Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.Main-St.A-1,Blk25.1978 f --, /-I~ --I t< Recorded 3:06 P.M. ~~~Y,r9" April 4,1978 Julie Hane Recorder ~345 ~Gt62B STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION WHEREAS, section 20-19 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen provides that following receipt of a recommenda- tion from the Planning Commission, the City Council may exempt a particular division of land from the definition of a sub- division set forth in section 20-3(s) when, in the judgment of the City Council, such division of land is not within the intent and purpose of the Aspen, Colorado, Subdivision Regula- tions; and WHEREAS, W. HARRY E. SHAW (hereinafter "Shaw") made application for such exemption under the above referenced provisions for the parceling into five (5) separate subdivision lots the following described original Aspen Townsite lots located within the City and Towsite of Aspen, pitkin County, Colorado, to wit: Lots A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H and I of Block 25, and WHEREAS, the Planning commission has approved such application and recommended the grant of exemption to the Aspen City Council: and WHEREAS, on review, the City Council has determined that the proposed division of land is without the intent and purpose of the Aspen, Colorado, Subdivision Resolutions, Section 20-1 et seq., of the Aspen Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to grant an exemption from the definition of subdivision and excuse the applicant from compliance with said Aspen, Colorado, Subdivision Regulations, subject to certain conditions as hereinafter set forth and the payment of a park dedication fee on Lots H and I, as required by Section 20-18 of said Regulations: and WHEREAS, Shaw is agreeable to the conditions as contained herein. ~nClf(345 ~629 NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council, pursuant to action taken at its regular meeting held Monday, February 13, 1978, does hereby grant an exemption from the definition of subdi- vision to the parceling of Lots A through I of Block 25, City of Aspen, by Shaw into the following five (5) subdivi- sion lots: Lot A: Lot B: Lots C & D: Lots E, F, & G: and Lots H & 1. PROVIDED, however, that such grant of exemption is subject to the following: 1. Payment to the City of Aspen of the appropriate park dedication fee attributable to Lots H & I, pursuant to Section 20-18: provided, however, that the payment of such dedication fee may be deferred until such time as a building permit application is filed with the City of Aspen for development of said Lots H & I: 2. Waiver of the right of protest to the formation of an improvement district for purpose of constructing sidewalks, curbs and gutters along Main and/or Fifth and/or Sixth Streets: 3. Waiver of the right of protest to the formation of an improvement district for the purpose of improving the alley located in Block 25: and 4. Removal of any and all encroachments extend- ing from the above described lots onto the alley located in Block 25 when requested to do so to permit the improvement of same pursuant to paragraph 3, above. -2- BullK345 ~l;l.630 PROVIDED, further, that the foregoing provisions shall be binding upon Shaw, his heirs, successors and assigns, and shall be deemed a covenant running with the land, shall burden the premises hereinabove described, and shall bind, and be enforceable in law or in equity against Shaw and all Dated: March , 1978 bed ,1;.~~ (~~- subsequent owners of the real property de I, KATHRYN S. HAUTER, duly appointed City Clerk of the City of Aspen, do hereby certify that the foregoing grant of exemption from the definition of subdivision was granted by the Aspen City Council by motion duly made, seconded and approved at its regular meeting held Monday, February 13, 1978. STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this 071~~) day of March, 1978, by STACY STANDLEY III and KATHRYN S. HAUTER, Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of !:;,:' ,.. ,-',.'.' ~: .' My commission +,.;_> i .-~, Aspen, Colorado, Witness my hand and official seal. v ,- " v ,';,', .':'-',' ,_,,:,.;'....:,c\:/ j',!";l...!