HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.Corkscrew Duplex
.
Special meeting
..~'i.
':~\"\ 10 ~U9Ust 28, 1981
.
excerpt
i
I
[
,
I
i
I
!
I
I
t
I
,
i
i
i
!
ED BAKER DUPLEX
Sunny Vann, planning director, told Council this is the final application
caught in the moratorium and is located at 118 East Hyman. This is a
duplex and was proposed at 1:1 FAR; This has been discussed with Ed
Baker and his attorney, Ron Austin. The only issue is special review
exemption for Ed Baker; this is exempt from growth management and from
subdivision. This was proposed at 9,000 square feet on a 9,000 square
foot lot at 1:1 FAR. Attached is a letter from Ron Austin, representing
their proposal to bring the building into compliance for the changes
anticipated in the R/MF zone as a result of the moratorium.
Vann told Council Baker is proposing to reduce the heighth of the
building by 3 feet to bring it into compliance or 1 foot below the
maximum height. currently allowed in other single family/duplex zone
districts. The overall bulk will be reduced to 8200 square feet
rather than 9,000 square feet. The FAR will be .9:1; the overall
footprint will be reduced by 1-1/2 feet on all sides. The setbacks
are more than the approximately 14 feet (McGrath; 14-1/2 feet when
you need 5), which significantly those currently in place in the R-6
through R-30 zones. Baker's open space is approximately 40 per cent
or more which exceeds that required in any other zone district in the
city. This is a compromise; the planning office does not have the
specifics that would be applied to single families and duplexes in
the R/MF zone. Until such time as the moratorium is completed, the
planning office feels this is reasonably in line with those controls
which would be imposed. Vann made two corrections to the resolution
Councilwoman Michael moved to read Resolution #43, Series of 1981;
seconded by Councilman Parry. . All in favor, motion carried.
RESOLUTION
Ed Baker clarified they will want to include two employee units in this
duplex; but, they will not for multiple of the .9:1. These units will
be included in the floor area ratio. There will be no bonuses asked
for. asked for a stake to see how high the house
will be. stated their concern is how much higher
this will be than the buildings that are already there. City Attorney
Taddune said this is not required of other applicants. The requirements
for building are established in the abstract. Baker said he had drawn
a profile of the block and he would be glad to show it to the neighbors.
Councilwoman Michael noted Baker has compromised with the Council and
the Council has gotten the best of both worlds. Baker can build and
the city can get their moratorium.
Councilwoman Michael moved to approve Resolution #43, Series of 1981;
seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried.
-
---
-
,,;,,"'"
MEMORAHDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE: Corkscrew Duplex - Exemption from GMP for Employee Housing
DATE: January 11, 1982
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
t
\"~1 v\"-
Location:
118 and 120 E. Hyman Street, Lots I~, 0,
Townsite of Aspen
68, Ci! and
Zonin9:
R-MF
Lot Size:
9,000 square feet
Applicant's
Request:
Exemption from GMP competition for two employee units to be con-
structed in the garden level of a duplex at 118 and 120 E. Hyman
Street.
Referra 1
Agency
Comments:
City Attorney
"It appears that the above-referenced application has been
submitted pursuant to the requirements of Section 24-11.2(h),
which provides as follows:
(h) All housing units constructed pursuant to Section 24-11.10
subject to the special approval of the City Council upon
the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission
which approval shall include a determination of community
need considering, but not limited to, the number of units
to be constructed, the type of units and the rental/sale
mix of the development.
Assuming that the applicant meets the above criteria and receives
approval, the applicant should submit for approval by my office
as to form the necessary covenants restricting the units to the
City's employee housing guidelines. In thi.s respect, be advised
that the City Council is presently considering a revi sed format
for the City's employee housing guidelines, to bring them into
conformity with what exists in the County."
City Engineeri ng
"Having reviewed the above application for exemption from the
GMP, the Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. We note that provision of two one-bedroom employee units
within the structure creates a four-plex from a duplex.
This new multi-family configuration would make it illegal
for the applicant to utilize "stacked" parking whereby the
spaces within the garage are denied unobstructed access
to the street. The applicant should be required to
apply for special review for a reduction in parking for
the employee units resulting in a reduction of two spaces
for the four-plex and allowing stacking of the parking for
the free-market bedrooms.
2. The applicant will be required to file a complete condo-
minium plat prior to sale.
3. This project is required to provide a 5 foot sidewalk
along the Hyman Street frontage.
"'"
-
~..
"-..,.,i<
Memo: Corkscrew Duplex - Exemption from GMP for Employee Housing
Page Two
January 11, 1982
4. The applicant should also provide a 10 foot by 7 foot
electric/communications easement in the northeast corner
of the property to allow placement of transformers and
pedestals for existing underground power and phone lines."
Fire Marshall/Building Department
No comments received as yet.
Planning Office
Review:
The employee units will be deed restricted for 50 years and the
applicant requests that the rentals be in the moderate income
category. The units are each approximately 800 square feet with
one bedroom, four piece bath, living room/dining room combination,
and all-electric fully-equipped kitchen. Each unit has its own
private entrance and patio. The housing office was contacted and
indicated that one-bedroom, moderate income units can be used
in the inventory of employee housing right now. New guidelines
were passed subsequent to this appli.cation which set the maximum
square footage for a one-bedroom, moderate income employee unit
at 650 square feet. Mr. Baker has indicated that he would rent
them at this size limitation.
These units are located in a structure which is one of four
which received an exemption from the R-MF Moratorium by
resolution of the City Council. The space being reviewed for
exemption as employee units was approved as a component of the
F.A.R. calculations when this construction project was reviewed
at the start of the R-MF Moratorium.
P & Z Action:
At that time, Mr. Baker s.ubmitted a letter in which he indicated
that the square footage of the buil ding woul d not exceed 8,200
square feet, the setbacks would be 14.5 feet on each side.
The side yards of the actual building conform to the agreement,
although decks and stairs do extend out to the 5 foot setback.
This i.s. not a problem, but the Planning Office wants to note
that the side yard is 5 feet.
The agreement worked out with Mr. Baker reduced allowable
FAR to a total of 8,200 square feet. The present configuration
has 1,586 square feet in the basement level, 1,436 square feet
on the first floor and 1,506 square feet on the second floor.
These figures include garage square footage, which at present
is exempted from FAR. Total garage space per unit is 635
square feet which leaves 3,890 square feet per side of the
duplex, for a total of 7,780 square feet for the structure
which is within the parameters set by the agreement.
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application
at their December 22, 1981 regular meeting and voted to deny
exemption from GMP for the two employee units and to deny
special review approval for a parking reduction of two spaces.
Planning Office
Recommenda tion;
The Planning Office recommends GMP exemption for the two employee
units to moderate income rental prices.
1. Submission of the necessary covenants restricting the units
to the moderate income category of the City's employee
housing guidelines to the City Attorney for approval.
2. A complete condominium plat be submitted prior to sale.
3. Provision of a 5 foot sidewalk along the Hyman Street
frontage.
4. Provision of a 10 foot by 7 foot electric/communications
easement in the northeast corner of the property to allow
placement of transformers and pedestals for existing under-
ground power and phone lines.
c
.......
~
LAW OFFICES
AUSTIN MCGRATH & -.JORDAN
600 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE
SUITE 205
RONALO D. AUSTIN
. J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH. JR.
WILLIAM R. JORDAN ill
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
January 8, 1982
AREA CODE 303
TELE:PHONE l<lZS-2601
B. LEE SCHUMACHER
The Honorable Herman Edel
Aspen City Council Members
The City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Employee Housing Application for
Edwin W. Baker, Jr.
