HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ec.Kuehlman 415 W. Francis 198535v�-$S
Kuehlman 9115 W. Francis 1985
Lot Line Adjustment
/ 0 7
EI
C
q&OAD SUKMA.RY SHEET -
City of. .-
DATE RECEIVED*f CASE NO.
DATE RECEIVs •MPLETE- STAFF:
..ES 1 z�Representative A..-In�iIIl.WM!n�l�Ll�flrl/
Type of Application:
I. GMP/SUBDIV IS ION/PUD (4 step)
Conceptual Submission ($2,730.00)
Preliminary Plat ($1,640.00)
Final Plat ($- 820.00)
II. SUBDIV IS ION/PUD (4 step)
Conceptual Submission ($1,900.00)
Preliminary Plat ($1,220.00)
Final Plat ($ 820.00)
III. EXCEPT ION/EXEMPTION/REZON ING (2 step) ($1,490.00 )
IV. SPECIAL REVIEW (1 step) ($ 680.00)
Special Review
Use Determination
Conditi a
✓ Other
l^
P&Z CC MEETING DATE: �`\ of PUBLIC HEARING: YES
HATE REFERRED: 2 INITIALS:
-------------------- -------------
REFERRALS:
City Atty Aspen Consol. S.D. School District
City Engineer Mtn. Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas
Housing Dir. Parks Dept. State Hwy Dept (Glenwd)
Aspen water Holy Cross Electric State Hwy Dept (Gr.Jtn)
City Electric Fire Marshall Bldg: Zoning/Inspectn
Envir. Hlth. Fire Chief Other:
---------------------------------
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED • i," i INITIAL:
City Atty City Engineer Building Dept.
Other: Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
Reviewed b XyeFsm.4`• Lot SI,t�`
Y= Aspen Pu City Counc'
JJ ✓� 0'4 / i fllr CDr1s+Fury �i) Ord .�v�'S�J.
1. The lot line between Lots F and G, where parallel to the existing
Kueh man structure, shall be moved 3-1/2 feet to the east, and
�r^rother segments of the lot line shall be change so as to retain
()Vlf i lots 3,000 s.f. each. A new plat shall be submitted for
CJy„il ,IrP 6 P1 ni g and Encineering Office approvals.
2. Both parties shall acree to join any special improvement dis-
tricts formeO in the future.
3. The plat shall contain all information requested in: the Engineer-
ing Office memorandum of October 11, 1985 and shall meet the
criteria of Section 20-15 of the I'ur.iciral Code in Final Plat
subr:ittal.
4. Any removal of trees shall be subject to Section 13-76 of the
Municipal Code.
6. A Statement of Subcivi_ion E.;cefticn shall be filed for approval
of the City Attorney.
-ev i euc . t.sren PL'
City Council
0
suox 554 PAGE486
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS
John Thomas Kuehlman and Helen Jane Kuehlman, and George
A. Wester ("Covenantors"), for themselves, their successors
and assigns, in consideration of the granting of a lot line
adjustment application by the City Council of the City of
Aspen, and as an inducement to the granting thereof, hereby
covenant with the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, to
restrict such property, and hereby do restrict such property
as follows:
1. Covenantors are the owners of the following
described property (the "Property") together with the
improvements thereon situated in the City of Aspen, Pitkin
County, State of Colorado:
Lots E and F (the "Kueh-1mann Lots") and Lots G, H, and I
(the "Wester Lots") Block 4, City and Townsite of
Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado.
2. In the event of any municipal improvement or
improvements of the kind contemplated in Section 20-16 of the
Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, as amended, become, in
the sole judgment or discretion of the City Council of the
City of Aspen, necessary or desirable to the area of the
subject property, Covenantors will make no objection to any
special assessment or special tax or proceeding therefor on
the basis that the property is adequately served by existing
improvements and/or on the basis that the premises will not
be served or benefited by the improvement or improvements
proposed. Covenantors further agree to join, upon the City's
demand therefor, any improvement district formed for con-
struction of such improvements (including, without limita-
tion, drainage, underground utilities, paving, curbs,
gutters, sidewalks, street lights, etc.) in the area of the
property or to reimburse the City of Aspen directly upon
demand therefor if the City should choose to construct these
improvements without the formation of such a district.
3. Covenantors warrant that they are the title owners
of the subject property with full authority to restrict the
property as aforesaid and that there are no persons or
entities who have an interest in the subject property who
have not agreed and consented to the aforesaid restrictions.
