HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit C_Application for Appeal•; 1 ' 1 1 1; 1
PROPERTY OWNER:
Robert I. Levy
2099 NW Pine Tree Way
Stuart, FL 34994
Aspen, CO 81611
PROPERTY:
320 W. Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Lot A, Smith-Elisha Lot Split
City and Townsite of Aspen
Pitkin County, State of Colorado.
Parcel ID No. 273 51244 1010
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
APPEAL OF CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
LAND USE INTERPRETATION FOR CHANGE OF USE OF A
HISTORIC LANDMARK STRUCTURE
320 W. Main Street, Aspen, Colorado
Lot A, Historic Landmark
In this Appeal, Robert L Levy ("Appellant") seeks review and reversal of the June 3,
2019 City of Aspen Community Development Department Land Use Interpretation which
prohibits the Historic Landmark Smith Elisha House located at 320 West Main Street from being
used as a single family residence. The Aspen Community Development Department Land Use
Interpretation is appended hereto as Attachment 1.
On June 7, 2019, the Appellant submitted an Application for Land Use Code
Interpretation in which he requested Planning Director interpretation of the following Sections of
the Land Use Code:
Section 26.710.180.D.I I .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
requested 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 would 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 would be that 320 W. Main Street would 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. Appellant incorporates the entire Application for Land Use Interpretation herein as if set
forth verbatim. The Application is appended hereto as Attachment 2.
Contemporaneously with the application for interpretation, the Appellant submitted an
Application for Change of Use of a Historic Structure seeking GMQS Exemption for a change
from office use to detached single family residential use.
Appellant seeks to be able to use the Smith Elisha House as a single family residence, as
it has been used for approximately 122 of its 135 year existence. Appellant does not propose any
changes to the exterior of the structure, does not propose to enlarge any aspect of the structure
and simply seeks to use the historic home as his personal residence.
The Smith Elisha House property, including the historic Carriage House, was granted
approval for a Historic Landmark Lot Split by Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2002. That
Ordinance is appended hereto as Attachment 3. As part of that Ordinance, City Council
required two plat notes as follows: "At a minimum, the subdivision plat shall:"
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.
These plat notes were incorporated onto the Historic Landmark Lot Split Plat for 320 W.
Main Street as Plat Notes 1 and 5. The Plat is appended hereto as Attachment 7. The plat notes
are significant to this Appeal because the approvals granted by the City as incorporated into the
Plat and relied upon by the property owner in completing the subdivision of the property and
performing required improvements to the Smith Elisha House, make it clear that the dimensional
requirements for the property are those defined in the Office Zone District.
The dimensional requirements established by the Office Zone District as they existed in
2002 when the Land Use approvals were granted by the City are appended hereto as Attachment
4.
In 2004, the tenant in the Smith Elisha House requested GMQS Exemption to utilize the
property for office purposes. That change of use was granted by the Community Development
Department. The change of use did not require a public hearing or public notification and did
not result in any changes or amendments to the prior Land Use approvals.
In 2005, pursuant to Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005, the City made modifications to the
Mixed Use Zone District. At that time, the Smith Elisha House was in the Mixed Use Zone
District, which had previously been known as the Office Zone District.
FA
One of the changes resulting from Ordinance 7, Series of 2005 was a reduction in
permissible Floor Area Ratio for single family detached residential structures in the Mixed Use
Zone District, to 80% of the allowable FAR of the R-6 Zone District Regulations.
The Smith Elisha House currently sits on a 4,500 square foot lot. Under current zone
district regulations, the Smith Elisha House, which contains 3,306 square feet of FAR, would
require a lot size of 6,263 square feet for residential purposes. Under the Office Zone District
regulations that existed at the time of the 2002 Land Use approvals, the 4,500 square foot lot
allowed for use of the historic 3,306 square foot structure as a residence. In fact, the Historic
Preservation Commission granted a 500 square foot bonus as part of the Historic Landmark Lot
Split Exemption so as to ensure that the size of the Smith Elisha House would be conforming for
the 4,500 square foot lot.
Because of the elimination of the Office Zone District and the adoption of the Mixed Use
Zone District, the Community Development Department has taken the position that residential
use of the Smith Elisha House will now create a prohibited non -conforming use under the Mixed
Use Zone District Regulations.
In the Application for Land Use Interpretation, Appellant requested an interpretation that
change of use from office to residential would not result in a non -conformity with respect to
FAR. In this regard, Appellant relied upon two sections of the Land Use Code:
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.
These provisions of the Land Use Code are appended hereto as Attachment 5.
The plain language of the non -conforming structure regulations makes it clear that even
though the size of a historic landmark structure may exceed that which is permitted in the zone
district for residential use because of lot size, that use is not deemed non -conforming so long as it
is a permitted use in the zone district. The Planning Director's refusal to interpret the Land Use
Code in accordance with the plain language quoted above constitutes an abuse of discretion.
In the Community Development Department Land Use Interpretation, the Planning
Director states: "As a form of development, a Change of Use request must show that not only
does the use comply with permitted uses allowed within the zone district, but also the
dimensional requirements (e.g. Floor Area or parking standards)." (Page 3.) Appellant
considers this statement to exceed the jurisdiction of the Planning Director because there is no
such requirement found in the City of Aspen Land Use Code.
Single Family Residential Use is a use permitted by right in both the Office and Mixed
Use Zone Districts. There is no provision in the Land Use Code that states that change of use of
a historic structure from office to single family residential must comply with the dimensional
requirements of the zone district. To the contrary, because residential use is a use permitted by
right, and the change of use is exempt from GMQS mitigation obligations, the change of use
should have been permitted and the Planning Director's refusal to allow the change of use
constitutes an abuse of discretion.
Furthermore, the language of Land Use Code Section 26.710.180 when properly
interpreted does not require a reduction in FAR for residential use of the Smith Elisha House:
The Mixed Use Zone District regulations, Sections 26.710.1 80.D. I Lee and ii 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.
The Mixed Use Zone District regulations are appended hereto as Attachment 6.
The Smith Elisha House as a structure was "established" as a detached residential
dwelling long before the adoption of Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2005. The use of that house for
residential purposes was also established long before 2005 notwithstanding that an
administrative acknowledgment of exemption from GMQS mitigation was granted in 2004 to
allow another use permitted in the zone district. The refusal of the Planning Director to
recognize that residential uses of the Smith Elisha House had been established long before 2005
and, therefore, the property was not subject to the FAR penalty was an abuse of discretion.