Dear Mayor Edel and Council Members:
As you know I represent Edwin W. Baker, Jr. with
respect to his duplex at 118 East Hyman Avenue and with
respect to the difficulties that earlier arose concerning
the FAR and height regulation in that zone. More parti-
cularly, I am now representing him with respect to his
request for allotment of two employee housing units within
the structure as allowed by the City of Aspen Code.
On December 22, 1981 the Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission by a vote of 2 - 1 voted to recommend against
approval of the employee housing units by the City Council.
The Planning and Zoning Commission also refused to allow an
adjustment in the parking spaces by special review.
We urge you to approve the employee housing units and
in support thereof point out the following:
1. Employee housing is a pressing matter in
the Aspen area and one for which we believe the City
Council has expressly stated its policy in support
thereof, both by ordinance and by its course of
conduct;
2. Mr. Baker's duplex, which was reduced in size by
agreement with the City Council, is already in ex-
istence and the requested two employee units would not
increase the bulk, height, or other size aspects of the
duplex;
3. While there has been some opposition to Mr. Baker's
duplex by a handfull of personally interested parties
,,-.
\..,.0
-
AUSTIN MCGRATH & JORDAN
The Honorable Herman Edel
Aspen City Council Members
January 8, 1982
Page 2
in the immediate vicinity, the general reaction of the
citizens of Aspen has not been one of disapproval.
There are 6 off-street underground parking spaces for
the building, and there will be two additional outside
off-street parking spaces. Thus, the addition of the
two employee housing units will cause no vehicular
impact on the area in the nature of parking congestion.
In response to statements made by other lodge owners in
the vicinity we would state that the parking problems
caused by their own lodges far surpass any conceivable
parking problem caused by these two employee housing
units;
4. Although the units will be single family and will
contain 800 square feet (the guidelines are for 650
square feet) Mr. Baker commits and agrees to charge
rent only on the-basis of 650 square feet;
5. Finally, to consider refusing this application for
employee housing units would be to question the validity
of the residential bonus overlay ordinance and its
employee housing implications. This we anticipate is
not the course intended by the City Council and we urge
your approval. While we hesitate to say it was clearly
implicit in the settlement of the moratorium issue as
it related to Mr. Baker's duplex that the employee
housing units would be favorably looked upon, it
certainly is consistent with that settlement and with
our understanding of the settlement.
We respectfully urge your favorable vote.
Sincerely,
AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN
RDA/ j s
Byr'21-! ,a~
Ronald D. Austin
cc: Paul Taddune, Esq.
Hr. Sunny Vann
Ms. Colette Penne
,,""...
,.' "
'k -'
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE: Corkscrew Duplex - Exemption from GMP for Employee Housing
DATE: December 22, 1981
Location:
Zoning:
Lot Size:
Appi i cants:
. Reques t
Referral
Agency
Comments;
118 and 120 E. Hyman Street
Lots N, 0, P, Block 68, City and Townsite of Aspen
R-MF
9,000 square feet
Exemption from GMP competition for two employee units to be con-
structed in the garden level of a duplex at 118 and 120 E. Hyman
Street, and special review for reduction in parking.
Ci ty Attorney
"It appears that the above-referenced application has been sub-
mitted pursuant to the requirements of Section 24-11.2(h), which
provides as follows;
(h) All housing units constructed pursuant to Section 24-11.10
subject to the special approval of the City Council upon the
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission which
approval shall include a determination of community need consid-
ering, but not limited to, the number of units to be constructed,
the type of units and the rental/sale mi x of the development."
Assuming that the applicant meets the above criteria and receives
approval, the applicant should submitt for approval by my office as
to form the necessary covenants restricting the units to the City's
employee housing guidelines. In this respect, be advised that the
City Council is presently considering a revised format for the
City's employee housing guidelines, to bring them into conformity
with what exi s ts in the County."
Ci ty Engi neeri ng
"Having reviewed the above application for exemption from the GMP,
the Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. We note that provision of two one-bedroom employee units
within the structure creates a fourplex from a duplex. This
new multi-family configuration would make it illegal for the
applicant to utilize "stacked" parking whereby the spaces within
the garage are denied unobstructed access to the street. The
applicant should be required to apply for special review for a
reduction in parking for the employee units resulting in a re-
duction of two spaces for the fourplex and allowing stacking of
the parking for the free-market bedrooms.
2. The applicant will be required to file a complete condominium
piat prior to sale.
3. - This project is required to provide a 5 foot sidewalk along
the Hyman Street frontage.
4. The applicant should also pr~vide a 10 foot by 7 foot
electric/communications easement in the northeast corner of the
property to allow placement of transformers and pedestals tor
exi s ti ng underground power and phone 1 i nes. "
Fire Marshall/Building Department
No comments received as yet.
~
Memoramdum:
Page Two
December 22,
Planning
Office
Review ;
Planning
Office
Recommen-
dation;
.------
...'.......
,
.
", ..~'
Corkscrew Duplex
1981
The employee units will be deed restricted for 50 years and the
applicant requests that the rentals be in the moderate income
category. The units are each approximately 800 square feet with
one bedroom, four piece bath, living room/dining room combination,
and all-electric fully-equiped kitchen. Each unit has its own
private entrance and patio. The housing office was contacted and
indicated that one-bedroom, moderate income units can be used in
the inventory of employee housing right now.
These units are located in a structure which is one of four which
received an exemption from the RMF Moratorium by resolution of the
Ci ty Counci 1. The space bei ng revi ewed for exempti on as employee
units was approved as a component of the F.A.R. calculations when
this construction project was reviewed at the start of the RMF
Moratorium.
At that time, Mr. Baker submitted a letter in which he indicated
that the square footage of the building would not exceed 8200
square feet, the setbacks would be 14.5 feet on each side. The
side yards of the actual building conform to the agreement, although
decks and stairs do extend out to the 5 foot setback. This is not
a problem, but the Planning Office wants to note that the side yard
is 5 feet.
The agreement worked out with Mr. Baker reduced allowable FAR to a
total of 8,200 square feet. The present configuration has 1,586
square feet in the basement level, 1,436 square feet on the first floor
and 1,506 square feet on the second floor. These figures include
garage square footage, which at present is exempted from FAR.
Total garage space per unit is 635 square feet which leaves 3,890
square feet per side of the duplex, for a total of 7,780 square
feet for the structure which is within the parameters set by the
agreement.
\
The applicant was initially proposing.a 3-car garage for the free
market units and a driveway space for the employee unit. This
arramgement is not acceptable (as per the Engineering Department's
comments) so the ~pplicant is simultaneously requesting special .
review approval for a reduction of one space per unit (to allow for
3 cars rather than 4). His request suggests that 2 garage spaces
will be provided for the free market units and 1 garage space for
the employee unit. This seems to be a reasonable request, especially
since the cars are in an enclosed space and not visible. Also, it
is conceivable that one occupant of a 3-bedroom unit may not have a
car or the employee may not have a car.
The Planning Office recommends GMP exemption for the two employee
units to moderate income rental prices and special review approval
for a parking reduction of two spaces with the following conditions;
1. Submission of the necessary covenants restricting the units
to the moderate income category of the'City's employee
housing guidelines to the City Attorney for approval.
2.' A complete condominium plat be submitted prior to sale.
3. Provision of a 5 foot sidewalk along the Hyman Street frontage.
4. Provision of a 10 foot by 7 foot electric/communications ease-
ment in the northeast corner of the property to allow
placement of transformers and pedestals for existing under-
ground power and phone lines.