4. None of the covenants contained herein shall be
released or waived in any respect without the prior consent
of the City of Aspen, reflected by resolution of the City
Council of the City of Aspen.
'L�
7
C"
2 <
-
-1
a <
R1
�
AA
'W
• fA
Cn
a
s
�
0 0
pzox 554 PAGE487
IN WITNESS 44•WHEREOF, this declaration has been duly
executed this / —day of �dP� 1987.
GEORGE( STER
(Owner of Lots G, H and I, Block
4, City and Townsite of Aspen)
JOHN THOMAS KUEHLMAN
WiLi jlx_
__"
HE EN JANE KUEHLMAN
(Owners of Lots E and F, Block 4,
City and Townsite of Aspen)
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
S� The fore oing instrument was acknowledged before me this
/ day of , 1987 by George A. Wester.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
10 '' ........ 'J iy 'commission expires:
�'�7A
• _JJ - r ti'
COLORADO )
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
C� L -L1
Notary Public
yank of Monaco
S. Monaco St. kwy.
Denver, Colorado 80224
The forego ng instrument was acknowledged before me this
day off 1987 by Helen Jane Kuehlman.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: /a '6 f- D
Notary Pub 7� \'
-2- Qo. �GA':.. d�cra
0
STATE OF COLORADO )
80N 5011
ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
The foregyng,instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of 1987 by John Thomas Kuehlman.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
No ary Publ i!' :.o
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Paul T,�dune, Ci y Attorney
JDS4D/01
-3-
v:-
•
•
Aspen City Council
Regular Meetina November 11; 1L8
.j
Mayor Stirling said one of the reasons for this condition was
that Council did not want to have
entertain a oject.changinathe
Stirling said he would be willing
to number of units that have to be sold.
Mayor Stirling toed to Councdilect as thestaff
gas possible; secondednby
ge
and get back
Councilwoman Fallin. All in favor, motion carried.
SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Saurel
Mayor Stirling left the meeting due to a conflict" of interest.
Steve Burstein, planning office, said this is a request to
condominiumize a duplex located on the corner of Monarch and
Sleeker. Burstein told Council when the building inspector did
an inspection, he found 3 dwelling units as defined in the Code,
there are some electrical corrections to be made, and some
encroachments to be addressed. Burstein told Council the
applicant has requested this duplex be exempted from the 6 month
rental restriction based on the history of the use. Burstein
told Council since the building was built, " t has been rented
short term. It is felt that it is not reasonable in the change
of form of ownership to make the rental restrictions a condition
i of approval. Burstein said staff feels this a unique
situation, and Council can exempt this frotr� the 6 month rental restriction.
Bob Hughes, representing the applicant, told Council none of the
conditions are unacceptable, and they ale in the process of
working them out. Hughes said they will take care of the third
unit. Hughes said they plan on straightening the fence out
rather than asking for an encroachment. City Attorney Taddune
said staff feels that the requirements of going through the full
subdivision process would be redundant and would serve no public
purpose, and is unnecessary to the land use policies of the city.
Councilwoman Fallin moved to approve a subdivision exception for
the purpose of condominiumization of the Saurel duplex subject to
the conditions 1 through 6 of the planning office memorandum
city
November 5, 1985, including the language as outlined by
attorney; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion
carried.
KU-EHLMAN LOT LINE- ADJUSTMENT
Steve Burstein, planning office, this is a request to move the
lot line 3 feet from the existing house. Councilman Isaac asked
if this would resolve the litigation. Jon Seigle said it would;
this has been in litigation for 5 years. Burstein said staff
14
i .y
Aspen City Council Regular Meeting_ Novembe 11, 1985
would rather see the lot line moved 6-1/2 feet so that it will
not create a non -conforming structure. Seigle told Council the
Kuehlman's encroach on Wester's land, and this is the only
solution they have come up with. Wester will -not agree to the
additional 3-1/2 feet.
Councilwoman Walls moved approval of the lot line adjustment
subject to conditions 2 through 6 in the planning office
memorandum November 4, 1985; seconded by Councilman Isaac.
All in favor, motion carried.
REQUEST TO L-EASE-CITE' STABLES
City Clerk Koch told Council 2-1/2 stalls at the stables are
presently being leased to Terry Harp; this is a request to lease
2 additional stalls by Morrison. There are a total of 6 stalls
at the city stables. City Attorney Taddune told Council this
lease should be rewritten by his office. Morrison told Council
he has a surrey he would like to do tours of town with, as well
as a horse drawn ski shuttle.
