HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.Merson-Lot9-Aspen-Subd.1977E�
C;5 PERSON, LOT 9, 4, ASPEN SUB
E
M - i
�I
STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION
FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION
WHEREAS, ALAN MERSON and MARIAN MERSON, are the owners
of a parcel of land located in Pitkin County, Colorado, more
particularly described as:
Lot 9, West Aspen Subdivision Filing No. 1
County of Pitkin, State of Colorado
WHEREAS, there exists on said property a duplex structure
in which the owners wish to separate interest without parceling
the land on which said structure is situate, and
WHEREAS, there has been made an application for exemption
from the definition of subdivision for such conveyance of interests
pursuant to Section 20-19 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Aspen, and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, at
its meeting held on September 13, 1977, has determined that such
exemption is appropriate provided that:
a. neither of the dwelling units shall be leased
for a period of less than six (6) months, except for
two (2) short term rentals,
b. that there be imposed a Park Dedication Fee
calculated pursuant to Section 20-18 of the Municipal
Code of the City of Aspen,
C. a right of first refusal being extended to the
then tenants of the units in the event of sale thereof
within ninety (90) days after October 11, 1977, that
being the date of the grant of the exemption, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has found the proposed division
of interest in the existing structure to be without the intents and
purposes of subdivision regulation provided that the constraints
imposed in subsections a, b and c, above, proposed by the
Planning and Zoning Commission be maintained.
THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Aspen does
hereby determine that the proposed division of interest in the
duplex structure situate on the above -described land is without
0
the intents and purposes of subdivision regulation, and does, for
such reason, grant an exemption from the definition of subdivision
for such action,
PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that this grant of exemption shall at
all times be conditioned on compliance by the owners, their heirs,
assigns and successors in interest, with the conditions itemized
in subparagraphs a through c above; which conditions shall be
deemed a covenant running with the 1
Dated: / -6- /a /> 1'
burden" the same.
Y /STANDLE� -III, MA
G
I, KATHRYN S. HAUTER, do cert fy that the foreg ing
Statement of Exemption from the definition of Subdivision was
considered and approved by the Aspen City Council at its regular
meeting held Tuesday, October 11, 1977, at which time the Mayor,
STACY STANDLEY, III, was authorized to execute the same on behalf
of the City of Aspen.
KATHRYN S HAUTER, CITY CLERK
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this L_ day
of /���_> , 1977, by STACY STANDLEY, III and KATHRYN S.
HAUTER, personally known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk,
respectively, of the City of Aspen.
My Commission expires ;.r�„J. / �, /� 7
r
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
4ary�,
NoPublic
-2-
CITY OF ASPEN
C`
_
S
-0VER
FINANCE
DORTMENT
CASHIER'S RECEIPT
01-111
LICENSES & PERMITS
01-111 FINES & FORFEITS
511
❑
BUSINESS LICENSES
561 ❑ COURT FINES
512
❑
SALES TAX LICENSES
562 ❑ COURT BONDS - FORFEIT
513
❑
BEER - WINE - LIQUOR LICENSES
563-01 ❑ TOWING FINES - IMPOUND
514
❑
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSES
563-02 ❑ TOWING FINES - NOT IMPOUND
516
❑
LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION
564 ❑ TRAFFIC FINES
517
❑
DOG LICENSE
566 ❑ FALSE ALARM FINES
518
❑
CENTRAL ALARM LICENSE
568 ❑ DOG IMPOUND FINES
519
❑
BICYCLE LICENSES
569 ❑ OTHER FINES & FORFEITS
520
❑
EXCAVATION PERMITS
521
❑
CONSTRUCTION PERMITS
01-111 OTHER MISC. REVENUES
522
❑
ELECTRICAL PERMITS
579 ❑ MAPS, CODES, ZONING REGS.
523
❑
PLUMBING PERMITS
589 ❑ OTHERS (DESCRIBE)
524
❑
HEATING PERMITS
525
❑
SEPTIC TANK PERMITS
01-988-632-03 ❑ XEROXING (DESCRIBE)
❑ OTHER - ACCT.
