HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.Wedum-Pardee, Lot K 22
,I..
Post Office Box 4153
Aspen, Colorado 81611
December 8, 1977
Ms. Karen Smith
City/County Land Use Administration
ASflen City Hall
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Wedum-Pardee Group Duplex
Dear Ms. Smith:
Please consider this letter a formal application
to the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission for an exemption
from the term "subdivision", as defined in the Aspen Muni-
cipal Code Sec. 20-3 (5), with respect to the proposed
condominiumization of the two-family dwelling ("duplex")
now under construction at 655 Gibson Avenue and situated
on one and one-half acres within the City of Aspen (see
attached metes and bounds description). The duplex structure
is a permitted use under the applicable zoning regulations,
and the condominiumization thereof is solely for purposes of
modifying the nature of ownership of this structure, and
will involve no additional land use, density or resource
impact.
For the foregoing reasons, it is respectfully submitted
the contemplated "division" does not fall within the intent or
purpose of Aspen's Subdivision Regulations, which are expressly
designed to assist the orderly, efficient and integrated de-
velopment of the City of Aspen, to insure the proper distribution
of population, to coordinate the need for public services, and
to encourage well-planned subdivision.
Current City policy allows an exemption from sub-
division requirements for the condominiumization of existing
duplex structures, and it is further submitted that there is
no meaningful distinction between such an exemption and the
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO:
Aspen City Council
FROM:
Planning Office, Karen Smith
RE:
Wedum-pardee - Subdivision Exemption for Duplex
Condominiumization
DATE:
June 21, 1978
This application is brought by Randy hTedum and Lee Pardee and
seeks subdivision exemption approval for the condominiumization
of their recently built duplex on Oklahoma Flats in the R-30
PUD Zone. The Planning Office has no objection from a zoning
standpoint. Mark Danielson commented that the project will not
reduce the supply of low and moderate income housing in that
the duplex was never part of that supply. Dave Ellis has re-
quested that road rights-of-way and utility easements be granted
as per the attached memorandum. In deference to the applicants
concerns about losing lot area if these easements are dedicated
to the public, Dave indicated that they would not have to be
dedicated but rather shown as easements on the condominium maps.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval at their
March 21, 1978, meeting contingent on satisfaction of the City
Engineer I s concerns and his review of the condominium map.
sr
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 7, 1978
To Whom it May Concern:
I have computed the allowable density on the
Wedum-Pardee Group parcel, containing 1.441 acres,
and situated North of Oklahoma Flats Subdivision.
The computation is based on the new Pitkin County
formula, and goes as follows:
Gross Area - 1.441 Ac. = 62,770 Sq. Ft.
% of Property Over 45% Slope = 36%
Density Penalty (6%) = 3,766 Sq. Ft.
Net = 59,004 Sq. Ft.
Tri-Co Management
JFF/ml
.
"
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
I ______ "__._ ,_.~._._...," .__ "~~"_~..~__
.,J'N"....
TRI-CO Marragement, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 11, 1978
To Whom it May Concern:
I have made a slope investigation on the
Wedum-pardee Group property located North of
Oklahoma Flats Subdivision and the results are as
follows:
Maximum Slope
(Measured between edges of
slopes less than 10%)
Gross Lot Area - 1.441 Ac.
38%
62,770 Sq. Ft.
Slope Reduction Penalty
18,000 Sq. Ft.
44,770 Sq. Ft.
Net Lot Area
I consider the above figures correct within
500 Sq. Ft. more or less, due to the difficulty
involved in determining precisely where the break
between over 10% and under 10% lies, and due to the
difficulty in determining precise elevations from
the city topographical maps used.
JFR/ml
.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
..
~'"
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 14, 1978
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
77-82
Gibson Ave.
Right-of-way
, DESCRIPTION
A RIGHT OF WAY SITUATED IN THE NE 1/4 SW 1/4 OF
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE
6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND
BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE WEST 1/4 CORNER OF
SAID SECTION 7 BEARS N 58028'48" W 2067.33 FEET;
THENCE N 43045'00" E 23.52 FEET;
THENCE 208.56 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE
RIGHT lU,VING A RADIUS OF 1133.00 FEET, THE CHORD OF'
WHICH BEARS S 72030'08" E 208.26 FEET;
THENCE S 55059'26" E 33.10 FEET;
THENCE S 59003'29" E 83.49 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 23.32 FEET;
THENCE N 59003'29" W 96.00 FEET;
THENCE N 55059'26" W 31.68 FEET;
THENCE 215.22 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE
LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1113.00 FEET, THE CHORD OF
WHICH BEARS N 72052'11" W 214.89 FEET;
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING CONTAINING 6680 SQUARE FEET
MORE OR LESS.