4
For the foregoing reasons, the reasons set forth in Appellant's Application for Land Use
Code Interpretation and for such additional reasons and explanations as may be provided at the
public meeting before City Council with respect to this Appeal, the Appellant respectfully
requests that the interpretation adopted by the Community Development Director be reversed
and that City Council confirm that the Smith Elisha House may be used for single family
residential purposes.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
1. City of Aspen Community Development Department Land Use Interpretation effective
date, July 3, 2019
2. Application for Land Use Interpretation
3. 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
4. City of Aspen Land Use Code, 2002, Office Zone District, Section 26.710.180
5. City of Aspen Land Use Code, current code, Non -conforming Structures, Section
26.312.030
6. City of Aspen Land Use Code, current code, Mixed -Use (MU) Zone District, Section
26.710.180
7. Final Plat of Historic Lot Split at 320 W. Main Street recorded September 3, 2003 in Plat
Boole 66 at Page 32
8. Agreement to Pay Application Fees
9. Land Use Application Form
R
CITY OF ASPEN
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
LAND USE INTERPRETATION
JURISDICTION: City of Aspen
APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: 26.312.030 (A) Authority to continue
26.312.050(C) Historic property
26.710.180 Mixed -Use
EFFECTIVE DATE:
July 3, 2019
WRITTEN BY: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director
Jessica GarrOw,
:,, APPROVED: � Colnt11unity Development Director
The 'Community Development department is issuing this Interpretation regarding an
�gnated property (320 W. Main Street) in determining what, if any, parameters are applicable
Re of the property from its currently approved office use to a single-family residence.
vI%,Izl998, a designated historic landmark building, containing what is known as the Smith
xr`�d_ a carriage house was granted an administrative Change in Use by the Community
tYP.tnr°tomlanae the Smith Elisha House from an office use to a single-family residence.
was .granted an historic landmark lot split, after a recently passed code
k lot splits in the Office (now known as the Mixed Use) zone district.
lot to be divided into two, 4,500 sq. ft. lots, with Lot A containing the
i residence) and Lot B containing the carriage house ' (a mixed -use
a Change ii Use request was applied for and administratively granted by the
rrt Dnectato vacate the single-family residence use of the Smith Elisha house and
r�
use=�i 3, .: A).
V.
Council ;.adopted' Ordinance No. 7 which made changes to the zone district, inclusive of
e zonictfron Office to Mixed Use and overhauling the permitted and conditional uses of
s
;tact` aszel a the dimensional standards. Of significance, was the introduction of a twenty
�r ._,
EM
ecltcon in Floor Area with the establishment of a single-family or duplex residence after
rs ___
date of place today, although there have been other,
the ordinance. This requirement is still.in
changes to the zone district.
Page 1 of 4
t30 South Ga{ena Street Aspen, CO 81e11-1975 1 P! 97o92o•boo0 (i : 97Q,920.5147 { tityoras�en.crm �`�
The applicant makes the argument that Lot A (containing the Smith Elisha house) should be vested in the
zone district requirements from 2002, that use of the property as a single-family residence would not exceed
the Maximum Allowed Floor Area, and that use of the property as a single-family residence does not result
in the creation of a non -conformity.. Specifically, the applicant requests an Interpretation on how three
sections of the Land Use Code apply to the potential residential use of the property.
DISCUSSION: Two of the citations noted by the applicant are from the Nonconformities chapter of the
Land Use Code. Under section 26.312.030, Non -conforming structures, sub -section (A) notes:
"a non -conforming 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."
A second citation, under section 26.312.050, Non -conforming lots of record, sub -section (C) notes:
"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 zone district subject to the standards and procedures established in
chapter.26.415."
Discussion Points
1)A code amendment in 2002 (Ordinance No. 1), allowed a historic landmark in the Office zone district to
subdivide (via a historic landmark lot split) down to a minimum of a 3,000 sq. ft.. lot as a preservation
incentive. The subject property benefited from this preservation incentive, which resulted in two lots of
4,500 sq. ft. being created. In 2002, as it is currently, the minimum lot size for historic landmark properties
is 3,000 sq..ft.. Hence, at 4,500 sq. ft., Lot A is a conforming lot of record with regard to lot size. At the
time of the lot split in 2002, Community Development records indicate that the property was conforming
to the MU zone district requirements. r
Also at the time of the lot split, Lot A contained a single-familyresidenee. Subsequently, in 2004, a Change
in Use request was processed and granted by the city for Lot A. The land use approval permitted the single-
family residence to be converted to an office use. A Change in Use is considered a form of Development,
which is inclusive of "the use or alteration of land or land uses...". In 2004, as it is currently, office use is
a conforming use in the Mixed -Use zone district. As recently as 2010, the City issued a Letter of Completion
for an. interior remodel of the space indicating the use of the building was entirely commercial, not
residential. All approved residential use of the building ceased with the 2004 Change in Use approval.
2) Applicant argues that due to language in the 2002 ordinance approving the historic landmark lot split
(Exhibit B), the property is vested in the 2002 Land Use Code. The language in the ordinance states that a
note be added to the subdivision plat "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." The same
ordinance also states that a note on the plat be added that "... any development of the lots will comply with
the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application."
3) Generally speaking, when a land use approval is granted, a vested property right is established. A vested
property right allows a site -specific approval to be built after approval without meeting any zoning or land
use changes during a prescribed time period: As required by Colorado Revised Statutes and codified in the
1 The 2002 historic lot split record shows that the Floor Area of the Smith Elisha house was 3,306 sq. ft. A 500 sq. ft. Floor
Area bonus a setback variance on the east property line were granted to accommodate the existing building.
Page 2 of 4
Land Use Code, a vested right in Aspen expires after the third anniversary of the issuance of a Development
Order. Additionally; the Land Use Code notes that "in no case shall a development order be valid more than
ten (10) years."
INTERPRETATION: As described in the General Purpose statement of the Zoning Districts chapter, the
city has adopted zone district regulations "..:to ensure that each permitted and conditional use is compatible
with surrounding land uses...." and that "all development within each zone district shall be consistent with
the purposes stated for that Zone District..."
These regulations change from time to time depending on the expectations and needs of the community and
development is required to comply with current standards. As a form of development, a Change in Use
request must show that not only does the use comply with the permitted uses allowed within the zone
district, but also with the dimensional requirements (e.g. Floor Area or parking standards).
With regard to the Nonconformities chapter, the intent of the chapter is to allow lawfully established
"....uses of land, buildings and structures" to "... continue, but not allow nonconfonmities to be enlarged or
expanded." In the case of the subject property, the lot is a conforming lot of record. It exceeds the minimum
lot size required for a historic landmark so the citation that references non -conforming lots is not applicable.
Even so, it provides an exemption for the minimum sized lot required of a property, but does not exempt a
historic property from other dimensional standards of the zone district.
The fact that this property is a' conforming lot of record and appears to be a conforming structure
with regard to the legally established use, renders the Nonconformities chapter irrelevant to the
Interpretation.
With regard to the subject property, changes in the use of the building and size of the lot have occurred over
time. Additionally, changes to the Land Use Code have occurred. For the Smith Elisha house, the permitted
use of the building is office, as memorialized by the land use approval granted in 2004. Any new
development, in this case the use of land being changed from office to a single-family residence requires
compliance with the Mixed -Use zone district dimensional standards in effect at the time of the application
being made for the Change in Use. The 2002 ordinance approving the historic lot split does not have
jurisdiction with regard to the Land Use Code to be used, as the vesting period is long over and no longer
valid.