NO.
ESCRIPTION: (NAME, NUMBER, ETC.):
11741 -Z
� CASHIER VALIDATION
1
RECEIVED FROM � `
0
•
ROBERT R. GRUETER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
420 E. MAIN STREET
SUITE 206
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
Ms. Lois Butterbaugh
City Finance Director
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
TELEPHONE
December 12, 1977
925-4544
AREA CODE 303
Re: Park Dedication Fee - Merson
Dear Lois:
Enclosed herewith please find a check made payable to the
City of Aspen in the amount of Three Thousand Six Hundred
Forty -Eight Dollars and Twenty -One Cents ($3648.21).
This check is in payment of the Park Dedication Fee imposed
by the City Council of Aspen when exemption from the definition
of subdivision was granted for this property on October 11,
1977.
Please note that the payment of this fee is made under protest,
as it is my opinion this fee is inappropriate and improper
in a situation such as this one.
Thank you very much.
Very truly yours,
LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT P. GRUETER
By , '� - r"I" , —.' �-- �_
4qro4ke.'PetVer o
Encl.
xc: Alan Merson
Dorothy Nuttall, City Attorney
Recorded at 9:31 A.M., Dec, 1977 Julie Hane, Recorder Re ion Number:
�a3K341- ;%f 5
STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION
FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION
WHEREAS, ALAN MERSON and MARIAN MERSON, are the owners
of a parcel of land located in Pitkin County, Colorado, more
particularly described as:
Lot 9, West Aspen Subdivision Filing No. 1
County of Pitkin, State of Colorado
WHEREAS, there exists on said property a duplex structure
in which the owners wish to separate interest without parceling
the land on which said structure is situate, and
WHEREAS, there has been made an application for exemption
from the definition of subdivision for such conveyance of interests
pursuant to Section 20-19 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Aspen, and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, at
its meeting held on September 13, 1977, has determined that such
exemption is appropriate provided that:
a. neither of the dwelling units shall be leased
for a period of less than six (6) months, except for
two (2) short term rentals,
b. that there be imposed a Park Dedication Fee
calculated pursuant to Section 20-18 of the Municipal
Code of the City of Aspen,
C. a right of first refusal being extended to the
then tenants of the units in the event of sale thereof
within ninety (90) days after October 11, 1977, that
being the date of the grant of the exemption, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has found the proposed division
of interest in the existing structure to be without the intents and
purposes of subdivision regulation provided that the constraints
imposed in subsections a, b and c, above, proposed by the
Planning and Zoning Commission be maintained.
THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Aspen does
hereby determine that the proposed division of interest in the
duplex structure situate on the above -described land is without
f
E.1pK 341 PAGE 58
the intents and purposes of subdivision regulation, and does, for
such reason, grant an exemption from the definition of subdivision
for such action,
PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that this grant of exemption shall at
all times be conditioned on compliance by the owners, their heirs,
assigns and successors in interest, with the conditions itemized
in subparagraphs a through c above; which conditions shall be
deemed a covenant running with thWACNY
d burden the same.
Dated:
T DLE ,-III, MAY R
I, KATHRYN S. HAUTER, do cert fy that the foreg ing
Statement of Exemption from the definition of Subdivision was
considered and approved by the Aspen City Council at its regular
meeting;,,heid; Tuesday, October 11, 1977, at which time the Mayor,
STACY STANDLEY;' III, was authorized to execute the same on behalf
of,, fhe Cit� of ,Aspen.
KATHRYN S HAUTER CITY CLERK
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this ,5 day
of Au -enter � , 1977, by STACY STANDLEY, III and KATHRYN S.
