Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.Curton-Subd.19838%S - -C\� -Curton Employee Unit E • 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption DATE: June 271 1983 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Location: Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Zoning: R-6. Applicant's Request: An exemption from growth management allotment procedures as per Section 24-11.2 of the Municipal Code for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. .Referral Comments: The City Engineering Department has no problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion concerning access which appears to be through the access easement in Parcel A and not through the alley in Block 4. The housing Authority Board has reviewed this application and makes the following recommendation: "1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." Planning Office Review: Parcel B was formed through a lot split obtained in 1980. The lot contains 21,950 square feet. Since this lot area allows for construction of a duplex in terms of area and bulk requirements, but a single unit is all that is allowed pursuant to the lot split, the applicant is proposing to construct a deed -restricted employee unit as the second half of the duplex. Section 24-11.29(f) provides an exemption from the compliance with GMP allotment procedures for employee housing units deed restricted in accordance with the City's adopted employee housing guidelines. The unit can be exempted from competition by the City Council, based on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The unit will be subtracted from the residential quota. The review for such an exemption request is to include, as per Section 24-11.2(f), "a determination of community need considering, but not limited to, the project's compliance with any adopted housing plan... specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit and the size of the unit, the rental/sale mix of the development and the proposed price categories to which the units are to be deed restricted." Memo: Curton Subdivision Exemption Page Two ;Tune 27, 1983 These criteria were addressed in the review of this unit by the Housing Authority. Planning and Zoning Commission Action and Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office recommend approval of an exemption from growth management for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it not be for less than a 1 year period. 3_ The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. Council Action: .Should Council concur with the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office, the appropriate motion is as follows: "I move to approve the Curton Subdivision Exemption with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a 1 year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser J.f for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." *I • C� \ l }Me4ty I�4a. .ct a 1-461 _-some _ y� � aN►aa sWati1 ., ,waD • wyiI f • Ca I s V ` to ���.. - 'i} •y ►tr.t•aP (a. •ti'[M V,M •Fr•• wto MrO•rar•l rt .\wK �{�' rtettw 4t V Jj + •s. wAt[f 1 ` -�-•• i •><. ,fit �O..t v: r f�[4 trt I •a '`� JRO. •RD �• Or I t•4 .•r•e•r-r� •i- a• I � " �til PARCEL «A" ar b `4'"`--� to t .•.►•. • t• n , a w Q, \�• tN " tom �� i .ia / - ^�• VoltT \ r t•• •t, i r MOOD FAAVEt t• �; a-- •• �T` u cwt •.a.,%* NL M•yr M " i M>t•tldt i I s. [ NA H C E L •�w a.s .. .14 tt.t•. is tt I6+.•ao .., n+..a. ,K+ HIV i w•a. el..W[.M !•alL►trNT � M.[[N / WtK lnwa� � 1 u [ y a•ec ...o caw..( :.. _ .. ONE qW�ne-mIKED pp '� r u etn � r ry• � �--``'ll fY • V R i TOP of YANK I N I f � , 1 I rr..2�__ c MutS •. t t. W. 1 I j� CI(I1l MM 60. ( 1 cO(Oq•OO •� �� / I StAt[ N(OMMAt Yn •� I I 1 I �-•_`+ r� tgYp� tan. 1 IYw .�.•.al.r� • I{w.I1 •[f M e•R(w(Tw ti rYU ni H/.aM • e•✓ an . w..w•►cn .•are �• �L � � f(+.I. s rn .nac+r*u•►ro to(wT�..t 1. ��** ats 1\.K ,,•iTaw •tM tI fir_ m�wa1w C MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Department DATE: May 10, 1983 RE: Curton Employee Unit Exemption from GMP --------------------------------------------------------- Having reviewed the above application, and made a site inspection, the City Engineering Department has only one comment that is not related to the matter of GMP exemption. We have no particular problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion recently, however, of access to the site. I would point out that, at this time, it remains our under- standing that access to the site will be accomplished through the access easement in parcel "A" and not through the alley in block 4. JH/co e n pitkin county 506 east main street aspen, Colorado B1611 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Colette Penne , -F ROi�+ii : Jim H ami 1 t o ` DATE: May 12, 1 8 3 RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption The Housing Authority Board has reviewed the curton subdivision exemption with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the Middle Income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. - 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale provided, that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. r <i C7 y ir 1 w7 s; ,.�12Tit3�IXLir�t �ztzt August 30, 1983 TO: Mayor Bill Stirling Aspen City Council FROM : Heinz and Karen Coordes SUBJECT: Access to Curton lot As homeowners in the neighborhood of the Curton lot, we urge the City to provide for access to this landlocked parcel via completion of the existing alleyway between Hallam and Francis in the 900 block. This is the most direct routing to the property with least detrimental effects on the neighborhood and uses existing rights -of -way. The other alternative - down Francis Street - would necessitate cutting right between two houses and has clearly more negative side effects, not the least of which would be the removal of a substantial amount of nice, mature landscaping. The 900 block of Francis is one of the only remaining unpaved streets in the City; being a dead-end street the traffic volume is low enough that the dust problem is still tolerable. The addition of the proposed duplex would almost double the dust problem, in which case it is quite conceivable that paving of this street would become necessary. As it now stands we don't request this. Further, six school -age children live on this block and often use the roadway as there are no sidewalks on the block. Increased traffic, particularly in winter, would diminish the safety factor. The intersection of 8th and Francis is also a school bus stop. Why not keep as much traffic as possible away from such an active corner. The alleyway access would do this. We definitely feel the alleyway is the proper access alternative to this lot. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. (303) 925-2980 233 West Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 MARTIN H. KAHN ATTORNEY AT LAW D 415 EAST HYMAN, ROOM 301 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE (303) 925-1539 September 2, 1983 Paul Taddune, Esq. Gary Esary, Esq. Office of the City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Curton Duplex Subdivision Exemption Dear Messrs. Taddune and Esary: I represent George and Connie Madsen, owners of Parcel A Herndon Subdivision, in the City of Aspen. I am in receipt of a copy of James T. Moran's letter to you of August 3, 1983 e points rais ran. The purpose of this letter, however, is to request some further consideration of the question of access to Parcel B, whether or not the "duplex" is granted, but particularly if it is. My clients, as well as certain other property owners in the area, maintain that access to Parcel B should be through the alley in Block 4 and not West Francis Street and the access easement across Parcel A. These property owners maintain that access through the alley would provide not only better access to Parcel B but better access and/or significant benefits to other property in the area as well. Moreover, it also appears, through conversations with the Fire Marshall, that access through the alley may be preferable from a fire -fighting standpoint, and through conversations with the City Engineering Department that such access to the Metcalf property would be preferable from a traffic flow and safety standpoint in light of the present hazards of access from Highway 82. I am enclosing copies of letters from Mr. and Mrs. Heinz Coordes and F. Mead Metcalf, property owners in the neighborhood, setting forth their views on the question of access. The Madsens endorse these views, and would note that access through West Francis and across their Parcel A would result in destruction of landscaping and traffic (exacerbated if a duplex is permitted on Parcel B) quite close to their residence. Paul Taddune, Esq. Gary Esary, Esq. September 1, 1983 Page 2 While Mr. Moran, in his letter, argues that the "platted alley is not open and has not been open for as long as anyone can remember", it is clear that the alley is City property, and that no claim of adverse possession would lie against the City. The fact (if it is one) that the alley has not previously been utilized for access does not mean that in the future acc it would n be appropriate. We would be happy to meet with you, City Council, the Planning Office or anyone else suggested by you further to set forth our views. Please let us know if any further information would be helpful. I would ask that you forward copies of this letter and enclosures to City Council and other interested City officials. Very truly yours, MHK/o Martin H. Kahn Encl. cc: Mr. and Mrs. George Madsen Mr. and Mrs. Heinz Coordes Mr. F. Mead Metcalf James T. Moran, Esq. Gideon Kaufman, Esq. F. MEAD METCALF * BOX 32 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 * PHONE 303 925-1455 August 23, 1983 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: It has come to my attention that property owned by T H E C R Y S T A L P A L A C E C O R P O R A T 10 N, situated at 923 West Hallam, in the city of Aspen might benefit if access were changed from the present ingress from Highway 82 (Hallam Street) to ingress from the alley behind the property. It has further come to my attention that the owner of the adjacent property DONNA LEE CURTIN has petitioned to use this same ingress from the alley for her proposed building project. This letter will serve to record my approval of using the alley for ingress to the D 0 N N A L E E C U R T I N property and my desire to utilize the same ingress if approval of said easement is forthcoming from MRS CURTIN. I feel that the present entrance to the CRYSTAL PALACE PROPERTY is quite dangerous in light of the heavy traffic on Highway 82 and the slope of the driveway before reaching the highway. In winter time with ice on the driveway it is virtually impossible to 1) Climb the grade and 2) Negotiate the turn into traffic. Sincerely yours, / F. Mead Metcalf, President THE CRYSTAL PALACE CORPORATION dl� 111 IN ( I a 1 r, al .b • Za : �nnsbruc[� �lnn August 30, 1983 TO: Mayor Bill Stirling Aspen City Council FROM: Heinz and Karen Coordes� SUBJECT: Access to Curton lot v� As homeowners in the neighborhood of the Curton lot, we urge the City to provide for access to this landlocked parcel via completion of the existing alleyway between Hallam and Francis in the 900 block. This is the most direct routing to the property with least detrimental effects on the neighborhood and uses existing rights -of -way. The other alternative - down Francis Street - would necessitate cutting right between two houses and has clearly more negative side effects, not the least of which would be the removal of a substantial amount of nice, mature landscaping. The 900 block of Francis is one of the only remaining unpaved streets in the City; being a dead-end street the traffic volume is low enough that the dust problem is still tolerable. The addition of the proposed duplex would almost double the dust problem, in which case it is quite conceivable that paving of this street would become necessary. As it now stands.we don't request this. Further, six school -age children live on this block and often use the roadway as there are no sidewalks on the block. Increased traffic, particularly in winter, would diminish the safety factor. The intersection of 8th and Francis is also a school bus stop. Why not keep as much traffic as possible away from such an active corner. The alleyway access would do this. We definitely feel the alleyway is the proper access alternative to this lot. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. (303) 925-2980 233 West Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Department DATE: May 10, 1983 RE: Curton Employee Unit Exemption from GMP --------------------------------------------------------- Having reviewed the above application, and made a site inspection, the City Engineering Department has only one comment that is not related to the matter of GMP exemption. We have no particular problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion recently, however, of access to the site. I would point out that, at this time, it remains our under- standing that access to the site will be accomplished through the access easement in parcel "A" and not through the alley in block 4. JH/co CITY OVASPEN 130 Guth Baler str: � :;p� olor'aJ781611 020 MEMORANDUM DATE: September 30, 1983 TO: Planning Director city Engineer 4 it.y Manager FROM: Paul Taddune PLANNIryG OFFS RE: Donna Carton Duplex and Access (Herndon Subdivision) Forwarded for your attention are a September 23, 1983, letter from attorney Gideon Kaufman and a September 28, 1983, letter from attorney Jim Moran regarding the City's position with respect to the apparent alleyway which might be utilized for access to the Donna Curton duplex. As you may recall, Jim Moran submitted a letter to my office on August 3, 1983, complaining about various irregularities in con- nection with this subdivision. Since Jim alleged that the plats submitted to the P&Z, Housing Authority and the City Council were totally inaccurate and misrepresented both the extent and config- uration of Parcel B, my office directed that no building permits be issued pending further investigation. After investigating this matter and meeting with Jim (representing Mr. & Mrs. Carl Berg- man), Gideon (representing Donna Carton), and Marty Kahn (repre- senting adjacent property owners, including George Madsen), I decided that there was no legal or factual. for con- tinuing to withhold the issuance of a building permit and so advised all of the attorneys at the meeting. However, an out- standing issue is the status of the access to Parcel B through the alley in Block 4. Jim Moran contends that the platted alley is not open and has not been open for as long as anyone can remember. He states that the plats and the City ;engineer's memoranda clearly reveal and establish that access to Parcel B is, or should be, via West Francis Street and the access easement a.ong Parcel A. His clients insist that access continue to be so restricted and request that the City reject any suggestion that the alley be opened to accommodate the owners of Parcel. B. Memorandum to Planning Director, City Engineer, City Manager September 30, 1983 Page Two In light of the conflicting points of view in this matter, I request that each of you make a recommendation to the City Council for discussion at a regularly scheduled meeting as quickly as is convenient. PJT/mc Attachment cc: Gideon I. Kaufman, Esq. Martin H. Kahn, Esq. James T. Moran, Esa_. City Council • E DENVER OFFICE SUITE 2900 555 SEVENTEENTH STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80202 TELE PH ONE (303) 575-8000 TELECOPIER (303) 575-8261 MONTANA OFFICE SUITE 1400 175 NORTH 27TH STREET BILLINGS, MONTANA 59101 TELEPHONE (406) 252-2166 TELECOPIER (406) 252-1669 JAMES T. MORAN (303) 925-3476 Paul Taddune, Esq. City Attorney 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 HOLLAND & HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW 600 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE (303) 925-3476 September 28, 1983 WASHINGTON, D. C.OFFICE SUITE 1200 1875 EYE STREET, N. W. WASHINGTON, D. C.20006 TELEPHONE (202) 466.7340 TELECOPIER (202) 466-7354 WYOMING OFFICE SUITE 500 2020 CAREY AVENUE CHEYENNE,WYOMING 82001 TELEPHONE (307) 632-2160 TELECOPIER (307) 778.8175 S.E.DENVER OFFICE BUILDING 5-SUITE 4002 5555 DTC PARKWAY ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80111 TELEPHONE (303) 575-8350 Re: Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision Access Restrictions Dear Mr. Taddune: I have a copy of Gideon Kaufman's letter dated September 23, 1983 wherein he asserts that his clients intend to use the purported alley in Block 4 as access to Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision "in accordance with its present status as a public thoroughfare". I would like to point out to you that the "present status" of the alley is neither physically nor legally that of a "public thoroughfare." Physically, it is not a roadway nor has it ever been opened or used as such. The area is presently occupied by lawns, gardens, trees and a small building. To characterize the tract as a "public thoroughfare" is to miss the point by a wide margin. Legally, the existence of an alley is evidenced so far only by lines on a map or maps of the City of Aspen. This is grossly insufficient evidence to establish a present alley as even a cursory examination of the relevant law will demonstrate. Let me briefly acquaint you with the applicable principles. In order to constitute a public street it is necessary that there be both a dedication and an acceptance as such. Board of County Commissioners v. Warneke, 85 Colo. 388, 396, 276 Pac. 671 (1929). Even if dedication and acceptance is historically established a street ceases to be a street and becomes private property if • HOLLAND & HART • Paul Taddune, Esq. September 28, 1983 Page 2 vacated or abandoned. Hand v. Rhodes, 125 Colo. 508, 514, 245 P. 2d 292 (1952). Failure to treat the controverted strip of land as an alley or to do any work whatsoever in the way of improving or maintaining it as such is evidence of lack of acceptance or aban- donment, or both. Id. See, also, 39 Am. Jur. 2d, Highways, Streets and Bridges, §§142, 184 et seq., City of Denver v. Denver & Santa Fe Railway Co., 17 Colo. 583, 585, 31 Pac. 338 (1892). Even if you can establish that the strip in question has been dedicated, accepted and not subsequently abandoned as an alley, it has never been "opened" for use as such. It is up to the City to decide in its discretion whether to put this so-called alley into condition for use and invite the public to use it. In 39 Am. Jr. 2d, Highways, Streets and Bridges, §68 the rule is laid down as follows: "The questions of the advisability of opening a road which has been formally established or dedicated to the public and of when it shall be opened rest largely in the discretion of the proper highway authorities, and the courts will not interfere with such discretion except in the case of abuse of discretion." Moreover, under certain circumstances "a municipality may be estopped to open or use a street theretofore created, still exist- ing in point of law, and never opened, or if once opened and in use, since fallen into disuse and seemingly abandoned." Id. at §155. It is our position that the Block 4 alley, if ever dedicated and accepted, has since been abandoned and that the facts in this case are sufficient to estop the City from now opening it to use. Recall, if you will, the fact that the City Engineer and the appli- cant both represented that access to Parcel B would be via West Francis Street and Parcel A, and not through the alley in Block 4. See Exhibits 2, 4, 7-6 and 7-9 to my letter of August 3, 1983. These representations about access cannot be dismissed as cavalierly as Mr. Kaufman and Mr. Kahn seem to think. "Where the municipality has in fact engaged in affirmative conduct of a type which is misleading and serves to induce a private party to place valuable improvements upon a street, under claim of right and in good faith, there is a relatively strong basis for • HOLLAND &HART • Paul Taddune, Esq. September 28, 1983 Page 3 an estoppel precluding the municipality from thereafter opening such street." 39 Am. Jr. 2d., Highways, Streets and Bridges, §155. When the Herndon parcel was divided it was represented that Parcel B would be restricted to one single family dwelling and that access thereto would be through the easement across Parcel A. Having obtained City approval at least partly on the strength of those representations, Herndon's successors in interest now want to summarily disregard both conditions. I want you and the Council to recognize that the present pro- posal, as a practical matter, would not create a public thoroughfare but only a private driveway for Parcel B. I do not believe, for instance, that Mr. Kaufman's clients are proposing to let the alley continue through Parcel B to Power Plant Road. Finally, I am astounded at the fact that Mr. Kaufman appar- ently thinks his clients can bulldoze a construction road through the Bergman and Skiff backyards simply upon confirmation that there has been no formal vacation of the alley in Block 4. Even the City cannot summarily take such action absent "imminent danger to the (sic.) life, limb, property or health" City Code, §13-91(b). Our Code prohibits injury to public or private property, §13-39; it requires a permit to remove trees, §§13-76, 19-127; and a separate permit to dig -up, open, disturb, grade, excavate or otherwise alter any alley, §19-46. It should be evident to all concerned that there are substantial legal and political questions at issue here; questions that cannot be resolved by a phone conversation with the City Engineer. You have asked me to give you our client's position on the access question. It is as follows: 1. Whether or not a dedicated and accepted alley ever existed in Block 4 has not yet been established by credible evi- dence; 2. If an alley ever did exist, it has never been opened, has in fact and law been abandoned, and the City is estopped from now opening the same; 3. Should the City disagree with the foregoing, it cannot nevertheless summarily create or authorize a road through the area; at the very least it must observe due process by following the • HOLLAND & HART u Paul Taddune, Esq. September 28, 1983 Page 4 notice and judicial abatement proceedings set forth in City Code §13-91. I will be at the Colorado Bar Association Convention for the remainder of this week but will be happy to discuss these issues further upon my return. Yours very ly, 6:iirla es Oran JTM/jlf cc: Mr. and Mrs. Carl Bergman Gideon Kaufman Martin H. Kahn 9 C'1... r,}.1 GIDEON I. KAUFMAN DAVID G. EISENSTEIN Paul Taddune, City Attorney 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION BOX 10001 611 WEST MAIN STREET ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 September 23, 1983 Re: Donna Curton Duplex and Access Dear Paul: Pursuant to our meeting last and Marty Kahn, I write this letter to access issue disscussed at that meeting. TELEPHONE AREA CODE 303 925-8166 week with Jim Moran address the alley My and Marty Kahn's understanding of your position is that if the alley has not been officially vacated by the City, it is still City property under City control and can be utilized for public access. During the meeting Jim Moran argued that his clients had utilized the property as their own but did not argue his clients had any ownership rights in the alley. Our intention is to utilize the alley as access in accordance with its present status as a public thoroughfare. I would like to get a statement from you on the City's position in this matter. I would appreciate it if you would confirm with Jay Hammond of the City Engineering Department that the property has not been vacated by the City and that without a vacation it remains available for public access. It is important that we have a response from you as soon as possible because we would like to utilize the alley during the construction phase of our project. Thank you very much for your help in this matter. Very truly yours, LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN, a Professional Corporation By Gideon Kaufman GK jd cc: Donna Curton Martin H. Kahn, Esq. James T. Moran, Esq. ...ax 1 ra WOWS a we' 1 Y ' i v ;Z. . •r[4 -ft ' .w Js AV W M I PARCEL •'A" j lee" %Isllow"w see Fm M1� • -oust � •. , M ...... I � M. V. a tC4A Jr�nEEr� FAA R C E L •,e., • Q ` 1 � ..�E -O M' l+f..rNT !I .[f!M 1 YMM �/ j •.l.Otn-fD -, _ j VT•..fr tMtMf4T � I44r l l a lnl.WtHT .mow rP on PP • TOP OF sAkK 1 1IV 1 1 / ­11 facer ... . 'r I a as» II I 1 . 1 I 4ewrr / j 1 1 z'ut ._ /..c.tTf y wiie.r 1 r\n.rc •► .r.. , a.rvwwtw .! ! ..o • � =��� tie n in W..1 `.,1 t� 8, .l rr[w.ee. a. so . ilYO Y ". 19,1 N. IURr..[,. �wrMW,• DENVER OFFICE HOLLAND & HART WASHINGTON, D. C.OFFICE SUITE 2900 ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 1200 555 SEVENTEENTH STREET 1875 EYE STREET,N.W. DENVER,COLORADO 80202 600 EAST MAIN STREET WASHINGTO N, D. C.20006 TELEPHONE: (303) 575-8000 TE LEPHONE(202)466.7340 TELECO PIER (303) 575-8261 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELECOPIER (202) 466-7354 TELEPHONE (303) 925-3476 MONTANA OFFICE - MING OFFICE SUITE 1400 UITE 500 175 NORTH 27TH STREET 2 CAREY AVENUE BILLINGS, MONTANA 59101 Cn J I E,WYOMING 82001 TELEPHONE (406) 252-2166 TE NE (307) 632-2160 T ELECO PIER (406) 252-1669 AUG 8 1983 TE (ER (307) 778-8175 JAMES T. MORAN August 3, 19 - ENVER OFFICE (303) 925-3476 ASPEN ING 5-SUITE 4002 555 DTC PARKWAY LEW000, COLORADO 80111 TELEPHONE (303) 575-8350 Paul Taddune, Esq. Gary Esary, Esq. Office of the City Attorney 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision Subdivision Exemption, Curton Duplex Dear Messrs. Taddune and Esary: I am writing this letter on behalf of our clients, Mr. and Mrs. Carl Bergman. My purpose is to inform you of a gross misapplication of the growth management plan exemption procedure in a manner which results in evasion of the subdivision regulations, without the due process safeguards of notice and public hearing. Here are the facts. On January 25, 1979, N. C. Herndon, Jr. owned an unsubdivided parcel of land at the end of West Francis Street. This parcel contained a single family dwelling. The parcel has some frontage on Colorado Highway 82 and falls away steeply to its western bound- ary which is Castle Creek. Relying on the so called "lot split" exemption in the growth management plan, §24-11.2(d), Herndon applied for subdivision exemption under §20-19. A copy of the application is attached as Exhibit 1 hereto. A subdivision exemption was granted allowing Herndon to divide his land into two parcels, A containing the existing house, and B the undeveloped parcel. Parcel B was specif- ically restricted to one single family dwelling. See Exhibits 3, 4 and 5 attached. There were also engineering constraints, including a restriction of access to an easement running from West Francis Street through Parcel A. See Exhibit 2 attached. There was no notice and no public hearing on this application. In February of 1983, one Stan Mathis applied to the Board of Adjustment for a variance to permit the construction of a duplex on Parcel B. The problem which triggered the variance application was • HOLL.AND &HART • Paul Taddune, Esq. Gary Esary, Esq. August 3, 1983 Page 2 a design problem not the single family restriction which apparently was overlooked by all concerned except my clients. The variance was denied because the design of the structure did not comply with the common wall requirements for a duplex. I attended that meeting on behalf of the Bergmans who are adjacent property owners. I advised the Board of Adjustment of the single family restriction and later documented that fact by a letter to the Zoning Enforcement Officer, Exhibit 6 attached. On March 31, 1983, one Donna Curton applied for an employee unit (duplex) exemption from the growth management plan, §24- 11.2(f). This exemption was granted by the City Council on June 27, 1983 as a subdivision exemption, again without notice or public hearing. Copies of the latest application, memos relative thereto and the council minutes are attached as Exhibit 7. The growth management plan is a building permit allocation scheme; it does not override zoning, subdivision or other land use regula- tions, §24-11.3(c)(3). In this situation it has been misused and misapplied not once but twice to circumvent the subdivision ordi- nances. The truly invidious aspect of the scheme that has been utilized here is its avoidance of the notice and public hearing requirements that apply to subdivision, §20-13; rezoning §§24- 12.5(c), 24-12.6 and variance §2-22(c) applications. Competition or exemption under the growth management plan pre- sumes that the applicant has the necessary zoning and has complied or will comply with the subdivision ordinance. A growth management plan exemption is not a subdivision exemption nor does it operate as a rezoning. In my opinion it is incumbent upon the City Council to review this matter and to either revoke its June 27, 1983 action or make it clear that the GMP exemption does not authorize duplex construc- tion on Parcel B. There are two other items which I want to bring