Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.ShawSeparationLots23&24from16-22—in V—�Y'- dff -- S HAW Lots 23, 24, Block 103, Hallam X A 7a w Ih. y � h= w, Mt.-rcu .i' =QEp,QR & CAD 5r T � � s s� � s�^: tiw r a' -t a •. . t x � v. �"iG "f „x�, �., x A � r -r s PROPERTY DESCRIPTION A parcel of land being located in Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian; said parcel also being the original Lots 16 through 24, Block 103, and which, under this plat, are now Lots 16 through 20, Block 103, Hallam's Addition to the City of Aspen, Colorado. Said parcel is more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue whence the East 1/4 corner of said Section 12 bears N 60" 46' 14" E., 654.94 feet; thence N 44' 34' 17" E., 125.00 feet; thence, 74.12 feet around a curve to the left having a radius of 3583,05 feet (the chord of which bears S 51' 21' 33" E., 73.99 feet); thence N 79' 06' 33" E., 69.33 feet; thence S 49' 47' 32" E., 50.25 feet; thence S 27' 58' 53' E., 51.81 feet; thence S 19' 51' 50" E., 99.76 feet; thence S 12' 47' 14' E.', 166.34 feet to the Northerly line of Smuggler Street; thence N 75° 09` 11" W. 118.48 feet along •the Northerly line of Smuggler Street to the intersection with the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue; thence 245.29 feet around a curve to the left having a radius of 401.20 feet (the chord of which bears N 39° 46' 29" W., 241.49 feet) along the Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue; ` thence 100.00 feet around a curve to the right having a radius of 483.05 .feet (the chord of which bears N 51' 21' 33' W. Qea 8? ° °*' Northeasterly line of Lake Avenue to th. ;-int y...,.l.:.a. arc,-1 contains 56,614 square feet, more or less. CITY OF ASPEN SHAW AND THE WPW JOINT VENTURE SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS APPROVAL This Subdivision Exemptions Plat evidences approval of the Shaw and WPW Subdivision exemption applications by action of the City Council of the City of Aspen, taken at a duly constituted meeting held on March 14, 1977, and is hereby accepted and approved by the City of Aspen for exemp- tions from the requirements of the full Subdivision Regulations contained in Section 20, Aspen Municipal Code, as amended, including those required by Ordinance 22, Series of 1975, City of Aspen, pursuant to Section 20-19(b) thereof, subject to the following conditions: 1. The owner of Lot 20, Dorothy Koch Shaw, shall seek historic desiq- nation for the existing structure thereon from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee. 2. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall seek historic designation for the existing structures on Lots 17, 18, and 19, from the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Committee; and, any proposed dwelling on Lot 16 shall be submitted to the City of Aspen Historic preservation Committee for its review. 3. The owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall remove the old frame dwelling located on Lots 18 and 19. 4. The owner of Lots 17, 18, and 19, The WPW Joint Venture, its individual venturers, their successors and assigns, shall maintain a floor area ratio (FAR) of not greater than .3:1 in any restoration or additions to the three existing structures on those lots, including within the ratio the size of the existing structures as modified by such additions or restorations. 5. Payment by the owners of the park dedication fee required by Ordinance 63, Series of 1976, City of Aspen, for Lots 17, 18, 19, and 20, in a total amount of $14,714.64, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged; and, payment of such park dedication fee for Lot 16 as would be due under that ordinance upon issuance of a building permit. Dated: 1977. ATTEST: 4 Kathryn S, Hau er, City Clerk SUNW ANDTNE W PW JOI NT VENTURE 5UI50IV1510N EXEMPTIONS PLAT' CITY OF i�hSpQN 6LOCK tOD , NALL&M' S n,00t_T tO N 1/�C�NtTY M4Sp CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP Dorothy Koch Shaw, owner of Lot 20, and The WPW Joint Venture, owner of Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, all in Block 103, Hallam's Addition and as described hereon, hereby certify that they are the owners of all the real property described in the within Subdivision Exemptions Plat; that such exemptions were sought in order for Dorothy Koch Shaw to sell old Lots 16-22, Block 103, Hallam's Addition, and retain old Lots 23 and 24, which nine lots, by the City's approval, now become Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19, owned by The WPW Joint Venture, and Lot 20, owned by Dorothy Koch Shaw, A as platted hereon. Dated: jwe.3 1977.