HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit B_Application for Interpretation320 W. Main Street
PROPERTY OWNERS:
Robert I. Levy
2099 NW Pine Tree Way
Stuart, FL 34994
Aspen, CO 81611
PROPERTY:
320 W. Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Lots N, O and P, Block 44
City and Townsite of Aspen
Pitkin County, State of Colorado.
Parcel ID No. 273512441010
REPRESENTATIVE:
Richard Y. Neiley, Jr.
Neiley Law Firm, LLC
420 E. Main Street, Suite 230
Aspen, CO 81611
6800 Highway 82, Suite 1
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
(970) 928-9393
aspenlaw@neileylaw.co
APPLICATION FOR LAND USE CODE INTERPRETATION
320 W. Main Street, Aspen, Colorado
Lot A, Historic Landmark
INTRODUCTION
In this Application, Robert I. Levy seeks interpretations of three (3) sections of the Land
Use Code of the City of Aspen as they apply to residential use of the Historic Landmark
Structure at 320 West Main Street:
Section 26.710.180.D.I l.c.i and ii which provide:
c. The following FAR schedule applies to single-family and duplex uses when
developed as the only use of the parcel:
i. Detached residential and duplex dwellings established prior to the adoption of
Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005: 100% of the allowable floor area of an
equivalent -sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. (See R-6 Zone District.)
Receipt of a development order shall constitute the date the use was established.
Replacement after demolition shall not effect a new establishment date for the
purposes of this Section. City historic transferable development rights shall not
permit additional floor area for detached residential and duplex dwellings.
ii. Detached residential and duplex dwellings established after the adoption of
Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005: 80% of the allowable floor area of an
equivalent -sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. (See R-6 Zone District.) City
historic transferable development rights shall not permit additional floor area for
detached residential and duplex dwellings.
Section 26.312.050.0 which provides:
C. Historic property. A lot of record containing a property listed on the Aspen
Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures need not meet the minimum
lot area requirement of its zone district to allow the uses that are permitted and
conditional uses in the district subject to the standards and procedures established
in Chapter 26.415.
Section 26.312.030.A which provides:
A. Authority to continue. A nonconforming structure devoted to a use permitted
in the zone district in which it is located may be continued in accordance with the
provisions of this Chapter.
The residence at 320 West Main Street is known as the Smith-Elisha House, was
constructed in 1886 and designated as a Historic Landmark Structure in 1988 pursuant to
Ordinance No. 56, Series of 1988 recorded December 18, 1988 as Reception No. 352038. At the
time of historic designation, the Smith-Elisha House was used as a residence.
In 2002, the residence was the subject of a Historic Lot Split application approved by
HPC pursuant to Resolution No. 19, Series of 2002, which approved a 500 square foot FAR
bonus for Lot A (320 W. Main Street) to ensure that the previously established residential use
was consistent with the FAR regulations under then existing Office zone district, stating "...the
HPC hereby approves a 500 square foot FAR bonus, for purposes of allowing the existing
construction to remain in place." (Resolution para. 1). At the time of the historic lot split, Lot A
was used as a residential dwelling.
In order to qualify for the FAR bonus for the residence, the owner had to submit a plan
for repair and re -painting of the residence to be approved by staff and implemented by December
31, 2002. (Resolution para. 2). This was done and as a consequence the Subdivision Exemption
Plat was approved by the City and recorded on September 3, 2003 at Plat Book 66, Page 32 in
accordance with City Council Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2002. That Ordinance provides that
"... any development of the lots will comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code
in effect at the time of application" (Section 2, paragraph 5.b). It goes on to state "...all new
development on the lots will conform to the dimensional requirements of the Office zone district,
except the variances approved by the HPC." (Section 2, paragraph 5.c).
In interpreting Ordinance 14, Series of 2002, the City should give effect to all of its
provisions. If City Council intended that the FAR would be established by reference to a zone
district other than the Office zone district, it would not have included Section 2, paragraph 5.c.
Rather, it would simply have stated that all new development of the lots must comply with all
land use code regulations then in effect. Instead, it choose to tie applicable FAR for the lots to
the provisions of the Office zone district. It did not state "as amended" or "as replaced by a
different zone district in the future." City Council unequivocally expressed its intent that the
Office zone district FAR provisions would be used to ensure the right to continue residential uses
on Lot A.