HAUTER, personally known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk,
refpegttyely, of the City of Aspen.
l My Commission expires �.�nJ. / %, /� 7 9
FITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public
-2-
-0
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Planning Office (KS)
RE: Merson Duplex - Subdivision Exemption
DATE: September 22, 1977
At their September 13th special meeting, the Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval of the subdivision exemption request
application of Alan Merson. The application proposes to divide an
existing duplex at the corner of Cemetary Lane and Alta Vista Drive
(Lot 9, Filing 1 of the West Aspen Subdivision) by tenants in common
r f agreement. Built in 1976, the duplex is located on a 15,000 square
r foot lot in an R-15 zone district and therefore complies with the
tminimum lot size of the district.
l
The Planning and Zoning Commission conditioned their recommendation on:
1. A minimum six month lease restriction.
2. A 90 day right of first refusal to existing tenants.
3. Payment of the appropriate park dedication fee.
4. City Engineering approval.
By memo dated September 16, 1977, the City Engineer has certified con-
formance with subdivision design standards. Therefore, no purpose would
be served by the full subdivision review procedure.
lmk
•
•
FEE SCHEDULE
(Subdivision, Exemption from Subdivision, Park Dedication)
Name of Project:
Address:
Applicant's Name:
Applicant's Address:
Phone:
f -6t&K zl-ZZ(O -
FOR ZONES WHICH ARE R-15, R-30, R-40, RR and CONSERVATION the Subdivision
Fee Formula is as follows:
Conceptual $100 + $5.00/dwelling unit
Preliminary $22.00/dwelling unit
Final $3.00/dwelling unit
FOR ALL OTHER ZONES the Subdivision Fee Formula is as follows:
Conceptual $100 + $60.00/acre of land
Preliminary $280.00/acre of land
Final $35.00/acre of land
EXEMPTION FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION FEE: $50.00
current market value of a percentage of the
land proposed as the development site, the
percentage of the land being determined at the
rate of two and one-half (2%) acres for every
one thousand (3,000) residents of the proposed
development (that isr the number of residents
multiplied by twenty-five ten thousandths
(.0025) of an acre per resident). the number
of residents attributable to the development
shall be calculated in the following manner:
Type of Dwelling Number of Residents
Per Uwellina Unit
:lulti-Family
studio
1.0
one bedroom
1.3
two bedroom
2.7
three bedroom
4.0
and 1.3 for each additional
bedroom
Single Family or Duplex
one bedroom 1.3
two bedroom 2.7
three bedroom 4.0
and 1.3 for each additional bedroom
A duplex structure shall constitute two dwelling
units for the purposes of this subsection.
(3) An example of the application of the above
formula is as follows, assultting the construction
of one single family residence containi.ng two
bedrooms on a lot containing 15,000 square feet
with a markot value of $65,000.00 (or, $4.33 per
square foot):
j 2.7 (2 bedroom - 2.7 residents) x 0.002.5 acres
x 43,560 (},quire feet per acre) x $4.33 (mar-
ket value of land per square foot) _ $1,273.15
(b) Unimproved land shall be appraised at the
current mrtrket value of the site incluOing it:s value
attributahl,i to curb, Clutters, street, ,•idt•walk
and utiIitiev if installod on the date of 1-rmit
issuance. lmnrnved lands shall he appr•nie4•1 accordinn
to their highest: and lost use taking into considera-
tion existing cfrucLurrs whether or not titoy are
conforming. Market. v,tltto may be r.uhntattt ioted by
a documtintetl purchaso p? ice (if an arm':: length
transactiolt not mart• than two years old). or by any
other recugn i zed ri,:,uls f ,,rov ideal that as::crur d
valu.ALion ::hall not lc 1-t•lic.1 on ae ovithulcu of.
Current. nuu•kt•l. volu.•. In till, cvt•ut. tlr, Cily and
dtwelolrr fail tt. „•Irt • on tilt' (lIC11•nl mal'kut. value
of t ilt` 1.11al, nurh v" I I., l,h.l l I I-: l "l-t i rht•d Ly is
PARK. DEDICATION FEE SCHEDULE
ROBERT P. GRUETER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
P. O. BOX 4226
ASPEN. COLORADO 61611
September 20, 1977
Mr. Mick Mahoney
City Manager
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Park Dedication Fee
Merson Duplex
Dear Mick:
rH AN D DELIVERED
TELEPHONE
Y=a-a644
AREA CODE 303
The purpose of this letter is to ask you to approve the
following park dedication fee to be paid under protest
by Alan and Marion Merson, as required in order to obtain
approval for their request to be exempted from the definition
of subdivision.