- Dorothy T'ocln Shaw - By t( rry w , Ramona Marka unas Her attorneys in fact The WPW Joint Venture J B. Wogan, J H e Pe ss c Jaqueline T. Wogan ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 01 day of , 1977, by HARRY SHAW and RAMONA MARKALUNAS, as attorn _s in fact for DOROTHY KOCH SHAW. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT I, HAROLD W. JOHNSON (JOHNSON-j.ONC;FELLOW & ASSO.) licensed surveyor, STATE OF COLORADO ) do hereby certify that this SHAW AND THE WPW JOINT VENTURE SUBDIVISION EXEMPTJONS PLAT was prepared under my supervision and that the out -side ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) boundaries, lots, roads and other features are correctly shown hereon, that the same are based on actual field surveys performed on the described The forggoinq instrument was acknowledged before me this A pr.operty under my direct control and supervision during the months of ►.�/GGE "ay of i , 1977, by JOHN B. WOGAN, JR., HENRY PEDERSEN, and "November and December, 1976, all in accordance with generally accepted 1973 JAQUELINE T. WOCAN, for themselves and for The WPW Joint Venture. surveying practices and Section 3r-51 et secs. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and seal on this ,3 r WITNESS my hand and official seal. 1977. -- - / My commission expires: a/��f JOHNSON-LONrFELLOW & ASSO. , .INC. �} tad { B-- HAROLDof �O`N, Presi ent m7 sale Notary Pi is _ y STATE OF' COLORADO� 54rr ss. r CrC i^ COUNTY PITKIN ffi RECORDING CERTIFICATE They fore oinci instrument was acknowledged before me thisT I hereby certify that the within Subdivision Exemptions Plat was _ day of 1977, b,,> HAROLD W. JOHNSO � for himself and accepted for filing in my office at Y A31 o'clock �y M. on the � ^T^� I r 1 , as President of T0111,7SON-LON FELLOW & ASSO. , INC,. � --- .a 'x ',ay of J7," e 1977, and was dulv filed in Plat Book t� at Page under reception number $ 16� WITNESS my hand and official seal.. PITKIN COL'NTY,CLERK & RECORDER :nmissior. expires: k cBy ---f - ---- f / r Clerk VAG tar:Public i ,r SWEET i OF 3 a �'�-:- • =R6BAR & CAP SWT SUEET 3 OF 3 HOLLA D << HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW TELEPHONE 292-9200 500 EQUITABLE BUI-DING CABLE ADDRESS 730 SEVENTEENTH STREET AREA CODE 303 HOLHART,DENVER DENVER, COLORADO P. O. BOX 8749 DENVER,COLORADO 80201 PLEASE REPLY TO: MOUNTAIN PLAZA BUILDING 434 E. COOPER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO 81611L4CRADO TELEPHONE 925-3476 AREA CCDE 303March 3, 1978William G. Kane, Planning DirectorAspen/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, Charles T. Brandt for HOLLAND & HART CIF CTB/kk Enclosure cc: Harry E. Shaw C. A. Vidal Michael D. Martin, Esq. Dorothy Nuttall, City Attorney David Ellis, City Engineer CC'4_A00 STATEMENT OF EXEMPTIONFROM 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. • • 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 & I. PROVIDED, however, that such grant of exemption is subject to the following: 11 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 Fifth 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- 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 the 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 RECE/\ F FFe251_9j O TO: Dave Ellis FROM: Planning Staff (HC) RE: Subdivision Exemption - Shaw Separation; Lots 23 & 24 from Lots 16 - 22 DATE: February 22, 1977 This is a request by Dorothy Shaw for Subdivision Exemption to separate lots 23 and 24 from lots 16-22, Block 103, Hallam's Addition. A separate subdivision exemption is in process for the division of lots 16-22 by 'dPW Venture. No separate survey was submitted for this application. Technically, this exemption will be processed prior to WPW, but will be considered simultaneously. We have set a preliminary date of March 1, 1977, for Planning and Zoning Commission review. g,14�-o �//4/77 l HOLLA D & HART ATTGR'., t:5 AT I -ASV V E Iy� /il 500 EQUITABLE BUILCI-NG /�� IE AODRE qj TELEPHONE 292-3200 730 SEVENTEENTH STPEET HOLHART,DENVER AREA CODE 303 0ENVER, C?LORADO eO202 P.O. BOX 8749 1p`'p. y,�, • E6 25 1977 DENVER,COLORADO S0201 PLAZA BUILDING F�A E«GINEE" V PLEASE REPLY TO: MOUNTAIN 434 E. COOPER STOEET, ASPEN. COLGRADO 81e11 COL� TELEPHONE 925-3476 AREA CODE 303 February 11, 1977 Mr. Bill Kane Planning Office Planning & Zoning Commission City of Aspen Ladies and Gentlemen: This firm represents Mrs. Dorothy Koch Shaw. We request a subdivision exemption to permit the separation of Lots 23 and 24, Block 103, Hallam's Addition from a parcel of.land designated as Lot 16 through Lot 22 of Block 103. Lots 23 and 24 consist of the Shaw residence and said lots are in compliance in all respects with the current zoning regulations for that property. A subdivision