Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.HP.230 Lake Rd.0025.2018.AHPC0 0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF ASPEN CASE NUMBER 0025.2018.AHPC PROJECT ADDRESS 230 LAKE ROAD PARCELID 273512488001 PLANNER SARAH YOON CASE DESCRIPTION HPC MINOR SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS BENDON DATE OF FINAL 10/9/2019 ACTION CLOSED BY LILLY CULVER CITY OF ASPEN Land Use Application Determination of Completeness Date: August 6, 2018 Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant, ptECEIVE!,- AUG 0 9 2018 CITY PEN CW"TMF�11 We have received your land use application for 230 Lake Avenue and reviewed it for completeness. ❑ Your Land Use Application is complete. Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed necessary by the Community Development Department. Please contact me at 920-5144 if you have any questions. Thank You, Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner City of Aspen, Community Development Department For Office Use Only: Mineral Rights Notice Required Yes No GMQS Allotments Yes No Qualifying Applications: New PD Subdivision, or PD (creating more than 1 additional lot) Residential Affordable Housing Commercial E.P.F. Lodging 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 P: 970.920.5000 1 F: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com CITYOFASPEN Land Use Application Determination of Completeness Date: July 27, 2018 Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant, We have received your land use application for 230 Lake Avenue and reviewed it for completeness. ❑ Your Land Use Application is incomplete: Please submit the following missing submission items. 1. A letter of authorization to apply and be represented by BendonAdams from the two trusts, in addition to T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trtust, who are listed as property owners on the Title Commitment. Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed necessary by the Community Development Department. Please contact me at 920-5144 if you have any questions. Thank You, Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner City of Aspen, Community Development Department For Office Use Only: Qualifying Applications: Mineral Rights Notice Required New PD Yes No Subdivision, or PD (creating more than 1 additional lot) GMQS Allotments Residential Affordable Housing Yes No Commercial E.P.F. Lodging 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 P: 970.920.5000 1 F: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com Permits 273 J —I2-Y" jW— 6Q 1 File Edit Record Navigate Form Reports Format Tab J Pj`' P `'" J -J ' 1`d �: r YJ L Help Main I Custom Fields Routing Status Fee Summary Actions ' Routing History t10 Jump 1 Permit b�pe khFc I;aFen Histcric Lan. Use I Permit # ICC2F.CC18.A%HPC .Address 23C L+ KE :.'v�E AptlSuite Cibr ASPEN State CO Z-1p c-11c11 Permit Information i Master permit Routing queue aslu 1 .Applied Project Status i=ercir; .Approved Desoipbon Submitted CHRIS BENC'ON Clock Running Days FC Submitted via O,,vner Last name COTSEN 1985 TRUST LLO`,' First name Phone i. i - Address .Applicant R Owner is applicant? ❑ Contractor is applicant? Last name COTSEN 1985 TRU`=— LL•_: First name Phone Cost ' 1 C'1 Address Email Lender Last name First name Phone If ! Address Issued Closed.Vinal Expires C = C = a 15 �- No • 0 ORDINANCE 029 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING MINOR AMENDMENT TO A SUBDIVISION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23o LAKE AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 16, HARMON GROUP TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT RECORDED JANUARY 17,1990 IN PLAT BOOK 23 A T PAGE 77 AS RECEPTION NO.319178. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-88-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust c/o Jannol Law Group, 230 Lake Avenue, As�en CO 81611, represented by BendonAdams, requesting approval for the following land use review approval: • Minor Subdivision Amendment- (Section 26.480.ogo.C) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the proposed application, and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, all required public noticing was provided as evidenced by an affidavit of public noticing submitted to the record, a summary of public outreach was provided by the applicant to meet the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.304, and the public was provided full access to review the Application; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Community Development Director and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, on September 24, 2018, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2018 with conditions, on First Reading by a five to zero (5 - 0) vote; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 22, 2018, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2018, by a five to. zero (5 - O) vote, approving Minor Subdivision Amendment for 23o Lake Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: I�IIIIII�III�II�I��III�Ig1111�IN�NN RECEPTION#: 652127, R: $23.00, 0: $0.00 Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 DOC CODE: ORDINANCE 230 Lake Avenue Pg 1 of 3, 11/2112018 at 03:43:13 PM Page 1 of 3 Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO tq $V4cV ivllils.lipr The Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Approval, paragraph 2 of the conditions, approved June 3,1977 (Reception #194835); is hereby amended as follows: 2. The owner of Lots 16,17, 18, and ig, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual ventures, their successors and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lots 17,18, and ig, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee. Sq - #�#qn 2s Extsting Litig;kfopp This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Public Hearing _ A public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 2211 day of October, 2018, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 22nd day of October, 2018. ATT)MT: '& . ............ [Al Linda Manning, City Clerk Steve'n'skad on, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 22n' day of October, 2018. Linda Manning, City Steven Skadr n, Mayor Ordinance *29,,Series of 2018 6T 230 Lake Avenue Page 2 of 3 • • APPROVED AS TO FORM: mes R. True, City Attorney Ordinance *29, Series of 2018 23o Lake Avenue Page 3 of 3 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council October 22, 2018 objections. He asked for explanation around the necessity of violating the Wheeler viewplane. He asked for a comment on the PD overlay to allow these uses as well as more discussion around the steakhouse component, specifically from the deed restricted dorm style housing to becoming a bar and restaurant. Ms. Garrow said on the view plane, one of the changes during the moratorium was creating the for, mid and background. This is in the background and we don't feel it is a significant impact. Councilman Frisch moved to read Ordinance #38, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Hauenstein. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 38 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE LIFT ONE LODGE SUBDIVISION / PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, WITH CONDITIONS, FOR A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, SUBDIVISION, RE -ZONING, GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM, COMMERCIAL DESIGN, AND RELATED REVIEWS, FOR THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 710 S. ASPEN STREET, WILLOUGHBY PARK, AND LIFT ONE PARK, AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1,2,3, AND 4 OF THE LIFT ONE LODGE SUBDIVISION / PUD ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED MARCH 5, 2013, AT BOOK 102, PAGE 1, RECEPTION NO. 597438, COUNTY OF PITKIN, CITY OF ASPEN, STATE OF COLORADO. Councilwoman Mullins moved to adopt Ordinance #38, Series of 2018 on first reading; seconded by Councilman Hauenstein. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Myrin, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #29, SERIES OF 2018 — 230 Lake Avenue Minor Subdivision Amendment Sarah Yoon, community development, stated this property is located in the R6 zone. Initial there were five conditions of approval. This ordinance will amend the language requiring HPC review. Condition number 2 says the owner of lots 16-19 shall seek historic designation for existing structures on Lot 17-19. At the time approval was given it was an empty lot. The applicant is requesting to amend the condition by removing HPC review. Since approval, the 3 Victorians received designation. Staff finds the criteria for minor amendment are met. The condition was added because of the possibility of historic overlay. That is no longer valid. HPC only has purview of properties located on the inventory or in the district. This property is neither of those things. Even though the structure is eligible for AspenModern, HPC does not have authority for review. Chris Bendon, representing the applicant, said the plat note is an outgrowth of a discussion of time where the west end was seen as a potential historic district. The property is in fairly good shape for 1979 construction. It is clearly not historic. We are asking for the restriction to be lifted. We recognize it is potentially eligible for AspenModern. Council Myrin asked if it is historic the neighbors get noticed if it is new development. Mr. Bendon said in a general sense. It is on Hallam lake bluff. If that review is triggered than there would be a review for that. Councilman Myrin said there are some advantages to that, no bonuses or setbacks. .I just want to make sure that the neighbors were aware. Councilman Hauenstein said I don't see a reason why this should be an HPC issue. Councilwoman Mullins said she is reluctant to give up any protection of a historic property. I understand this is voluntary and the way this reads now it is not compatible with the current HP program and even the AspenModern program. My goal is to make sure our historic preservation succeeds and survives. Keeping these anomalies compromises the program. 8 9 • Reiular Meetin! Aspen City Council October 22, 2018 Mayor Skadron said he supports staff recommendation. Mayor Skadron opened the public comment. There was none. Mayor Skadron closed the public comment. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #29, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Hauenstein. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Hauenstein, yes; Frisch, yes; Mullins, yes; Myrin, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. RESOLUTION #139, SERIES OF 2018 — Release of covenant requiring two affordable housing units at 304 E. Hopkins Avenue Ms. Simon told the Council the existing building was approved in 1982. Part of agreement was for two affordable housing units; two category one studios. The covenant is for 50 years or 21 years after the last council member passes away. In order for credits to be used we need the covenants to be released. Staff recommends approval. Councilman Myrin said the current units are uninhabitable, how did they get to that. Ms. Adams replied that was the situation the current owner inherited. There are rumors someone was living in the units. There are a lot of questions in the deed restriction. Councilman Myrin said that is why I am supporting what we are doing tonight. Mixing the affordable housing and commercial is not compatible on a small footprint. Councilwoman Mullins moved to approve Resolution #139, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. EXECUTIVE SESSION — Ms. Bryan stated staff is recommending Council go in to Executive Session pursuant to C.R.S. 246402 (a) the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of any real, personal, or other property interest; (b) Conferences with an attorney for the local public body for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions and (e) Determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations; developing strategy for negotiations; and instructing negotiators; regarding the potential sale of property and litigation update regarding 17CV30131 119 Neale Ave v City of Aspen. At 7:30 p.m. Councilman Frisch moved to go in to executive session; seconded by Councilman Hauenstein. All in favor, motion carried. At 8:45 p.m. Councilman Hauenstein moved to come out of executive session; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Hauenstein moved to adjourn the regular meeting; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. Linda Manning City Clerk • • \'11,11j1 CITY OF ASPEN Memorandum TO: Mayor Skadron and Aspen City Council FROM: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner THROUGH: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director MEETING DATE: October 22, 2018 RE: 230 Lake Avenue - Minor Subdivision Amendment, Second Reading of Ordinance #29, Series of 2018. APPLICANT OWNER: SUMMARY: T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust The applicant has requested to amend the Shaw and the WPW C/o Jannol Law Group Joint Venture Subdivision Exemption approval from 1977 pertaining to Lot 16 by removing the requirement for HPC review REPRESENTATIVE: of any proposed dwelling on the lot. This lot is not historically BendonAdams, LLC designated. LOCATION: Street Address: 23o Lake Avenue Legal Description_: Lot 16, HARMON GROUP - TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT, as shown on the Plat recorded January 17, 1990 in Plat Book 23 at page 77 as Reception No. 319178 Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2735-124-88-001 CURRENT ZONING & USE R-6 - Medium -density Residential PROPOSED LAND USE: No change STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the Subdivision Exemption as outlined in the ordinance. Site Locator Map - 230 Lake Avenue Page 1 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 p: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com oil, CITY OF ASPEN Response to Council Comments at First R_eading 1. Council requested additional information regarding the history of the current restriction: The current condition of the subdivision language requires a land use review by HPC, despite the project not being designated. According to HPC records the now existing dwelling on Lot 16 was reviewed by HPC in 1979 as part of the condition language. Further research into this discussion has shown that Aspen Modern recognized architect Ellie Brickham designed the house. Under today's code voluntary Aspen Modern designation would be possible. The existing condition on Lot 16 would not allow HPC to require preservation. In the case of this application, the context of when the condition was created is of importance. This condition for HPC review of a proposed dwelling was related to conversations that were occurring in 1977 related to a possible historic district overlay in the West End and the historic designation of the surrounding miner's cottages around Lot 16. The preservation program now operates and makes decisions based on set review criteria, and there is no HPC review criteria for a lot that is not designated and/or does not contain a historic resource. The Land Use Code provides parameters for review requests to be overseen by the appropriate review body, and in this case staff does find that HPC would not be the appropriate review body for this Lot. 2. Council requested clarification of noticing for this application: Second Reading for this application is a Public Hearing and the newspaper notification for this hearing was published in the Aspen Times on October 4th, 2018. The applicant was also required to do a posting on the property and send out mailers to notify the surrounding neighbors of this public hearing and application request. The public notice requirements have been met for this project. BACKGROUND: 23o Lake Avenue, Lot 16, Hallam's Addition, is in the R-6 zone district and backs up against the Hallam Bluff ESA area. The lot is across from Triangle Park and surrounded by historically designated properties. The Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions approval covers Lots 16-20 in Hallam's Addition which was approved and signed by the City in 1977. The attached plat records three historic Victorian structures on Lots 17-19, an old frame dwelling straddling Lots 18 and 19, and the Shaw family dwelling on Lot 20. Lot 16 was an empty lot at the time of the approval. As a condition of approval, the Shaw residence and the three Victorian structure were to seek historic designation, and the old frame dwelling was to be removed. A specific condition was included in the approval stating any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 would need to be reviewed by the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (Exhibit B). At the time of this request for subdivision exemption, there were discussions about historic overlays/districts in the West End to help maintain the historic character of the neighborhood. Since 1977, the three Victorians and the Shaw family dwelling received historic designation, and are listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Page 2 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 p: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com 0 • \11ij% CITY OF ASPEN A Certificate of Occupancy was issued in 1980 (building permit no. 143-79) to John Wogan Jr. for 230 Lake Avenue. The building permit indicates a new residential duplex was built on this Lot, and according to the HPC 1978-1979 Index, the "Wogan house" was discussed twice in 1979. LAND USE REQUEST FROM ASPEN CITY _COUNCIL: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval: • Subdivision Amendments -Minor Amendment (Section 26.480.090.C) to amend the language of the original approval requiring Lot 16 to have review by HPC, despite not being a historic landmark. Aspen City Council is the final review authority. PROJECT SUMMARY: 230 Lake Avenue, Lot 16, Block 103 of Hallam's Addition, is not a designated historic landmarked property. The structure on the lot currently is a building completed in the 1980's. The applicant wishes to remove the required HPC review of any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 because the property is not individually designated or in a historic district. Figure 1 — 23o Lake Avenue, 2012 The proposed amendment will remove language related to HPC review of Lot 16 in condition no. 2. No other changes to the 1977 Subdivision Exemption Approval is requested. Condition no. 2 of the approval, as amended, would read as follows: 2. The owner of Lots 76, 77, 78, and 79, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual ventures, their successors and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lot 77, 78, and 79, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee. and,-any-prepesed-dwelling-on Lot-76-shall be -submitted to-the-C #tof-Aspen-!Hist-er-ic-Preservation—Committee-fer4ts-r-eet. STAFF COMMENTS: The intent for including HPC review of Lot 16 was an attempt to help preserve the historic character and context of the West End during a time when the Historic Preservation program was newly established and lacked the tools to promote and incentivize preservation work. The Historic Preservation program now has a sophisticated design guidelines, preservation incentives/benefits, and Page 3 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 P: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com I CITY OF ASPEN set parameters for what is considered HPC purview. The applicability section of the Land Use code for Historic Preservation states the following: Section 26.475. o75• This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including rights -of -way within Historic Districts as specifiedin Section 26.475.o6o. 230 Lake Avenue is not on the Inventory, nor in a Historic District that would justify HPC review. The only time when new construction is reviewed by HPC on a lot that does not contain a historic resource is if the lot was created by a Historic Landmark Lot Split (Section 26.415.11o.A). As noted earlier in the memo, the house on Lot 16 could be considered for designation today as an Aspen Modern resource associated with Ellie Brickham. The owner would need to consent to preserve the existing home. Staff encourages consideration of this opportunity. The criteria for Minor amendment to a subdivision is that the change needs to respond to the original issue or address an issue that was not anticipated during the original review. The underlying conversation about a possible historic district overlay of the West End is no longer likely, and the code specifies that HPC review is applicable to properties with historic designation listed on the Inventory. Staff finds that the request meets the criteria for Minor amendment, and complies with the Historic Preservation code section for applicability. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Aspen City Council grant Minor Subdivision Amendment finding that the applicable review criteria have been met, and the property does not qualify for HPC review. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance #29, Series of 2o18." ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 Exhibit A - Minor Subdivision Amendment Criteria /Staff Findings Exhibit B - Subdivision Exemptions Approval & Plat Exhibit C - Land Use Application Page 4 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 P: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com ORDINANCE #29 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING MINOR AMENDMENT TO A SUBDIVISION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23o LAKE AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 16, HARMON GROUP TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT RECORDED JANUARY 17,1990 IN PLAT BOOK 23 A T PAGE 77 AS RECEPTION NO.319178• PARCEL ID: 2735-124-88-00i WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust c/o Jannol Law Group, 23o Lake Avenue, Aspen CO 81611, represented by BendonAdams, requesting approval for the following land use review approval: • Minor Subdivision Amendment- (Section 26.480.090.C) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the proposed application, and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, all required public noticing was provided as evidenced by an affidavit of public noticing submitted to the record, a summary of public outreach was provided by the applicant to meet the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.304, and the public was provided full access to review the Application; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Community Development Director and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, on September 24, 2018, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2018 with conditions, on First Reading by a five to zero (5 - o) vote; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 22, 2018, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2018, by a _ to _ (_ - _) vote, approving Minor Subdivision Amendment for 23o Lake Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 23o Lake Avenue Page 1 of 3 0 Section 1: Minor Amendment to a Subdivision The Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Approval, paragraph 2 of the conditions, approved June 3, 1977 (Reception #194835); is hereby amended as follows: 2. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual ventures, their successors and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lots 17,18, and 19, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee. Section 2: Existing Litigation This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: Severabilitx If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 22nd day of October, 2018, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 22nd day of October, 2018. ATTEST: Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2018. ATTEST: Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 230 Lake Avenue Page 2 of 3 LJ LJ APPROVED AS TO FORM: James R. True, City Attorney Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 230 Lake Avenue Page 3 of 3 CITY OF ASPEN Exhibit A Minor Amendment Criteria Staff Findings Review Criteria for 230 Lake Avenue The applicant is requesting a Minor Amendement to the Subdivision Exemptions Approval from 1977, specifically dealing with Lot 16. Section 26.480.090.C: Review Criteria for Subdivision Amendment - Minor An amendment to an approved subdivision found to be generally consistent with the original approval but which does not qualify for an insubstantial amendment may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council. The amendment must either respond to issues raised during the original review or must address an issue that could not have been reasonably MET NOT MET DOES NOT anticipated during the review. The City Council must find that the change is minor and that it is APPLY consistent with or an improvement to the approved subdivision. Notwithstanding the above, the City Council may find that an amendment request is substantial and should require review as a Major Amendment. The amendment responds to the issue raised during the original review or The amendment addresses an issue that could not have been reasonably anticipated during the review. N/A 26.480.090.C: Subdivision Amendments - Minor Amendment C. An amendment to an approved subdivision found to be generally consistent with the original approval but which does not qualify for an insubstantial amendment may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council. The amendment must either respond to issues raised during the original review or must address an issue that could not have been reasonably anticipated during the review. The City Council must find that the change is minor and that it is consistent with or an improvement to the approved subdivision. Notwithstanding the above, the City Council may find that an amendment request is substantial and should require review as a Major Amendment. Staff Finding: This condition of approval related to Lot 16 requiring HPC review of any dwelling development was in response to the possibility of a historic overlay in the West End and an attempt to promote historic preservation goals in 7977. The possibility of a historic district in the area is no longer likely and Lot 16 does not meet the established criteria for HPC review because it is not a designated property. Staff finds the application meets the criteria for Minor Amendment for a Subdivision. Page 1 of 1 I ­.l or 1-4 b—. —1.4 in l—t— .'h' es ih.— N 79- 01- 1l: 11 I'l lr IM: �'� N: I'll : N- ":. lh* 1nt a Mh i . .... l' M—L. --f. —1— 1h. . ...... . ai.eln9 l­ h. .... ... .... . .. . th, 1111 ---d C ... . 111, 11 I.:7n. 1-1— 20-ipl f.— i., _.__ 20. W1.1h, • h n.fl"d 'I h:nmvieea`v . ........ ... ii r®ve tn. eta rim 'h" Ill. l. —h onere•tere t—1 f $14,714:44, —lpt f l. ih- ..1— Vol 11 lit, 11— 5WAWANOTWE WM=7 yr."Tup 5U501V151ON ON 5 PLAT T; t"' Mdthh*d= —.1 f—dne th .171 etui h-- EXHIBIT B - Shaw & WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Plan er l7. l.. — il, .11 1 �1_ d.—i— h:—�dh—' 11,111, —1 t�, 1h. d . h Mlli.' ly"'h'. lt—, — —.1. .1d SWEL-7 1 OF 3 $..k5 S4EET 2 OF 3 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council September 24, 2018 At 5:00 p.m. Mayor Skadron called the regular meeting to order with Councilmembers Frisch, Myrin, Mullins and Hauenstein present. CITIZEN COMMENTS 1. Toni Kronberg said election season is here. The city is taking pro con statements until October 1'. October 1 Ph is squirm night. She said there needs to be more clarity in the numbers for city offices in value versus cost. 2. Ian Grey, city forester, said there will be open houses on October 10 and 17 from 3:30 to 7:30 at City Hall to talk about all things trees. They will showcase the new community forest management plan. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Myrin said the Next Gen meeting is this week. He asked staff to share the appraisal of the Gravel Pit and 312 West Hyman lot sale. If there isn't one for 312 he would like to have one. The Main Street crossings are still not consistent. If we are going to spend millions on the mobility plan we should get the crossings consistent. Scott Miller, public works director, said council has directed staff to talk about taking over all or parts of 82. We are close to coming back to you with that. We will have a decision for you soon. Councilman Hauenstein said I have a flag here from the 9-11 remembrance at the fire station. Each of the flags have a photo and a name to remember. Captain Martin Eagan Jr, division 15. Keep the first responders in our thoughts. Councilwoman Mullins also thanked the fire department for putting on the memorial. Mayor Skadron talked about modifying Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples Day. From that conversation we started something called the Shining Mountains film festival. Sunday October 7, marks the I` ever film festival. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS Steve Barwick, city manager, spoke about Amendment 74 — if approved, it would allow compensation to private property owners due to any government action or inaction. There are no minimums or exclusions. Any zoning, setback variance, paving, anything under the sun is eligible for a lawsuit for any amount that government action has changed the value of their property. This does not stop at city boundaries. CONSENT CALENDAR • Board Appointment • Minutes— September 17, 2018 Councilman Frisch moved to adopt the consent calendar; seconded by Councilwoman Mullins. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #29, SERIES OF 2018 — 230 Lake Avenue — Minor Subdivision Sarah Yoon, community development, stated the property is located in the Hallam's addition and the R6 zone. It was part of the 1977 approval with five conditions. One of them was any proposed dwelling requires HPC review. At the time it was an empty lot. This discussion is about the historic overlay to amend the condition to remove the HPC review. Since the original approval a building has been constructed. The existing structure is not historic and was never designated. Only properties on the Regular Meeting Aspen City Council September 24, 2018 historic inventory or in a historic district are to be reviewed by HPC. Staff finds the criteria for a minor amendment are met. The public hearing is scheduled for October 22. Councilman Frisch said three neighbors get together and agree to come up with their own little deed restriction between themselves and lock themselves into an HPC regulation. Time goes on and all of a sudden they want to unwind a private deal, but they need to come here because that private deal got the stamp 20 years ago by the city. Chris Bendon, representing the owner, stated it was an outcome of the subdivision review by the council at the time. The context of that time period wat the HP program at the time was in its infancy. This application landed in the center of that. There were several legitimate historic resources on the property. This was a vacant lot. Looking back, there is nothing about the property that is historic. We are not sure why HPC would be reviewing this. It is a 1980's building. There is no historic credibility to the property. Councilman Frisch said he is more concerned if outside people can make an agreement outside of council then change it years later. Jim True, city attorney, said to clarify, this was not designed to restrict the property to HPC rules. It was an area for it to go for review. The language did not bind it to HPC laws. Councilman Hauenstein, said the 7`h whereas, is that council finds the development proposed meets or exceeds the standards. He is not sure why there would be historic review on it. I don't see any reason why there would be any historic review on this property. I haven't seen any development plans so I'm not sure why there is that 7`h whereas. Phillip Supino, community development, said there are no development plans, it is boilerplate language. Councilman Myrin asked did the neighbors get noticed. Mr. Bendon said they will before second reading. Councilman Hauenstein Moved to read Ordinance #29, Series of 2018; seconded by Councilman Frisch. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #29 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING MINOR AMENDMENT TO A SUBDIVISION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 230 LAKE AVENUE, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 16, HARMON GROUP TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT RECORDED JANUARY 17, 1990 IN PLAT BOOT 23 AT PAGE 77 AS RECEPTION NO. 319178. Councilman Frisch moved to adopt Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 on first reading; seconded by Councilman Hauenstein. Roll call vote. Councilmembers Frisch, yes; Myrin, yes, Hauenstein, yes, Mullins, yes; Mayor Skadron, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #23, SERIES OF 2018 — Changes to Title 24 of the Traffic and Motor Vehicle Code Mitch Osur, parking, said there were work sessions April 2 and June 26. As we have raised prices in the core we have moved more and more vehicles into the residential zones. We are recommending four changes to council with the first no unattached non motorized vehicles may be parked in the residential zone. Residents may purchase three, three day permits per year. The second change is to residential permits. Starting November 15, a maximum of four resident and one guest permits per residence per calendar year and three for next year. Councilman Frisch said this is regardless of the size of house or lot. Councilwoman Mullins said this is also if they have a garage or a driveway. Mr. Osur replied correct. Councilman Frisch asked if staff talked about the equity or fairness if someone has a driveway that can hold two cars and a two car garage, and someone has a property with no off street parking they are treated the same. Was it discussed, or should we discuss it. Mr. Osur say part of it is we do about 1200 of these a year. That means I would 3 0 • ij4.0� CITYOFASPEN Memorandum TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner THROUGH: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director MEETING DATE: First Reading, September 24, 2018 (Public Hearing 10/22/2018) RE: Ordinance #29, Series of 2o18 - 23o Lake Avenue - Minor Subdivision Amendment APPLICANT OWNER: T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust c/o Jannol Law Group REPRESENTATIVE: BendonAdams, LLC LOCATION: Street Address: 230 Lake Avenue Legal Description: Lot 16, HARMON GROUP - TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT, as shown on the Plat recorded January 17, 19go in Plat Book 23 at page 77 as Reception No. 319178 Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2735-124-88-001 CURRENT ZONING & USE R-6 - Medium -density Residential PROPOSED LAND USE: No change SUMMARY: The applicant has requested to amend the Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemption approval from 1977 pertaining to Lot 16 by removing the requirement for HPC review of any proposed dwelling on the lot. This lot is not historically designated. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the Subdivision Exemption as outlined in the resolution. Site Locator Map - 230 Lake Avenue Page 1 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 P: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com • 0 I OF OF ASPEN BACKGROUND: 23o Lake Avenue, Lot 16, Hallam's Addition, is in the R-6 zone district and backs up against the Hallam Bluff ESA area. The lot is across from Triangle Park and surrounded by historically designated properties. The Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions approval covers Lots 16-20 in Hallam's Addition which was approved and signed by the City in 1977. The attached plat records three historic Victorian structures on Lots 17-19, an old frame dwelling straddling Lots 18 and 19, and the Shaw family dwelling on Lot 2o. Lot 16 was an empty lot at the time of the approval. As a condition of approval, the Shaw residence and the three Victorian structure were to seek historic designation, and the old frame dwelling was to be removed. A specific condition was included in the approval stating any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 would need to be reviewed by the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (Exhibit B). At the time of this request for subdivision exemption, there were discussions about historic overlays/districts in the West End to help maintain the historic character of the neighborhood. Since 1977, the three Victorians and the Shaw family dwelling received historic designation, and are listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. A Certificate of Occupancy was issued in 1980 (building permit no. 143-79) to Wogan Jr. for 23o Lake Avenue. The building permit indicates a new residential duplex was built on this Lot, and according to the HPC 1978-1979 Index, the "Wogan house" was discussed on September 11,1979. LAND USE REQUEST FROM ASPEN CITY COUNCIL: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval: Subdivision Amendments - Minor Amendment (Section 26.480.ogo.C) to amend the language of the original approval requiring Lot 16 to have review by HPC, despite not being a historic landmark. Aspen City Council is the final review authority. PROJECT SUMMARY: 23o Lake Avenue, Lot 16, Block 103 of Hallam's Addition, is not a designated historic landmarked property. The structure on the lot currently is a building completed in the 1980's with a series of renovations that occurred over time. The applicant wishes to remove the required HPC review of any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 because there is no historic merit for review. Figure 1 - 230 Lake Avenue, 2012 Page 2 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 P: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com ►�i ;1�1.► CITY OF ASPEN The proposed amendment will remove language related to HPC review of Lot 16 in condition no. 2. No other changes to the 1977 Subdivision Exemption Approval is requested. Condition no. 2 of the approval, as amended, would read as follows: 2. The owner of Lots 76, 77, 78, and 79, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual ventures, their successors and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lot 77, 78, and 79, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee. anel, any proposed c4s�e&g 0 Lot 76 shall be submitted to the City, f spen44istsr-ic-Preser-atio; C- �.,, t F4ts�. STAFF COMMENTS: The intent for including HPC review of Lot 16 was an attempt to help preserve the historic character and context of the West End during a time when the Historic Preservation program was newly established and lacked the tools to promote and incentivize preservation work. The Historic Preservation program now has a sophisticated design guideline, preservation incentives/benefits, and set perimeters for what is considered HPC purview. The applicability section of the Land Use code for Historic Preservation states the following: Section26.475.o75.• This Chapter applies to allproperties listedon the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including rights -of -way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.475 o6o. 230 Lake Avenue is not on the Inventory, nor in a Historic District that would justify HPC review. The only time when new construction is reviewed by HPC on a lot that does not contain a historic resource is if the lot was created by a Historic Landmark Lot Split (Section 26.415.11o.A). The criteria for Minor amendment to a subdivision is that the change needs to respond to the original issue or address an issue that was not anticipated during the original review. The underlying conversation about a possible historic district overlay of the West End is no longer likely, and the code specifies that HPC review is applicable to properties with historic designation listed on the Inventory. Staff finds that the request meets the criteria for Minor amendment, and complies with the Historic Preservation code section for applicability. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Aspen City Council grant Minor Subdivision Amendments finding that the applicable review criteria for minor subdivision have been met, and the property does not qualify for HPC review. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance #29, Series of 2o18, on First Reading. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 Page 3 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 P: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com • • CITY OF ASPEN Exhibit A - Minor Subdivision Amendment Criteria /Staff Findings Exhibit B - Subdivision Exemptions Approval & Plat Exhibit C - Land Use Application Page 4 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 P: 970.920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com 0 • ORDINANCE #29 (SERIES OF 2018) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING MINOR AMENDMENT TO A SUBDIVISION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23o LAKE AVENUE, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 16, HARMON GROUP TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT RECORDED JANUARY 17,1990 IN PLAT BOOK 23 A T PAGE 77 AS RECEPTION NO.319178. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-88-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust c/o Jannol Law Group, 230 Lake Avenue, Aspen CO 81611, represented by BendonAdams, requesting approval for the following land use review approval: • Minor Subdivision Amendment- (Section 26.480.090.C) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the proposed application, and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, all required public noticing was provided as evidenced by an affidavit of public noticing submitted to the record, a summary of public outreach was provided by the applicant to meet the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.304, and the public was provided full access to review the Application; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Community Development Director and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, on September 24, 2018, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2018 with conditions, on First Reading by a _ to _ (_ - � vote; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 22, 2018, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2018, by a _ to _ (_ - _) vote, approving Minor Subdivision Amendment for 23o Lake Avenue; and, WHEREAS, City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all the applicable development standards; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 23o Lake Avenue Page 1 of 4 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Minor Amendment to a Subdivision The Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Approval, paragraph 2 of the conditions, approved June 3,1977 (Reception #194835); is hereby amended as follows: 2. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual ventures, their successors and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lot 17,18, and 19, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee. Section 2: Subdivision Amendment An amended plat shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review within one hundred eighty (180) days following issuance of a Development Order. Failure on the part of the applicant to submit required approval documents within this timeframe shall render the land use approval invalid. The Community Development Director may extend the submission deadline if the request is made within the statutory vesting period, the applicant demonstrates evidence of preparing the needed documents, and the applicant shows reasonable cause for the delay. The Community Development Director may forward the extension request to the City Council. Unless an alternate timeframe is specified by the Community Development Director, corrected approval documents shall be resubmitted to the Community Development Department within ninety (90) days following the City's issuance of requested corrections to the documents. Failure on the part of the applicant to resubmit corrected documents within this timeframe shall render the land use approval invalid. The Community Development Director may extend the resubmission deadline if the applicant demonstrates good cause. The Community Development Director may forward the request to the City Council. Section 3: Existing Litigation This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severabilitx If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: Vested Rights Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 230 Lake Avenue Page 2 of 4 The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site -specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site -specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described properties: 230 Lake Avenue. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.07o(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 6: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 22th day of October, 2018, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 241h day of September, 2018. Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 23o Lake Avenue Page 3 of 4 ATTEST: Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2018. ATTEST: Linda Manning, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: James R. True, City Attorney Steven Skadron, Mayor Ordinance #29, Series of 2018 230 Lake Avenue Page 4 of 4 ON14 ►, CITY OF ASPEN Exhibit A Minor Amendment Criteria Staff Findings Review Criteria for 230 Lake Avenue The applicant is requesting a Minor Amendement to the Subdivision Exemptions Approval from 1977, specifically dealing with Lot 16. Section 26.480.090.C: Review Criteria for Subdivision Amendment - Minor An amendment to an approved subdivision found to be generally consistent with the original approval but which does not qualify for an insubstantial amendment may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council. The amendment must either respond to issues raised during the original review or must address an issue that could not have been reasonably MET NOT MET DOES NOT anticipated during the review. The City Council must find that the change is minor and that it is APPLY consistent with or an improvement to the approved subdivision. Notwithstanding the above, the City Council may find that an amendment request is substantial and should require review as a Major Amendment. The amendment responds to the issue raised during the original review or The amendment addresses an issue that could not have been reasonably anticipated during the review. N/A 26.480.090.C: Subdivision Amendments - Minor Amendment C. An amendment to an approved subdivision found to be generally consistent with the original approval but which does not qualify for an insubstantial amendment may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council. The amendment must either respond to issues raised during the original review or must address an issue that could not have been reasonably anticipated during the review. The City Council must find that the change is minor and that it is consistent with or an improvement to the approved subdivision. Notwithstanding the above, the City Council may find that an amendment request is substantial and should require review as a Major Amendment. Staff Finding. This condition of approval related to Lot 16 requiring HPC review of any dwelling development was in response to the possibility of a historic overlay in the West End and an attempt to promote historic preservation goals in 7977. The possibility of a historic district in the area is no longer likely and Lot 16 does not meet the established criteria for HPC review because it is not a designated property. Staff finds the application meets the criteria for Minor Amendment for a Subdivision. Page 1 of 1 SWA\ovAWD7Hrzw Vr.NTURE 5U501V1 51ON M=" 5 PLAT SL TVIS­ 'h�D_ 11.1 th- 17. h.. EXHIBIT B - Shaw & WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Plan of .00r NY "1.I77h 1h... .., 11 f 1,1 wt 2o, 19. .111— 103, lab .4 24. ­,,h P_ h.. ­ 11, . ­d bl 20, ­ by ­11,v 9-1, Sh., ­—j—.3 1971. • IT— or cowmw w. Cotmft 11 1 Ibi. I'd 07,01' 71 1, . . I. ...... I h.r.by ­1ify ­1 P1 SWU-7 I OF r:_-X 5u6ET 2 OF 3 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Off- 2zad gq_ 5,'D�& , 20/9 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkn ) I, (name, please print) being or re resenting an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height.' Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the _ day of , 20, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26:304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAS or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and. new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signs e The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this J_ day of 201L by NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: no Lab Avenue Pabk"illwing: Monday October 22nd, 2018; WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 5:00 PM Meegng ,!.Location'. City Hell, City Council I Cham130 S. Galena SL, Aspen, CO 81611 Proleet Location: 230 Lake Avenue, legally deacri- My_ commission expires: bed as Lot 1pl Hannon Group n Tomlinson Lot Line Adjustment Plat, in shown on the Plat recorded 'qY► "v, January o. 1990 m Plat Book -1 at page 1- as Re - caption �/ " '� No.319176. PID82735-124-88-001. ELSON Dssoriptlon:The applicant is requesting approval to amend the Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdi-105 vision Exemptions approval from 1977 by removing the requirement for HPC review of any proposed Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO dwelling on Lot 16. Lot 16 is not designated or in a NOTARY ID #20014030017 historic distnct. Land Use Reviews Req: Minor Subdivision My C Amendment. ommission Expires September 25, 2021 Decision Making Body: Aspen City Council, Applicant: T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, c/o Jannol Law 9eGers8 Group. 18017Century Park East, Ste 2150, Los More tlroie project, contact Sarah Yoon at information city 'As- ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: °,",,°,°nt Department, 130 S. 'UBLICATION GGNerw St., A Q n, CO, 0.920.5144, serah.yoonQcityofaspen.Com. Published in the Aspen Times on October 4, 2016 - OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) . 0000915012 - vWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 230 Lake Avenue . Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: October 22 , 2018 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1, Anna Reilly Thimons (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official Paper or paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development bepartmerlt; which was made of suitable, waterproof Materials, which was not less than twenty two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) Inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to; the public hearing on the 4 _day of October , 2618 , to`and i,ttcluding the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto: Mailingo nonce. By mailing of a notice obtai f ned from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E) (2) of The Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S mail to all owners of property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. ECEIVED (Continued on next page) OCTI; March, 2016 City of Apen � 130 S. Galena St. � (970) 920 5050 0 Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, To affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. the names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivision, Spas or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Development, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notices requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in anyway to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, to whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other significant legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real estate property in the ears of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit Notice" was acknowledged before me this day of a�lrze4'+ , 20 to, by kw... TNM TARA L. NELSON WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID #20014030017 My commission expires: Z My Commission Expires September 25, 2021 Notary Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICES (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED I -TA ►� /_1II • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICED AS REQUIRES BY C.R.S §24-65.5-103.3 VL EX ' _ ` - . ;• "'AAA Ldk rf . 4 R i • � 7 � l •�jyam�,• 3•.7a1��,., l - - t �..� r rim'{. _ - '_ � ,r ' •'T :'�~�` -t.. `�-' w•`.+ - .. _ .� .cam ', .r - .<^' . RA— � � • � -� !_ � '�-_ � r � r � mr.�.� y +/I I 1 �+ 41 i ��1�► NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: �NOu230 Lake Avenue \'YA�0 Project Location: 230 Lake Avenue; Aspen Land Use Reviews: Minor Subdivision Amendment. r-ITV nC A5PF1, Decision Making Body: City Council 130 S. Galena Street, Hearing Date: October 22, 2018, 5:00 p.m. Aspen, CO 81611 Hearing Location: City Hall, Council Chambers; 130 S. p: (970) 920.5000 Galena St; Aspen, CO 81611 f: (970) 920.5197 www.aspenpitkin.com Project Description: The applicant is requesting approval to amend the Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions approval from 1977 by removing the requirement for HPC review of any proposed dwelling on Lot 16. Lot 16 is not designated or in a historic district. Legal Description: Lot16, Harr ,on Group — Tomlinson Lot Line Adjustment Plat, as shown on the Plat recorded January 17, 1990 in Plat Book 23 at page 77 as Reception No.319178. Parcel ID: 2735-124-88-001 Applicant: T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, c/o Jannol Law Group; 1801 Century Park Eas Ste 2150; Los Angeles, CA 90067. Represented by BendonAdams. More Information: For further information related to the project, contact Sarah Yoon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 920.5144, sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com BendonAdams `�" 300 So Spring St 202 Aspen, CO 81611 970.925.2855 bendonadams.com CITY OF ASPEN 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 "USA I'll MIIli i,hI!iii-BiIII i-11i1111111iijili'III IIHIIIIidIdIi NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: ". . 230 Lake Avenue 41 Project Location: 230 Lake Avenue; Aspen Land Use Reviews: Minor Subdivision Amendment. ("..fry ��� ASPEN Decision Making Body: City Council 130 S. Galena Street, Hearing Date: October 22, 2018, 5:00 P.M. Aspen, CO 81811 Hearing Location: City Hall, Council Chambers; 130 S. p: (970) 920.5000 Galena St; Aspen, CO 81611 f: (970) 920.5197 www.aspenpitkin.com Project Description: The applicant is requesting approval to amend the Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions approval from 1977 by removing the requirement for HPC review of any proposed dwelling on Lot 16. Lot 16 is not designated or in a historic district. Legal Description: Lot16, Harmon Group — Tomlinson Lot Line Adjustment Plat, as shown on the Plat recorded January 17, 1990 in Plat Book 23 at page 77 as Reception No.319178. Parcel ID: 2735-124-88-001 Applicant: T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, c/o Jannol Law Group; 1801 Century Park East, Ste 2150; Los Angeles, CA 90067. Represented by BendonAdams. More Information: For further information related to the project, contact Sarah Yoon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 920.5144, sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com BendonAdams 300 So Spring St 202 Aspen, CO 81611 970.925.2855 bendonadams.com D W RINGSBY ENTERPRISES LLC GREENBERG ASPEN LP CMML PROPERTIES LLC 1336 GLENARM PL #200 240 LAKE AVE 120 E 56TH ST #320 DENVER, CO 80204 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10022 229 WEST SMUGGLER LLC SCHERMER GREGORY P & GRANT E SCHIFF DAVID T 3509 CRESCENT AVE 210 LAKE AVE 1177 AVE OF AMERICAS 42ND FL DALLAS, TX 75205 ASPEN, CO 81611-1347 NEW YORK, NY 10036 WEST SMUGGLER CONDO ASSOC 300 LAKE LLC MCMANUS JAMES R REV TRUST COMMON AREA 0133 PROSPECTOR RD #4102B 43 NORTH AVE 322 W SMUGGLER ASPEN, CO 81611 BRIDGEPORT, CT 06606 ASPEN, CO 81611 LAND TRUST 426 NORTH SECOND LLC SECOND AND SMUGGLER CONDO ASSOC 1650 TYSONS BLVD #900 3509 CRESCENT AVE COMMON AREA MCLEAN, VA 22102 DALLAS, TX 75205 426 N SECOND ST ASEPN, CO 81611 ASPEN RIVER RENDEZVOUS LLC 326 WEST SMUGGLER LLC LEWIS JONATHAN D TRUST PO BOX 7138 500 E MOORHEAD ST #200 414 N FIRST ST GARDEN CITY, NY 11530 CHARLOTTE, NC 28202 ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHERMER LLOYD G & BETTY A TENEDOS LLC LAKE 206 LLC 210 LAKE AVE 1630 SHERIDAN RD #56 PO BOX 3337 ASPEN, CO 81611-1347 WILMETTE, IL 60091 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 PHILLIPPE THOMAS E JR & SUSAN MARIE OAK LODGE LLC BLOCK FAMILY TRUST 225 W SMUGGLER ST PO BOX 7951 6699 DUME DR ASPEN, CO 81611-1356 ASPEN, CO 81612 MALIBU, CA 90265 HUNT ELLEN B 322 SMUGGLER LLC BLOCK FAMILY TRUST PO BOX 8770 6120 S YALE AVE #813 6699 DUME DR ASPEN, CO 81612 TULSA, OK 74136 MALIBU, CA 90265 ASPEN CTR FOR ENVIRON STUDIES BLOCK FAMILY TRUST CONOVER CATHRINE M 100 PUPPY SMITH ST 6699 DUME DR 1010 WISCONSIN AVE NW #550 ASPEN, CO 81611 MALIBU, CA 90265 WASHINGTON, DC 20007 320 LAKE LLC CITY OF ASPEN JOSHUA 19 LLC 151 E 85TH ST #C 130 S GALENA ST 730 E DURANT AVE # 200 NEW YORK, NY 10028 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 Exhibit 3 LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name and Address: 230 Lake Avenue e ,%W � W - W A i i, A A 2 n1 R Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 2735-124-88-001 APPLICANT! CITY OF ASPEN Name: T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust c/o Jannol Law Group Address: 1801 Century Parr k East, Ste 2150; Los Angeles, CA 90067 310.788.3990 mj@jannollawgroup.com Phone #: email: REPRESENTIVATIVE: Name: BendonAdams Address: 300 So Spring St. #202; Aspen, CO 81611 Phone#: 970.925.2855 email: Chris@BendonAdams.com Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions Removal of a HPC review condition of the 1977 subdivision approval Review: Administrative or Board Review Required Land Use Review(s): Minor Subdivision Amendment Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields: Net Leasable square footage na Lodge Pillows naFree Market dwelling units na Affordable Housing dwelling units na Essential Public Facility square footage na Have you included the following? FEES DUE: $ 1,950 Pre -Application Conference Summary Signed Fee Agreement HOA Compliance form All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary November 2017 City of Aspen 1 130 S. Galena St. 1 (970) 920 5090 r 0co2S7 • 2.0 I'� -#�APc, Exhibit 4 City of Aspen: 230 Lake Avenue Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director ,� City Use: Fees Due: $ Received $ Case # 4 �; 6 a � �Nv-� Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen ("City") and Address of Property: AUG 092018 Please type or print in all caps CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DMOPME? Tobe Cotsen, Trustee BendOnAdams Property Owner Name: y Representative Name (tf different from Property owner) o sen Living Trust Billing Name and Address - Send Bills to: c/o Jan nol Law Group 1801 Century Park East, Ste 2150; Los Angeles, CA 90067 Contact info for billing: e-mail: mj@jannollwgroup.com Phone: 310.788.3990 I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2017, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $. flat fee for $. flat fee for $, flat fee for $. flat fee for For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no -payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafte7deposit ed. $ 1,950 for 6 hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. Signature: PRINT Name: Tobey Otsen Trustee; T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust Title: 0-- D AU G p 6 2018 CITY OF ii"". r . ... COMMI*M W"& t L 0 Stewart title Real partners. Rea! possibilities'' Date: July 10, 2018 File Number: 245253 Property Address: 230 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 Buyer/Borrower: William Guth Please direct all Title inquiries to: Kurt Beereboom Phone: (970) 925-3577 Fax: (866) 277-9353 Email Address: Kurt.Beereboom@stewart.com William Guth Delivery Method: Emailed Stewart Title Company 620 E Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611 �,IMk'v�- `4- Please direct all Closing inquiries to: Julie Morrah Phone: (970) 925-3577 Fax: (866) 277-9353 Email Address: julie.morrah@stewart.com Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, dated September 12, 1989 The Amended and Restated Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust dated April 16, 2015, which amended and completely restated the Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust Delivery Method: Emailed Coldwell Banker Mason Morse Real Estate 514 E Hyman Ave Aspen, CO 81611 Coldwell Banker Mason Morse Real Estate 514 E Hyman Ave Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen International Properties 625 E Main St, Ste 102B, PMB233 Aspen, CO 81611 Holland & Hart, LLP 600 E Main St, Ste 104 Aspen, CO 81611 Attn: Carrie Wells Phone: (970) 925-7000 Fax: E-Mail: carrie@carriewells.com Delivery Method: Emailed Attn: Sarah Armstrong Phone: (970) 925-7000 Fax: (970) 925-7027 E-Mail: sarah@carriewells.com Delivery Method: Emailed Attn: William Guth Phone: (970) 300-2120 Fax: E-Mail: bill@aspenprops.com Delivery Method: Emailed Attn: Mark Hamilton Phone: Fax: E-Mail: mehamilton@hollandhart.com Delivery Method: Emailed 9 stewart title ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY NOTICE IMPORTANT - READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY'S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; Schedule B, Part II - Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas corporation (the "Company"), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I - Requirements have not been met within six months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company's liability and obligation end. 'aa -.z Z� A4� Authorzed Countersignature Stewart Title Company 620 E Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611 61111A Matt Morris i President and CEO ac�`P01�r� $ 1908 Denise C rraux Secretary For purposes of this form the "Stewart Title" logo featured above is the represented logo for the underwriter, Stewart Title Guaranty Company. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice, the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule 8, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule 8, Part ll - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LANE) TITLE File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Page 1 of 3 IF • (d) The Company's liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured's actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (e) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any. (f) In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I - Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (g) In any event, the Company's liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy. 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT (a) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment. (b) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. (c) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (d) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II - Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (e) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company. (f) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company's only liability will be under the Policy. 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company's agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company's agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO -FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro -forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro -forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro -forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at <http://www.alta.o[g/arbitration>. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall be addressed to it at P.O. Box 2029, Houston, Texas 77252-2029. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy, the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule 8, Part / - Requirements; and Schedule 8, Part // - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TIT[ F. File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16Arm- Page 3 of 3 • ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY File No.: 245253 Lot 16, HARMON GROUP-TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT, as shown on the Plat recorded January 17, 1990 in Plat Book 23 at page 77 as Reception No. 319178. County of Pitkin, State of Colorado This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy, the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule 8, Part ll - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. W4D TITLE File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Auk - Page 2 of 6 . ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART I ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY 11. Regarding Deed recorded November 22, 2017 as Reception No. 643295; Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title of Colorado, Inc. furnished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen, that the following taxes have been paid, or that conveyance is exempt from said taxes:(1) The "Wheeler Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and(2) The "Housing Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990) 12. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title of Colorado, Inc. furnished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen, that the following taxes have been paid, or that conveyance is exempt from said taxes:(1) The "Wheeler Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and(2) The "Housing Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990). 