.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
'"
,
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 13, 1978
... ...'~
77-82
Utilities Easement
DESCRIPTION
A UTILITIES EASEMENT SITUATED IN THE NE 1/4 SW 1/4
OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF
THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
AND BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE WEST 1/4 CORNER OF
SAID SECTION 7 BEARS N 55027'55" W 2369.32 FEET;
THENCE N 89020'00 W 3.47 FEET;
THENCE N 15030'00 E 52.39 FEET;
THENCE N 74030'00 W 7.10 FEET;
THENCE N 15000'00 E 156.96 FEET;
THENCE S 55059'26 E 10.29 FEET;
THENCE S 59003'29 E 10.68 FEET;
THENCE S 15000'00 W 91.44 FEET;
THENCE N 59030'00" W 10.38 FEET;
THENCE S 15000'00" W 113.60 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING CONTAINING 2629 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
.....,
...,.,
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 13, 1978
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
77-82
Spring Street
Right-of-way
, DESCRIPTION
A RIGHT OF WAY SITUATED IN THE NE 1/4 SW 1/4 OF
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE
6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND
"BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE WEST 1/4 CORNER OF
SAID SECTION 7 BEARS N 55027'55" W 2369.32 FEET;
THENCE N 89020'00" W 3.47 FEET;
THENCE N 15030'00" E 52.39 FEET;
THENCE N 74030'00" W 125.00 FEET;
THENCE N 57001'28" W 145.29 FEET;
THENCE N 19015'00" E 41.18 FEET;
THENCE S 57001'28" E 148.93 FEET;
THENCE S 74030'00" E 121.39 FEET;
THENCE S 15000'00" W 91.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING CONTAINING 11033 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS.
.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
1"'.
-
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
'-'
April 7, 1978
To Whom it May Concern:
I have computed the allowable density on the
Wedum-Pardee Group parcel, containing 1.441 acres,
and situated North of Oklahoma Flats Subdivision.
The computation is based on the new pitkin County
formula, and goes as follows:
Gross Area - 1.441 Ac. = 62,770 Sq. Ft.
% of Property Over 45% Slope = 36%
Density Penalty (6%) = 3,766 Sq. Ft.
Net = 59,004 Sq. Ft.
Tri-Co Management
JFR/ml
.
"
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303,925,2688
-
..........
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 11, 1978
To Whom it May Concern:
I have made a slope investigation on the
Wedum-pardee Group property located North of
Oklahoma Flats Subdivision and the results are as
follows:
Maximum Slope
(Measured between edges of
slopes less than 10%)
38%
Gross Lot Area - 1.441 Ac.
62,770 Sq. Ft.
Slope Reduction Penalty
18,000 Sq. Ft.
Net Lot Area
44,770 Sq. Ft.
I consider the above figures correct within
500 Sq. Ft. more or less, due to the difficulty
involved in determining precisely where the break
between over 10% and under 10% lies, and due to the
difficulty in determining precise elevations from
the city topographical maps used.
JFR/ml
.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
.
-'''-'~''-''''II~
po _ '-- J~GW'- ~.Q{.A ~
o.rpP\ <:($~~
\Y:::;OJ\ ~N
~ Q?O\~CC~\{~ ~CA.~_
b'<- '~Q~E6L ~~ D- t\QC\,.J.~~~
~R 0.... ~ "\-~\ v-~ QOV\..& o'\IV\ ~ V\ ~ <--) VV\
Q,^~ go t(J\:\-\-~ S~~ \QcU
~a.- OG~ Co&~ ^~~'-=J\V~
~V\.CLk. ",-- Qc~( V\C'-J VV\-~ it 6 ~
IW 0- S \ V\.9 t ~ <0 <::.J ~ (CQ (V\~ (;I
M~ CcJ\/\.C'4RN ~ ~\'~
\ ~ ~~ ( CA-~ ~ ()^CA-~CC ,
0ACli\~R( ~_ ~~ oJ dLcM lCC.~\'
B~~ G-o-Ql~~(~9_ ~~~~ ~~~
'\--"^,,vdl- o'^~ G:J~~ 6~ccNV\~
~ ~~ pCAAoJ\~ <2.~~~\ 0 ~
~< (:s..' -9.~a~~~ lA, Cc~s.~"1' . J)
d( \. ~ -~i}I'\. (..\2 4 ' 00 cl <() 0 l ~
~ \ ~ :-t- LDCJ '-J\.! i"G-.. '.:) \~v ~
~ ii' D- C~&~-U~
\2 <( "2 ~CR- Q() ~~ L
~ ov\._dlC/V\/'-..( ~ VV\ cio C c..) ~ .s
.. cr\ ~'^^"
. C9-. {.>.[) ~, C
i \. '-€.. ~ e/'"--
(')
f
-
.....,;
506 E, MAIN STREET
,"'\
...."
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
p
r
"
T
'II'
/.l.
I
N
MEMORANDm1
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Mark Danielsen
DATE: February 28, 1978
c
o
U
N
T
Y
RE: Application for Exemptions
Wedem-Pardee Duplex - Subdivision Exemption Application
It has been represented by John Wedum that the units are
still under construction, hence there are no tenants cur-
rently living there, and none will be displaced. Each
duplex contains approximately 3150 square feet, Constructed
at a cost of approximately $60/sq. feet for a total cost of
$189,000, the w1its will sell for approximately $300,000
each.