exemption is requested to permit the sale of Lot 16 through 22 of Block 103 to a third party while retaining Lots 23 and 24 as Mrs. Shaw's residence. We are aware that the proposed purchaser of Lot 16 though Lot 22, WPW Joint Venture, has filed a request for sub- division exemption. We ask that this exemption request be considered separately from WPW's request. We have no objection to the WPW submittal, (in fact we agree with the intent of the submittal), however, we wish to estab- lish the right of Mrs. Shaw to separate her reside ce and lot from the remainder of the property independently from any particular proposal submitted for the remainder of the property. Very truly yours, Michael D. Martin for Holland & Hart MDM:bb Before the Planning Commission Board of Adjustment, and City Council, City of Aspen February 1977 Application of WPW JOINT VENTURE for Exemption from the Definition of a Subdivision or, in the alternative, for Conceptual Subdivision Approval, and for a Variance, in order to Change the Existing Seven Lots 16-22, Block 103, Hallam's Addition into Four Lots OATES, AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr. 600 E. Hopkins, Suite 204 Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-2600 Attorneys for Appli E. C WPW Joint Venture F` O F81 It 0o, LEONARD M. OATES RONALD D. AUSTIN J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH, JR. WILLIAM R.JORDAN M ROBERT W. HUGHES BARRY D. EDWARDS LAW OFFICES C�t, OATES, AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN 600 EAST HOPKINS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 �'�February 10 , 1977 --- -14 Mr. William G. Kane Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Planning & Zoning Commission City Hall, 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 City Council, City of Aspen City Hall, 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Ladies and Gentlemen: We represent WPW Joint Venture, which has an option to purchase from the Shaw Estate and Dorothy Shaw Lots 16 through 22, Block 103, Hallam's Addition, which are seven city lots on Lake Avenue abutting Hallam's Lake. Presently existing on that property are four houses: three Victorians and one frame dwelling. Lots 16 through 22, together with Lots 23 and 24 (on which the large green Shaw house is located) are presently owned by the Shaw Estate and Dorothy Koch Shaw. Lots 23 and 24 and the Shaw house are not included in the sale to WPW. We understand the Shaw Estate will separately apply for an exemption in order to avoid any question as to a subdivision violation in selling Lots 16 through 22. E-0 WPW Joint Venture wishes to change the existing seven City lots (Lots 16 through 22) into four lots, pre- serve the three historic Victorian dwellings, remove the frame house (it is on too small a portion of a lot and violates set -back requirements), all of which we believe will contri- bute substantially to the improvement of this historic area. To accomplish that, it is necessary to seek a subdivision exemption, since two lot lines are to be changed and lot sizes increased. It may also be necessary to seek _ a --variance since (1) by reason of the curve in Lake Avenue the lots are necessarily somewhat trapezoidal or pie -shaped, and (2) the lot lines have to be drawn to enhance the three existing Victorians; and hence the front lot lines in one instance will not meet the 60-foot minimum presently required by the City (all seven existing lots do not meet that standard). • 5� OATES, AUSTIN S, MCGRATH Page Two The changing of the existing seven lots (Lots 16 through 22) into four lots will result in lot sizes in excess of 9,000 square feet each; existing zoning requires a size of 6,000 square feet, and three of the seven lots are substandard in size. ( 1(6,1q+22') The Victorian dwellings that exist on three of the proposed new lots will be restored and preserved, the timing of such restoration depending upon the owner. That will leave one additional building site, which is the fourth lot and which consists of existing Lots 16 and 17; it is to be owned by a long term local family (some 25 years, but who reside also in Denver) who will build a single family resi- dence on it. One of the new lots will be purchased by another long term local (25 years or so) who will enter into a long-term lease with option to purchase with Peggy Clifford, so that Ms. Clifford can continue to reside in the house that she has rented from the Shaws for some 21 years; and her option price will be less than that given to her by Ms. Shaw and the Shaw Estate. A second Victorian dwelling and the lot supporting it is subject to a right of first refusal for Mr. Frank Baranko, who I gather has resided