According to my calculations the Mersons should be required to
pay a fee of $3,647.21. This is based upon an application of
that formula found in §7-143 of the Aspen City Code to a
oe duplex, each side of which contains three (3) bedrooms, with
,the current market value of the unimproved property equal to
$70 000 a value given to me by James Mollica, reduced by ad
fjV1 vaTrT'Mrtaxes paid on the property in the amount of $261.02.
I would appreciate it if you would see if this fee meets with
your approval as we are scheduled to go before the City Council
for subdivision exemption on the 26th day of September, 1977.
Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you very
much.
Very truly yours,
LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT P. GRUETER
`B'ooke A: Petersgn
BAP:d
xc: Alan Merson
Dorothy Nuttall, Esq.
•
mrmnpamni im
TO: Clayton Meyring
FROM: Mick Mahoney
DATE: September 21, 1977
RE: Park Dedication Fee Valuation
Merson Duplex
The accompanying letter from Brooke Peterson is acceptable in determining
the park dedication fee valuation for the Merson duplex. Please consider
the value of the lots to be $70,000.
Thank you.
PSM/pm
Ecc. Brooke A. Peterson
0
11
Aspen City Council October 11, 1977
Rishart moved to table this license application for specified problems with
Aarshal and health department are listed, and the consideration of a tavern
and reschedule the issue at the applicant's discretion; seconded by Councilman
/'y. All in favor, with the exception of Mayor Standley. Motion carried. i
,DIVISION EXEMPTION - P4erson Duplex * j
'en Smith, planning department, told Council this request involves an existing duplex.
s was tabled from the last meeting because the attorney wanted to investigate if the
'k dedication fee had already been satisfied by the donation of land. They have not
!n able to find any substantiation to that effect. 19s. Smith told Council they are
:ing for approval with the payment of the park dedication fee, 90 day first right of
'usal, and a six month lease restriction. Brooke Peterson said regarding the 90 day
'st right of refusal, there are no tenants, they are owners, and they are willing to
.ept the conditions.
;ncilwoman Johnston moved to approve the exemption from subdivision with the conditions
the payment of the park dedication fee, 90 day right of first refusal and six month
,imum lease; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried.
r_unntnF cna
.n Stanford, planning office, told Council that SPA's are adopted by ordinance and
sented Ordinance 154 for consideration. The plan presented resulted from a study
sion and includes (1) area dedicated to greenway area adjacent to the river, (2) SPA
ludes a recreational park with a future building zone, (3) SPA with a fraternal lodge
ch is involved in the Andre's trade.
ncilwoman Johnston said she assumed that the recreation could in time be passive
reation. Councilman Hershey asked why the right-of-way road from Spring street did
go through. Planner Bill Kane told Council that a 60 foot right -of- way was needed
h 24 feet of paving, drainage system, etc., and there is not enough room without cutting
the ball field. t,ane said there was nothing to prevent building a road in the future.
e explained that the playing field is 3 feet above grade, a berm is needed, and there
a 3 to 1 slope.
ncilman Hershey moved to read Ordinance ##54, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman
hart. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDIIJA14CE # 54
(Series of 1977)
AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE APPROXIMATELY 11.50 ACRES OF LAND OWNED BY
THE CITY OF ASPEN AND KNOWN AS THE "RIO GRANDE" PROPERTY, ACCORDING
TO AN APPROVED SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA MASTER PLAN FOR THE SITE, THE
ELEMENTS OF WHICH MASTER PLAN WILL CONSTITUTE THE DEVELOPPIENT REGU-
LATIONS FOR THE AREA ALL AS PROVIDED BY ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 24 OF
THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE was read by the city clerk
ncilwoman Johnston moved to adopt Ordinance #54, Series of 1977, on first reading;
onded by Councilman Wishart.
ncilman Parry said he did not think this should be planned without putting a street in
re. Councilman Parry said he hated to see the street closed off. Councilman Parry
ad if a road would be open to the parking lot. Kane said that access to Aspen One
a legal concept and a pencil concept to the parking lot. Councilman Hershey said he
Id not go along with this concept if there was no road at all. Councilman Parry
nted out the closure of the street would create traffic on Mill for people that live
that end of town.
a told Council that the City spent 1.75 million dollars for this piece of property.
there is to be a road there, that's all there will be, a road and a parking lot. The
ncil wants something other than just a parking lot. Mayor Standley pointed out that
the City built a road there, it would have to meet the same standards set for everyone.
said if this is adopted, it will enable the City to subdivide and trade land with
re Ulrych. Councilman Hershey said he support a road being built through the property.