As these units do not displace any PMH tenants, and the costs
are not, near PI-ll-j guidelines, it is reconunended that the sub-
division exemption be granted.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: Dave Ellis, City Engineer
Dorothy Nuttall, City Attorney
Jim Holland, Parks Director
Harold (Pup) Smith, Streets
FROM: Richard Grice, Planning
RE: Wedum-Pardee P.U.D. Exemption and Subdivision Exemption
DATE: April 18, 1978
The attached request for P.U.D. and Subdivision exemption is a reV1Slon
of the original subdivision exemption application, therefore a new application.
Dorothy, can the third unit be considered as a request for a third
condominium or should it be considered a request for a separate building
site.
This item is tenetively scheduled for May 16th, unless we hear differ-
ently from you.
sr
1"'.
"..-./
"''"'
..,,.F
WEDUM-PARDEE GROUP
Post Office Box 4153
Aspen, Colo~ado 81611
Ap~i1 14, 1978
Ms. Ka~en Smith, Di~ecto~
Planning Depa~tment
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena St~eet
Aspen, Colo~ado 81611
Dea~ Ka~en:
Since the Planning and Zoning Commission app~oved ou~ ~equest fo~ condo-
miniumization of the duplex located on our 1,441 ac~e pa~cel no~th of
Oklahoma Flats, it has come to our attention that we have sufficient
density on tLe parcel to warrant a thi~d unit, The~efo~e, this lette~
is a ~equest fo~ conside~ation by the Planning Office and the Planning
and Zoning Commission fo~ a P.U.D, exemption (the parcel is zoned R-30
P.U.D.) and subdivision exemption fo~ the pu~poses of condominiumization.
Ou~ ~equest fo~ P,U.D. exemption is based on substantial compliance with
all P.U.D, ~equi~ements. The one a~ea of compliance which only ma~ginally
meets P.U,D, ~equi~ements is net density afte~ allowing fo~ slope ~eduction
~equi~ements. Ou~ position on this matte~ is as follows:
a, The duplex is located on the steepest slope, the p~oposed unit
would be on ove~ 15,000 sq. ft. that have less than 10% slope,
b. The pa~cel in question meets all the intents and purposes of
the slope ~eduction section of the Code to: 1) ~educe wildfire,
mudslide and avalanche haza~d; 2) enhance soil stability; and
3) gua~antee adequate fi~e p~otection access.
c. The slope ~eduction section is g~ossly inequitable as evidenced
by a hypothetical situation where a flat 3/4 ac~e parcel with
45% ten foot d~op at one end of the parcel would not be buildable
regardless of the zoning.
Further evidence of the inherent inequities of the slope reduction
fc:~ula is the fact that the Planning Department recently recommended
a change in the Pitkin County slope reduction formula and this
change was accepted by County Planning and Zoning Commission,
Under the Pitkin County slope reduction formula, the parcel in
question would have a net density of 59,004 sq, ft, (pe~ J, Reser,
T~iCo), -
d. Even under the p~esent system, the pa~cel in question has a net
density, after slope reduction, of 44,770 (45,000 sq, ft. would be
~equired fo~ three units). It should be pointed out that J. Reser,
April 1'1, 1978
Page 2
I'"
.,-,
/"
'.,J
TriCo, indicated, as a part of his slope reduction calculations,
that "I consider the above figures correct wi thin 500 sq. ft,
more or less, due to the difficulty involved in determining pre-
cisely where the break between over 10% and under 10% lies, and
due to the difficulty in determining precise elevations from
City tcpographical maps used."
The granting of easements is a standard requirement in subdivision proceedings,
however, the unique nature of this parcel requires that we grant easements
which total almost 1/3 of our 62,770 sq, ft. We are willing to comply
with these conditions, however, we feel that the magnitude of these easements
and the corresponding gain by the City should be important considerations
in evaluating the merits of our application for P.U.D, exemption and sub-
division exemption.
It is important that our request for a third unit be treated as a request
for a third condominium unit rather than a request for a separate building
site, In general terms, this is because the best usage of this unique
parcel, with its view areas, flat areas, steep areas and quiet isolated
areas, requires that it be treated and be used as one parcel and not divided
whereby none of the residents could enjoy the full variety of areas and
activities offered by the parcel. Additionally, the third unit is in the
same view plane and proximity as the two family structure and therefore it
is necessary that the Homeowners' Association be able to control all the
architectural, usage, environmental and maintenance aspects of the entire
parcel. Specifically, this means that:
a. We intend to design and build the third unit with as many archi-
tectural and material similarities to the existing two units as
possible. A separate lot, even with restrictive covenants, would
not allow such control.
b. The Homeowners' Association would be able to maintain architectural
control over renovations, remodels, restorations and even exterior
painting.
c. The Homeowners' Assocation will be able to have and control a
common guest parking area for the single family unit and the
up?er unit of the two family structure,
d. The Homeowners' Association will be able to have two common
recreational areas for the three units, The children's play
area, with sandbox, swings, etc" would be in the flat area
across Spring Street, while the picnic/barbeque area would be
locatec' on the good view terrace betFeen the two unit structure
and the single family unit.
e. The Homeowners' Association can have a common trail from the upper
area down to the children's recreational area; this trail will be
used primarily by the residents and guests of the upper unit and
the residents and guests of the single family unit,
April 14, 1978
Page 3
t'"'
"'--...