The fact that language in the ordinance mentioned compliance with the Office zone district at the
time, but also required any new development to meet the requirements of the Land Use Code at time
of application, as well as the expiration of the vesting rights timeline, cannot be interpreted to allow
new development to comply with seventeen year old land use regulations.
Since the property is currently an office use, conversion to a residence will establish the use subsequent to
adoption of the 2005 ordinance, requiring a twenty percent (20%) reduction in Floor Area for establishment
of a single-family residence. The Floor Area schedule needs to be met and not exceeded in order to approve
a Change in Use request.
APPEAL OF DECISION: Any person with a right io appeal an adverse determination shall initiate an
appeal by filing a notice of appeal on a form prescribed by the Community Development Director and with
the City office or department rendering the decision or determination within fourteen (14) days of the date
of the decision or determination' being appealed. Failure to file such notice of appeal within the prescribed
time shall constitute a waiver of any rights under this Title to appeal any decision or determination.
Page 3 of 4
This Interpretation was provided on July 3, 2019, and shall become effective on November 21, 2018. This
Interpretation of the Land Use Code shall be valid until such time as the code, sections specified are amended
to implement this clarification or for other purposes.
Attachments:
Exhibit A: 2004 Change in Use approval
Exhibit B: Ordinance No. 14 (Series of 2002)
Page 4 of 4
MEMORANDUM
TO: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
FROM: ' Joyce A. Allgaier, Deputy Director
RE: GMQS Exemption by Community Development Director for Change in
Use of a Historic Landmark, 320 W. Main Street, Smith-Elisha House
DATE: January 15, 2004 .
CC: Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer .
Amy Guthrie, Historic Presezvation, Officer
SUMMARY: Staff recommends approval of. a Growth Management Quota System
(GMQS) Exemption for the proposed change in; use 'fiom residential to office for a
property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and 'Struciures. 'A
request for a conversion of the existing residential space to accommodate an office use is
proposed, along with the necessary physical internal changes The owners are Caroline
and Scott McDonald who have agreed to this request and'have authorized Patrick Imeson
to make this application.
LOCATION: 320 W. Main Street, Lot N and '/Z Lot 0, 9166k'44, City and Towi�site of
Aspen. Note that the application refers only to the Smith-Elisha House and not the
existing barn on the property. This property is also calle4, "Lot A", on the official
Historic Landmark Lot Split Plat for this subject property.
ZONING:."0", Office,
APPLICANT: Patrick hneson
STAFF REVIEW: Section 26.410:010'.D.1 of the Municipal Code provides 'a GMQS
Exemption by the Community Development Director for: the � "Change ' in Use" of a
designated historic landmark which does not increase the *building's existing floor area
ratio. The applicant proposes to convert existing residence into office space.
In'order to grant a GMQS exemption, the Community Development Director must find
that the following standard is met:
3. The. change in use of a historic landmark shall inbi increase 'the Building's
existing floor area ratio.
Response: ' The applicant will make'renovations. to, the it terior.of the building in order
to create space appropriate for office use, but no alterations which affect'existing FAR are
indicated in the application and are not allowed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends this GMQS Exemption be granted.with the conditions as noted below.
DECISION:
A GMQS Exemption for a Change in Use from residential to office use for the
structure located at 320 W. Main Street, also known* as the Smith-Elisha House, a .
designated historic landmark, .is, hereby - APPROVED with the conditions as
follows:
This approval is effective. on. February 30, 2004; and,
No additional floor area. shall be created or added; to the structure without the
required approvals of the City of Aspen; and,
That the business owners strive to. provide bus passes to their employees as a.
means to mitigate trip generation and minimize on -site parking demand.
Julie AUi Woods, C unity Development birectot Date
I IlllIIIII14'f I IIIII IIII�I Ill lllllf 111II I III IIII °°p° o:;mSILVp ,a.o
ORDINANCE NO. 14
(Series of 2002)
11A
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, TO GRANT APPROVA TORA'SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION
:FOR AN HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT At 320 WX . MAIN STREET',
LOTS N, O, AND P, BLOCK 44, CITY AND TOW NSITE 'OF' ASPEN
PARCEL ID#: 2735-124-41-005
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 Historic Preservation Commission (hereinafter
HPC); and
WHEREAS, the applicants, Scott and Mary Caroline McDonald, owners of 320
W. Maui Street, Lots N, O, and P, Block 44, City and Towns zte ofAspen, 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 12, 2002, and'recommended 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 TIRE
CITY-OV ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT:
471904
Page: 2 of a
09/05/2002 09:11A
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00 J
Section I
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, the City Council finds' as follows in regard 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 thai development encourages the preservation of important
and unique natural 'or scenic features, including but not limited to mature trees or
indigenous vegetation, bluff, hillsides, or similar geologic features, or edges of
rivers and other bodies of water, and, promote the health, safety and general
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 FAR bonus, for the purpose of allowing
the existing structures to remain in place. The bonus is not'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-Elisha house must be submitted to HPC staff by July 31, 2002, and the
work must be completed by December 31, 2.002. 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
Smith-Elisha House. As a condition of the variance, which was partialy justified
by the owner's desire to have the two new lots share an existing sidewalk; it was
471904
Page: 3 of 4
09/05/2002 09:11A
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO — f2 21 ,00 D 0 _0.0 —�
determined that as long as the historic carriage house remains the only structure
on the east half of Lot O and' all of Lot P, Bloch 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 HPC. This
condition shall be noted on the plat.
5. 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 reeonsideration of the plat by City Council will be regLiired 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.
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-El'isha 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
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
rectify any inadequacies prior io filing the plat.
&. 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
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 lot split, a fence shall not be allowed to be.
constructed 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
I
471904
Page: 4 of 4
09/05/2002 09:11A
SILVIA DAVIS KTKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00
the ordinances repealed or amended as, herein provided, and the same shalt be conducted
and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 4,
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is
for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any 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
A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 24th day of June, 2002, in the
City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado,
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by
the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 13"' day of May, 2002.
ATTESCT:':1
H en. Za�i KI e ud, Mayor
thiyri S. 1h, City Clerk
ALLY, adopted, passed and- approved this 24th day of Just e,20020
Approved as to form:
John . Worcester
City Attorney
12 mi�'111[ 1511 11111 11111110nmart
1• 1 1- .11;
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
aspelilaw@neileylaw.com
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.1 Led 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 confinning
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 ins Lire 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 staffs 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.11.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-confoi-mity.
Section 26.3 12.03 O.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 Summaiy
8. Pitkin County Cormnunity Development Department Agreement for Payment of Land Use
Application Fees
ROBERT 1. LEVY
2099 NW Pine Tree Way
Stuart, Florciia 34994
May 2, 2019
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street, Third Floor
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: 320 West Main Street, County of Pitkin
State of Colorado — Parcel ID No. 273512441010
Dear Sir/Madam:
Please accept this letter as authorization for Richard Y. Neiley, Jr. and the Neiiey Law
Firm, LLC to represent Robert I. Levy in connection with a Land Use Application for Land Use
Code interpretation or determination, change of use, and any and all other land use applications
to the City of Aspen related to the use of 320 West Main. Street; Aspen, Colorado for residentiat
purposes, including any applications related to modifications to the improvements of the above -
referenced property.