in it for several years. Another long term local (25 years or so) will choose either the lot and house subject to Tor. Baranko's right of first refusal, if he does not exercise it, or the adjacent lot and house. In short, if my three clients who comprised the WPW Joint Venture obtain the subdivision exemption and thus buy the property, and if Mr. Baranko exercises his right of first refusal, then the four new lots created out of the old seven lots will have long term local people residing in the three existing Victorian dwellings, and a long term local building a single family residence on the one additional lot. This is in contrast to what could be possible if a developer were permitted to build on all seven lots, possibly destroying the Victorian homes there, as they have not been subjected to historic designation. That is, the maximum density permissible is either seven single family dwellings or perhaps a total of eight units (four duplexes) depending upon how the buildings would be constructed upon the lots. OATES, AUSTIN S, McGRATH Page Three My three clients who comprised the WPW Joint Venture do not desire the publicity perhaps attendant upon the public nature of a land use application. Similarly, the friend and benefactor of Peggy Clifford does not desire public exposure, and hence we ask your indulgence in the vague references to them contained herein. We believe that the plan of WPW Joint Venture for this land is meritorious and capable of being considered solely on its merits apart from the people involved. We hope that you agree their desire for anonymity does not reflect upon their plan. In conjunction with this subdivision exemption application, WPW Joint Venture seeks a waiver of any require- ment for park dedication fees. We understand that while payment of park dedication fees under Ordinance 63, Series of 1976, is not specified as a condition in the City code for subdivision exemption, that the City has often required such payment as a condition of exemption. We would urge you to consider that with regard to the normal subdivision exemption -- for example, condominiumization of an existing apartment house -- there is a rationale and justification for exacting such fees: the condominiumization increases the value at least on paper of the existing building and hence some payment of a fee for the general public benefit may be warranted. In this plan, however, a developer's profit and increase in value is not involved nor created by the subdivision exemption or approval process. While the market price of the property to the joint venture is high, all of the four lots to be created out of the seven old lots are to be for the primary residence of a local family, and no real increase in value of the property on paper or otherwise is accomplished by making four out of seven lots. Rather, giving each of the existing three dwellings more land area on which to exist justifies the substantial expenditures that might be involved in the restoration of the Victorians. In addition, no new density is created, nor any new building sites, since the fourth lot that will be a building site could be built upon presently as two existing lots. OATES, AUSTIN 8, MCGRATH Page Four WPW Joint Venture must exercise its option by March 16. We ask therefore that this matter be heard by the Planning Commission on March 1, so that, in the event of favorable action, the application would be heard by City Council at its March 14th meeting. This letter perhaps states the matter in more detail than it need be stated. The accompanying map will show more accurately the area and what we seek to accomplish. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH & JORDAN By J k),LL1u4, WG k-AL L- J. Nicholas McGrath, J . JNMjr/gc MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Planning Staff (HC) RE: Subdivision Exemption - Shaw Separation; Lots 23 & 24 from Lots 16 - 22 DATE: March 10, 1977 This is a request by Dorothy Shaw for Subdivision Exemption to separate Lots 23 and 24 from Lots 16-22, Block 103, Hallam's Addition. A separate subdivision exemption is in process for the division of lots 16-22 by WPW Venture. The Planning and Zoning Commission extensively reviewed this=request on March 1, March 8 and conducted a site inspection on March 3, 1977. The joint recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office is to approve the request subject to two conditions: 1) Payment of the park dedication fee 2) That the applicant request historic designation for the Shaw dwelling. HOLLAND & HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW TELEPHONE 292-9200 500 EOUITABLE BUILDING 730 SEVENTEENTH STREET AREA CODE 303 OENVE R, COL.O RADO 