and free market units , and is in a neighborhood containing a majority of free market units, it obviously aids in geographic disbursal of deed restricted units. April 9-, --19B2 Page 4 5 . Since the development is in an area of similar developments and close to the commercial core area, there are minimal adverse social and/or environmental impacts. 6 . As stated above , because of the area in which it is located, the project is compatible with surrounding land uses and zoning. 7 . Since the project is located at Hyman and Garmisch, it has immediate proximity to transportation and is located only two blocks from the commercial core area of Aspen. Therefore , automobile use connected with the units will be minimal and its on-site parking spaces meet the requirements of the Code . 8 . Since the project is basically complete , the adequacy of utilities and other services is obvious . 2 . Special Review for Exemption of Employee Units from the Growth Management Plan. Section 24-11. 2 of the Municipal Code contains exceptions to the Growth Management Plan. Paragraph H refers to the exemption of housing units constructed pursuant to Section 24-11. 10 , subject to special approval of City Council after recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Commission . Employee housing is described by Section 24-11. 10 as low, moderate or middle income housing approved pursuant to Section 24-11. 4 (b) (3) . Section 24-11. 2 sets forth the review criterion to be used by the Planning and Zoning Commission in considering the exemption. Said criterion should improve the following : "A determination of community needs considering, but not limited to, the number of units to be constructed, the type of units , and the rental/sale mix of the development. " As described previously, this project consists of adding two small rental units to an existing, previously condominiumized duplex. Since the onset of the growth mnagement plan, there has been a limited number of residential employee units. It would seem, therefore , that employee housing, particularly when provided by the private sector, is still much needed by the City. Another important factor is that these units would be available almost immediately. All necessary improvements should be completed within a � 4 April 9 , 1 2 Page 5 few weeks of the issuance of the permit, thus providing an immediate two unit addition to the employee rental pool. Another important factor is that there is no current intention of selling the requested employee units. You will note that this application does not request additional condominiumization. Present plans call for the units to remain a part of the existing units to be available for rent under the Housing Guidelines for Middle Income Units set forth in Ordinance 79 . Applicant will , of course , agree to enter into an appropriate deed restriction with respect to the employee units. In view of the foregoing, the applicant respectfully requests that the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council- approve the exemption from the Growth Management Plan. Conclusion. While the Code provisions involving the RBO designation are rather complex, the project itself is simple . The duplex structure in which the two units would be currently exists as the two unit Eagle ' s Nest Condominiums , which have been approved by the City of Aspen. All that is requested is that a one bedroom, deed restricted rental unit be permitted in the basement of each unit. There will be no increase in the number of bedrooms or bathrooms , nor will any external structural changes be made to the existing building. Adequate parking, as required by the Code , exists on site . At present there are no plans for these units to be separated from the condominium units of which they are a part, as they are rental rather than sale units. In short, the applicant submits that impacts on the neighborhood will be minimal to non-existant and the community, if the requested approvals were to be granted, will have the addition of two middle income units to the rental pool. Attached are (1) the list of the names and addresses of the property owners within a300 foot radius of the subject property prepared by Aspen Title Company and (2) copies of page one of the condominium map for the Eagle ' s Nest Condominiums. If you have further questions or need further information, please let me know and I will be happy to provide same . Yours very truly, John Thomas Kelly Attorney-in-Fact for Applicant , The Green Family Trust JTK/jeo enc. cc : Elizabeth Green JOHN THOMAS KELLY ATTORNEY AT LAW POST OFFICE BOX 1 109 TELEPHONE 1 17 SOUTH SPRING STREET (303) 925-1216 ASPEN, COLORADO 8161 1 April 9, 1982 Mr. Alan Richman Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re : The Green Family Trust Dear Alan: Enclosed herewith is an application for rezoning to RBO for the Eagle ' s Nest Condominiums situate on Lots H and I, Block 61, City and Townsite of Aspen. Since this is a new area for me, I would appreciate it if you could take a quick glance at the submission and let me know if you need additional information and/or materials. I did not request an exemption from subdivision as no current additional condominiumization is contemplated. Please let me know if you think that is necessary. Assuming the application is satisfactory to you, I would appreciate an early setting before P & Z. I will , however, be out of town from June 5 to June 19, 1982 . Thank you for your kind cooperation in this matter. Yours vzetruly, John Thomas Kelly JTK/jeo enc. ALTA OWNER'S POLICY—Amend. 