HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.Frost, Lots N,O,P, Block 24Frost
LOts N, 0, P, Block24
E
X
Recorded at 3:29 P.M. Mar 23,079 Loretta Banner Recorder
reception No: 41293
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION
■.365 ► u,1 289
WHEREAS, EVA HELEN ROBISON, MONA J. FROST, FRANK
EARLE JENKINSON and LUCILLE J. PRICE have applied for an
exemption from the subdivision laws of the City of Aspen
for the purpose of dividing Lot N from Lots 0 and P, Block
24, City of Aspen.
AND WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Aspen
finds that the conditions required under Section 20-19(a) of
the Aspen Municipal Code have been met and satisfied.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Aspen hereby grants an
exemption from the subdivision laws of the City for the
separation and division of Lot N, Block 24, from Lots 0 and P,
Block 24 of the City of Aspen.
DONE this 12th day of March, 1979.
CITY OF ASPEN
�'A' fES T
.Cit Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
�t
City Attorney
's
PITKIN C06M y
5
0
MLMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Planning Office, Richard Grice
RE: Frost - Subdivision Exemption
DATE: March F,, 1979
The attached letter of application requests subdivision exemption for the
purpose of separating Lot N from Lots 0 and P, Block 24, Aspen, Colorado. The
three lots contain two single family residences one on Lot N and the other on
Lots 0 and P. These lots are zoned 0-Office with anrinimum lot area per dwelling
urlit of 6000 square feet. The residence located on Lot N encroaches into Lot
0 by approximately 1 foot.
It would appear that the exemption would result in a creation of a non-
conforming lot. It was with this in mind that the referral was made to Ron
Stock.
Ron recommends approval of the subdivision exemption. With regard to
the creation of a non -conforming lot and the encroachment, Ron comments as
follows: "The approval of this exemption seems to create a non -conforming lot
in Lot N together with the encroachment of the house situated thereon into a
portion of Lot 0. However, this is an existing situation and subdivision
will not create a non -conformity if the Board of Adjustment removes the
condition placed on the previous variance." The condition Ron was referring
to was that both houses meet set backs. The Board of Adjustment has recon-
sidered the variance from the minimum lot size requirements and granted a
new variance in view of the fact that the applicant has agreed to grant a
perpetual easement for the benefit of the owner of Lot N which guarantees
that no structure will be erected, constructed or maintained within 11 feet
of the westerly line of Lot 0. This action was taken in two meetings, one
held February 1, 1979 and the other February 6, 1979. Copies of the minutes
of these meetings are attached for your review.
The application was also referred to City Engineering with comments as
follows: "After reviewing this revised application for subdivision exemption,
the Engineering Department feels that the concerns stated in our December
15, 1978 memo have been adequately addressed. Consequently we recommend
granting of the exemption subject to the grant of the easement of the
encroachment on Lot 0."
Since the easement requested by City Engineering has already been granted
by the applicant and recorded, the Planning Office recommends you approve
this subdivision exemption without condition.
This application was reviewed by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
at their regular meeting on February 21, 1979. At that time they recommended
you approve the subdivision exemption provided the City Engineer prepares a
written legal opinion statement which supports their recommendation.
Aid
A L 13 E IZT I{EI2N
ATTORNIY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW
V. 0. SO)( ao•
430 it. HYMAN STR66T
"PKM. COLORA00 81411
TtLEPNONQ 42071 029.7411
December 14, 1978
63
Hand Delivered //
City of Aspen Pla4ining Department
130 South Galen Street
Aspen, Colorao 81611
-Attention: Mr. Richard Grice
Re: Subdivision Exemption
Lots N, 0 and P, Block 24,
City and Townsite of Aspen
Dear Richard:
In accordance with your suggestion at our meeting with
Ron Stock yesterday, I am submitting three (3) copies of the
certified improvement survey prepared by Alpine Surveys
covering Lots 0 and P and a portion of Lot N, Block 24, Aspen,
Colorado, which had been requested by Dave Ellis in his memo
to Karen Smith, dated December 15, 1977. In a phone conver-
sation with Dave Ellis yesterday, I explained to him what the
improvement survey contained and he indicated that it would
not be necessary to have an additional improvement survey
showing all of Lot N, since this subdivision exemption request
will not be changing the lot lines. Also, he indicated that
no subdivision exemption plat would be required for the same
reason.