,-, ,
,."
....
...."
,
MEMORANDUt1
TO: Paul Taddune, City Attorney
City Engineering Department
Fire Marshal/Building Department
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE: Corkscrew Duplex - Exemption from GMP for Employee Housing
DATE: November 16, 1981
Attached is an application submitted by Ed Baker requesting Exemption from
GMP for Employee Housing for two deed. restricted employee units to be constructed
in the garden level of the duplex at 118 and 120 E. Hyman Street. This item
is being scheduled for City P & Z on December 22, 1981; please review and
return comments to me by Monday, December 7.
Thank you!
.
.....'"'
..'....
~. ".I'
SPEN
130 s
MEMORANDml
DATE:
November 24, 1981
TO:
Colette penne ---
~\
Paul Taddune
FROM:
RE:
Corkscrew Duplex - Exemption from GMP for Employee Housin~
It appears that the above-referenced application has been sub-
mitted pursuant to the requirements of Section 24-1l.2(h), whiCh
provides as follOWS:
"(h) All housing units constructed pursuant to Section 24-
11.10 subject to the special approval of the City Coun-
c il upon the recommendation of the Plannin':j and zoning
COITUlIiss ion which approval shall incl ude a determination
of community need considerin':j, but not limited to, the
number of units to be constructed, the type of units
and the rental/sale mix of the development."
Asswning that the applicant meets the above criteria and receives
approval, the applicant should submit for approval by my office as
to form the necessary covenants restricting the units to the
City's employee housing guidelines. In this respect, be advised
that the City Council is presently considering a revised forwat
for the City's employee housing guidelines, to bring them into
conformity with wnat exists in the County.
PJ'r: mc
-
,....
\.,...,
Suite 1220
650 South Cherry Street
Denver, Colorado 80222
303/320-0600
October 28, 19B1
Sunny Vann
Planning Director
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Sunny:
Pursuant to our earlier conversations, I would like to request special
review for two (2) deed restricted employee units to be constructed in
the garden level of the duplex I am currently building at 118 and 120
East Hyman St., Aspen, Colorado. I agree to have these units deed
restricted for fifty (50) years when rented to employees qualifying for
moderate income housing as well as moderate income sale prices if
condominiumized separately from their upstairs units and sold separately.
Attached to this letter are floor plans for the units themselves as well
as the free market units they attach to upstairs. As stated above, each
of these one bedroom units is attached to a free market unit above
numbered 118 and 120 East Hyman St. It is not anticipated that the
employee units will be condominiumized and separated from their respective
units above. Each unit contains approximately eight hundred (800) square
feet of living space and includes one bedroom, four piece bath,
living room/dining room combination and all electric fully equipped
kitchen. The kitchens include disposal, dishwasher, ice maker
refrigerator, range and self cleaning oven. Adequate closets and
storage are provided. Each unit also has its own private patio and
separate entrance. Finish will be comparable to the units I built at
117-117~ W. Hyman, which you may recall is excellent. In return for
reduced rent, I will plan to have the tenant in my unit (120 E. Hyman)
provide nominal caretaking duties. Each of the three bedroom free market
units has a three car enclosed garage. In addition, there are three
spaces on grade adjacent to these garages for employee and guest parking.
Therefore, there are a total of twelve parking spaces for the eight
bedrooms in the free market (6) and employee (2) units.
In addition to three sets of floor plans for the employee and free market
units, I enclose three plot plans including parking plans and locator
map. If there is anything else you require, please let me know. Present
plans call for completion in early spring. I would appreciate being
placed on the agenda at the earliest possible date. Thank you for all
your assistance and past courtesies.
you.r,:, V~ry. t<~'Yb. i
((dwvr> j(/~---,
Edwin W. Baker, Jr. J
EWB/cjh
Enc.
Real Estate Investments and Development
U-"ilH:2jTLE INSURAN~E Company 01)allas
~ots N, 0 & p. Block
City and Townsite of
Baker
68
Aspen"
,
. ",:..:~~
".'. ;..",
. ~ ~ -..)'
.- ',- ~~~~
....;.
,\
'7"
-.:', :.
>'."
., -.;"\
'.
Endorsement
,I,
1:-
~,.
):~
Attachod to and forming I) pDrt of
.'cv,:;,
- ";'~';:~:
.....-..>
", ..~(
'~
Connnitment
A81-329
No
Issued by
ASPEN TITLE CO:-lPAHY
'I,',
USUFE Title Insurance Company of DallJs
!
Schedule A, Item 3. is hereby amended to read:
EDWIN W. BAKER, JR.
Schedule B-Section 1, Requirements, is hereby amended by deleting
Items (b) 1. and (b) 3.
This endorsement is mJde a part of the policy or commitment and is subject to all the terms and provisions
thereof and of any prior endorsements therelo. Except to the extent expressly stated, it neither modifies
any 01 the terms and provisions of the policy or commitment and prior endorsements, if any, nor does 'it
extend the effective dale of tho~oljcy or commitment and prior endorsoments or increase the face amount
thereof.
Dllted;
September 22, 1981
USLlFE Title Insurance Company of Dallas
~//!/~
President & Chief [16cucivo Officel
~c,L~
Attest f:.ecutive Vice-President, Secret.:uy and TrltaSUISf
'A ASPEN ,COLORADO
f~f1~4~_2.,-~
AuCh.mrrd CovlItO(SllIn;J:uro
Formorlv DAlLAS TITlE AND GU~ COMPANY
FORM S 10 4QM SETS 37BH
.__.._'M___
.
_____~~-:i!~!~- T~~~L~_~S_~_F'ANC~ C()lTll'il,~~.r Dilllus
....:;;1
Conlmitment
for Title Insurance
-.
Sw
USLlFE Tille Insuranco Cornp;.m.,.. of O"lta~, herein cn!lcd thq Camp,my, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies
oltille insuranlO. as identified in Sch-:>dulc A. in favor of the proposed In:oured nilflH!d in Schedule A. as owner or n10ngagee of Ihe ostale or
interest covcfed hefcby in the I;m!! dt'scrd)l!d or referred to in Schedule A. upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subjccllo
the provisIons 01 Schedules A ,HH1 B ,md to lhe Cundltlons and Stipulations hereof
Thls Commitment shalll.w efleclov,~ ollly whcll the identity 01 thu proposed Insured and thu amount of the pOlicy or policies commillcd for have
lIeen inserted'lIl Schedule A her cui by the Cornp;my, either at IhQ hmo 01 !he is::,uilrlce of this Commilment or by subsequent endorsemont.
This Co,rnmitmenl is plelinlln;Jry to tr'ie i-ssuCHlce of such policy or policies of \;lle in~urance and all liabililY <lnd obligations hereunder shall ceaso
and terminate Sill. (6) months ;Jt:r~r the effeClive d;JIC hereof or when the policy or policlCs commilled for shall issuo, whichever first occurs,
rllovidcd thaI lhe 1,Iilure lu I"SIIl' "uch polley or policies is not the fault of the Company This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until
countersigned by ..n aulhrHlled ollicer or agent.
Schedule A
1 Elleuivcd;.ele August 26, 1981
2 Pulley Of poliCies 1O l"'I~"l]l'd at 8 :00 A.H.
Case No..
A8l-329
ASPEN TITLE CO~WANY
Inquiries directed to~25-4~~
A ':L1A Owner" Policy Pr"l>lI",'d 1[\'lIr('1I
Amount $
Premium $ ___ _~___.