Robert I. Le�,y hereby consents to and assumes all rights and obligations associated with
the laud use application or applications for the subject real property.
Robert
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 COLOR -ADO )
ss.
COUNTY OF GARFIELD )
The foregoing Certificate of Ownership was acluiowledged and signed before me this
day of May, 2019, by RICHARD Y. NEILEY, JR.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: MN, I., -RP 2,Z
FANDREA JO GROUSE N
RY Rt BUCF COLORA00D #20184009074 Expires March 1, 2022
IIIIIII IIIlIIIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilIIII IIII II I1ilIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
RECEPTION#: 661215, R: $23.00, D: $320.00
DOC CODE: WD
Documents Fee $ 320.Q0 Pg 1 of 3, 10/1512018 at02:45;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 ( OF ASPEN
DATE REP NO. 5^-� HRETT PAID
/o�/�l/ a DATE REIN NO.
EXHIBIT ��7
/ /�%i��� � %
A .
RECEPTION#: 651215, 1011512018 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 LLQ, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
BY: ",�' 41�WIL
KENNETH S. WITKOWSKI, VICE PRESIDENT
STATE OFL }
ss
COUNTY OF Gt )4 A�)
c
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this i Z-6y of OCTOBER, 2018,
by KENNETH S. WITKOWSKI, VICE PRESIDENT OF 320 WEST MAIN LLC A DELAWARE LIMITED
I IABII ITY COMPANY.
WITNESS my hand and official seal
my commission expires: (Q ,.- (c�Q — 2.0
2
Notary Public
OFFICIAL SEAL
R
HELLE CONFUORTO PUBLIC • STATE OF ILLINOISmiSSION EXPIRES:06116f20
RECEPTION#: 651215, 10t1512018 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 Paqe 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 Page 32.
12, Any and all leases andfor tenancies.
13. Encroachment of stone retaining wall as disclosed by Survey of Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. dated September
2018 as Job No. 18234A.
I W
9
PH
uj a) Z,
LU
(1) t a
o 2
Z3
CY) 0
0 >;
<_j
z Sc
0 c(o) Ul)
0 U)
Croy
U)
0
z
i5 E 'a o
E
o 0
LL
r 0
:3 0)
< O.S;
:2 C) E
U) (D
0
0
-f-, LL
co
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPI..IT
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 4: 2735-IZ4-41-005
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, O, and P,
Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and
WAEREAS, in order to complete a historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant shall meet
the following requirements of Asper, 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 Iand 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 261oaW(A)(l)(c)•
c) The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was trot 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 26100.
e) Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be
recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure an
the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180)
468870
Page: I of 5
OS/19/2002 01:04P
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY 00 R Moo D Oleo
days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the aty Council will be required for a
showing ofgood causes
J . 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 compased of a duplex and a
single-family home.
26.450.030(A)(4), Subdivision 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 I2 6, R-15, R-15A,, RMF, or Q 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
I N 1111 Jill 68870
4 z of a
l I 05/19/2002 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 Inlet 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, Floor Area 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 form, 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'pro ject retains a historic outbuilding; alid/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 26.415.11 OX, 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 -lice fees may be
approved upon a finding by 'the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an
111111111111111111111111111111111111111
1�i411111f 8Q7t��1Page; 3 of 5
�I06/19/2002 31:04P
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 25.00 D 0.00
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.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
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 td, O, and P, Block 44, City and
Townsite of Aspen, Aspen, Colorado, with the following conditions:
I, 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. As.a minirnurn, 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 developlinent 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 offhe
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 (Le., slopes, access easements, etc.). The
applicant shall verify with the City Zoning Officer the total allowable FAR on
468870
Page; 4 of S
1
05/19/2002
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 2500 Da.0001 64P
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.
5. 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.
7. 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 pennitted 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 Sth day
of May, 2002.
Approv to Form:
Davi Hoefer, Assistant CYty Attorney
Approved as to Content:
HISMIZIC PRESERVA-TWN COMMISSION
Suisaf na 61d, Chair
ATTES ;
Kathy Strickfand, Chief Deputy Clerk
468870
Page: 5 of 5
05/iB/2002 01:04P
5ILVIQ ORUTS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 25,00 0 0.00
m � GO
471904
l 09M/2002 09: 11A
II�
t, I�Ill�lllll�l�) 1� l��I� II
SIt,ViR DAVIS PTTKIN ppUNTY CO R 21,60 [? 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 EXEWTION
FOR AN HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN STREET,
LOTS IN, 0, AND P, BLOCK 44, CITY AND TOWNSI`I'E OF ASPEN
PARCEL IDN; 2735-124-41�005
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26,480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section
?6.470,070(C), and Section 26,4[5,010(D) of the Municipal Code, a Historic Landiark
Lot Split is a subdivision exemption subject to review and approval by City Council after
obtaining a recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission (hereinafter
HP C); Arid
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
aot[ced public hearing on May 8, 2002, and reviewed a setback variance request at- a
public hearing on June 12, 2002, and recommended, approval; and
"WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council • has reviewed and oonsidered 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 ail applicable development standards of the above referenced Munioipal 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,
4`ir 1904
I IIII II I II II l Il lll��lil{11�11111
II�II �I 09/05/2002 09! 11R
SILvIR DAVIS pTTKIN CDUMTY 06 7 ,2.�•00 p �'00
�e�tion i
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 rinds as follows in r6gard 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
indigenous vegetation, bluff, hillsides, or similar geologic features, or edges of
rivers and other bodies of water, and, promote the health, safety and general
welfare of the residents of the City of A.speri.
Section �
Pursuant to the findings set forth -in Section. 1, above, the City Council does
hereby grant an Historic Landmark Spot 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 al3oMng
the existing structures to remain in place, The bonus is not 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-Flisha house must be submitted to HPC staff by July 31, 2002, and the
work must be completed by December 3 t, 2002, The City will require a financial
scourity 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
Smith-l;lisha House, Asa condition of the variance, which was partially Justified
by the owner's desire to have the two new lots shale an existing sidewalk, it was
I I�� IIII i �l PaVP-; 3 0 4
05/0
6l2Q02
l` U T V
1 II�It , 0�
Z1 .OEi
A
• SILVIR pAV15 PITKIN COUNTY CO i? 0
determined that as long as the historic carriage house remains the only stxuctwo
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 HPC. This
condition shall be noted on the plat.
5. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and
approved by the Cbmmunity Development Departmont 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 reeonsideration 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 ?vlunzeipal Coda;
b. Contain a plat note stating 'that the lots contained therein shall be
prohibited from further subdivision and any developmert of the lots will
comply with the applicable provisions of the Sand 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 ofthe
buildings. At'this<time::,the;;�,mith.-1✓Iisha;;house.�ls�intended`to._be,_a�;,Esidence.,a??d
•tlie'eafriagehouse-ismixed=use, The maximum FAR aeor each s easemantst. ay bG.)affected
by applicable lot area reductions slope ,
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 parcols, Tots A and B, each 4,500 square
Peet iu sizc, 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, eurb, and gutter in fxant
of the property meet the requirements of the City Engineering Department, or
rectify any inadequacies prior to filing the plat,
=s6, 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
are strongly associated architecturally and establish a strong historic context on
t the site. The HPC will review any f4ure development on the property, however,
r;
as a condition of approval of this Iot split, a fence shall not be allowe to e
which would separate them
construoled between the two 'newly create lots:
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
Of
operato as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue
471904
09/05/2002 09: 11A
II {lf �fll 0 0.0a
5kLViA bpVIS PiTKIN COUNTY Co R 2i.00
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
for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any 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.
Se I- t i —on 5
A public hearing on the Ordinance was -held on the 24th day of June, 2002, in the
City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBUS� OD as provided by law by
the City Council of the City of Aspen on the B" day of May,
jr,
+ �P#
ATTESC }t en ta11 KI e ud, Mayor
th—ryn&AXh, City Clerk
ALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 24th day of J e 2002,
ele Ka K erud, iYlayor
approved as to'forzn:
John , Worcester
City Attofrley '
(24 x 1 copy included"
t"
I
211
to P
iR
1:9 toy T 1
1; FIRM f ON inq
or 2159
HH'
199T 811:
N209AN
oil
2,
K4, R ON.
1
oil vu
15d
;h
Ej
Ok,
m VMiT1
PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
DATE: April 23, 2019
PLANNER: Mile Kraemer, 429.2741. mil<e.l<raemer@citVofaspen.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@neileVlaw.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.
e subject property is located within the Mixed Use (MU) zone district which permits both residential and commercial
=s. The existing building on Lot A most recently contained a commercial use that was approved pursuant to a change
se u=approval in 2004. To date, the building and property has operated in compliance with the MU zone district
1u1cements. The applicant proposes to convert the existing approved commercial use to a residential use. The lot
� Ki, recorded at BK66, P32 contains plat note #5 which states that "Development of the lots will comply with the
Me le provisions of the land use code in effect at the time of application". The current Land Use Code requires that
iett 7a ot,ls developed with a detached single family dwelling after the adoption of Ordinance 7, Series 2005, the
Mable floor -area shall be limited to 80% of the R-6 zone district FAR schedule. With a lot size of 4,500 square feet,
subject�'70 o, erty is limited to an allowable floor area of 2,256 sq. ft. The existing structure is approximately 3,306
aareYfeett'laze and exceeds the 2,256 sq ft single family allowable floor area in the MU zone. Converting the
ucture tcia residence v'ouftl;create a non -conformity.
ant to Land Use Code Section 26.312.050.C: Non -conforming lots of record —
is permitted to exceed the allowable floor area in the MU zone district.
Staff
d the Applicant has requested a process for this request. Staff has determined
,a 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
Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below:
Lion Land Use Code
plete application and determination
REQUIRED LAND USE REVIEW:
• Interpretations of Title
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 51611-1975 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).
LICATION 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
c c t
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
Cindy Houben
Community Development Director
APPLICANT
Richard Y. Neile Jr.
P ' � Na►�e
�AA
Aignature
Date: June 6, 2019
Mailing Address:
Neiley Law Firm LLC
6800 Highway 82, Suite 1
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
IIII III III Illllllilll111lilllllllilllllllllll 19°05/ 09:11A
II I II II
SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO 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#; 2735-124-41.-005
WHEREAS, pu-rsuant 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 Historic 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 &, 2002, and reviewed a setback variance request at a
public hearing on June 12, 2002, and recommended, 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 1T ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT,
Ill�llflll(IIIIIIIII�MIIIIII�IIIIIIl�IIIIIIIIIIIIII.I��I 0Paqv�9/059�0 09111A
SILVIA DAVIS PITK]N COUNTY 00 R 2-1,00 0 0100
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 regaxd 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 publio 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
indigenous vegetation, bluff, hillsides, or similar geologic. features, or edges of
rivers and other bodies of water, and, promote the health, safety and general
welfare of the residents of the City of Asperi,
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 FAR bonus, for the purpose of allowing
the existing structures to remain in place, The bonus is not being awarded to allow
any expansion on the property. This condition shall be noted on the plat.
2, -n 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-Elisha house must be submitted to HPC staff by duly 31, 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 parkcan
parking that not 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
Smith-Elisha house, As a condition of the variance, which was partially justified
by the owner's desire to have the two new lots share an existing sidewalk, it was
`` I 1471904
DAVIS 11lIIIllllll
�II�II��I�IIIIIIII 09/05%2002 09;1iR
f Illlll �
SILVIR RVJ5 PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 P 0,00
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 HPC. This
condition shall be noted on the plat.
5. 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. As a 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 band 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 tittle.;_the,Smith.-Elsha;hawse. is_intended:-to
:bearesidence.:and
tfie'carriaga house is tnixed=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
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,
5. 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
rectify 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
are strongly associated architecturally and establish a strong historic context on
the site. The HPC will review any fixture development on the property, however,
as a condition of approval of this lot split, a fence shall not be allowed to be
constructed 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
IIIIIIIiIIIIIIII ii) Illlli ill IIIII II 111 Ill) I IIIIIII 09 06��� 09; I1A
SILVIA DA4IS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21,00 p 0.00
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
for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any 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
A public hearing on the Ordinance was'held on the 24th day of ,tune, 2002, in the
City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by
the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 13`n day of May, 2002.
ATTEST:','
h en ali KI e ud, Mayor
thryn S, h, City Clerk
Y, adopted, passed and approved this 24th day of J e 2002,
ele Ka K erud, Mayor
Approved "to'form;
may...
John , Worcester
City Attorney
26.710.180
3 bedroom: 3,000.
! 3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area.
b. Accessory dwelling units on lots more than nine thousand (9, 000) square feet:
Studio: 1,000..
1. bedroom: 1,250.
2 bedroom: 2,100.
3 bedroom: 3,630.
3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area.
3. Miniinuin lot width (feet): Thirty (30).
4. Minimum fi-ont yard setback (feet): Ten (10).
5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): Five (5).
6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): Five (5).
7. Maximuin height (feet): Twenty-eight (28) (increasable to thirty-two (32) by special review
pursuant to Chapter 26.430).
8. Miniinum distance between principal and accessory buildings (feet): No requirement.
9. Percent of open space required for building site: Twenty-five (25).
10. External floor area ratio: 1: 1.
(Ord. No. 38-2000, § 2)
26.710.180 Office (0).
A. Purpose. The purpose of the Office (0) zone district is to provide for the establishment of offices
and associated commercial uses in such a way as to preserve the visual scale and character of former
residential areas that now are adjacent to commercial and business areas, and commercial uses along
Main Street and other high volume thoroughfares.