"'"
~."
\ f. The Homeowners' Association can control the upkeep and maintenance
of the whole parcel.
g. The Homeowners' Association can control pets, noise, number of
people, etc,; the units are close enough that we don't want
separate ownership of the "common" areas,
We agree to abide by the provisions of Section 20-20, Chapter 20 of the
Aspen Municipal Code,
Attached please find our improvement survey which has delineated and
identified by metes and bounds the easements requested by the City Engineer
and also indicates the proposed location of the third unit.
Pro~pt consideration of this request will be greatly appreciated,
Sincerely,
WEDUM-PARDEE GROUP
BY:P fwed~~
By
!djc
encl
,"'-....
TRI-CO Man~gement, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 14, 1978
"
,
77-82
Gibson Ave.
Right-of-way
. DESCRIPTION
A RIGHT OF WAY SITUATED IN THE NE 1/4 SW 1/4 OF
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE
6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND
BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE WEST 1/4 CORNER OF
SAID SECTION 7 BEARS N 58028'48" W 2067.33 FEET;
THENCE N 43045'00" E 23.52 FEET;
THENCE 208.56 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE
RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1133.00 FEET, THE CHORD OF
WHICH BEARS S 72030'08" E 208.26 FEET;
THENCE S 55059'26" E 33.10 FEET;
THENCE S 59003'29" E 83.49 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 23.32 FEET;
THENCE N 59003'29" W 96.00 FEET;
THENCE N 55059'26" W 31.68 FEET;
THENCE 215.22 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE
LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1113.00 FEET, THE CHORD OF
WHICH BEARS N 72052'11" W 214.89 FEET;
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING CONTAINING 6680 SQUARE FEET
MORE OR LESS.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
TRI-CO Man~gement,lnc.
""""\
.....I
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 13, 1978
77-82
Utilities Easement
DESCRIPTION
A UTILITIES EASEMENT SITUATED IN THE NE 1/4 SW 1/4
OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF
THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
AND BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE WEST 1/4 CORNER OF
SAID SECTION 7 BEARS N 55027'55" W 2369.32 FEET;
THENCE N 89020'00" W 3.47 FEET;
THENCE N 15030'00 E 52.39 FEET;
THENCE N 74030'00 W 7.10 FEET;
THENCE N 15000'00 E 156.96 FEET:
THENCE S 55059'26 E 10.29 FEET;
THENCE S 59003'29 E 10.68 FEET;
THENCE S 15000'00 W 91.44 FEET;
THENCE N 59030'00 W 10.38 FEET;
THENCE S 15000'00 W 113.60 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING CONTAINING 2629 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303,925.2688
TRI-CO Man~gement, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 13, 1978
,...'-""
-
77-82
Spring Street
Right-of-way
, DESCRIPTION
A RIGHT OF WAY SITUATED IN THE NE 1/4 SW 1/4 OF
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE
6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND
BEING MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE WEST 1/4 CORNER OF
SAID SECTION 7 BEARS N 55027'55" W 2369.32 FEET;
THENCE N 89020'00" W 3.47 FEET;
THENCE N 15030'00" E 52.39 FEET;
THENCE H 74030'00" W 125.00 FEET;
THENCE N 57001'28" W 145.29 FEET;
THENCE N 19015'00" E 41.18 FEET;
THENCE S 57001'28" E 148.93 FEET;
THENCE S 74030'00" E 121.39 FEET;
THENCE S 15000'00" W 91.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING CONTAINING 11033 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS.
.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
.'
TRI-CO Ma~gement, Inc.:)
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 7, 1978
To Whom it May Concern:
I have computed the allowable density on the
Wedum-Pardee Group parcel, containing 1.441 acres,
and situated North of Oklahoma Flats Subdivision.
The computation is based on the new Pitkin County
formula, and goes as follows:
Gross Area - 1.441 Ac. = 62,770 Sq. Ft.
% of Property Over 45% Slope = 36%
Density Penalty (6%) = 3,766 Sq. Ft.
Net = 59,004 Sq. Ft.
Tri-Co Management
~
-,,/ ~
-~c::-c -
cra'trres r F': Reser
L. S. 9184
JFR/ml
.'
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation ' Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
"
TFU-CO Man~gement,lnc. :) .
Planning. Design' Surveying. Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
April 11, 1978
To Whom it May Concern:
I have made a slope investigation on the
We dum-Pardee Group property located North of
, Oklahoma Flats Subdivision and the results are as
follows:
Maximum Slope
(Measured between edges of
slopes less than 10%)
38%
Gross Lot Area - 1.441 Ac.
62,770 Sq. Ft.
Slope Reduction Penalty
18,000 Sq. Ft.
44,770 Sq. Ft.
Net Lot Area
I consider the above figures correct within
500 Sq. Ft. more or less, due to the difficulty
involved in determining precisely where the break
between over 10% and under 10% lies, and due to the
difficulty in determining precise elevations from
the city topographical maps used.
JFR/ml
.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303,925,2688
...
j...'-- ",.
,
)/:/
..--
<~.-\ /
, '"
MEMORANDUM
,
i)i "1', J I.