to your atten- tion. First there is the matter of access to Parcel B. In the Council minutes the applicant's attorney, Mr. Kaufman, mentions that he has talked to the engineering department about access to Parcel B through the alley in Block 4. See Exhibit 7, page 14. The platted alley is not open and has not been open for as long as anyone can remember. The plats and the City Engineer's memoranda clearly reveal and establish that access to Parcel B is via West 9 HOLLAND &HART • Paul Taddune, Esq. Gary Esary, Esq. August 3, 1983 Page 3 Francis Street and the access easement across Parcel A. See Exhibits 2, 6, 7 at page 9. My clients insist that access continue to be so restricted and request the City to reject any suggestion that the alley be opened to accommodate the owners of Parcel B. Second, your attention is directed to the fact that the plats apparently submitted to the P & Z, the Housing Authority and the City Council are totally inaccurate and misrepresent both the extent and the configuration of Parcel B. These plats were appar- ently copied from Book 10 at page 31. The amended plat which appears in Book 11 at page 14 shows that an additional Parcel C consisting of 1880 square feet was carved out of Parcel B and deeded to Crystal Palace Corporation. Due to the topography of the land, the carve -out of parcel C significantly reduced the area available for a building site on Parcel B. Compare Exhibit 7, pages 8 and 13 with Exhibit 8. This error or misrepresentation alone is reason to revoke the exemption granted by council. See, e.g. 5§24-14.3, 24-14.5. In summary I believe it is absolutely clear that council did not have all the facts before it when it granted the Curton exemption on June 27, 1983. This is wh:t can be expected when notice and public hearing requirements are circumvented by an applicant. Please review the attached materials and place this issue on the council's agenda for reconsideration at an early date. If you have any questions or desire further infor- mation please call me at your convenience. Yours very truly, James T. Moran JTM/jlf enclosures cc: Mr. and Mrs. Carl Bergman Gideon Kaufman, Esq. Hon. William Stirling, Mayor Ms. Colette Penne, Planning Office Perry Harvey, Chairman, Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission i APPLICATION FOR rXi::•:PTION S['finI�'ISIO' �FCC1.11'IONS The request is hereby made on behalf of N.C. Herndon, Jr, (hereinafter referred to as "applicant") under Section 20-19 of the Aspen, Colorildo, Subdivision Regulations for exemption from the definition of the term "subdivision" with respect to a lot split of the real property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. It is submitted that an exemption in this case would be appropriate. The application involves subdividing a current lot existing of approximately forty-four thousand (44,000) square feet. This lot also contains an existing structure. Ordinance 3 of 1978 exempts the construction of a :! L upon a lot that was subdivided after the adoption of the growth management plan, provided that said lot has a current existing structure and is subdivided into no more than two (2) lots. This is exactly the case in the application before you. It is the contention of the applicant that the granting of the exemption will not be detrimental to. the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the subject property is situate. The granting of this application will not undermine any intent of the subdivision regulations, as it is clearly within the area intended for exemption under Section 20-19. The applicant would appreciate your consideration of this applica- tion at your next regular meeting. Dated: January LT , 1979. BY Gideon I. Ka fman Attorney fo N.C. Herndon, Jr. II EXHIBIT � A tract of land in the N 0 • /4 of tl►c ,,>~ r� 114 of Set t Icon l?, 7••"isT,ip 10 ScuCh, RnnEe 85 hest of the 6th P, it., Colorado. rare si•ccitically de-.cribed as follows; ]Beginning at a point on the North line of State t82 at the intersection of the westerly line ��of the Town of A, -pen As I.."Id 1 i nc cx i st rd on February 21, 1957; thence N. 7 38 E. 304.9 feet F.iid -t—tcrly line to the northerly line of Francis Street; thence N. 75*10' W. 4 1.5 of Francis Street produced westerly !, c t along the ciorther)y line to the c,.r,;,.rl far of Castle Creek; thence S. 44*lu' E. 218.0 feet along centerline of C1•,;)i. Creek; thence S. 1'0' W. 195.88 feet along centerline of Castle Creek to the Northerly line of State Highway #82; thence S. 75010' E. 226.07 feet aloz,r. the northerly line of State highway #82 to point of beginning; all in the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. EXCEPT the following described tract: Beginning at a ),Dint nn the north line of State Highway 082 at the intersection with the �c,:tcrly line of the Town of Aspen as said line existed on February 21, 1957; tl:once' 1:. 7*38' E. 8.0 feet more or less; thence N. 75*10' W. 7.35 feet; thence 1:. 10*15' E. 95.8 feet along fence line; thence N. 87*23' W. f67.44 feet; thence S. 1.0' W. 83.00 feet; thence S. 75*10' E. 162 feet more or le§s along north line of State Highway 1782 to point of beginning. ALSO EXCEPTING from the above described property, a parcel of land as set forth in instrument recorded February 15, 1966 in Book 219 at page 18. ALSO EXCEPTING from the above described tract, a parcel of land described as follows: Beginning at a point on North line of Hallam Street and intersecting with the West line of City Limit Line as said line existed on February 21, 1957; thence N. 75°10' W• 7.35 feet; thence.N. 10*15' E. 164.8 feet along fence line to intersection of said City Limit,Liue; thence S. 7°38' W. along said City Limit Line to point of beginning. ALSO EXCEPTING the tract described in Book 213 at Pape 104 Wore particularly described as follows: A tract of land lying in the NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P. M. Said tract is more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of Francis Street extended westerly (Francis Street being a street in the City of Aspen, Colorado) from whence the Northeast corner of the NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 12 bears N. 9*15' E. 297.17 feet; thence N. 75°09'11" W. 42.80 feet to the center line of Castle Creek; thence S. 54*43' E. 207.08 feet along the center line of Castle Creek; thence S. 36.19' E. 46.00 feet along the center line of Castle Creek; thence N. 62°50' E. 89.12 feet; thence N:•3°58' E. 41.61 feet to the north line of Francis Street extended westerly; thence N. 75*09'11" W. 244.65 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO EXCEPTING a tract of land in the SE 1/4 NW 1/4 and the NE 1/4 SW 1/4 of , Section 1.2, Township 10 South, Range 85 'Pest of the 6th P.H., more fully described; as follows: . Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Aspen Townsite line be'tween'i.: Corners 6 and 7 and the North line of Smuggler Street whence the center corner i of said Section 12 (which is a brass cap in place marked center 1/16 Cor., Section' 12) bears S. 65049'30" E. 361.55 feet; thence S. 7*38' W. 335.18 feet along' said Townsite line to the intersection with the prolonged centerline of Francis Street; thence N. 75*07' W. 187.51 feet -along said centerline of Francis Street prolonged to the base of steep bluff; thence N. 3*58' E. 196.05 feet along the ' base of the bluff; thence N. 7*42' W. 156.03 feet along the base of the bluff' ' to the prolonged North line of Smuggler Street; thence S. 75*07' E. 234.47 feet' along said street line to the point of beginning, - County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. E^,H 1T • LEGEND i NOTES 0 •alhD •'.VRV CV MON VM r_NY' �6 • RCOAR v/ UP U 'ACT S RCDAR CAP PC�MAV Ll7G- •� •�PIItC Sb-•P SURVCY .COKTra01- CO. AAOO DYATC HIGH W..Y LOCATCO OY �� ASSJM/NG COV TIGV OJT GCNTG4LINC WITH HALLAM iYItEET COOK ?-19 P'AGC IB LOGATl=p OY N�SUr.wIN4 LOGIT I°y •• ••�.y MIC.H tvnY ypp NTnGE ( ILG•O0•) YO >Ip�p_ •,o.. •,• •• • a . y• ..,� c • .•M i ASY1fRN flRO.CP-ry LINE LOc • ►•c.o �♦ • .. • •_---Q, MONUMLNTS AND ATCO OY FOUNO - �•`•�• ��•�� TOwµiIYC ,. IMPnOVtMeµY4 Cn, S SMOWw¢ L•rr\* (�_ 7r t,OCATCO O \ ♦O. �+ 1970 SVA VcY OF PAOPC 0.YY pY $v4VCY CNG/N¢E0.5• \�1•^'^• • �, 1 M • .. t JVRVRY Oft1ENY¢O W� 7•q/N •J M01.1C1M E: /•t T5• \�1' • l . \ t I f o. cwct•t •.c..o»,+. I�// wt, i� M1I•••.••I.•or f s.a' • 0 ST •ram / SCA L E 1 INCN . 60 FEET e+9184 � • • FOVhQ1 • • Coo •s �>.cw Tow..>rYG �J =D VVO.�Tut O.O •1+ci.71e.,) >,= O•. ,. ►LTTtR � 9•iG 4I v°>•�p O•.r>D • MAY i0. 11sa, rv= r1•••r.•,l Iv ••+\ PROPERTY SURVEY FOR 01' /• TRnCT Or LI.No !.IT•/ATC� Ih NCl/Y OC TME. SVII/H SECTION 12 TOWNSHIO 10 9OJT,• I R.\hCE ©J WCSY C." P. M • CITl1 Of AS ocy PIT•VN CcM1,.ITT coton..Oo C E RT I F—I C AT l ON suRVGY ENGRI,IZNc, P-O. t5ox 23Oi-.1SPENICO O. i• GERARp N. pCSMAN C1_RTIRY YH 1T ••j TMI� I\/.T IS P C-TCD FARM FIeLp NOTE OF A 9l1RV _y MAOC t/N DER MY SVPERVl�p1•I f2 Ct/IS CL> 11 ��Of 7s OuFtINC. CC-T. Iq�a TO: FROM: DATE: RE: ri I: M O R A N D U RS RICHARD GRICE, PLANNING DAVE ELLIS, CITY ENGINEER +,_ April 11, 1979 Herndon Subdivision - Conceptual Review In reviewing this conceptual subdivision application, the engi- neering department has found several problem areas. The first area of concern is with the access to Parcel B; the access as shown is not adequate since it is both too narrow for emergency vehicles, and new entrys on arterial roadways are prohibited. A second area of concern is with the inclusion of the prescriptive right-of-way for Power Plant Road and the Castle Creek Bridge within the pro- perty ownership; dedication of these rights -of -way will be neces- sary. We would also want to thoroughly examine the extent and loca- tion of the other access and utility easements indicated on the survey and in the title committment. The third area of concern is with the supply of fire protection and domestic water service as indicated by the water department. Although the present concept for subdivision of the tract into two lots is not acceptable to the engineering department, we feel that modifications such U 0LiWX 5;taqgmay provide a viable subdivision. We also feel that the question of water supply can be satisfactorily resolved. Subject to the above concerns, we would recommend approval of the conceptual subdivision so that the applicant can proceed to the preliminary stage at which time a detailed examination can be made of the concerns expressed here. jk cc: Gideon Kaufman . EX11-BJT �._._-_c_:.�._..,,,,------•..,.,,...;•� _�-tip--;- - ._ ,. •r--_-�•.---"*----ter_ _. MEMORANDUM T0: • • - Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office RE: Herndon Subdivision - Preliminary Plat - Public Hearing DATE: July 25, 1979 This is the preliminary plat review for the subdivision of a 44,250 square foot parcel owned by Mr. 1-1. C. Herndon, Jr. The parcel of land lies at the west end of Francis Street overlooking the Castle Creek, is zoned R-6, and presently contains one single family residence. The subdivision falls under the Growth Management exemption identified in Section 24-10.2(d). That exemption allows for the construction of on on a lot subdivided after the effective date of the Section, where the tract of land to be subdivided had a pre-existing dwelling and no more than two lots were created by the subdivision. The proposal is to split the property approximately in half with each parcel containing in excess of 6,000 square feet of developable land, less than 30°0 slope. The Aspen Water Department has commented that they will allow one connection only of a water service line to the existing 14" steel main located on the south side of the water easement under the following conditions: I. One connection only. 2. Service isolating valve that can be operated by conventional valve key 2" cast iron square head gate valve with street box). 3. Parcels A and B must both be serviced off of this service line, so that in the event of a problem with the service, it will not be necessary to shut down the transmission main. 4. Thirty (30) days notice prior to the commencement of water service tap, in order that we may purchase a special tapping saddle and valve. All speciality items required to tap the 14" steel line will be paid for (an additional charge) by the persons making the water tap. Heiko Yuen of Aspen Metro Sanitation District has commented that he sees no problem in servicing the proposed subdivision with sanitation facilities. There appear to be several lines nearby that have capacity for additional hook-ups. . Willard Clapper of Rocky Mountain Natural Gas has no problem with the subdivision. \. Mountain Bell has requested that all streets and driveways be dedicated to the use of the public utilities. Bob Jacobs, Fire Marshall, has stated that while the access does not comply, fully with the A.M.C., it should be adequate in the case of emergency. As of -the time of this writing we have not received comment from the City Engineering Department. They have verbally informed us that they know of no problems so severe as to prevent the subdivision's ultimate approval and request that your approval tonight be subject to forthcoming comments from the Engineering Department. The Planning Office recommends approval subject to the resolution of the above concerns. 2ba l Meeting Aspen City Council April 23, 1979 Regular - f GULATIONS IN OFF-SEASON 11 � , � i .