Mayor Stirling moved to instruct the city attorney to negotiate
and drawn up a lease with Mr. Morrison and return to the next
Council meeting; seconded by Councilwoman Fallin.
Mayor Stirling said the lease payments seem quite low. Cindy
Shafer, finance director, told Council the city pays the water
bills on this property and they are close to what the city
receives in rent.
All in favor, motion carried.
RESOLUTION #29, -1985 - Commercial GMP Carry Over
Steve Burstein, planning office, prepared two versions of this
resolution. One carries over quota in the SCI and
Commercial/lodge category. Two weeks ago, two Councilmembers
felt that nothing should be carried over. Staff is willing to
support not carrying any quota over. Councilwoman Walls noted
Council has voted in the past to not carry any quotas over.
Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Resolution #29, Series of 1985,
carrying over quota in the NC/SCI zone; motion DIES for lack of
a second.
Mayor Stirling moved to adopt Resolution #29, Series of 1985,
carrying no commercial space forward; seconded by Councilwoman
Walls.
15
0 •
0 •
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
THR3 : Hal Schilling, City Manag
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Kuehlman Lot Line Adjustment
DATE: November 4, 1985
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of the lot line
adjustment subject to the conditions listed below.
LOCATION: 915 W. Francis, Lot F and G, Block 4, City and Townsite of
Aspen. Lots E and F, owned by Mr. Keuhlman, presently contain a
single-family house, while Lots G, H and I; owned by Mr. Wester, are
presently undeveloped.
ZONING: R-6
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Mr. and Mrs. John Kuehlman, owners of Lots E and
F, and Mr. George H. Wester, owner of Lots G, H and I of Block 4,
request a subdivision exception for the purpose of a lot line adjust-
ment between Lots F and G.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACT ION: None.
BACKGROUND: A corner of the
Kuehlmans' house, 915 W.
Francis,
encroaches on Lot G,
owned by Mr.
Wester. Civil Action No.
80CV99 was
brought against the
Kuehlmans
by Mr. Wester regarding this matter.
Both parties agreed
that a lot
line adjustment would be
the most
appropriate resolution
of the
encroachment, after which
a request
would be made to the
Court to stipulate to a Consent Decree
approving
the adjustment.
APPLICABLE SECTION OF CODE: Stated in Section 20-19(a)(4) of the
flunicipal Code, are the conditions by which a lot line adjustment may
be granted:
(i) The applicant demonstrates that the purpose of the request is
to correct an engineering or survey error in a recorded plat, to
permit a boundary change between consenting adjacent landowners
or to address specific hardship, provided that the corrected plat
meets the standards of the Code at the time of the request; and
(ii) The adjustment will not directly or indirectly affect the
development rights or permitted density on the property by
providing the opportunity to create a new lot or parcel for
• •
••
development or resale purposes. It may be considered sufficient
proof that the application will not affect the development rights
or permitted density of the property if the applicant documents
that the lands in question are fully developed under existing
zoning and will not change in developments status due to the
adjustment; or if the applicant agrees to compete under the GMP
for any development rights beyond the existing level of develop-
ment on the newly created lots or parcels; and
(iii) Subsequent to the adjustment, the parcels or lots will
continue to conform to the underlying area and bulk requirements
of the zone district. In cases of an existing non -conforming
lot, the adjustment shall not increase the non -conformity of the
resulting lots or parcels; and
( iv) The applicant otherwise complies with all applicable zoning
and subdivision regulations of the City of Aspen.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION:
Referral Comments: In a memorandum from the Engineering Office, dated
October 11, 1985, the following comments were made:
1. The lot line adjustment would create a non -conforming situation
in which the existing house would encroach in the eastern five
(5) foot side yard setback.
2. The applicants should be required to join any Improvement
Districts formed in the future.
3. The plat should note the square footage of the area affected by
the lot line adjustment, existing utility sources, and meter
locations.
PLANNING OFFICE COMMENTS: The lot line adjustment meets the criteria
by which it is to be considered in Section 20-19 (a) (4) . It is a
boundary change between consenting adjacent landowners for the purpose
of rectifying an encroachment problem. Both Lots F and G would remain
at 3,000 s.f. after the requested lot line adjustment. Development
rights and permitted density on the properties would not be affected.