[ call vote; Councilmembers Wishart, aye; Van Ness, aye; Parry, aye; Johnston, aye;
shey, aye; Mayor Standley, aye.
CLE A`7NIE SKI AREA - Joint Review Process
Dr Standley said this is a request to ask the City to enter into the joint review
:ess for Little Annie. Mayor Standley removed himself from the discussion; Councilman
shey removed himself also as he might have an interest in the matter as a law firm.
icilman Parry was appointed to run the meeting.
Garfield, representing the proposed Little Annie Ski Area, was asking Council to join
:he joint review process to study the area to find out whether it has any merit as a
area. This is not asking for approval, just asking to get the process going. The
1t process is a method of studying the ski area. Prior to this time there has been no
rdination of governmental entities, which are 25 state agencies, Forest Service, and
it governmental authorities. There will be a committee formed with representatives
:ach governmental agency. The planning office submitted a memorandum, which brings
Council up-to-date on this project. On September 19, Pitkin County agreed to go into
joint review process, and also agreed to act as the lead agency. The Forest Service
also agreed to enter the process.
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council September 26, 1977
HnT.Y CROSS TASIt-F"110E RECOMMENDATTON
Cil.y Mantuler ttahonoy tolcl Council he had wanted to make the wording of the resolution so
ti"I' it wouldn't I- do open ended and make a commitment for the City. This has been done
now. ;Icahn planning office, requested that Council accept what has been adupted
in Iby 1101y CIorn citizens Task Force resolution a, the master plan for the Holy Cross
prolwrI.y.
Councilman Wishart moved to adopt the recommendations contained in the Holy Cross Citizen':
Task Force resolution as amended; seconded by Councilwoman Johnston.
Last time Mahoney felt that the City would be giving up the right of decisions and the
task force would be assuming the responsibility of the building. Councilman i1cr51i� y ,;;,.icI
he saw nothing objectionable in the ten points. Stanford told Council they were tryin(J t-
get the Holy Cross building registered with the National Trust. Councilwoman Johnston
asked if there would be problems on not owning the land for 20 years. City Attorney Nutt.,
said the City could still get loans on the escrow even though we don't have the deed.
All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Behrendt moved to expand the facility planning board to include Dick Carter,
Mary Helen Cattell, Barbara Conviser, Nick DeWolfe, Marty Kahn, Janet Landry, Diane Lewy,
Roger Moyer, Wes Pouliot, Bob Starodoj, Carla Stroh, Missy Thorn, Laura Wheeler, Larry
Yaw; seconded by Councilman Hershey.
Janet Landry told the Council that this is a development board only and is appointed for
one year. Their job is to make up the by-laws and procedures for a visual arts center
and bring them back to Council.
All in favor, motion carried..
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Merson Duplex +
John Stanford, planning office, told Council this is a request for exemption from subdivi-
sion for an existing duplex located on Snowbunny lane. The P & Z has reviewed this and
given their approval with the four conditions identified in a memorandum to Council.
Brooke Peterson addressed the payment of the park dedication fee. Peterson said this is
an existing subdivision and the park dedication fee in this instance is not proper at there
is no increased use of City facilities being created. Councilwoman Johnston asked if the
dedication fee was paid at the time this was subdivided. Peterson answered no. Council-
woman Johnston pointed out the City Code said it has to be paid. Peterson said at the
time this was subdivided land was dedicated for parks for the West Aspen subdivision.
City Attorney Nuttall said that may make some difference and is worth looking into.