60202 P.O. BOX 8749 DENVER,COLORADO 80201 PLEASE REPLY TO: MOUNTAIN PLAZA BUILDING 434 E•COOPER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE 925-3476 AREA CODE 303 February 11, 1977 Mr. Bill Kane Planning Office Planning & Zoning Commission City of Aspen Ladies and Gentlemen: CABLE ADDRESS HOLHART,DENVER This firm represents Mrs. Dorothy Koch Shaw. We request a subdivision exemption to permit the separation of Lots 23 and 24, Block 103, Hallam's Addition from a parcel of land designated as Lot 16 through Lot 22 of Block 103. Lots 23 and 24 consist of the Shaw residence and said lots are in compliance in all respects with the current zoning regulations for that property. A subdivision exemption is requested to permit the sale of Lot 16 through 22 of Block 103 to a third party while retaining Lots 23 and 24 as Mrs. Shaw's residence. We are aware that the proposed purchaser of Lot 16 though Lot 22, WPW Joint Venture, has filed a request for sub- division exemption. We ask that this exemption request be considered separately from WPW's request. We have no objection to the WPW submittal, (in fact we agree with the intent of the submittal), however, we wish to estab- lish the right of Mrs. Shaw to separate her residence and lot from the remainder of the property independently from any particular proposal submitted for the remainder of the property. Very truly yours, Michael D. Martin for Holland & Hart MDM:bb WPW Subdivision Exemption Application - March 1977 Clifford House Brick House Baranko House Existing house size 800 sq.ft. 1,550 sq.ft. 1,250 sq.ft. Existing Shaw Victorians with Proposed Size Limitations for Additions and Restoration Size of proposed lots 11,882 sq.ft. 11,987 sq.ft. 9,479 sq.ft. Size of house permitted under existing city area and bulk requirements 16,256 sq.ft. 14,456 sq.ft. 10,568 sq.ft. Proposed City R-6 FAR .3 .3 .3 Total 3,564 sq.ft. 3,596 sq.ft. 2,843 sq.ft. • • ASPEN CITY CODE AREA AND BULK REQUIREMENTS Requirement R-6 Requirement R-6 t (1) Minimum lot area ' (square feet unless 6,000 (6) Minimum rear yard Principal build- ! designated in acres) (feet) ing-15 ' Accessory build- ing-5 (2) Minimum lot area 4,500 !; per dwelling unit (square feet unless designated in acres) (7) Maximum height Principal build - (feet) ing8-25 Accessory build- i ings-21 on front ` 2/3 of lot, 12 (3) Minimum lot width 60 on rear 1/3 of (feet) lot (8) Minimum distance 10 ' (4) Minimum front Principal build between principal yard (feet) ing-10 and accessorybuild- Accessory build- ing (feet) ing-1.5 (9) Per cent of open No space required .for requirement building site (per- .centage) (5) Minimum side yard 5 (10) External floor area No i (feet) ratio requirement ( , (11) Internal floor area No ratio requirement , _ (0 WPW Subdivision Exemption Application - March 1977 ANALYSIS OF DWELLING UNIT TYPES IN 10 BLOCK NEIGHBORHOOD OF LAKE AVENUE Conclusion: Of a total of 55 houses in the neighboring 10-block area, approximately 30 are duplexes, or have caretaker's apartments. The survey follows: Block 55 1. Large new victorian house (assume single family) 2. Sullivan house - remodeled victorian with separate caretaker's house 3. Forbes house - victorian single family 4. Paepcke house - remodeled victorian with two bedroom caretaker's apartment Block 48 1. Swearingen house - remodeled victorian duplex 2. Pan abode house - modest single family 3. Old frame house - modest single family 4. Anderson house - victorian with separate caretaker's apartment 5. Frishman - large victorian duplex Block 41 1. Kettering house - modern duplex 2. Janss house - modern single family 3. Colen house - modern single family 4. Wogan house - large modern with caretaker's apartment 5. Kelly house - large remodeled victorian with live-in unit 6. Farrish house - large single family Victorian Block 34 1. Coors house - large modern with caretaker's apartment 2. Chamberlain - older large house with separate care- taker's house 3. Stranahan - remodeled victorian with separate care- taker's house l 4. Small modern duplex 5. Poppell - remodeled victorian single family Block 33 1. Kienast family house - remodeled victorian with caretaker's apartment 2. Kienast house - victorian single family 3. Thalberg house - victorian with.separate caretaker's house 4. Behind Thalberg house - modern large house; appears to be a duplex 5. 