The following is the background pertaining to this situa-
tion. Eva Jenkinson was the owner of Lots N, O and P. She
died in 1964 and her surviving heirs are: Mona Frost, Eva
Robison, Frank Earle Jenkinson and Lucille Price. The one-story
frame house on Lot P has been located there for over fifty years
and a house was moy_ed-n Lat-R :Ln 1970, or thereabouts, after
issuance of
-a-�uilding permit, by Eva Robison who still resides
in the house. The other heirs had agreed to convey Lot N to
Mrs. Robison and, in fact, mistakenly deeded her Lot N in June
• ; ,•, o n n N.pSj_ellLbBr-�7
of.1978, believing that the
1977 allowed them to make such conveyance. I might point out
that the variance granteU__5y_ �oard�o� Adjustment was condi-
tional upon the house meeting the setback requirements which all
parties believed to be the fact at the time. The parties entered
. '�' • .�•''. • i. ••�+.+—�_ ..'�,; +l '�. kr'� • + a:�. °,� .. .ram � ,,i ..t•
._. .II Ate. �• �•• • Iwr— ..1
r.- _ tom_ _ ...�..._ ra _^:\�� - �' - - .• - rr : 2►� .�'�!rL'.•.` .Jl� �r �'.� _ � ��... ' = ' - -
Mr. Richard Grice
City of Aspen Planning Dept.
December 14, 1978
Page Two
into a contract of sale for Lots O and P in August of 1978,
and when the proposed purchaser had the enclosed improvement
survey made, the encroachment on Lot O was ascertained.. I
have discussed this matter with the purchaser's attorney and
it has been agreed that the conveyance of Lots O and P will
reserve a permanent easement for the benefit of Mrs. Robison
covering the encroachment (.27 to 1.0 feet), which easement
will terminate in the event the house is moved or destroyed.
It is anticipated that the parties will appear before the
Board of Adjustment to request a non -conditional variance,
since the hardship was not self-imposed, in that the variance
and subdivision exemption will not affect the Growth Management
Plan or general comprehensive plan adopted by the City.
Accordingly, I am requesting that the division of Lot N
from Lots O and P be exempted from subdivision requirements
and that a hearing be set with the Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion at the department's convenience. If you require further
information, please contact me.
Yours very truly,
Original Signed by
ALBERT KERN
Albert Kern
AID/s s s
Enclo�ores ( 3 )
cc:✓ Ronald Stock, City Attorney
Dave Ellis, City Engineer
Mona Frost
Eva Robison
Frank Earle Jenkinson
Lucille Price
v:a •7''1
^�Tr
� -t +-.:
e-7�r � -Z -+.fieIL
(77T r�
_--••!•�,, Tr?"q ►
•1
'..x.
•�
7'L�.
a
`'. •._ .. _ ; !1
—. . :C�
,.,.�. •,,,� ...-�,,,.•x' .�.
.�. �•'
0 0
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
re... C. V .111M a. I . t. a
Regular fleeting Asr)en Lkoara of el� ei�ruary- 1_1 r`I/9--
The .'aspen Board of Adjustment held a regular meeting on February 1, 1979, at
4:00 PP4 in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Remo Lavagnino,
Charles Paterson, Josephine Nann, Gil Colestock and Francis Whitaker. Also
present was building Inspector Clayton Meyring.
Approval of Minutes Paterson moved to approve the minutes of October 5,
October 19, November 2 and 14ovember.30, Mann seconded.
All in favor, notion approved.
Case No. 77-30, Albie nern, representing the applicant, noted that this
Eva Robison variance was granted in November of 1977. This involves
Lots N, O, and P, Block 24, Asnen. When Eva Jenkinson
died in 1964, she left this property to Eva Robison,
Mona Frost, Frank Earl Jenkinson and Lucille Price. The
heirs agreed to convey Lot 17 to Eva Robison who then
applied for a variance from the minimum lot size require-
ment. A condition of the variance was that the two houses
meet the setback requirements which a survey showed was
not possible. 1Irs. Robison then entered into a contract
of sale for Lots O and P. A subdivision exemption was
then necessary. The P&Z" tabled .the case until the set-
back question is resolved. Xern requested, that this
condition be released. He noted that the house -on Lot N
encroaches approximately 1 foot onto Lot O. The house
was moved onto Lot N in 1970. The purchaser of Lots O
and P have agreed to grant an easement for the encroach -
went of the house into Lot N and have also agreed that
there will be no improvements between the existing house
on Lot N and 10 feet inside Lot O.