13. Deed from vested owner(s) vesting fee simple title in the purchaser(s). NOTE: Notation of the legal address of the grantee must appear on the deed as per 1976 amendment to statute on recording of deeds CRS 38-35-109 (2). NOTE: Statement of Authority for Cotsen 1985 Trust recorded November 22, 2017 as Reception No. 643296, discloses the following persons as those authorized to transact business on behalf of said entity: Margit Sparling Cotsen If there have been any amendments or changes to the management of the entity, written documentation reflecting the changes and a new Statement of Authority will be required. NOTE: Statement of Authority for Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust recorded November 22, 2017 as Reception No. 643297, discloses the following persons as those authorized to transact business on behalf of said entity: Lloyd Eric Cotsen If there have been any amendments or changes to the management of the entity, written documentation reflecting the changes and a new Statement of Authority will be required. NOTE: Statement of Authority for T L J Cotsen Living Trust recorded November 22, 2017 as Reception No. 643298, discloses the following persons as those authorized to transact business on behalf of said entity: Tobey L.J. Cotsen Victor If there have been any amendments or changes to the management of the entity, written documentation reflecting the changes and a new Statement of Authority will be required. NOTE: The vesting deed is shown as follows: Warranty Deed recorded November 22, 2017, as Reception No. 643295. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTAO Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule B, Part ll - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AME- as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TITLE File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Page 4 of 6 ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART II ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY NOTE: Exceptions 2 and 5 may be deleted from the policies, provided the seller and buyer execute the Company's affidavits, as required herein, and the Company approves such deletions. If work has been performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils testing, foundation work, installation of materials), and the Company has not reviewed and approved lien waivers and indemnitor financials, Standard Exception 5 (mechanic lien exception) will not be deleted and no mechanic lien coverage will be furnished. Exceptions 3 and 4 may be deleted from the policies, provided the Company receives and approves the survey or surrey affidavit if required herein. Exception 1 will not appear on the policies, provided the Company, or its authorized agent, conducts the closing of the proposed transaction and is responsible for the recordation of the documents. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTAO Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy,, the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule B, Part 11- Exceptions, and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TITLE File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Page 6 of 6 • File No.: 245253 DISCLOSURES Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: A. THE SUBJECT REAL PROPERTY MAY BE LOCATED IN A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT; B. A CERTIFICATE OF TAXES DUE LISTING EACH TAXING JURISDICTION SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE COUNTY TREASURER OR THE COUNTY TREASURER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT; C. INFORMATION REGARDING SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND THE BOUNDARIES OF SUCH DISTRICTS MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, OR THE COUNTYASSESSOR Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2, Section 5, Paragraph G requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed." Provided that Stewart Title Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lender's Title Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative Mechanic's Lien Protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception No. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single-family residence, which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled Mechanic's and Materialmen's Liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased, within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and/or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium; fully executed Indemnity agreements satisfactory to the company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. To comply with the provisions of C.R.S. 10-11-123, the Company makes the following disclosure: a. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and b. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. NOTE: THIS DISCLOSURE APPLIES ONLY IF SCHEDULE B, SECTION 2 OF THE TITLE COMMITMENT HEREIN INCLUDES AN EXCEPTION FOR SEVERED MINERALS. Notice of Availability of a Closing Protection Letter: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulation 8-1-3, Section 5, Paragraph C (11)(f), a closing protection letter is available to the consumer. NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE COVERAGES REFERRED TO HEREIN, UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED. C� July 20, 2018 Ms. Sarah Yoon Historic Preservation Planner City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 V RECEIVED 0o25-• 2WS •PAA AUG 06 2018 C17Y OF ASPEN OO BendonAcr'iam°9' RE: 230 Lake Avenue Minor Subdivision Amendment I►1W00, Please accept this application for a Minor Subdivision Amendment to the Shaw and WPW Subdivision Exemption. The 5-lot subdivision was approved in 1977 from 9 lots of the Hallam Addition. Several of the properties in this subdivision contained historic resources at the time and "°thn e9e 230 Lake Avenue became official historic landmark properties. W Sm�99tM � This lot, Lot 16, was vacant at the time. The subdivision plat Triangle Park included a note requiring HPC review of any new home on the parcel. This application seeks removal of the HPC W� 2 review condition for Lot 16. The property was not required to seek historic designation and the property has never surfaced on any assessment of historic properties. The property is not a listed historic landmark and is not included on any mapping of the inventory. The 1980 home does not appear to have any historic merit. jAr �`x The HPC review condition appears to have been and outgrowth of community discussion of broader planning issues. The City Council even discussed creating a historic district covering the West End neighborhood just two weeks prior to this subdivision being reviewed. 300 SO SPRING ST 1 202 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 1 BENDONADAMS.COM • 0 We have provided minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings and the City Council meeting regarding this case. The record reflects discussion of the existing buildings (existing in 1977) with particular focus on the Shaw house, which became a historic landmark. The property appears to not be part of Aspen's historic preservation program in all respects except forth is plat note. The attachments should provide everything outlined in the pre -application summary. If you have any questions, please let me know. Kind Regards, 49 Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams, LLC Attachments: 1. Review Standards 2. Pre -Application Summary 3. Application form 4. Agreement to Pay form 5. HOA form 6. Authorization to represent 7. Proof of ownership 8. Vicinity Map 9. March 1, 1977, P&Z Minutes 10. March 8, 1977, P&Z Minutes 11. February 28, 1977, City Council Minutes 12. March 14, 1977, City Council Minutes 13. Photo context of neighborhood 14. 1977 Subdivision Plat 300 SO SPRING ST 1 202 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 1 BENDONADAMS.COM 0 0 Exhibit 1 Review Criteria 26.480.090.B. Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial amendment to an approved subdivision or between adjacent subdivisions may be authorized by the Community Development Director. An insubstantial amendment shall be limited to technical or engineering considerations which could not reasonably have been anticipated during the approval process or any other minor change to a subdivision which the Community Development Director finds has no substantial effect upon the subdivision or to the allowances and limitations of the subdivision. Response — At the time of the 1977 Subdivision Exemption approval, the City's historic preservation program was in its infancy. Concern about the changing character of town included discussion of designating the entire Original Townsite as an historic district. The idea was floated concurrent with this application review, including by a council member just one meeting prior to Shaw application being presented to the City Council. Notes from the Planning and Zoning Commission review included discussion of floor area, whether the parcels should allow for single family or duplex use, and discussion of historic preservation. The record shows the opinions of the various P&Z members regarding a conditioned approval and a request from the applicant for an approval without conditions. The P&Z record shows a motion to recommend subdivision exemption (to City Council) but does not show a final vote or whether any conditions were attached to the recommendation. The City Council minutes also show discussion of floor area, single-family verses duplex use, and historic designation. The historic designation discussion appears to have been focused on the Shaw house. The applicant's attorney was asked about restricting the floor area of the Shaw house and about historic designation. His response and follow-up discussion of City Council resulted in historic designation of the Shaw house being accepted by the applicant, with floor area restrictions being those of the neighborhood. The City Council motion adopted by City Council conditioned approval of the subdivision exemption upon historic designation of the Shaw house. This record shows a continued discussion after the motion carried regarding the same issues, but with the contract purchaser WPW. The contract purchaser appears to accept a floor area cap and historic designation in advance (of the restoration). There are no follow-up motions or approvals granted. The result appears to have been historic designation of Lot 20 (Shaw house); a requirement for WJW to seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lots 17, 18 and 19. Lot 16 (230 Lake) was vacant at the time and the requirement for it was for any proposed dwelling to be submitted to the HPC for review. Condition No. 2 on plat reads as follows: 2. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lots 17, 10, and 19, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee; and, any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 shall be submitted to the City of Aspen Historic preservation Committee for its review. Exhibit 1 Review Criteria While subject to HPC review for a new dwelling, the record reflects Lot 16 being treated differently than the other lots in that it was not required to seek historic designation. Lot 16 is not listed as a historic landmark. The historic preservation program in Aspen has been refined multiple times over the past 40 years, including several assessments of the inventory. 230 Lake, with its home built in 1980, has never surfaced as a potential historic landmark. This application requests striking the language requiring HPC review for a new home on Lot 16. The property is clearly not historic and the discussion of a historic district covering the West End never gained support. Subsequent assessments of the historic preservation program and re -reviews of properties have never identified 230 Lake as a potential resource. The HPC review of the new home occurred prior to the 1980 home being built. There is no evidence in the building permit file of subsequent development activity requiring HPC review, suggesting the one-time review requirement was met or that the City does not consider the property to be subject to HPC review. To the extent that an HPC review is required, it is not clear what jurisdiction the HPC would have as the limitation does not appear to have been adopted by City Council Ordinance. Removal of this language would be consistent with the evolution of the historic preservation program. The 1970s involved case -by -case discussion of preservation, floor area, and allowed uses. This history of this case demonstrates this. The program has matured into a program were properties are assessed by a preservation expert and proposed for the inventory through adoption of an ordinance. Removal of this plat note affecting Lot 16 will not represent impact on other lots within the subdivision and is consistent with today's historic preservation program. Homeowner Association Compliance Policy All land use applications within the City of Aspen are required to include a Homeowner Association Compliance Form (this form) certifying the scope of work included in the land use application complies with all applicable covenants and homeowner association policies. The certification must be signed by the property owner or Attorney representing the property owner. Property Owner ("I"): Name: Tobey Cotsen, Trustee; T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust Email: inj@jannollwgroup.com Address of 230 Lake Avenue Property: Aspen, CO 81611 (subject of p application) I certify as follows: (pick one) Phone No.: 310.788.3990 QThis property is not subject to a homeowners association or other form of private covenant. ❑ This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this land use application do not require approval by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. ❑ This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this land use application have been approved by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. I understand this policy and I understand the City of Aspen does not interpret, enforce, or manage the applicability, meaning or effect of private covenants or homeowner association rules or bylaws. I understand that this document is a public document. Owner signature: ./ date: July 20, 2018 Owner printed name: Tob y Cotsen, Trustee T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust or, Attorney signature: Attorney printed name: date: AUG 0 6 2018 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUMTY DEt`:Lo0'A-,:-trrT PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ' A parcel of land being located in Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian; said parcel also being the original Lots 16 through 24, Block 103, and which, under this plat, are now Lots 16 through 20, Block 103, Hallam 'a Addition to the City of Aspen, Colorado. Said parcel is more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue whence the East 1/4 corner of said Section 12 bears N 60° 46' 14" E., 654.94 ,.at; thence N 44" 34' 17" E., 125.00 feet; thence 74.12 feet around a curve to the left having a radius of 358.05 feet (the chord of which bears S 51° 21' 33" E., 73.99 feet); thence N 79" 06' 33" E., 69.33 feet; thence S 49° 47' 32" E., 50.25 feet; thence S 27° 58. 53. E., 51.81 feet; thence S 19° 51' 50" E., 99,76 feet; thence S 12° 47. 14" E., 166.31 feet to the Northerly line of Smuggler Street; thence N 75° 09' 11" W., 118.48 feet along the Northerly line of Smuggler Street to the intersection with the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue; thence 245.29 feet around a curve to the left having a radius of 401.20 feet (the chord of which bears N 39° 46' 29" W., 241. 49 feet) along the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue; thence 100.00 feet around a curve to the right having a radius of 483.05 .feet (the chord of which bears N 51° 22' 33" W.. 99.82 feet) alone the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue to the point of beginning. Said parcel contains 56,614 square feet, more or less. CITY OFASPEN SHAW AND THE WPW JOINT VENTURE SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS APPROVAL This Subdivision'Exemptions Plat evidences approval of the Shaw and - WPW Subdivision exemption applications by action of the City Council of the City of Aspen, taken at a duly constituted meeting held on March 14, 1977, and is hereby accepted and approved by the City of Aspen for exemp- tions from the requirements of the full Subdivision Regulations contained in Section 20, Aspen Municipal Code, as amended, including those required by Ordinance 22, Series of 1975, City of Aspen, pursuant to Section 20-19(b) thereof, subject to the following conditions; IThe owner of Lot 20, Dorothy Koch Shaw, shall seek historic desig- nation for the existing structure thereon from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee. 2. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successor. and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lots 17, 18, and 19, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee; and, any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 shall be submitted to the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee for its review. 3. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, ita individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall remove the old frame dwelling located on Lots 18 and 19. 4. The owner of Lots 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall maintain a floor area ratio (FAR) of not greater than .3:1 in any restoration or -� additions to the three existing structures on those lots, including within the ratio the size of the existing structures as modified by such additions or restorations. 5. Payment by the owners of the park dedication fee required by Ordinance 63, Series of 1976, City of Aspen, for Lots 17, 18, 19; and 20, in a total amount of $14,714.64, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged; and, payment of such park dedication fee.for Lot 16 as would be due under that ordinance upon issuance of a building permit. Dated: �I , 1977. Sta .ndley ay ATTEST:, / ��s/ Bawer, sty c er, 5UAW4NDTWE_WPW JOINT VENTUPE 5UBDIV1510N EXPIMPTION5 PLAT CITY OF Z'5PEN 15LOCK 103, HPLLGM'S �DDIT ION SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I, HAROLD W. JOHNSON (JOHNSON-LONGFELLOW 6 ASSO.), licensed surveyor, do hereby certify that this SHAW AND THE WPW JOINT VENTURE SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS PLAT was prepared under my supervision and that the out -side boundaries, lots, roads and other features are correctly shown hereon, that the same are based on actual field surveys performed on the described property under my direct control and supervision during the months of November and December, 1976, all in accordance with generally accepted surveying practices and Section 38-51-101, at seq.C.R.S. 1973 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and seal on this 3 i� day of ,/ ,� , 1977. JOHNSON-LONGFELLOW S ASSO., INC.JO O.•• 1cr '•.;'Y BY +/ —re HAR LD W. J ON, 11, 9i end t D01B :r} STATE OF COLORADO sif�.la ) as. tuWE� TE CF OOICp.P COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foreoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisJAd day of 1977, by HAROLD W. JOHNSON, for h mse f an as President— JOBNSON-LONGFELLOW a ASSO., INC. WITNESS my hand and official seal. my commission expires: Q,�j�K/ �7 _S6 Notary P CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP Dorothy Koch Shaw, owner of Lot-20, and The WPW Joint Venture, owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, all in Block 103, Hallam's Addition and as described hereon, hereby certify that they are the owners of all the real property described in the within Subdivision Exemptions Plat; that such exemptions were sought in order for Dorothy Koch Shaw to sell old Lots 16-22, Block 103, Hallam'. Addition, and retain old Lots 23 and 24, which nine lots, by the City's approval, now become Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, owned by The WPW Joint Venture, and Lot 20, owned by Dorothy Koch Shaw, as platted hereon. Dated: JaA►IL3 , 1977. Dorothy Koch Shaw N y Ra ona Marta Her attorneys in fact The WPW Joint Venture By 2Fi W�✓� T Jyhy B. Wogan, JrC' — Ae e Janine T. Wogan Exhibit 14 ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF COLORADO ) as. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The regoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1971, by HARRY SHAW and RAMONA MARKALUNAS, as attor in act orDOROTHY KOCH SHAW. WITNESS my hand and official seal. - My conmtission expires: �int S /976 '`•` v c✓ ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF COLORADO ) ) as. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The for going instrument was acknowledged before me this ?Adday of 1977, by JOHN B. WOGAH, JR., HENRY PEDERSEN, and JAQDELIN { N, or themselves and for The WPW Joint Venture. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: -at, P 1c 1 RECORDING CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that the within Subdivision Exemptions Plat was accepted for filing in my office at /�:4fa o'clock �_.M. on the 3 _/4[ _day of ,T�Q I177--a 7 — duly filed in Plat Book at Page - 9/ under reception number PITKIN COUNTY CLERK fi 'RECORDER By v n ' c SWEET i OF 3 a • 0 CITY OF ASPEN Exhibit 2 PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Sarah Yoon, 970.920.5144 DATE: June 15, 2018 PROJECT: 230 Lake Avenue REPRESENTATIVE: Chris Bendon, BendonAdams REQUEST: Subdivision Amendment — Minor DESCRIPTION: The property at 230 Lake Avenue is located in the R-6 zone, Hallam's Addition, Block 103, Lot 16. The lot was included in the Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemption approval granted by City Council in 1977 with a condition that "any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 shall be submitted to the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee for its review." Since this approval, the reviewing body for historic preservation projects has been renamed from the Historic Preservation Committee to the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), Ordinance NO.60, Series 1989. The applicant would like to pursue amending the condition pertaining to Lot 16 in the subdivision exemption approval by dropping the requirement for HPC approval. The lot is not designated historic, and HPC approval is not needed if not for this condition. This amendment does not qualify as an Insubstantial Amendment, therefore, will be conducted as a Minor Amendment that will be taken to City Council to approve, approve with conditions or deny (Section 26.480.090.C). Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): RECEIVED 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.480.090.0 Subdivision Amendments — Minor Amendment AUG 0 6 2018 Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: CITY OF ASPEN CMWTY DEVELOPMENT Land Use Code: http://cityofaspen.com/276/Title-26-Land-Use-Code Land Use Application: http://citvofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/HomeNiew/305 Review by: Planning Staff for completeness and recommendation City Council for decision. Public Hearing: Yes, at City Council. Neighborhood Outreach: No. Referral Agencies: No. Planning Fees: $1,950 for 6 billable hours of staff time. (Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.) Referral Agencies Fee: $0. Total Deposit: $1,950. ASLU 230 Lake Avenue Minor Subdivision Amendment 2735-124-88-001 1 0 • Please submit one copy of the completed application to the Community Development Office on the Third Floor of City Hall before each review step: ❑ Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement. ❑ Pre -application Conference Summary (this document). ❑ Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. ❑ Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. ❑ HOA Compliance form (Attached). ❑ An 81/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. ❑ A written description of the proposal and an explanation of how the amendment is consistent with or an improvement to the approved subdivision. ❑ Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the property including at least one (1) of the following: diagrams, maps, photographs, models or streetscape elevations. Once the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted: ❑ 1 digital PDF copy of the complete application packet ❑ Total deposit for review of the application. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 2 • 0 Exhibit 6 t WMTV, : 002 ko T i? -1 `M14 � �92 U1 4�� I. =0 -�' July 20, 2018 Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 230 Lake Avenue; Aspen, CO. Ms. Garrow: RECEIVED AUG 06 2018 CITY OF ASPEN CWIIMNiY DEVEI(1PMENT Please accept this letter authorizing and BendonAdams, LLC, to represent our ownership interests in 230 Lake Avenue and act on our behalf on matters reasonably associated in securing land use approvals for the property. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property — 230 Lake Avenue Owner —T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, dated September 12, 1989 Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended; The Amended and Restated Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust dated April 16, 2015, which amended and completely restated the Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust Legal Description — Lot 16; Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Plat recorded at Book 5, Page 91. Parcel ID — 2735-124-88-001 Kind Regards, C--� Jo T,Trustee obey C T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust cto Jannol Law Group 1801 Century Park East, Ste 2150 Los Angeles, CA 90067 m c,jannollwgrouD.com 310.788.3990 300 SO SPRING ST 1 202 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 1 BENDONADAMS.COM � RECEIVED AUG 06 2018 CITY OF ASPEN COMlAl1MTY DEVELOPIdENT 0E) BendonAdams July 27, 2018 Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 230 Lake Avenue; Aspen, CO. Ms. Garrow: Please accept this letter authorizing and BendonAdams, LLC, to represent our ownership interests in 230 Lake Avenue and act on our behalf on matters reasonably associated in securing land use approvals for the property. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property — 230 Lake Avenue Owner — T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, dated September 12, 1989 Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended; The Amended and Restated Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust dated April 16, 2015, which amended and completely restated the Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust Legal Description — Lot 16; Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Plat recorded at Book 5, Page 91. Parcel ID — 2735-124-88-001 Kind Regards, aorrinnatsen, Trustee The Amended and Restated Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust c/o Jannol Law Group 1801 Century Park East, Ste 2150 Los Angeles, CA 90067 m" 'annollwgroup.com 310.788.3990 300 SO SPRING ST 1 202 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 1 QENQONAOAMS.COM 19000"WE MOM!. MI �.MJMOR August 2, 2018 Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 230 Lake Avenue; Aspen, CO. Ms. Garrow: Please accept this letter authorizing and BendonAdams, LLC, to represent our ownership interests in 230 Lake Avenue and act on our behalf on matters reasonably associated in securing land use approvals for the property. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property — 230 Lake Avenue Owner — T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, dated September 12, 1989 Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended; The Amended and Restated Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust dated April 16, 2015, which amended and completely restated the Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust Legal Description — Lot 16; Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Plat recorded at Book 5, Page 91. Parcel ID — 2735-124-88-001 Kind Regards, Lloyd Eric Cotsen, Trustee Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended c/o Jannol Law Group 1801 Century Park East, Ste 2150 Los Angeles, CA 90067 ml5,jannollwgroup.com 310.788.3990 300 SO SPRING ST 1 202 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 1 BENDONADAMS.COM • 0025 201"S �P� RECEIVED AUG 0 6 2018 CITY OF ASPEN OMMY DMOPWW OO BendonAdams August 2, 2018 Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 230 Lake Avenue; Aspen, CO. Ms. Garrow: RECEIVED AUG 0 9 2018 CITY OF ASPEN CMANITY DEYEtOPMENT Please accept this letter authorizing and BendonAdams, LLC, to represent our ownership interests in 230 Lake Avenue and act on our behalf on matters reasonably associated in securing land use approvals for the property. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property — 230 Lake Avenue Owner — T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, dated September 12, 1989 Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended; The Amended and Restated Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust dated April 16, 2015, which amended and completely restated the Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust Legal Description — Lot 16; Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Plat recorded at Book 5, Page 91. Parcel ID — 2735-124-88-001 Kind Regards, Lloyd Eric Cotsen, Trustee Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended c/o Jannol Law Group 1801 Century Park East, Ste 2150 Los Angeles, CA 90067 mlCcDjannollwgroup.com 310.788.3990 300 SO SPRING ST 1 202 I ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 1 BENDONADAMS.COM Gillespie Ave z z V) Cl) a' _ �, Wild► �� �,, Y. *r. aLft� °rtf� �� A . •� k rian' le-Rjrk gal " L. .4%c. Exhibit 9 EXuoroeewouoxIN000..aprM RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 1977 Members present were Torn Isaac, Dick Kienast, Olaf Hedstrom, John Schuhmacher, Danny Abbott, Roger Hunt and Chic Collins. Also present were Hal Clark and John Stanford from the Planning Office. Hunt made a motion to table the minutes. Hedstrom seconded it and it was passed. Montgomery The conditional use of Montgomery Wards was continued from Wards February 1, 1977. Clark said that the applicant was not available for comment. Collins opened the public hearing and closed it since no comments were made. Stanford said that a public hearing should be set for around April 5. There should be study session on March 8. Shaw Estate The commission moved on to new business. First on the WPW - subdi- agenda was the subdivision exemption for the Shaw Estate vision ex- which was to be bought by WPW Joint Venture. The request emption was to change the existing lot lines for Lots 16-22, Block 103, Hallam's Addition from 7 lots into four lots all in excess of 9,000 square feet. The property is zoned R6 which would allow four duplex units to be built under existing zoning. Hal Clark explai'n7�ng.thePlanning Office comments. (1) PO wants the area designated historic. The applicants wish to remove a frame building from one of the lots. Due to the dilapidated condition of the building and its proximity to one of the brick houses, we agree. We would like to preserve the Victorian buildings on lots 18, 20 and 22. This would restrict the area to single family dwellings. (2j We recommend deed restricting lots 18-19, 20-21, and 22-23 to be used by single-family dwelling only. Lot 16-17 could be developed with a duplex. (3) PO does not feel the subdivision dedication fee should be waivered. (4) The application will have to get a variance for lot 19 which will only have a 55 foot frontage as opposed to the required 60 foot frontage. (5) The replat of these lots should be recorded with the Office of the Pitkin County clerk and Recorder. Upon satisfaction of these suggestions the PO recommends approval of the exemption request. Shaw's attorney Jim Moran said that Shaw not tied to WPW. Shaw's application divides the land into two parcels for sale. This would retain simplicity of application without conditions of duplex, etc. which might evolve in WPW's future applications. Collins stated that contiguous lots deserve consideration tegether. Moran. interjected that historic designation would apply to the existing structures. Nick McGrath, attorney for WPW, supported Moran's view. WPW can't buy the seven lots unless Shaw gets the subdivision exemption. WPW is dependent on P&Z to get an exemption. McGrath went on the explain the WPW exemption. Henry Pederson, Jack and Jackie Woger, John Doremus and Peggy Clifford were given an option to buy the land. A letter from Clifford supported the application of WPW with Shaw to buy the lots. The option must be exercised before March 16. He showed some photos and described the lot line changes. The exemption would allow the present tenants to stay. McGrath then addressed Clark's February 25th memo. Regarding Historic designation WPW would prefer to restore the houses at their own pace and get designation after the restoration is complete. If there is a deed restriction it would bind the property forever. The only problem with • • Meeting Continued Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 1977 single family dwelling would be if we propose to build a house we wouldn't want restriction which would go beyond the present zoning requirements. Also H. Pederson might like a caretakers unit which would be historically designed. if dedication fees are imposed we will work those out with. Shaw. The lot line cannot be redrawn to make a 64 foot frontage. We will deal with the Board of Adjustment. Pederson felt that he wanted to have a caretaker or tent to a local for low cost housing. Collins asked McGrath to explain why historic designation was unfavorable. How else would the integrity of the neighborhood be explained. McGrath retorted that the city's flexibility will dictate this. Single family residences are not imposed because of individuals developing their own homes. instead, by giving historic designation this accomplishes the mission. Abbott asked where tenants would go. McGrath said options to purchase were given with a reasonable time notice. If there is no response the Shaw estate will serve notice to quit on tenants. Hunt stated that he didn't want to leave duplex question up to HPC. They are notorious for letting building get out of hand. Clark said that it was no way to not allow a duplex and to allow caretakers. Expansion can be restricted to size or FAR restrictions. Historic designation is important. Collins stated that historic designation is necessary to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood character. Ann Schwind of the West Side Improvement Association supported P&Z concept. Wants to maintain single family dwellings in that area including lots 16-17. Letter from Dr. and Mrs. Freshman writen to the board supported WPW. Mrs. Paepcke wrote a letter against the rezoning of the Shaw property. McGrath said that it would be hard to agree on size, etc of expansion at this meeting. He wanted to make conditions as to preserve quantity and set limits before the Council meeting. They would make recommendations subject to size limits. Isaac said that perhaps they would not exempt them. They ought to get a public hearing. The processis too hurried. McGrath said that this is the process that has been used with single owners of existing buildings. Isaac stated that there is a difference between houses, duplexes, caretakers, etc. Schwind asked about the Hallam Lake dedication fund. Clark said that perhaps they could negotiate for open space. McGrath said that it would be a method of saving cash outlay. Perhaps a trail is an alternative to explore. Clark said that it was worth considering. Hunt asked if this might be determined by next week. Clark said that they can add information but they are satisfied with the recommendations. Comments are noted. What other information is needed. i RRAAFORR MJRLI41I1" aa., DOMM RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Meeting Continued Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 1977 Collins said if we are looking at the house size then duplex should be taken into consideration. Schwind asked if off street parking would be handled if duplex is allowed. Collins asked if the lot line had to change. McGrath said that lot lines will preserve the aesthetics. Clark said that it was a favorable move. Collins asked if 9,000 feet would allow a duplex. Yes. I think that should schedule a site inspection and table this until March 8 at 5:00. Hunt moved that it be tabled. Abbott seconded the motion. Passed by all. A site inspection was set up for Thursday at 5:00 PM. There was a motion to table the Shaw request make by Hunt. Abbott seconded. All passed the motion. Abbott made a request to revote on AIRS. Hunt moved to revote.Abbott seconded the motion. Hunt then withdrew his motion. It was decided to review the parliamentary procedure. A.E.M. A.E.M. asked for condo of existing 8 unit building called Partners- Pioneer Apartments. There are nine individuals who own Pioneers Apts. five units. It is an awkward ownership. It is subject to 6 month lease requirements according to Ord. 19. We have sent an affidavit of notification to owners to condos of intent to condo. It was agreed to allow tenants the right of first refusal. They are local owners. We would be willing to go thru the proper subdivision process. First we need to condo one more unitl Goodheim said that a study of condo was being done. Not asking to hung up the applicant, but there is no data on future residents. There are results to a study of condo of Aspen View. Only one apartment was purchased by a tenant. The rental marketis drying up. Condo is mostly profit motivated. It is easier to sell a smaller unit than a whole building. Collins asked what was the composition? Goodheim said mostly local employees. Majority could not afford the increase in rent (79%). You might advise the appellant that more conditions may be added during the process. Hunt questioned the six month ordinance. McGrath said that it was already restricted in contract. McGrath asked why they didn't object to the subdivision dedication fee. Goodheim said that it was included in the motion to send information to Goodheim. McGrath said that he was never asked for it. Hunt made a motion to recommend the concept of resubdivision under the conditions that there not be a waiver of the subdivision dedication fee (Ord. 63). Abbottseconded the motion. All were in favor. Durant Galena Brooke Peterson representing the During Galena Building condo asked for condominiumization. There were no comments from the Engineering department. He said that it was being condo in order to sell Le Caberet. Collins said that there was no problem. Hunt said that that they were exempt on the condition of the payment of the fee. Isaac seconded. All passed. 0 • Meeting Continued Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 1977 Doremus Duplex Doremus Duplex is asking for a subdivision exemption for Lots M, N, and O Block 8. Engineering department had no comments. The proposed duplex on the north corner of 7th and Smuggler Strees. The mechanism for financing is under separate ownership. The planning office said that there was not problem. It conforms to normal zoning regulations. Hunt made a motion to exempt. Minimum lease requirements would be required by RMF. Ordinance 63 would not be waivered. Isaac seconded. All passed. Winchester Winchester Duplex asked for a subdivision exemption because they had less lot size than they needed. The Board of Adjustments granted the variance (case no. 73-9). The Engineering Dept. has no comments about Lot 18, Block 11, Snowbunny which is zoned R-15. The Board studied the plans. Hunt moved to exempt Winchester from the six month restriction and not to waiver Ordinance 63. Abbott seconded the motion. All approved. Hunt motion to add to the agenda. Hedstrom seconded. All passed. Collins said that there was a conflict of interest. A property dispute would result because the property line was erratic. The line would have to be changed to have as common property. It would make a more usable line. Abbott moved to exempt Smuggler and Durant Mining Corporation for the purposes of the boundary adjacent to Tri County Boundary Survey NE k SW 4 of Sec 7, T 10S, R 84 W of the 6 PM. Hung seconded the motion. All in favor. Motion passed. Isaac motion to adjourn. Abbott seconded the motion. All were in favor. Meeting adjourned at 7:25 PM. CJ�? (tia �Ai�- Z Elisabeth Sherrill Deputy City Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Exhibit 10 100 Leaves Special Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission March 6, 1977 Shaw Subdivision -Request for Exemption hike Martin was present to represent the Shaw inter- est. Hal Clark noted that a letter from Dr. Schiff had been received by the Planning Office voicing support of the Planning Office recommendations to P&Z regarding the Shaw exemption request. Clark noted that same changes had been made in the application, and asked Martin to explain the changes. Martin deferred to Nick McGrath, attorney for the WPW exemoton request. McGrath explained that an analysis of the surrounding neighborhood within ten blocks had been done, and showed photographs to the P&Z that depicted homes in the area that are not single family dwellings. McGrath noted that 30 of 55 of the homes are duplexes or have caretaker apartments on the property. In regard to FAR requirements, McGrath addressed the fact that there are presently no FAR regulations in the R-6 zone. However, if the P&Z were to impose a .3 FAR on the subdivision exemption motion, the project would still be viable for his clients to pur- sue. McGrath passed out copies of the proposed change to the original application to the P&Z members. one of the proposals was that if the City was interested in the character of the surrounding neighborhood,this could be accomplished by historic designation of the existing builidngs rather than FAR restrictions. Clark read into the record a telegram from Mr. and Mrs. Warren Bennis who stated their support of preserving the historic flavor of the neighborhood, as well as their concern that historic buildings not be removed unnecessarily under the guise of progress. There was also a telephone call from Mrs Elizabeth Paepkce that stated that she was opposed to any rezoning in the neighborhood. Michael Martin stated that the Shaw exemption request was a very basic request: they were asking only to sell less than one half block of property. The sale of the lots is important to the Shaw family because they must liquidate some of the estate for tax reasons. They want to sell a part of the estate without having to move. Martin threatened that the property will be sold to some purchaser and the property will inevit- ably change to some extent regardless of the present action of the P&Z. The Shaw family wants to continue to own the green house, and to sell the rest of the block. Martin further added that the request was for the P&Z to approve the exemption without conditions. Hal Clark stated that the proposition of a land dedi- cation rather than a monetary one would be impracti- cal in this case. Hunt asked which party would be responsible for payment of the dedication fee, to whict Clark responded that the Shaw's would be the,ones to pa the subdivision dedication fee. Planning and Zoning Commission March 8, 1977 Bill Kane stressed that FAR restrictions should be included as a condition to the motion in order to limit the size of any future',buildings on the prop- erty. McGrath told the P&Z that Lots 16 and 17 are going to be purchased for the purpose of building a family home for the Wogans. If a .3 FAR is imposed, the option to buy may not be exercised as that'_ would not allow them to build the size home necessary for their family. Chairman Collins noted that it was important to look at the 9 lots in question in a historic setting. His interest was in protecting the historic buildings, and possibly a historic overlay could be applied to lots 16 through 24. This would limit the development poten- tial and preserve the historic character of the neigh- borhood. Kane questioned the idea of historically designating the entire area in the property lines, as opposed to the idea of an historic overlay of the Original Aspen Townsite as was mnetioned at a previous meeting. Presently, the review criteria is set up for commercial buildings. Expanding the H-Historic designation would be premature at this time as the design criteria must be developed as a tool to deal with review. Kienast stated that perhaps this would be a good test case for the UPC, and the tools could be developed in the pro- cess. Kane reiterated that by setting up a district in this case would not be apptopriate because this could catapult the City into designating the entire original townsite, a process that the HPC is not equipped to handle. Kienast stated again that he wanted to see the H designation given to the entire parcel. McGrath and Martin both agreed that by designating the entire parcel as historic, the P&Z was not acknow- ledging the mix of styles in the neighborhood. McGrath pointed out several examples of the different sizes and styles of architecture in the immediate neighbor- hood. P&Z member Isaac asked what the future ownership of the property would be. McGrath clarified which prop- erties were under option and which were not. He added that the lot lines were being changed to allow for better side yard setbacks. The P&Z went into executive session. Kienast stated that imposing a .3 FAR would unreasonably restrict the owners of the properties. He suggested that H- designation would more effectively restrict the prop- erty. Hedstrom said he would prefer to give H desig- nation to the three buildings now on the property, as opposed to the overlay concept. Abbott strongly en- couraged historic designation of the Shaw house. He also supported an overlay of the entire parcel. Isaac was in favor of historic designation of the whole subdivision application as well as restricting the FAR to .3. Collins opined that he wanted the entire par- cel designated historic to preserve the integrity of the neighborhood. Martin stated that if the P&Z plan was burdensome to the Shaws, the result would be that the property would be sold to osmeone who may not have the same concern as the Shaws have exhibited over the years in caring for their home and the neighborhood. -2- 4 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves anal w e r wocan MC&L.C% Planning and Zoning Commission March 8, 1977 McGrath was not willing to accept the FAR restric- tions or the historic designation of the properties. Kienast moved to recommend subdivision exemption from strict application of the subdivision regulations as those Elisabeth Sherrill, Deputy City Clerk �vw,uii February 28, 1977 Taxis Buses CFS Highlands buses Shaw Property in West End - Historic Preserva- tion Parks - gardens is Council salaries Buses in west end i V Mayor Standley called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. wfth Councilmembers Behrendt, De Gregorio, Parry, Pedersen, Wishart, and City Manager Mahoney present. MINUTES Exhibit 11 Councilwoman Pedersen moved to approve the minutes of February 14, 1977; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There were no comments , COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman De Gregorio pointed out that for the.last two weeks, taxis have been taking up a lot of parking places by the drug store at Cooper and Galena. Councilman De Gregorio stated he would like to.see the laws enforced better as far as this is concerned. 2. 'Councilman De Gregorio asked if Council would be interested in having a workroession on projects the Council indicated they would like to have seen done during their tenure. Some projects have not been done, and Councilman De Gregorio stated he would like to push them along. 3. Councilman De Gregorio stated that City buses.are not stopping for pedestrians in crosswalks, and asked'.City,,Manager Mahoney to enforce stopping at crosswalks, especially for City buses. Councilman De Gregorio said that the Highlands buses are stopping at the intersection of Maroon Creek and Highway 82, and this is getting very hazardous. Councilman De Gregorio asked Mahoney to talk to Highlands and not to have their buses stop there. 4. Councilman Behrendt told Council that �:he would like to add another member to the Community Facilities Board, a representative from Second Sunday. Councilman Behrendt moved to put this item on the agenda; seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Behrendt moved to nominate Wes Pouliout, second Sunday, as a representative to the Community Facilities Boards seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. All in favor, motion carried. S. Councilman Parry mentioned that the Highland buses bring a lot of people downvalley, to the high school, etc. He stated he would not.like to see the Highland buses stopping at Maroon Creek eliminated. City Manager Mahoney told Council he would talk to Highlands and make this work. 6. Councilman Parry stated he had had reports that the.Shaw property on Lake Avenue will be sold and the four Victorians will be torn down. The purchaser plans to build four duplexes. Councilman Parry stated he would like to have a way to preserve the West and; it is a really nice place. Councilman Parry stated he would like to have an administrative delay to work toward historic preservation of the west end area. Planner Bill Kane told Council thiw..project was requesting subdivision exemption to realignment the lot lines. The planning office has requested that each building be individually designated historic before granting any exemptions. Kane told Council the planning office had been discussion with the UPC and P 6 Z, the extension of the historic district to the Original Aspen Townsite. Kane stated he felt this would require major changes in the reviewing procedures. Councilman Parry stated fe felt the City is obligated to keep .the area nice; the City has purchased a park on Lake Avenue. 7. Councilman Wishart told Council it was suggested to him that given the economy and weather, there may be food shortages. Councilman Wishart'said he thought it might be a good idea for the parks department to find land to have truck gardens on and rent these to people for a nominal fee to cover watering, etc. Mahoney said he would have Parks Director Smith look into it. S. Councilman Wishart stated he would like to reinstitute the luncheon meeting, which he felt expedited the night meetings. Councilman Behrendt suggested modifying to so that there was a lunch meeting only when Council had a long agenda or -A critical issue. Councilwoman Pedersen suggested a breakfast meeting, only when necessary. Council agreed. 9. Councilman Wishart said he would like to have to issue of raising Council salaries on the next Council agenda. Councilman Wishart said he felt that people in his income bracket won't run for office unless they can get paid more. It is hard to hold down a full".time job and be a councilmember. 10. Councilwoman Pedersen requested Jim Mollica be contacted and that the City get an appraisal on the Shaw property triangle just purchased by the City. 11. Mayor Standley pointed out the problem of buses parking all weekend in the West End. Mayor Standley had gotten together with the police department, and Sergeant Horan contacted all the bus company managers. Horan instructed them to have the buses park in the Rio Grande property. STUDENT COMMENT There were none. --i i I Exhibit 12 J Mayor Standley called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m. with bouncilmembers Behrendt, Johnston, Pedersen, Commissioners Child and Kinsley, City Manager Mahoney and City Attorn Nuttall present. lE. Transportatio�nkeeppccrt. Sandy Knaub told the Boards that she *ould like a study session to go over t e ansportation alternatives study. The study session was set for Transportatt, Monday, March 21, at 4:00 p.m. Ms. Knaub handed out large packets she would go through Report at the study session. 2. Communit Facilities Board Report. Edgar Stern, chairman of the CFB, read a memorand to Counc an t e Co ss oners. This memorandum stated that the CFB has made and passed resolutions for the use of the old hospital, the Wheeler Opera House, and the Holy Cross property. The CFB recommended that the hospital be used as a community service facility and that the land adjacent be dedicated for employee/student housing. The Wheeler Opera House was recommended to be used as a community/cultural complex, with a recommendation to purchase the two lots west of the Wheeler so that the center could be expanded. The CFB resolved to "reserve use of the Holy Cross Facility and surrounding property as being suitable for use by artistic, cultural, educational and other leisure time activities of the community". Stern stated that the CFB is ready for phase two of its activities, which is to come up with recommendations for the uses that will be specific and definitive. The CFB has divided into three task forces. These task forces will (1) invite all interested communi group to present views on the recommended uses for the buildings, (2) review requests of various organizations, (3) will attempt to match the facilities available with requests presented and develop an order of priority, (4) obtain services of architects and other technical consultants. Each task force will prepare a budget to present to Council and the Commissioners, (5) prepare schematic designs describing uses of facilities and assignments, 'The task forces will prepare different phases, the first of which will require the absolute minimum of modification of the facility in question, and will presen a cost estimate and construction schedule. The Community Facilities Board acting as a group and through its task forces will attempt to make recommendations on what is considers to be the most appropriate management structure for the operation and management of these facilities. It will consider the question as to whether the facilities should be managed by the City or County or through other boards. The CFB hopes to complete this task and make specific recommendations to Council and the Commissioners within'90 days. The CFB will also enumerate those uses for which it was not able to accommodate and make recommendations for the solution of these outstanding problems. Councilman Wishart came into Council Chambers. Mayor Standley+ asked Stern if he had any idea of the budget requirements. Stern said it was hard to give an estimate, but initially it would be very small. Mayor Standley asked if the CFB had had contact with the conference centerboard. Stern said they would participate as a member of the task forces. Mayor Standley asked that the proposed budge be ready for the next joint meeting, and that the task forces be enumerated. Council and Commissioners agreed that the CFB is right on track and doing a good job. 3. overall Economic Develo men! Plan. Brian Stafford and H. J. Staff are working to form t e committee for the OEDP. Stafford pointed out that Pitkin County only has 2h months to get all the work done. Every elected official received an invitation to be involved in this committee. Stalf asked that they get a partial committee going and add to it at the next meeting. 4. Police De artment and Sheriff's Office. Mayor Standley had growth statistics of both organ tat ons s tte so tnat ese cou d be compared to the ones published in the Denver Post. George Ochs stated that after looking at the possibility of merging t}ie Two departments in the Courthouse, the Commissioners decided against it. Ochs stated he would like to pursue the feasilibity study for a new building to house the APD, SO, and district attorney's offices. Ochs stated this would be done in a three step process; the City and County staffs would be working on it. The staff would investigate financing work with local architects on space requirements; the planning staff will examine possibl sites. After all this is completed, a report will come back to Council and the Commissio Mayor Standley stated this concept ought to be expanded to include all protection service like the fire department and perhaps Mountain Rescue. Mayor Standley pointed out this is one of the projects that does fit the guidelines of the EDA, and another reason why the OEDP has to be done. Councilman De Gregorio stated that if the police department was Community Facilities Board Report It Overall Economic Development Plan Police & Sheriff's Departments SPA AMENDMENT - TRUEMAN BUILDING Truman SPA Amend- ment Conceptual . Subdivision Blue Spruce Ord. 2,1977 Water Extension , to Midland/ Park Ord. 8, 1977 Employee Retirement Kane told Council this was a request for an additional 1,000 square feet on the top of the building for housing and technically is an amendment to the SPA. Larry Yaw stated when they originally dealt with numbers in zoning, the housing was set at 10,000 square feet. It was established that the building could not be done in a single phase. Yaw' told Council that they did get financing for housing. The housing officer was asked was kind of unit would serve all interests best; these are 600 square feet. Yaw said they had found room for two more one bedroom units. This will add approximately 1,200 square feet. The physical result is neglible; it does not add to the height or massing of the building. Truman has agreed to six month rental restruction and to review by the housing authority. Kane told Council that the P 8 Z's only concerns were that these have a six month lease and that they not be condominiumized in the future. Councilman Wishart moved to set the public hearing for April 11; seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Behrendt. Motion carried. , CONCEPTUAL SUBDIVISION - Blue Spruce Kane told Council this is a proposal to take the back building of the present Blue Spruce, at Durant and Monarch, remove it and replace it with a new building of 15 condo- minium units. There are 17 lodge units presently. The management and rental control will continue to be managed through the main office of the Blue Spruce. Councilman Behrendt asked if the square and cubic footage would be roughly comparable. Bob Sterling told Council that it is the desire of his client to provide employee housing. Some units will be provided for employee housing; these new units will be short term rental. The lower parcel of the Blue Spruce is zoned L-1 and does not permit any condo- miniums. The upper portion is zoned L02 and does permit condominiums. Sterling said they were doing on -site parking now. Kane pointed out this property is only lk blocks from Rubsy Park, the main transportation center. Kane told Council that the housing office was looking into moving the existing building to be used for employee housing or for the M.A.A. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out that the existina building was going to be demolished or removed, and stated she had a hard time calling this a remodelling. Councilwoman Johnston asked how this fit into the administrative delay. Kane stated it was the opinion of the planning office that this project would be a reduction in density. Councilwoman Johnston stated this is an exception to what has been stated will be administrative delay. Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the conceptual subdivision; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, with the exception of Councilwoman Johnston. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #2 SERIES OF 1977 Water Extension to Midland/Park Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to read Ordinance #2, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman De Gregorio. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE 02 (Series of 1977) AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXTENSION OF WATER SERVICES TO THE PROPOSED MIDLAND PARK SUBDIVISION AND DOING SO PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 11.3 OF THE ASPEN HOME RULE CHARTER was read by the city clerk. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance 42, Series of 1977, on second -reading; seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Behrendt, aye; De Gre aye; Johnston,:iaye; Parry, aye; Pedersen, aye; Wishart, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Ma carried. ORDINANCE #8, SERIES OF 1977 - Amendinc Employee Retirement Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments, Mayor Standley closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to read Ordinance #8, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #8 (Series of 1977) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING RETROACTIVLY TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE NO. 3, (SERIES OF 1976) PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN AND TRUST, ARTICLE VII OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PERMITTING CITY CONTRIBUTION FOR EACH PARTICIPANT EMPLOYED BY THE. CITY FOR MORE THAN TEN YEARS AN AMOUNT,EQUAL TO FIVE (5S) PER CENT; ELIMINATING THE REQUIREMENT THAT CONTRIBUTION CHANGE ELECTION BE MADE BETWEEN DEC)'F".FFR 1 AND DECEMBER 15 AMENDING CALCULATION METHOD FOR ALLOCATING MET EARING OR LOSSES OF THE TRUST FUND; AND PROVIDING FOR VESTING OF CITY CONTRIBdTIONS ON ANY ANNIVERSARY YEAR BASIS was read by the city clerk. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance 08,..Series of 1977, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Councilmembers De Gregorio, aye; Wishart, aye; Parry, aye; Behrendt, aye; Johnston, aye; Pedersen., aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. Dirt in town Council projects Open Containers Transportar tion programmer not interested, VW should this go ahead. Chief of Police AWhey stated he was interes in pursuing it at this level. Sheriff Kienast.stated this was absolutely essential from the County's point of view because of the jail needs. Councilwoman Pedersen moved that the Council and Commissioners ratify the decision to proceed with the feasibility effort without an expenditure'of any funds; seconded by Councilwoman Johnston. All in favor, motion carried. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Councilwoman Pedersen moved to approve the minutes of the February 28, 1977, Council meeting; seconded by Councilman De Gregorio. All in favor, motion carried. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Councilwoman Johnston asked if finance director Butterbaugh was satisfied that everything is authorized and there are no trouble areas. Ms. Butterbaugh answered yea. - Councilwoman Johnston moved to approve accounts payable for February; seconded by Council- woman Pedersen. Councilman Wishart asked how close to the point of cutting back on capital projects was the City. Ms. Butterbaugh stated that the anticipated surplus for 1976 was in excess of $700,000, and the city should be able to proceed with the 1977 budget with no cut backs. All in favor, motion carried. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There were no comments. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman De Gregorio suggested that the City inform restaurants in town not to serve water unless customers request it. City Manager Mahoney stated this was not necessary at this time because Aspen has no storage capacity, and this is a low peak demand time. 2. Councilwoman Johnston stated she was very concerned about the dust and dirt around this town. There is trash dumped around and this makes•a very bad impression far a resort town. 3. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out a theme with the growth management plan, the OEDP, the CFB, and the upcoming election that says that the Council should be getting together and defining projects they want done. The Council has to define what they want Aspen to be. The Council should schedule a series of work sessions to get this done and also to get citizens feedback. 4. Councilwoman Johnston stated the city was going to have tb.=face the automobile problems and congestion. The Council should start thinking about options for auto disincentive. 5. Councilwoman Pedersen said that many cars of city employee were parking in front of the bakery across the street. This guts down access to the bakery. City Manager Mahoney said he would write a memo to all employees. 6. Mayor Standley welcomed and introduced the new City Attorney, Dorothy Nuttall. 7. Mayor Standley said that some signs had been put together by,the City for occupancy loads in restaurants and bars. There is a law in the city against open containters. It would be nice if the City got some design telling people not to take containers out in the streets and distributed them to bars, restaurants, and liquor stores. Chief of Police Hershey suggested someone in his department make a cartoon and present it at the next meeting. i 8. Councilman De Gregorio said he felt some bare were letting kidd>ih to drink. Council- man De Gregorio asked that the police department start enforcing the age limit for drink- ing. 9. Mayor Standley told Council that February was the biggest month ever for the trans- portation routes. Mayor Standley stated the City had never had a professional transpor- taion programmer. It might be a good time to have someone look at the City's system and tell us what the City ought to be doing. Mayor Standley said a professional programme could evaluate the needs, rather than the City trying to force transportation. STUDENT COMMENTS t There were none. t� A-95 REVIEWS j IPig?k 1. Retired Senior Volunteer ram. Phyllis Kenny told Council this is a program that I encourages senior citizens to vely volunteer in the community. Betty Erickson had a 1 recommended favorable comment. 