Councilman Hershey moved to table this item until the dedication is resolved; seconded
by Councilwoman Johnston. All in favor, motion carried.
FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL - Gignoux/Lynch
Stanford told Council this subdivision is for the creation of two lots of property behind
the Concept 600 building. There is an existing building on one of the lots, and there is
proposed to be a Sears building on the second lot. The P & Z gave a use determination
for a Sears store in that location. Pat Lynch told Council there is presently a very
old house on the lot, and the person living in the house plans to try to move the house.
Stanford told Council there were a number of problems but these have been worked out to
the satisfaction of the planning office and engineering department. The applicant is
urging that the park dedication fee be paid only on th newly created lot. Councilman
Parry asked if the project had employee housing, and if not, why is the City collecting
a park dedication fee. Stanford answered the Code required in non-residential areas a
6 per pent land value fee. Councilman Behrendt asked what the guarantees were that the
landscaping that is proposed will actually be done. Albie Kern told Council there is a
subdivision agreement with the City. Mayor Standley asked if the alley had been vacated
by the City. Kern said he had had a title company to a very thorough search. When Ms.
Gignoux bought the property, she received a deed to one-half of the alley. The City gave
a Mayor's deed. The title company found no proof of any vacation of the alley. Kern
stated as far as he was concerned that is a City alley. Mayor Standley directed Mahoney to
open up that alley.
Councilwoman Johnston asked the size of the lots. Stanford answered lot 1 is 10,890 square
feet; lot 2 is 12,863 square feet. Councilwoman Johnston read from the Municipal Code
concerning payment of the park dedication fee. Ms. Nuttall said she did not think the
!City could charge for lot 1, which will not be developed. Kern said they were granting a
perpetual easement on the property for 10 feet from Pat Lynch to the City. Kern explained
that Bleeker street is shown as 60 feet wide all the way through. In fact, Bleeker street.
is not 60 feet wide; it narrows down as a result of many Mayor's deeds given out to adjac-
ent land owners. The City is taking 10 feet from lot 1. City Engineer Ellis told Council
Iithat every utility but Mountain Bell was prepared to underground down there.
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the subdivision subject to escrow or performance bond
to the City Manager for landscaping and completing that plan; subject to normal encroach-
ment provisions and agreement concerning the metal building on lot 2, and subject to the
seven points identified by Dave Ellis in his memorandum of September 22; and subject to tit(,
payment of the park dedication fee on lot 1 only at this time and it is not to be accepted
as a waiver for the rest of the lots if they are to be further developed; seconded by
C011110i lmon Wi:;h,ir.t. All in favor, motion carried.
""''' `' :':'_ 1• "UHDIVISION - Schiff apartments
Karen smith, ilannind office, told this is conceptual subdivision for an existing building
at 101: 1',': ' ,•,,.; ..t , ;.1,:, ;,• , i, :.howed Council .-1 1.1 t of tht! eul-J,vir.ion and requested
�' that most ti,t ,,.,l,•,t� �. , „•,its be waived until tit,, u-elirliu.11 ,lat st.ice. The build-
1 i 1 1
ROBERT P. GRUETER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
420 E. MAIN STREET
SUITE 206
ASPEN, COLORADO 61611
TELEPHONE
November 1, 1977 925-4544
AREA CODE 303
Ms. Karen Smith
County Planning Dept.
City Hall
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Merson
Dear Karen:
Per your request, please find enclosed a copy of the Memorandum
from Mick Mahoney.
Should you have any other questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Very truly yours,
LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT P. GRUETER
By : ¢�
Bvro-ke A. Peterson
Encl.
ro�ri�G�. /su��,e �
��'
a �
'Y°" '�'
_. Z e�w�«.�«kFt
___
_—
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Planning Office (KS)
RE: Merson Duplex - Subdivision Exemption
DATE: September 22, 1977
At their September 13th special meeting, the Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval of the subdivision exemption request
application of Alan Merson. The application proposes to divide an
existing duplex at the corner of Cemetary Lane and Alta Vista Drive
(Lot 9, Filing 1 of the West Aspen Subdivision) by tenants in common
agreement. Built in 1976, the duplex is located on a 15,000 square
foot lot in an R-15 zone district and therefore complies with the
minimum lot size of the district.