•r a pARI:I NG RE ! jcj Mayor Standley said this has been put on the agenda for reconsideration. There have been lot of complaints and disgruntled people. Councilman Behrendt said one of the problems f with City has is creating confusion with the irregular enforcement. The Municipal Court } department would like to see the enforcement stay on during the off-season. Chief of police RoblicClunTheacitizenspolice woulddlikettonseehas the streetsdefinite returned tolem with themenforcing during the season parking. i off-season. McClung said in a community like this, everyone would like the chance to relax led offing the office season and have no pressure from tickets. McClung said this is the only time he can allow the TCO's•to go on vacation. Mayor Standley moved to reconsider; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in favor, with the �y ; except ion of Councilman Isaac. Motion carried. s Councilman Wishart moved not to enforce on -street parking during the off season; seconded ad. by Councilwoman Anderson. Councilman Van Ness asked for a date specific; Councilman y,i.shart added to June 15 to his motion. • Councilman Wishart asked if this is timed parking only. Council said yes, everything else iwill be enforced. Councilman Isaac said he felt this is a step backwards in trying to solve the parking problems. Councilman Parry agreed. e Councilmembers Wishart, Anderson, Van Ness and Mayor Standley in favor; Councilmembers Isaac, Behrendt, and Parry opposed. Motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Helmich Richard Grice, planning office, told Council this is an application request for condomini- umization of an existing duplex in West Aspen Subdivision. The Helmich have lived on one -side for 10 years. The other side is currently rented for $450 per month. FIelmich has no objection to 5 year restriction within the housing pool. Stock has recommended approval subject to the property being deed restriction to six month minimum leases and to comply -with the notice and option requirements, and that at least one unit is restricted in price and occupancy. The engineering department has requested approval be conditioned thsir. upon receiving new improvements surveys. The P & Z has recommended approval subject to pa;, the comments of engineering and the City Attorney. ,S Reci Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the subdivision exemption given engineerings considera- tions and the restrictions imposed by City Attorney Stock; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Victorian Square Condominiumization Grice told Council this application comes from Garfield & Hecht, who own this building and k are seeking condominiumization. The building is occupied by Garfield & Hecht. and several businesses. The subdivision will result in no increase in density, and there are no residential units involved. ,t Fis' ; Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the subdivision exemption for condominiumization; Bor' seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. ; Lng CONCEPTUAL SUBDIVISION - Herndon . • tG�ee..po.�rztedr�<stitl�eb�2�4'-Al"0�2"E+�'�]rows.+�orarith��t�Y"ar*�►f�xam.�graow:► . < ern - zere tFetrcteciplttolc5ttIyattr�; dw'e33�1 The lots are located at the West end of Francis tted. i streets and are in excess of 44,000 square feet.Tiee`�iai_lJ bey<rt3rl17eastx6i�:00:Oilgr:f are ifnt sslgpeA rlarky expressed doubt on adequate water supply. Dave Ellis had some concerns, but feels these problems can be -e addressed along with access and easements, and these can be addressed at preliminary ola-E— state. P & Z recommended approval with the understanding these concerns will be addr'e.^--- Gideon Kaufman told Council he had gone to the property with Dave Ellis and Bob Jacobs and everything can be worked out. There are adequate water main, and the access will be off west Francis street. a- 4 Councilwoman Anderson moved to give conditional approval; seconded by Councilman Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Blitz Ms. Smith said the planning office recommends approval of the Blitz condominiumization application, which is a duplex on lot 14 of the Anthony Acres subdivision, zoned R-15 and does allow for duplex. The application received 8040 greenline review in 1975. Ms. Smith said this is not affected by displace of low, moderate and middle income tenants as it is recently build and never has been occupied. P & Z recommended approval with condition of a 15 foot trail easement, and the property should be deed restricted to six month minimum leases. Bob Jacobs has reviewed this for the impact on fire access. Bob Jacobs told Council this property has no emergency access road.. The road they face on is Covered by snow six months of the year and is unusable. The owners have shown a desire to provide private equipment. Mayor Standley said he felt the fire access was a serious problem. Gideon Kaufman told Council they had installed a fire hydrant and have bought hose. Mayor Standley said he was not interested in supporting this with the fire dangers. Kaufman told Council this is a 6,000 square foot duplex; a 4,000 unit on top two floors anc a 2,000 unit on the bottom. Councilman Van Ness pointed out the City has an entire process to go through, and tell people what the rules are and what they can build. After the building i,s built, you cannot come along and tell them the building is no good. Mayor Standley said the person who builds this knows what the risks are; a person buying it may not know what the risks are and will come back on the City because there is no fire pro- tection, p • 2'791 a Iri Is 1 se, i re , i t usint' -, 4-0 ion tly i I M Aspen City Council December 17, 1979 VISION EXEMPTION - Roosen I SUpD .i Vann, plannin office, told Council this duplex seeking condominiumization through i sunny is located on West Alta Vista Drive. The rental rates currently and have exemptionexceeded the housing pool. The engineering department reco^mends approval I historically subject to a number of conditions and the applicant agreeing to enter into a sidewalk d13trict. The attorney comments that the units should be conditioned upon six month minimum lease and notice and option provision. The planning office recommends approval subj ect to those conditions; P & Z concurred. oveh the 4 Councilma29$e Behrendt ed toapprondedbyRcouncilman 1Parry. eAll pinofavo-, motiono carried.' %ovemb-rmemorandum; i� SUIIDIVISION EXEMPTION - Pedersen was trice told Council that the motion o`etheese ownersain arestogle seekaindividuallyehisttoric �Io�:ever, in the conditions for approval, nation for the structures. trice said there is no reference to going before FIPC. 3csig .'sig ted that staff give this item more attention before Council votes on -it. Edel reques F'IYAL PLAT APPROVAL - Herndon Subdivision Grice told Council this is final plat approval for 44,000 square feet in the R-6 zone at the end of Frances street overlookin Castle Creek with an existing house. The a request is to put a line through the property to create a second building site. Grice i request this application is made under a growth management exempt deon:s' Both e n g ; uS Siyeigi Sia :pu+Qng raeE &M Pa 4 sr zt�3le i;Y2 9• lepartment and planning department have reviewed this and found that all conditions have been m-t since conceptual. Grice pointed out there are two quit claim deed needed for the western boundary. jl Councilman Parry moved to approve final plat for the Herndon Subdivision; seconded by { Councilman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried. II ORDINANCE #81, SERIES OF 1979 - Electric Appropriation Ordinance Councilman Isaac moved to read Ordinance #81, Series of 1979; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #81 (Series of 1979) AN ORDINANCE MAKING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION IN THE ELECTRIC FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $140,277 FROM UNAPPROPRIATED REVENUES AND $55,723 FROM PRIOR YEAR SURPLUS; APPROPIRATE EXENPDITURES OF $196,000 FOR PURCHASED POWER; AND DECLARING THAT AN EMERGENCY EXISTS REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ENACTMENT was read by the city clerk. Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Ordinance #81, Series of 1979, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Parry. Ms. Butterbaugh explained this is due to increased rates from public service. The city Is loosing ground in their revenues and will be back for a rate increase. Because of increased cost, there have been more revenues but the city has.had to pay out more. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Behrendt, aye; Isaac, aye; Collins, aye; Parry, aye; Jan Ness, aye; Michael, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. CITY MANAGER I. KSNO Building. City Manager Chapman told Council KSNO offered to donate their build ing to the city prior to the end of this year. They agreed to pay the city rent of $750 Per month to the maximum of $4,000. Chapman said if Council wants to accept the donation, he would need a motion, and he would bring a lease back to Council. Chapman pointed out the building would have to be moved or demolished at the beginning of building season. City Engineer McArthur said the parks department would have use for this building out at the golf course. Mayor Edel said if they would pay the city $4,000, would the city wind UP with the same problem of setting it up and costing more. Ms. Butterbaugh said there Is no money budgeted for this. Councilman Behrendt pointed out the space at the golf course is open space and the city keeps putting more things on it. Councilman Behrendt said he did not see that this benefitted the city a lot, and this would also preclude the P & Z decision of allowing the building at the golf course. Chapman suggested finding a use for the building and then acce tin the donation and the rent money. If Council decides not to move the building, g g, it can be demolished. Councilman Van Ness said before accepting the donation, !Use should have a definite use for it. MayoK Edel said unless the staff determines e use and the P & Z goes along with it, then Council is not interested. 2• Mill Street Lighting. McArthur reminded Council they had asked for a break down on co sts olightingr on brill street on antique lights versus standard highway poles. McArthur showed the closest pole he could fine resembling what is already in the city, which costs $2995 just for the pole. The antique lights are $3150 per pole, and at least 12 Poles are needed. The regular aluminimum 30 foot pole cost about $738 per pole. McArthur said he had not seen the pole resembling the city's, which is made in Mexico and lei ghs only 100 pounds. The engineering department figures $8856 for lighting on Mill street; the antique lights would cost $39,000. The $27,000 difference would mean eliminating four streets of paving in the downtown. EX. UBIT _.. ...-_ +mow �.w.•.w .- _ y 1. Fcbruary 11, 1983 Bill Drueding `> Zoning Enforcement Officer Pitkin County Building Department 110 E. Ha11aM Aspen, Colorado -81611 Rom: Herndon Subdivision Dear Bill: At the variance hearing on th- Stan Mathis duplex application, you indicated that it might be helpful if I furnished copies of certain docuTents that S found in my research of the City records. Although I understand that Mr. Mathis has withdrawn his application, 1 am happy to furnish ray information on the single X.. restriction and access issues for wh t-evcr use it might be to you in the future. There are three pertinent files in the City archives. These are: Title File Code Herndon Sub(Ilivision SU 47 'Herndon Resubmission SU 47 Metcalf EC 47 From the first file mentioned above 1 have obtained -and enclose copies of the following: 1. Application including property description and conceptual plat;: 2 City Engineer's memorandum. to Planning Office dated April 11, 1979; t X Bill Drueding ' February 11, 1983 Page r 3. Planning office memorandum to P u Z dated July 25, 1979 From the' City Council minutes I have obtained and enclose copies of: 4. Conceptual Subdivision - Herndon, Dock 5, page 2627. 5. Final Plat Approval - Herndon, ;Book 6, page 2791. With regard to the sing!-, family Yestriction, you will sas that 5 24-10.2(C.2) controls. This appears quite clearly from certain language in Enclosures 1, 3; 4 and 5 above. I ha.,,e highlighted the pertinent language in yellow on'the enclosures. The access issue does not emerge quite ?s emphatically is do s the single family restriction. NCeve_rthel ^ss I tni nk it is -quit^ clear that access to Parcel 3 is from West Francis Street via, t1he access and utility casement across Parcel A. t;y reasoning is as follows: On the plat attached to Enclosure 1, the application, the only apparent access to Parcel is the 14 root e3scment from Highw?y 82 which crosses the Crystal Palace Corp. Parcel. In Enclosure 2, the City Engineer objects to -the proposed access as too narrow and entering from an arterlvl. Ble recomm-nnends access off "West Francis Street." (Highlighted in pink). Finally in the plat of the First Amendment to the Herndon Subdivision, Book 11, page 14 the former easement across the parcel owned by Crystal Palau Corp has be -en eliminated. Since- there is no mention in any of the file materials I:'have seen of accessing Parcel S via the alley in Block 4, 1 conclude, that access to Parcel B must be from :west Francis Street via -..the platted access easement which crosses Parcel A. In. case you don't have copies of the official plats I Qrc1ose'; please return them after you. have my only file copies. Would you looked them over. I hope this information will be useful. - Yours very truly, James T. Moran J'"M/j l f enclosures cc: Mr. & Mrs. Carl Bergman • LAW OFFICES OF • GIDEON I. KAUFMAN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION BOX 10001 GIDEON I. KAUFMAN 611 WEST MAIN STREET ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 DAVID G. EISENSTEIN March 31, 1983 Alan Richman Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Donna Curton Employee Unit Dear Alan, TELEPHONE AREA CODE 303 925-8166 Please consider this letter an application on behalf of Donna Curton for an exemption of an employee unit from the requirements of the Growth Management Plan quota system for the City of Aspen. Donna Curton owns Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. This lot is a duplex lot containing 21,950 square feet. However, because the lot was split pursuant to an exemption from the growth management quota system, all that is, permitted on this lot is a single family unit without further growth management approval. Pursuant to Aspen City Code, Section 24-11.2, Exceptions, a unit of employee housing constructed pursuant to Section 24-11.10 may be exempt from the growth management quota system provided it gets the approval of City Council upon the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The one requirement is the showing of community need considering the number of units, the type of units and the rental mix. I have been in contact with the Housing Director, Jim Hamilton, who has given us his support for the type of unit we would like to construct. Donna would like to construct a duplex on the site, containing one free market unit which is allowed by right and another unit which would be allowed under the employee housing exemption from the Growth Management Plan. There will be no necessity to vary any of the density or PAR requirements or any other requirements of the Land Use Code. We simply ask that allowable density be permitted on this lot. To accomplish this we need the exemption from the Growth Management Plan for the employee unit. EXHISIT'�Z- P. / Alan Richman March 31, 1983 Page Two The contemplated size of the unit, per Jim Hamilton's request, is 1,300 square feet. It will be a three -bedroom unit and Donna would like to be able to rent out the unit and then sell it or continue to lease it, at her option. The employee unit will be governed by the middle income guidelines. This is justifiable because this project is not a large multi -unit complex; rather it is a duplex and as such construction costs and high quality of the unit dictate the middle income classification. I look forward to having this item placed on your next available agenda. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN, a Professional Corporation By Gideon Ka fman GK kw cc: Donna Lee Curton Donna Lee Curton Trust f SCHEDULE A Order Number: 11192 Commitment Number: 1. Effective date: 14OVEM13ER 19, 1982 AT 8:00 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount of Insurance premium A. ALTA Owner's Policy s 112,500.00 $269.81 Proposed Insured: DONNA LEE CURTON TRUST Tax Certificate 5.00 B. ALTA Loan Policy $ Proposed Insured: C. $ 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and covered herein is fee simple and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: RALPH CURTON, JR. 4. The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows: Parcel B. HERNDON SUBDIVISION, according to the plat thereof recorded August 15, 1980 in Plat Book 10 at pages 31 and 32, as Reception No. 226007, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. r Authorized Countersignature s Page STE,WART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY 1652 Ty ;..t ,.alit,{: 4•.Ntt,d�..niu�KAFts'.ls%c�+H,^+r'f�i�}{��a�!:S�t�ar�.rii:lm'list"raY�ik'�R�ideT%A�flaV3bl3?�aL�Ptilt7l�dl�..,•��iYi�d�'1'•}e.itxr7'f��Y�e..vdL•t N3e +i'a.Jb'�•ij..�04�,i' �3it.i�.i f.�ieSY,Y'Yl:s"a ..+t+i�4.S•.;:.e 7-3 • SCHEDULE B — Section 1 • a Order Number. 11192 Commitment Number. Requirements The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to -wit: 1. Affidavit by a Trustee setting forth the name of the Donna Lee Curton Trust, the nrmcs and addresses of all the Trustees who are represented by such n:;ine and the authority of the affianC to execute and record the affidavit, and the authority of the -Trustees who are, thereby empowered to convey or otherwise act on behalf of the Donna Lee Curton Trust. 2. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart title. Guaranty Company, furnished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen, that the real estate trattsfer tax pursuant to city ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979, has been laid or that conveyance is exempt froze said tax. 3. Deed from vested owner, vesting fee simple title in purchaser(s). NOTE: Said deed Taust also convey the fol w ng described easement: Together with an easement for ingress and er re. a over Parcel A, IIERNDON SUbDIVISICN, to be used by coo vehicles, norn or vehicles and pedestrians as such easement is described n the plat of the Herndon Subdivision, which ease tent shall be for the lusive use and 'benefit of Parcel B. 1653 } Page 3 S T E NVA Wr T I T L l GUARANTY COMPANY AGENT'S FILE COPY �. .'.t•:. ..... .. .� ..-.� .�.. .. ._: 11. :�aiSJ.��+ i)%.Mi.A.a41.:r.1 J.:7.. 1:>....e.. r1 :�1 tF� 1...••'.-) i.... i`.., r. 4 �. .. LiF r, ni I.H i.., .... ...�—.._._ _..._... __.__. �v • SCHEDULE B — Section 2 • Exceptions Order Number: 11192 Commitment Number: The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of satisfaction of the Company: to the I. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by te 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnpublic records. ished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if an y, created, records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the rproposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment.st Fearing in the public 6. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments. 7. The effect of inclusion in any general or specific fire protection, soil conservation or other district aorrinclusionnin, any water service or street improvement area. 8. The right of the p pro rietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found,to penetrate or intersect the premises, as reserved in United States Patent recorded in Book 55 at page 35. 9• An easement for water line 16 feet in width, together with enter along the course of said easement for maintenance andthe repairrhofto said pipe line, as set forth in instrument recorded December 10, 1959 in Book 189 at page 320. 10. Pole line -easement along the Southerly line of subject property as shown on Plat Map recorded August 15, 1980 in Plat Book 10 at page 31. 11. Easements affecting subject property as shown on Plat August 15, 1980 in Plat Book 10 at pag recorded 12• Easement granted Aspen f4 ropolitan Sani a on District, corded flay 17, 1978 in Book 348 at aye 113. y 13.' Easement to private dri corded in Boo 183 at page 286. 14. A fifteen -oot roadway eas m t recorded in Book 172 at page 197. 15. A Deed of T uAt dated September 1, 1981 the Public , executed b tee of Pitkin Counture y Ralph Curton, Jr. to in favor of Richard Grimes, recorded September 4, 1981an indebtedness in'Book 413$at2Pa08e'00, 594 as Reception No. 235373. tceptions numbered are hereby omitted. i 50 Page STEWA►R.T TITLE - COPY FOR ISSUING OFFICE GUARANTY COMPANY 7-T MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: Aspen City Council Colette Penne, Planning Office Curton Subdivision Exemption DATE: June 13, 1983 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Location: Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Zoning: R-6. Applicant's Request: An exemption from growth management allotment procedures as per Section 24-11.2 of the Municipal Code for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Referral Comments: The City Engineering Department has no problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion concerning access which appears to be through the access easement in Parcel A and not through the alley in Block 4. The Housing Authority Board has reviewed this application and makes the following recommendation: "l. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and -occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." Planning Office Review: Parcel B was formed through a lot split obtained in 1980. The lot contains 21,950 square feet. Since this lot area allows for construction of a duplex in terms of area and bulk requirements, but a single unit is all that is allowed pursuant to the lot split, the applicant is proposing to construct a deed -restricted employee unit as the second half of the duplex. 3 , Section 24-11.29(f) provides an exemption from the compliance with GMP allotment procedures for employee housing units deed restricted in accordance with the City's adopted employee housing guidelines. The unit can be exempted from competition by the City Council, based on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The unit will be subtracted from the residential quota.' The review for such an exemption request is to include, as per Section 24-11.2(f), "a determination of community need considering, but not limited to, the project's compliance with any adopted housing plan... specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit and the size of the unit, the rental/sale mix of the development and the proposed price categories to which the units are to be deed restricted." ,r Memo: Curton_ Subdivision Exemption Page Two June 13, 1983 -These criteria were addressed in the review of this unit by the Housing Authority. Planning and Zoning Commission Action and Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office recommend approval of an exemption from growth management for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision with the following conditions: 1• The unit be -restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2• The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it not be for less than a 1 year period. Council Action: 3• The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if -for rent or purchaser if for sale that all tenants or purchasers be ified that the Housing Office prior to their Occupancy.by Should Council concur with the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office, the appropriate motion is as follows: "I move to approve the Curton Subdivision Exemption With the following conditions: 1• The unit be restricted to the middle income Price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2•- The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a 1 year period. 3• The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. f z. 7,7 0 —d rl a "Z % 14" 10A MIA" -­w-we 5, .4 *Alto ..100 Iwo JA,. PARCEL I - %To 04 v VOOtI FAAVtf x. e 0.0, 7 ram SOUS[ -11.1.1tL7 'A PA R C E L "B" L =4 1 sc•C . [Ic 7 PA , ipzFp Was da TOP OF BANII 60., 00 STA,r Mail Ij WK? W W—,.ryzi ft.wxm fLs, c,, Ills "ITER -IT, 0 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penner Planning4 Office FROM: Jay Hammond Engineering Department - DATE; May 10, 1983 RE: ----- Curton Employee Un ----------------nit_ Exemption_ from _GMP_- _ Having reviewed the above application, inspection, the comment City Engineerin and made a site that is not related g Department has We have no particular t0 the matter of Only one for an employee problems with the GMP exemption. concerns oroyee unit on the site relative to exemption 'B�.CIY§j rovision of services. tO engineering : j;;a �'PQa e�cy e�ny t5l h e ze o b' i>4+As. tton... _ eS_SwtT.,10-� JH/co } b'd AkI !1 r: Ar pitkin county 5O6 east main street aspen, colorado 81611 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Colette Penne FROM: Jim Hamilto DATE: May 12, 1 83 RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption The Housing Authority Board has reviewed the Curton subdivision exemption with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the Middle Income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than'a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale provided, that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the.Housing Office prior to their occupancy. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption DATE: May 17, 1983 Location: Parcel B. Herndon Subdivision. Zoning: R-6. Applicant's Request: An exemption from growth management allotment procedures as per Section 24-11.2 of the Municipal Code for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Referral Cor-:ents: The City Engineering Department has no problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion concerning access which appears to be through the access easement in Parcel A and not through the alley in Block 4. The Housing Authority Board has reviewed this application and makes the following recommendation: "l. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." Planning Office Review: Parcel B was formed through a lot split obtained in 1980. The lot contains 21,950 square feet. Since this lot area allows for construction of a duplex in terms of area and bulk requirements, but a single unit is all that is allowed pursuant to the lot split, the applicant is proposing to construct a deed -restricted employee unit as the second half of the duplex. ' Section 24-11.29(f) provides an exemption from the compliance with GMP allotment procedures for employee. housing units deed restricted in accordance with the City's adopted employee housing guidelines. The unit can be exempted from competition by the City Council, based on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The unit will be subtracted from the residential quota. 0 • Memo: Curton Subdivision Exemption Page Two May 17, 1983 The review for such an exemption request is to include, as per Section 24-11.2(f), "a determination of community need considering, but not limited to, the project's compliance with any adopted housing plan... specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit and the size of the unit, the rental/sale mix of the development and the proposed price categories to which the units are to be deed restricted." These criteria were addressed in the review of this unit by the Housing Authority. Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning Office recommends approval of an exemption from growth management for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. 7.--IZ 9 \ r - .. .. .rrYND cow • iJ l••,crs ►Iwl- •ln,• .o...vff, a mac, t •.w R'L_iKl2 = w{D •wbOsro.►a MMK • i .c•af►a wasa+► .-w.wD • r.•aCj= I t yy j ` f IF f s•r �••4L`�7C V't`. .•.-•i•_'����_ � r`f Ir• � . \ , q •,• 1.94• Y stil' PARCELto + •• ww fas ` 1 ;a 1 ra.faa , t• n :?act 1 • 1•oAr �. a. - . � r � •w004 taavLr • i �t r• .. a PARCEL "f3" ,,t-:.. CWw• Mlr lV 1 1!y,•r.1O ... n,.N:. rnna UTNI,Y n -rr r,•. e• • (V it1 flA)• • be If ' •�,,y� ec,+ev L•Da'••aN,��r I •e f.[H / woa bF Zpp �••a •• _ - r•NC 'O PK • r V..l•TY c,•aa MwMT I l V AaCC .eRf �M _ 9 �. wf a.orr�co - c .• ` t • h I / f J f: ie lop Of /ANK ' a f . f a. tl1► ! I 1 cmw"" • AO. � I { trA*, M1000*41, Na . r. • . ,Q,,.D. aril, , ..,.r . • „•,.,.f. 1 •t.•rr 1aT ., L.s a � .f1 N.o+TY•••• yoa.