415 North Avenue (next to Vagneur remodel house) - large duplex 6. Vagneur remodel house - single family 7. Vagneur victorian house - single family now Block 40 1. Welborn house - remodeled victorian with separate caretaker's house 2. Ball house - small contemporary with separate unit 3. Gates house - large modern house with caretaker's apartment 4. Ickes house - large victorian, was single family, presently being remodeled 5. Lundy house - large modern with basement apartment 6. Between Lundy and Welborn houses - small modern single family Block 101 1. Seymore house - large modern duplex 2. Edel house - large modern single family 3. Carlson house - large duplex 4. Durand house - modern single family 5. Pan abode house (next to Durand house) - believed to have two kitchens 6. Corner Pan Abode house - not certain, but believed to be single family Block between Pearl and Gillespie - Block 100 1. Bargsten house - modern single family 2. Hartmeister house - large duplex 3. Schwinn house - remodeled victorian single family 4. Williams house - remodeled victorian single family 5. Gronner house - large modern single family (.0 C9 Block 102 1. Martin house - or caretaker's 2. Irwin house - 3. Salter house - apartment 4. Freeman house 5. Copley house - 6. Trentaz house Block 103 large victorian with separate guest house victorian with caretaker's apartment remodeled victorian with caretaker's remodeled victorian duplex modern single family modern single family 1. Marquand house - remodeled victorian with separate rental house and caretaker's apartment 2. Hume house - remodeled victorian with caretaker's unit 3. Mitchell house - remodeled victorian single family 4. Barnard house - modern single family 5. Shaw house - large victorian single family [Note: Applicant believes the above survey, based on two individual's familiarity with the area, is fairly accurate. Applicant did not believe it appropriate to check by means of a field survey, and hence acknowledges there may be some error herein. Similarly, applicant cannot state with assurance that all caretaker's apart- ments have kitchens, etc. Certain names used above are prior, not current, owners.] S rlm c • r • 1 MA R f I I I `\!✓M► '/\y'/yj\ AKE AVE ill l %G { o 0 33 i`•� ,, .. `' Faso ,►ss.� 0ir - _ th - ; SUSJ GT PROPERt'Y' Ow �Z •; tom/ � �•'f a, `•�. - �•�,�:� . G, � • �5;�G�•,�` .� \ \ _ ` . MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Planning Office (HC) RE: WPW Subdivision Exemption DATE: March 10, 1977 This is a request by WPW Joint Venture for subdivision exemption to create four subdivided lots by combining seven existing Lots numbered 16-22, and located on Block 103, Hallam's Addition. The Lot lines are proposed to be altered to accommodate additional side yard setbacks for the existing buildings. The seven Lots under option by WPW (excluding the Shaw House and Lots 23-24) consist of 43,220 sq.ft. and are zoned R-6. Dorothy Shaw and the Shaw Estate are the present property owners. Four single-family dwellings presently occupy the seven Lots. The applicants propose to remove one of the buildings which is in poor condition and crowds the more substantial brick dwelling. It is important to note that the present R-6 zoning would allow four duplex units to be constructed by right on this property (9,000 sq.ft. required for duplex). Also, the existing houses are not currently subject to historic zoning protection and as such are vulnerable to destruction or major remodeling. Extensive discussion of this exemption has occurred at the Planning and Zoning Meetings with primary topics being the unanimity of the desire to require Historic Designation on the existing units; a desire to limit the size of the allowed expansion of the existing buildings; and con- sideration of requiring the vacant Lots 16 and 17 to be included in a new Historic District and/or restrict building size on the site. His- toric Designation of the existing buildings can be accomplished simply by application to the Historic Preservation Committee, receiving the approval of the H.P.C. and action by Council to affirm the designation. To require Historic Designation of vacant property such as lots 16 and 17 will entail the formation of an Historic District for these lots. In- clusion of these vacant lots in an Historic District implies that any Aspen City Council Page Two March 10, 1977 construction should relate to the unique historic character established by the three adjacent historic structures, and that the neighboring property excluded from the district has no similar historic character. It would appear that the justification for the district would only be the boundaries of the subdivision application rather then the unique historic character• of the area. The Planning Office is in process of reviewing the merits of establishing an Historic District for the entire original Aspen townsite area. We do not recommend establishing an isolated district in this area without proper justification nor standards for review of residential development. The joint recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office is to approve the W.P.W. Subdivision Exemption request subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant request Historic Designation of the existing three houses on the proposed Lots 17, 18 and 19. It is agreed that the yellow frame house may be removed due to its dilapidated condition; its encroachment on the property line; and its crowding of the more substantial brick dwelling. 