0/17/70 • SCHEDULE A Order No.: . 9639 Policy No.: 0 356915 Date of Policy: SEPTEMBER 27 , 1080 AT 8 :00 A.MAmoulu of Insurance: S 330,000. 00 1. Name of Insured: THE GREEN FAMILY TRUST 2. The estate or interest in the land described herein and which is covered by this policy is: IN FEE SIMPLE 3. The estate or interest referred to herein is at Date of Policy vested in: THE GREEN FAMILY TRUST 4. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: Lots I-i & I , Block 61 , CITY AND TO ,SITE OF ASPEN, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. • Page 2 ti'1' 1:\ '1' '1'I 'I'L L DE 0012 GUARANTY CI)MI'ANY ALTA ONINCR'S POLICY -Mi,. 3:3 • SCHEDULE B Order No. 9639 Policy No.: 0 356915 This policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public: records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5.Taxes for the year 1980 and thereafter, and any special assessment or charges not yet certified to the office of the County Treasurer. 6.Any tax, assessment, fees or charges by reason of the inclusion of subject property in Aspen Sanitation District , Aspen Street Improvement District , Aspen Fire Protection District, Aspen Valley Hospital District and The City of Aspen. 7.Deed of Trust from The Green Family Trust to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County for the use of Inez Marshall Zordel to secure $237 ,600.00 dated September 25, 1980 and recorded September 26, 1980 in Book 395 at page 758 . Id\VA 1:1"F L Page 3 I I I)A It A N T Y ('0,N I.A,S 1' • JOHN TIRO!.\ R I:1.1.v ATTO12NEY AT LAW POST OFFICE BOX 1 109 TELEPHONE 117 SOUTH SPRING STREET 13031 925-1216 ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 . August 3 , 1982 Ms. Collette Penny Aspen Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Paul Taddune, Esq. City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Jim Hamilton Pitkin County Housing Director 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen City Council 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Request for Rezoning, Request for Exemption from Growth Management • Plan, Lots H & I , Block 61 , Eagles Nest Condominium Ladies and Gentlemen: The purpose of this letter is to update the application filed on behalf of my client, The Green Family Trust, to permit the construction of two deed restricted units within the existing structure . Planning and Zoning granted approval for the rezoning and exemption subject to the following: 1 . That the applicant provide two additional off street parking spaces . 2. That the applicant execute a standard encroachment license regarding encroachment of a retaining wall. 3 . That the applicant execute the proper subdivision exemption required by the City Attorney ' s office. • • • • Collette Penny , et: a] . August 3, 1982 Page 2 • 4 . That the occupancy requirements of the ,building department (from R-1 to R-3) be met. The applicant has no problem with items 2 thru 4 above. The only problem lies with the creation of two new parking spaces. The applicant has previously requested that the parking requirement be set at the existing 6 spaces . I believe council has the flexibility to do this pursuant to Section 24-4 . 1 (c) of the code . Clearly the intent of this code provision is to permit the council flexibility in dealing with parking requirements where low, moderate or middle income housing are involved. In addition, the cir.cumstances' of this project are such that a flexible approach is appropriate, based on the following: 1 . From a practical point of view, one space per employee unit and two spaces per free market units are sufficient. The Green Family currently owns one car and do not rent their unit, which is in any event burdened with a six month rental restriction. The other unit to date has not been occupied. In short, the project has a history of • minimal auto use , and has not burdened the surrounding neighborhood with off street parking. 2. The location of the property (within 2 blocks of the commercial core) does not lend itself to heavy auto use . The fact that the project is on. the bus route is a further mitigating factor. 3. In order to provide the additional parking, it will be necessary to remove expensive, attractive landscaping and foliage. We feel this would be unfortunate visually for both the applicant and the neighborhood. The applicant is , however, aware of the concern of the council and the neighborhood regarding, the possibility of on street parking burdening the neighborhood. Accordingly, the applicant is willing to designate two additional parking spaces (one ,to the south of the structure and one on the north westerly portion of the property on the condominium map) . The applicant would also be willing to include in the declaration and/or exemption statement appropriate language requiring the applicant to construct said spaces as soon as practical after request by the City. Then in the event the City, in its discretion , determines that the additional parking is necessary do to on street parking impacts on the neighborhood, the applicant