As noted by the Engineering Office, the lot line adjustment would not
accomplish making the existing house in complete conformity with
required setbacks. Sufficient side yard setbacks considering the
three foot (31) roof overhang, would require that the property line be
six feet, six inches (616") from the Kuehlman residence. The proposal
is for a property line three feet (3') away from the house.
The Planning Office believes that it would be more desireable if the
lot line adjustment were to bring the structure into conformity. If a
structure were built on Wester Is property, sited as close to the
setbacks as allowed, then the two structures would be eight feet (81)
2
• •
00
apart and roof projections would be 3-1/2 feet apart. Furthermore,
the Kuehlman residence will be subject to the non -conforming structure
regulations in Section 24-13.3 of the Code. Under the circumstances
that the two parties cannot agree to a rectified lot line adjustment,
we feel that the proposal is still beneficial in reducing non -confor-
mities and merits Council approval.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Off ice recommends approval of the
Kuehlman Lot Line Adjustment subject to the conditions listed below:
1. The lot line between Lots F and G, where parallel to the existing
Kuehlman structure, shall be moved 3-1/2 feet to the ea st , and
other segments of the lot line shall be change so as to retain
lots of 3,000 s. f . each. A new plat shall be submitted f or
Planning and Engineering Office approvals.
2. Both parties shall agree to join any special improvement dis-
tricts formed in the future.
3. The plat shall contain all information requested in the Engineer-
ing Office memorandum of October 11, 1985 and shall meet the
criteria of Section 20-15 of the Municipal Code in Final Plat
submittal.
4. Any removal of trees shall be subject to Section 13-76 of the
Municipal Code.
6. A Statement of Subdivision Exception shall be filed for approval
of the City Attorney.
SB.221
C. }- r v C
3
• • . •
KLEIN, SEIGLE & KRABACHER
PROFESBIONAL CORPORATION
HERBERT B. KLEIN
JON DAVID SE10LE
0.JOBEPH KRABACHER
THOMAS C. HILL
Alan Richmond
Planning Department
City of Aspen
Aspen City Hall
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
ATTORNEY@ AT LAW
201 NORTH MILL STREET
ABPEN, COLORADO 81E11
September 12, 1985
TELEPHONE
13031 925.9700
Re: Lots F and G, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen
Dear Alan:
This firm represents John and Helen Kuehlman, who are the
owners of Lots E and F, BLock 4, City and Townsite of Aspen. I
have had previous communication with Paul Taddune, City Attorney,
regarding a certain quiet title action brought by Mr. George
Wester, who is owner of Lots G, H, and I, Block 4, City and
Townsite of Aspen, against my clients regarding a lot line
encroachment on the common boundary of Lots F and G.
On behalf of my clients, I am requesting a lot line adjust-
ment pursuant to Sections 20-19 (a) (4) and 20-19 (b) (c).
The lot line adjustment sought is for purposes of solving
the enroachment problem.
It is my understanding, based upon my discussions with Mr.
Taddune and yourself, that this matter may be taken directly to
City Council for approval as an exception from the application of
the provisions of Section 20 of the Aspen Municipal Code because
compliance with those provisions, in connection with this
application, would serve no public purpose and would be redundant
and unnecessary in relation to the land use policies of the City
of Aspen.
Please find enclosed four copies of the amended plat and
four copies of this application letter, along with a check in the
amount of $680.00 to cover the application fee. It is my
understanding that the application fee is in reality a retainer
and that the unused portion will be returned to the applicants
upon completion of this matter. It is my hope, in light of the
Alan Richmond
September 12, 1985
Page Two
very simple request contained herein and the costs involved to
date by my clients and Mr. Wester, that your office can keep its
fees to a minimum.
Sincerely yours,
KLEIN, SEIGLE & KRABACHER, P.C.
By I
J n avid Seigle
JDS/jgc
Enclosures
cc: Robert Hughes, Esquire
Mr. and Mrs. Kuehlman
* 0
•
MEMORANDUM
To: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
From: Elyse Elliott, Engineering Office
Date: October 11, 1985
Re: Kuehlman Lot Line Adjustment
After reviewing the above application and making a site inspection,
the Engineering Department has the following comments:
- The lot line adjustment will create a non -conforming lot
because the existing house on Lots E & F will not have a 5' side
yard setback. As long as we're adjusting the lot line to rectify
an existing problem, we should solve all complications.
- The applicants should be required to join an Improvement
District.