2) Limits to total size of the building area for proposed Lots 17, 18 and 19 to conform to the proposed .3 floor area ratio -(F.A.R.) or the F.A.R. as finally adopted by City Council. A representation of the allowed expansion is shown on the attached F.A.R. exhibit submitted by the applicant. 3) The revisions to the property lines be drawn or a plat to be recorded of record in the Office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. 0 0. MEMO TO: HAL CLARK PLANNING DEPT. FROM: DAVE ELLIS CITY ENGINEER DATE: March 8, 1977 RE: SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Lots 16-22, Block 103, Hallam's Addition (WPZ,I Joint Venture) Having reviewed the improvement survey and made a site inspection of this project, the engineering department concurs with the recommendations for approval in your 2/25 memo to the P&Z. We would like to review the replat survey before it is recorded. We also understand that the Shaw Estate is making a concurrent application for exemption to parcel the larger group of Lots 16-24 into Lots 16-22 and Lots 23 & 24, 1] • LAW OFFICES OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH 8, JORDAN 600 EAST HOPKINS STREET LEONARD M. OATES ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 RONALD D. AUSTIN March 9, 1977 J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH, JR. WILLIAM R.JORDAN III ROBERT W. HUGHES BARRY D. EDWARDS City Council, City of Aspen City Hall, 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Ladies and Gentlemen: AREA CODE 303 TELEPHONE 925-2600 We represent WPW Joint Venture, which is composed of Henry Pedersen, and Jack and Jackie Wogan. WPW has an option to purchase from the Shaw Estate and Dorothy Shaw Lots 16 through 22, Block 103, Hallam`s Addition, which are seven city lots on Lake Avenue abutting Hallam`s Lake. Presently existing on that property are four houses: three Victorians and one frame dwelling. Lots 16 through 22, together with Lots 23 and 24 (on which the large green Shaw house is located) are presently owned by the Shaw Estate and Dorothy Koch Shaw. Lots 23 and 24 and the Shaw house are not included in the sale to WPW. The Shaw Estate has separately applied for an exemption in order to avoid any question as to a subdivision violation in selling Lots 16 through 22. WPW Joint Venture wishes to change the existing seven City lots (Lots 16 through 22) into four lots, preserve the three historic Victorian dwellings, remove the frame house (it is on too small a portion of a lot and violates set -back require- ments), all of which we believe will contribute substantially to the improvement of this historic area. To accomplish that, it is necessary to seek a subdivision exemption, since two lot lines are to be changed and lot sizes increased. The changing of the existing seven lots (Lots 16 through 22) into four lots will result in lot sizes in excess of 9,000 square feet each; existing zoning requires a size of 6,000 square feet, and three of the seven lots are substandard in size. The Victorian dwellings that exist on three of the proposed new lots will be restored and preserved. The timing of such restoration depending upon the owner. That will leave one additional building site, which is the fourth lot and which con- sists of existing Lots 16 and 17; it is to be owned by the Wogans. one of the new lots will be purchased by another long term local (25 years or so) who will enter into a long-term lease with option to purchase with Peggy Clifford, so that Ms. Clifford can continue 0 OATES, AUSTIN 8, MCGRATH City Council, City of Aspen March 9, 1977 Page Two to reside in the house that she has rented from the Shaws for some 21 years; and her option price will be less than that given to her by Ms. Shaw and the Shaw Estate. A second Victorian dwelling and the lot supporting it is subject to a right of first refusal for Mr. Frank Baranko, who I gather has resided in it for several years. Henry Pedersen will choose either the lot and house subject to Mr. Baranko's right of first refusal, if he does not exercise it, or the adjacent lot and house. The Planning and Zoning Commission has approved our application after much discussion subject to certain restrictions: (1) recording a replat of the area showing