B. Permitted uses: The following uses are permitted as of right in the Office (0) zone district:
1. Detached residential dwellings, multi -family dwellings;
2. Professional business offices;
3. Accessory residential dwellings restricted to affordable housing guidelines;
4. Home occupations;
5. Group homes;
710-81 (Aspen 10/02)
26.710.180
6. Accessory buildings and uses;
7. Dormitory; and
8. A mixed -use building(s) comprised of a residential dwelling unit and permitted and condi-
tional uses in the Office (0) zone district so long as such conditional use has been approved sub-
ject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425; and
9. Accessory dwelling units meeting the provisions of section 26.520.040.
10. For properties which are listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Struc-
tures: two (2) detached residential dwellings or a duplex on a lot with a minimum area of nine
thousand (9,000) square feet, of which one unit shall be restricted as affordable housing to the
middle income price and occupancy guidelines. The affordable housing unit shall comprise a
minimum of one-third (1/3) of the total floor area of the two dwellings. In the alternative, both
may be free market units if an accessory dwelling unit shall be provided for each unit.
C. Conditional rises. The following uses are permitted as in the Office (0) zone district, subject to
the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425:
1. Only for those structures listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures: an-
tique store, art studio, art studio, bakery, bed and breakfast, boarding house, bookstore, broadcast-
ing station, church, dance studio, florist, fraternal lodge, furniture store, mortuary, music store (for
the sale of musical instruments), music studio, restaurant, shop craft industry, visual at gallery;
provided, however, that (a) no more than two (2) such conditional uses shall be allowed in each
structure, and (b) off-street parking is provided, with alley access for those conditional uses along
Main Street;
2. Duplex residential dwelling, of which one unit shall be restricted as affordable housing to the
middle income price and occupancy guidelines. The affordable housing unit shall comprise a
minimum of one-third (1/3) of the total floor area of the duplex. In the alternative, both may be
free market units if an accessory dwelling unit shall be provided for each unit;
3. Two (2) detached residential dwellings or a duplex on a property listed on the Aspen Inven-
tory of Historic Sites and Structures with a minimum area of six thousand (6,000) square feet, of
which one unit shall be restricted as affordable housing to the middle income price and occupancy
guidelines. The affordable housing unit shall comprise a minimum of one-third (1/3) of the total
floor area of the two dwellings. In the alternative, both may be free market units if an accessory
dwelling unit shall be provided for each unit;
4. Child care center;
5. Commercial parking lot or parking structure that is independent of required off-street park-
ing, provided that it is not located abutting Main Street;
(Aspen 10/02) 710-82
26.710.180
6. Health and fitness facility; and
7. Lodge units and lodge units with kitchens.
D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted
and conditional uses in the Office (0) zone district:
1. Minimum lot size (square feet): Six thousand (6,000). For lots created by section
26.480.030(4) Historic Landmark Lot split: Three thousand (3,000).
2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (square feet:
a. Detached residential dwelling: Six thousand (6,000).
b. Duplex or two detached units: Three thousand (3,000) per unit.
c. Multi family dwellings on lot between six thousand (6, 000) and nine thousand (9, 000)
square feet:
Studio: 1,000.
1 bedroom; 1,200.
2 bedroom: 2,000.
3 bedroom: 3,000.
3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area.
d. Multi family dwellings on lot of more than nine thousand (9, 000) square feet:
Studio: 1,000.
1 bedroom; 1,250.
2 bedroom: 2,100.
3 bedroom: 3,630.
3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area.
e. Multi family dwellings on a lot of twenty-seven thousand (27, 000) square feet or less,
when at least fifty (50) percent of the units built on -site are restricted as affordable housing:
Studio: 500.
1 bedroom: 600.
2 bedroom: 1,000.
3 bedroom: 1,500.
3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 500 square feet of lot area.
i Multi family dwellings on a lot of twenty-seven thousand (27, 000) square feet or less,
when one hundred (100) percent of the units built on -site -are restricted as affordable hous-
ing:
Studio: 300.
1 bedroom: 400.
2 bedroom: 800.
3 bedroom: 1,200.
710-83 (Aspen 10/02)
26.710.190
3+ bedrooms: One (1) bedroom per 400 square feet of lot area.
3. Minimum lot width (feet): Sixty (60).
4. Minimum front yard setback (feet):
Principal building: Ten (10).
Accessory building: Ten (10).
5. Minimum side yard setback (eet�: Five (5).
6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet):
Principal building: Fifteen (15).
Accessory building: Fifteen (15).
7. Maximum height (feet:
Principal building: Twenty-five (25).
Accessory building: Twenty-one (21) on front two-thirds (2/3) of lot, twenty-five (25) on
rear one-third(1/3) of lot.
8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): Ten (10).
9. Percent of open space required for building: No requirement.
10. External floor area ratio (applies to conforming and nonconformint, lots ofrecord: For de-
tached residential dwelling units and duplexes the external floor area shall be the same as in the
R6 zone district. All uses other than detached residential and duplex dwellings: 0.75:1; however,
the 0.75:1 external floor area ratio may be increased to 1:1 by special review pursuant to Chapter
26.43 0; however, if the external floor area ratio is increased by special review pursuant to Chapter
26.430, then sixty (60) percent of the additional floor area must be approved for residential use re-
stricted to affordable housing. (Ord. No. 56-2000, § 7 (part); Ord. No. 25-2001, § 5 (part); Ord. l-
2002 § 20 (part), 2002)
26.710.190 Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR).
A. Paaapose. The purpose of the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR) zone district is to encourage con-
struction and renovation of lodges in the area at the base of Aspen Mountain and to allow construction
of tourist -oriented detached, duplex and multi -family residential dwellings.
B. Permitted asses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Lodge/Tourist Residential
(L/TR) zone district:
Lodge units;
2. Boardinghouse;
Hotel;
(Aspen 10/02) 710-84
26.312.030. Non -conforming structures.
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 Chaptef.
B. ' Normal maintenance. Normal maintenance to nonconforming structures may be performed
without affecting the authorization to continue as a nonconforming structure.
C. Extensions. A nonconforming structure shall not be extended by an enlargement or expansion
that increases the nonconformity. A nonconforming structure may be extended or altered in a manner
that does not change or that decreases the nonconformity.
1. Historic structures. The first exception to this requirement shall be for a structure listed on the
Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Such structures may be extended into
front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, may be extended into the minimum distance between
buildings on a lot and may be enlarged, provided, however, such enlargement does not exceed the
allowable floor area of the existing structure by more than five hundred (500) square feet, complies
with all other requirements of this Title and receives development review approval as required by
Chapter 26.415.
2. Mandatory occupancy Accessory Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses. The second exception
to this requirement shall be for a property with a detached Accessory Dwelling Unit or Carriage
House ("ADU") having a mandatory occupancy requirement. Such a detached ADU may be
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 300 — Nonconformities
Page 2 -
enlarged or expanded by up to five hundred (500) square feet of floor area, provided that this bonus
floor area shall go entirely to the detached ADU and also provided that the ADU does not exceed
the maximum size allowed for an ADU or carriage house. The enlargement or expansion must
comply with all other requirements of this Title and shall receive development review approval as
required herein.
a) Procedure. The procedure for increasing the maximum floor area of a property for the
purpose of increasing the size of an ADU requires the submission of a development
application. The development application shall be processed under Chapter 26.430, Special
Review.
b) Review Standards. An application for increasing the floor area of a property for the purpose
of increasing the size of an ADU shall meet the standards in Section 26.520.050, Design
Standards, unless otherwise approved pursuant to Section 26.520.080Special Review, as
well as the following additional review standards:
(1)Newly established floor area may increase the ADU up to a cumulative maximum of 500
sq. ft. of floor area and is required to be mitigated by either of the following two options.
(a) Extinguishment of Historic Transferable Development Right Certificates
("certificate" or "certificates"), A property owner may increase the ADU by
extinguishment of a maximum of two certificates with a transfer ratio of 250 sq. ft.
of floor area per each certificate. Refer to Chapter 26.535 for the procedures for
extinguishing certificates.
(b) Extinguishment of unused floor area from another property. A property owner may
increase the maximum floor area of a property for the purpose of increasing the size
of an ADU by extinguishment of a maximum of 500 square feet of available un-
built floor area from one property to the ADU.
(2) The additional floor area is a conversion of existing square footage which was not
previously counted in floor area. (Example: storage space made habitable or the
additional floor area creates a more desirable, livable unit with minimal additional
impacts to the bulls and mass of the ADU structure.
(3) The additional floor area creates a unit which is more suitable for caretaker families.
(4) The increased impacts from the larger size are outweighed by the benefits of having a
larger, more desirable ADU.
(5) The area and bulls of the ADU structure, after the addition of the bonus floor area, must
be compatible with surrounding uses and the surrounding neighborhood.
(6) For the transfer of allowable floor area through the use of Historic Transferable
Development Right Certificates, the certificates shall be extinguished pursuant to
Chapter 26.535, Transferable Development Rights.
(7) For the transfer of allowable floor area from a non -historically designated property to
an ADU deed -restricted as a mandatory occupancy unit, the applicant shall record an
instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney removing floor area from the
sending property to the mandatory occupancy ADU.
D. Relocation. A nonconforming structure shall not be moved unless it thereafter conforms to the
standards and requirements of the zone district in which it is located.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 300 — Nonconformities
Page 3
E. Unsafe structure. Any portion of a nonconforming structure which becomes physically unsafe
or unlawful due to lack of repairs and maintenance and which is declared unsafe or unlawful by a duly
authorized city official, but which an owner wishes to restore, repair or rebuild shall only be restored,
repaired or rebuilt in conformity with the provisions of this Title.
F. Ability to restore.
1. Non -purposeful destruction. Any nonconforming structure which is demolished or destroyed
by an act of nature or through any manner not purposefully accomplished by the owner, may
be restored as of right if a building permit for reconstruction is issued within twenty-four (24)
months of the date of demolition or destruction.
Purposeful destruction. Any nonconforming structure which is purposefully demolished or
destroyed may be replaced with a different structure only if the replacement structure is in
conformance with the current provisions of this Title or unless replacement of the
nonconformity is approved pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Any
structure which is nonconforming in regards to the permitted density of the underlying zone
district may maintain that specific nonconformity only if a building permit for the replacement
structure is issued within twelve (12) months of the date of demolition or destruction.*
* Density Replacement. A duplex or two single-family residences on a substandard
parcel in a zone district permitting such use is a nonconforming structure and subject to
nonconforming structure replacement provisions. Density on a substandard parcel is permitted
to be maintained but the structure must comply with the dimensional requirements of the Code
including single-family floor area requirements.
(Ord. No. 1-2002, § 6 [part]; Ord. No. 9-2002, § 5; Ord. No. 35-2004, § 1; Ord. No. 7-2008)(Ord No.
6-2018
26.312.040. Nonconforming accessory uses and accessory structures.
No nonconforming accessory use or accessory structure shall continue after the principal structure or
use shall have terminated unless such structure or use thereafter shall conform to the provisions of the
zone district in which it is located.
26.312.050. Nonconforming lots of record.
A. General. A detached single-family dwelling and customary accessory buildings may be
developed on a lot of record if:
The lot of record is in separate ownership and not contiguous to lots in the same ownership;
and
2. The proposed single-family dwelling can be located on the lot so that the yard, height, open
space and floor area dimensional requirements of the zone district can be met or a variance is
obtained from said dimensional requirements pursuant to Chapter 26.314.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 300 — Nonconformities
Page 4
B. Undivided lot. If two (2) or more lots or combinations of lots with continuous frontage in
single ownership (including husband and wife as in all cases a single owner) are of record as of
November 22, 1971, regardless of time of acquisition and if all or parts of the lots do not meet the
requirements established for lot width and area, the lots shall be considered an undivided parcel and no
portion shall be used or occupied which does meet the width and area requirements of this Title.
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.' (Ord. No. 1-2002 § 6 [part])
26.312.060. Lot reduction.
A. No lot or interest therein shall be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided so as to create a new
nonconforming lot, to avoid, circumvent or subvert any provision of this Title or to leave remaining
any lot in violation of the dimensional requirements of this Title.
B. No lot or portion of a lot required as a building site under this Title shall be used as a portion
of a lot required as a site for another structure.
C. No building permit shall be issued for any lot or parcel of land which has been conveyed, sold
or subdivided in violation of this Section.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 300 — Nonconformities
Page 5
ILT41 NOW-
26.710.180 Mixed -Use (MU).
A. Purpose. The Mixed Use (MU) zone serves as a transition from the more intense
commercial areas of the CC and C-1 zones, and the residential and lodging zones surrounding
Main Street. By allowing for a mix of commercial and residential uses and smaller -scale
development, the Mixed Use zone reflects Aspen's historic character and provides different
economic and residential opportunities from more traditional commercial zones. Particularly
along Main Street, the Mixed Use zone serves as a buffer from the traffic of Highway 82 while
allowing for smaller scale commercial and residential opportunities.
Buildings in the Mixed Use zone consist primarily of commercial, service and office uses on
the ground floor, and residential and office uses on upper floors and off of the primary street
frontage. Uses in the MU zone should not erode the character of the neighborhood or create
excessive impacts to the surrounding residential and lodging zone. Standalone residential uses
are permitted on properties as a reflection of the historic residential nature of the zone district.
B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Mixed -Use (MU) Zone
District:
1. On historic landmark properties: Bed and breakfast.
2. General retail uses.
3. Specialty retail uses.
4. Restaurant, bar and entertainment uses.
Service uses.
6. Office uses.
7. Lodging.
Ants, cultural, civic and community uses.
9. Public uses.
10. Recreational uses.
11. Academic uses.
12. Affordable multi -family residential.
13. Free-market multi -family housing is permitted in a mixed use building if the housing
was legally established (having received a Certificate of Occupancy, Development
Order, or applied for a Development Order) prior to Ordinance 29, Series 2016. No
new Free -Market Residential Units may be established in mixed -use buildings.