- The plat should note the square footage of the area affected by
the lot line adjustment. It should also show the existing
utility sources and meter locations.
*0
• •
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
PENDRANDUM
City Attorney
City Engineer
Steve Burstein, Planning Office
Kuehlman Lot Line Adjustment
City Case No. 0,35-85
September 18, 1985
Attached is an application submitted
by Jon Seigle on behalf
of John
and Helen Kuehlman, requesting subdivision
exemption approval
for the
purpose of a
lot line adjustment.
Mr. and Mrs. Kuehlman own
Lots E
and F, Block
4, City and Townsite of
Aspen. They propose to
purchase
I.ot G, Block
4, City and Townsite of
Aspen from the current Mr.
Wester
(represented
by Bob Hughes) .
Please review this application and return your referral comments to
the Planning Office no later than October 16, 1985, in order for this
office to have adequate time to prepare for its presentation before
the City Council on October 28th.
Thank you.
ft
go
KLEIN, SEIGLE & KRABACHER
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
HERBERT S. KLEIN
JON DAVID SEIGLE
B.JOSEPH KRABACHER
THOMAS C. HILL
Allan Richmond
City of Aspen
Planning Office
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
201 NORTH MILL STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
September 20, 1985
Re: Application for Lot Line Adjustment/Lots F and G,
Block 4, Aspen, Colorado.
Dear Alan:
TELEPHONE
(303) 925-8700
Following our telephone conversation please be advised, that
based upon my review of all title documents, that John Thomas
Kuehlman and Helen Jane Kuehlman are the record owners of Lots E
and F, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County,
Colorado.
Mr. George Wester, who owns Lot G, Block 4, is represented
by Robert Hughes, and he will be sending you a letter which
evidences Mr. Wester's consent to lot line adjustment as well as
setting forth Mr. Wester's ownership of Lot G.
It is my understanding that this matter will be scheduled to
go before City Council sometime in the month of October and I
would appreciate that as soon as you have definitively scheduled
this matter to please let me know.
Sincerely yours,
KLEIN, SEIGLE & KRABACHER, P.C.
I1
A�n David Seigle
JDS/ jgc `--
cc: John Kuehlman
Bob Hughes
•
LAW OFFICES
OATES, HUGHES & KNEZEVI
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
THIRD FLOOR. ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING
533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE
LEONARD M. OATES ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
ROBERT W. HUGHES
RICHARD A. KNEZEVICH
DEBORAH QUINN September 19, 1985
Mr. Alan Richman
Planning Director
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
i
SEP 2 3 Wr, 4
AREA CODE 303 1
TELEPHONE 920-1700
TELECOPIER 920-1121
Re: Lots F and G, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen
Dear Alan:
We represent George A. Wester, who is the owner of Lot
G, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen. We have been asked by
Jon Seigle to confirm for you as accurate that Mr. Wester had
commenced an action in trespass as a result of an encroachment
upon his property by the single-family residence constructed on
Lot F and owned by John Thomas and Helen Jane Kuehlman. In
connection with that matter, the parties have agreed to settle
the dispute by effecting a lot line adjustment in the manner that
was proposed to you in Jon Seigle's letter to you dated Septem-
ber 12, 1985. Should you require any further confirmation in
order to complete staff review of the lot line adjustment appli-
cation, please let me know.
Incidentally, the matter has been unresolved for quite
some time and, if there is anything that you can do to expedite
the process, I would certainly appreciate that.
Sincerely,
OATES, HUGHES. & KNEZEVICH, P.C.
By
Robert W. Hughes
RWH/caa
cc: Jon D. Seigle, Esq.
rwh3.21
ft
of
KLEIN, SEIGLE & KRABACIIER
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
HERBERT S. KLEIN
201 NORTH MILL STREET
JON DAVID SEIGLE
ASPEN. COLORADO 51811
S. JOSEPH KRABACHER
THOMAS C. HILL
September 12, 1985
Alan Richmond
Planning Department
City of Aspen
Aspen City Hall
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
TELEPHONE
13031 925-9700
Re: Lots F and G, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen
Dear Alan:
This firm represents John and Helen Kuehlman, who are the
owners of Lots E and F, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen. I
have had previous communication with Paul Taddune, City Attorney,
regarding a certain quiet title action brought by Mr. George
Wester, who is owner of Lots G, H, and I, Block 4, City and
Townsite of Aspen, against my clients regarding a lot line
encroachment on the common boundary of Lots F and G.
On behalf of my clients, I am requesting a lot line adjust-
ment pursuant to Sections 20-19 (a) (4) and 20-19 (b) (c).
The lot line adjustment sought is for purposes of solving
the enroachment problem.
It is my understanding, based upon my discussions with Mr.
Taddune and yourself, that this matter may be taken directly to
City Council for approval as an exception from the application of
the provisions of Section 20 of the Aspen Municipal Code because
compliance with those provisions, in connection with this
application, would serve no public purpose and would be redundant
and unnecessary in relation to the land use policies of the City
of Aspen.
Please find enclosed four copies of the amended plat and
four copies of this application letter, along with a check in the
amount of $680.00 to cover the application fee. It is my
understanding that the application fee is in reality a retainer
and that the unused portion will be returned to the applicants
upon completion of this matter. It is my hope, in light of the
Alan Richmond
September 12, 1985
Page Two
very simple request contained herein and the costs involved to
date by my clients and Mr. Wester, that your office can keep its
fees to a minimum.
Sincerely yours,
KLEIN, SEIGLE & KRABACHER, P.C.
By
J n avid Seigle
JDS/jgc
Enclosures
cc: Robert Hughes, Esquire
Mr. and Mrs. Kuehlman
MRMORANDUM
TO: Paul Taddune, City Attorney
FROM: Alan Richman, Acting Director
RE: Wester vs Kuehlman
DATE: January 10, 1984
I have read the materials you sent me regarding the referenced law
case. It is quite clear to me that this matter falls within the
bounds of Section 20-19(a)(4), lot line adjustment provisions. These
matters have been routinely handled by my office as an expedited
subdivision exception, one step to Council. I strongly recommend
against processing this request as a subdivision exemption because
there should certainly be a plat filed along with the proposal to
protect future buyers.
Please refer the applicant to my office.
CITY OF-ASPEN
130 qalena street
aspe%� !gn,7corado 81611
303-925 -2020
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 9, 1985
TO: Planning Director
FROM: City Attorney
RE: Wester v. Kuehlman
p IE@IEnd[EIn
Annexed please find a letter from Jon Seigle dated January 2,
1985, and related materials involving a boundary adjustment with
regard to Lot G, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen. Please
review the proposed plat and lot line adjustment. Unless there
are major problems, it might be appropriate to refer this matter
to the City Council as a subdivision exemption under the provi-
sions of Section 20-3(4) as amended.
PJ T/mc
Attachment
cc: Jon David Seigle, Esq.
Robert W. Hughes, Esq.
ft
N
KLEIN, SEIGLE, DELMAN & KRABACHER `^ A,
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION V�1IV
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
201 NORTH MILL STREET
HERBERT S. KLEIN ASPEN. COLORADO 8 161 1
JON DAVID SEIGLE
JAMES H. DELMAN
B. JOSEPH KRABACHER January 2, 1985
THOMAS C. HILL
Paul Taddune, City Attorney
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Wester v. Kuehlman
Civil Action No. 80 CV 99
Dear Paul:
REM
TELEPHONE
(303) 925-8700
This firm represents the defendants John Thomas Kuehlman and
Helen Jane Kuehlman, and Bob Hughes, of Oates, Hughes &
Knezevich, represents the plaintiff George A. Wester in the
above -referenced action filed in the District Court of Pitkin
County. As you will recall, Bob and I met with you to discuss
this case in the spring of 1984. Essentially, the case revolves
around the fact that the Kuehlman's house, which they purchased
in 1963, encroaches slightly on the property owned by Mr. Wester
(being Lot G, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen).
The parties to the litigation have agreed that the most
appropriate resolution of the encroachment is to do a lot line
adjustment and then request the Court to stipulate to a Consent
Decree approving the adjustment.
I am enclosing for your review the following documents:
1. Stipulation for Entry of Consent Decree;
2. Affidavit;
3. Proposed Form of Order;
4. Plat and Title Lot Line Adjustment.
We would appreciate the City's consent to the Stipulation.
Given the posture of the litigation and the simplicity of the
solution, I do not see that the City of Aspen would have any
objection to consenting to the Stipulation. Although it is not
entirely clear from reading the City Code whether this matter
requires a hearing before Planning and Zoning Commission, it is
my understanding based upon my meeting with you, that you should
be able to resolve this matter at council level.
•
Paul Taddune
January 2, 1984
Page Two
I would appreciate your review of the enclosed documentation
and upon your review, communicating with me regarding any
questions you might have and also a timetable for obtaining the
City's consent.
Sincerely yours,
KLEIN, SEIGLE, DELMAN
& KRABACHER, P.C.
By
4o—David Seigle
JDS/dg
Enclosures
cc: Mr. & Mrs. Kuehlman
Robert Hughes
DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF C
OLPAD0
Civil Action No. 80 CV 99
AFFIDAVIT
GEORGE A. WESTER,
Plaintiff,
v.and
JANE
, ASSOCIATION,
aH
JOHN THOMAS KUEHLtColorado corporation,
�1 'Ate
ASPEN SAVINGS AND LOAN
Defendants.
The undersigned being duly sworn states as follows • Block 4,
StateCity and
1, That they are the owners , of tof Colorado (hereinafter referred
Townsite of Aspen, County of
to as "Real Property") • tember 15 , 1963.
2, That they purchased the Real Property on Sep ert
3. That at the time of their purchase of the property, the pro P y
was improved with a single-family residence.
4, That the
undersigned have continued uisitioside in the residence
located on the real property since the date of acq encroach or
located on the real property
5. That the improvements
County of Pitkin, State of
Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen,
the plat attached hereto as Ex
Colorado as inhibit B .
Lot G, dicated on
had no knowledge of the encroachment until
6. That the undersigned
1974.
FURTHER the affiant sayeth not.
10 n omas ue man
e en ane ue man
*0
• •
/ IIDISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. BOCV99
STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT DECREE
GEORGE A. WESTER,
Plaintiff,
V.
JOHN THOMAS KUEHLMAN, HELEN JANE KUEHLM.AN, and ASPEN SAVINGS AND
LOAN ASSOCIATION, a Colorado corporation,
Defendants.
COME NOW the Plaintiff by and through his attorneys
GOLDSMITH and LUBY, a Professional Corporation, and Defendants
John Thomas Kuehlman, Helen Jane Kuehlman and Aspen Savings and
Loan Association, by and through their attorneys, SACHS, KLEIN &
SEIGLE, P.C., and hereby stipulate as follows:
1. Plaintiff's complaint alleges that the certain
improvements located on Defendants Kuehlmans' real property
described as Lot F, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin
County, Colorado (hereinafter referred to as "Lot F") encroaches
on Plaintiff's real property, which is described as Lot G, Block
4, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado (herein-
after referred to as "Lot G").
2. Defendants Kuehlmans admit that the improvements
encroach as alleged in the complaint.
3. The parties desire to dispose off the claim set
forth in the complaint by requesting the Court to enter a
Consent Decree which would provide that the common lot line
between Lot F and Lot G be adjusted as set forth on the replat
of Lot F and Lot G which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and
incorporated herein by reference.
4. Each party shall pay his or her own costs,
including attorneys' fees, incurred in the prosecution of this
matter except that Defendants Kuehlmans agree to reimburse
Plaintiff the sum of $1,500.00 for attorneys' fees incurred in
these proceedings and further provided that Defendants Kuehlmans
shall pay all surveying costs and filing fees incurred in
•
• •
connection with the preparation and filing of the replat of Lots
F and G, and all attorneys' fees incurred by Plaintiff from date
hereof in connection with review of this documentation and
obtaining approval of the City of Aspen to this Consent Decree,
provided, however-, that in the event a Consent Decree is not
granted by the Court for any reason, Defendants Kuehlmans shall
no longer have responsibility for reimbursement to Plaintiff for
future fees incurred, except as the Court might otherwise order
and allow.
5. The replat of Lots F and G is for purposes of
equitably resolving the problems created by the encroachment of
the improvements on Lot G and not for the purposes of evading
the subdivision regulations of the City of Aspen.
6. The City of Aspen has been informed of these
proceedings and the request for the Entry of a Consent Decree,
has no objection thereto, and by its signature below confirms
that, as adjusted, Lots G, H and I taken together meet the area
and bulk requirements of thCdateehereoff for thethe yof Asen constructionnofla
pal Code in effect one
duplex thereon.
WHEREFORE, the parties request that the Court enter a
Consent Decree which orders a replat of Lot F and Lot G as set
forth in Exhibit "A" and orders the parties to bear their own
costs, including attorneys' fees, subject to the provisions of
paragraph 4 above, and for such other and further relief as the
Court deems proper.
GOLDSMITH and LUBY, SACHS, KLEIN & SEIGLE,
Professional Corporation
Professional Corporation
By
Paul F. Goldsmith,1016
Attorney for Plaintiff
George A. Wester
1151 Bannock Street
Denver, CO 80204
(303)893-0234
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
By
Jon David Seigle, #6620
Attorney for Defendants
John Thomas Kuehlman,
Helen Jane Kuehlman, and
Aspen Savings & Loan Assoc.
201 N. Mill St., Suite 201
Aspen, CO 81611
(303)925-8700
CITY OF ASPEN
Paul Taddune, City Attorney
-2-
/, DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 80 CV 99
GEORGE A. WESTER, Plaintiff,
V.
JOHN THOMAS KUEHLMAN, HELEN JANE KUEHLMAN, and ASPEN SAVINGS AND
LOAN ASSOCIATION, a Colorado corporation, Defendants.
This matter comes on for consideration of the Stipulation
for Entry of Consent Decree and the Court being fully advised in
the premises finds as follows:
1. That Plaintiff is the owner of Lot G, Block 4, City and
Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado (hereinafter referred
to as "Lot G") .
2. That Defendants John Thomas Kuehlman and Helen Jane
Kuehlman ("Kuehlmans") are the record owners of the property
described as Lot F, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin
County, Colorado (hereinafter referred to as "Lot F") and have
been so since 1963.
3. That at the time of the Kuehlmans' acquisition of the
property, it was improved with a single-family residence which
remains intact as of the date of this Order.
4. Th7,.t the improvements located on Lot F encroaches on Lot
G.
5. That the parties have stipulated to a replat of the
common property line between Lot F and Lot G for purposes of
resolving the encroachment and such replat is not done for
purposes inconsistent with the subdivision regulations of the
City of Aspen.
6. That the City of Aspen by and through its counsel, Paul
Taddune, has consented to the entry of this Order.
THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS:
1. That the common lot line between Lot F and Lot G be
hereby replatted as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto which
is titled replat of Lots F and G, City and Townsite of Aspen;
'a
a
FRANCIS STREET
W� `,,C \%-#-
ALLEY R_"
i
E
4'. t
"v FNGTNFERS AnnROVAL
.This Plat'was approved by the. Citv Fnaineer,
City of Aspen, this day of
19
City Fngineer
ASPEN CIT`.' COUNCIL APPROVP-
This Plat was approved by the Aspen Cite
Council this day of
19—and sianeed this c?av of
, 19
yor
ATTEST:
C�-tv Clerk
RECORDING CERTIFICATE
I hereby certifv that: this Plat was accepted
for filing in my off4ce at o'clock_.M.
on the day of �__ and
was duly filed. in Plat Rook _^ at
Paae
PITKIN COT.?NT' CLERK & RECORDER
Clerk
John Thomas xuelhman and Helen
Jane Kuelh_m.,an beina the owners
of Lots F and F Block 4 and
George A. Wester heina the
owner of Lots G, H, and I Block
4 Aspen, Colorado have by these
present laid out and replatted
the same into Lots F and F-1
and into Lots G-1, H and I as
shown on this Plat.
Join Thomas Kuelhman
Helen Jane Kuel man
George A. Wester
STATE OF COLORADO)
) s s
COUNT" OF PITKIN)
The foreaoina certificate was
acknowledged before me this
day of 19 by
John Thomas Kue�iman and Helen
Jane Kuelhman.
My Commission expires
Witness my hand and official seal:
Notar7y--pul5lic
The foreaoina certificate was
acknowledged before me this
day of , 19�1 by
Georae A. Wester.
My Commission expires:
Witness my hand and ofT1_(5_1a1 seams
Notary Public
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
I, HAROLD Ta, JOHNSON, registered surveyor do hereby certify that
this Plat was prepared under my supervision and the the out-
side boundaries, lots, roads and other features are correctly
shown hereon, that the same are based on actual field surveys
Performed on the described property under my direct control
and supervision all in accordance with generally accepted
survevina or.actices and Section 38-51, C.R.S. (1973).
IN WITNESS T,TPFREOF, I have set my hand and seal on this
day of sf.... fir 19 P�
Harold W. Joh on - L.S. 9018
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
LOTS F & G. BLOCK 4
ASPEN, COLORADO
HAROLD W. JOHNSON
REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR
BOX 249 WOODY CREEK, COLORADO 81656 TEL. (303) 923-3496