B AITA lO;1n PoliCY Prupll",~d 111',l,ll~d
Amount S
Premium S __~_
c
ALTA CONSTRUCTION LOAN POLICY
Proposed Insured:
Amounl S
900,000.00
Premium $_!!l}X~~_
GUARANTY BANK & TRUST
*Upon payment of A8l-234, premium will be
reduced to $1,262.25 (Company information only)
J Tilt.' c,>l:lIC ur 1I11l'IC'.1 ltl llll' 1.111<1 dl'''CllbcJ or rrdt~rr('d 10 Hl thiS COlIlll,I!Il','l)! and covered herein is fee simple and titlo thereto is
ilt the ellccllvC dale hereof vc.,lt,d 011
HERRITT COOK and PHYLLIS COOK
.1 The land relt~rrl'J to In ;~;IS CUll1lltlllllerlll., descflbt)d ,I:) folluvvs
Lots N, 0 and P
Block 68
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
Pitkin County. Colorado
Sch.:dLde a-SeCll0n 1 RequlremelllS
The lullo,....tny ale the requir(:lllenl~ 10 be complied with
Ill'rn (.1) P,lymellltu or lor lh,~ ,ICCi'\Hlt of the grimlors 01 rnortgngors of the filII cunSlderalion for the eSlate or interest to be insured.
!ler:l {b) Proper In::;lrument(s} C11'.lIH\9 lhe estate or intcfflstto be l/lsufed must be- executed and duly filed lor record, to-wit:
1.
Deed from Herritt Cook and Phyllis Cook vesting fee simple title in
Edwin W. Baker.
2. Deed of Trust from Edwin W. Baker to the Public Trustee of Pitkin
County, Colorado for the use of Guaranty Bank & Trust to secure
$900,000.00.
3. Evidence of compliance with the provisions of the Real Estate Transfer
Tax, Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979).
(lJIIlHI
f "U''''lfl' UAltAS 11 HE I,ND GU.\f1ANTy CQMf'M,y
FOPM J"~ (COl ~...teotl
-
." Schedule B-Sectlon 2
tJl,U:IJ'~-)
S\rCIl! Address or Prop,..
~
-il
,,0
TilL' poli<:y or pollclcs to hI' I..;SIWt! will conwin exceptions 10 the followlll~J llllless the Slime arc disposod of to tho satisfaction 01 the
C1ll11ihlllV
Rights or cblffis of p,lIIIC~ 11\ pU......f~SSl(Jn 1'01 shown by the public f{'C(JHj<;
2 EasPlnmHS. or cl<lnns 1)1 P.I',I..nlcn(s. nol shown by the public rCeorus
ExccptlOns numbered
-0-
are hereby Ofl\lllcd
/;
t-
,
b
~
W
>
~
!
I
I
3 Olscrcp..Hlcics. CQnfl,{:\s In boundary lUlL'S. ~ho(tagc in arc;.!, p-nrrO(1(hm€'nts. and <lflY l;:lels which a correct survey and inspection of
lhe p(emlSus would (t.sdo!>~ ;\lld wlllch me nOI shuwn by lh~ public 'records,
4 Any lien, or fight to il 11l)1\, lor ser'o'lces. l.1bor or malCrial lhcretofor~ or hercaher furnished, imposed by law and nOI shown by the
p~Jt)lt{; rcconh.
5 Delcel':), liens enClllllhr,mCl:';, ,Hl",clse clHim,; or other mOilers. if <lny clc.lIeJ. lir,>l <lppearinu in the publ:c records or attaching subsequent
to the effecll....e d,lll.! hCI(:nl Illll pllor \0 the d~lte the proposed insured ;!Cquires 01 record lor value the estate or interest or mOrl{)ago
theH!on covered by thiS COlllllldmcnt
6. Taxes due and payablc:
See Tax Certificate No. 19433, attached.
7. Any tax, assessments, fees or charges by rcason of the inclusion of the
subject property in Aspen Fire Protcction District, Aspen Sanitation District,
Aspen Street Improvement District and Aspen Valley Hospital District.
(.'iI'illlI0Il~. ;11111 SI'jllII.JIIOII...
The lvlnl nHiltU"\II~ ,,,;,I,,'I'II,,,,d IWlenl, sh;dl include (I+'"d 01 lfuSl, truSI dpp, I. ar ather security inSlrunlen1.
:J II the jllupo$ed In'''lHl'd Ii,)" \II .IcqUt!('~; ..ttU;I! knowled~ie of any dc.lee! lII'n, t~ncumhrance. adverse claim or other maner affccting
:111 ,."t,lW 01 1l1\t:IL'::,t or I1Hillq,HI" tlll'If',)rl cuvelcu by tillS Cornnlllmcnt othel th.1Il those shown in Schedule B hert:of. and shall fail to
dl',. 1l!~C s'lch IUlIJwh:dW' lo :h,' CUlllP,lI1Y 111 Wlllln\l, the Cump_my sh:JIJ ue ftdH!Vl:d hom liability fOf any loss or dalllagc resulting trom
,Ill, ,leI ut 1t'II,Hlt:!. j,"fL'llIl 10 :!I" '-"1"\1 the Comp;1r1Y IS pl!!Judlced uy 1,,.1\11;) 10 so dlscloso such knowledge, 1f the proposed Insured
,.11,.1: d,st.ln:)l: such kllOwkd!W t(l II", Com\ldlly, ur Ii the COnlp<lny othcrwlSC ,lCqulf('S ,KllIal knowledge of any such defect, lien. encumbrance,
.I(h\"~e c1,wn or olher nl,tlh'l 1111~ CI1:l1p,1I1Y ~I Its option m..y ;)Illr-nd SctH.:uule B of Ihls Commitment accordingly, bul such amendment
,>Ildll not relwve lhe CompdllY ffO!1l II.lu,lilY pre....!Ously ir1(.:urf~d pursualltlo p<l'aglaph 3 01 these Conditions and Stipulations
] llabll(ty uf llle (UIl1PdIlY 1I1Hkr thiS COllllllltment sflJll bt~ only to lhe n;lnlt;d proposed Insurcd and such parties included under the
ddllldtOn (11 Insuled III the h.lft11 (It palicy or policics comrni1\ed for an.d only !nr Jctual loss incurred In reliance hereon in undertaking
III quod "Hth i.l) to comply ",,',Ih tht, It.~qlllfernents herent. or (b) 10 elimin:HC etr,eplions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acqu,ire or create
lh,~',,~.l.Itl: OlllllL'lcsl Of 11l~lllt.,ql' Ilwll'(lfl co...t~rcd by this COlnfllltment 1.1 nn t,,"'~r\l ..h;1l1 such liabdilY exceed lhe amount staled in Schedule
A 'III tllC pullcy ur IltJln:lc~ Cllllllllllll'd hll :JIlU s~Jch liability '5 sublCClto the Hl"UIIIl~J fHO....lslons. excltlsion Irom coverage. and the Conditions
,!llIl StljJul,ll'OI1S 01 the !01111 of p,>lwy or policics cumrnllll!d lor In l<lvor 01 lhr [Hopo:;ed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference
dml ,Ill: made a part nf lt1l3 COI1Hlllll1lt:llt except..s eltpl(~ssly moddled hC!l;m
.... A.ny clium 01 105" or dd/ll:t[]t' whtqhcr Of not b<lsed on negligence. ann which arises out of tho status of the title to the estate or
"l!t-",!>t or the IHln 01 Itl!.: ul,>uIl'd llIurtU.lDt:! covered hereby or any JCtlon <l~sefll1lg such claim, shall be restricted to tho provisions and
rondlll()f1S and sllpul"ll(lrl~ 01 till'> I Olllmllmcnl
"~A
SEAl:;)
,~~~y
IN WiTNESS I,!VH[REOF, Itl(! C'\lI'l'dIlY /);.<; c<lused thiS Commilment to o.~ slUiH.'d
;If) ,llllh{llllCd ofllccr or (l~Jt'nl 01 Ihe Comp,lI1Y. all in accordance with Its Oy-linN:;
111 Schedulp A as "Effective O.llt'
USUFE Title lnsur<lnce Comp;my 01 O<lHas
and sealed, te become valid whcn countersigned by
This Commitment is cfiective as of tho date shown
k~~~
P,,.I..,,,,,,.. ell,.ff..":,,t... Oil....'