By repairing and re -painting the residence and recording the Subdivision Exemption Plat,
the owners relied on the approvals of HPC and City Council and, therefore, established vested
rights in those approvals through reliance and performance. Notwithstanding the change in the
Land Use Code in 2005 replacing the Office zone district with the Mixed Use zone district,
Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2002 specifically directs that for purposes of determining permitted
FAR, staff must look to the Office zone district regulations as they existed at the time of
approval. This was the clear intent of HPC and City Council in approving the Historic Lot Split
and granting the FAR bonus. Both bodies expressly approved the continued residential use of
320 W. Main Street.
THE RESIDENCE DOES NOT EXCEED PERMITTED FAR
As noted above, the permissible FAR for 320 W. Main Street is to be determined by
reference to the provisions of the Office zone district as it existed in 2002 and, thus, residential
use of the Smith-Elisha House is not constrained by the current zone district regulations.
Although in 2004 a tenant of the building sought approval to use the residence for office
purposes, a use expressly permitted in the zone district, the only regulatory process was to
submit an application for exemption for change of use under the Growth Management Quota
System, which was approved by the Planning Director on January 14, 2004, effective "February
30, 2004". This did not, and did not purport to, change the previously granted vested rights
under the 2002 and 2003 land use approvals granted by HPC and City Council.
The Change of Use that was approved in 2004 was only for the purpose of confirming
that there was exemption from GMQS. The exemption did not invalidate or vacate the vested
approvals received in 2002 and 2003 or the granting of the 500 square foot FAR bonus that was
expressly intended to insure that the residential use of the property conformed to the FAR
requirement for Lot A.
In 2004 both office and residential uses were uses by right in the Office zone district.
Those uses are still both uses by right in the Mixed Use zone district.
The FAR penalty in the 2005 Land Use Code changes applies only to "detached
residential and duplex dwellings established after the adoption of Ordinance No. 7, Series of
2005". 320 W. Main is a detached residential dwelling established long before 2005 and the
specific use as residential was confirmed in 2002 by HPC and City Council. The fact that the
property was used as office space follow the 2004 GMQS exemption does not alter the approvals
granted in 2002 and 2003. Nor does that fact alter the permitted uses in the zone district.
Residential use continues to be a permitted use for the Smith-Elisha House.
Even if the 2004 change of use somehow could be construed as altering the vested rights
granted by City Council in 2002, residential use is still a use permitted by right. Thus, even if
the building is considered too large under staff s proposed interpretation of the applicable FAR,
residential use is expressly permitted by the Land Use Code, even if the building is now
interpreted to be non -conforming as to FAR.
Thus, because the detached residential dwelling (that is, the physical characteristics of the
structure and its use) was established prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005,
and residential use remains a use by right in the zone district, the Smith-Elisha House should not
be subject to the FAR penalty.
USE OF THE RESIDENCE FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE DOES NOT RESULT IN A
NON -CONFORMITY
It appears that staff takes the position that a change of use of 320 W. Main Street to
residential would result in a non -conformity with respect to FAR. However, because this is an
historic structure, there would be no non -conformity.
Section 26.312.050.0 of the Land Use Code provides: "A lot of record containing a
property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures need not meet
the minimum lot area requirement of its zone district to allow the uses that are permitted ... in
the district subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.415." The Smith-
Elisha House complies with all standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.415.
Residential use is a use permitted by right in the MU zone district. Staff has concluded
that the land use approvals granted in 2002 for the property no longer allow residential use
because the historic structure now exceeds permissible FAR for the size of the lot under the
current MU zone district regulations. Under staff s interpretation, the minimum lot size required
for residential use of the existing historic structure of 3,306 square feet of FAR in the MU zone
district is now 6,263 square feet. The lot is 4,500 square feet in area and is, thus, according to
staff, now non -conforming in size for the residential use permitted in the zone district.
Because the non -conforming lot size regulations do not apply to historic structures, 320
W. Main Street may be used for residential purposes and the use would not be non -conforming.
Even if the historic structure is now considered non -conforming for residential use, the
Land Use Code does not prohibit a change of use that would be non -conforming as to FAR.
There is no provision in the Land Use Code that prohibits such a change of use, so long as the
use is one permitted by right in the zone district. Section 26.312.030.A provides "A non-
conforming structure devoted to a use permitted in the zone district in which it is located may be
continued...."
Finally, with respect to the "change of use" issue, the only "process" required under the
Land Use Code is a determination that the change is exempt from GMQS. As a historic
structure, the change in use to residential is exempt. There is no other Land Use Review
process. Nor does the Land Use Code say anywhere that creating a non -conformity in
connection with a change of use from office to residential in the MU zone district, or elsewhere
for that matter, is prohibited. As pointed out above, the Land Use Code actually allows such a
change for a historic structure.
Because Section 26.312.050.0 expressly provides that historic landmark structures need
not meet the minimal lot area requirements for permitted uses in the zone district, the Smith-
Elisha House does not have to meet the minimal lot size for residential use in connection with
the existing structure. Rather, that code section expressly confirms that a non -conformity does
not result from the change in use to residential simply because the lot does not meet the
minimum lot area requirement for the zone district.
REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATIONS
Based upon the foregoing discussion of land use approvals and regulations, the Applicant
respectfully requests that the Community Development Director make the following
interpretations with respect to the historic landmark structure at 320 W. Main Street under the
following Land Use Code provisions:
Section 26.710.180,D. l l .c.i — that the language "established prior to the adoption of
Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005" specifically applies to detached residential dwellings that were
historically used as residences regardless of any other uses to which the dwelling may have also
been put as permitted under the MU zone district. In connection therewith, the Applicant
requests that the Community Development Director acknowledge that Section 2, paragraph 5.c
of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2002 expressly requires that the determination of applicable FAR
for 320 W. Main Street must be based upon the Office zone district regulations as they existed in
2002, notwithstanding the subsequent change in the zone district regulations implemented by
Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005, The effect of this interpretation shall, therefore, be that the
historic landmark structure at 320 W. Main Street may be utilized for residential purposes
without regard to the "FAR penalty" of Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005.
Section 26.312.050.0 — that this section of the Land Use Code establishes that historic
landmark structures may be used for residential purposes even though the FAR of the structure
exceeds that which would otherwise be permitted based upon the minimum lot area of the zone
district. That is, so long as the use is permitted in the underlying zone district, in this case the
MU zone district, the property may be developed for residential uses even though the structure
exceeds the amount of FAR that would otherwise be allowed based upon the lot size. The effect
of this interpretation is that 320 W. Main Street shall be permitted to be used for residential
purposes even though the dwelling structure exceeds the FAR that would currently be permitted
in the MU zone district based upon the minimum lot area requirement of the zone district. That
is, under the referenced land use section, use of the historic landmark structure on 320 W. Main
Street for residential purposes does not result in a non -conformity.
Section 26.312.030.A — that this section of the Land Use Code allows the historic
landmark structure at 320 W. Main Street to continue to be used for residential purposes even
though the structure may be considered non -conforming as to FAR so long as the structure was
historically used for residential purposes and that use is permitted by right in the MU zone
district.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
1. Authorization Letter from Robert I. Levy
2. Certification of Ownership
3. Vicinity Map
4. Resolution No. 19, Series of 2002 of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
Approving an Application for a Historic Landmark Lot Split for the Property Located at
320 W. Main Street recorded June 19, 2002 as Reception No. 468870
5. Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2002 — City of Aspen approving subdivision exemption for a
Historic Lot Split recorded September 5, 2002 as Reception No. 471904
6. Historic Lot Split Plat recorded September 3, 2003 in Plat Book 66 at Page 32
7. Pitkin County Pre -Application Conference Summary
8. Pitkin County Community Development Department Agreement for Payment of Land Use
Application Fees
- - F, aw 0
FAII IS I ff�
ROBERT I. i.Evy
2099 NW Pine Tree Way
Stuart, Flordia 34994
klay 2, 2019
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street, Third Floor
Aspen, Colorado 8 1611
Re: 320 West Main Street, County of Vitkin
State of Colorado— Parcel 11) No. 273512441010
Dear Sir/M.adaru:
Please accept this letter as authorization for Richard Y. Neiley, Jr, and tile Neiley Law
Firm, LLC to represent Robert 1, Levy in connection with a [,and Ilse, Application for I -and Use
Code interpretation or determination, change ofuse, and any and all other land use applications
to the City ofAspen related to the use of 320 West Main Street, Aspen. Colorado for residential
purposes, including any applications related to modifications to the improvements of the above -
referenced property.
Robert 1. Levy hereby consents to and assumes all rights and obligations associated -,vith
the land rise application or applications for the subject real property.
FA, - I
MVMVA Viol
40TI
40 a 5 lu
CERTIFICATION OF OWNERSHIP
The undersigned, Richard Y. Neiley, Jr., an attorney licensed to practice law in the State
of Colorado, Colorado Attorney Registration No. 9878, hereby certifies as follows:
1. The owner of the real property located at 320 West Main Street, Aspen, Colorado,
as described in the Warranty Deed appended hereto as Exhibit A, Pitkin County, Colorado, is
Robert I. Levy, 2099 NW Pine Tree Way, Stuart, Florida 34994.
2. There are no mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts or agreements
affecting the use and development of the subject real property or that could conflict with the
approvals requested for the property.
3. There is legal access to the subject real property via Main Street, a public right of
way.