2. Colorado Mineral Leasing Review. Ms,. Kenny stated this would strengthen the State's 4 ' J 9 that Z' said the drainag-Rroject will probably run up at $50,000, any agreement comes through this should be a topset figure. The project will be funded at $350,000; 80 per ll cent. Federal and 20 per cent state. This cannot go to bid until after there is an (i agreement. Ellis said they hoped to get started by June. is Highway•82 L Councilman Behrendt pointed out that the City streets are already falling apart, and he s� Drainage would rather not take the $30,000 out of the chip and seal budget. The last couple of years the City has been treated to engineering disruption. Councilman Behrendt•asked how long this will take, where the construction will take place. Ellie answered the storm drainage project would be from Sixth to Garmisch on the south side of Main street. There will be no work on the north side of Main street. There will be two blocks of work on the sewer from the Courthouse to Spring and Main. The project will tie the existing 36 inch storm drain on Original into a new storm drain on Spring street. This 21 will be run down Spring to the Obermeyer building and will eliminate outfall directly st into the river. Ellis stated a possibility is to put the irrigation water into the j sewer at Glory Hole park. This could be brought down using the storm drainage system, !; and utilize water rights via the storm drainage system. :t Ellis told Council he had not seen a•construction schedule, but the City is looking at 11 four weeks minimum to do just the dtorm drain work. This will take up one parking lane and one traffic lane at minimum. The paving would be much less disruptive and would go faster. There would probably be &-detour of one block at a time. Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the work at the levels suggested by the City Engineer; seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. Councilwoman Johnston stated she feels that the City is working in the opposite directions` of auto disincentive. Councilwoman Pedersen pointed out this work is incumbent upon the •` City as this is a state highway, and the City will get the change to do the drainage work that is necessary. All in favor, motion carried. ? ti DUPLEX CONDOMINIUMZATION Councilman Behrendt pointed out there was a general undertone about condominlumization.` Condominiumi of duplexes that somehow is undesirable. Planner.Bill Kane told Council he had spent zation of some time looking into this question. Kane stated the issue had been raised that Duplexes condominiumization of existing duplexes had the effect of removing local housing from the market. Kane stated this has not been happening. Duplexes generate high rents to beging with, so they are already missing.the local market. In most cases looked at, condominiumization of duplexes is providing an opportunity for someone local to buy, splitting the per land cost across two units. Housing officer Brian Goodheim stated +i that without any controls, condominiumization of duplexes may take units out of the t' local market. Goodheim said to protect against this, the City should ask for six month j rental restrictions. Goodheim pointed out that condominiumization makes housing much •: more affordable for local persons. Councilwoman Pedersen asked how the six month rental restriction was to be enforced. Mayor Standley, suggested that the lease agreements be recorded. Kane pointed out that at present, the City could only get a six month rental restriction voluntarily; it is only applied to the R/MF zone. Kane stated the.County Commissioners are definitely of the feeling that duplex condominiumization leads to taking housing off the market. Kane said the planning office has been overrun with requests for condominiumization. Goodheim confirmed this is a very complicated value judgment, and requires the City to determine whether it is good or bad. There is a difference between multi -family build- ings and duplexes. Condominiumization of duplexes increases single family dwellings available to locals. A six month rental restriction has a depressing Value on the price,, and keeps tourists out. Goodheim stated that in terms of apartments buildings, it can be demonstrated there is up to 100 per cent increase in housing costs. Councilwoman Johnston stated she felt this question needed more study. Mayor Standley said the Council had agreed to continue with duplex condominiumization but not to process;, any multi -family units until Council had a report from the Housing Authority. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Alpine Acres Bill Kane told Council this is a request for condominiumization of three existing Alpine Acres Victorians on Gibson avenue. The city engineer has reviewed this, and his comments Subdivision are attached. The annexation agreement for this property covers improvements that are i Exemption to be made. Barry Edwards told Council that they had not agreed to six month rental restrictions but had agreed to right of first refusal to tenants in the buildings. This works just as ;. well as is easier for everyone concerned. Edwards stated that the P 8 z had recommended-&. exemption be approved subject to payment of the park dedication fee and giving first right of refusal at market price to all tenants. Councilman De Gregorio pointed out that if no tenants wanted to purchase the units, they could turn into short term. Mayor Standley stated that if Council were to give an exemption, which is an advantage j to the owner, the Council ought to be requesting to see the sales contract on the propert*_ This was the Council could see if it is being sold to locals, and what the sales price is. Goodheim said he had been approached by two of the tenants who were concerned that this is being condominiumized and sold at prices they cannot afford. Mayor Standley suggested this ought to be tabled until Council could get the kind of information they needed. Nick McGrath told Council if they wanted to see sales contract, these contracts t could be provided. ship of the ShaiMuse, lots 23-4, from the balance of the Wd, and (2) lot line adjust- ment to facilitate separate ownership of three buildings and creation of four duplex lots. Subdivision Exemption Shaw C Essentially there are four existing small Victorians in the area; this would include the removal of a small yellow frame house that sits on the property line. This yellow house is in total disrepair. The P & n and planning office recommend approval with three conditions: (1) Limitation on FAR that can be added on to existing buildings. In a broader context, the planning office has been discussion with the P & z and Council placing FAR limitations on all residential construction. A .3:1 FAR has been discussed in this district. (2) Historic designation on three existing Victorians, and (3) Historic designation on the Shaw house. There are two controls imposed here; the FAR and review by the HPC. No building activity can take place without HPC review. Shaw Pro ert . Jim Moran, representing this project,,told Council there are nine lots IR an - zone. Moran stated they would like a subdivision exemption to allow the Shave to draw a boundary line on a lot line in Hallams Additions so that Mrs. Shaw can live in the houseMoran said his clients, the Shaws, have been responsive to ideas that the Council has indicated they are in favor of. Councilmanr.Behrendt asked if their would dedicate the main house as single family piece of property and also agree to historic designation. Moran answered that historic designation is agreeable. The idea of restric. ing the house to single family had not come up. As far as ehaing the house into a board- ing house, that -.is not authorized use at present in the R-6 zone. If the coadominiumized it, it could become two units. Moran stated he felt this proposal is responsive to some of the policy statements of'Council and the P & Z. The alternative, of course, is that the nine lots could be all single family dwellings. Councilman Behrendt stated he, -would like to see the house designated historic and would like to see an:FAR of 3:1. Moran stated if that FAR became law, they would be bound by it. With respect to the,application of the Shaw estate, Moran would not be inclined to accept conditions that are not generally acceptable throughout the neighborhood. The FAR in the surrounding area is nowhere near .3:1. Kane told Council that the approach on the subdivision dedication fee would be that the fee be paid for thd%'Shaw house and'the land that is being subdivided. Any additional building that would take place would be covered at time of building permit issuance. w Councilman Wishart moved to.approve the subdivision exempti6n conditioned upon seeking historic designation for the Shaw house and conditioned upon City Manager Mahoney agreeinc to the park dedication fee; seconded by Councilman Parry. Moran asked that Mollica's leeter of opinion of value, dated March 14, on the Shaw properl lots 23 and 24, valued at $150,000 be made part of the record., All in favor, motion carried. WPW. Mayor Standley told Council that his interest in the project was that Frank Baranko contacted him to'see if Mayor Standley was interested in putting in a contract for the lot next to W. Bennis' house. Mayor Standley stated he did put in a contract for that any his offer was rejected by the'Shaws. Mayor Standley received his contract and earnest money back. City Manager Mahoney was also contacted, and also submitted an offer. That offer was rejected, and Mahoney has now,placed earnest money on a lot in Mountain Valley. Nick McGrath, representing WPW, submitted background information on this project in the packet. McGrath stated that the house that is proposed to be removed does not even have a foundation. Peggy Clifford and Frank Baranko, present tenants in the existing Victoria= both have options to purchase from WPW. There is a letter in the file from Peggy'Cliffori support WPW's application. WPW has an option on the property that will expire on March 16. The only substanitive thing being requested is changing of the lot lines. This will help to preserve the exist- ing Victorians and will make the middle one a conforming house. McGrath.pointed out that under the existing R-6 zoning, they could put up very large duplexes. A chart submitted indicated that the Clifford house could.be up to 16,000 square feet; the brick house up to 14,000 square feet; the Baranko House up to 10,000 square feet under the existing bulk and requirements of the City. McGrath stated if the means to accomplishing the subdivision exemption was an imposition of an FAR requirements, he had indicated to P & Z that WPW could live with a .3:1 PAR. An additional requirement.:of the P & 2 was historic designation in advance. McGrath expressed preference to restoration first, then historic designation. Again if to assure approval of the exemption with historic designation as a contingency, WPW can live -with that. McGrath presented pictures and a chart of the immediate area indicated that over 50 per cent of the houses are duplexes or have carriage houses. McGrath also pointed out that not all the houses in the area were Victorian. There are many modern -structures in the area. McGrath told Council this is the proposal that P & 2 approved. Council is talking about an extremely expensive piece of property, and McGrath said he felt this is a fair and sensitive project for a nice area. Councilwoman Johnston asked what the advantage would be of doing restoration before getting historic designation. McGrath answered only that they would not have to go to HPC. Kane stated his recommendation is for historic designation as a condition. Histori designation requires that any additions go through a public forum. Councilman Behrendt pointed out that the City recently bought property across the street. This neighborhood is one of substance and quality, and Councilman., -Behrendt would like to see it continue on that basis. Councilman Behrendt asked McGrath if they would be willing to designate these as single .family dwellings. McGrath said they intended to build homes., not duplexe Some of these people may want to build caretakers homes, however. SPA AMENDMENT RUEMAN BUILDING 1 1 Kane told Council this was a request for an additional 1,000 square feet on the top of the building for housing and technically is an amendment to the SPA. Larry Yaw stated Trueman when they originally dealt with numbers in zoning, the housing was set at 10,000 square SPA Amend- feet. It was established that the building could not be done in a single phase. Yaw ment told Council that they did get financing for housing. The housing officer was asked was kind of unit would serve all interests best; these are 600 square feet. Yaw said f they had found room for two more one bedroom units. This will add approximately 1,200 f square feet. The physical result is neglible; it does not add to the height or massing of the building. Trueman has agreed to six month rental restruction and to review by the housing authority. E { Kane told Council that the P & Z's only concerns were that these have a six month lease and that they not be condominiumized in the future. Councilman Wishart moved to set the public hearing for April 11; seconded by Councilwoman �l Pedersen. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Behrendt. Motion carried. I CONCEPTUAL SUBDIVISION - Blue Spruce Kane told Council this is a proposal to take the back building of the present Blue 11 i Spruce, at Durant and Monarch, remove it andreplaceit with a new building of 15 condo- minium units. There are 17 lodge units presently. The management and rental control Conceptual will continue to be managed through the main office of the Blue Spruce. Subdivision r i Blue Councilman Behrendt asked if the square and cubic footage would be roughly comparable. Spruce Bob Sterling told Council that it is the desire of his client to provide employee housing.! Some units will be provided for employee housing; these new units will be short term k rental. The lower parcel of the Blue Spruce is zoned L-1 and does not permit any condo- miniums. The upper portion is zoned L02 and does permit condominiums. Sterling said { they were doing on -site parking now. Kane pointed out this property is only lh blocks II from Rubey Park, the main transportation center. C` Kane told Council that the housing office was looking into moving the existing building !� to be used for employee housing or for the M.A.A. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out 11 that the existing building was going to be demolished or removed, and stated she had a { hard time calling this a remodelling. Councilwoman Johnston asked how this fit into the administrative delay. Kane stated it was the opinion of the planning office that this project would be a reduction in density. Councilwoman Johnston stated this is an ! exception to what has been stated will be administrative delay. !i Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the conceptual subdivision; seconded by Councilman �{ Parry. All in favor, with the exception of Councilwoman Johnston. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 1977 - Water Extension to Midland/Park FI Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley Ord. 2,1977 closed the public hearing. Water Extension,, Councilwoman Pedersen moved to read Ordinance 02, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman �! to Midland/ De Gregorio. All in favor, motion carried. i Park I; ORDINANCE #2 (Series of 1977) 1i AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXTENSION OF WATER SERVICES TO THE PROPOSED 1 MIDLAND PARK SUBDIVISION AND DOING SO PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 11.3 OF THE ASPEN HOME RULE CHARTER was read by the city clerk. II Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance *2, Series of 1977, on second•.reading; il seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Counc£lmembers Behrendt, aye; De rregori aye; Johnston,,,aye, Parry, aye; Pedersen, aye; Wishart, aye; Mayor Standley, ave. Motion 1; carried. 777 ORDINANCE #8, SERIES OF 1977 - Amending Employee Retirement Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed li Ord. 8, 1977 the public hearing. ! Employee Retirement Councilwoman Pedersen moved to read Ordinance #8, Series of 1977; seconded by_Counc£lman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried. t, ORDINANCE #8 {Series of 1971) I� AN ORDINANCE AMENDING RETROACTIVLY TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE NO. 3, (SERIES OF 1976) PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN AND TRUST, ARTICLE VII OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PERMITTING j CITY CONTRIBUTION FOR EACH PARTICIPANT EMPLOYED BY THE CITY FOR MORE THAN TEN YEARS AN AMOUNT,- EQUAL TO FIVE (5$) PER CENT; ELIMINATING THE REQUIREMENT THAT CONTRIBUTION CHANGE ELECTION BE MADE BETWEEN DFCE;.RFR ]. AND DECnMER 15 ! L" AMENDING CALCULATION METHOD FOR ALLOCATING NET FARING OR LOSSES OF"THE TRUST FUND; AND PROVIDING FOR VESTING OF CITY CONTRIBdTIONS ON ANY ANNIVERSARY YEAR BASIS was read by the city clerk. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance #8, Series of 1977, on second reading; h' seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Councilmembers De Gregorio, aye; Wishart,rl aye; Parry, aye; Behrendt, aye; Johnston, aye; Pedersen, aye; ?Mayor Standley, aye. +' j i Motion carried. li CITY MANAGER 1. Snow Obstructin Mail Boxes. City Manager Mahoney had included a note from the U. S. Post O€fice tell ng res dents that they could not deliver mail if the mail boxes were obstructed. This was just informational. 2. Elevator Re uirement in CC and C-1. Art Hougland and Clayton Meyring were directed to do researc on elevators and have been working on it for two weeks. Houcland told Elevator Council they had gone to Denver and talked to Division of labor and employment and HEW. Requirements They did not come up with clot; there are some incline stairways and lifts, but they are designed for residential use. Small commercial elevators for $11,000 are just starting to be manufactured. Hougland told Council that they had also contacted handicapped people and organizations. Hougland pointed out that the City should not hold up adopting the 1976 Uniform Building Code any longer. Councilwoman Pedersen moved that because of the inconsistency in elevator demand, that the whole elevator question in the CC and C-1 district be dumped; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilman De Gregorio reminded Council that the original direction was to find some way to get handicapped people in and out of building, not necessarily by elevators. Council- woman Johnston said that if building are more than two floors, they have to have an elevator. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman De Gregorio. Motion carried. 3. Hunter Creek Water: Mahoney told Council that John Musick, City's water counsel, has asked for act on on his case #2744, opposition to Salvation Ditch Company. Mahoney submitted the stipulation agreement to Council, and asked for a resolution agreeing to Hunter Creek the stipulation agreement. Water and Salvation Councilman Behrendt moved that the City agree to the stipulation agreement as submitted; Ditch seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. Company Clyde Vagneur left a note with Mahoney opposing the agreement on behalf of the Salvation Ditch Company. All in favor, motion carried. 4. Hunter Creek Exchan e., Musick requested that the City trade the Salvation Ditch some of the water EN e C ty owns coming out of Hunter Creek in exchange for letting some water flow through the Roaring Fork. Mahoney stated this is a good program, and asked for a resolution to support this raw water exchange agreement. Councilman Parry moved to support this raw water exchange; seconded by Councilman Wishart All in favor, motion carried. 5. Another Season Economy. City Manager Mahoney told Council he had been approached by the Cha er o Commerce and other groups, -the lodge owners, over their concern about Aspen's dependence on two seasons. June, September and October are good months for conference business. These groups recommended building up the economy to accommodate this June, September and October possibility of business. Mahoney told Council this mean looking into a conference center and support facility. How it will be paid for will have to be examined; "a real estate transfer tax was suggested. Mahoney told Council that at the last Chamber meeting he attended, the Chamber would take this question by themselves and develop it and come back to the City with a program. Mahoney explained this item was put on the agenda because he thought Council might be asked to do something. At present, they are not. 6. Minibus. Mahoney told Council this question is starting to develop after sitting for one year. There is information in the packet on what the City paid for the minibuses Minibus how long they were used, and an opinion from a mechanic. Mahoney has to appear in Denver suit with the city's attorney to give depositions. The City is required to provide some information on this case. Mahoney told Council that the County is negotiating for a settlement. Mahoney said he would like a resolution from Council in support of the City' suit, but also allowing some flexibility to negotiate. City Attorney Nuttali stated she did not have a feel of what an acceptable offer would be right now. Mayor Standley directed Mahoney to contact each Councilmember individually to get a reading from them. Councilman De Gregorio moved to adjourn at 10:45 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All in favor,.motion carried. Kathrrh S. Hauter, city C er Citv Council March 28, 197, Mayor Standley called the joint meeting to order at 5:25 p.m. with Councilmembers Behrend Johnston, Pedersen, Commissioners Child and Edwards, City Manager Mahoney and City Attorney Nuttall present. 1. Communit Facilities Board Bud et Reu eat. Mayor Standley announced that the City ha recieved 17,300 from the State H stor cal Society for a planning grant for restoration CFB Budget PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ' A parcel of land being located in Section 12, Township 10 South, Bangs 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian; said parcel also being the original Lote 16 through 24, Block 103, and which, under this plat, are now Lots 16 through 20, Block 103, Hallam's Addition to the City of Aspen, Colorado. Said parcel is more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue whence the East 1/4 corner of said Section 12 bears N 60° 46' 14" E., 654.94 feet; thence N 44° 34' 17" E., 125.00 feet; thence 74.12 feet around a curve to the left having a radiu. of 35a.05 feet (the chord of which bears S 510 21' 33" E., 73.99 feet); thence N 79• 06. 33" E., 69. 33 feet; thence S 49° 47' 32" E., 50.25 feet; thence 5 27° 58' 53" E., 51.81 feet; thence S 19° 51' 50" E. 99.76 feet; thence S 12° 47' 14" E., 166.34 feet to the Northerly line of Smuggler Street; thence N 75. 09' 11" W., 118.48 feet along the Northerly line of Smuggler Street to the intersection with the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue; thence 245.29 feet around a curve to the left having a radiu. of 401.20 feet (the chord of which bears N 39• 46' 29" W., 241.49 feet) along the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue; thence 100.00 feet around a curve to the right having a radius of 483.05 feet (the chord of which bears N 51° 21' 33" W., 99.82 feet) alnna the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue to the point of beginning. said parcel contains 56,614 square feet, more or less. CITY OF ASPEN SHAW AND THE WPW JOINT VENTURE SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS APPROVAL This Subdivision Exemptions Plat evidences approval of the Shaw and MPW Subdivision exemption applications by action of the City Council of the City of Aspen, taken at a duly constituted meeting held on March 14, 1977, and is hereby accepted and approved by the City of Aspen for exemp- tions from the requirements of the full Subdivision Regulations contained in Section 20, Aspen Municipal Code, as amended, including those required by Ordinance 22, Series of 1975, City of Aspen, pursuant to Section 20-19(b) thereof, subject to the following conditions: 1. The owner oP Lot 20, Dorothy Koch Shaw, shall seek historic desig- nation for the exiati ng structure thereon from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee. 2. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lot. 17, 18, and 19, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee; and, any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 shall be .ubmitted to the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee for its review. 3. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall remove the old frame dwelling located on Lots 18 and 19. 4. The owner of Lots 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall maintain a floor area ratio (FAR) of not greater than .3:1 in any restoration or additions to the three existing structures on those lots, including within the ratio the .izet of the existing structures as modified by such additions or restoration.. 5. Payment by the owners of the park dedication fee required by Ordinance 63, Series of 1976, City of Aspen, for Lots 17, 18, 19; and 20, in a total amount of $14,714.64, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged; and, payment of such park dedication fee .for Lot 16 as would be due under that ordinance upon issuance of a building permit. Dated: �3 , 1977. Sta ndley ay ATTEST: ad—t au er, ity arc SUAW AND714L W PW JOINT VENTURE 5UB0IV1510N PXEMPT10N5 PLAT CITY OF O5pGN ®LOCK %OB. NALLGM'S G010I-1101V SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I, HAROLD W. JOHNSON (JOHNSON-LONGFELLOW b ASSO.), licensed surveyor, do hereby certify that thin SHAW AND THE WPW JOINT VENTURE SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS PLAT was prepared under my supervision and that the out -side boundaries, lots, roads and other features are correctly shown hereon, that the same are based on actual field surveys performed on the described property under my direct control and supervision during the month. of November and December, 1976, all in accordance with generally accepted surveying practice. and Section 38-51-101, et eeq.C.A.S, 1973 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have eat my hand and seal on this 3 ••� Jay of M L , 1977. JOHNSON-LONGFELLOW b ASSO., INC. I , sBy O -X 19� esi enLDIFOOfB 7;} STATE OF COLORADO ) J4;�e SS. tf Cf 00.. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The fore oing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of�, 1977, by HAROLD W. JOHNSON, for h mse an as Presl ant o 1- NGPELLOW b ASSO., INC. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires Notary Pu c CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP Dorothy Koch Shaw, owner of Lot 20, and The WPW Joint Venture, owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, all in Block 103, Hallam's Addition and as described hereon, hereby certify that they are the owners of all the real property described in the within Subdivision Exemptions Plat; that such exemptions were sought in order for Dorothy Koch Shaw to sell old Lot. 16-22, Block 103, Hallam's Addition, and retain old Lots 23 and 24, which nine lots, by the City's approval, now become Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, owned by The WPW Joint Venture, and Lot 20, owned by Dorothy Koch Shaw, as platted hereon. Dated: JUOLS , 1977. Dorothy Koch Shaw By 11 rry moos Mar a ones Her attorneys in fact The WPW Joint Venture By B: ogan, S ..} ye Jaqueli.e T, ogan Exhibit 14 ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF COLORADO ) es. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The regoing instrument was acknowledged before me this e3q day o�_�, 1977, by HARRY SHAW and RAMONA MARKALUNAS, s attor s In ac or ROTHY KOCH SHAW. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: iC 9 �� ary Pu I. ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The far going instrument was acknowledged before me this t3 day of u , 1977, by JOHN B. WOGAN, JR., HENRY PEDERSEN, and JAQUELINE i, or themselves and for The WPW Joint Venture. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary P.Di- RECORDING CERTIFICATEF" + I hereby certify that the within Subdivision Exemptions Plat was accepted for filing in my office at 0• o'clock �� M. on the /+eL day ag LC/16, ,°an was duly filed in Plat Book —at Page - under reception numberJI?J01fie . PITKIN COUNTY CLERK b RECORDER By 4 C =j k SUE -VT 1 OF 3 a Sao A`w'.NUG �p� • -REBGR 9 C4D bET LINE. 5NEET 3 S V F=T 2 OF 5 649'4-1'32'E 10.01 _ k, •.REES&R & CAP SLT StaEET 5OF3 0 U i nffj r ■ter key Oviews of front of house Oviews of adjacent neighborhood W NORry sr 230 lake ove "A r] Exhibit 13 230 lake ave context map and images ©BendonAdams �1 to .o eo ro �iCALE I • . 10' /N 17 Or nENCIK � A5 lIWN NprC' ALL CLRACF> NCT RVNo zT y TM REnAR 4 oµ u+r L_5 ef. f ZG191. R,LnAR t C, L..] LY •role HARMON GROUP - TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT V�CLEITY AXCN GTY COUNCIL NrROVAI.� K,MOiI GNA.I TpMLIN'Qnl :Of Nra�ADJtnTMENT RAT4 wA5 ArrROYCD M M CrtT +C4hCL r r »,GLUM L'•rreRLx�R.yA�aR .trTc4r TNR .I FO(JI�. Lm ue K GRT It " em,' ArrROyAt _ Al =' AMN, 04CYfALO, >p IERGD+ KTRDK TW HAFLroN WiRJI tAwLInY I {Or LING MJV�TM[M�Mt _ lzo-f, ' s/ aT7 LKSI CLERK f RECOIRDCR"J /.CCVTnr1C -Tn•r vL , MY! WILD eAl FCCCN> IN TNC ArrKL nr THL { RCGCxpEI� 4 IRK CCICRAI , L�eineel uov�m N rv.T oAorL �i i ITC RLC �IRVEYCR'7 CE. T rICATE• —IL FCeRTIIM1 TINT ON MARUY 21, I,rO ; LOf RJ t VRIL N HEo ;:Gi W) A �JIVLY W ICRFCIRMm LtYA[K NY .xXLR IZION d LOT, IL t IT %+Ur' A TLE WIW Jd Ni VGINTLKE ,DIVI>4 CITY MfCN (,"XDC.L,.J. THE r,TnL a L ♦TIC OUfLOt CN lDr ] W[K ICLNq TD 1�E 1LCA l M �1A MLIVlIN "IileRL ARE NT UTLIT, UxwtCNn Or KCORD AFrCCTING. anlO rRORJRT, rLR n N CMt}+I TIr1,L, NL. TITLL R{,IC.I W ]GT >2 DT tTr ->2OD Tun A lI H1> A M THCMATxCAL CJ.D'LRe WITH MIT Cl M poop, AND WM FCICIPY N ACCdtPVNCC IYITH c.R.l. MTA TITIL >e, ARTKLt.1, M AMCXXI.T M WRNL'» TIT tp Z I�AVL AEr MY rYN) NO of:'ICVL , TN jmIL_ KT Q' n 19D'1 A,.n > yen" Kc n, PM1CL r MKCNLIE 101•fl OWNCR7' GFJRTIrIC.1TE elYw ALL MEN D, iNeYE rsC5eM7 THAT' T.E r14cMPlX, IIL. A pFJ-/.MV[c fGRrrlItATION, DRIN'. rNE OFTLJL P CLRTNN LMt» IN 'ItK ;,�" 1 fT A>rW, rnFIN CDINI'Y. C1MOR.LO, TD w,TLUT n, sswwt nE w.rw wlNr VENTURE •wrx�Wnla.l, 1 TINT IRWTn n I TlIN l aR., AZ TRUlTLC or 'i11L FALLOWING->LATTEX, TRIYJf yu. IT 1/M/67MWAN uNAWloeo eox mrnL>] HdJDTON RUHF u/A uTrn / M/.> A5 ro MI I.NDN IDx v]reUC!'•T' t RVSTON 'TR:hT W. O\TMI' 1/IY/I, AS '10 THE eEMAININL LNONIpep WA tNTCICC T. nCIK THC LMNER> Of CALT N 1V0 CITY ,N' A5rlN, fi W? Lof IL, A StNW TK Wr. W. LTOINT VENTING >UDPVI>IMI, W HEIiEeY CUCTIP`1 tN1T T+IT MK Of TLC fM1tMON C NIrTOMLINSON LDI' LINE Ao.]mNleiaT ruT HW. DELN rcerAneo rUc^wl.n' TD TiNT CLICT N <m LML ADJVJfMCNr Krl[OyAL 6RANTHI [YI TFE CITY �UNCIL ar THE Un or AZRrI NR>IW,T TD 'Jr(.T1Q1 'I -.W> ex TI, uL0 VYC 1= Q TLC C.- tX AD]EN OM1I CY,TorsER b I1 DD LIN[NdJ 6RdJr, .NC. rFc>I rRL /s n. TOMLINlpN( M TtNTCE OF TNL >LATTFJ(•1 TRusT' lib. dITED I i4/i 4101TW TRUST V,:A R.TQ` I,H/eT RNTCN TRV9] U/ prLp 11,/0T n rc ar •l E� 7Fn:i.l THE MXC6JIW. ..'�VIyW'GLC11fIUTf WM .1!IUIDWILILL= DY /:>u% 1+'I...I •I�, As rRES10ENTOF TNL wuU-fON W[LZ.T, iK., A pElAxKRL CORIORrtTTON. wITNPfh Mn rNNO a rne.LAL >vf� _: f �+ :9�a _ MY cvNml»lon fxPIRE>' >TAtc or i%°' cgx.Ry rx IM.ffA. �5! E FGKEEOnN.' OwNERi"ClJfrlri TC A: YKNOWLERSC.:. IlEFCMfL ML TNHLy-�fR., Or .UTI:yI,.x- I,BY. rREMIS n TOLF.IN>CRJ. JR, M TRU>TLL (s TNL rO4DWRE.. lIAT'TlICI iYJ>r UA fKTCD 1/H.W, rtESTOF! TISnT U,l,l fNTCD I,H/e> t WhION ,ICU>] U% DITYD I /IL �D" wrtNe» Nn rwm f arICIAL xnL MY COMMI591CJ ERIIRE`!' -11 'I% c%J'f� ZsE-tr. rNCY� N61JC. TITL- 3RTVICI.TE: "TKIN rdUlNn TITLE, I A WLY LICGH[D TRLL N>IIRMICL AGlN] IN TIE WATL p' COLOF/Lc LEREIYI GERTI tj TINT: ,}t HAIWW [NIC%X, ING A DEIrWARG CORIAR4TION I> TLE OWNU( IN rCG 31MrLC CF LA'T IT. ,I�Yw t TIE wrw JpNT VCNTlR2 ryM1NI51Cwl .Vr TW.r FRLLrt I� n YMlJNSer., -. M 1RVYfC[ Or >LATTER, TFUn' U A Ol / In.,N AZ 7— UNDIVIOLp Fo'l INtb2E.YF IDV.RDtI TRV T U% OkTEP I/N/e] ro 1D ,aN U.IDMOm lox INTFJfL�Ar RUSTCYY T l U/A L T® Ina /e] A, v TK SCMNNIINC. LIND .mv lox IMEKL•Sl; I TNL OWNEIL IN r-'I LC Y IOT I., —w f THC JCYNr VLNTML hUOOIV'1!,gY cRY Q A>PEA COtORNX+ !VnJF1T 10 CNf_M1AFJI7S iKKlf17"CP-V.M .i FlYUAhRMGC� • T/I C. K sTAre a caLawaA , Issrn - _ cLt+NTN a rnTUN �s! TtK, rJRLGG,NG TIT CGRflrl<ATL WAS A:.IYHOw^.LDK! rEIS�RtL ML TUn1L� v __ __ ITSI-_.. MI Lam, I�IrISNOft A,,. MymYPDer of rIMIN CO -+-I AfJ MY WND MT CIFIC.IAL •XAL � ' M. cc�YMI»ION - rlRe-, �L"95-11. � Anou.»I uolcE Hc�1 g19eN, Ca Tql l AIPIne JUrveys. Inc. deb Ye DD ro:I oIIKe Do. I]�o ,^ I a]e! v.R s Ir D, CIIe10 .-I,uNw, nw��. rd,„m„ nw12 CR ' Il.c 3U! 9]5 MBtl u • July 20, 2018 Ms. Sarah Yoon Historic Preservation Planner City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 230 Lake Avenue Minor Subdivision Amendment Ms. Yoon: Please accept this application for a Minor Subdivision Pearl CT Amendment to the Shaw and WPW Subdivision Exemption. The 5-lot subdivision was approved in 1977 from 9 lots of the Hallam Addition. Several of the properties in this subdivision contained historic resources at the time and became official historic landmark properties. This lot, Lot 16, was vacant at the time. The subdivision plat included a note requiring HPC review of any new home on the parcel. This application seeks removal of the HPC review condition for Lot 16. The property was not required to seek historic designation and the property has never surfaced on any assessment of historic properties. The property is not a listed historic landmark and is not included on any mapping of the inventory. The 1980 home does not appear to have any historic merit. The HPC review condition appears to have been an outgrowth of community discussion of broader planning issues. The City Council even discussed creating a historic district covering the West End neighborhood just two weeks prior to this subdivision being reviewed. RECEIVED JUL 2 3 2018 CITY OF ASPEN "4MMt"TY QE'VSLW*KT Nwu sr N �230 Lake Avenue 9. 