would have to .promptly provide the same. The foregoing proposal would appear to he a logical solution to the problem. In our view the existing • • • R • Collette Penn August 3, 1982, et al . Page 3 • parking is adequate, but even if erroneous,it be that City h the ability to proves to b that paces Y to re e landscaping there will in its discretion .wire the fully protected, the interest of st ruction of he result attractive e City and neighbors are for this In closing, I would point th for t edoonlhe premises at enable t}heua the Principal all applicant nt reason this as Welly on a part time times as their tO have are of a well at Provide two excellent Approval will is are unitshanCOUntyuperior to any others I am a unitpu Wit and and will to Penn am aware filch quality. , I believe, confirmss personally inspected pected Construction Respec , ul y submitted, • II JTK/sw o n Thomas Kelly 1 • . • 1 II,I . • y • RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM SO C.K.HfECKEI..9.A. ORDNIANCE NO. ( Series of 1982) AN ORDINANCE REZONING FROM RMF TO RMF/RESIDENTIAL BONUS OVERLAY (RBO) THE DUPLEX LOCATED ON LOTS H AND I , BLOCK 61 , FOR THE PROVI- SION OF TWO EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS IN THE MODERATE INCOME RENTAL CATEGORY WHEREAS , the Green Family Trust , the owner of real property more specifically described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference, has applied to rezone said property from RMF to RMF/RBO, and WHEREAS , the purpose of the Residential Bonus Overlay Dis- trict (RBO) as outlined in Section 24-10. 1 of the Municipal Code "is to provide for present and future housing needs of the commun- ity by authorizing the development of bona fide low, moderate and middle income housing free from speculative investment influence and for primary residential use by local residents" , and WHEREAS, the intent is further stated to allow an increased residential density to promote such housing, and WHEREAS , the structure meets the requirement of being a "pure" residential project, and WHEREAS , the change in occupancy level from an R-3 occupancy (duplex) to an R-1 occupancy (multi-family) will require addi- tional safety modifications in the structure, and WHEREAS, the duplex located on Lots H and I, Block 61 , is completed and the rezoning to RBO will not increase its bulk, and WHEREAS, the City Housing Office has recommended that the employee units be rented in the moderate income category, and WHEREAS, the units will remain as rental units and will not be sold, and WHEREAS , with changes in the floor area ratios , the structure is now non-conforming and this RBO will have the effect of making . it a conforming structure , and • RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM•0 C.F.NO0CKEL 6.H.8 1.C?. WHEREAS, the owner , the Green Family Trust , is willing to amend the condominiumization documents to commit to the provision for additional parking spaces if required, and WHEREAS, a railroad tie cribbing and step structure is located on the Garmisch Street right-of-way and requires an encroachment license. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That a Residential Bonus Overlay be applied to the duplex at 105 West Hyman (Lots H and I, Block 61 ) for the purpose of provid- ing two one-bedroom employee units to be rented in the moderate income level with the following conditions: 1 . The applicant modify the condominiumization documents to indicate a commitment to provide two additional parking spaces if a new owner of half the duplex requests them. 2. The applicant obtain an encroachment license for the existing encroachment into the Garmisch Street right-of-way. 3. The applicant execute the Statement of Subdivision Excep- tion and the Declaration of Covenants Restrictions and Conditions through the City Attorney 's Office. 4. The applicant meets ,the requirements for occupancy of the units to R-1 occupancy standards. Section 2 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or por- tion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconsti- tutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity ' of the remaining por- tions thereof. 2 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves F04M'O C.F.HnicKFI a.O.A l..C. • Section 3 A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the _ day of , 1982, at 5: 00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, 130 South Galena Street. , Aspen, Colorado, 15 days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its regular meeting held , 1982 . Herman Edel,. Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of , 1982. Herman Edel, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 3 . • BLOCK 53 Lot S (Lots R & S now Koch Townhouses) KOCH TOWNHOUSES Unit 1 - Tyron Austin Thompson a/k/a Tyrone Austin Thompson 211 S. First Street , Aspen, Colorado Unit 2 - Orr-Drazek Properties 500 Patterson Road, Grand Junction, Colorado 81301 Unit 3 - Julia Jackson Peavy P. 0. Box 4303, Aspen, Colorado Unit 4 - Barbara Iloff P. 0. Box 2222, Aspen, Colorado Unit 5 - Robert L. Orr 500 Patterson Road, Grand Junction, Colorado 81301 BLOCK 54 Lots I & S Lot I - City of Aspen Lot S - C. M. Clark P. 0. Box 566 Aspen, Colorado BLOCK 60 Lot A & W 221/2 of B Margaret B. Day 2655 N. Beach Road Englewood, Florida 33533 Lots E 7.5' of B, C, 1), E, F & G (Holiday_ House) June Moss Cantrup and Hans B. Cantrup Box 388 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Lots H & I W. A. Prechtel and Lena Prechtel. 