~._~
~-
\ (", , .
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: P1 anni ng Department (HC)
RE: Subdivision Exemption - Smuggler Durant Mining Corp, and Wi11aim
Laughran lot line adjustment
DATE: March 9, 1977
This is a request for Subdivision Exemption by the Smuggler Durant Mining
Corp. and William Laughran to readjust the property line between their
adjoining properties. Equal easements of land will be exchanged between
the two properties. Parcel A consists of 1.77 acres and Parcel B has
.50 acres. A duplex is allovled by right on Parcel A and a single family
dwelling on Parcel B. '
The Planning and Zoning Commission considered the request on March 1, 1977
and. recommended approval with no conditi ons.
The comments of the Planning Office are as follows:
1) The lot line change ~i11 not alter the development densities
allowed by current zoning and will facilitate management of
the individually owned parcels.
2) The park dedication fee will be paid at the time of building
permit application
1
.
,....
-
-",,",
.~
.....,,,'
TO: City of Aspen
Planning Department
DATE: February 15, 1977
This is a request for subdivision exemption in
order that the adjoining property owners can readjust
the property line between the two properties, to
remedy the interlocking nature of the existing
lot lines.
Equal amounts of land will be exchanged as shown
on map provided.
The owners would like to be placed on the agenda
for the next Planning and Zoning meeting and the
agenda for the following City Council meeting.
Owners:
Smuggler Durrant Mining Corp.
William H. Laughran
~--._->--,--<<..,,-~._.,--.------.._....,-
.1",-..."
,""
,-....;
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Planning Office, Karen Smith
RE: Wedum-Pardee - Subdivision Exemption for Condominiumization
DATE: June 2, 1978
In March of this year, the Commission considered and approved a request
by Randy Wedum and Lee Pardee to condominiumize their new duplex located
on Oklahoma Flats. A six month minimum lease was one restriction placed
on the approval. Other conditions involved concerns of the City Engineer
that either dedication of certain roads or easements for roads and utility
lines be provided by the applicants. The requirement for dedication made
a substantial difference to the applicants since it appeared that the ded-
ications would remove some of their land area for purpose of density cal-
culations and might prevent them from later subdividing for a third unit.
The applicants were able to convince the Engineer that easements shown on
the condominum plat would be sufficient and thus there would be no loss of
land for density purposes. This would have been Dave's recommendation to
Council, but the applicants have now decided to modify their application
to ask for approval of 3 units through the subdivision exemption route.
The old application never went to Council.
The new application requests a third unit separate from the duplex to be
located on the ridge above to the northwest, adjacent to Gibson Avenue,
The application asks subdivision and PUD exemption to condominiumize the
three units. PUD approvial or exemption is required because the area is
designated R-30, mandatory PUD.
We asked Dorothy Nutall to comment whether it was appropriate to condomin-
iumize three units in two separate structures. She found that neither
state law or our own code requires that a condominium be in one structure.
She noted a concern, though, that as a practical matter it's difficult to
control the third unit from becoming a separate entity and would ask for
a commitment to the items mentioned on pp. 2-3 (a-g) of the attached appli-
cation.
Dave Ellis will insist on the easements and conditions mentioned in his
March 6 memorandum. He reserves right to comment further prior to Council
consideration however.
The P & Z may exempt applications from mandatory PUD requirements pursuant
to Section 24-8.13 provided that a finding is made that the proposal com-
plies with all the objectives of the PUD process. These are:
1. satisfactory water pressure and utilities
2. adequate roads to insure fire protection, snow removal and road
maintenance
3. suitability for development given geologic, slope, and soil con-
diti ons
4. effects of the development on erosion, runoff, and water pollution.
5. airquality
6. compatibility of roads, driveways and structures with the terrain
7. minimal land disturbance
8. reduction of building height and scale to preserve natural features
In addition to these objectives, there is a density reduction fonmula that
will reduce the density on any given parcel depending on the amount of steep
slope areas. The applicant has had this calculated by a surveyor and he
- 1 -
---'-_.~'-~---.,~~._~~^'~-_._~"_._-
,
Memo to City P&Z
Wedum-Pardee
Page 2
comes out just short by 230 square feet of land area necessary to accomodate
three units at the site, although the surveyor's margin of error may be up
to 500 square feet.
For this density reduction reason alone, the applicant's request for 3 units
should be denied even if the application were processed through the full PUD
procedure. We therefore recommend against any exemption, But beyond that,
the exemption appears to us to be inappropriate. Due to the difficult
topography of the site, it is impossible for us to say that the development
proposed, given the information presented meets all the objectives of PUD.
For example, without detailed grading and landscaping plans and without
site and architectural design, we cannot state that the site modification
will not result in the least terrain disturbance and compatibility with
natural features. The lower portion of the site noted as a recreation area
should be deed restricted as open space and common area (we concede that
this could be accomplished though, through an exemption). However, other
concerns are evident: proper location of parking, potential sewer loading
problems, and visual impact on and incompatibility with the surrounding
neighborhood.
We note that many of these same concerns were raised when Council was con-
sidering a final plat for subdivision and PUD for four units on the site.