the change in two lot lines; (2) removal of the small yellow frame house that presently crowds the Victorians; (3) submission of the three Victorians for Historic Designation; (4) imposition of the proposed R-6 FAR of .3 (or whatever it is the City adopts) for the three lots (as modified) on which the three Victorians are situated, thus to limit size. It is important when assessing this application, a1d the P&Z recommendations, to have an understanding of the under- lying possibilities and existing City restrictions: the area is zoned R-6, which permits duplexes on 9,000 square feet; under existing City area and bulk requirements dwellings could be built on the four proposed lots of between 10,568 and 16,256 square feet. Of course, no one in his right mind would do so; and my clients are sensitive to the needs of the area. For example, the .3 FAR would allow an increase in the size of the three Victorians only to 2,843, 3,596, and 3,564 square feet. Also, under WPW's proposal,the property would house four local families (unless Mr. Baranko did not exercise his option, in which event his house and lot would be sold). Thus, this is not a developer's proposal for anywhere near maximum density. Rather, it is a sensitive proposal by local people to help preserve the area. Perhaps it should not be necessary to state that, but given some of the ill-founded rumors we've heard, WPW wishes its feelings in that regard to be stated. WPW must exercise its option with the Shaw Estate by March 16, and thus it needs a conclusion from you at your March 14 meeting. To help you, besides the materials in your package, we have posted some photographs, maps, and the like on the bulletin board in Council Chambers for your review prior to the meeting. We naturally assume by earlier review of some of our OATES, AUSTIN & MCGRATH City Council, City of Aspen March 9, 1977 Page Three materials, you will not judge the application prior to a full presentation on Monday. Thank you. JNMjr/gc Sincerely, OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATft & JORDAN By J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr. I] • TO: Aspen City Council peggy dif f ord march 10, 1977 RE: Subdivision Exemption -- WPW Joint Venture I have lived in one of Mrs. Dorothy Shaw's houses on Lake Avenue for nearly 21 years. I plan to buy the house and to continue to live here. I know the street and care deeply about it. As a present and future resident of Lake Avenue, I have a big stake in its fate and natu- rally want, above all, for its serenity and character and integrity to be preserved. It is a matter I have thought about for years, a matter of utmost importance and great seriousness. Since the property was put up for sale, I have seen and heard of a vhriety of plans for the street. For several reasons, I favor the WPW Joint Venture acquisi- tion and plan. First, I have known Henry Pedersen and Jackie Wogan for more than twenty years. Both of them have demonstrated in numerous ways that they care deep- ly about Aspen and the West End. I would welcome them as neighbors. Second, their plan does not suggest the addition of anything -- in terms of size and form -- that is not already present in the neighborhood, does call for the preservation of the three Victorian houses and the preservation of the serenity, character and integrity of the street. Third, this is not a commercial venture. Henry Pedersen and the Wogans plan to live on Lake and will therefore .take great pains now and in the future to maintain the unique character of the area. The WPW Joint Venture plan as amended and approved by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission is, I believe, sensible, functional and effective and will insure the preservation of the character, serenity and inte- grity of the neighborhood -- which is what all of us want. Further restrictions are, in my opinion, neither desirable nor necessary. Historic designation and Floor Area Ratio are reasonable controls as they re- flect, I think, the community will. Other controls would deny options to us that our neighbors have al- ways enjoyed and enjoy now. Preservation of the character, serenity and integrity of the neighborhood -- that has always been the goal of the Shaw family and those of us who have lived on the street, has been the goal of the Shaw family advisors for four months, has been the goal of Henry 230 lake avenue aspen, colorado 81611 0 page two Pedersen and the Wogans for two months. In that same spirit, I urge the Aspen City Council to approve the WPW Joint Venture plan as amended and approved by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on March 8. Sincerely yours, -�� & U41i Peggy Clifford