201 South Garmisch Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 BLOCK 60 Lots K, L, M, N and 0 COTTONWOODS CONDOMINIUM Unit lA - Charles L. Weisenthal and Suki Weisenthal 1030 East Courtland Place Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202 Unit 2A - Martin R. Warshaw and Alice H. Warshaw Box 8976 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Unit 3A - Robert J. Franks and Lester Trachman, Co-Trustees of the R. J. Franks Trust No. 1 Dated 9/10/75 2222 Corinth Avenue Los Angeles, California 90064 Unit 18 - Tom B. Crawford and Christine N. Lucas 12625 Memorial Drive Houston, Texas 77024 Unit 2B - Emilio DeTurris 31 Bramble Lane Mellville, New York 11747 Unit 3B - Louis R. Richards and Frances F. Richards Rt. 2, Hilltop Road Mokena, Illinois 60448 Unit 1C - James C. Brennan 417 Royale Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Unit 2C - William F. Goodnough and Vivian V. Goodnough 221 E. Hyman Aspen, Colorado 81611 Unit 3C - Albert I. Strauch 4327 South Yosemite Court Englewood, Colorado 80110 Unit 1D - Dorothy N. Pack 3205 Austin Drive Colorado Springs, Colorado 60901 Unit 2D - Walter C. Pope, III and Dorothy Wilson Pope Box 1123 Sonora, Texas 76950 Unit 3D - Chester Firestein and Beverly Firestein 9777 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 714 Beverly Hills, California 90212 Unit lE - Robert G. Faber 2455 Adare Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 Unit 2E - Suzanne B. Ryan and Terrance J. Ryan 1055 16th Street Denver, Colorado 80202 COTTONWOODS CONDOMINIUM Unit 3E - Jane Erb Box 3207 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Unit 1F - Elliot L. Coles 2929 East Hartford Avenue Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53211. Unit 2F - Raymond J. Koenig and Elizabeth G. Traggis Box 234 New London, Connecticut 06320 Unit 3F - Katharine J. Denton and Robert G. Denton Box 10666 Aspen, Colorado 81612 BLOCK 60 Lots P, Q, R and S ASPEN TOWNHOUSES CONDOMINIUM Unit 1 - John K. Tipton and Nancy L. Tipton 6477 E. Manor Drive Englewood, Colorado 80110 Unit 2 - Mary P. Pullen Lieutenant River Old Lyme, Connecticut 06371 Unit 3 - Robert J. Pietrzak and Susan Ringsby Pietrzak 1476 Weld County Road #26 Longmont, Colorado 80501 Unit 4 - Roberta R. Lewis 167 Bellaire Street Denver, Colorado S0220 Unit 5 - Thomas Markle and Barbara F. Markle Box 3647 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Unit 6 - Kenneth F. Cross and Kathleen Cross Box 2431 Aspen, Colorado 31612 Unit 7 - William S. Midkiff and Kathryn N. Iiidkiff 120 Canyon Vista Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544 Unit 8 - Kathleen L. Krieger, George ii. Krieger and Stephen E. Krieger Box 4342 Aspen, Colorado 31612 Unit 9 - Robert J. Lewis and Eileen Lewis 101 West Mall Plaza Carnegie, Pennsylvania 15106 BLOCK 68 Lots A - G Lots A & B - Albert J. Bishop and Pearl Bishop 202 South Garmiech Aspen, Colorado 81611 Lots C & D - Rex R. Moore, Jr. 230 Hightower Building 105 North Hudson Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102 Lots E & F - Mary Hyde Millard 121 East Hopkins Aspen, Colorado 81611 Lot G - Margaret Bosshardt Pace Willson 208 Morningside Drive San Antonio, Texas 78209 BLOCK 68 Lots K Q Lots K, L & M - (Chalet Lise) Carl Allan Blomquist and Carol Blomquist 100 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Lots N, 0 & P - Edwin W. baker, Jr. 3206 S. Newport Street Denver, Colorado 80211 Lot Q - The Hearthstone House of Aspen, Inc. 134 East Hyman Aspen, Colorado 81611 BLOCK 69 Lots A, B, C, D, E,_ F and G Lots A & B now Hyman Apartments Condominiums Lots G, H and I now Good Thunder Condominiums Lots C & D - Wayne Ariola, Sharon F. Berle and Rodney E. Berle 534 South West Gate Los Angeles, California 90052 Lots E & F - C. M. Clark P. 0. Box 566 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Lots K, L, ?I, N now DerBerghoff Condominiums Lots 0 and W'-i of P (Little Red Ski Ilaus) Marjorie T. Riley 118 East Cooper Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Lots Q and EY) (Snow Queen Lodge) Norma L. Dolle Box 4901 Aspen, Colorado 81612 BLOCK 69 Lots A & B HYMAN APARTMENTS CONDOMINIUMS Unit 1 - Terry A. Miller and Janet L. Miller 21873 W. Hwy 82 Aspen, Colorado Units 2, 3 and 4 - Glenn Eugene Law Box 2537 Aspen, Colorado BLOCK 69 Lots G, H and I GOOD THUNDER CONDOMINIUMS Building A - Units 1 - 4 Brixia, Inc. c/o Dan Hindelang Building B - Units 1 - 4 Box 8502 Aspen, Colorado BLOCK 69 Lots K, L, M and N DER BERGHOFF CONDOMINIUMS Unit 1 - Glennis Beck Box 1111 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Unit 2 - Albert Rosen and Myrtle Rosen Box MM Taos, New Mexico 87571 Unit 3 - The Colorado National Bank of Denver, Trustee Horace E. Thompson and Edith Thompson Verne G. La Tourette and N. W. La Tourette 5619 Marador Circle Shreveport, Louisiana 71109 Unit 4 - Lucretia Coke 7221 Lakehurst Dallas, Texas 75230 Unit 5 - James Manning and Harriet Manning 4193 South Dahlin Street Englewood, Colorado 80110 Unit 6 - Robert H. Durham, Jr. Suite 2460 717 Seventeenth Street Denver, Colorado 80202 Unit 7 - Fred Larkin & Lucetta Larkin One Cove Lane Littleton, Colorado 