For these reasons, Council did not approve the plat and the applicants
decided to build a duplex. To exempt a 3 unit application from PUD proce-
dures would, we feel, ignore the serious concerns raised in the earlier
reviews. The only appropriate mechanism for review is full PUD so all these
concerns can be addressed and the public afforded an opportunity to comment.
If the applicant would pursue the full PUD procedure, that should be accompanied
by an application to the Board of Adjustment for variance from the density
reduction. Only if that is granted would it be appropriate for P & Z to
even recommend conceptual approval of the PUD. The exemption route would
short circuit all appropriate concerns.
sr
,....-,.....
,.....,....
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zonning Gommission
FROM: Planning Office, Karen Smith
RE: Wedum-Pardee Duplex - Subdivision Exemption
DATE: March 16, 1978
This is an application for subdivision exemption for the condominiumization
of a new duplex on Oklahoma Flats in the R-30 zone district. The lot is
conforming having only recently received a building permit. This duplex is
stepped into the hill below Lone Pine Drive.
The Engineering Department has listed certain conditions for approval. These
are related to dedications never made because the Final Plat of a larger sub-
division at this site was never completed as the project was dropped.
The Housing Authority recommends the exemption finding that it was never part
of the supply of low and moderate income housing. The six month minimum
lease and 90 day right of first refusal should be conditions to comply with
Ordinance #53.
.
MEMO
TO:
KAREN SMITH
PLANNING
FROM:
DAVE ELLIS 'VI'
ENG INEERING' .' z.,....-
DATE:
March 6, 1978
RE:
Subdivision Exemption for Wedum-Pardee
Duplex (655 Gibson Avenue)
As the planning office and some members of the planning com-
mission will undoubtably recall, this parcel has had a long
and controversial history involving the subdivision and PUD
processes. At one time it received final plat approval from
council, but the approval lapsed and the project was denied
re-approval on two later attempts. Knowing this background
and the enormous amount of time that has been wasted to date,
I hesitate to make any comment whatsoever.
However, the recording of a condominium map without resolu-
tion of the three major right-of-way problems as proposed in
the original subdivision would create serious practical and
legal problems for the future. These three problems and the
solutions proposed earlier are as follows:
1) Gibson Ave. - The private property description
includes a sizeable portion of the paved road-
way, There was to be a dedication of sufficient
land to provide for one-half of a 60-foot right-
of-way.
2) Spring St. - Over 250 feet of the driven roadway
is included within the private property descrip-
tion. The solution in this case was to dedicate
a 40-foot right-of-way.
3) Utility Lines - Existing water and gas distribu-
tion lines cross the property in a north-south
alinement just east of the new dwelling, A 20
foot public utility easement was proposed to pro-
vide for the future use and maintenance,
SUbject to conveyance of the three rights-of-way described
above and review of the condominium map, the engineering
department recommends granting the request for subdivision
exemption.
jk
. "
,..<"
M E M 0 R h N DUM
TO:
Dave Ellis, City Engineer
FROM:
Karen Smith, Planning
RE:
DATE:
Wedum-Pardee Duplex - Subdivision Exemeption
February 21, 1978
The attached is in reference to the application of Lee Pardee and
Randy Vledum to condominiumize their recently built duplex on Oklahoma
Flats. I will tentatively schedule the matter for the March 7th Plan-
ning and Zoning Comm'ission Agenda unless I hear differently from you,
sr
1"""
1
~
M [ 1'1 0 R A I~ D II 11
TO:
FRor~ :
RE:
DATE:
Marc Dan'ielson, Housing Authority
Koren Smith, Plannin~ Office
I-ledum-Pardee Duplex - Subd"ivision [):efliption
February 21, 1978
The attached material relates to a subdivision exemption application
that must comply with the housing impact requirements of Ordinance #53,
Although the applicant has offered to comply with the 90 day right of first
refusal provision and 6 month minimum lease, there is no infcirmation given
relative to whether the conversion will "reduce the supply of low and mod-
erate income housing." For ,example since this is a recently built duplex,
we need to know construction cost versus intended sale price of the condo-
miniumized units in order to determine whether this has ever been within
the supply of low and moderate income housing. Knowing the duplex, I
suspect it was very expensive. However, if it can be considered eligible
as low and moderate housing, the next question to ask would be who are
the current tenants and is it likely that they \'li11 be misplaced. I am
schedul i ng thi s i teOl for the ~1al^ch 7th meeti ng of the City PI anni ng and
Zoning Commission and would appreciate your contacting Lee Pardee or Randy
Wedum for clarification and giving me your comments by February 28th.
Thanks again,
sr
'--,"".,
#'".....
Post Office Box 4153
Aspen, Colorado 81611
February 16, 1977
Aspen City Council
Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Sirs:
We dum-Pardee Group, the owners of the duplex located on the
track of land described on the attached sheet as Exhibit A,
agree to abide by the provisions of Section 20-20, Chapter 20,
of the Aspen Municipal Code, to wit:
(a) Any existing tenants shall be given written notice
when their unit is offered for sale, which notice
shall specify the sale price, Each tenant shall
have a gO-day non-assignable option to purchase
their unit at this preliminary market value, In
addition, each tenant shall have a gO-day exclusive
non-assignable right of first refusal to purchase
their unit which shall commence when a bona fide
offer is made by a third person, and accepted by
the owner. In the event that such offer is made
while the gO-day option is still in effect, the
tenant may purchase the unit for the amount of
the initial sales price or the amount of the bona
fide offer, whichever is less.