~(<<f /l~ ;,L,.~ft! (a~L
Art.,' l..Cul'v,. V,c.. p,.."""". .'>..C'''I.... _,_"I ,....1\",..,
r., l' . n i\. I )
',_V.~._'0_ \.~ \1' ~. ~^.ll <l,'>L-
. ........"....../\ . .
I"""
'-. "
/"
,.I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Collette Penne, Planning Department
FROM:
if\.
Jay Hammond, Assistant City Engineer ~
DATE:
December 2, 1981
RE:
Corkscrew Duplex, Lots N, 0, & P, Block 68, O.A.T.
Exemption from GMP for Employee Housing
--------------------------------------------------------------
Having reviewed the above application for exemption from the
GMP, the Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. We note that provision of two one-bedroom employee
units within the structure creates a fourplex from a duplex.
This new multi-family configuration would make it illegal for
the applicant to utilize "stacked" parking whereby the spaces
within the garage are denied unobstructed access to the street.
The applicant should be required to apply for special review for
a reduction in parking for the employee units resulting in a
reduction of two spaces for the fourplex and allowing stacking
of the parking for the free-market bedrooms.
2. The applicant will be required to file a complete
condominium plat prior to sale.
3. This project is required to provide a S foot sidewalk
along the Hyman Street frontage.
4. The applicant should also provide a 10 foot by 7 foot
electric/communications easement in the northeast corner of the
property to allow placement of transformers and pedestals for
existing underground power and phone lines.
?"-..
"'.,
" .."
LAW OFFICES
AUSTIN MCGRATH & -.JORDAN
600 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE
SUITE 205
RONALO O. AUSTIN
.J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH. .JR.
WI LLlAM R. .JOROAN m
ASPEN, COLORADO S1611
December 17, 1981
AREA COOE 303
TELEPHONE 92S-2601
B. LEE SCHUMACHER
HAND DELIVERED
Colette Penne, Planner
City Planning Office
Aspen Planning & Zoning
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Ed Baker Duplex Parking
Dear Colette:
Pursuant to our telephone conversation this
letter constitutes the official application by Edwin
W. Baker, Jr. for a special review at the City Planning
and Zoning Commission meeting on Tuesday December 22,
1981 with respect to the parking requirements. As you
know, at that hearing Mr. Baker's application for two
employee units is to be heard. If the employee units
are approved then there would be eight off-street parking
spaces required based upon the one space per bedroom
requirement in that zone.
The purpose of this request for special review
is to ask that two parking spaces be eliminated from the
requirement and that six spaces be required, two each
allocated to the condominium units and one each allocated
to the employee units. As you know, these six spaces
will all be covered, underground parking spaces and the
two spaces being eliminated would be outside parking
spaces.
We will anticipate addressing this request at
the meeting and I appreciate your consideration.
Sincerely,
RDA/ j s
AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN
By~aoj) ~JJ~~
on ~us in '
Attorneys for Edwin W.. Baker, Jr.
CC: Mr. Edwin W. Baker, Jr.
Mr. Stan Mathis
,__W.,""".~___~_~______"""'--'.....-.'" "
Suite 1220
650 South Cherry Street
Denver, Colorado 80222
303/320-0600
October 28, 1981
Sunny Vann
Planning Director
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Sunny:
Pursuant to our earlier conversations, I would like to request special
review for two (2) deed restricted employee units to be constructed in
the garden level of the duplex I am currently building at 118 and 120
East Hyman St., Aspen, Colorado. I agree to have these units deed
restricted for fifty (50) years when rented to employees qualifying for
moderate income housing as well as moderate income sale prices if
condominiumized separately from their upstairs units and sold separately.
Attached to this letter are floor plans for the units themselves as well
as the free market units they attach to upstairs. As stated above, each
of these one bedroom units is attached to a free market unit above
numbered 118 and 120 East Hyman St. It is not anticipated that the
employee units will be condominiumized and separated from their respective
units above. Each unit contains approximately eight hundred (800) square
feet of living space and includes one bedroom, four piece bath,
living room/dining room combination and all electric fully equipped
kitchen. The kitchens include disposal, dishwasher, ice maker
refrigerator, range and self cleaning oven. Adequate closets and
storage are provided. Each unit also has its own private patio and
separate entrance. Finish will be comparable to the units I built at
l17-117~ W. Hyman, which you may recall is excellent. In return for
reduced rent, I will plan to have the tenant in my unit (120 E. Hyman)
provide nominal caretaking duties. Each of the three bedroom free market
units has a three car enclosed garage. In addition, there are three
spaces on grade adjacent to these garages for employee and guest parking.
Therefore, there are a total of twelve parking spaces for the eight
bedrooms in the free market (6) and employee (2) units.
In addition to three sets of floor plans for the employee and free market
units, I enclose three plot plans including parking plans and locator
map. If there is anything else you require, please let me know. Present
plans call for completion in early spring. I would appreciate being
placed on the agenda at the earliest possible date. Thank you for all
your assistance and past courtesies.
Yours very trUlY),? . J
~)rJlW-M~
Edwin W. Baker, Jr. V
EWB/cjh
Enc.
Real Estate Investments and Development
U.-UF~JtTLE INSURANCE Company ofiallas
Lots N, 0 & P, Block
City and Townsite of
Baker d
~
~..
.
.., ~ -, ~,-
Endorsement
Attached 10 and forming a part of
Connnitment
A8l-329
No.
Issued by
ASPEN TITLE COMPM,y
USLlFE Title Insurance Company of Dallas
Schedule A, Item 3. is hereby amended to read:
EDWIN W. BAKER, JR.
Schedule B-Section 1, Requirements, is hereby amended by deleting
Items (b) 1. and (b) 3.
.".)
68 '!:~~,
Aspen'.,.,', "
;f{~t~~J
...\.-1 ~."
" "":"';'~h,-J
":-\~',f,::-:-;
""$;':,;-
;',.',',"
This endorsement is m..ue a part of lhe policy or commitment and is subject to all the terms and provisions
thereof and of any prior endorsements lhereto. Except to the extent expressly stated, it neither modifies
any of the terms and provisions 01 the policy or commitment and prior endorsements, if any. nor does it
extend the effective date of the '~olicy or commitment and prior endorsements or increase the face amount
thereof.
Dated:
September 22, 1981
USUFE Title Insurance Company of Dallas
.~/(/~
President & ChifJl fXfJcutive OffiCBr
~cL~
Allest fxecutive Vice-President, Secret.:Jry and Treasurer
'~ ASPEN, COLORADO
1___11W~5~~
Aulhonzed CounterSjgnawre
Formerfy DAllAS TITlE AND GUARANTY COMPANY
FOAM 5 10 40M SETS 378H
-
-
U-'ilfFlE TITLE INSURANCE Cornpa~f Dallas
.... ')...-----------.--...