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
COUNTY OF GARFIELD )
The foregoing Certificate of Ownership was acknowledged and signed before me this
day of May, 2019, by RICHARD Y. NEILEY, JR.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: M(\v ) I ,-�,01-Z
ANDREA JO CROUSE
NOTARY�
STATE OF COLORAPO
NOTARY ID 02,0184009874
MY Cornminion
Illllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
RECEPTION#: 661216, R: $23.00, D: $320.00
DOC CODE: WD
Documentary Fee $ 320.00 Pg 1 of 3, 10/1612018 at 02:45.39 PM
rY Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED, made October 15, 2018,
Between 320 WEST MAIN LLC A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
of the County of DuPage, State of Illinois, GRANTOR,
AND ROBERT 1. LEVY, GRANTEE
whose legal address is: 2099 N.W. PINE TREE WAY, STUART, FLORIDA 34994
of the County of Martin, State of Florida
WITNESSETH, That for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor has granted,
bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey and confirm
unto the Grantee, his heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together with improvements, if any,
situate and lying and being in the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, described as follows:
LOT A,
HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN STREET, according to the Final Plat recorded
September 3, 2003 in Plat Book 66 at Page 32,
TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise
appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the
estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor either in law or equity, of, in and to
the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the
said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the Grantee, his heirs and
assigns forever. And the Grantor, for its self, its successors and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain,
and agree to and with the Grantee, his heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of
these presents, it is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and
indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority
to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free
and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and
restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except those matters as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The Grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER
DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the Grantee, his heirs
and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The
singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of gender shall be applicable
to all genders.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed.
SIGNATURES ON PAGE 2
CITY OF ASPEN
WRETT PAID 1 i OF ASPEN
DATE REP Iiiiiiiiii�EXHIBIT
O. 5^ `�-7 HRETT PAID
DATE 11511 � ENO. 5-5"o 7'6
RECEPTION#: 651215, 10/15/2018 at 02:45:39 PM, Pgs 2 of 3, Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
SIGNATURE PAGE TO WARRANTY DEED PAGE 2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Grantor has executed this deed.
320 WEST MAIN LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
BY:
KENNETH `S. WITKOWSKI, VICE PRESIDENT
STATE OFL� _}
ss
COUNTY OF l.(Ta-a )
� -
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged beforeme thisjZ_1hday of OCTOBER, 2018,
by KENNETH S. WITKOWSKI, VICE PRESIDENT OF 320 WEST MAIN LLC A DELAWARE LIMITED
I IARII ITY MMPANY.
WITNESS my hand and official seal
my commission expires: (.0 (�Q —20
2
AtL'c
Notary Public
OFFICIAL SEAL
MICHEU.E CONFUORTO
NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE Of ILLINOIS
W CoMmISSION EXPIRES:016120
RECEPTION#: 651215, 10115/2018 at 02:45:39 PM, Pgs 3 of 3, Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
EXHIBIT "A"
1. Taxes for the year 2018, and subsequent years, not yet due or payable.
2. Exceptions and reservations as set forth in the Act authorizing the issuance of the Patent for the City and Townsite
of Aspen recorded March 1, 1897 in Book 139 at Page 216.
3. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City of Aspen recorded December 6, 1887 in Book
59 at Page 129 providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or
copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws".
4. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions of Easement Agreement as set forth in instrument recorded
December 11, 1986 in Book 524 at Page 964,
5. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth In Resolution of the City Council recorded
December 18, 1992 In Book 698 at Page 213 as Resolution No. 56.
6. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Quit Claim Deed recorded September 2, 1999 as
Reception No. 435152.
7. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Aspen Historic
Preservation Commission recorded June 19, 2002 as Reception No. 468870 as Resolution No. 19.
8. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Aspen Historic
Preservation Commission recorded July 5, 2002 as Reception No. 469507 as Resolution No. 21.
9. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2002 by
Aspen City Council recorded September 8, 2002 as Reception No. 47.1904.
10. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Subdivision Agreement recorded September 3, 2003
as Reception No..487833.
11. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of subject property recorded September 3, 2003 in
Plat Book 66 at Pale 32.
12. Any and all leases and/or tenancies.
13. Encroachment of stone retaining wall as disclosed by Survey of Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. dated September
2018 as Job No. 18234A.
I - 0 JUV I ol
FA, I
45YOVMTJ
m m as
FAW, I NOW
4SYMYMTJ
40 m Oulu
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 320 W. MAIN STREET, LOTS N, O, AND
P, BLOCK 44, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO.19, SERIES OF 2002
Parcel ID #: 2735-12441-005
WHEREAS, the applicants, Scott and Mary Caroline McDonald requested a Historic
Landmark Lot Split for the property located at 320 W. Main Street, Lots N, ®, and P,
Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, in order to complete a Historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant shall meet
the following requirements of Aspen Land Use Code: Section 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4),
Section 26,470.070(C), and Section 26.415.010(D.), which are as follows:
26.480.030(A)(2), Subdivision Exemptions, Lot Split
The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family
dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where
all of the following conditions are met:
a) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin
County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land
is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided
after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on
March 24, 1969; and
b) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to
the requirements of the underlying zone district Any lot for which
development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to
Section 26.100, 040(A)(1)(c).