80123 ti DER BERGHOFF CONDOMINIUMS Unit 8 - Colorado National Bank of Denver, Trustee Horace Thompson and Edith Thompson 5619 Mirador Circle Shreveport, Louisiana 71119 Unit 9 - Steven R. Stunda and Susan L. Stunda 4203 Somerset Place Baltimore, Maryland 21210 Unit 10- Colorado National Bank of Denver, Trustee Horace Thompson and Edith Thompson 5619 Mirador Circle Shreveport, Louisiana 71119 Unit 11- Hugh McGee and Ann McGee 3928 South Jasmine Street Denver; Golorado 802-37 -- -- - Unit 12- James Carder and Carolyn Carder 5769 Snowberry Drive Littleton, Colorado 80123 BLOCK 70 Lots A, B, C, D and E Lots A, B & C now Aspen Wild Condominiums Lots D & E (F and W 25' G) W/J Ranch, Inc. Box 4765 Aspen, Colorado ASPEN WILD COND0MINIUMS Unit 101 - Lyle D. Reeder Box 4359 Aspen, Colorado Unit 102 - Joseph R. Tarbet and Barbara P. Tarbet Box 3640 Aspen, Colorado Unit 103 - Lyle D. Reeder Box 4859 Aspen, Colorado Unit 201 - Stuart Williams and Richard Lavigne 18 Field Point Road Greenwich, Connecticut 06830 Unit 202 - Isaiah Coleman Box 11239 Aspen, Colorado Unit 203 - Robert G. Gardner 5 Hilliard Place Cambridge, Massachusetts Unit 301 - Lyle D. Reeder Box 4859 Aspen, Colorado ASPEN WILD CONDOMINIUMS Unit 302 - Lyle D. Reeder Box 4859 Aspen, Colorado Unit 303 - William R. slough One Beach Drive Apartment 1002 St. Petersburg, Florida 33701 • RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM 50_.K.H:lECKEt,8.B.h 1.. ORDNIANCE NO. ( Series of 1982) AN ORDINANCE REZONING FROM RMF TO RMF/RESIDENTIAL BONUS OVERLAY (RBO) THE DUPLEX LOCATED ON LOTS H AND I, BLOCK 61 , FOR THE PROVI- SION OF TWO EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS IN THE MODERATE INCOME RENTAL CATEGORY WHEREAS, the Green Family Trust , the owner of real property more specifically described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference, has applied to rezone said property from RMF to RMF/RBO, and WHEREAS , the purpose of the Residential Bonus Overlay Dis- trict (RBO) as outlined in Section 24-10. 1 of the Municipal Code "is to provide for present and future housing needs of the commun- ity by authorizing the development of bona fide low, moderate and middle income housing free from speculative investment influence and for primary residential use by local residents", and WHEREAS, the intent is further stated to allow an increased residential density to promote such housing, and WHEREAS , the structure meets the requirement of being a "pure" residential project, and WHEREAS , the change in occupancy level from an R-3 occupancy (duplex) to an R-1 occupancy (multi-family) will require addi- tional safety modifications in the structure, and WHEREAS, the duplex located on Lots H and I, Block 61 , is completed and the rezoning to RHO will not increase its bulk, and WHEREAS, the City Housing Office has recommended that the employee units be rented in the moderate income category, and WHEREAS, the units will remain as rental units and will not be sold, and • WHEREAS, with changes in the floor area ratios , the structure is now non-conforming and this RBO will have the effect of making . it a conforming structure, and • RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves CORM'0 C.F.HECK EL B.0.9 L.C?. WHEREAS, the owner , the Green Family Trust , is willing to amend the condominiumization documents to commit to the provision for additional parking spaces if required, and WHEREAS, a railroad tie cribbing and step structure is located on the Garmisch Street right-of-way and requires an encroachment license. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That a Residential Bonus Overlay be applied to the duplex at 105 West Hyman (Lots H and I, Block 61 ) for the purpose of provid- ing two one-bedroom employee units to be rented in the moderate income level with the following conditions: 1 . The applicant modify the condominiumization documents to indicate a commitment to provide two additional parking spaces if a new owner of half the duplex requests them. 2. The applicant obtain an encroachment license for the existing encroachment into the Garmisch Street right-of-way. 3. The applicant execute the Statement of Subdivision Excep- tion and the Declaration of Covenants Restrictions and Conditions through the City Attorney 's Office. 4. The applicant meets ,the requirements for occupancy of the units to R-1 occupancy standards. Section 2 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or por- tion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconsti- tutional by any court of competent jurisdiction , such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity ' of the remaining por- tions thereof. 2 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM'0 C.F.1400CKEL a.0.9 L. Section 3 A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the _ day of , 1982, at 5: 00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall , 130 South Galena Street , Aspen, Colorado, 15 days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its regular meeting held , 1982 . Herman Edel,. Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 1982. Herman Edel, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk • 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Paul Taddune, City Attorney „City Engineering Department ti Ron Mitchell , Assistant City Manager/Interim Housing Director Fire Marshal/Building Department FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Eagle's Nest Condominiums - Rezoning to Residential Bonus Overlay (RBO) and Exemption from GMP for Employee Units DATE: April 21 , 1982 Attached is an application submitted by the Green Family Trust for property located at Block 61 , Lots H and I, Aspen (southwest corner of Hyman and Garmisch). The request is for Rezoning to Residential Bonus Overlay (RBO) and Exemption from GMP for Employee Units. This item is scheduled for City P & Z on May 18, 1982; therefore please review and return any comments you may have to me by Thursday, May 6. • Thank you. x MEMORANDUM APR ; ;, 1982 TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office jj4/ FROM: Louis Buettner, Engineering Departmen-/ DATE: April 29, 1982 RE: Eagle ' s Nest Condominiums After reviewing the submission material and having made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments : 1 . The addition of 2 units of 1 bedroom each will require 2 more parking spaces. The size of the existing structure precludes the addition of any parking. Middle income rental units as applied for require off-street parking per Municipal Code. 2 . There is a railroad tie cribbing and step structure located on Garmisch Street right-of-way, that I have been unable to find an encroachment license for; said encroachment requires a license. 3. The City Attorney should comment if the condominium plat will need to be amended if the additional units are approved. LB/co pr717777,771c7-7) MEMORANDUM �lf APR �; ;.� ', ;I TO Paul Taddune, City Attorney AsPrN,1 % Pi s rr;;^! ^ a. • City Engineering Department P' '°''r',-;° 0' =,vE Ron Mitchell , Assistant City Manager/Interim Housing Director Fire Marshal/Building Department FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Eagle's Nest Condominiums - Rezoning to Residential Bonus Overlay (RBO) and Exemption from GMP for Employee Units DATE: April 21 , 1982 Attached is an application submitted by the Green Family Trust for property located at Block 61 , Lots H and I, Aspen (southwest corner of Hyman and . Garmisch). The request is for Rezoning to Residential Bonus Overlay (RBO) and Exemption from GMP for Employee Units. This item is scheduled for City P & Z on May 18, 1982; therefore please review and return any comments you may have to me by Thursday, May 6. Thank you. �1■ � _ P4 1 U - .. i_,..._.:2__,.._1_,:_i l''T, %1f i (1 r.JOHN THOMAS KELL 1N` I ATTORNEY AT LAW 11 APR 20 1982 li 1 ASPEN / PITKIN CO. POST OFFICE BOX 1 109 �j�q�a NtN � ��,y�C TELEPHONE 1 17 SOUTH SPRING STREET PLANNING I`f 11Y 13 I1vG (303) 925-1216 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 April 20 , 1982 Ms. Colette Penny Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office (Hand delivery) Re :- Eagles Nest Condominiums Dear - - - - Dear Colette: The purpose of this letter is to certify that I am an attorney duly authorized to practice law in the State of Colorado and have examined the records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado regarding the following described real property: Condominium Units A & B, Eagles Nest Condominiums (a condominium) according to the Condominium Map appearing in the records of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado in Plat Book 12 at Page 53 (formerly known as Lots H & I, Block 61, City and Townsite of Aspen from the effective date of Stewart Title Policy No. 0-356915 (copy attached) up to and including April 20 , 1982 at 8 : 00 A.M. I find said property vested as follows : THE GREEN FAMILY TRUST, in Fee Simple, subject to and excepting the following: 1. Taxes for the year 1982 and thereafter, and any special assessment or charges not yet certified to the office of the County Treasurer. 2 . Any tax, assessment, fees or charges by reason of the inclusion of subject property in Aspen Sanitation District, Aspen Street Improvement District, Aspen Fire Protection District, Aspen Valley Hospital District and The City of Aspen. Colette Penny - - - - - - - - Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office April 20, 1982 Page 2 3 . The lien of that Deed of Trust from The Green Family Trust to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County for the use of Inez Marshall Zordel to secure $237 ,600. 00 dated September 25 , 1980 and recorded September 26 , 1980 in Book 395 at page 758. 4 . Terms and conditions of Condominium Declaration for Eagle' s Nest Condominiums recorded -January 15 , 198=2 in Book 419 at Page 879 of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado. 5. Easements as shown on Plat of Eagle ' s Nest Condominiums recorded in Plat Book 12 at Page 53. 6 . Terms, conditions and obligations of Statement of Subdivision Exception recorded in Bpok 419 at Page 893. Yours vefy ruly, John Thomas Kelly JTK/jeo JOHN THOMAS KELLY ATTORNEY AT LAW POST OFFICE BOX 1 109 TELEPHONE 1 17 SOUTH SPRING STREET (3031 925-1216 ASPEN. COLORADO 8161 1 August 3, 1982 Ms. Collette Penny Aspen Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Paul Taddune, Esq. City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Jim Hamilton Pitkin County Housing Director 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen City Council 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Request for Rezoning, Request for Exemption from Growth Management Plan, Lots H & I, Block 61 , Eagles Nest Condominium Ladies and Gentlemen: The purpose of this letter is to update the application filed on behalf of my client, The Green Family Trust, to permit the construction of two deed restricted units within the existing structure. Planning and Zoning granted approval for the rezoning and exemption subject to the following: 1 . That the applicant provide two additional off street parking spaces. 