Commitment
for Title Insurance
sw
USLlFE Title Insurance Company of DdJlas. herein called the Company, lor valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies
01 tille insurance, as identified In Slh,.dule A. in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A. as owner or mortgagee of the estate or
inlerest covered hereby in the lilnd described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject 10
the provisions of Schedules A <lnd l3 <lnd to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof
This Commitment shall be eflccllv(' unly when the identity ollhe proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have
been inserted in Schedule A hereo: by the Company. either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement.
ThiS Commitmenl is prelimln:ny to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease
and terminate SIX (6} months :.du'r :he effective dale hereof Of when the policy or policies committed for shall issue. whichever first occurs.
plo...ided that the failure tu isslH' such polICY or pOlicies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until
countersigned by dn authoriwd olhcer or a~Jent
,)' Ill'dull' A
1 {lkc1lv(' dilll' August 26, 1981
7 Pulley or pollLlI'<; to Ill: 1,,';lI,.j at 8: 00 A. H.
ASPEN TITLE
COMPANY
925-4444
Case No
A81.329
Inquiries directed to
,\ AIlA ()WIl!'f " Pul,cy' Pf"i''''''''! 1'I'UI(',j
Amount $
Premium 5._
Ll fll TA LOdfl PolICY f'lupu<,,!d li\'"",'\1
Arnount $
Premium $ ._.__ __.
,.
c.
ALTA CONSTRUCTION LOAN POLICY
Proposed Insured:
AnlOUf1t S
900,000.00
P'em;um ,...l,13 7.00 *
GUARANTY BANK & TRUST
*Upon payment of A8l-234, premium will be
reduced to $1,262.25 (Company information only:
lilt' ('~L1te or Illkl":,t III :1". 1,1I,d dl",crdll:d ur f('!t'II,:d 10 III thiS C()l1llllltl1'l'nt ilJld covered herein is fee simple and title thereto is
.I! :ll!! tdh:cllvi! daw htnl'of VI:"II'!! III
MERRITT COOK and PHYLLIS COOK
The I;l!ld fl'h'u('d tu II] tillS ('I)lllIllolrllcrlllS descfluvd .1:; folluws
Lots N, 0 and P
Block 68
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
Pitkin County, Colorado
Sch:dule B-SeLtlun 1 R('4lJl[!"lH~Ilt:;
[f,(, lul:U^'Ir1Y ,He the reqlllrenH'~1~~ to be complied with
It"[11 (.II P;lyrnent tn or lu! tip' .ICU'lII11 of the grantors o! mongayors of the full cOI1:;ideration for the estate or interest to be insured.
11,. 'I ih) PI()~WI Instrum!'n1(s) ClI<.ltlllU the eS1ate or interest to be Insured must ue executed and duly filed for record. to-wit
1. Deed from Merritt Cook and Phyllis Cook vesting fee simple title in
Edwin W. Baker.
2. Deed of Trust from Edwin W. Baker to the Public Trustee of Pitkin
County, Colorado for the use of Guaranty Bank & Trust to secure
$900,000.00.
3. Evidence of compliance with the provisions of the Real Estate Transfer
Tax, Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979).
';)\[:;1
f ''''''''1;, LJ';lLAS TITLE AND GUARANTY COMI'ANY
FORM 105 (CO) 5M680H
."
~",
.""-""
~EALl
I
.,
---_./
, Schedule B-SeClion 2
Street Address (If pf(jP"~
beq:""
T)'f~ policy or POIICICS 10 be Isslwd will conti.Jln exceptions to the folluwlfl~J unless the same <lrc disposed of to the satisfaction of tho
C('P11pany
Rights or claims of piH1ICS in pll"session not shown by the public records
') Easements. 01 claims of p,l"cmenlS, nut shown by the public records
3 Discrepancies, confllCIS ill boundary lines. short3ge in area, enCloachrllcnts, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of
the premises would disclose ,Hid which are !lot shown by the public records
4 Any lien. or fight 10 <l 1,(:Il, for services. labor or material theret%re Of hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown bV the
publiC records
5 Defects. liens enClIrnhr,lI11l]'; ddvcrse c1ilims or other rTWl1crs, if any, creiltcd, first appearinfJ in the public records or attaching subsequent
to the effective (LllC hereof but pllor \0 the dJte the proposed insured Llcquiles of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage
thel(~Of1 covered by lhis Com!llltlllf'f1t
Exu_'ptlons numbered
-0-
ilre hereoy omitted
6. Taxes due and payable:
See Tax Certificate No. 19433, attached.
7. Any tax, assessments, fees or charges by reason of the inclusion of the
subject property in Aspen Fire Protection District, Aspen Sanitation District,
Aspen Street Improvement District and Aspen Valley Hospital District.
I.,,, r 111")11', ~llld St'IIL11.ilIOI1"
I II,.' kl '" 111, 'I I!.ld(jP \.'1.'1 It" , LJ'" 'If Ill.'leln shdll include (f"':d of trust. lr USI dl'r'd. or olher security instrument.
Ii Ihe fjlfJll(1Sed 1,ISLJIl'd h,IS !II d('qU(l(;~; aClu~i1 knowled(jC of (lny detect Il('n, encumbrance, adverse claim or other maner affecting
:'11 ",:.I1l: 0' lllh:'l:"l or l11\ilt\I"\)(' tlwtl'n!1 covered by this Commitment other IhJn those shown in Schedule B hereof. and shall fail to
,I, lUSt, :,llch k'l(lwl(~d!l(~ 10 the CU'l1P,'rlY III wrillfl\l, the Cumpany sh<111 b(~ 'ulll:ved from liability lor any loss or da'llage resulting from
,"I, LeI 01 Il'I'dllty 11I"nlll tll II!(.' ('xh'llt the Comp,my I::' prejudiced uy bdu';' 10 so dlscloso such knowledge. II the proposed Insured
,1,,1:: dl~;cI():;(! :,ulh krlo',\Iled~w tu tlw CUlllpdny ur If the Company otherWise acquire,s ;Ictual knowledge of any such defect. lien. encumbrance,
,111\,'r~,e cl,\11ll ur otln:r rn.lllt'l tth~ CU'lljldllY <It Its option mClY <lmend Schedule B of Ihis Commitment accordingly, but such amendment
',11,111 'lot rell(;v(' ll1e Comn,H1Y bu,n Ildblllly plevrou:;ly incurred pursuant to P,l!<19raph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations
I LI~llJillty 01 til\, CUrnl"l'lY 1,,111('1 thiS Comr11ltment shJII be only to the nd,n(!d proposed Insured and such parties included under the
,h.I""tlon of Insu,ed Irl the furnl (Of ;JOlley or policies committed for and only Inr actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking
1'1 ~i(JL)d faith (;1) 10 comply With lh(~ rt'quiremcnts hereof. or (b) to eliminate excefltions shown in Schedule B. or (c) to acquire or create
11,.. '.1.It(. o[ 1111{'lt':-,1 Of !l1ortq,HI(' tl".t("Hl covI~r('d by this Cumnlllrnent 1,\ no ('veil! <;h<lll such liability exceed the amounl staled in Schedule
/, I,,' \11C flolH.y ur 111)11\1(;:-' l:()lll,n,I:"IJ 1", ;Illd suctllldililllY IS subJeCI to the In<;u'ln\1 provisions. exclusion from coverage. and the Conditions
.,,1,1 ':;1IpuldlIUI1S of till: 101111 of P,dILY Of poliCies comrnltted fOI in favor of th" proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference
,",'~ ,IrC ll1,lde il flail of tIllS COIT"l1,tITIt:I1Il'x.cept as ex.pressly modified he,cirl
,1 f\ny clillnl of lu<;,; or d,1I11"~i" wlwliwr 01 not uased un negligence, ann which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or
'II, '.,sl or the li"" of the In<;Ij".'" IlI\Ht\j.ltW covl'red hereby or any action Zlsserting such claim. shall be restricted to the provisions and
')" !'llons ,Hid 51111Ul<lll0l1S 011/11';' '.Hllll)ll'llPrlt
I~~ \NI1NESS WHEREOF lhe C()IIIP;lrIY has cilused thiS Commitment to be s'gned and sealed. te become valid when countersigned by
<1'1 ~1I11hofl1Cd officer or <lU'~n1 of lile CompiHlY, all in accordance with Its By-LIWS This Commitment is effective as of the date shown
"I Sr:hedlJle A as "'Effective O,lle
USllFE Title Insur;mce Company of Dallas
~t/(/~
!',~\"j"nr &. Cfl,el ['''rul',~ O!l,c~'
;it"<<f A ~~/(! (a~L
_'lIf'.1 / '"(,,I,,'~ v,,:~ p,..",j",,' 5f('l"''-'" ,'-'HI I,~,)
>~'^1Z,,'C-\' {\ \ V\.. ( J ,\.,(. <>">L-.