c) The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the
subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a
"lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.100. 040(C)(1)(a); and
d) A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to
the requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of the
Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further
subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built
without receipt of applicable, approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth
management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100.
e) Recordation, The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be
recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on
the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180)
468870
Page: 1 of 5
06/19/2002 01:04P
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 25,00 D 0.00
days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the GYty Council will be required for a
showing ofgood cause:
In the case where an existing single-family dwelling occupies a site which is
eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to
application for a lot split
g) Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split
shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a
single-family home.
26.450 030(A)(4), Subd1vision Exemptions, Historic Landmark Lot Split
The split of a lot that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and
Structures for the development of one new single-family dwelling may receive a
subdivision exemption if it meets the following standards:
a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of six thousand (6,000)
square feet in size and be located in the R-6, R-15, R-15A, RMF, or O zone district.
b. The total FAR for both residences shall be established by the
size of the parcel and the zone district where the property is located. The total FAR
for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat.
In the Office zone district, the following shall apply to the calculation of maximum
floor area for lots created through the historic landmark lot split. Note that the
total FAR shall not be stated on the Subdivision Exemption Plat because the floor
area will be affected by the use established on the property:
If all buildings on what was the fathering parcel remain wholly residential in use,
the maximum floor area will be as stated in the R-6 zone district.
If any portion of a building on a lot created by the historic landmark lot split is in
commercial/office use, then the allowed floor area for that lot shall be the floor area
allowed for all uses other than residential in the zone district, If the adjacent parcel
created by the lot split remains wholly in residential use, then the floor area on that
parcel shall be limited to the maximum allowed on a lot of its size for residential use
according to the R-6 standards.
If there is commercial/office use on both newly created lots, the maximum floor
area for all uses other than residential in the zone district will be applied.
C. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements
of the underlying zone district. The variances provided in Section
26.415.120(B)(1)(a),(b), and (c) are only permitted on the parcels that will contains a
historic structure. The FAR bonus will be applied to the maximum FAR allowed on
the original parcel; and
468870
Pace: 2 0( 5
08/19/2002 01;04P
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 25.00 D 0.00
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has found that the review standards
are met in order to grant a 500 square foot FAR bonus and a waiver of parking spaces that
cannot be provided on the site using the following criteria:
Section 26.415.110.C, FloorArea Bonus
1. In selected circumstances the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500)
additional square feet of 'allowable floor area for projects involving
designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, It must be
demonstrated that:
a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; and
b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the
addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual
integrity of the historic building and/or
c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic
appearance; and/or
d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns
found in the historic building's forth, materials or openings; and/or
e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or
f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the
building; and/or
g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or
h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained.
2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is
contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's
assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to
demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that
demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood
of being awarded additional floor area.
3. The decision to grant a Floor Area Bonus for Major Development projects
will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan,
pursuant to Section 26.415.070(D). No development application that includes
a request for a Floor Area Bonus may be submitted until after the applicant
has met with the HPC in a work session to discuss how the proposal might
meet the bonus considerations.
Section 26.415.110.C, Parking Variance,
Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable
to contain the number of on -site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning.
Commercial designated historic properties may receive waivers of payment -in -lieu
fees for parking reductions.
1. The parking reduction and waiver of payment -In -flue fees may be
approved upon a finding by -the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an
468870
I ` Page: 3 of S
II
I 06/19/2002 01:04P
II
I� �l
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 25.00 0 e.00
adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a
designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic
district; and
WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated May 8, 2002 performed an analysis
of the application based on the standards, and recommended the application be approved
with conditions; and
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on May 8, 2002, the Historic Preservation
Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and
approved the application by a vote of 4 to 2.
That the HPC recommends Council approval of a Historic Landmark Lot Split into two
4,500 square foot lots for 320 W, Main Street, Lots N, O, and P, Block 44, City and
Townsite of Aspen, Aspen, Colorado, with the following conditions:
1. The HPC hereby approves a 500 square foot FAR bonus, for the purpose of
allowing the existing construction to remain in place. The bonus is not being
awarded to allow any expansion on the property.
2. In order to qualify for the bonus, the applicant must meet design guideline 2.2. A
plan for repair and repainting of the Smith-Elisha house must be submitted to
HPC staff by June 30, 2002, and the work must be completed by December 31,
2002.
3. The HPC hereby waives any of the required parking that cannot be contained on
the site in the form of legal sized spaces.
4. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and
approved by the Community Development Department and recorded in the office
of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of
final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision
exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the plat invalid
and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of
good cause. Asa minimum, the subdivision plat shall:
a. Meet the requirements of Section 26.480 of the Aspen Municipal Code;
b. Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be
prohibited from further subdivision and any development of the lots will
comply with the applicable provisions of the land Use Code in effect at
the time of application;
c. Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the lots will
conform to the dimensional requirements of the Office zone district,
except the variances approved by the HPC.
5. The FAR. on the two lots created by this lot split shall be based on the use of the
buildings. At this time the Smith-Elisha house is intended to be a residence and
the carriage house is mixed -use. The maximum FAR for each lot may be affected
by applicable lot area reductions (i.e., slopes, access easements, etc.). The
applicant shall verify with the City Zoning Officer the total allowable FAR on
488870
Page; 4 of 5
06/19/2002 01:04P
SILVIR DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 25.00 D 0.0e
each lot, taking into account any and all applicable lot area reductions. The
property shall be subdivided into two parcels, Lots A and B, each 4,500 square
feet in size.
6. Sidewalk. Curb and -Gutter - The site is located on Main Street, where pedestrian
improvements are an important goal, The applicant must refer to the City
Engineering Department for required Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter in front of the
property.
T With regard to any future development of these properties, the HPC wishes to state
that there are unique historic qualities to the site that will require strict compliance
with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. These qualities
include the historic relationship between the primary structure (the Smith-Elisha
house) and the secondary structure (the carriage house), the overall setting, open
lawn area, and historic landscape, and the high visibility that the carriage, house and
the eastern side of the Smith-Elisha house have now. The board has reservations
that strict compliance with the guidelines will allow the maximum allowable floor
area to be achieved.
8. No fence shall be permitted to separate the Smith-Elisha house and the carriage
house. This shall be recorded on the plat as a note.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 8th day
of May, 2002.
Approv to Form:
lDavi Hoefer, Assistant Cky Attorney
Approved as to Content:
HISTORIC PRESERVAMN COMMISSION
Sukafina did, Chair .
ATTES :
Kathy Strieldand, Chief Deputy Clerk
468870
page: 5 of 5
06/19/2002 01:04P
SILVIA QAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 25.00 0 0.00
FA - I
MVVVXA,I
m - a 5
471904
II
IIIIIIIIIIIII
Illlilllllll IIII
( III II III III I DOM/2002 08; 11A
SIGVIA OAVI5 PCTKIN COUNTY GO R 21,00 Q 0,00
ORDINANCE NO, 14
(Series of 2002)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, TO GRANT APPROVAL FOR A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION
FOR AN HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN STREET,
LOTS N, 0, AND P, BLOCK 44, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
PARCEL ID#, 2735-I24-4I-005
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26,480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section
26.470,070(C), and Section 26.415,010(D) of the Municipal Code, a Historic Landmark
Lot Split is a subdivision exemption subject to review and approval by City Council after
obtaining a recommendation from the HistoHe Preservation Commission (hereinafter
HPC); and
WHEREAS, the applicants, Scott and Mary Caroline McDonald, owners of 320
W. Main Street, Lots N, O, and P, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, have requested
approval to split a 9,000 square foot parcel into two lots of 4,500 square feet each; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has reviewed the
application and recommends approval of the Historic Landmark Lot Split; and
WHEREAS, the HPC reviewed the request for the historic lot split at a properly
noticed public hearing on May 8, 2002, and reviewed a setback variance request at a
public hearing on June 1.2, 2002, and recommanded.approval; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council . has reviewed and considered the
subdivision exemption under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as
identified herein, has reviewed and considered those recommendations made by the
Community Development Department, and the Historic Preservation Commission, and
has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Historic Landmark Lot Split meets or
exceeds all applicable development standards of the above referenced Municipal Code
sections; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary
for the public health, safety and welfare,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT,
471904
I I fl i l l I1111 llf 8 l fff l Il f l 1.1 l 09/0b/200M UR
5JVA DAVIS PTTKJN COUNTY CC R 21.00 00,00
Section 1
Pursuant to Sections 26,480,030(A)(2) and (4), Section 26,470.070(C), and
Section 26.415.010(D) of the Municipal Code, and subject .to those conditions of
approval as specified herein, dIe City Council finds as follows in ri gaud to the
subdivision exemption:
1, The applicant's submission is complete and sufficient to afford review and
evaluation for approval; and
2. The subdivision exemption is consistent with the purposes of subdivision as
outlined in Section 26.480 of the Municipal Code, which purposes include: assist
in the orderly and efficient development of the City; ensure the proper
distribution of development; encourage the well -planned subdivision of land by
establishing standards for the design of a subdivision; improve land records and
survey monuments by establishing standards for surveys and plats; coordinate the
construction of public facilities with the need for public facilities; safeguard the
interests of the public and the subdivider and provide consumer protection for the
purchaser; acquire and ensure the maintenance of public open spaces and parks,
provide procedures so that development encourages the preservation of important
and unique natural or scenic features, including but not limited to mature trees or
of
indigenous vegetation, bluff, hillsides, or similar geolagie.features, or edges a
rivers and other bodies of water, and, promote the health, safety and general
al
welfare of the residents of the City of Aspen,
Section 2
pursuant to the findings set forth in Section 1, above, the City Council does
hereby grant an Historic Landmark Lot Split subdivision exemption for 320 W. Main
street with the following conditions.