(b) Both units shall be restricted to six (6) month
minimum leases with no more than two (2) shorter
tenancies per year.
Prompt approval of the condominiumization of the above-
described duplex will be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
/LH
Encl,
WEDUM-PARDEE GROUP
BY~ 1<. CJ~
J ,. weU~r
BYJ, ~~dee~ Partner
r-.
......,
,.>"..,
-
Post Office Box 4153
Aspen, Colorado 81611
December 8, 1977
Ms. Karen Smith
City/County Land Use Administration
Aspen City Hall
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: We dum-Pardee Group Duplex
Dear Ms. Smith:
Please consider this letter a formal application
to the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission for an exemption
from the term "subdivision", as defined in the Aspen Muni-
cipal Code Sec. 20-3 (5), with respect to the proposed
condominiumization of the two-family dwelling ("duplex")
now under construction at 655 Gibson Avenue and situated
on one and one-half acres within the City of Aspen (see
attached metes and bounds description). The duplex structure
is a permitted use under the applicable zoning regulations,
and the condominiumization thereof is solely for purposes of
modifying the nature of ownership of this structure, and
will involve no additional land use, density or resource
impact.
For the foregoing reasons, it is respectfully submitted
the contemplated "division" does not fall within the intent or
purpose of Aspen's Subdivision Regulations, which are expressly
designed to assist the orderly, efficient and integrated de-
velopment of the City of Aspen, to insure the proper distribution
of population, to coordinate the need for public services, and
to encourage well-planned subdivision.
Current City pOlicy allows an exemption from sub-
division requirements for the condominiumization of existing
duplex structures, and it is further submitted that there is
no meaningful distinction between such an exemption and the
-
-
....."......
-
Ms. Karen Smith
Page Two
Re: We dum-Pardee Group Duplex
exemption of a duplex to be constructed in the near future.
We would appreciate your earnest consideration of
this application,
Sincerely yours,
WEDUM-PARDEE GROUP
By
J. L. Pardee
Enclosures:
Check $50.00
Metes and Bounds Description
Improvement Survey
".....
....-.,...'
.' "
,,,
EXHIBIT "An to letter of February 16, 1977 to Aspen City Council
A Parcel of land situated in the NEI,; S\;I,; of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range
84 West of the 6th Principle Meridian, being more rully described as follows:
~
Beginning at a point on the Southerly line of that certain tract known as the J .R.
Williams Ranch whence the West!,; corner of said Section 7 bears North 55027'55" West
2,369.32 feet; (Being the same point of beginning as the point of beginning in that
Deed recorded in Book 119 at Page 22~)
thence North 89020'00" \;est 3.47 feet along said Scutherly line;
thence North 15030'00" East 52.39 feet;
thence North 74030' West 125,00 feet;
thence South l5030'00"West 85.49 feet;
thence North 89020'00" West 87.22 feet;
thence North 04012'54" West 160.88 feet;
thence North 19015'00" East 92.00 feet;
the~ce North 43045'00" East 40.88 feet; to a point on the centerline of Gibson Avenue;
thence following said centerline 208.56 feet along the arc of a curve to the right
}~wing a radius of 1,133.00 feet, the chord of which curve bears South 72~30'08" East
208.26 feet;
thence South 55059'26"
thence South 59003' 29"
thence South 00000'00"
thence North 59030'00"
thence South 15000'00"
East
East
West
\~est
West
33.10 feet;
83.49 feet;
101. 61 feet;
110.32 feet;
113.6 feet to
the point of beginning.
r
(Subdivision,
J"~ ~
'-~
Exemption
FEE SCHEDULE
from Subdivision,
-...,
"
Rezoning, ~rk Dedication)
Name of Project:
Wedum-Pardee Group Duplex
Address:
655 Gibson Avenue
Applicant's Name:
Applicant's Address:
Lee Pa rdee
Phone:
925-8737
P ,0. Box 41533
FOR ZONES WHICH ARE R-15, R-30, R-40, RR and CONSERVATION the Subdivision Fee
Formula is as follows:
Conceptua 1
$100 + $5,OO/dwe11ing unit
+
Pre1 iminary
$22,OO/dwelling unit
Final
$3,OO/dwe11ing 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,OO/acre of land
~ EXEMPTION FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION FEE: $50.00
REZONING APPLICATION FEE: $125.00 (once a year)
1;2. -li-'1'7
firearm OF rr~Jr;[L~:~;t';S
1(... l!'-wcs
PARK DEDICATION FEE SCHEDULE
------=-~.~==-==.,...__==_=_~-._.."O"_.==__""_""'_===__=_==_- __-==,..,.___ ~"'-=_,.