•Twt. � ry M�• Y•eb Wr A Tl Rw I•I.T'C,. .rMM„+, n• • 3 Council June 27, 1983 Aspen City egular Meeting - _- - pric as fair aufman asked what 11lacatprice" beforemeans. CouncilnislannSPAKnecht apolicationdand askedmifkCouncil e• li aufman said t%e app roved the applica-{ ad turned that application down. Taddune said the Council has not approved Aon. ` ;ouncilman Kmecht amended his motion to include and/or exchange of property; seconded by f ;ouncilman (aollins. All in favor, motion carried.Ig ean; i li layor Stirllng said ethat Therelismargroupvalue beginswhatever willing the process of negotiating withathelownerl )uyer can megotiat. >f the property. s LIQUOR LICENSE RF.NF.WAL - Arthur's Restaurant David Moss told Council he wants to work with the city another year. moss sbsaid he Moss the city Nave reached an agreement on certain financial items that lagged an for del said he •rer-eived a verbal okay on a commitment anmentsmeveryent lweek and ehas gmade themfor and utility payments. Moss said he is making payments II d what the city the last four weeks. Moss told Council he is current with that plan and should be necht totally up to date wish tCitclAttorneytY on gTadduneust �saiduthelcityman Kagreedatoeassume ownership 1 is leasing to Arthur Y of the property so that taofspecial. exemptia school on would come into effect exempting the property' from the within 500 fee Councilman Collins moved to direct the city clerk to proceed and renew the liquor license ht. All in favor, motion carried. for Arthur's; seconded by Councilman Knec INDEPFNBENCF. GHOST TOWN - Request for funds R al ot Jere Road ttlodstartcrestorationvOf Independence. Rood saidil after seen years of study, the nhelspoke cwith 2500yvisitors ;+ permission Theyl last year. Last $10y000,this yearHistorical aresociety askingfthelcityeforn$3500. tTheaHistori0cal.society need to raiseN has begun restoration work and has someone living at Independence so that people do not j. carry off parts of the buildings. The $3500 will qo towards materials and salary. Rood told Council this is a people project, and is a great entrance project on the east j side of town. Ir taken ;;Councilwoman Blomquist asked if the boahaverd f the Historical Society isthe Historical society shoping that action 'requesting this money. Rood said they Independence will become self-sustaining as Ashcroft has become. There wgiving 80ohours j funds raising project this summer. The county is giving no money but is giving ' of in -kind services. Finance Director, She ree Bonfield, told Council the Historical Society received $6,000 for 1983 in budget received $6,000 and t requests. In 1982 th �• $2,000 for Independence. Councilman Collins asked why this wasn't included by the Eistorical Society when they camefunding in nafor budget dy settledue independence. el1 RoodtoldeCouncil it about this and they have planned at ghost show at the Wheeler.and a picnic as other fund raisers. ;Councilman Knecht moved to approve the $3500 request and in next year's budget, any request for Independence be put in the original budget; seconded by Councilwoman Walls. Councilman Collins asked why the request is doubled from last year. Rood told Thehope Council last winter, Independence lost three more cabins because o th of cil last to of he 31 s. the Historical 300Sacmotv nth,sand itehas7beentraisedstoe$400. The trestCofnthe money yisr his salary $ precedent to do it necessary materials. Councilman Blomquist said he felt it is a bad p necessary ml appropriations of this nature. Councilman Blomquist said the Council should' not encourage these precedent. Councilman Collins agreed, but pointed out not has done this in the past. Councilman Collins asked for an amendment to make sure the city has the money. Councilman Knecht amended his motion for staff to show Council where the money is coming i from tie fund this request; seconded by Councilwoman Walls. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Blomquist. Motion carried. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Curton Colette Penne, planning office, told Cowzcil this is a request of subdivision exemption f the for the purpose soofadding makingnitnalduplex. unit iso Pennegle pointedloutouse the Codeaprovidesthis Herndon subdivision, exemption from the GMP as an incentive for employee housing. When the unit is builMs. will be deducted from the quota. The unit - it I' it is exempted from the competition only. �i he Penne t`capprovalofornconstructionhas of thisedeedtrestrictedaunitof tin the nlmiddle and has recommendedconstruction for rent or for sale. The application may income category. The unit may be provided select the tenant or purchaser provided he or she is qualified by the housing authority, Gideon Kaufman, representing the applicant, told Council this previously went through lot split approval. The applicants granted the city easements that were requested at that time.. One oft e concerns of theparc tiswthroughtlot A. Kaufmanhey did not tmore- curb as not hastalkedtocthe ess to ap on highway 82. The I Counc engineey•department about accessgle thrcu h thmarketyumnitaonparcel dB; theylareeaskingcan {, high the right for an exception to build an employee unit. Councilman Knecht moved to appwing rove the Curton subdivision exemption with the follouide- 'I conditions; (1) the unit be restricted to the middle income price andovidedathat gif the lines for 1982; (2) the unit be offered either for sale or for rent the p applicant be unit is rented, it is rented for not less tha a. one year period; (providedpthat all ti allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchase if for sale, p tenants or purchasers be qualified by the housing office prior to their occupancy; seconded by Councilman Collins. �� ! q i� 0 • Regular Pleetina Aspen City Council June 27, 1983 11 an additional condition, which is that the d..eed restrictions City Attorney Taddune requested be .approved as to form by his office. Ii C©•uacilman Knecht amended his motion to add that as conidition (4); seconded by Councilman f Cw1lins. All in favor, motion carried. f S_MDIVISION EXEMPTION - Green Familv Trust i Colette Penne, Planning office, told Council the Eagle's Nest condominiums have gone through nearly every city review. This subdivision exemption is to add narking spaces required in the RBO action, which allowed two employee units to exist in the downstairs of this duplex. Ms. Penne told Council she has done a site visit, and the units are very + attractive. The reauirement from the last Council was that the designated narking be shown' on the plat. These parking spaces would remove the landscaping of the employee units if i is they were ever put in. The condominium plat will show these as designated parking spaces. The condominium documents state if a subsec*uent buyer wants the parking spaces put in, they will be nut in. Councilman Knecht moved to approve subdivision exemption for the addition of two designated. parkincr spaces on the Eagle's Nest condominium map and the commitment to construct them in the condominium documents and that these revised documents be recorded within 90 days .of this action; seconded by Councilwoman laalls. All in favor, with the exception of ? ifI , Councilman Collins. Motion carried. Il HERRON APARTMENT PLAT A?"TNDMENT Mayor Stirling said he was involved in this transaction as listing and selling agent and feels he has a conflict of. interest. Plavor Stirling stepped down from the table. Colette Penne, planning office, told Council this is a change to the plat. Ms. Penne said unit 1B has a porch area at the back, which is shown as a general common element for the Herron apartments. This actually has been finished and used by unit lB for several years. This action is formalizing the fact the porch is actually part of unit 1B. Ms. Penne pointed out in her recommendation there are three conditions, one of which is not necessarily fair. The first one is the condominium join any improvement district in the area if one is formed. This is a minor change and only affects unit 1B; it is unfair to ask the entire condominium to join.in an improvement district. The engineering office agrees this is an onerous condition. Ms. Penne recommended Council drbp condition 1. Also, there is a timing problem, if this plat isn't filed in two days, the applicant will lose money. Councilman Blomquist moved to approve subdivision exemption for the alteration of the condominium map of the Herron condominiums at 333 West Main street to include a porch area un Unit 1B that is _presently shown as a general common element with conditions 2 and 3 in the planning office memorandum of June 27, 1983; seconded by Councilman Knecht. All. in favor, motion carried. Mayor Stirling returned to the table. WHALE. OF A WASH - CONDOMINIU.MIZATIOM Colette Penne, planning office, told Council that the Whale of a Wash, 415 East Main successfully competed in both residential and commercial GMP competition for 2700 sauare feet, and may build all commercial or a combination of commercial and one residential unit. The applicant has not decided which he will do; whichever is not used will be returned to the appropriate cuota. Ms. Penne said the applicant is asking for cor•dominium- ization of. unit 1 and unit 2. In the commercial core, one can only have free market units that are accessroy to the commercial use. Ms. Penne recommended approval of the condomini-11 umization with the conditions in the memorandum. Councilman Blomquist moved to.grant subdivision exception for the purposes of condominiumi ject to conditions 1, 2, and 3 in the planning zation of the Whale of a Wash building, sub office memorandum of June 27, 1983; seconded by Councilman Collins. Mayor Stirling asked why dwelling units are not allowed. Ms. Penne said the commercial !I core is for commercial use. The plannina office does not want to encourage free market units because they would occupy a lot of space that should be commercial. Rmplovee units are allowed because of auto disincentive and they are subsidized by the commercial project.l' II All in favor, motion carried. M.A.A. REQUEST FOR FUNDING I Ford Schumann said the reauest to Council is self-explanatory. The problem with the watery and sewer is vital to the P?.A.A.'s use of the campus and the use of the campus by Aspen as just raised money from County Day School. This was totally unbudgeted. The M.A.A. h their constituency. The M.A.A. is prepared to assume a portion of. this expense. Schumann! said what the M.A.A. means to the community is evident. Martin Flub told Council the M.A.A. had accummulated a deficit and had to go out for an emergency appeal, in which they raised $400,000. The b1.A.A. is budgeting on a break even basis. Flub said the M.A.A. '+ is unable to spend what they need in deferred maintenance. Flub said the cost of the I' infrastructure of the music school and festival has increased at a rate higher than inflation. The M.A.A. has received contributions in from. the artists and faculty. Flub said a very small portion of donors provides over 75 per cent of the contributions. Flub said the M.A.A. cannot go back against and again for contributions. Flub said he hoped the city could pick up the connects, because withoutthem, the M.A.A. cannot be in business. Tom Dunlop, environmental health officer, said his department had an indication, in ii Yebruary, that at least one well was not providing the auality water supply for this area.;1 Dunlop told Council he has come up with some bad water samples. One well has been abandoned.A temporary water system has been devised, which will provide water to the student's and faculty. Dunlop said. this is a critical problem, and stressed that the city-'s cooperation and the M.A.A.'s cooperation is a priority. i� N 03. 39'e P /1 R R Y �.; SUED. l r� • �� 0 i! n t i aj� g •h 1 g '� ex �a.s PS JSD PAic?CEL 'dada Dr \ \ 21,950 SA. FT. �! ! 7.00, h z N0�•13 0 D 4� 0 OE n 0 y 01 / O J H >� 0o,3$.r.T. COl ORADO h To C*A � I`Pf 47UA.TXf> tW r.,4Vt1., N 4 S I. RED E 9yB,t OF 1`/. FR gfyrl3 ST. EX7ENDE0 trt s PtARC3:L 16,802 S0. FT. PALACE CORP. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption DATE: June 27, 1983 APPROVED AS TO FORM: &,t Location: Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Zoning: R-6. Applicant's Request: An exemption from growth management allotment procedures as per Section 24-11.2 of the Municipal Code for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Referral Comments: The City Engineering Department has no problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion concerning access which appears to be through the access easement in Parcel A and not through the alley in Block 4. The Housing Authority Board has reviewed this application and makes the following recommendation: "l. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." Planning Office Review: Parcel B was formed through a lot split obtained in 1980. The lot contains 21,950 square feet. Since this lot area allows for construction of a duplex in terms of area and bulk requirements, but a single unit is all that is allowed pursuant to the lot split, the applicant is proposing to construct a deed -restricted employee unit as the second half of the duplex. Section 24-11.29(f) provides an exemption from the compliance with GMP allotment procedures for employee housing units deed restricted in accordance with the City's adopted employee housing guidelines. The unit can be exempted from competition by the City Council, based on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The unit will be subtracted from the residential quota. The review for such an exemption request is to include, as per Section 24-11.2(f), "a determination of community need considering, but not limited to, the project's compliance with any adopted housing plan... specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit and the size of the unit, the rental/sale mix of the development and the proposed price categories to which the units are to be deed restricted." LI L� Memo: Curton Page Two June 27, 1983 Subdivision Exemption These criteria were addressed in the review of this unit by the Housing Authority. Planning and Zoning Commission Action and Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office recommend approval of an exemption from growth management for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it not be for less than a 1 year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. Council Action: Should Council concur with the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office, the appropriate motion is as follows: "I move to approve the Curton Subdivision Exemption with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a 1 year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." • MEMORANDUM • TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption DATE: May 17, 1983 Location: Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Zoning: R-6. Applicant's Request: An exemption from growth management allotment procedures as per Section 24-11.2 of the Municipal Code for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Referral Comments: The City Engineering Department has no problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion concerning access which appears to be through the access easement in Parcel A and not through the alley in Block 4. The Housing Authority Board has reviewed this application and makes the following recommendation: "l. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." Planning Office Review: Parcel B was formed through a lot split obtained in 1980. The lot contains 21,950 square feet. Since this lot area allows for construction of a duplex in terms of area and bulk requirements, but a single unit is all that is allowed pursuant to the lot split, the applicant is proposing to construct a deed -restricted employee unit as the second half of the duplex. Section 24-11.29(f) provides an exemption from the compliance with GMP allotment procedures for employee housing units deed restricted in accordance with the City's adopted employee housing guidelines. The unit can be exempted from competition by the City Council, based on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The unit will be subtracted from the residential quota. • • Memo: Curton Page Two May 17, 1983 Subdivision Exemption The review for such an exemption request is to include, as per Section 24-11.2(f), "a determination of community need considering, but not limited to, the project's compliance with any adopted housing plan... specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit and the size of the unit, the rental/sale mix of the development and the proposed price categories to which the units are to be deed restricted." These criteria were addressed in the review of this unit by the Housing Authority. Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning Office recommends approval of an exemption from growth management for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. r 3 < 1N•ACW ►■•Y�- W Wr.l OMIRL D�■■r{i[ {n' • hT elr.� . ►_._ esut. 1 I { t[•00'M. rr r {1{• MD r' O: • •'at PARCEL "Aa -Ouft y■yt • 1 I PARCEL "B" r i jr [t.{{O t {{ •f /!.I.YtO ... A,.rw'•y/1H� ./t.a�,r / arA� KM.W [•laMlNTI• Mt. X1••iD �T �, 3 t�tc ....DG<w•.,. �" :. P.P. _ {i ,,.gasw rs {r•t I LI IM I ..w t 11{I N 1 ■ t{ r ■ ` TOP Or OANt Z � Lav{T�. r..K._ •a a - co, Oq4p •� __ �`` 0 STAY[ NI�MIYAr MO i 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 •frrr,D �... { ato rlollwlr.a r MK a •10 Joe �! r ddf I � �' i c......R et.T.e..•{� >e ,OIR.tA4r.f fTo w�wcf� •�• Ilr .pp t ti �ttt r ��'• 1IF-7 N I esevs_; �lcttl _: � I. a.errTwa l• �MYft.�t .fY'w K, N T pin[wtft ■fIM■•r �MM iy tR< rlt0 taI s. Tt wa rVwT•[a .rr■wlatT+a ` 1 . `I .0 •S .. N:i 1 e MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Department -> DATE: May 10, 1983 RE: Curton Employee Unit Exemption from GMP --------------------------------------------------------- Having reviewed the above application, and made a site inspection, the City Engineering Department has only one comment that is not related to the matter of GMP exemption. We have no particular problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion recently, however, of access to the site. I would point out that, at this time, it remains our under- standing that access to the site will be accomplished through the access easement in parcel "A" and not through the alley in block 4. JH/co pitkin county 506 east main street aspen, colorado B1611 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Colette Penne � FR0214: Jim Hami l to DATE: May 12, 1 9,83 RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption The Housing Authority Board has reviewed the Curton subdivision exemption with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the Middle Income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale provided, that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. El pitkin county 506 east main street aspen, colorado 61611 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Colette Penne FROM: Jim Hamilto DATE: May 12, 1 83 RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption The Housing Authority Board has reviewed the Curton subdivision exemption with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the Middle Income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale provided, that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. • ,x.Tr r aw w ww w.w raw Ma 1 ..�! .au aar.www b,M•M a>ay^ II ,( ALE CO`0*, �. a'a llTo., _ It LLGFND 6 NOTES • ro...Y a.N!•.a•u.[ri N w..M .1•Y Y .0•4 o acT .f w.•r .Itr T!f•a...aN' f!T fnR ).wV[T O.MTIal C w.s•w rot :Qt04•D aT.T[ ......T IYC.Ta• M .. ..wr. .w.w•..a � w. a , fo .et. ..wp�I....'. nc.N .R➢..ou TaJ w •w ay..T. s rwy.Tr r Vw W.a.•...K ..T• e.n..-w .�raw.e orrv+T w.wry�>wT!••� ' M m 51&A aL. q•A t...n —"Wow rr a 1 u'r w M 't"apa�a• 1i.Tw1 fai 4.t t-ra • w, v rrts r. ,onr.! wr 1aw•tw ..• FINAL PLAT HERNDON SUBIVISION a• Y ""a a. la.laaa•' * a " w.w.c w -r . 1d,45i�� Yam• �< r aM �lraMrC iYYYYJ 1 1 PARK'S DEPARTMENT APPROVAL r.w•'twT d M WIV'ida Wpvrrb• ft".a a" . •.[N +YM Y.•IOMO � dT• ��� a+[NT a Sanwa Ta«• orw a► 111 INDEX' SHEET I •,ti NETT .yI t[•TiaKATaa SHEET 2� r[a s,K oante I OWNER 8k "arum t a w.w+ow . •w t r rwaus arwcET •arai..co.ow.00 64 _ IW O" DEDICATION �.... aan. •. n..a .w[ Y M awMR . Tn.cr o. Nlaat M aaaaT v Tr[ M I-,, a0 as wa awT♦w[r uwraw aam• art aa•1•awuwa . sa�asra ias .r w Tw ram • crrl aMy.r•a. a•• n 00 elm m AT .w•a a" -- is �a•n•. t n.aw " » Ora wmw" .T I '. !w ca at'. 4Maaia 1440 R asaa ararp t. a�•...N •tiwNl 4 0.0 a0 0 • v w ftw anaw.w, 4 �ys�t � •aa►! TO wK w•ser w M+• T• u swar.r -•w •rr wrYa. • tAa ears e aaMa•• , /rTl•r 1 as "a roasrmom alaTar..s�T . V wa.wr a r•nr•s... n aaa aaalwsaraa aw.R• 34 aA•�w M w..� r QI.KI.L SURVEYOR'S CE �. wM• r am." . ft o ' ..r. . nawa.a•amA .•aw• wT•..T 9 tT a.0 * M•acT., aa aawT'fto LIa• LON/O.b• TO T tgMTf O• i Tr[ !O[qN. M+aRNrW�. M t0.•.,ab•N /Orr/a FTN[w W` II.IO .NO OII,G,. PLANNING 9 ZONII rrra n.rT o. T.[ ..awNooN ASPEN CITY COUK, 1.4 "T O .,a r.a W f. a •.•.r �wo.,♦ CITY ENGINEERS AF Twq .t.r A Tw yj�, RECORDING CERT+ aT.T[ ar to�ow.•o j a, CO.MTf l]I N i aarw uwn� <twT.+• • .1 A- ,ON SUBIVISION m tw .. ncwr a, lm.,Gr • avlr• Mt • t/t• .. o..arfw, wnr.• OnO.r,iL\MrOO �'-RK'S DEP.'RTMENT APPROVAL ...e •a..rroo.. e.nosor ro'..a erry or d c*or o OWNER a SUMMER mzu DEDICATION M. a w.11. ftnrr O� tl�n.).�......w. .,.......r ....�. Y� Ma► nl[ritTr «� ft q lM{I[t Y at�atl r�[M /Nt r.a[ y Y R� Rt Y�~t we sin AMPON ta.t ttYt rMe tf oom Mawr M Mrtar M ttftYM �' r [rtt 1Mt • —� A�. y 9 Offrt Or aaMaf� 1 tt on..rrr or Paws 1 r•arrOM.taaM rttretrtwt w tM.otw�taat rarer r.t rra� !1_ w M �—.-. �.� t• atn.w f w.rer. rw aAr Q♦OltaaMM aawttt. W rrfr/tO r1 arm M try Y SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ., arrt r attarM .rwaa M nMf ttaMr rMM wM rtnranta •wf rfyr or .af llrMdr skso.. M. twat fa 62"" at ar wK evown Oltr1MO. rM waO1 rta.ste" am ~Wws, ar f..t tCa�acf.r atr.tOr wMN. •wft rwt try rat Haft OM NLLO boom* aY vwm "a rawtt0 v�nr oa4loww. w laatK arrrao M ft`t Mutt. Mr4D Sir► w-amm aaa.srwar urt aai.+taaf fur[ a aoaarro t fff � .• _ . owan or .••wrr lug r[t[fe,rf ��yy.atwaofao arata� w ow tr r cwarw [r•rs T^ . J as.rwafa trr aalwtl we flrKiK +I�r .tom PLANNING 9 ZONING CCMMISSION APPROVAL •a..f rtln 1 rrt ..[rhoe.w wf.or w rrO trry OI rtf —ow" t• fwt f.rr or -40 r rtw+••.r n.v crw..r rr••r.sf.w nrfwawr or • r ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL rw .ur s raat w ao ..t ury w . n wo• •rr.tsvco o. c... cn.n.cw Or w6.9. +wy a., .� w. •tt+ .rr CITY ENGINEER'S APPROVAL ..if rt.• s •.f ..00.. arrawt.er m cn. v .tar, �J�' �^''n r.wwn w ••.a c... tw+.+etf, car• d .ra•a.. rwa �o.• a—..fL ( ) 1/w.._ RECORDING CERTIFICATE rrw ran . uw•ar. wTw nr. w .w t.•. oo-. wraq. rwj o +w c� s.fra.. wrf .w�►rw or .v.r �.. r. ws[ w Y.H o raww ar ..� 'wo.. n �r�,YL w —Ara • r.ato _[c_ wo .rcowwr SHEET i OF 2 0 • &A 1g) p&jt r, vyo a+Wl •F rtwc[ SCALE '"Id _. Y••s•ea �� . ree 4 .•..[ . �..a , fCwTna•w' N i' MMN�/ LEGEND QNOTES 8S \. • ro F• sr/avar [a1lruYa Fl •• wlW I aK✓ w MWl• �J ' Kf Ia •.Y• a .[uDar R.r.• a CY 'M Mw.F Ifr. ti_ scf fra.l raw a,rw,lr .ar.Iwua . wr tif,�, •CCaf. f Wa a•afa- p rpAlw •ya r o rcaa 'v " stir 41f••a ��"[ 1 rx.o+aa raw.•..s ow fnl.Fu{ a- r MlOwo .•a MMw{ .•[ •�IJ •t.fMlfO • 1 / / y a.aar.a.-to ;Fa.a• PP �c T ter•• It aG[.fi•F ar fr.a fr•na/1f KaM .. t r{f on.n.a. — nt w{ww u - --ra f `� rae Iwe No". c 1 •..rt[w N.- • � � •.a[ aoc.Igr. or ne rsa ., F/ aN r fffcw+ao •r. rsvw •• ,w MC d _ a•r .a—T— —Iowa {w• ••f •{•.ww•a •••a0 a+.al+• rM .o�wa •a to • w.QYa YO o. wDYc{M• Ww OwM•aa Q L� GIDEON I. KAUFMAN DAVID G. EISENSTEIN LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION BOX 10001 611 WEST MAIN STREET ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 March 31, 1983 Alan Richman Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Donna Curton Employee Unit Dear Alan, TELEPHONE AREA CODE 303 925.8166 Please consider this letter an application on behalf of Donna Curton for an exemption of an employee unit from the requirements of the Growth Management Plan quota system for the City of Aspen. Donna Curton owns Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. This lot is a duplex lot containing 21,950 square feet. However, because the lot was split pursuant to an exemption from the growth management quota system, all that is permitted on this lot is a single family unit without further growth management approval. Pursuant to Aspen City Code, Section 24-11.2, Exceptions, a unit of employee housing constructed pursuant to Section 24-11.10 may be exempt from the growth management quota system provided it gets the approval of City Council upon the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The one requirement is the showing of community need considering the number of units, the type of units and the rental mix. I have been in contact with the Housing Director, Jim Hamilton, who has given us his support for the type of unit we would like to construct. Donna would like to construct a duplex on the site, containing one free market unit which is allowed by right and another unit which would be allowed under the employee housing exemption from the Growth Management Plan. There will be no necessity to vary any of the density or FAR requirements or any other requirements of the Land Use Code. We simply ask that allowable density be permitted on this lot. To accomplish this we need the exemption from the Growth Management Plan for the employee unit. Alan Richman March 31, 1983 Page Two The contemplated size of the unit, per Jim Hamilton's request, is 1,300 square feet. It will be a three -bedroom unit and Donna would like to be able to rent out the unit and then sell it or continue to lease it, at her option. The employee unit will be governed by the middle income guidelines. This is justifiable because this project is not a large multi -unit complex; rather it is a duplex and as such construction costs and high quality of the unit dictate the middle income classification. I look forward to having this item placed on your next available agenda. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN, a Professional Corporation By J� Gideon elfman GK kw cc: Donna Lee Curton Donna Lee Curton Trust i� • • SCHEDULE A Order Number: 11192 1. Effective date: NOVEMBER 19, 1982 AT 8:00 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: A. ALTA Owner's Policy Proposed Insured: DONNA LEE CURT014 TRUST 13. ALTA Loan Policy Proposed Insured: C. Commitment Number: Amount of Insurance Premium $112,500.00 $269.81 Tax Certificate 5.00 $ 5 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and covered herein is fee simple and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: RALPH CURTON, JR. 4. The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows: Parcel B, HERNDON SUBDIVISION, accordin„ to the plat thereof recorded August 15, 1980 in Plat Book 10 at pages 31 and 32, as Reception 1:u. 226007.9 County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. Authorized Countersignature 1652 E Page2 STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY _• .% 0 • Order Number: 11192 SCHEDULE B — Section 1 Requirements Commitment Number. The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to -wit: 1. Affidavit by a trustee setting forth the name of the Doane Lee Curton Trust, Elie names and addresses of all the Trustees who are represented by such n,wne and the authority of the affiant to execute and record the affidavit, and the authority of the Trustees vho are thereby espowered to convey or uthe rvise act on behalf of the Donna Lee Curton Trust. 2. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart title Guaranty Company, furnished by the Office of the Director of finance, City of Aspen, that the real estaLe transfer tax pursuant to city ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979, has been paid or that conveyance is exempt from said tax. 3. Deed from vested owner, vesting fee simple title in purchaser(s). NOTE: Said deed roust also convey the fol ng described easement: Tugether with an easement for ingress and egre a over Parcel A, HERNDON SUbDIVISION', to be used by wo vehicles, nonce or vehicles and pedestrians as such easement is described n he plat of the Herndon Subdivision, which easement shall be for the lusive use and benefit of Parcel B. 1653 I Page STf':OVAwr TIT1.I AGENT'S FILE CGPY GUARANTY COMPANY 9 0 Order Number: 11192 SCHEDULE B — Section 2 Exceptions Commitment Number: The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments. 7. The effect of inclusion in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. 8. The right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises, as reserved in United States Patent recorded in Book 55 at page 35. 9. An easement for water line 16 feet in width, together with the right to enter along the course of said easement for maintenance and repair of said pipe line, as set forth in instrument recorded December 10, 1959 in Book 189 at page 320. 10. Pole line _easement along the Southerly line of subject property as shown on Plat Map recorded August 15, 1980 in Plat Book 10 at page 31. 11. Easements affecting subject property as shown on Plat recorded August 15, 1980 in Plat Book 10 at pag 12. Easement granted Aspen M ropolitan San i a on District, corded May 17, 1978 in Book 348 at a e 113. 13. Easement fo private dri corded in Bo 183 at page 286. 14. A fifteen -oot roadway eas m t recorded in Book 172 at page 197. 15. A Deed of uEW dated September 1, 1981, executed by Ralph Curton, Jr. to the Public tee of Pitkin County, to secure an indebtedness of $112,500.00, in favor of Richard Grimes, recorded September 4, 1981 in Book 413 at Page 594 as Reception No. 235373. Exceptions numbered are hereby omitted. 1654 Page STEWART TITLE COPY FOR ISSUING OFFICE GUARANTY COMPANY MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Location: Zoning: Aspen City Council Colette Penne, Planning Office Curton Subdivision Exemption June 13, 1983 Applicant's Request: .Referral Comments: Planning Office APPROVED AS TO FORM: Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. An exemption from growth management allotment procedures as per Section 24-11.2 of the Municipal Code for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. The City Engineering Department has no problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion concerning access which appears to be through the access easement in Parcel A and not through the alley in Block 4. The Housing Authority Board has reviewed this application and makes the following recommendation: "l. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." Review: Parcel B was formed through a lot split obtained in 1980. The lot contains 21,950 square feet. Since this lot area allows for construction of a duplex in terms of area and bulk requirements, but a single unit is all that is allowed pursuant to the lot split, the applicant is proposing to construct a deed -restricted employee unit as the second half of the duplex. Section 24-11.29(f) provides an exemption from the compliance with GMP allotment procedures for employee housing units deed restricted in accordance with the City's adopted employee housing guidelines. The unit can be exempted from competition by the City Council, based on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The unit will be subtracted from the residential quota. The review for such an exemption request is to include, as per Section 24-11.2(f), "a determination of community need considering, but not limited to, the project's compliance with any adopted housing plan... specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit and the size of the unit, the rental/sale mix of the development and the proposed price categories to which the units are to be deed restricted." • 0 Memo: Curton_ Page Two June 13, 1983 Subdivision Exemption These criteria were addressed in the review of this unit by the Housing Authority. Planning and Zoning Commission Action and Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office recommend approval of an exemption from growth management for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it riot be for less than a 1 year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. Council Action: Should Council concur with the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office, the appropriate motion is as follows: "I move to approve the Curton Subdivision Exemption with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a 1 year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." • 0 .. L .-,1167. SWAP s \� a, W N �t' • , M••L•.D ►r•Ra{. • 1 iA11B1. w�oaY p /` �►..rwy A' l�►. eLCLlt.♦`siA. f ffl �cnr.rKIM w 0 F +.[4 Yaa PARCEL "A" �\` ¢ _` A u d I 1• �` - M•Ya i, .". • IsRaLMYM� / PARCEL "8" IL,r• •� �` J I LLeaard)!! a,`K;.w r+ tMr • ' �I ) X � tI [N / N rt I� � [o n..n acM 8 W..cr.r ., 4 '� 7 ZPP 44 • (� l ...[ u w. cAaK.aaNTlt.r e � •er.[N / ww v • � re[.uew-en wt = Yr`L`iV [MtMflrT I • L f _ -L. SO MAt{. .�. t i wIW'M• I / ♦.ra H GR116T *_ f I e IN,IIx.r.T P.P. .n•ar'r.•s ` 1 • .. NeRS a.•s`wsc ..�- i 1 41 a •' 1 'k n• n. e L �H 1 f •- i I TOP Or BANK MrONA.I /40 fi c 1 • s,oav FOOL FA&W "oust 'i I � 1 ►Kc s.m / l I 1 r •� Ialr.e• mrL. t Avwl �_ pynK r �. N!►Ir M.T M trlwa.Ra NT4� .{/V rK Fjt.� ,. (llJ�r • , ILc'a. tV IA wtMeTL1t.[r0 IOCwTgM 1. ufT GA •]. Mr7o Wr �• /r.1 rpP /mow rw ClL �"rowrMTw,L 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Department A - DATE: May 10, 1983 RE: Curton Employee Unit Exemption from GMP --------------------------------------------------------- Having reviewed the above application, and made a site inspection, the City Engineering Department has only one comment that is not related to the matter of GMP exemption. We have no particular problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion recently, however, of access to the site. I would point out that, at this time, it remains our under- standing that access to the site will be accomplished through the access easement in parcel "A" and not through the alley in block 4. JH/co k t . ij • pitkin county 506 east main street aspen, colorado 61611 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Colette Penne FROM: Jim Hamilto DATE: May 12, 1 83 RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption The Housing Authority Board has reviewed the Curton subdivision exemption with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the Middle Income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale provided, that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. i 4 f • I 1 wl 1� �l 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: Curton Subdivision Exemption DATE: May 17, 1983 Location: Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Zoning: R-6. Applicant's Request: An exemption from growth management allotment procedures as per Section 24-11.2 of the Municipal Code for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision. Referral Comments: The City Engineering Department has no problems with the proposed exemption for an employee unit on the site relative to engineering concerns or provision of services. There has been some discussion concerning access which appears to be through the access easement in Parcel A and not through the alley in Block 4. The Housing Authority Board has reviewed this application and makes the following recommendation: "1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy." Planning Office Review: Parcel B was formed through a lot split obtained in 1980. The lot contains 21,950 square feet. Since this lot area allows for construction of a duplex in terms of area and bulk requirements, but a single unit is all that is allowed pursuant to the lot split, the applicant is proposing to construct a deed -restricted employee unit as the second half of the duplex. Section 24-11.29(f) provides an exemption from the compliance with GMP allotment procedures for employee housing units deed restricted in accordance with the City's adopted employee housing guidelines. The unit can be exempted from competition by the City Council, based on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The unit will be subtracted from the residential quota. Memo: Curton Subdivision Exemption Page Two May 17, 1983 The review for such an exemption request is to include, as per Section 24-11.2(f), "a determination of community need considering, but not limited to, the project's compliance with any adopted housing plan... specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit and the size of the unit, the rental/sale mix of the development and the proposed price categories to which the units are to be deed restricted." These criteria were addressed in the review of this unit by the Housing Authority. Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning Office recommends approval of an exemption from growth management for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex on Parcel B, Herndon Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it be for not less than a year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchasers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-2020 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES City 00113 - 63721 - 47331 52100 GMP/CONCEPTUAL 63722 47332 52100 GMP/PRELIMINARY 63723 47333 52100 GMP/FINAL 63724 - 47341 - 52100 SUB/CONCEPTUAL 63725 47342 52100 SUB/PRELIMINARY 63726 47343 52100 SUB/FINAL 63727 47350 52100 EXCEPT/EXEMPTION ` J L 63728 47350 52100 REZONING _ 63729 - 47360 52100 SPECIAL REVIEW SUB -TOTAL County 00113 63711 47331 - 52200 GMP/GENERAL 63712 47332 52200 GMP/DETAILED 63713 47333 52200 GMP/FINAL 63714 47341 52200 SUB/GENERAL 63715 47342 52200 SUB/DETAILED 63716 47343 52200 SUB/FINAL 63717 47350 52200 SPECIAL REVIEW 63718 47350 52200 REZONING 63719 47360 52200 SPECIAL APPROVAL SUB -TOTAL PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 - 63061 09000 52200 COUNTY CODE 63063 09000 52200 ALMANAC 63062 09000 00000 GMP 63066 09000 00000 COPY FEES 63069 09000 OTHER SUB -TOTAL TOTAL _ Name: /Z ( Phone: Address: 4 Project: k lC�ii Check No. Date: Additional Billing: No. of Hours: ___ N 03. 58'E 3,74'� PARRY SUBD. PO o O dab 01 ro N4700030 W A�� 7.9 9 , • �C ONCE - �.. - SCALE O Zo 40 t0 30 1 INCH = 20 FEET .` PTO h • �' • -- �, y 11 0 a° ��v� 18K 189 PG .570 ,. SECOND AMENDMENT to the HERND.ON SUBDI V SI ON A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE NE'/,•} OF -THt: gw'/.+ SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 50k-)-rH, RANGE 8S WE5T G-" o. T CITY OF' ASPEN, Pi_rKIN COUNTY, COL,ORAUC) FOUND CDR 6 ASPEN TOWNSITE (A RED SANDSTONE) 9184 E OF W FRANCIS ST. EXTENDED ­ /o•Av 4r0a UNC Gj 01 0 N 19 ° 17i.W _-1'r O �O� 28.00 Q _ IAuGE�1 s ) , I TYP. • ap r "ETA N 08024'E 0 I �1 X ! 28.00' A, w --- RC EL B �11,950 t s.f• I N08°41 E a 0 39.00 ' 0 co 0 N f' M I/ • o 9q;I9, 0 Fps A �0 N 10' 3 6 ' E a`` � ON s E � fT NG�oMM 4 �137.00' 1 `� ti �o V• ' Q' o � . 0 010 0� °O v / -2 M /Lu W 0 / 0 0_ O O O W O o cO i 44) z 3 �x, °o °° r F °. 2 1 tAJ O O O 0 M 0 '° a PARCEL A 16,802 t s.f. 10 0 gE��BLE�dr` lV 03 0 N oPti " PARCEL C N09 13 I E ti°j Tn RF nl=Pncn -rn 129.00 2/ • S 87° 23'1N 48,76' D .10 � Q' Q C`i 1 Q 1 , N 13° 20 E h In 43.00' 0 IRA()) 'In FT r CRYSTAL PALACE CORP. PARCEL 0 I0 � BK 219 PG. IB • � O • I o O S �5,0g 11 O 3g 14, COLORADO STATE II u(t I, 1�— Nr J io lei _% Ii iw� II 4� 1, N'' &, VICINITY MAP TRACCD FROM ANNEX. MAP SCALE I" = 400 HI GHWAY NO 82 CONIHot (D W F QNCjS ST � w � m %5. 09' I IE 11.0 0 N 75' 09' 1 1 F 1.19 AL LFY O� -`=C K 4 I S10*15'W 0.98' �1 1 CO.R 0 W W H A r�Q 3L,�AM ST CDR 7 ASPEN TOWNSITE LOCATION REESTABLISHED FROM i- ^S IgD c../ CAP 9/7,S COLORADO MONUMENT REPORT FORM IN CoNC. O/S7vR0/=0 ON FILE PITKIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE OWNER & SUBDIVIDER UIS�A I..EE CUKTON 7VVST (: oWVAE W. T'IAMt,g JY,. ANIt7 C.MNELIA G. MAMEN 3124 JVFF SON 931 W E13T FPMCl5 5Ct�T_1=T W tTE 9I8 ASPEN , CALORaDO , 8tc�l t ANT I N , TEYA`5, -78-1 S! DEDICATION KNOWN GtirotzlwG W . MAD86N }5R . aNb /4LL MEN BY T44ESL. PRESENTS THAT Ttip- P Polo+ = cUtZ'YoI.1 'TK057 A-W 60V.NBL1 A r4. iAAOrFN AS OWN'6RS OF A - PtACT OF LAND S%TUATEb IN TNIa HEY* OF THS SILVA OR $EGT10P1 12, T0WNSWP to SOUTH, K^N4E 85 WEST OF TiIE Ca,-F+IP M , CITY OF ASPEN, PIT}S1N COUNT(, COLORAt>O, b@.SCR1$EC AS POL.LOWS 15ttC4)NN1N6i "AT A PoiWr ON ASPira.rJ TY7wmet-r8 LINE a-7 ANb THE CE.NTf_KL.1NZ OF - WEST FMANCiS 5T;;kr_E-r ( A NO, 5 Kf-5Aik Lol YF_L CAP 9175) ; THENGV_ SOZ688'w S7•e+4, PT. ALONG, TCWNS)-rFr LIt Co-7 To THE NOPTHW-Vkt`Y LIN(_ Ot' ibLOC;K t}, A.SP@N TOwr4bl I t, ANrJ i-•V,IN4 TV4E. N0K-THFJkL.Y LINE Or- T► AcT PAR.CVL [A SCIR1fNV D IN ROOK iRS AT F'A(6tE Z93, PITKIN Y T►F-NeC S-75sOa'11"r- :$.00 P'T AL-C)"CA THE NORTHERLY t INE ov 4L06.1< 4 ANO THIL NOMTHIeKLI-/ L IN:=. (')h `:AID t40()K 1Q5 /•,1 FACIE 248, I HENCFJ' 11002'I6°W 100.Z2 FT. f0 I HE SOUTHr_kt-Y I-INE ()F L_Oar G DLOGK 4 Ofilr3tNAL- / ,pEN Wws-rQETIkLNr AND 0M13(7RIT!5t'_U IN MObK 145 AT PA"*' 242 AN0 29lb, I,IIIVN cot)NTY IiIGC_ORDS, TH![Nr.E. ST50OQ'lI"r_ t,J, PIT AL -ONO TH< 5OU`iHERiY LIME (3t; "SAID tSOOK IRS AT P^Oe SCV?_ IC) TH{• wILS"TEftLY LINE 09w THE EXCIEPTIOIV C�L'_lCIZICSt`.D- 1N L30OK 165 AT fl^l 9 Q�-�, PIT'<IN c.OuN-TY RECORD-; I1W_NCtE 5I0'15'w: 23.18 ET ALONG TH< waLI% IW_{RI-'( L.-tNW of "sAlc) i xC EPTI ON , i t1F NC M '11004'W 1o3.441.; -r+4ENGE S° 39° *P 14 371.&5' ; 4-tw4cE S W" 23' W 4b.i(O' ; THw:NCE S 01600W 70•03 1=T :L TO THw_ tJ(7RTHQ.IZLY Ft [h W. /)1' (nls-,RADO `5TATV! ►HIGHWAY No EIZ. THi'NCT* N-15009111"W 71,0 I-T. MORE 0Ti LiiLSb A10N6 THF= NORTH E rALY 171r,,A 1 (- - WAY ()v r OL.nRI-�LJC) N1C•1 IWA , N r) VS?- I" rHW- OIw AB T l rE ( Ili �.1( YHw_Nr,,gr, N rIT� T tl[ RLY ALONO f I�Ir. r. ENYI*Rl lt.l tr 01•• C.ASTI_!!, CW r-w-K . N 13•2o'E /13.o I-T. , N07'►3'11L 29.0 Mr-T, N IO"3,81? t_3 PT , N045"WE. 39•0 FT, NOS'ZA'v� 2.80 FT., Nt9°17'W 26.0PT , N47°oo'30•W 7.gq FT. -i-n rl•11- r..nUTHwwl Y 1 INC (-)il PAR>RY 9UT',jDIVISIhN, PITKIN COUNTY rjECAFiD�, 1H>-NCt- wGZ6SO'lE 49.00P`T Mhtia r"tfR L,>i>�U ALXINO, 'T E1E °,r,t) 1 rtG'A%TM ALY L5OUN0^FkY t�)ir "AiD PARRY-%(J%OIV1%10N `to AN ANQI%_v POIN'r, 1 HWNr, NO3•58'r- 3.79 FT. ALONG. THM MA,5TF_RLY r-,r)L,NDA/kY OP I�ARRa TO THI, Of�NTZRI, NCT ['feF W► 11A.trV_r_r %XTiRNDE 1I 'N[ S11- ill Y ; IHE-NCtp S'7500q'ItoE 17e}.18.1I ,1=r. AL_ONa THr- r &NT'M(-kL-tNP nF WCK`!T FrkPvICt',S 5TrRwe'r C' xTrNUEU TO 'TH1! POINT ©F MW-CaINNINC., CONTA,ININU 41r,,40o `sq E 1 MORL. mark L E.Ss . n0 F-4%:rk _c5Y `sijcsOIvI0F_ ANID PL.^T SAID fyEAL PROPTLT-ATV INTO IE11REE PARCLLS ^S SHOWhI "F_REON, OEDtCATE Ir+E ACCESS AND UTILIT`( Ag SHOWN ANU OEDICATI" TO THE CITY OIm ASPtSN FHE- POLNL'I-k 1�L_ANT ROAD AS SHOWN i ALL TO pC I<NOWN "I= RT_AFTr'R AS THE. FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE HERNOON SUI'''5DIVISION , CITY OF P.SPIEN COUNT`r OF PI rKiN, 5 1-AT C OF CO1_0R04.00. _ �X EGUTED TH I S DAY of l9 -T-kAz VnIIO� LEE GU12roN -T12usT BY i�DNNA (fig wlzrota 4EolutB MA .S1cN v>z. STATE OF C0L0F2Ai)0)-'���• C_ OU N T Y OF PITKIN j S S 44PKMOLIA CI • MAf IEveN THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGf_D pLrFORE ME THIS 0AY C>P I9_ , 13�( TkE PoWNA L88 CURToN-TROerr AW C4ECJTZ4E V4. MA0904 J7 - AND AS O W N E R.S . G.OiZNELIA G • MADSEN MY COMMIS310N CXPIRES/5��i / W)TNF_SS MY WAND AND OP-FICIAL_ SEAL_ fJ! NO-rAlZY PU5UC. NOTES SURVEYOR IS CERTIFICATE FOUNO +5 REDAR -/CAP Z"57r, UNLESS I,- (SURVEY ENGF2S. INC) DO HEREcitlY CI<RTIFY THAT I HAVE PREP:>RED -rHl% r�LAT OF oTHr_RwISC ,.Lo-rmo THE,Qf)=r_0t4VAMENDM1ENT TO THE i-IERNOON SUWDIVIS10N, THAT THL' LOCATION 01- THT: Ol>Tg1D= e�OUNDARY- AND OTHER FEATURES ARE ACCURATF-t_Y ANL7 CORItCCTLY SHOWN HLRrotJ, Tt-IAT SAME_ ARC O/aSED O s+6 RErjAR -/CAP IG12-9 TO rat SET ON FIELD SURVE-YS ANO "THAT THL- PLATTmo LaTS CONFORM TO T'T{OSE STAKWO ON THIE GROUNiD- COLORA.00 STATE HIGHWAY L,OCATEp L5Y 09TEO THIS DAY OF 19_ ASSUMING CONTIGUOUS CENTEREINE WtTF-1 )-4ALLAM ST. - 13K 219 PG . Ig LnC_ATL-D aY ASSUMING - - -" 'HIGHWAY FRONTAGE HOLD PLANNING 8& ZON I NG COMMISSION APPROVAL SURVEY ORIENTED WITH FOUNO MONUMENTS r3EATitNGS TRUE RASED ON SOLAR THIS PLAT OF THE $EC(�►.Ib aMENOMCNT TO THE HERNOON SUDOIVIyION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN IS HEREBY APPROVED ODSERVATION. DY THE Ci_rY OF ASPEN PLANNING 4 ZONING COMMISSION THIS_ bAYOF ;19_ FGD I980 APPROVLw_O ra-L.M. SURVEY OF ASPEN TOWNSITC L5E5 THE GHAiR1�tAN -, SAME MONUME1h175 FOR T0WN51-rC CoRS. ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL r, S 7 fjUT RECORD 015TANCL C 13CAfi1NG of TOWN9iT)= LINE G -7 THIS PLAT OF THE SECAiJb AMF_NDMCNT TO T!-IE HERNDON SUgDtVISION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN 18 HiER2t5Y APPROVED TOES NOT CON' ORM -ro F)EL_D BY THE CITY OF ASPEN rHIS CONDITIONS NOT' U__Ji<D. �._`,• .. ... /� ATTEST Gl [r( GLE Mp.Y012 W, CITY ENGINEER'S APPROVAL THIS PLAT OF THE $EGONq AMENDMCNT ToTHC HE kNDON SUODIVISION TO THC CITY OF ASPEN IS HER'E15Y APPROVEO 3Y THE CITE{ ENGINEER, CITY OF ASPCN THIS DAY OF ,IQ_ " Y Grr E9G1NlrEK f3' RECORDING CERTIFICATE STATT= OF COL0121c\00 SS. ^per COUNTY OF PITY.11.1 L )rAEREDY CERTIFY THAT TA1S PLAT OF THE SEWgpAME:NOMENT TO THE HERNOON SUODIVIS\ON TO THE CITY OF ASPEN WAS ACC'=PTETJ FOR 5=lL1NG IN NnY OFFICE AT O'CLOCK,M. ON THE BAY OF ' PREPARED BY AND WAS DULY FILED IN PLAT BOOK AT PAGE _ REC.EPTION NO. SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. P 0 BOX 2506 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 JAN 12, 1981 1;�6V15EJ DP_C /3, /983 rr rKw4 coowrf C L-e Wi 4 KF_c.0RI7F..R SHEET I -OF I 1 0357- ��. 40' tftJft.RZR"4�'L 2, , 1 jj 7896.7 x 1 