300 SO SPRING ST 1 202 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 1 BENDONADAMS.COM 19 Triangle Park We have provided minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings and the City Council meeting regarding this case. The record reflects discussion of the existing buildings (existing in 1977) with particular focus on the Shaw house, which became a historic landmark. The property appears to not be part of Aspen's historic preservation program in all respects except for this plat note. The attachments should provide everything outlined in the pre -application summary. If you have any questions, please let me know. Kind Regards, ke Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams, LLC Attachments: 1. Review Standards 2. Pre -Application Summary 3. Application form 4. Agreement to Pay form 5. HOA form 6. Authorization to represent 7. Proof of ownership 8. Vicinity Map 9. March 1, 1977, P&Z Minutes 10. March 8, 1977, P&Z Minutes 11. February 28, 1977, City Council Minutes 12. March 14, 1977, City Council Minutes 13. Photo context of neighborhood 14. 1977 Subdivision Plat 300 SO SPRING ST 1 202 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 1 BENDONADAMS.COM E 0 Exhibit 1 Review Criteria 26.480.090.B. Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial amendment to an approved subdivision or between adjacent subdivisions may be authorized by the Community Development Director. An insubstantial amendment shall be limited to technical or engineering considerations which could not reasonably have been anticipated during the approval process or any other minor change to a subdivision which the Community Development Director finds has no substantial effect upon the subdivision or to the allowances and limitations of the subdivision. Response — At the time of the 1977 Subdivision Exemption approval, the City's historic preservation program was in its infancy. Concern about the changing character of town included discussion of designating the entire Original Townsite as an historic district. The idea was floated concurrent with this application review, including by a council member just one meeting prior to Shaw application being presented to the City Council. Notes from the Planning and Zoning Commission review included discussion of floor area, whether the parcels should allow for single family or duplex use, and discussion of historic preservation. The record shows the opinions of the various P&Z members regarding a conditioned approval and a request from the applicant for an approval without conditions. The P&Z record shows a motion to recommend subdivision exemption (to City Council) but does not show a final vote or whether any conditions were attached to the recommendation. The City Council minutes also show discussion of floor area, single-family verses duplex use, and historic designation. The historic designation discussion appears to have been focused on the Shaw house. The applicant's attorney was asked about restricting the floor area of the Shaw house and about historic designation. His response and follow-up discussion of City Council resulted in historic designation of the Shaw house being accepted by the applicant, with floor area restrictions being those of the neighborhood. The City Council motion adopted by City Council conditioned approval of the subdivision exemption upon historic designation of the Shaw house. This record shows a continued discussion after the motion carried regarding the same issues, but with the contract purchaser WPW. The contract purchaser appears to accept a floor area cap and historic designation in advance (of the restoration). There are no follow-up motions or approvals granted. The result appears to have been historic designation of Lot 20 (Shaw house); a requirement for WJW to seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lots 17, 18 and 19. Lot 16 (230 Lake) was vacant at the time and the requirement for it was for any proposed dwelling to be submitted to the HPC for review. Condition No. 2 on plat reads as follows: 3. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 19, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existinif structures on Lots 17, 19, and 19, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee; and, any pproppoosed dwelling on Lot 16 shall be submitted to the City of Aspen Historic t?zeservation Committee for its review. • Exhibit 1 Review Criteria While subject to HPC review for a new dwelling, the record reflects Lot 16 being treated differently than the other lots in that it was not required to seek historic designation. Lot 16 is not listed as a historic landmark. The historic preservation program in Aspen has been refined multiple times over the past 40 years, including several assessments of the inventory. 230 Lake, with its home built in 1980, has never surfaced as a potential historic landmark. This application requests striking the language requiring HPC review for a new home on Lot 16. The property is clearly not historic and the discussion of a historic district covering the West End never gained support. Subsequent assessments of the historic preservation program and re -reviews of properties have never identified 230 Lake as a potential resource. The HPC review of the new home occurred prior to the 1980 home being built. There is no evidence in the building permit file of subsequent development activity requiring HPC review, suggesting the one-time review requirement was met or that the City does not consider the property to be subject to HPC review. To the extent that an HPC review is required, it is not clear what jurisdiction the HPC would have as the limitation does not appear to have been adopted by City Council Ordinance. Removal of this language would be consistent with the evolution of the historic preservation program. The 1970s involved case -by -case discussion of preservation, floor area, and allowed uses. This history of this case demonstrates this. The program has matured into a program were properties are assessed by a preservation expert and proposed for the inventory through adoption of an ordinance. Removal of this plat note affecting Lot 16 will not represent impact on other lots within the subdivision and is consistent with today's historic preservation program. • • CITY OF ASPEN Exhibit 2 PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Sarah Yoon, 970.920.5144 DATE: June 15, 2018 PROJECT: 230 Lake Avenue REPRESENTATIVE: Chris Bendon, BendonAdams REQUEST: Subdivision Amendment — Minor DESCRIPTION: The property at 230 Lake Avenue is located in the R-6 zone, Hallam's Addition, Block 103, Lot 16. The lot was included in the Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemption approval granted by City Council in 1977 with a condition that "any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 shall be submitted to the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee for its review." Since this approval, the reviewing body for historic preservation projects has been renamed from the Historic Preservation Committee to the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), Ordinance NO.60, Series 1989. The applicant would like to pursue amending the condition pertaining to Lot 16 in the subdivision exemption approval by dropping the requirement for HPC approval. The lot is not designated historic, and HPC approval is not needed if not for this condition. This amendment does not qualify as an Insubstantial Amendment, therefore, will be conducted as a Minor Amendment that will be taken to City Council to approve, approve with conditions or deny (Section 26.480.090.C). Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.480.090.0 Subdivision Amendments — Minor Amendment Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: Land Use Code: http://cityofaspen.com/276/Title-26-Land-Use-Code Land Use Application: hfD://citvofasi)en.com/DocumentCenter/HomeNiew/305 Review by: Planning Staff for completeness and recommendation City Council for decision. Public Hearing: Yes, at City Council. Neighborhood Outreach: No. Referral Agencies: No. Planning Fees: $1,950 for 6 billable hours of staff time. (Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.) Referral Agencies Fee: $0. Total Deposit: $1,950. ASLU 230 Lake Avenue Minot• Subdivision Amendment 2735-124-88-001 1 Please submit one copy of the completed application to the Community Development Office on the Third Floor of City Hall before each review step: ❑ Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement. ❑ Pre -application Conference Summary (this document). ❑ Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. ❑ Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. ❑ HOA Compliance form (Attached). ❑ An 81/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. ❑ A written description of the proposal and an explanation of how the amendment is consistent with or an improvement to the approved subdivision. ❑ Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the property including at least one (1) of the following: diagrams, maps, photographs, models or streetscape elevations. Once the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted: ❑ 1 digital PDF copy of the complete application packet ❑ Total deposit for review of the application. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 2 Exhibit 3 LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name and Address: 230 Lake Avenue Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) APPLICANT: 2735-124-88-001 Name: T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust c/o Jannol Law Group Address: 1801 Century Park East, Ste 2150; Los Angeles, CA 90067 310.788.3990 mj@jannollawgroup.com Phone #: email: REPRESENTIVATIVE: Name: BendonAdams 300 So Spring St. #202; Aspen, CO 81611 Address: Phone#: 970.925.2855 email: Chris@BendonAdams.com Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions Removal of a HPC review condition of the 1977 subdivision approval Review: Administrative or Board Review Required Land Use Review(s): Minor Subdivision Amendment Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields: Net Leasable square footage na Lodge Pillows naFree Market dwelling units na Affordable Housing dwelling units na Essential Public Facility square footage na Have you included the following? FEES DUE: $ 1,950 Pre -Application Conference Summary Signed Fee Agreement HOA Compliance form All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary November 2017 City of Aspen 1 130 S. Galena St. 1 (970) 920 5090 Exhibit o CITY OFAsPEN COMMUNITY i1P/ PA G O r Agreement to Pay Application Fees n N — CA An agreement between the City of Aspen ( City") and -0 o < cc — M Please type or print in all caps Z 230 Lake Avenue v Address of Property: BendonAdams Tobe Cotsen Trustee Property Owner Name: y Representative Name (If different from Property owner) o sen Living Trust Billing Name and Address -Send Bills to: c/o Jannol Law Group 1801 Century Park East, Ste 2150; Los Angeles, CA 90067 Contact info for billing: e-mail: mj@jannollwgroup.com Phone: 310.788.3990 1 understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2017, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services Indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $. flat fee for $. fiat fee for $. flat fee for $. flat fee for For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs Involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that It is Impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient Information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no -payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $ 1,950 deposit for 6 hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deoosit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director City use: Fees Due: $ Received $ Case R Signature: � '7(t) PRINT Name: Tobey otsen Trustee; T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust Title: ■ 0 � M � � � � � `� T. 1 W rw.� '� al � tl d iin. rcaaM • • Homeowner Association Compliance Policy All land use applications within the City of Aspen are required to include a Homeowner Association Compliance Form (this form) certifying the scope of work Included in the land use application complies with all applicable covenants and homeowner association policies. The certification must be f§�y the property owner or Attomey repnesenft the proper owner. Property Owner (T): Name: Tobey Cotsen, Trustee; T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust Email: mj@jannoliwgroup.com Address of 230 Lake Avenue Property: Aspen, CO 81611 (subject of p application) I certify as follows: (pick one) Phone No.: 310.788.3990 This property is not subject to a homeowners association or other form of private covenant. ❑ This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this land use application do not require approval by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. ❑ This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this land use application have been approved by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. I understand this policy and I understand the City of Aspen does not Interpret, enforce, or manage the applicability, meaning or effect of private covenants or homeowner association rules or bylaws. I understand that this document is a public document. Owner signature: J date: July 20, 2018 Owner printed name: To e ry Cotsen, Trustee T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust or, Attorney signature: date: Attorney printed name: t Exhibit 6 W —A, � i • • " • . July 20, 2018 Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 230 Lake Avenue; Aspen, CO. Ms, Garrow: Please accept this letter authorizing and BendonAdams, LLC, to represent our ownership interests in 230 Lake Avenue and act on our behalf on matters reasonably associated in securing land use approvals for the property. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property — 230 Lake Avenue Owner — T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, dated September 12, 1989 Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended; The Amended and Restated Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust dated April 16, 2015, which amended and completely restated the Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust Legal Description — Lot 16; Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Plat recorded at Book 5, Page 91. Parcel ID — 2735-124-88-001 Kind Regards, Jo (-� f CZ� Tobey C ,Trustee T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust c/o Jannol Law Group 1801 Century Park East, Ste 2150 Los Angeles, CA 90067 mi@iannollwarouD.com 310.788.3990 300 SO SPRING ST 1 202 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 970,925.2855 1 BENDONADAMS.COM • stewart title Real partners. Real possibilities'' Date: July 10, 2018 File Number: 245253 Property Address: 230 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 Buyer/Borrower: William Guth Please direct all Title inquiries to: Kurt Beereboom Phone: (970) 925-3577 Fax: (866) 277-9353 Email Address: Kurt.Beereboom@stewart.com William Guth Delivery Method: Emailed 0 Ws� Stewart Title Company 620 E Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611 Please direct all Closing inquiries to: Julie Morrah Phone: (970) 925-3577 Fax: (866) 277-9353 Email Address: julie.morrah@stewart.com Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, dated September 12, 1989 The Amended and Restated Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust dated April 16, 2015, which amended and completely restated the Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust Delivery Method: Emailed Coldwell Banker Mason Morse Real Estate Attn: Carrie Wells 514 E Hyman Ave Phone: (970) 925-7000 Aspen, CO 81611 Fax: E-Mail: carrie@carriewells.com Delivery Method: Emailed Coldwell Banker Mason Morse Real Estate Attn: Sarah Armstrong 514 E Hyman Ave Phone: (970) 925-7000 Aspen, CO 81611 Fax: (970) 925-7027 E-Mail: sarah@carriewells.com Delivery Method: Emailed Aspen International Properties 625 E Main St, Ste 102B, PMB233 Aspen, CO 81611 Holland & Hart, LLP 600 E Main St, Ste 104 Aspen, CO 81611 Attn: William Guth Phone: (970) 300-2120 Fax: E-Mail: bill@aspenprops.com Delivery Method: Emailed Attn: Mark Hamilton Phone: Fax: E-Mail: mehamilton@hollandhart.com Delivery Method: Emailed • • Jannol Law Group 1801 Century Park E, Ste 2150 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Attn: Martin Jannol Phone: (310) 788-3990 Fax: (310) 788-3433 E-Mail: mj@jannollawgroup.com Delivery Method: Emailed Waas, Campbell, Rivera Johnson & Velasquez LLP Attn: J Bart Johnson 420 E Main St, Ste 210 Phone: (970) 544-7006 Aspen, CO 81611 Fax: (866) 492-0361 E-Mail: johnson@wcrlegal.com Delivery Method: Emailed WIRED FUNDS ARE REQUIRED ON ALL CASH PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT THE ESCROW OFFICE AS NOTED ABOVE. We Appreciate Your Business and Look Forward to Serving You in the Future. stewart title ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY NOTICE IMPORTANT - READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY'S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; Schedule B, Part II - Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, a Texas corporation (the "Company"), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I - Requirements have not been met within six months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company's liability and obligation end. Auth-orrzed Countersignature -A4:�� Stewart Title Company 620 E Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611 GUMA Matt Morris i °k+r� yrb+ President and CEO 3 1908 Denise C rraux Secretary For purposes of this form the "Stewart Title" logo featured above is the represented logo for the underwriter, Stewart Title Guaranty Company. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTAO Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy, the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule B, Part I/ - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERTCAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TITU File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 1210-k- Page 1 of 3 Xt 0 0 COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS (a) "Knowledge" or "Known": Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records. (b) "Land": The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term "Land" does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (c) "Mortgage": A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. (d) "Policy": Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (e) "Proposed Insured": Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) "Proposed Policy Amount": Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (g) "Public Records": Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (h) "Title": The estate or interest described in Schedule A. 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I - Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, this Commitment terminates and the Company's liability and obligation end. 3. The Company's liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: (a) the Notice; (b) the Commitment to Issue Policy; (c) the Commitment Conditions; (d) Schedule A; (e) Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; (f) Schedule B, Part II - Exceptions; and (g) a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. 4. COMPANY'S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY (a) The Company's liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured's actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company's delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured's good faith reliance to: (i) comply with the Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; (ii) eliminate, with the Company's written consent, any Schedule B, Part II - Exceptions; or (iii) acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. (b) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (c) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy,- the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule 8, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule 8, Part ll - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TIT' F File No.: 245253 ASSOC1A110N ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Page 2 of 3 M • E (d) The Company's liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured's actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (e) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any. (f) In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I - Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (g) In any event, the Company's liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT (a) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment. (b) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. (c) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (d) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II - Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (e) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company. (f) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company's only liability will be under the Policy. 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company's agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company's agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO -FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro -forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro -forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro -forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at <http://www.alta.org/arbitration>. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall be addressed to it at P.O. Box 2029, Houston, Texas 77252-2029. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA" Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice, the Commitment to Issue Policy, the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule 8, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule 8, Part ll - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMtRICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TTTLf ASSOCIATION File No.: 245253 ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Page 3 of 3 ^ 0 • ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Transaction Identification Data for reference only. Issuing Agent: Issuing Office: ALTA® Universal ID: Loan ID Number: Commitment Number: Issuing Office File Number: Property Address: Revision Number: Stewart Title Company 620 E Hopkins Ave, Aspen, CO 81611 245253 245253 230 Lake Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 Commitment Date: June 22, 2018 at 8:00AM 2. Policy to be issued: Proposed Policy Amount (a) ALTA Owner's Extended $13,000,000.00 Proposed Insured: William Guth (b) ALTA Loan Standard Proposed Insured: 3. The estate or interest in the Land described or referred to in this Commitment is: FEE SIMPLE 4. Title to the said estate or interest in the Land is at the Commitment Date vested in: Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust dated 4/13/2007, as amended and T.L.J. Cotsen Living Trust, dated September 12, 1989 and Amended and Restated Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust dated April 16, 2015, which amended and completely restated the Corinna Cotsen 1991 Trust 5. The Land is described as follows: See Exhibit "A" Attached Hereto This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule 8, Part 1- Requirements, and Schedule 8, Part II - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. AME RICAN The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing LAND TITLE as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. MSOCLkTION File No.: 245253 ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 IFF Page 1 of 6 0 ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY File No.: 245253 Lot 16, HARMON GROUP-TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT, as shown on the Plat recorded January 17, 1990 in Plat Book 23 at page 77 as Reception No. 319178. County of Pitkin, State of Colorado This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule B, Part ll - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TITLE File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Page 2 of 6 ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART I ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY File No.: 245253 Requirements All of the following Requirements must be met: 1. The Proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. 2. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. 3. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. 4. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. 5. Payment to or for the account of the grantor(s) or mortgagor(s) of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. 6. Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record. 7. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title Guaranty Company of payment of all outstanding taxes and assessments as certified by the County Treasurer. 8. Execution of Affidavit as to Debts and Liens and its return to Stewart Title Guaranty Company. NOTE: If work has been. performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils testing, foundation work, installation of materials), please notify the Company's escrow officer within 10 days of receipt of this title commitment. 9. Payment of any and all Homeowners assessments and expenses which may be assessed to the property. 10. THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENT IS FOR DELETION OF SURVEY EXCEPTIONS 2 AND 3 OF THE OWNERS POLICY: An Improvement Survey, prepared by a registered Colorado surveyor, within the last TWO MONTHS, must be presented to Stewart Title Guaranty Company, for its approval prior to the deletion of any survey exceptions from the OWNERS POLICY. Stewart Title Guaranty reserves the right to take exception to any adverse matters as shown on said surrey, or make further inquiry or requirements relative thereto. Said Survey, must be certified to Stewart Title of Colorado and/or Stewart Title Guaranty Company. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy, the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule B, Part ll - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association, LAND TTTLi File o.:245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance B-1-16 Page 3 of 6 • 0 ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART I ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY 11. Regarding Deed recorded tovember 22, 2017 as Reception No. 643295; Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title of Colorado, Inc. furnished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen, that the following taxes have been paid, or that conveyance is exempt from said taxes:(1) The "Wheeler Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and(2) The "Housing Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990) 12. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title of Colorado, Inc. furnished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen, that the following taxes have been paid, or that conveyance is exempt from said taxes:(1) The "Wheeler Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and(2) The "Housing Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990). 13. Deed from vested owner(s) vesting fee simple title in the purchaser(s). NOTE: Notation of the legal address of the grantee must appear on the deed as per 1976 amendment to statute on recording of deeds CRS 38-35-109 (2). NOTE: Statement of Authority for Cotsen 1985 Trust recorded November 22, 2017 as Reception No. 643296, discloses the following persons as those authorized to transact business on behalf of said entity: Margit Sparling Cotsen If there have been any amendments or changes to the management of the entity, written documentation reflecting the changes and a new Statement of Authority will be required. NOTE: Statement of Authority for Lloyd Eric Cotsen Trust recorded November 22, 2017 as Reception No. 643297, discloses the following persons as those authorized to transact business on behalf of said entity: Lloyd Eric Cotsen If there have been any amendments or changes to the management of the entity, written documentation reflecting the changes and a new Statement of Authority will be required. NOTE: Statement of Authority for T L J Cotsen Living Trust recorded November 22, 2017 as Reception No. 643298, discloses the following persons as those authorized to transact business on behalf of said entity: Tobey L.J. Cotsen Victor If there have been any amendments or changes to the management of the entity, written documentation reflecting the changes and a new Statement of Authority will be required. NOTE: The vesting deed is shown as follows: Warranty Deed recorded November 22, 2017, as Reception No. 643295. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA" Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule 8, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule 8, Part ll - Exceptions, and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TITLE File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Page 4 of 6 0 • ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART II ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Exceptions File No.: 245253 THIS COMMITMENT DOES NOT REPUBLISH ANY COVENANT, CONDITION, RESTRICTION, OR LIMITATION CONTAINED IN ANY DOCUMENT REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SPECIFIC COVENANT, CONDITION, RESTRICTION, OR LIMITATION VIOLATES STATE OR FEDERAL LAW BASED ON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, HANDICAP, FAMILIAL STATUS, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN. The Policy will not insure against loss or damage resulting from the terms and provisions of any lease or easement identified in Schedule A, and will include the following Exceptions unless cleared to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter that appears for the first time in the Public Records or is created, attaches, or is disclosed between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Schedule B, Part I - Requirements are met. 2. Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records. 3. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the public records. 5. 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. 6. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) Minerals of whatsoever kind, subsurface and surface substances, in, on, under and that may be produced from the Land, together with all rights, privileges, and immunities relating thereto, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b) or (c) are shown by the Public Records or listed in Schedule B. 7. Water rights, claims or title to water. 8. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any unredeemed tax sales. 9. Right of Proprietor of a vein or lode to extract or removeore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premiseshereby granted as reserved in the United States Patents recorded January 8, 1888 in Book 55 at Page 2. 10. All matters shown on the Plat of Shaw and the WPW Joint Venture Subdivision Exemptions Plat recorded June 3, 1977 in Book 5 at Pape 91. 11. All matters shown on the HARMON GROUP-TOMLINSON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT recorded January 17, 1990 in Book 23 at Page 77 as Reception No. 319178. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule 8, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule B, Part ll - Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICA as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TITLE File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Page 5 of 6 - F ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE B PART II ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY NOTE: Exceptions 2 and 5 may be deleted from the policies, provided the seller and buyer execute the Company's affidavits, as required herein, and the Company approves such deletions. If work has been performed on, or in connection with, the subject property (architectural drawings, soils testing, foundation work, installation of materials), and the Company has not reviewed and approved lien waivers and indemnitor financials, Standard Exception 5 (mechanic lien exception) will not be deleted and no mechanic lien coverage will be furnished. Exceptions 3 and 4 may be deleted from the policies, provided the Company receives and approves the survey or surrey affidavit if required herein. Exception 1 will not appear on the policies, provided the Company, or its authorized agent, conducts the closing of the proposed transaction and is responsible for the recordation of the documents. This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule 8, Part I - Requirements; and Schedule 8, Part 11- Exceptions; and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing AMERICAN as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. LAND TTTLE File No.: 245253 ASSOCIATION ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 Page 6 of 6 • C� ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY File No.: 245253 STATEMENT OF CHARGES These charges are due and payable before a policy can be issued: Basic Rate 2006 Owner's Policy: Owner's Extended Coverage: Tax Certificate: $18,950.00 $65.00 $25.00 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy,,, the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule 8, Part 1- Requirements, and Schedule R Part ❑ - Exceptions, and a countersignature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. A M F- Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. ASSOCIATION The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. . File No.: 245253 ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance 8-1-16 0 0 File No.: 245253 DISCLOSURES Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: A. THE SUBJECT REAL PROPERTY MAY BE LOCATED IN A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT; B. A CERTIFICATE OF TAXES DUE LISTING EACH TAXING JURISDICTION SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE COUNTY TREASURER OR THE COUNTY TREASURER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT; C. INFORMATION REGARDING SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND THE BOUNDARIES OF SUCH DISTRICTS MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, OR THE COUNTYASSESSOR Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2, Section 5, Paragraph G requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed." Provided that Stewart Title Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lender's Title Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative Mechanic's Lien Protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception No. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single-family residence, which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled Mechanic's and Materialmen's Liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased, within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and/or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium; fully executed Indemnity agreements satisfactory to the company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. To comply with the provisions of C.R.S. 10-11-123, the Company makes the following disclosure: a. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and b. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. NOTE: THIS DISCLOSURE APPLIES ONLY IF SCHEDULE B, SECTION 2 OF THE TITLE COMMITMENT HEREIN INCLUDES AN EXCEPTION FOR SEVERED MINERALS. Notice of Availability of a Closing Protection Letter: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulation 8-1-3, Section 5, Paragraph C (11)(f), a closing protection letter is available to the consumer. NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE COVERAGES REFERRED TO HEREIN, UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED. 0 L� Stewart Title Guaranty Company Privacy Notice Stewart Title Companies WHAT DO THE STEWART TITLE COMPANIES DO WITH YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION? Federal and applicable state law and regulations give consumers the right to limit some but not all sharing. Federal and applicable state law regulations also require us to tell you how we collect, share, and protect your personal information. Please read this notice carefully to understand how we use your personal information. This privacy notice is distributed on behalf of the Stewart Title Guaranty Company and its title affiliates (the Stewart Title Companies), pursuant to Title V of the Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act (GLBA). The types of personal information we collect and share depend on the product or service that you have sought through us. This information can include social security numbers and driver's license number. All financial companies, such as the Stewart Title Companies, need to share customers' personal information to run their everyday business —to process transactions and maintain customer accounts. In the section below, we list the reasons that we can share customers' personal information; the reasons that we choose to share; and whether you can limit this sharing. Reasons we can share your personal information. Do we share Can you limit this sharing? For our everyday business purposes— to process your transactions and maintain your account. This may include running the business and managing customer accounts, such as processing transactions, Yes No mailing, and auditing services, and responding to court orders and legal investigations. For our marketing purposes— to offer our products and services to Yes No you. For Joint marketing with other financial companies No We don't share For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about your transactions and experiences. Affiliates are companies related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and non -financial Yes No companies. Our affiliates may include companies with a Stewart name; financial companies, such as Stewart title Company For our affiliates' everyday business purposes— information about No We don't share your creditworthiness. For our affiliates to market to you — For your convenience, Stewart Yes Yes, send your first and last name, the email has developed a means for you to opt out from its affiliates marketing address used in your transaction, your Stewart file even though such mechanism is not legally required. number and the Stewart office location that is handling your transaction by email to optout@stewad.com or fax to 1-800-335-9591. For non -affiliates to market to you. Non -affiliates are companies not No We don't share related by common ownership or control. They can be financial and non -financial companies. We may disclose your personal information to our affiliates or to non -affiliates as permitted by law. If you request a transaction with a non -affiliate, such as a third party insurance company, we will disclose your personal information to that non -affiliate. [We do not control their subsequent use of information, and suggest you refer to their privacy notices.] SHARING PRACTICES How often do the Stewart Title Companies notify me We must notify you about our sharing practices when you request a transaction. about their practices? How do the Stewart Title Companies protect my . To protect your personal information from unauthorized access and use, we use personal information? security measures that comply with federal law. These measures include computer, file, and building safeguards. How do the Stewart Title Companies collect my We collect your personal information, for example, when you personal information? request insurance -related services provide such information to us We also collect your personal information from others, such as the real estate agent or lender involved in your transaction, credit reporting agencies, affiliates or other companies. What sharing can I limit? Although federal and state law give you the right to limit sharing (e.g., opt out) in certain instances, we do not share your personal information in those instances. Contact us: K you have any questions about this privacy notice, please contact us at. Stewart Title Guaranty Company, 1980 Post Oak Blvd., Privacy Officer, Houston, Texas 77056 File No.: 245253 Revised 11-19-2013 • 0 Exhibit 8 230 Lake Avenue — Vicinity Map ---�� Exhibit 9 MAOIOgp ►USUGHIN060., 00CA11 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 1977 Members present were Tom Isaac, Dick Kienast, Olaf Hedstrom, John Schuhmacher, Danny Abbott, Roger Hunt and Chic Collins. Also present were Hal Clark and John Stanford from the Planning Office. Hunt made a motion to table the minutes. Hedstrom seconded it and it was passed. Montgomery The conditional use of Montgomery Wards was continued from Wards February 1, 1977. Clark said that the applicant was not available for comment. Collins opened the public hearing and closed it since no comments were made. Stanford said that a public hearing should be set for around April 5. There should be study session on March 8. Shaw Estate The commission moved on to new business. First on the WPW - subdi- agenda was the subdivision exemption for the Shaw Estate vision ex- which was to be bought by WPW Joint Venture. The request emption was to change the existing lot lines for Lots 16-22, Block 103, Hallam's Addition from 7 lots into four lots all in excess of 9,000 square feet. The property is zoned R6 which would allow four duplex units to be built under existing zoning. Hal Clark explakning the Planning Office comments. (1) PO wants the area designated historic. The applicants wish to remove a frame building from one of the lots. Due to the dilapidated condition of the building and its proximity to one of the brick houses, we agree. We would like to preserve the Victorian buildings on lots 18, 20 and 22. This would restrict the area to single family dwellings. (2) We recommend deed restricting lots 18-19, 20-21, and 22-23 to be used by single-family dwelling only. Lot 16-17 could be developed with a duplex. (3) PO does not feel the subdivision dedication fee should be waivered. (4) The application will have to get a variance for lot 19 which will only have a 55 foot frontage as opposed to the required 60 foot frontage. (5) The replat of these lots should be recorded with the Office of the Pitkin County clerk and Recorder. Upon satisfaction of these suggestions the PO recommends approval of the exemption request. Shaw's attorney Jim Moran said that Shaw not tied to WPW. Shaw's application divides the land into two parcels for sale. This would retain simplicity of application without conditions of duplex, etc. which might evolve in WPW's future applications. Collins stated that contiguous lots deserve consideration tegether. Moran. interjected that historic designation would apply to the existing structures. Nick McGrath, attorney for WPW, supported Moran's view. WPW can't buy the seven lots unless Shaw gets the subdivision exemption. WPW is dependent on P&Z to get an exemption. McGrath went on the explain the WPW exemption. Henry Pederson, Jack and Jackie Woger, John Doremus and Peggy Clifford were given an option to buy the land. A letter from Clifford supported the application of WPW with Shaw to buy the lots. The option must be exercised before March 16. He showed some photos and described the lot line changes. The exemption would allow the present tenants to stay. McGrath then addressed Clark's February 25th memo. Regarding Historic designation WPW would prefer to restore the houses at their own pace and get designation after the restoration is complete. If there is a deed restriction it would bind the property forever. The only problem with 0 • Meeting Continued Planning and Zoning Commission March 1 1977 single family dwelling would be if we propose to build a house we wouldn't want restriction which would go beyond the present zoning requirements. Also H. Pederson might like a caretakers unit which would be historically designed. If dedication fees are imposed we will work those out with Shaw. The lot line cannot be redrawn to make a 64 foot frontage. We will deal with the Board of Adjustment. Pederson felt that he wanted to have a caretaker or rent to a local for low cost housing. Collins asked McGrath to explain why historic designation was unfavorable. How else would the integrity of the neighborhood be explained. McGrath retorted that the city's flexibility will dictate this. Single family residences are not imposed because of individuals developing their own homes. Instead, by giving historic designation this accomplishes the mission. Abbott asked where tenants would go. McGrath said options to purchase were given with a reasonable time notice. If there is no response the Shaw estate will serve notice to quit on tenants. Hunt stated that he didn't want to leave duplex question up to HPC. They are notorious for letting building get out of hand. Clark said that it was no way to not allow a duplex and to allow caretakers. Expansion can be restricted to size or FAR restrictions. Historic designation is important. Collins stated that historic designation is necessary to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood character. Ann Schwind of the West Side Improvement Association supported P&Z concept. Wants to maintain single family dwellings in that area including lots 16-17. Letter from Dr. and Mrs. Freshman writen to the board supported WPW. Mrs. Paepcke wrote a letter against the rezoning of the Shaw property. McGrath said that it would be hard to agree on size, etc of expansion at this meeting. He wanted to make conditions as to preserve quantity and set limits before the Council meeting. They would make recommendations subject to size limits. Isaac said that perhaps they would not exempt them. They ought to get a public hearing. The processis too hurried. McGrath said that this is the process that has been used with single owners of existing buildings. Isaac stated that there is a difference between houses, duplexes, caretakers, etc. Schwind asked about the Hallam Lake dedication fund. Clark said that perhaps they could negotiate for open space. McGrath said that it would be a method of saving cash outlay. Perhaps a trail is an alternative to explore. Clark said that it was worth considering. Hunt asked if this might be determined by next week. Clark said that they can add information but they are satisfied with the recommendations. Comments are noted. What other information is needed. 4P RMSM m raeuONING CO.. UMVM RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Meeting continued Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 1977 Collins said if we are looking at the house size then duplex should be taken into consideration. Schwind asked if off street parking would be handled if duplex is allowed. Collins asked if the lot line had to change. McGrath said that lot lines will preserve the aesthetics. Clark said that it was a favorable move. Collins asked if 9,000 feet would allow a duplex. Yes. I think that should schedule a site inspection and table this until March 8 at 5:00. Hunt moved that it be tabled. Abbott seconded the motion. Passed by all. A site inspection was set up for Thursday at 5:00 PM. There was a motion to table the Shaw request make by Hunt. Abbott seconded. All passed the motion. Abbott made a request to revote on AIHS. Hunt moved to revote.Abbott seconded the motion. Hunt then withdrew his motion. It was decided to review the parliamentary procedure. A.E.M. A.E.M. asked for condo of existing 8 unit building called Partners- Pioneer Apartments. There are nine individuals who own Pioneers Apts. five units. It is an awkward ownership. It is subject to 6 month lease requirements according to Ord. 19. We have sent an affidavit of notification to owners to condos of intent to condo. It was agreed to allow tenants the right of first refusal. They are local owners. We would be willing to go thru the proper subdivision process. First we need to condo one more unitl Goodheim said that a study of condo was being done. Not asking to hung up the applicant, but there is no data on future residents. There are results to a study of condo of Aspen View. Only one apartment was purchased by a tenant. The rental marketis drying up. Condo is mostly profit motivated. it is easier to sell a smaller unit than a whole building. Collins asked what was the composition? Goodheim said mostly local employees. Majority could not afford the increase in rent (79%). You might advise the appellant that more conditions may be added during the process. Hunt questioned the six month ordinance. McGrath said that it was already restricted in contract. McGrath asked why they didn't object to the subdivision dedication fee. Goodheim said that it was included in the motion to send information to Goodheim. McGrath said that he was never asked for it. Hunt made a motion to recommend the concept of resubdivision under the conditions that there not be a waiver of the subdivision dedication fee (Ord. 63). Abbottseconded the motion. All were in favor. Durant Galena Brooke Peterson representing the During Galena Building condo asked for condominiumization. There were no comments from the Engineering department. He said that it was being condo in order to sell Le Caberet. Collins said that there was no problem. Hunt said that that they were exempt on the condition of the payment of the fee. Isaac seconded. All passed. Meeting Continued Planning and Zoning Commission March 1, 1977 Doremus Duplex Doremus Duplex is asking for a subdivision exemption for Lots M, N, and O Block S. Engineering department had no comments. The proposed duplex on the north corner of 7th and Smuggler Strees. The mechanism for financing is under separate ownership. The planning office said that there was not problem. It conforms to normal zoning regulations. Hunt made a motion to exempt. Minimum lease requirements would be required by RMF. Ordinance 63 would not be waivered. Isaac seconded. All passed. Winchester Winchester Duplex asked for a subdivision exemption because they had less lot size than they needed. The Board of Adjustments granted the variance (case no. 73-9). The Engineering Dept. has no comments about Lot 18, Block 11, Snowbunny which is zoned R-15. The Board studied the plans. Hunt moved to exempt Winchester from the six month restriction and not to waiver Ordinance 63. Abbott seconded the motion. All approved. Hunt motion to add to the agenda. Hedstrom seconded. All passed. Collins said that there was a conflict of interest. A property dispute would result because the property line was erratic. The line would have to be changed to have as common property. It would make a more usable line. Abbott moved to exempt Smuggler and Durant Mining Corporation for the purposes of the boundary adjacent to Tri County Boundary Survey NE 4 SW 4 of Sec 7, T 10S, R 84 W of the 6 PM. Hung seconded the motion. All in favor. Motion passed. Isaac motion to adjourn. Abbott seconded the motion. All were in favor. Meeting adjourned at 7:25 PM. Elisabeth Sherrill Deputy City Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Exhibit 10 100 leaves Pq M C. P. NOCtK ,... \ ... Ca Special Meeting Planning and Zoning Com. fission March 8, 1977 Shaw Subdivision -Request for Exemption Mike Martin was present to represent the Shaw :inter- est. Hal Clark noted that a letter from Dr. Schiff had been received by the Planning Office voicing support of the Planning Office recommendations to P&Z regarding the Shaw exemption request. Clark noted that sane changes had been made in the application, and asked Martin to explain the changes. Martin deferred to Nick McGrath, attorney for the WPW exemoton request. McGrath explained that an analysis of the surrounding neighborhood within ten blocks had been clone, and showed photographs to the P&Z that depicted homes in the area that are not single fartily dwellings. McGrath noted that 30 of 55 of the homes are duplexes or have caretaker apartments on the property. In regard to FAR requirements, McGrath addressed the fact that there are presently no FAR regulations in the R-6 zone. However, if the P&Z were to impose a .3 FAR on the subdivision exemption motion, the project would still be viable for his clients to pur- sue. McGrath passed out copies of the proposed change to the original application to the P&Z members. One of the proposals was that if the City was interested in the character of the surrounding neighborhood,this could be accomplished by historic designation of the existing builidngs�rather than FAR restrictions. Clark read into the record a telegram from Mr. and Mrs. Warren Bennis who stated their support of preserving the historic flavor of the neighborhood, as well as their concern that historic buildings not be removed unnecessarily under the guise of progress. There was also a telephone call from Mrs Elizabeth Paepkce that stated that she was opposed to any rezoning in the neighborhood. Michael Martin,stated that the Shaw exemption request was a very basic request: they were asking only to sell less than one half block of property. The sale of the lots is important to the Shaw family because they must liquidate some of the estate for tax reasons. They want to sell a part of the estate without having to move. Martin threatened that the property will be sold to some purchaser and the property will inevit- ably change to some extent regardless of the present action of the P&Z. The Shaw family wants to Continue to own the green house, and to sell the rest of the block. Martin further added that the request was for the P&Z to approve the exemption without conditions. Bal Clark stated that the proposition of a land dedi- cation rather than a monetary one would be impracti- cal in this case. Hunt asked which party would be responsible for payment of the dedication fee, to whici Clark responded that the Shaw's would be the -ones to pa the subdivision dedication fee. Planning and Zoning Commission March 8, 1977 Bill Kane stressed that FAR restrictions should be included as a condition to the motion in order to limit the size of any future',buildings on the prop- erty. McGrath told the P&Z that Lots 16 and 17 are going to be purchased for the purpose of building a family home for the wogans. If a .3 FAR is imposed, the option to buy may not be exercised as that'. would not allow them to build the size home necessary for their family. Chairman Collins noted that it was important to look at the 9 lots in question in a historic setting. His interest was in protecting the historic buildings, and possibly a historic overlay could be applied to lots 16 through 24. This would limit the development poten- tial and preserve the historic character of the neigh- borhood. Kane questioned the idea of historically designating the entire area in the property lines, as opposed to the idea of an historic overlay of the Original Aspen Townsite as was mnetioned at a previous meeting. Presently, the review criteria is set up for commercial buildings. Expanding the H-Historic designation would be premature at this time as the design criteria must be developed as a tool to deal with review. Kienast stated that perhaps this would be a good test case for the HPC, and the tools could be developed in the pro- cess. Kane reiterated that by setting up a district in this case would not be apptopriate because this could catapult the City into designating the entire original townsite, a process that the HPC is not equipped to handle. Kienast stated again that he wanted to see the H designation given to the entire parcel. McGrath and Martin both agreed that by designating the entire parcel as historic, the P&Z was not acknow- ledging the mix of styles in the neighborhood. McGrath pointed out several examples of the different sizes and styles of architecture in the immediate neighbor- hood. P&Z member Isaac asked what the future ownership of the property would be. McGrath clarified which prop- erties were under option and which were not. He added that the lot lines were being changed to allow for better side yard setbacks. The P&Z went into executive session. Kienast stated that imposing a .3 FAR would unreasonably restrict the owners of the properties. He suggested that H- designation would more effectively restrict the prop- erty. Hedstrom said he would prefer to give H desig- nation to the three buildings now on the property, as opposed to the overlay concept. Abbott strongly en- couraged historic designation of the Shaw house. He also supported an overlay of the entire parcel. Isaac was in favor of historic designation of the whole subdivision application as well as restricting the FAR to .3. Collins opined that he wanted the entire par- cel designated historic to preserve the integrity of the neighborhood. Martin stated that if the P&Z plan was burdensome to the Shaws, the result would be that the property would be sold to osmeone who may not have the same concern as the Shaws have exhibited over the years in caring for their home and the neighborhood. -2- 4' NNO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves row* c.r.MoaanCw&t.M Planning and Zoning commission March 8, 1977 McGrath was not willing to accept the FAR restric- tions or the historic designation of the properties. Kienast moved to recommend subdivision exemption from strict application of the subdivision regulations as those Elisabeth Sherrill, Deputy City Clerk . .Y �vuu,uii _ February 28, 1977 i Mayor Standley called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. 17 Councilmembers Behrendt, De Gregorio, Parry, Pedersen, Wishart, and City Manager Mahoney present. 11 Exhibit MINUTES Councilwoman Pedersen moved to approve the minutes of February 14, 1977; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. I CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There were no comments COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS i i 1. Councilman De Gregorio pointed out that for the.last two weeks, taxis have been Taxis taking up a lot of parking places by the drug store at Cooper and Galena. Councilman De Gregorio stated he would like to.see the laws enforced better as far as this is ! R concerned. 1 2. 'Councilman De Gregorio asked if'Couneil would be interested in having a work+session on projects the Council indicated they would like to have seen done during their tenure. Some projects have not been done, and Councilman De Gregorio stated he would like to s push them along. 3. Councilman De Gregorio stated that City buses are not stopping for pedestrians in ! crosswalks, and asked'-City-Aanager Mahoney to enforce stopping at crosswalks, especially Buses for City buses. Councilman De Gregorio said that the Highlands buses are stopping at ! the intersection of Maroon Creek and Highway 82, and this is getting very hazardous. I Councilman De Gregorio asked Mahoney to talk to Highlands and not to have their buses stop there. 4. Councilman Behrendt told Council that �:he would like to add another member to the Community Facilities Board, a representative from Second Sunday. ! i CFB Councilman Behrendt moved to put this item on the agenda; seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. All in favor, motion carried. i Councilman Behrendt moved to nominate Wes Pouliout, Second Sunday, as a representative to the Community Facilities Board: seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. All in favor, i motion carried. 5. Councilman Parry mentioned that the Highland buses bring a lot of people downvalley, Highlands to the high school, etc. He stated he would not -like to see the Highland buses stopping i buses at Maroon Creek eliminated. City Manager Mahoney told Council he would talk to Highlands ! I and make this work. 6. Councilman Parry stated he had had reports that the.Shaw property on Lake Avenue i will be sold and the four Victorians will be torn down. The purchaser plans to build I Shaw four duplexes. Councilman Parry stated he would like to have a way to preserve the I Property West and; it is a really nice place. Councilman Parry stated he would like to have R in West an administrative delay to work toward historic preservation of the west end area. I End - Planner Bill Kane told Council this project was requesting subdivision exemption to realignment the lot lines. The planning office has requested that each building be I Historic Preserva_ individually designated historic before granting any exemptions. Kane told Council k tion the planning office had been discussion with the HPC and P & Z, the extension of the historic district to the Original Aspen Townsite. Kane stated he felt this would require major changes in the reviewing procedures. Councilman Parry stated fe felt the City is obligated to keep the area nice; the City has purchased a park on Lake Avenue. 7. Councilman Wiahart told Council it was suggested to him that given the economy Parke - and weather, there may be food shortages. Councilman Wishart-said he thought it might I ir be a good idea for the parks department to find land to have truck gardens on and.rent gardens these to people for a nominal fee to cover watering, etc. Mahoney said he would have I Parks Director Smith look into it. 8. Councilman Wishart stated he would like to reinstitute the luncheon meeting, which he felt expedited the night meetings. Councilman Behrendt suggested modifying to so that there was a lunch meeting only when Council had a long agenda or a critical issue. Councilwoman Pedersen suggested a breakfast meeting, only when necessary. Council agreed. Ij 9. Councilman Wishart said he would like to have to issue of raising Council salaries i Council on the next Council agenda. Councilman Wishart said he felt that people in his income ' salaries bracket won't run for office unless they can get paid more. It is hard to hold down a full'.tite job and be a councilmember. I � 10. Councilwoman Pedersen requested Jim Mollica be contacted and that the City get an appraisal on the Shaw property triangle just purchased by the City. 4 11. Mayor Standley pointed out the problem of buses parking all weekend in the West j Buses in End. Mayor Standley had gotten together with the police department, and Sergeant Horan west end contacted all the bus company managers. Horan instructed them to have the buses park in the Rio Grande property. ! STUDENT COMMENT 1 V There were none. ri is is i' i Exhibit 12 Ci Mayor Standley called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m. with Councilmembers Behrendt, Johnston, Pedersen, Commissioners Child and Kinsley, City Manager Mahoney and City At Nuttall present. 1w. Transr oEtation Re ort. Sandy Knaub told the Boards that she would like a study sess on to go over the transportation alternatives study. The study session was set for Transportath Monday, March 21, at 4:00 p.m. Ms. Knaub handed out large packets she would go through Report at the study session. 2. Communit Facilities Board Report. Edgar Stern, chairman of the CFB, read a memorand to Ceunc an t e Comm Ss oners. This memorandum stated that the CFB has made and passed resolutions for the use of the old hospital, the wheeler Opera House, and the Holy Cross property. The CFB recommended that the hospital be used as a community service facility and that the land adjacent be dedicated for employee/student housing. The Wheeler opera House was recommended to be used as a community/cultural complex, with a recommendation to purchase the two lots west of the Wheeler so that the center could be expanded. The CFB resolved to "reserve use of the Holy Cross Facility and surrounding property as being suitable for use by artistic, cultural, educational and other leisure time activities of the community". Stern stated that the CFB is ready for phase two of its activities, which is to come up with recommendations for the uses that will be specific and definitive. The CFB has divided into three task forces. These task forces will (1) invite all interested communi group to present views on the recommended uses for the buildings, (2) review requests of various organizations, (3) will attempt to match the facilities available with requests presented and develop an order of priority, (4) obtain services of architects and other technical consultants. Each task force will prepare a budget to present to Council and the Commissioners, (5) prepare schematic designs describing uses of facilities and assignments, 'The task forces will prepare different phases, the first of which will require the absolute minimum of modification of the facility in question, and will presen a cost estimate and construction schedule. The Community Facilities Board acting as a group and through its task forces will attempt to make recommendations on what is considers to be the most appropriate management structure for the operation and management of these facilities. It will consider the question as to whether the facilities should be managed by the City or County or through other boards. The CFB hopes to complete this task and make specific recommendations to Council and the Commissioners within'90 days. The CFB will also enumerate those uses for which it was not able to accommodate and make recommendations for the solution of these outstanding problems. Councilman Wishart came into Council Chambers. Mayor Standlu asked Stern if he had any idea of the budget requirements. Stern said it was hard to give an estimate, but initially it would be very small. Mayor Standley asked if the CFB had had contact with the conference centerboard. Stern said they would participate as a member of the task forces. Mayor Standley asked that the proposed budge be ready for the next joint meeting, and that the task forces be enumerated. Council and Commissioners agreed that the CFB is right on track and doing a good job. 3. Overall Economic Develo ment Plan. Brian Stafford and H. J. Stalf are working to form the co ttee or t e OEDP. Stafford pointed out that Pitkin County only has 21; months to get all the work done. Every elected official received an invitation to be involved in this committee. Stalf asked that they get a partial committee going and add to it at the next meeting. 