1, The HPC has approved a 500 square foot PAR bonus, for the purpose of allowing
the existing structures to remain in place, The bonus is n6t being awarded to allow
any expansion on the property. This condition shall be noted on the plat. .
2, In order to qualify for the bonus, the applicant must meet "City of Aspen Historic
preservation Design Guideline 2.2." A plan for repair and repainting of the
Smith-1 lisha house must be submitted to HPC staff by July 3 t, 2002, and the
work must be completed by December 31, 2002, The City will require a financial
security be posted by the applicant to ensure that this condition is met.
3:. The HPC has waived any of the required parking that cannot be contained on the
site in the form of legal sized spaces, This condition shall be noted on the plat.
4. The HPC has granted a 3 foot sideyard setback variance along the east side of the
ch
Smith-owne s House,
es re o have hreuon of two new lots share antexi existing sidewalk, partially uittfied
was
by the owner's
`` 47 � 904
�Illl 1 papa: 3 of 4
`4 111 II III I l 11 �� 111 09/0v/2002 09:11A
II II 0.60 � � �� I R
• 511.4IFl DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO P
determined that as long as the historic carriage house remains the only structure
on the east half of Lot 0 and all of Lot P, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen,
said building shall be accessed from the street via the shared sidewalk which runs
down the east side of the adjacent Smith Elisha house, No new sidewalk can be
created from Main Street to the carriage house unless approved by the UPC. This
condition shall be noted on the plat.
emption agreement shall be reviewed and
A subdivision plat and subdivision ex
approved by the Community Development Department and recorded in the office
of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of
final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision
exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the, plat invalid
and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of
good cause, Asa minimum, the subdivision plat shall:
a. Meet.the requirements of Section 26,480 of the Aspen Municipal Coda;
b. Contain a plat note stating 'that the lots contained therein shall be
prohibited from further subdivision and any development of the lots will
comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at
the time of application;
G. Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the lots will
conform to the dimensional requirements of the Office zone district,.
except the variances approved by the HPC,
4. The FAR on the two lots created by this lot split shall be based on' the use of the
buildings. At this time the -Smith Elisha house is.=intended to be aresidence.,and
th' 'ddpriage house is mixed -use• The maximum FAR for each lot may be affected
by applicable lot area reductions (i.a,, slopes, access easements, etc•). The
applicant shall verify with the City. Zoning Officer the total allowable FAR on
each lot, taking into account any and all applicable lot area reductions• The
property shall be subdivided into two parcels, Lots A and B, each 4,500 square
feet in size, This condition shall be noted on the plat,
The site is located on Main Street, where pedestrian improvements are an important
goal, The applicant must verify that the existing sidewalk, curb, and gutter in. front
of the property meet the requirements of the City Engineering Department, or
reetify any inadequacies prior to filing the plat,
6, part of the historic significance of this property lies in the fact that this is a
significant residence with a large carriage house on the site. These two structures
t= are strongly associated architecturally and establish a strong historic context on
the site. The HPC will review any future development on the property, however,
as a condition of approval of This Iot split, a fence shall not be allowed to be
1=
construoied between the two 'newly create lots, which would separate them
visually from each other. This shall be noted on the plat.
Section 3
This Ordinance shall not. have any effect on existing litigation and shall not
operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of
471904
IIII III 1 1� I Pegs; b of A
'ill II III' III 69/0b/200202 09; 11A
I III I I II I I II 21,00 p 0.00
SrI.VIA DAMS PITKTN COUNTY 00 R
the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted
and concluded under such prior ordinances,
Section 4
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is
jurisdiction,
for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent
such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section J
A public hearing on the Ordinance waslteld on the 24th day of June, 2002, in the
City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado,
ED, READ A?qD ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by
I VTI2aDUC
the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 13"` day of May,002,
V ref" ��
ATTESC } en [Cali Kl e ud, Mayor
1
th- S= h, City Clerk
W
ALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 24th day of J X
2001
elegy Ka K erud, Mayor
Approved asto'forrn:
may...