~,\" :;""Ji"" -3- , CITY OF ASPEN FINANCE DEPARTMENT CUSTOMER CASHIER'S RECEIPT 01-111 LICENSES & PERMITS 511 D BUSINESS LICENSES 512 D SALES TAX LICENSES 513 D BEER - WINE. LIQUOR LICENSES 514 D CONTRACTOR'S LICENSES 516 D LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION 517 D DOG LICENSE 518 D CENTRAL ALARM LICENSE 519 D BICYCLE LICENSES 520 D EXCAVATION PERMITS 521 D CONSTRUCTION PERMITS 522 D ELECTRICAL PERMITS 523 D PLUMBING PERMITS 524 D HEATING PERMITS 525 D SEPTIC TANK PERMITS 01-111 FINES & FORFEIT5 561 D COURT FINES 562 D COURT BONDS. FORFEIT 563.01 D TOWING FINES - IMPOUND 563.02 D TOWING FINES. NOT IMPOUND 564 D TRAFFIC FINES 566 D FALSE ALARM FINES 568 D DOG IMPOUND FINES 569 D OTHER FINES & FORFEITS 01-111 579 589 OTHER MISC. REVENUES D MAPS, CODES, ZONING REGS, D OTHERS (DESCRIBE) 01.988.632.03 D XEROXING (DESCRIBE) . / COI ro ( "2,'7 Ii'fOTHER.ACCT.NO. '\ \.L...r:J. 1,_ DESCRIPTION, (NAME, NUMBER, ETC.), S0W \ V .0\'-~', \\5t'C1 \ ~\CL~/_ ~ . " (!l~ S"\ J\\ jI5frf', < .. ,- JI '. , ~.' ~~ '-, L\r\ '\' ,~~S~;~R~At~t5:r-'i.fX) 00 RECEIVED FROM \ U \_.\. U L- .' \ 1 .' I I \ (XliX EhpJ.oyee Housing at Water Plant Shaw - Sub:livision ExE>..mption 'I -. '~~~OO~'r'" r....\'f. I: nf;;'~lular 11(>cting l\f:.pen City coullci 1 February 13, 197(; WIIEREj\S, LhL' council wi~;]ws to approve s,1id i:lgreoment and do so by resolution, fl.]l i1S n:>quired by the Aspen Home Rule Charter, NOW, 'l'IIEH.E\,'UHE, ilL.; 1'1' HI~SOLVL.;D BY 'J'IIE Cl'l'Y COUNCIL OF 'filE CI'l'Y OF ASPEN, COLUHAUU, That it do('~, hereby ratify. and .Clpprove the Joint Service Agreement for community amlJul,:lllce scrvicc:s attached hereto and incorporated hy 1..hi5 referellce, and dons authoriz(~ the mayor pro tem, H. l-1idwcl Behrendt, to execute the sume on the City's behalf. Councilwoman \o','ishart moved to adopt Resolution #3, Series of 1978; seconded by Coun,eilman Van Ness. Councilwoman Johnston asked if the fin.J.nce department were received the reports monthly and if they were satisfied with them. Ms. Butterbaugh answered yes, and told Council that the hospital was being very cooperative. All in favor, motion carried. EMPLOYEE HOUSING AT WATER PLANT Mark Danielson, County housing officer I told Council he and Chuck Vidal have been workinq on different proposalS and conditions pertaining to the water plant site. Danielson has been working on the Midland/Park qualifications and solec-tion criteria. Danielson said he would like to postpone any serious discussion until the criteria is t'inalized. Chuck Vidal told Council he was prepared as a first step to define the goals of tile project as far as the City is concerned; not in the physical planning sense but what group of employees and economic range the housing will be for. l\.fter that, the Council can determine what the options are;'-whether the private sector can get involved. or the City has to get involved. Vidal said he felt the Council could benefit from discussiorl of the criteria that Danielson is involved in. Councilman Wishart sugqes~ed a study session, but to wait until Mayor Standley is back because he is very involved in this project. '* SUBDIVISIOtJ EXEMP'fION - Shaw Dill Kane, planning office, told Council that the subdivision regulations of the City 20-4(c) stipulates that contiguous lots, in order to convey land, require processing through subdivision regulations. The Shaws lawn lots A through I, block 2S, on Hain street. between Fifth and Sixth streets. Lots H and I are vacant. This is a request for exemption fJ':'om full subdivision procedures. There are nine lots; they will be con- veyed as Lot A; Lot B, Lots C and 0; Lots E, F, G, for the Shaw residence, and Lots H and I, which are vacant. Kane pointed out there is request to crea~e.separate 3,000 square foot 10ts{A and B) for two individual homesites. There are encroachments in the alley of sheds ancl fences. Also the payment. of the park dedication fee on lots H and I at the time of tJ)f:~ buildinlj permit issuance. Kane explained the planning office recommends the 3,000 square foot lots be granted as homes are already in existence and all improvements an~ there. This will not crGate additional development density but allow the st:ructures to stay. Kane poinled out the Code does not allO\", non-conforming lots or building sites. The planning -office interpreted this to mean that a non-conforming building site not be created. Kall<": told Council that the alley .is not paved.. The planning office recomm0nds t.hat the appli'cants by formally recorded resolution indicate their willingness to waive right of prot~ext to an improvement district should that alley be paved. 