4. Police De artment and Sheriff's Office. Mayor Standley had growth statistics of both organ zationa s tte so that ese could be compared to the ones published in the Denver Post. George Ochs stated that after looking at the possibility of merging toe two departments in the Courthouse, the Commissioners decided against it. Ochs stated he would like to pursue the feasilibity study for a new building to house the APD, SO, and district attorney's offices. Ochs stated this would be done in a three step process; the City and County staffs would be working on it. The staff would investigate financing work with local architects on space requirements; the planning staff will examine possibl sites. After all this is completed, a report will come back to Council and the Commissio Mayor Standley stated this concept ought to be expanded to include all protection service like the fire department and perhaps Mountain Rescue. Mayor Standley pointed out this is one of the projects that does fit the guidelines of the EDA, and another reason why the OEDP has to be done. Councilman De Gregorio stated that if the police department was Community Facilities Board Report Z Overall Economic; Development i Plan Police 6 Sheriff's Departments SPA AMENDMENT - TRUEMAN BUILDING 'Trueman .SPA Amend- ment Conceptual . Subdivision Blue Spruce t Ord. 2,1977 Water Extension , to Midland/ Park t t 1 I Ord. 8, 1977 Employee Retirement Kane told Council this was a request for an additional 1,000 square feet on the top of the building for housing and technically isan amendment to the SPA. Larry Yaw stated when they originally dealt with numbers in zoning, the housing was set at 10,000 square feet. It was established that the building could not be done in a single phase. Yaw' told Council that they did get financing for housing. The housing officer was asked was kind of unit would serve all interests bests these are 600 square feet. Yaw said they had found room"for two more one bedroom units. This will add approximately 1,200 square feet. The physical result is neglible; it does not add to the height or massing of the building. Trueman has agreed to six month rental restruction and to review by the housing authority. Kane told Council that the P & 2's only concerns were that these have a six month lease and that they not be condominiumized in the future. Councilman Wishart moved to set the public hearing for April 11; seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Behrendt. Motion carried. . CONCEPTUAL SUBDIVISION - Blue Spruce Kane told Council this is a proposal to take the back building of the present Blue Spruce, at Durant and Monarch, remove it and replace it with a new building of 15 condo- minium units. There are 17 lodge units presently. The management and rental control will continue to be managed through the main office of the Blue Spruce. Councilman Behrendt asked if the square and cubic footage would be roughly comparable. Bob Sterling told Council that it is the desire of his client to provide employee housing, Some units will be provided for employee housing; these new units will be short term rental. The lower parcel of the Blue Spruce is zoned L-1 and does not permit any condo- miniums. The upper portion is zoned L02 and does permit condominiums. Sterling said they were doing on -site parking now. Kane pointed out this property is only A blocks from Rubey Park, the main transportation center. Kane told Council that the housing office was looking into moving the existing building to be used for employee housing or for the M.A.A. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out that the existing building was going to be demolished or removed, and stated she had a hard time calling this a remodelling. Councilwoman Johnston asked how this fit into the administrative delay. Kane stated it was the opinion of the planning office that this project would be a reduction in density. Councilwoman Johnston stated this is an exception to what has been stated will be administrative delay. Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the conceptual subdivision; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, with the exception of Councilwoman Johnston. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 1977 - Water Extension to Midland/Park Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to read Ordinance #2, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman De Gregorio. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #2 (Series of 1977) AN ORDINANCE AUTHORISING THE EXTENSION OF WATER SERVICES TO THE PROPOSED MIDLAND PARK SUBDIVISION AND DOING SO PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 11.3 OF THE ASPEN HOME RULE CHARTER was read by the city clerk. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance 42, Series of 1977, on second -read seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call votes Councilmembers Behrendt; aye; De aye; Johnston,.iaye; Parry, aye; Pedersen, aye; Wishart, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. carried. ORDINANCE #8, SERIES OF 1977 - Amending Employee Retirement Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to read Ordinance #8, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #8 (Series of 1977) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING RETROACTIVLY TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE NO. 3, (SERIES OF 1976) PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN AND TRUE_', ARTICLE VII OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PERMITTING CITY CONTRIBUTION FOR EACH PARTICIPANT EMPLOYED BY THE CITY FOR MORE THAN TEN YEARS AN AMOUNZ'EOUAL'To FIVE (58) PER CENT, ELIMINATING THE REOUIREMENT THAT CONTRIBUTION CHANCE ELECTION BE MADE BETWEEN DECF.rV3ER i AND DECF.MBER 15 AMENDING CALCULATION METHOD FOR ALLOCATING NET FARING OR LOSSES OF -THE TRUST FUND; AND PROVIDING FOR VESTING OF CITY CONTRIBOTIONS ON ANY ANNIVERSARY YEAR BASIS was read by the city clerk. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance #8,.Seriee of 1977, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Couneilmembers De Gregorio, aye; Wishart, aye; Parry, aye; Behrendt, aye; Johnston, aye; Pedersen,, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. ! 0 Dirt in II { Mown Council projects 4C Open Containers Transporta tion programmer not interested, OW should this go ahead. Chief of Police i hey stated he was interes, in pursuing it at this level. Sheriff Kienast.stated this was absolutely essential from the County's point of view because of the jail needs. Councilwoman Pedersen moved that the Council and Commissioners ratify the decision to proceed with the feasibility effort without an expenditure of any funds; seconded by Councilwoman Johnston. All in favor, motion carried. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Councilwoman Pedersen moved to approve the minutes of the February 28, 1977, Council meeting; seconded by Councilman De Gregorio. All in favor, motion carried. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Councilwoman Johnston asked if finance director Butterbaugh was satisfied that everything is authorized and there are no trouble areas. Ms. Butterbaugh answered yea. Councilwoman Johnston moved to approve accounts payable for February; seconded by Council- woman Pedersen. Councilman mishart asked how close to the point of cutting back on capital projects was the City. Ms. Butterbaugh stated that the anticipated surplus for 1976 was in excess of $700,000, and the city should be able to proceed with the 1977 budget with no cut backs. All in favor, motion carried. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There were no comments. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS 1. Councilman De Gregorio suggested that the City inform restaurants in town not to serve water unless customers request it. City Manager Mahoney stated this was not necessary at this time because Aspen has no storage capacity, and this is a low peak demand time. 2. Councilwoman Johnston stated she was very concerned about the dust and dirt around this town. There is trash dumped around and this makes•a very bad impression for a resort town. 3. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out a theme with the growth management plan, the OEDP, the CFB, and the upcoming election that says that the Council should be getting together and defining projects they want done. The Council has to define what they want Aspen to be. The Council should schedule a series of work sessions to get this done and also to get citizens feedback. 4. Councilwoman Johnston stated the city was going to have to•face the automobile problems and congestion. The Council should start thinking about options for auto disincentive. 5. Councilwoman Pedersen said that many cars of city employees were parking in front of the bakery across the street. This cuts down access to the bakery. City Manager Mahoney said he would write a memo to all employees. 6. Mayor Standley welcomed and introduced the new City Attorney, Dorothy Nuttall. 7. Mayor Standley said that some signs had been put together by,the City for occupancy loads in restaurants and bars. There is a law in the city against open containters. It would be nice if the City got some design telling people not to take containers out in the streets and distributed them to bars, restaurants, and liquor stores. Chief of Police Hershey suggested someone in his department make a cartoon and present it at the next meeting. 8. Councilman De Gregorio said he felt some bars were letting kidt Uft to drink. Council- man De Gregorio asked that the police department start enforcing the age limit for drink- ing. 9. Mayor Standley told Council that February was the biggest month ever for the trans- portation routes. Mayor Standley stated the City had never had a professional transpor- taion programmer. It might be a good time to have someone look at the City's system and tell us what the City ought to be doing. Mayor Standley said a professional programme could evaluate the needs, rather than the City trying to force transportation. STUDENT COMMENTS There were none. A-95 REVIEWS 1. Retired Senior Volunteer Pro ram. Phyllis Kenny told Council this is a program encourages senior c t zens to act vely volunteer in the community. Betty Erickson recommended favorable comment. 2. Colorado Mineral Leasing Review. Ms,. Kenny stated this would strengthen the St Highway. 82 Drainage zation of Duplexes Alpine Acres Subdivision Exemption L said the drainagiRTroject will probably run up at $50,000, am any agreement that comes through this should be a topset figure. The project will be funded at $350,000; 80 per cent -Federal and 20 per cent state. This cannot go to bid until after there is an agreement. Ellis said they hoped to get started by June. Councilman Behrendt pointed out that the City streets are already falling apart, and he would rather not take the $30,000 out of the chip and seal budget. The last couple of years the City has been treated to engineering disruption. Councilman Behrendt. asked how long this will take, where the construction will take place. Ellis answered the storm drainage project would be from Sixth to Garmisch on the south side of Main street. There will be no work on the north side of Main street. There will be two blocks of work on the sewer from the Courthouse to Spring and Main. The project will tie the existing 36 inch storm drain on Original into a new storm drain on Spring street. This will be run down Spring to the Obermeyer building and will eliminate outfall directly into the river. Ellis stated a possibility is to put the irrigation water into the sewer at Glory Hole park. This could be brought down using the storm drainage system, and utilize water rights via the storm drainage system. Ellis told Council he had not seen a•construction schedule, but the City is looking at four weeks minimum to do just the dtorm drain work. This will take up one parking lane and one traffic lane at minimum. The paving would be much less disruptive and would go faster. There would probably be &-detour of one block at a time. Councilman Behrendt.moved to approve the work at the levels suggested by the City Engines seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. Councilwoman Johnston stated she feels that the City is working in the opposite direction of auto disincentive. Councilwoman Pedersen pointed out this work is incumbent upon the City as this is a state highway, and the City will get the change to do the drainage work that is necessary. All in favor, motion carried. DUPLEX CONDOMINIUMZATION Councilman Behrendt pointed out there was a general undertone about condominhumization' of duplexes that somehow is undesirable. Planner.Bill Kane told Council he had spent some time looking into this question. Kane stated the issue had been raised that condominiumization of existing duplexes had the effect of removing local housing from the market. Kane stated this has not been happening. Duplexes generate high rents to beging with, so they are already missing.the local market. In most cases looked at, r condominiumization of duplexes is providing an opportunity for someone local to buy, splitting the per land cost across two units." Housing officer Brian Goodheim stated that without any controls, condominiumization of duplexes may take units out of the local market. Goodheim said to protect against this, the City should ask for six month j rental restrictions. Goodheim pointed out that condominiumization makes housing much more affordable for local persons. Councilwoman, Pedersen asked how the six month rental restriction was to be enforced. Mayor Standley suggested that the lease agreements be recorded. Kane pointed out that at present, the City could only get a six month rental restriction voluntarily; it is only applied to the R/Mr zone. Kane stated the .County Commissioners are definitely of the feeling that duplex condominiumization leads to taking housing off the market. Kane said the planning office has been overrun with requests for condominiumization. Goodheim confirmed this is a very complicated value judgment, and requires the City to determine whether it is good "or bad. There is a difference between multi -family build- ings and duplexes. Condominiumization of duplexes increases single family dwellings available to locals. A six month rental restriction has a depressing Value on the price.f and keeps tourists out. Goodheim stated that in terms of apartments buildings, it can be demonstrated there is up to 100 per cent increase in housing costs. Councilwoman Johnston stated she felt this question needed more study. Mayor Standley said the Council had agreed to continue with duplex condominiumization but not to process': any multi -family units until Council had a report from the Housing Authority. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Alpine Acres Bill Kane told Council this is a request for condominiumization of three existing Victorians on Gibson avenue. The city engineer has reviewed this, and his comments n are attached. The annexation agreement for this property covers improvements that are to be made. r Barry Edwards told Council that they had not agreed to six month rental restrictions but had agreed to right of first refusal to tenants in the buildings. This works just as well as is easier for everyone concerned. Edwards stated that the P & Z had recommended,;! exemption be approved subject to payment of the park dedication fee and giving first right of refusal at market price to all tenants. Councilman De Gregorio pointed out that:: if no tenants wanted to purchase the units, they could turn into short term. Mayor Standley stated t4at if Council were to give an exemption, which is an advantage ? to the owner, the Council ought to be requesting to see the sales contract on the property. This was the Council could see if it is being sold to locals, and what the sales price is. Goodheim said he had been approached by two of the tenants who were concerned that this is being condominiumized and sold at prices they cannot afford. Mayor Standley suggested this ought to be tabled until Council could get the kind of information they needed. Nick McGrath told Council if they wanted to see sales contract, these contracts could be provided. ship of the SheiMuse, lots 23-4, from the balance of theWd, and (2) lot line adjust- ment to facilitate separate ownership of three buildings and creation of four duplex lots. (Subdivision Exemption Shaw I' L Essentially there are four existing small Victorians in the area; this would include the removal of a small yellow frame house that site on the property line. This yellow house is in total disrepair. The P & Z and planning office recommend approval with three conditions: (1) Limitation on FAR that can be added on to existing buildings. In a broader context, the planning office has been discussion with the P & Z and Council placing FAR limitations on all residential construction. A .3:1 FAR has been discussed in this district. (2) Historic designation on three existing Victorians, and (3) Historic designation on the Shaw house. There are two controls imposed here; the FAR and review by the HPC. No building activity can take place without HPC review. Shaw Property. Jim Moran, representing this project,.told Council there are nine lots an EF ne. Moran stated they would like a subdivision exemption to allow the Shaves to draw a boundary line on a lot line in Hallams Additions so that Mrs. Shaw can live in the house. Moran said his clients, the Shaws, have been responsive to ideas that the Council has indicated they are in favor of. Councilmanr.Behrendt asked if they would dedicate the main house as single family piece of property and also agree to historic designation. Moran answered that historic designation is agreeable. The idea of restrict ing the house to single family had not come up. As far as chaing the house into a board- ing house, thatAs not authorized use at present in the R-6 zone. If the condominiumized it, it could become two units. Moran stated he felt this proposal is responsive to some of the policy statements of'Council and the P & Z. The alternative, of course, is that the nine lots could be all single family dwellings. Councilman Behrendt stated he.would like to see the house designated historic and would like to see an.).FAR of 3:1. Moran stated if that FAR became law, they would be bound by it. With respect to the,application of the Shaw estate, Moran would not be inclined to accept conditions that are not generally acceptable throughout the neighborhood. The FAR in the surrounding area is nowhere near .3:1. Kane told Council that the approach on the subdivision dedication fee would be that the fee be paid for thO,Shaw house and'the land that is being subdivided. Any additional building that would take place would be covered at time of building permit issuance. Councilman Wishart moved to.approve the subdivision exemption -conditioned upon seeking historic designation for the Shaw house and conditioned upon City Manager Mahoney agreeinj to the park dedication fee; seconded by Councilman Parry. Moran asked that Mollica's leeter of opinion of value, dated March 14, on the Shaw propert lots 23 and 24, valued at $150,000 be made part of the record.. All in favor, motion carried. WPW. Mayor Standley told Council that his interest in the project was that Frank Baranko contacted him to'see if Mayor Standley was interested in putting in a contract for the lot next to W. Bennis' house. Mayor Standley stated he did put in a contract for that an his offer was rejected by the'Shaws. Mayor Standley received his contract and earnest money back. City Manager Mahoney was also contacted, and also submitted an offer.. That offer was rejected, and Mahoney has now.placed earnest money on a lot in Mountain Valley. Nick McGrath, representing WPW, submitted background information on this project in the packet. McGrath stated that the house that is proposed to be removed does not even have a foundation. Peggy Clifford and Frank Baranko, present tenants in the existing Victoria] both have options to purchase from WPW. There is a letter in the file from Peggy'Clifforl support WPW's application. WPW has an option on the property that will expire on March 16. The only substanitive thing being requested is changing of the lot lines. This will help to preserve the exist ing Victorians and will make the middle one a conforming house. McGrath.pointed out that under the existing R-6 zoning, they could put up very large duplexes. A chart submitted indicated that the Clifford house could.be up to 16,000 square feetr the brick house up to 14,000 square feet; the Baranko House up to 10,000 square feet under the existing bulk and requirements of the City. McGrath stated if the means to accomplishing the subdivision exemntion.was an imposition of an FAR requirements, he had indicated to P & Z that WPW could live with a .3:1 FAR. An additional requirement.:of the P & Z was historic designation in advance. McGrath expressed preference to restoration first, then historic designation. Again if to assure approval of the exemption with historic designation as a contingency, WPW can live with that. McGrath presented pictures and a chart of the immediate area indicated that over 50 per cent of the houses are duplexes or have carriage houses. McGrath also pointed out that not all the houses in the area were Victorian. There are many modern structures in the area. McGrath told Council this is the proposal that P & Z approved. Council is talking about an extremely expensive piece of property, and McGrath said he felt this is a fair and sensitive project for a nice area. Councilwoman Johnston asked what the advantage would be of doing restoration before getting historic designation. McGrath answered only that they would not have to go to HPC. Kane stated his recommendation is for historic designation as a condition. Histori designation requires that any additions go through a public forum. Councilman Behrendt pointed out that the City recently bought property across the street. This neighborhood is one of substance and quality, and Councilman:.Behrendt would like to see it continue on that basis. Councilman Behrendt asked McGrath if they would be willing to designate these as single .family dwellings. McGrath said they intended to build homes., not duplexe Some of these people may want to build caretakers homes, however. SPA AMENDMENTWRUEMAN • BUILDING Kane told Council this was a request for an additional 1,000 square feet on the top of the building for housing and technically is an amendment to the SPA. Larry Yaw stated Trueman when they originally dealt with numbers in zoning, the housing was set at 10,000 square SPA Amend- feet. It was established that the building could not be done in a single phase. Yaw . -went told Council that they did get financing for housing. The housing officer was asked was kind of unit would serve all interests best; these are 600 square feet. Yaw said they had found room for two more one bedroom units. This will add approximately 1,200 square feet. The physical result is neglible; it does not add to the height or massing of the building. Trueman has agreed to six month rental restruction and to review by the housing authority. { Kane told Council that the P 6 Z's.only concerns were that these have a six month lease ' and that they not be condominiumized in the future. 1 Councilman Wishart moved to set the public hearing for April 11; seconded by Councilwoman I Pedersen. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Behrendt. Motion carried. ' CONCEPTUAL SUBDIVISION - Blue Spruce Kane told Council this is a proposal to take the back building of the present Blue- , Spruce, at Durant and Monarch, remove it and replace it with a new building of 15 condo- minium units. There are 17 lodge units presently.. The management and rental control ! Conceptual will continue to be managed through the main office of the Blue Spruce. Subdivision Blue Councilman Behrendt asked if the square and cubic footage would be roughly comparable. Spruce Bob Sterling„ told Council that it is the desire of his client to provide employee housing.{ Some units will be provided for employee housing; these new units will be short term I rental. The lower parcel of the Blue Spruce is zoned L-1 and does not permit any condo- I miniums. The upper portion is zoned L02 and does permit condominiums. Sterling said they were doing on -site parking now. Kane pointed out this property is only 1h blocks from Rubey Park, the main transportation center. '{ Kane told Council that the housing office was lookinc into moving the existing building to be used for employee housing or for the M.A.A. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out that the existing building was going to be demolished or removed, and stated she had a hard time calling this a remodelling. Councilwoman Johnston asked how this fit into i the administrative delay. Kane stated it was the opinion of the planning office that this project would be a reduction in density. Councilwoman Johnston stated this is an � exception to what has been stated will be administrative delay. . I; Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the conceptual subdivision; seconded by Councilman I } Parry. All in favor, with the exception of Councilwoman Johnston. Motion carried. j ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 1977 - Water Extension to Midland/Park !I Mayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley Ord. 2,1977 closed the public hearing. Water j! Extension , Councilwoman Pedersen moved to read Ordinance 02, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman {� to Midland/ De Gregorio. All in favor, motion carried. Park I ORDINANCE 02 (Series of 1977) AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXTENSION OF WATER SERVICES TO THE PROPOSED �! MIDLAND PARK SUBDIVISION AND DOING SO PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 11.3 OF THE ASPEN HOME RULE CHARTER was read by the city clerk. ! Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance #2, Series of 1977, on second -.reading; II 4 seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Behrendt; aye; De Gregori aye; Johnston,aaye; Parry, aye; Pedersen, aye; Wishart, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion carried. ORDINANCE 08, SERIES OF 1977 - Amending Employee Retirement Mayor Standleyopened the p public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed II r Ord. 8, 19771 the public hearing. ! Employee I! Retirement Councilwoman Pedersen moved to read Ordinance #8, Series of 1977; seconded by.Councilman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried. o� i. ORDINANCE #8 0 {Series of 1977) �{ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING RETROACTIVLY TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE NO. 3, (SERIES OF 1976) PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN AND TRUST, ARTICLE VII OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PERMITTING { CITY CONTRIBUTION FOR EACH PARTICIPANT EMPLOYED BY THE CITY FOR MORE THAN j TEN YEARS AN AMOUNTrEQUAL TO FIVE (58) PER CENT; ELIMINP_TING THE REQUIREMENT THAT CONTRIBUTION CHANGE ELECTION BE MADE BETWEEN DEC£lV;F.R 1 AND DECEM4BER 15 f AMENDING CALCULATION METHOD FOR ALLOCATING NET EARING OR LOSSES OF -THE I TRUST FUND; AND PROVIDING FOR VESTING OF CITY CONTRIBdTIONS ON ANY ANNIVERSARY YEAR BASIS was read by the city clerk. Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance #8, Series of 1977, on second reading - seconded seconded by Councilman Wishart. Roll call vote; Councilmembers De Gregorio, aye; Wishart,q aye; Parry, aye; Behrendt, aye; Johnston, aye; Pedersen, aye; tlayor Standley, aye. t i i t i Motion carried. r, ii 1. CITY MANAGER - 1. Snow Obstructin Mail Boxes. City Manager Mahoney had included a note from the U. S. Post Office tell ng res dents that they could not deliver mail if the mail boxes were obstructed.• This was just informational. 2. Elevator Re uia rement in CC and C-1. Art Hougland and Clayton Meyring were directed to do researc on evators and have been working on it for two weeks. Hougland told Elevator Council they had gone to Denver and talked to Division of labor and employment and HEW. Requirements They did not come up with alot; there are some"incline stairways and lifts, but they are designed for residential use. Small commercial elevators for $11,000 are just starting to be manufactured. Hougland told Council that they had also contacted handicapped people and organizations. Hougland pointed out that the City should not hold up adopting the 1976 Uniform Building Code any longer. Councilwoman Pedersen moved that because of the inconsistency in elevator demand, that the whole elevator question in the CC and C-1 district be dumped; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilman De Gregorio reminded Council that the original direction was to find some way to get handicapped people in and out of building, not necessarily by elevators. Council- woman Johnston said that if building are more than two floors, they have to have an elevator. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman De Gregorio. Motion carried. 3. Hunter Creek Water: Mahoney told Council that John Musick, City's water counsel, has asked for act on on his case #2744, opposition to Salvation Ditch Company. Mahoney submitted the stipulation agreement to Council, and asked for a resolution agreeing to Hunter Creek the stipulation agreement. Water and Salvation Councilman Behrendt moved that the City agree to the stipulation agreement as submitted; Ditch seconded by Councilwoman Pedersen. Company Clyde Vagneur left a note with Mahoney opposing the agreement on behalf of the Salvation Ditch Company. All in favor, motion carried. 4. Hunter Creek Exchan e.' Musick requested that the City trade the Salvation Ditch some of the water the C ty owns coming out of Hunter Creek in exchange for letting some water flow through the Roaring Fork. Mahoney stated this is a good program, and asked for a resolution to support this raw water exchange agreement. Councilman Parry moved to support this raw water exchange; seconded by Councilman Wishart All in favor, motion carried. 5. Another Season Economy. City Manager Mahoney told Council he had been approached by the Chaffer o�Commerce and other groups, -the lodge owners, over their concern about Aspen's dependence on two seasons. June, September and October are good months for conference business. These groups recommended building up the economy to accommodate this June, September and October possibility of business. Mahoney told Council this mean looking into a conference center and support facility. How it will be paid for will have to be examined; "a real estate transfer tax was suggested. Mahoney told Council that at the last Chamber meeting he attended, the Chamber would take this question by themselves and develop it and come back to the City with a program. Mahoney explained this item was put on the agenda because he thought Council might be asked to do something. At present, they are not. 6. Minibus. Mahoney told Council this question is starting to develop after sitting Minibus for one year. There is information in the packet on what the City paid for the minibuses how long they were used, and an opinion from a mechanic. Mahoney has to appear in Denver suit with the City's attorney to give depositions. The City is required to provide some information on this case. Mahoney told Council that the County is negotiating for a settlement. Mahoney said he would like a resolution from Council in support of the City' suit, but also allowing some flexibility to negotiate. City Attorney Nuttall stated she did not have a feel of what an acceptable offer would be right now. Mayor Standley directed Mahoney to contact each Councilmember individually to get a reading from them. Councilman De Gregorio moved to adjourn at 10:45 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried. J Katnryn S. Hunter, city C erck Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 28, 1977 Mayor Standley called the joint meeting to order at 5:25 p.m. with Councilmembers Behrend Johnston, Pedersen, Commissioners Child and Edwards, City Manager Mahoney and City Attorney Nuttall present. 1. Cc mu nit Facilities Board Bud et Reu est. Mayor Standley announced that the City had CFB Budget recieved 17,300 from the State H stor cal Society for a planning grant for restoration _..._._._....,_— 0 119 0 Exhibit 13 O 230 lake ave context map and images -. I c, -- key Oviews of front of house Oviews of adjacent neighborhood NEW W IV 0 sr 3 1 230 lake ave & 'd 5 © BendonAdams