John , Worcester
City Attorney
Ali 14''
1
.a;(24"
t
copy v
I
.11;
An.
W.-
19-
PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
DATE: April 23, 2019
PLANNER: Mile Kraemer, 429.2741. mil<e.kraemer@cityofaspen.com
PROJECT NAME AND ADDRESS: 320 W Main Street, Smith-Elisha Lot Split, Lot A
PARCEL ID# 273512410010
OWNER: Robert Levy 1
REPRESENTATIVE: Rick Neiley. 928-9393. aspenlaw@neileVIaw.com
ZONING: Mixed Use (MU)
DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is part of the Smith-Elisha Historic Lot Split approved pursuant to Ordinance 14, Series 2002. The
historic lot split plat created Lot A and Lot B and was recorded at B66, P32. Both lots are developed with designated
historic structures. Lot A is the subject of this application and is 4,500 square feet in size. The Lot is developed with a
3,306 square foot structure that has historically contained both residential and commercial uses.
The subject property is located within the Mixed Use (MU) zone district which permits both residential and commercial
uses. The existing building on Lot A most recently contained a commercial use that was approved pursuant to a change
in use approval in 2004. To date, the building and property has operated in compliance with the MU zone district
requirements. The applicant proposes to convert the existing approved commercial use to a residential use. The lot
split pla I t5 recorded at BK66, P32 contains plat note #5 which states that "Development of the lots will comply with the
applicable provisions of the land use code in effect at the time of application". The current Land Use Code requires that
when a lot is developed with a detached single family dwelling after the adoption of Ordinance 7, Series 2005, the
allowable floor area shall be limited to 80% of the R-6 zone district FAR schedule. With a lot size of 4,500 square feet,
the subject property is limited to an allowable floor area of 2,256 sq. ft. The existing structure is approximately 3,306
square feet in size and exceeds the 2,256 sq ft single family allowable floor area in the MU zone. Converting the
structure to a residence would create a non -conformity.
ant to Land Use Code Section 26.312.050.C: Non -conforming lots of record —
permitted to exceed the allowable floor area in the MU zone district. Staff
the Applicant has requested a process for this request. Staff has determined
i Land Use Code section that could have broad reaching policy implications
nterpretation application is the correct procedure.
Section Title
Interpretations of Title
Non -conforming lots of record -Historic Property
J Use Application and Land Use Code are below:
Land Use Code
nd determination
REQUIRED LAND USE REVIEW:
• Interpretations of Title
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 1 P: 970.920.5000 1 F: 970,920.5197 1 cityofaspen.com
PLANNING FEES: $81 deposit
TOTAL DEPOSIT: $81.00 (additional/lesser planning hours are billed/refunded at a rate of $325/hour).
APPLICATION CHECKLIST —These items should first be submitted in a paper copy.
❑ Attachments 1 and 2 of the Land Use Application (Signed Agreement to Pay and Land Use Application form)
❑ Pre -Application Conference Summary (This document).
❑ A letter signed by the applicant, with the applicant's name, address and telephone number, stating the
name, address and telephone number of any representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.
❑ Written request for determination and explanation, which may include:
® Any relevant previous building permits and land use approvals.
® Recorded Plats.
® Floor Plans.
® Other documents.
Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:
❑ 2 copies of the complete application packet and drawings.
❑ 1 digital PDF copy of the application.
❑ 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
PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and ROBERT I. LEVY (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS
FOLLOWS:
1. APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for 320 W. Main Street, Aspen,
Colorado 81611 (hereinafter, THE PROJECT).
2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Ordinance No. 012-2016 establishes a
fee structure for land use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a
determination of application completeness. The fee structure is based on the County's policy that
development shall pay, in full, the cost of development review in Pitkin County. Fees have been set to be
consistent and fair to the public and to reflect the expense incurred in providing such services to the public.
3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed
project, it may not be possible at the time of application to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in
processing the application.
4. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that fees charged for the processing of land use applications shall
accumulate if an application includes more than one type of land use review.
5. COUNTY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for COUNTY staff to complete
processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or Board of County
Commissioners to enable the Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to make legally
required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision.
6. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the COUNTY's waiver of its right to
collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay a base fee in the
amount of $81.00 which is based on n/a hours of staff time, and if actual time spent by staff to process the
application exceeds the average number of hours by more than 20%, then the COUNTY will bill the
APPLICANT quarterly for the additional time spent. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of
the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for
suspension of processing.
PITKIN COUNTY APPLICANT
Cindy Houben
Community Development Director
Richard Y. Neile Jr.
P t Na e
Aignature
Date: June 6, 2019
Mailing Address:
Neiley Law Firm LLC
6800 Highway 82, Suite 1
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
���n�'