2. That the applicant execute a standard encroachment license regarding encroachment of a retaining wall. 3. That the applicant execute the proper subdivision exemption required by the City Attorney' s office. Collette Penny at al. August 3 , 1982 Page 2 4. That the occupancy requirements of the building department (from R-1 to R-3) be met. The applicant has no problem with items 2 thru 4 above. The only problem lies with the creation of two new parking spaces. The applicant has previously requested that the parking requirement be set at the existing 6 spaces. I believe council has the flexibility to do this pursuant to Section 24-4. 1 (c) of the code. Clearly the intent of this code provision is to permit the council flexibility in dealing with parking requirements where low, moderate or middle income housing are involved. In addition, the circumstances of this project are such that a flexible approach is appropriate, based on the following: 1. From a practical point of view, one space per employee unit and two spaces per free market units are sufficient. The Green Family currently owns one car and do not rent their unit, which is in any event burdened with a six month rental restriction. The other unit to date has not been occupied. In short, the project has a history of minimal auto use, and has not burdened the surrounding neighborhood with off street parking. 2. The location of the property (within 2 blocks of the commercial core) does not lend itself to heavy auto use. The fact that the project is on the bus route is a further mitigating factor. 3. In order to provide the additional parking, it will be necessary to remove expensive, attractive landscaping and foliage. We feel this would be unfortunate visually for both the applicant and the neighborhood. The applicant is, however, aware of the concern of the council and the neighborhood regarding the possibility of on street parking burdening the neighborhood. Accordingly, the applicant is willing to designate two additional parking spaces (one to the south of the structure and one on the north westerly portion of the property on the condominium map) . The applicant would also be willing to include in the declaration and/or exemption statement appropriate language requiring the applicant to construct said spaces as soon as practical after request by the City. Then in the event the City, in its discretion, determines that the additional parking is necessary do to on street parking impacts on the neighborhood, the applicant would have to promptly provide the same. The foregoing proposal would appear to be a logical solution to the problem. In our view the existing Collette PE y, et al. August 3, 1982 Page 3 parking is adequate, but even if this proves to be erroneous, the City has the ability to require the construction of the spaces in its discretion. The result will be that there will be no destruction of attractive landscaping and the interests of the City and neighbors are fully protected. In closing, I would point out the principal reason for this application is to enable the applicant to have someone on the premises at all times as their unit is occupied only on a part time basis. Approval will permit this as well as provide two excellent employee units, which are of a quality superior to any others I am aware of in the City or the County. Collette Penny has personally inspected the units and will, I believe, confirm superior construction and quality. Respect 1 submitted, John Thomas Kelly JTK/sw JT111 'I'ITT1NIA A 1TORNEY AT L.AW POST OFFICE BOX 1 109 TELEPHONE 117 SOUTH SPRING STREET _.._ (303) 925.1216 ASPEN. COLORADO 8161 1 ' r rk October 27 , 1982 L . s t „ The Honorable Herman Edel Mayor, City of Aspen Councilmembers Aspen City Council 130 South Galena Street Aspen , CO 81611 Re : Green Family Trust/Eagle ' s Fest Dear Mr. Mayor and Councilpersons : On September 8 , 1982 there is scheduled what I 'm sure everyone hopes will he the last meeting regarding this matter. In reviewing the file recently it occurred to me that perhaps some or all of you would like to view the units first hand. While the planning office has inspected the Units , to my knowledge none of you have been inside the proposed employee units . I believe that to a large extent the Units sell themselves . If any of you are interested in visiting the Eagle ' s Nest I will be happy to see to it that you get a key at a convenient time . To avoid any question of "ex parte" contacts I would not accompany you unless you specially request my presence. Thank you for your consideration. Very tr'-_.y y John Thomas Kelly JTK/sw cc : Collette Penny JOHN THOMAS KELLY ATTORNEY AT LAW POST OFFICE BOX 1 109 TELEPHONE 1 17 SOUTH SPRING STREET (303) 925-1216 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 q May 17, 19— b, j�1, f