14. Free-market multi -family residential when a stand-alone use, or in conjunction with
affordable multi -family residential.
15. Single-family residence, Duplex residence, or Two (2) detached single-family
residences. Accessory dwelling unit in a separate building accessed off the rear of a lot
as an accessory use.
16. Home occupations.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, MU zone
Page 1
17. Accessory uses and structures.
18. Storage accessory to a permitted use.
19. Vacation rentals. Pursuant to Section 26.575.220
C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Mixed -Use
(MU) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425:
1. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Chapter 26.515.
2. Automobile showroom and dealership.
3. Formula uses in the Main Sheet Historic District, subject to the provisions contained in
Section 26.425.045.
4. Lodge, Boutique.
D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all
permitted and conditional uses in the Mixed -Use (MU) Zone District. The dimensional
standards and allotments provided in this section for commercial and mixed -use developments
are the maximum allowable for the zone and may not be achieved for all developments. Site
constraints, historic resources, on -site mitigation and replacement requirements, and other
factors may prevent development from achieving some or all of the maximum allowable
dimensional standards.
1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): 3,000.
2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet):
a. Detached residential dwellings: 4,500. 3,000 for historic landmark
properties.
b. Duplex dwellings (square feet): 4,500. 3,000 for historic landmark
properties.
c. All other uses: Not applicable.
3. Minimum lot width (feet): 30.
4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): 10, which may be reduced to 5, pursuant to
Special Review, Chapter 26.430.
5. Minimum side yard setback (feet: 5.
6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 5.
7. Minimum utility/trash/recycle area: Pursuant to Chapter 12.06.
8. Maximum height;
a. Detached residential and duplex dwellings: 25 feet.
b. All other uses: 28 feet.
9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): 10.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, MU zone
Page 2
10. Pedestrian amenity pace: Pursuant to Section 26.412.
11. Floor Area Ratio (FAR):
a. The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively and individually when
part of a commercial, lodging, or mixed -use development, as follows:
Use
Maximum
(alloived by right)
Maximum by special review
(see Subsection 26.430.040.A
Main Street
Historic
District
All Other
Locations
Cumulative total of all uses
1:1
1.25:1
1.5:1
Commercial
1:1
1.25:1
1.5:1
Civic
1:1
1.25:1
1.5:1
Lodging
0.75:1
1:1
1:1
Affordable Housing
No limitation other than cumulative total
of all uses
b. The following FAR schedule applies to affordable housing and free-market
residential uses when developed as the only use of the parcel:
i. Affordable Housing, multi famdy housing: Limited to cumulative total outlined
in Section 26.710.180.1 La, above.
ii. Free-market, affordable housing: 0.5:1, which may be increased to 0.75:1 if
affordable housing floor area equal to 100% of the free-market residential floor
area is developed on the same parcel.
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 dii)ellings 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.
12. Maximum multi -family residential dwelling unit size (square feet):
a) Category 1-7 Affordable multi -family housing_ No limitation.
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, MU zone
Page 3
b) Resident Occupied Affordable multi -family housing: Individual units shall be
limited to 2,000 sq. ft. of net livable area.
c) Free -Market multi -family housing: Individual units shall be limited to 2,000 sq. ft.
of net livable area. Combination of Free -Market residential units is permitted, but
subject to the net livable size limitations herein, as well as other provisions of this
title.
d) Expansions Allowed: Notwithstanding the above, individual multi -family unit sizes
may be increased by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right
Certificates ("certificate" or "certificates"), subject to the following:
1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is
extinguished.
2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units.
However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring
development rights is 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500
additional square feet may be applied per unit).
3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development
rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot or the
use.
13. Commercial/residential ratio: When development includes mixed -uses, the total
residential net livable area shall be no greater than 150% the total commercial net
leasable and lodging net livable area located on the same parcel.
E. Compliance with City of Aspen Charter. Any property located east of Castle Creek that
was in the Mixed -Use (MU) zone district on January 1, 2015, is subject to the provisions of
Article XIII Section 13.14, Voter authorization of certain land use approvals, of the City of
Aspen Charter.
(Ord. No. 56-2000, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 25-2001, §5 [part], Ord. 1-2002, §20, Ord. No. 7-
2005, § 1 [part]; Ord. No. 12-2006, 13; Ord. No. 11, 2007; Ord. No. 27-2010, §4; Ord. No.34-
2011, §16; Ord. No. 17-2014, §2; Ord. No. 20-2015, �6; Ord. No. 29, 2016, �.5; Ord. No. 6,
2017, §7, Ord. No. 23-2017)
City of Aspen Land Use Code
Part 700, MU zone
Page 4
FMANSWMIAL Tv
N
--------- --
Nn
w Lo
RAvt ;r. -.,3 t
.jj
S I
jiy
I- WXM5��
; it
-Pga�
gi:
ix qQ
A. u,
EP
NO
gv
HR? y,,F,tv 5...-
n? 89
c c �'
An agreement between the City of Aspen ("City") and
Please type or print in all caps
Address of Property: 320 W. Main Street, Aspen, CO 81 61 1
Property Owner Name: Robert I. Levy Representative Name (if different from Property Owner) Richard Y .
Neiley, Jr.
Billing Name and Address - Send Bills to:
Neiley Law Firm, LLC, 6800 Highway 82, Suite 1, Glenwood Springs,
Contact info for billing: e-mail:
aspenlaw@neileylaw.com
CO 81 601
Phone: 970-928-9393
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 hereinafter stated.
$ 1 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 deposit for 4 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��rtment staff time. Additional time above the
deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. I n v
City of Aspen:
Signature:
Jessica Garrow, AICP
Community Development Director PRINT Name: Richard Y.. Neiley, Jr.
City Use: Title: Representative for Robert I. Levy
Fees Due: $ Received $
Case #
• - •- 1 • •- 1 • 1 1 1./
FA
LAND USE APPLICATION
Project Name and Address: 320 W. Main Street, Aspen, Colorado
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 273512441010
APPLICANT:
Name: Robert I Levy
Address: 2099 NW Pine Tree Wa Stuart.,Florida -44994
Phone#: 772-341 —069S email: r-1 PyT@msn mom
REPRESENTIVATIVE:
Name: Richard Y. Neiley., Jr
Address: Neiley Law Firm, LLC, 6800 Highway 82, Suite 1 , Glenwood Springs
CO 81 601
Phone#: 970-928-9393 email: aspenlaw@neileylaw. com
Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions
Use of 320 W. Main Street as a detached single family residence
Review: Administrative or Board Review City Council
Required Land Use Review(s): Appeal of Planning Director's Interpretation of
Land Use Code
Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields:
Net Leasable square footage Lodge Pillows Free Market dwelling units
Affordable Housing dwelling units Essential Public Facility square footage
Have you included the following? FEES DUE: $ 1 , 3 0 0 . 0 0
0 Pre -Application Conference Summary n/Z..
Signed Fee Agreement
HOA Compliance form
All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary
-P