'fhis would have the effect of requiring that the encroachment.s be removed. Councilwoman ,Johnston asked what would happen if t.he houses on the first two lots w(-~re removed. K.J.ne answered they would have to comc back in under the zoning regulations. Kane told Council if they required these be sold as two lots, they would qet a conforming structure which would be an office building. - Kane said that it hasn't been a rule to have any formali7.ed written recorded document of conditions for subdivision exemptions. The planning office suggested the language be on the plat. Chuck nrandt, representing the Shaws, prepared a rcsolut.ion o[ these con<;1itions for signature to be recorded. Councilwoman Johnston asked if the FARs f01: Lots H Blld I were under control. Kane said this is an office zone; the FARs would not: apply. There arc height limitations and set back limitations. 'l'here would be more cont.rol through R/ME' regulat.ions on this 101... Councilman Isaac moved to grant the subdivision aqreement for lots A through I, block 2S, the applicant must waive the right of protest for 1..he formation of an improvement di.strict for sidewalks along ~'ifth street and [o~ lots A through I for Main street; the applicants must.waive the riqht of protest for an improvcnlcnt district foy the alley Wllich separates block 25; payment of park dedicatioll fee for lots H and I he deferred unlil issuunce of a building permit; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilwoman ~Johnfiton added that the plat or resoiution outlining th0sC conditions be recorded. Councilwoman Johnston pointed out that tenant displacement W.J.S not addressed at all. Kane said their interpretation of Ordinance 53 was tllat it was, directed towar~s condo- llliniumization. All in favor, motion cClrried. J I ...... '", I' '-' HOLLAND & HART ATTORN EYS AT LAW TELEPHONE 292-9200 AREA CODE 303 500 EQUITABLE BUILDING 730 SEVENTEENTH STREET CABLE ADDRESS HOLHART, DENVER DENVER, COLORADO P. O. BOX 8749 DENVER, COLORADO B0201 PLEASE REPLY TO; MOUNTAIN PLAZA BUILDING 434 E. COOPER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO 81BII TELEPHONE 925-3476 AREA CODE 303 March 3, 1978 William G. Kane, Planning Director Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Shaw Subdivision Exemption - Block 25 Dear Bill: Enclosed with this letter is a xerox copy of the proposed Statement of Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision which I have prepared relating to the recent grant of subdivi- sion exemption by the City Council. The original of the State- ment has been transmitted to Dorothy Nuttall for her review and a xerox copy also has been sent to City Engineer David Ellis. I would greatly appreciate it if the three of you could review the proposed Statement of Exemption and, if satisfactory, obtain Mayor Standley's and City Clerk Hauter's signature and have their signatures notarized. Once done, please let me know and I will record the Statement of Exemption so that it will appear in the real property records of Pitkin County as you have requested. Please do not hesitate to give me a call if you have any questions or suggested changes to the Statement of Exemption. Very truly yours, d>...u~ Charles T. Brandt for HOLLAND & HART CTB/kk Enclosure cc: Harry E. Shaw C. A. Vidal Michael D. Martin, Esq. Dorothy Nuttall, City Attorney David Ellis, City Engineer I STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION WHJ?REAS, Section 20-19 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen provides that following receipt of a recommenda- tion from the Planning Commission, the City Council may exempt a particular division of land from the definition of a sub- division set forth in Section 20-3{s) when, in the judgment of the City Council, such division of land is not within the intent and purpose of the Aspen, Colorado, Subdivision Regula- tions: and WHEREAS, W. HARRY E. SHAW (hereinafter "Shaw") made application for such exemption under the above referenced provisions for the parceling into five (5) separate subdivision lots the fOllowing described original Aspen Townsite lots located within the City and Towsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, to wit: Lots A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H and I of Block 25, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has approved such application and recommended the grant of exemption to the Aspen City Council: and WHEREAS, on review, the City Council has determined that the proposed division of land is without the intent and purpose of the Aspen, Colorado, Subdivision Resolutions, Section 20-1 et seq., of the Aspen Municipal Code: and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to grant an exemption from the definition of subdivision and excuse the applicant from compliance with said Aspen, Colorado, Subdivision Regulations, subject to certain conditions as hereinafter set forth and the payment of a park dedication fee on Lots H and I, as required by Section 20-18 of said Regulations: and WHEREAS, Shaw is agreeable to the conditions as contained herein. , I -~~-... NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council, pursuant to action taken at its regular meeting held Monday, February 13, 1978, does hereby grant an exemption from the definition of subdi- vision to the parceling of Lots A through I of Block 25, City of Aspen, by Shaw into the following five (S) subdivi- sion lots: Lot A: Lot B: Lots C & D: Lots E, F, & G: and Lots H & 1. PROVIDED, however, that such grant of exemption is subject to the following: 1. Payment to the City of Aspen of the appropriate park dedication fee attributable to Lots H & I, pursuant to Section 20-18: provided, however, that the payment of such dedication fee may be deferred until such time as a building permit application is filed with the City of Aspen for development of said Lots H & I: 2. Waiver of the right of protest to the formation of an improvement district for purpose of constructing sidewalks, curbs ,."1 and gutters along Main and Fifth Streets:5';:~' 3. Waiver of the right of protest to the formation of an improvement district for the purpose of improving the alley located in Block 25: and 4. Removal of any and all encroachments extend- ing from the above described lots onto the alley located in Block 25 when requested to do so to permit the improvement of same pursuant to paragraph 3, above. -2- II . ."", ~.. PROVIDED, further, that the foregoing provisions shall be binding upon Shaw, his heirs, successors and assigns, and shall be deemed a covenant running with the land, shall burden the premises hereinabove described, and shall bind, and be enforceable in law or in equity against Shaw and all subsequent owners of the real property described herein. Dated: March , 1978 STACY STANDLEY III, MAYOR I, KATHRYN S. HAUTER, duly appointed City Clerk of the City of Aspen, do hereby certify that the foregoing grant of exemption from the definition of subdivision was granted by ~he Aspen City Council by motion duly made, seconded and approved at its regular meeting held Monday, February 13, 1978. KATHRYN S. HAUTER, CITY CLERK STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of March, 1978, by STACY STANDLEY III and KATHRYN S. HAUTER, Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Aspen, Colorado, Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public -3- -....,... MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Planning Office (BK) DATE: February 8, 1978 RE: Subdivision Exemption for Lots A through I, Block 25 City of Aspen, (The Shaw Property) You will find included in your packet'a memo of February 3, 1978, from the Planning Office to the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion describing the request. Application is made for subdivision exemption approval to avoid full subdivision regulations for the purpose of conveying five separate building sites from the nine lots (A through I) on Block 25. As we point out in the attached memo, we recommend approval of this request subject to three condi tions: 1. That the applicant waive right of protest for the formation of an improvement district for the purpose of constructing sidewalk and gutter along Fifth Street and on Lots H and I. 2. The applicant waives the right of protest to the formation of an improvement district for the improve- ment of the alley which splits Block 25 and such district would have the effect of requiring that all encroachments within that alley be removed at the time of improvement. 3. Agreement that payment of the park dedication fee for any construction on Lots H and I may be deferred until time of construction at the direction of the applicant. We would like to add one additional condition, that the three points of condition that are outlined here be drafted in clear language and be presented on a subdivision exemption plat and be recorded with the signature of the City Engineer to certify that the language regarding the improvement districts be cleared by the Engineering Office prior to recording. There is an increasing problem with maintaining the conditions applied to subdivision exemptions. As you know, there is no formal pro- cedure for plat recordation or subdivision agreement as there is through the normal subdivision process. Providing for rcquirp~ sigI1~tur2S 2n~ Fl~t reco~ding is sO~2thi~g that ~0 s~c~lj ?~~-. provide within the City Code and provide some more formal arrc,:lcje- ment so that the City may maintain a clear record of what conditions were applied to the grant of subdivision exemption. I think this void exists because there has always been an assumption that if somebody was exempted from subdivision regulations, there would be no conditions upon that exemption. ~his is certainly not the case and I think the City Attorney and the planning Office should probably give some thought to formalizing the actual recording procedures for subdivision exemptions and associated plats. until we have such an amendment, we recommend that the plat actually be drawn and prepared for signature of the City Engineering Department. BK:mc '. '\,,,- .?' \'",y\ M E M 0 R A I DUM \ TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Planning Office, Bill Kane RE: Subdivision Exemption for Lots A through I of Block 25, City of Aspen DATE: February 3, 1978 . In accordance with Section 20-4 (c) two or more lots with continuous front- age, and under single ownership are regarded as an undivided parcel for the purposes of the City Subdivision Regulations. Request is being made here for exemption from the full subdivision procedures to create five (5) single-family homesites from the existing nine (9) Lots, A through I, on Main Street between Fifth and Sixth on the south side. As you will recall, we processed a similar application for William Drueding on the south side of this lot of this block on the other side of the alley. There, three homesites were created from six lots. Several unique problems are presented by this application, but we feel that they can be dealt with. First of all, a request is being made to recognize the original 3,000 square foot lots for Lots A and B. There are already existing frame- houses on these lots which have been in existance for some time, The request here is to recognize these lots for purposes of separate con- veyance. . While our subdivision regulations specifically prohibite the creation of non-conforming lots, upon review of the language of the ordinance, it appears clear to us the Section was intended to avoid the creation of non-conforming building sites so as to avoid the prospect of somebody coming in and building a new dwelling on lots that would be non-conforming with respect to size for a given zoning district. In a case here where we have existing residences with all utilities in place, it seems appropriate to recognize these as lots, especially in light of the great cost that would otherwise be associated with requiring removal of the house and dedication of 6,000 square feet. In short the practical strict application of the subdivision regulation in this case would require, in all probability, the removal of a very valuable dwelling; and in our mind would constitute terrible waste of resources and material. In this Section of the Code, we believe. the intention is not to create non- conforming building sites. In fact in the past, we have recognized the old townsite lots as official lots as long as they are developed. A second problem is created by the fact that there are sheds and fences which encroach on the public right-of-way on the alley which splits Block 25. Please find comments of the Engineering Department, TomJones, attached to our memo which summar.izes their view of this and it is one with \~hich we concur. The sheds and fences present no pt'oblem at this til'''': that as a m~tter of record, the applicant should waive right of prot~st to the formation of an improvement district and agree that, should there be a need to pave and improve that alley, that they recognize that as a right of the City to require the removal of the sheds and fence at such a time as may be necessary. We feel this is a practical way to deal with this problem. The application thirdly requests that the park dedication fee for Lots H and I be deferred until time development. Having done this in the case of Drueding and Jenkinson, just recently, we feel there is adequate precedent to grant this request. We recommend approval of this request with the understanding that: 1) the applicant waive right of protest for the formation of an improvement district for purposes of constructing sidewalk and gutter along Fifth Street, Lots H and I; 2) the applicant waive right at protest of the formation of an improvement district for the improvement of the alley which splits Block 25 which would have, the effect of requiring that all encroachments be removed; and 3) def:.i"riement of payment of the park dedication fee until time of construction. lmk enc. " \ . ....,.~ t l. ) CITY. OF ASPEN 130 south galena street aspen, colorado' 81611 . MEMORANDUl1 DATE: February 2, 1978 TO: Planning Office FROM: Engineering (TJ) ~ RE: Shaw Subdivision Exemption The only problem we see with this request is the shed and fence encroachments. Since this alley is presently unpaved, these encroachments are not of great concern. However, the applicants should be required to file a separate agreement (which will be recorded) stating that they will waive the right of protest to the formation of an improvement district for alley paving. They should also state that the existing sheds shall be removed at the request of the City to facilitate alley paving or any other need that the City may have for that right of way. This will also apply to the encroaching fence along the south side of Lots I, H and a portion of G. Regarding the encroaching patio on Lot B, we feel it should be the applicant's option to grant an easement to allow the encroachment or to cut it back to the property line. The fence running north-south on Lot C should be relocated to the common line between Lots Band' C. In addition, Lots H and I should be committed to constructing curb, gutter and walk along Fifth Street at the time of construction on those lots, and the existing house on Lot A should be required . to join in any improvement district formed for th." construction of curb, sutter, and walk along Sixth Street, should that ever occur. With these conditions, approval is recommended. TJ:r.lc , j i . . , , " t . ( ') () ~ HOLLAND & HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW TELEPHONE 292-9200 AREA CODE 303 500 EOUITABLE BUILDING 730 SEVENTEENTH STREET DENVER, COLORADO P. O. BOX 8749 DENVER. COLORADO 80201 CAeLE ....DDRESS HOLHART, DENVER PL.EASE REPLY TO; MOUNTAIN PLAZA BUILDING 434 E.COOP'ER STREET. ASPEN,COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE 925-3476 AREA CODE 303 January 11, 1978 Planning and Zoning Commission c/o William Kane, City/County Planner Ci ty Hall 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Bill: This firm represents Harry E. Shaw who is the owner of real property located on the south side of Main Street between Fifth and Sixth Streets (a plat of the property is attached). The property consists of Lots A through I, Block 25 and contains Mr. Shaw's residence and three other houses. An exemption from the subdivision regulations of the City of Aspen is requested pursuant to Section 20-19 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen to permit division of the existing nine Aspen Townsite lots into 5 separate parcels. The five desired parcels are: 1) the western most house situated upon Lot A: 2) the second house situated upon Lot B: 3) the third house situated upon Lots C and D: 4) Mr. Shaw's residence located on Lots E, F and G: and 5) Lots H and I, presently unimproved. Each lot is a regularly platted Aspen Townsite lot and contains 3,000 square feet (30' x 100'). The four houses were all constructed on the lots around the turn of the century and they have been preseved by the Shaw family through the years. The three houses on Lots A, B, and C and D, respectively, are rented to tenants, one of whom has rented the house for a long term. If the subdivision exemption is granted, the three houses will be sold in due course. An opportunity to purchase the house in which he resides will be provided the long-term tenant. . , I.\.- . FEE SCHEDULE (SUbdivision, Exemption from Subdivision, Rezoning, Park Dedication) Name of Project: Shaw Subdivision Exemption Address: Lots A through I, Block 25 Applicant's Name: Chuck Brandt, Esq~' Phone: 925-3476 Applicant's Address:. Holland & Hart~ Attorneys at Law, 434 East Cooper FOR ZONES WHICH ARE R-15, R-30, R-40, RR and CONSERVATION the Subdivision Fee Formula is as follows: Conceptua 1 $100 + $5.00/dwe11ing unit 1- Prel iminary $22.00/dwe11ing unit Final $3.00/dwe11ing unit FOR ALL OTHER ZONES the Subdivision Fee Formula is as follows: Conceptua 1 $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 REZONING APPLICATION FEE: $125.00 (once a year) 1-17-78 "rcorm or r!~JC[[~:NliS 1t:.~ l!'.1WS PARK DEDICATION FEE SCHEDULE _' ---o<.