Ms. Colette Penny 't1 1) i Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office ;1% �g 1 130 South Galena Street , "i . yew✓ Aspen, Colorado 81611 ASPEN / PI AKIN CO. PLANNING OFFtCE Re: Green Family Trust Dear Colette: The purpose of this letter is to amend the above referenced rezoning application by the addition of a request, by special review, for approval of six (6) parking spaces for the project. This request is necessary at this late date because of a misunder- standing on my part as to the number of bedrooms existing prior to the addition of the proposed employee units. If approved, the project would have a total of six (6) parking spaces for the entire project, including the new employee units. The condominium map would be amended to specifically designate the spaces, if desired, and my client would further be willing to enter into whatever deed restriction which the City would feel is appropriate. I feel this request should be granted for two reasons : 1. From a practical point of view, two spaces per free market unit and one space for employee unit are adequate for normal use. It is unlikely that the owner of a condominium would have more than two vehicles or that the occupant of a moderate income employee unit would have more than one car. 2 . A second, and more important, reason lies in the code itself. The very existence of the Residential Bonus Overlay indicates a commitment by the City to promote employee housing. Further, rather than setting an inflexible formula, Section 24-4 . 1 (c) states that Colette Penny Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office May 17, 1982 Page 2 . with regard to low, moderate and middle income housing, Council shall determine the amount of offstreet parking upon recommendation by Planning and Zoning. This would appear to represent a desire by the City for flexibility regarding parking where low, moderate and middle income housing is concerned. Accordingly, my client respectfully requests approval of the two (2) additional units with a total of six (6) parking spaces for the entire project pursuant to Section 24-4. 1 (c) . Yours v ry uly, John Thomas Kelly JTK/sm cc: Alan Richman PUBLIC NOTICE RE: Eagle's Nest Condominiums - Rezoning to Residential Bonus Overlay NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, May 18, 1982 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall , 130 S. Galena Aspen, to consider an application submitted by the Green Family Trust for a rezoning request for a Residential Bonus Overlay and a request for an exemption from GMP for employee units. The property is located at Block 61 , Lots H and I, Aspen. For further information, contact the Planning Office, 130 S. Galena, Aspen, 925-2020, ext. 223. s/ Olof Hedstrom Chairman, Aspen Planning and Zoning Committee Published in the. Aspen Times on April 29, 1982 City of Aspen Account CITY/COUNTY PLANNING OFFICIt' At17-0* . ,j7'74 130 S. GALENA 18PEN, COLORADO 81 6 1 1 : • ; MOVED„ E FT Terry A. Milleranet L. Miller 21873 W. Hight6y Aspen, CO,-81 CITY/COUNTY PLANNING OFFICE 130 5. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 i4to, • EFT NO ADDRESS Tyron Austin ompson a/k/a Tyro)i4Austin Th6Mpson 211 S. T rst Stre9.e' Aspen/CO 81611' CITY/COUNTY PLANN:NG OFFICE 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 . „ James Carder and Carolyn Carder 5769 Snowberry Drive Littleton, CO 80123 CAR 69 04i01318N1 05/01/82 R URN. TO SE:01. E.1,;. DELIVERABLE UNABLE: lu' F WARD ........— —...■..... ---...—,—.--..... '--....■''''''-i7..^;.',. ,,enzr*......t.ky, CITY/COUNT l' 141...AMONG OFFICE ',..- . 130 S. GALENA ,-,---..- ASPEN, COLORADO 81 6 1 1 TO ' ,:„ FORWARDING 07DDR '''' ‘kis::•4; ....,_,.....- ORDER DORM Stuart Williams and Richard Lavigne 18 Field Point Road Greenwich, Connecticut 06830 CITY/COUNTY PLANNING OFFICE ---------- -- ... . ____1,..........,_—,1 130 S. GALENA o ASPEN, COLORADO 81811 MAY 1'. .. , ri!--11.• .t." ,:.)..t)..:rRO --------,..--- NOI: 0E1.2J -1::f,W.:1 F AS ADE.4a.....s.6iJ) 1-1...uo4,4;1) Thomas Markle and Barbara F. Markle _ Box 3647 , .c. - Aspen, CO 81612 , 1,(_,(\ (( it- _ -. , 1 - ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 1 130 South Galena Street Aspen,Colorado 81611 (303)925-2020 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES ;j ��j �� GMPICONCEPTUAL I City ,63721 - 47331 - 52100 GMP/PRELIMINARY j 00113 47332 52100 63722 - 52100 GMP/FINAL 63723 - 47333 SUB/CONCEPTUAL 63724 - 47341 - 52100 63725 - 47342 - 52100 SUB/PRELIMINARY SUB/FINAL Y ,•� J 63726 - 47343 - 52100 „ . 47350 - 52100 EXCEPT/EXEMPTION •- 637 27 .- 63728 - 47350 - 52100 REZONING 63729 47360 - 52100 SPECIAL REVIEW SUB-TOTAL County 47331 52200 GMP/GENERAL 00113 63711 GMP/PRELIMINARY 63712 47332 52200 0 GMPIFINAL 63713 - 47333 52200 SUBIGENERAL 63714 - 47341 - 52200 SUB/DETAILED 63715 47342 52200 63716 - 47343 - 52200 SUB/FINAL 63717 - 47350 - 52200 SPECIAL REVIEW 63718 47350 - 52200 REZONING SPECIAL APPROVAL 63719 - 47360 - 52200 SP SUB-TOTAL PLANNING OFFICE SALES COUNTY CODE 00113 • 63061 09100 52200 63063 - 09100 - 52200 ALMANAC 63062 - 09100 - 52300 GMP 63066 - 09100 - 52300 COPY FEES 63069 - 09100 - OTHER SUB-TOTAL tr,. ,,,.___7777---�I TOTAL NAame: t � Phone: t dde >, � : ' Project , . •-`` . : • 71 <i ., ;;�,. :� ' ; I•. Date. '� i Check No. No. of Hours: Additional Billing: