Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ec.715&717 Cemetery Ln.chapmanresubdiv.1982 J940fh~. 130S0~HIG~~AST~! - ~E~'~L~R~081611 IVIESSAGE TO r=A-L,L~'" 12' C# HIJ~ REPLY /~ J DATE ~b ; cfl/lPH/lAl Ctf//f(J;?O /eJ -/'7- - 2" .-z-... :J DATE j? J-/5//-se /I- c c. IE- (7/ -r/fr.s /1-5 r=t'/ ,.e BY /'f1VP gv~~ SIGNED "_,,,_~_,_,__,.__,___._,_,__,__,,_"'__'__'__'__'__~_~___u l ,:.;/ ~ MEr.mRANDUM TO: Alan Richm~n, Planning Office FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Department ~ DATE: November 9, 1982 RE: Chapman Condominium Revised Plat Having reviewed the above application and having made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. The applicants should be required to join an improvement district in the event one is formed. 2. Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended to show the following: a. Indicate on-site parking spaces at one space per bedroom. b. Utility sources and meter locations. c. Show the fence around unit two. d. Location of the irrigation ditch along the westerly property line. e. The wording of the surveyor's certificate is somewhat unclear and should indicate that the work was done by the surveyor. JH/co '" L ~ .., .. .','., ". ~ MEMORANDUM ...,r:.. Ci ty Attorney" Engineering Department Building Department Alan Richman TO,: PLANNER: RE: DATE: Chapman Condominium Resubdivision,- Special Review October 13, 1982 The attached is an application for review fo.r resubdivision under Section 20-21 of the Code. The resubdivision is required due to changes made during construction. Please review the plat, and return any comments you may have back to the Planning Office by November 8 so that we may prepare our memo for the November 16 City P & Z meeting. Thank you. SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Chapman Condominiums : 1 U Alan Richman told Councilttle:se'llnit$,are already.built and tl built so that all changes that were made after construction'aJ Mayor Edel said he does not understand why this has to be on 1 Councilwoman Michael moved to grant subdivision exception to 1 subject to tpe fallowing conditions; (1), the applicants shoul( improvements district in the event, one is formed: (2}. prior t< should be amended to show the following; (a) indicate on-site bedroom: (b) utility sources and meter locations i (c}show thE location of the irrigation ditch along the westerly property : the surveyor's certifcate is somewhat unclear and should indi( by the surveyor; seconded by Counc:ilman Parry. All in favor, SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION,- pitkin Center Alice Davis, planni:ngoffice, told .council there must be plam applicant wants to.transfer deyelqpment rights between the 101 has a development right and can be subdivided. Councilman Collins. moved, toa:pprove the request for subdivis,ic of dividing lots 0, P, Q, arid lots Rand S, Block 94, Aspen 0: four parcels. Approval is subject to the three conditions lis memeorandum dated December 27, 1982; seconded by Councilman Pc carried. SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION - Mountain River Manor i V Alice Davis told Council this is a request for subidivision e: and recondominiumizing Mountain River M.anor. studio .units., .T( building, a loft was add.ed. ,Council neea.sto make the determ: lofts does not change the studio unit. Ms. Davis s'aid if CO~l bedroom units, they would need 1,000 square feet. These unitf lofts were built without the proper 'approvals or permits; howE Gideon' Kaufman said the applicant would like permission to amE these lofts exist. P & Z unanimously recoromendedthis . Ms. 1 the units more habitable. ' Councilman Knecht moved to approve the subidivision,.exception to allow the addition of sleeping areas to 8 of the 16 studio necessary changes to the original plat. Approval is subject . (1) plat must be titiled "a:menged plat"; (2) changes in the p: and a statement that the reInaining sheets of the original pIa" signature blocks for approving authorities and engineering de] and recorder's acceptance certificate must be added to the pl. Parry. All in favor, motion carried. REVENUE SOURCES FOR JOINT'HOUSIN'G AUTHORITY Mayor Edel said on all suggested sources of funding, who is rl Mayor Edel said it ~ooks like the employee will end up paying said the employee housing certfication fee will add about $4.1 Councilman Knecht said he would rather see the city pay the $, authority than to add onto any employee costs. Mitchell said operations; it will not give the department money to do anyth. Assistan~ City Attorney Esary said there is a benefit to the c enforcement of the policies on the books. Mayor Edel said hi mistake in going into this. Councilwoman Michael said she wa: sources #3 and 4. Councilman Knecht moved that if staff recommends going to fou: the housing office has an on~going revenue, the Council shoul, 1""'1_...__";"'___ n___.... rt_~._"'..:,.......-"""'~-~,... ~-,,~"I""'\"" ~'t"'\'?-~~t.".=--,""',.=I! ~ MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Aspen City Council Alan Richman, Planning Office RE: DATE: Chapman Condominiums Subdivision Exception December 21, 1982 APPROVED AS TO FORM:~~~ Location: Lot 2, Aspen Employee Housing No.1 (715 and 717 Cemetary Lane y. Lot Size: 19,800 square feet (approximately). Zoning: R-15. Applicant's Request: The Champan Condominiums are a residential duplex currently occupied by members of the City of Aspen staff and are deed restricted for use as employee housing. This applicant requests resubdivision of the units under Section 20-:21 of the Code due to changes made to the units during the construction stage. Referra 1 Comments: The Engineering Department's comments are attached for your review in a memo from Jay Hammond dated November 9. The comments include the need for the plat to be amended prior to recordation and the requirement that the applicants join an improvement district, in the event one is formed. The Planning Office's comments on this application reflect a concern which has been voiced repeatedly by City Council regarding lithe excessive reivew requirements of our Code. II It is quite obvious that the only review necessary to approve this plat is that of a qualified engineer, not that of a planner, P&Z or Council. We have been asked to look at portions of the Code where reviews can be delegated to staff or otherwise simplified and find this to be an ideal example of one such review. We intend to come back to you with a series of Code amendments which set criteria in the Code for permitting simplified review procedures, whenever legally permissable and wherever no land use policy considerations are involved. Planning Office and P&Z Recommendation: The Planning Office and P&Z, at a meeting on December 7, 1982, recommend the approval of the Chapman Condominiums subdivision exception, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicants should be required to join an improvement district in the event one is formed. 2. Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended to show the fo 11 owi ng: a. Indicate on-site parking spaces at one space per bedroom. b. Utility sources and meter locations. c. Show the fence around Unit 2. d. Location of the irrigation ditch along the westerly property line. e. The wording of the surveyor's certificate is somewhat unclear and should indicate that the work was done by the surveyor. ~ Memo: Chapman Condominiums Subdivision Exception December 27, 1982 Page Two Council Action: Should you concur with the recommendations of the Planning Office and P&Z, the appropriate motion is as follows: "Move to grant subdivision exception to the Chapman Condominiums, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicants should be required to join an improvement district in the event one is formed. 2. Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended to show the following: a. Indicate on-site parking spaces at one space per bedroom. b. Utility sources and meter locations. Show the fence around Unit 2. c. d. Location of the irrigatior ditch along the westerly property line. e. The wording of the surveyor1s certificate is somewhat unclear and should indicate that the work was done by the surveyor. 10 ,.,...---'f"~-' ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Alan Richman, Planning Office RE: Chapman Condominiums Revision DATE: December 7, 1982 Location: Lot 2, Aspen Employee Housing No.1 (715 and 717 Cemetary Lane). Lot Size: 19,800 square feet (approximately). Zoning: R-15. Applicant's Request: The Champan Condominiums are a residential duplex currently occupied by members of the City of Aspen staff and are deed restricted for use as employee housing. This applicant requests resubdivision of the units under Section 20-21 of theC()dedue to changes made to the units during the construction stage. Referra 1 Comments; The Engineering Department's comments are attached for your review in a memo from Jay Hammond dated November 9. The comments include the need for the plat to be amended prior to recordation and the requirement that the applicants join an improvement district, in the event one is formed. The Planning Office's comments on this application reflect a concern which has been voiced repeatedly by City Council regarding lithe excessive review requi rements of our Code. II It is quite . obvious that the only review necessary to approve this plat is that of a qualified engineer, not that of a planner, P&Z or Council. We have been asked to look at portions of the Code where reviews can be delegated to staff or otherwise simplified and find this to be an ideal example of one such review. We intend to come back to you with a series of Code amendments which set criteria in the Code for permitting simplified review procedures, whenever legally permissable and wherever no land use policy considerations are involved. Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning Office recommends that you recommend to City Council the approval of the resubdtvision of the Chapman Condominiums~ subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicants should be required to join an improvement district in the event one is formed. 2. Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended to show the fo 11 owi ng; a. Indicate on-site parking spaces at one space per bedroom. b. Utility sources and meter locations. c. Show the fence around Unit 2. d. Location of the irrigation ditch along the westerly prope rty 1 i ne. e. The wording of the surveyor's certificate is somewhat unclear and should indicate that the work was done by the surveyor.