-~-""",=-:_~ _.~_.=~'="~=-_-=-_-=-_=-....,._ _-="'......_. .'. currC"nt. In.:lrk..-t v.Jluc of 01 pc-rccnl.J.l)c o! the 111nd propo~cd iJ::i the dcvcloi'r.\Cnt site, the perccnt.,gc of the land bcinq uctcrmincd at the rate of b'o and one-half (2',) .:lcre:; for every one thouS01nd (I,OOO) residents of the pro?o~cd development. (th<l:' is. the nu~b,;:or of rczidcnts nIltiplicd by t\.:t:nty-fivc ten thousandths (.0025) of an acre per rC5idcnt). Th~ number of residents attributable to the development shall be calculated in the following manner: .' .' Type of Dwellinq hulti-r.:u:'Ii.ly studio l~O one bedroom 1~3 two b~d=c~m 2.7 three bcdroo~ 4.0 and 1.3 for each additio~al bedroom /" Nu~~c~ of R0~idc~ts PC'r O.....C'lj.;.;"':~ L";:::::. lingle Family or Dupley. one bcurc::,:-:'l tt.>o bC'c:-=.::-:t three b......:::-::>..:':-:'l and 1.3 ~or c~~h addition~l 1.3 2.7 ~.O :'cd~oom .. A durl("~ st=:';~";lt=e sh.,ll c.:):1"ti:.~te t....o d...'.ellin.; \lnit~ !;;):; t::,;:; Fu=t'c~..~:i c~ ~:;~:.; $'-1O)s"::'::'10n. (J) An cX.J::-_~lc of the .:I:~i'lic,!:.io:1. of t~,~ .:l:~o\.C' fonr.ulJ. i::: ;':~; folln\.'~~. .1'.' ::;":;;::.-, tll'" C":-:l,',Lru,-:...:on of 0\1(' $lnC'lll.' 1..:_11]\. .<"':,;."1;',' t,:'~nl.l!..:'!::l<l l,:o bC"Jroll;~:~: (.'11.1 l.~t C"~'nl.Jl:\;::1 L"Ji,ltJ ~'::;::.j::L~ :.,'Pt. with ,1 t::.11 !..."t \'.llu.... 01. $b:>.'JDU.OJ (or :H.JJ per .']UoLlh' fO...,t.J: 2.7 P 1,,'.lll'.lm" ~.7 n':~idl'l1t<3) x o.oo:'~ o..l('res Jl. 4J.!o(,O (:;qll,lrc f"I~t ("'1' .l.:'h') X :;;'.1,3,1 (r:"n-. "'t't v,IlI'" \II LlIl,l l"'l ~"i':"t" 1,l\,t} , ~;1,':::J.l5 (h) Un ir,,.~,,,.,',1 1 ,1!1I1 f.h;lll 1..' .11'1'~ " 1,;,',l llt th,.. ('"Ir,'nl ,- I ! \1.11 ']0' l'l I Ii.' ',1:,' .Ill, i 'h~ l i.: II:: \',Ilu,' ftltTII>~:~,,:,:" t.' CUt:'. qllt!"I~" ~t"t'l. ':,,:,'I.,dL, nn.! t'l 1 1 1 : '," ~ I :1',: .11 1. ',1 1"\ t ')'" ,',': ' n: :'. -1.1', I ~ J:.~.l;.",_-,'. I,. '.'\', ~ \'1:". ,~,.," >-' 'i.' .;'l.:~n" t.o 11,,'11 ljl,:~" I ,,1.,11-0'".1, 'I \,.1,1:1-; ~lLl,' 1-,'10; ;.I'l'o..l' t lOll ,.". ~ I: I I ~'". - : \I ' ''', I."', : !: (":11 . t PH';' ., T . . COUll'lI:'I!l'l. .':",1, I ""I"" 11..,' I.., ~.{;l,__ 1"'''1.1:.'<1 hv Asn."'~' /Pi f ~T; f.. . . - ~1i~' 1.i<: .it.e. t.}{'k li l'i.: " nv~;mJ'~ 0" iff~ce ..,-. .C" . 4h [:'7 !! 1i _r 130 SOFt . J :;. t (, ;:1 ;-: :,treet 81611 "speI"';':"}1'."':(' lUl.. .l '5 ,~- '-,' L . - .. . .'.', ,. January 17, 1978 Mr, Charles Brandt Ho 11 and and Hart 434 East Cooper Street Mountain Plaza Building Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Chuck: We are in receipt of your application for exemption from the City Subdivision regulations to cover Lots A through I, Block 25 of the City. I have forwarded a copy of the plat to City Engineering for comment and will a\~ait their reply. I would like to schedule this item for the February 7, 1978 Aspen Planning and Zoning meeting. I will comment on the questions raised by the application at that time, Sincerely, William G, Kane Planning Director lmk I.~-" M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: Tom Jones, Engineering FROM: Planning Office, Bill Kane RE: Shaw Subdivision Exemption DATE: January 17, 1978 Tom, please review the attached request for subdivision exemption with particular attention to the sheds which encroach on the alley and advise. As you know, all exemption plats are required to be reviewed by engineering. We would like to set this item for the February 7th P&Z meeting. Thank you. lmk enc. ~ _..,--~--...-......_- ... ~,~ HOLLAND & HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW AREA CODE 303 500 EQUITABLE BUILDING 730 SEVENTEENTH STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80202 P. O. BOX 8749 DENVER,COLORADO 80201 CABLE ADDRESS TELEPHONE 292-9200 HOLHART, DENVER PLEASE REPLY TO: MOUNTAIN PLAZA BUILDING 434 E. COOPER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO BI611 TELEPHONE 925-3476 AREA CODE 303 January 13, 1978 Planning and Zoning Commission c/o William Kane, City/County Planner ci ty Hall 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Bill: I neglected to send to you the enclosed check in the amount of $50 representing the subdivision exemption fee required in connection with the subdivision exemption appli- cation as set forth in my January 11th letter. I shall look forward to hearing from you at your early convenience on this matter. Very truly yours, ~~ Charles T. Brandt for HOLLAND & HART CTB/kk Enclosure cc: Harry E. Shaw C. A. Vidal Michael D. Martin, Esq.