current IlMrkL't VJluc of a pcrccnl.;lgc of the
l<lnd propo!;cd as the development site, the
pcrccnt<lgc of the 1.:l1ld bcinq determined at the
rate of two and o~c-h.:llf (2iJ) acre::. for every
one thousand (1,000) residents of the propoGcd
development" (that is, the number of residents
multiplied by t~L'~ty-fivc ten thousandths
(.0025) of an acre per resident). The number
of residents attributable to the development
shall be calculated in the following manner:
~ype of Dwellinq
l1ulti-Family
studio 1.0
one bedroo:n 1.3
two bedrcom 2.7
three bedroor!!. ".0
and 1.3 for each additional bedroom
/
Number of Residents
Per Dwelling U:llt
Single Family or Duplex
one bcclroo::\ 1.3
two bedrc:., 2.7
three bcc~':>o~ -4.0
and 1.3 for e~ch additional bedroom
A duplc~ stru~~u~e shall constitute t~o dwelling
Unit~. :::.:-r t;,~ PI.:::.-pcses c: this su:.>section.
(3) An eXd~~lc of the a=~lic~tion of the above
formula i.s <!s foJlc~..s, 'l~;umillq the construction
of one single fa~ily residcn~~'contai~ing two
bcdroo::''s on a lot contai:1:.ng 15,000 sq:.:.:J:-c f('l~t
with a t.;drkct value of $65,000.00 (or $4.33 per
square foot):
2.7 (2 bl',:t.oom... 2.7 r('siucnt-:;) x 0.0025 .l("rcs
x 43,560 (,.qtl.:1rc fcr:>t per .lore) x $4.33 (r.I.I[--
J:..cl v,llul' at Lll:.i per squdre foot) ""' $1.273.15
(h) Ul1ir\t'r:'l\"f'd 1.weI :~h:)ll bt' ilPf'!,"<Ii!;cd at the
('\ll'!"I'nt r:..,~-~~cl \'.llUl~ 0: Uh' sitt' il1<:lu'::111<] it~. \'..l.lu~
.ottribut,1bl~' t.o curb, qutter~;. !:tr,-,'l, !iid"\~,l]k.
and \:1.iliti,'~; i~' i~l~;t;!lled l':l l~h' (~.lt'... of p,'r;nit
ib~t1.-;l1l'l'. Imprn\'(',! L!r,j,; ~j;.lll lo,' di'j'r.ll'l'd ,1C,'OI-dio,'
to lI11'ir Jllqh..~;t .1I1d I,,-.~;t. U:.,' laJ...illq J.nlu ":'-oll'..ldl'ru-
lion t'xi~..ti:lq !,t:\u:_:"u.:-~'s \...:h.'th.'r- "r- 110! th,'~' drl'
couful"luilJ'l. .'l.Ltl...t v.due m.IY b,' ~'.Uh~;l.l:)llilt.'.! by
a dO("\lmL'nt,-'~l pun:h..l.!;(' price (if all una's lCIl'Jth
tr-.lll:;dClioll not 1.I,llt' lh..l.ll tl.I~'yt'.lr!. olL1) 01 h~' an}'
other r('C"oql\i:~f'J r.\~'.1n~: ;Jrovided th.tt a~~(,!;5ed
CUSTOMER
CITY OF ASPEN
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
CASHIER'S RECEIPT
01-111 LICENSES & PERMITS
511 0 BUSINESS LICENSES
512 0 SALES TAX LICENSES
513 0 BEER - WINE - LIQUOR LICENSES
514 0 CONTRACTOR'S LICENSES
516 0 LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION
517 0 DOG LICENSE
518 0 CENTRAL ALARM LICENSE
519 0 BICYCLE LICENSES
520 0 EXCAVATION PERMITS
521 0 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS
522 0 ELECTRICAL PERMITS
523 0 PLUMBING PERMITS
524 0 HEATING PERMITS
525 0 SEPTIC TANK PERMITS 01-988-632-03 0 XEROXING (OESCRIBE)
I
/ C'(- I \-[:--- i .iLl
!MOTHER-ACCT,NO,") \ \ ,"X-)VJ 1,,\
01.111 FINES & FORFEITS
561 0 COURT FINES
562 0 COURT BONOS - FORFEIT
563-01 0 TOWING FINES - IMPOUNO
563-02 0 TOWING FINES - NOT IMPOUND
564 0 TRAFFIC FINES
566 0 FALSE ALARM FINES
568 0 DOG IMPOUNO FINES
569 0 OTHER FINES & FORFEITS
01-111 OTHER MISC, REVENUES
579 0 MAPS, COOES, ZONING REGS,
589 0 OTHERS (DESCRIBE)
DESCRIPTION, (NAME, NUMBER, ETC,), ~.' \~('\ i '--) .
\\\'
U):~Y\i\"\
, k 1\
f \
,--' ~~)
\0, . .
~. \
I L___r /" ~, ,<::, !<'l'''--'''
iG/,-:""J-;) \ ,\ \ \,~ \
...,j
i.;'^:2 I ~\ ,--F.,,:,SHlER VA{~V-9J 5C),U
RECEIVED FROtA),. Yl Jl)\ ) \~ \ \ \\ ( ~
\2..fq \- l i