A""';"I-~~ _<,;n.(,,) --.. , I ~
o
o
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM; Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE: Corkscrew Duplex - Exemption from GMP for Employee Housing
DATE: December 22, 1981
Location:
Zoning:
Lot Si ze:
ApPlicants:
Request
Referra 1
Agency
Comments;
118 and 120 E. Hyman Street
Lots N, 0, P, Block 68, City and Townsite of Aspen
R-MF
9,000 square feet
Exemption from GMP competition for two employee units to be con-
structed in the garden level of a duplex at 118 and 120 E. Hyman
Street, and special review for reduction in parking.
City Attorney
"It appears that the above-referenced application has been sub-
mitted pursuant to the requirements of Section 24-11.2(h), which
provides as follows;
(h) All housing units constructed pursuant to Section 24-11.10
subject to the special approval of the City Council upon the
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission which
approval shall include a determination of community need consid-
ering, but not limited to, the number of units to be constructed,
the type of units and the rental/sale mix of the development."
Assuming that the applicant meets the above criteria and receives
approval, the applicant should submitt for approval by my office as
to form the necessary covenants restricting the units to the City's
employee housing guidelines. In this respect, be advised that the
City Council is presently considering a revised format for the
City's employee housing guidelines, to bring them into conformity
with what exists in the County."
City Engineering
"Having reviewed the above application for exemption from the GMP,
the Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. We note that provision of two one-bedroom employee units
within the structure creates a fourplex from a duplex. This
new multi-family configuration would make it illegal for the
applicant to utilize "stacked" parking whereby the spaces within
the garage are denied unobstructed access to the street. The
applicant should be required to apply for special review for a
reduction in parking for the employee units resulting in a re-
duction of two spaces for the fourplex and allowing stacking of
the parking for the free-market bedrooms.
2. The applicant will be required to file a complete condominium
plat prior to sale.
3. This project is required to provide a 5 foot sidewalk along
the Hyman Street frontage.
4. The applicant should also provide a 10 foot by 7 foot
electric/communications easement in the northeast corner of the
property to allow placement of transformers and pedestals for
existing underground power and phone lines."
Fire Marshall/Building Department
No comments received as yet.
Memoramdum:
Page Two
December 22,
Planning
Offi ce
Review :
Planning
Office
Recommen-
dation;
-
-
-
~....
Corkscrew Duplex
1981
The employee units will be deed restricted for 50 years and the
applicant requests that the rentals be in the moderate income
category. The units are each approximately 800 square feet with
one bedroom, four piece bath, living room/dining room combination,
and all-electric fully-equiped kitchen. Each unit has its own
private entrance and patio. The housing office was contacted and
indicated that one-bedroom, moderate income units can be used in
the inventory of employee housing right now.
These units are located in a structure which is one of four which
received an exemption from the RMF Moratorium by resolution of the
City Council. The space being reviewed for exemption as employee
units was approved as a component of the F.A.R. calculations when
this construction project was reviewed at the start of the RMF
Moratorium.
At that time, Mr. Baker submitted a letter in which he indicated
that the square footage of the building would not exceed 8200
square feet, the setbacks would be 14.5 feet on each side. The
side yards of the actual building conform to the agreement, although
decks and stairs do extend out to the 5 foot setback. This is not
a problem, but the Planning Office wants to note that the side yard
is 5 feet.
The agreement worked out with Mr. Baker reduced allowable FAR to a
total of 8,200 square feet. The present configuration has 1,586
square feet in the basement level, 1,436 square feet on the first floor
and 1,506 square feet on the second floor. These figures include
garage square footage, which at present is exempted from FAR.
Total garage space per unit is 635 square feet which leaves 3,890
square feet per si.de of the duplex, for a total of 7.780 square
feet for the structure which is within the parameters set by the
agreement.
The applicant was initially proposing a 3-car garage for the free
market units and a driveway space for the employee unit. This
arramgement is not acceptable (as per the Engineering Department's
comments) so the spplicant is simultaneously requesting special
review approval for a reduction of one space per unit (to allow for
3 cars rather than 4). His request suggests that 2 garage spaces
will be provided for the free market units and 1 garage space for
the employee unit. This seems to be a reasonable request, especially
since the cars are in an enclosed space and not visible. Also, it
is conceivable that one occupant of a 3-bedroom unit may not have a
car or the employee may not have a car.
The Planning Office recommends GMP exemption for the two employee
units to moderate income rental prices and special review approval
for a parking reduction of two spaces with the following conditions:
1. Submission of the necessary covenants restricting the units
to the moderate income category of the City's employee
housing guidelines to the City Attorney for approval.
2. A complete condominium plat be submitted prior to sale.
3. Provision of a 5 foot sidewalk along the Hyman Street frontage.
4. Provision of a 10 foot by 7 foot electric/communications ease-
ment in the northeast corner of the property to allow
placement of transformers and pedestals for existing under-
ground power and phone lines.
,......
-',
'l
'" \ t' (-
L' :t~\ ;: ~l,
, r I,
LAW OFFICES
AUSTI N MCGRATH & -.JORDAN
600 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE
The Honorable Herman Edel
Aspen City Council Members
The City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
5U,TE 205 ~ill1\'
ASPEN. COLORAD~ . -
i 1! C_':l@~' .. i AREA CODE 303
January 8, 1982 ~'. . .~.. nEPHONE 925,260'
\'i I"" .\\. 10Q? .\ \
lt~~"\- .'~':.J~~
ASPEN I I'll KIN OJ.
Pl.ANW14COirICI:,
RONALD D. AUSTIN
..J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH, JR.
WILLIAM R. JORDAN ill
B. LEE SCHUMACHER
Re: Employee Housing Application for
Edwin W. Baker, Jr.
Dear Mayor Edel and Council Members:
As you know I represent Edwin W. Baker, Jr. with
respect to his duplex at 118 East Hyman Avenue and with
respect to the difficulties that earlier arose concerning
the FAR and height regulation in that zone. More parti-
cularly, I am now representing him with respect to his
request for allotment of two employee housing units within
the structure as allowed by the City of Aspen Code.
On December 22, 1981 the Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission by a vote of 2 - 1 voted to recommend against
approval of the employee housing units by the City Council.
The Planning and Zoning Commission also refused to allmv an
adjustment in the parking spaces by special review.