The Planning and Zoning Commission conditioned their recommendation on:
1. A minimum six month lease restriction.
2. A 90 day right of first refusal to existing tenants.
3. Payment of the appropriate park dedication fee.
4. City Engineering approval.
By memo dated September 16, 1977, the City Engineer has certified con-
formance with subdivision design standards. Therefore, no purpose would
be served by the full subdivision review procedure.
lmk
CITY OF ASPEN
P. O. BOX V e ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
L.
T O � Lt/T esil �1% -4
? ./ / weTI
•
DATE T'1617 7
kf C' �� s GV L � S
BY
INSTRUCTIONS TO BENDER:
1. KEEP YELLOW COPY. 2. SEND WHITE AND PINK COPIES WITH CARBON INTACT.
DATE
SIGNED
INSTRUCTIONS TO RECEIVER:
I. WRITE REPLY. 2. DETACH 5TUB, KEEP PINK COPY, RETURN WHITE COPY TO SENDER.
CITY of ASPEN
u
P.C. HIM V • Aft. CM.oRA013 61*11
i
I
TO C�'T'e�-t �i'L1K DATE
Q �
17
DATE 'j6/77
PXP�y�e7�c.r. L. � Gt�s.-r r, C�CRu �� : �E'GvetirH trr-r�
BY 97. I SIGNED
form N-R 73q Bou�,� ,Box 505, Dallas, Ta "
RECIPIENT KEEP THIS COPY, RETURN WHITE COPY TO SENDER
•
ek. 9`44--
qa AtLU!d�;rwwrw'J�
kvUmAza,
�rvo--O-�
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Planning Office (KS)
RE: Merson Duplex Condominiumization - Subdivision Exemption Request
DATE: September 2, 1977
This application proposes to divide a one and one-half story duplex
located at the corner of Cemetary Lane and Alta Vista Drive; more
specifically on Lot 9, Filing 1 of the blest Aspen Subdivision. Zoning
is R-15 which allows a duplex on 15,000 square feet for previously
subdivided lots. The duplex was built in 1976 by Alan Merson who
now wishes to divide the property through a tenants in common agreement.
Unless we hear differently from the City Engineer, we recommend approval
of the subdivision exemption inasmuch as the improvements meet the
current subdivision design standards. Therefore, no purpose is served
by the full subdivision review.
In accordance with Council policy regarding housing impact, we recom-
mend approval be conditioned on:
1. A minimum six month lease restriction.
2. A 90 day exclusive non -assignable right of first refusal
to the existing tenant to purchase the unit at current
fair market value.
An additional condition should be payment of the appropriate park dedi-
cation fee.
lmk
• •
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION
Pursuant to Section 20-19 of Chapter 20 of the Municipal
Code of the City of Aspen, ALAN MERSON and MARION MERSON, hereby
apply for an exemption from the definition of the term "Sub-
division" with respect to the real property described as:
LOT 9, of West Aspen
Subdivision, Filing No. 1,
City and Townsite of Aspen,
Pitkin County, Colorado.
The applicant submits that the exemption in this case would be
appropriate.
The application involves subdivision of an existing
duplex. The owners of the property will be tenants -in -common
and there will be a declaration of restrictions applicable to
the property and does not in any way increase the land use im-
pact of that property. The applicant submits that such an exemp-
tion in the instant case would not conflict with the intent and
purpose of the subdivision regulations which are directed to
assist, among other things, orderly, efficient and integrated
development of the City of Aspen; to insure the proper distri-
bution of population; to coordinate the need for public services;
and to encourage well planned subdivision. They are directed to
considerations of subdivision design and improvements and to rest-
rict such building where it is inappropriate after considering
its land use impact.
In the present application those decisions cannot be
made as the building exists, and the density would not effect
the prevailing contemplated or desired population density on
this property.
We would greatly appreciate your consideration of this
matter at your next regular meeting.
Sincerely,
C /ti
o ke e son
for th Applicant
0