We urge you to approve the employee housing units and
in support thereof point out the following:
1. Employee housing is a pressing matter in
the Aspen area and one for which we believe the City
Council has expressly stated its policy in support
thereof, both by ordinance and by its course of
conduct;
2. Mr. Baker's duplex, which was reduced in size by
agreement with the City Council, is already in ex-
istence and the requested two employee units would not
increase the bulk, height, or other size aspects of the
duplex;
3. vlliile there has been some opposition to Mr. Baker's
duplex by a handfull of personally interested parties
."',,",
"""'
.
....;
AUSTIN MCGRATH & JORDAN
The Honorable Herman Edel
Aspen City Council Members
January 8, 1982
Page 2
in the immediate vicinity, the general reaction of the
citizens of Aspen has not been one of disapproval.
There are 6 off-street underground parking spaces for
the building, and there will be two additional outside
off-street parking spaces. Thus, the addition of the
two employee housing units will cause no vehicular
impact on the area in the nature of parking congestion.
In response to statements made by other lodge owners in
the vicinity we would state that the parking problems
caused by their own lodges far surpass any conceivable
parking problem caused by these two employee housing
units;
4. Although the units will be single family and will
contain 800 square feet (the guidelines are for 650
square feet) Mr. Baker commits and agrees to charge
rent only on the basis of 650 square feet;
5. Finally, to consider refusing this application for
employee housing units would be to question the validity
of the residential bonus overlay ordinance and its
employee housing implications. This we anticipate is
not the course intended by the City Council and we urge
your approval. While we hesitate to say it was clearly
implicit in the settlement of the moratorium issue as
it related to Mr. Baker's duplex that the employee
housing units would be favorably looked upon, it
certainly is consistent with that settlement and with
our understanding of the settlement.
We respectfully urge your favorable vote.
Sincerely,
AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN
RDA/ j s
Byr21P~
Ronald D. Austin
cc: Paul Taddune, Esq.
Mr. Sunny Vann
Ms. Colette Penne
$~6:
-"
, ,
No. (d'-tf'/
CASE LOAD SUMMARY SHEET
Ci ty of Aspen
C'er\8;td C&".,)ldc: eN I. hPJ A le-11 ~
1. DATE rtJfil'JITn~:_t /10\1, IWI ha STAFF: LO ne Jenne
2. APPLICANT; 'icJWly\"-!d. ~ ~r J""r.) . () y-trJ(' d IfntJ(I/a f-e4/;
SU1'~ \ ;;(;<0) (PSG .\tudh Cfrorf'j' '\1reef) Den J/l'I"J
foh,.
f(JOQ;)..
4. PROJECT NAME: (btI<SaCLt,r--' ))up/ex - V~I7lj71;~/1 A;MY1 IJ../lfr j;"'U
r I j S:.L A ('" "",,o/~///
5. LOCATION: IIf and ./:20 '-'" '11Yi7((11 '1 JpMV J -"r' 1IICIJJ;.';
(~.A1 fwd-) f.f)+S N) o)? " 131()('f( Ie Y: (j
3. REPRESENTATIVE:
6. TYPE OF APPLICATION:
Subdivision
Exception
X Exemption
70:30
Residential Bonus
____Stream Margin
____8040 Greenline
____View Pl ane
____Conditional Use
____Other
Rezoning
P.U.D.
Special Review
Growth Management
HPC
, ~o'
=-t --=-_ ... -- '--. .
1>'1-rxY\ r{; fH\ . -\\"&1'/1
\dJv.-J~"l{ 8., ) : .
\
c: 01 P ~o
" ,:
7. REFERRALS:
Mttorney
~Engineering Dept.
____Housi ng
_Water
_City Electric
Sanitation District _School District
~Mountain Bell ~o-cky Mtn. Nat: Gas
Parks ____State Highway Dept.
Holy Cross Electric Other
~Fire Marshal/Building Dept.
8. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS: G IYlt---) (xc" .1\.(;iV
--i. . 't---.. .. , I', ;7\
-0 t ","; .-<, 1. i . (~.h---f It. (' " .
~ ((, 'j/l2d\~c,--) ~\r) yo r' i'l /f
U
'. I' j)c (~"L,
!
~() ,I. i (
-~""-
r t r 1''/,'(''-1'. p, .
(
-------_._--~~----~ ---------~ -----
-_._---,--~--- --- ------- - ------~--
---- ---------------
.
I
I
.
.
I
I
I
I
I
. ,Q.
()
~
9. DISPOSITIO~
P & Z / Approved
/
Date I"zJ;!"-:l--/'5? I
Denied
eiftP~~
}
~ Q]l " 0"/ (J 'I a ,/V'1 ~ -1-7'~1 --C.:-n--,41
- 2 VY\[)!crUP (I / htH1~; ~ 7 .
\ I, (j (\' .
~_V\; <T J. () \I-; l/ln fi ;:()~' 0
. 9> --tv n h L~ h-rl-
'-J
Council / Approved / Denied . Date /(t!r;<Z-"
f-=~" W'''-+;t'rY> ~...-- Q W\"ICNH I.., A<::: --In. II\IJo~. - ;V\f'm"tD ;-t,..,-li1o.ls:
. (] AJ;4;~s: I ;&,I-~:~'~.OY'()['+kllCo<'<'<l""'''''' (In\lO(]V\ ~sthdl~1
~ ,. .k -+-o-H"lo lMockxn-k ;V'c",,,,' PIl4ef/f'YlI ~-n. t~-hl M/\r>'o{, rofr6,(Jj
.2 -AC'o\Mb.IQ-k-rr,-...Jn .',,,,:,,,,,,/,,+ ~O" :--Ikrl ~,.-"-hlJ~fc
~ p n> ~ ',<:', e--v- cL () ,<; L r;f -< ;1.-1 u..)oJ k: /\ I "-<^ fi --+L, ~ !lMt'l V1 sa- ~ 7a )of
\ ., \ I~I h -1 I I-+--' / ., I ~
r, d I ".,I"t-J/\ o. 0. U ~ I p ~ r" .... (' V"u..u~ (M/I< f(ln....V2',4 (
J \ lJ I f I _I r
.~ 1.L C'..bVlAV n -\L.. _ tl\{\o......nJ.. () \1.....2'1 ('\h I' 0 w<oE.,o+ I
-1yV-nS-Co~. o....V' d ~J.o.?t~ ~1Y i:s+i V'?\- ~~~
p~ o...Ad t'ktr~ 111'vv.-O;:;:. . U U
10. ROUTING:
htorney
~ilding
~gineering
Other
~
o
(""
J
,.-
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
1a ..s An" I ke~Jreproject: LlrkY';e!JJ~
t'lo.l'\l'W\ 0
1%,,4 Phone: qcJ.O - /131-
~Yl ,(.(j .;l..
\\G:. Oate: /'tlvemhor/:l../ AI" I
LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
County
00100 - 63711 09009 - 00000
63712
63713
63714
63715
63716
63717
City
00100 - 63721 09009 - 00000
63722
fl37~1- {t~~o -5d./iJO
63725
63726
PLANNING OFFICE SALES
00100 - 63061 09009 - 00000
63062
63063
!
Name:
Address:
Check No.
i
Receipt No. P
Subdivision/PUD
Special Review
P&Z Review Only
Detailed Review
Final Plat
Special Approval
Specially Assigned
Conceptual Application
Preliminary Application
[,e"Jiial ~~1"tionp.,t;; -
. ExemptIon trP7 [.. I c:;() ,tfO
R . <;"--1(;w.J nIt
ezonlng "'If" I--
Conditional Use
County land Use Sales
GMP Sales
Almanac Sales
Copy fees
Other
(