Whitaker felt these agreements should be in writing.
Kern agreed with this. Fie read a•letter to the attorney
of the purchasers stating these agreements.
Whitaker moved that, due to the practical difficulties
in .the location of the houses and the amount of building
lot space available for two houses,. the Board table this
case to February 6, i979, pending submission
of a copy of the deed showing a ten foot easement onto
Lot O from. the present building on Lot N, Colestock
seconded. All in favor, motion approved.
Case No. 79-1, Lavagnino read the application. Application is made for
Donald Fleisher a building permit to build an addition to an existing
commercial building. The proposed addition will provide
a trash access area thirty (30) feet long and ten (10)
feet deep.. The required trash access area for the pro-
posed building would be sixty (60) feet long and ten (10)
feet deep.
Andrew Dracopoli, representing the applicant, noted the
expansion involved the demolition of the existing
Magnifico Liquor building and then building an L.-shaped
building that will adjoin the back of the Siri & Peter's
store. To -comply with the trash access requirement would
create an area of approximately 600 square feet which
they feel excessive and would create an adverse visual
impact. Ile noted that experience has shown these ex-
cessive areas have been used for parking which hinders
the function.
Lavagnino noted
also noted that
smaller access
that this is not' a unique proble n. Fie
the HPC reviewed a drawing showing this
area. Fie also noted that they must demon-
•
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS { 100 Leavos
■ % C. V. M rr.ft 1. 0.. 1. CO
Special Meeting Aspen Board of Adjustment February G, 1979
The Aspen Board of Adjustment held a special weeting on February 6,•1979, at
4:00 PI1 in the City Hall Atrium. Members present were Remo Lavagnino, Gil
Colestock, Josephine Mann, Francis Whitaker and Charles Paterson. Also present
was City Attorney Ronald Stock.
Case No. 77-30, Lavagnino noted that this case was tabled from February
Eva Robison 1, 1979. The applicant submitted an easement for the
encroachment of the mouse on Lot N into Lot O.
Lavagnino asked Stock if the -document met all the legal
requirements. Stock said yes. Iie noted that this
variance is to correct an illegal act. The applicant,
after obtaining the original variance, thought the;'
complied with all the requirements and conveyed this,
lot to -the applicant which then required a subdivision
exemption. The board asked Stock to prepare a resolu-
tion.
As Stock prepared the resolution, Lavagnino read a
letter from the Board of Adjustment to the Planning and
Zoning Commission recommending an amendment to
Section 2!-3.7(h)(4) concerning trash access area re-
quirements. The Board recommended an area 10 feet
by 20 feet minimum for one lot and 10 contiguous feet
more for each additional lot.
Stock read resolution ul, 1979.
Whereas, an application was made by Eva H. Robison
on behalf of the Eva Jenkinson estate for a variance
from the minimum lot area requirements for a single
family dwelling located in the 0-office district and,
Whereas, a variance was granted on Itdovember.17, 1977,
subject to the structures' meeting the setback require-
ments of the code and,
• Whereas, the applicant has submitted an improvement
survey of Lots N, 0, and P, Original Aspen Townsite
and,
Whereas, the improvement survey indicates the stuctures
cannot meet the conditions of said variance and,
..Whereas, the applicant has requested that the Board of
Adjustment modifies said conditions and,
Whereas, proper notice has issued and a hearing has been
held and the Board of Adjustment finds a continuing set I
of circumstances which justify the issuance of a variance;
under the provisions of Section 2-21 of the code of the
City of Aspen and,
Whereas, the applicant has agreed to grant a perpetual '
easement for the benefit of the owner of Lot 14, Block 24,
'City and Townsite of Aspen upon which the house is
presently located together with the right to enter upon
Lot 0 for the purpose of maintenance and repair of said
house and has agreed to restrict as long as the house
presently located on Lot N encroaches that one foot onto
Lot 0 that no structure he erected, constructed or main -
trained within 11 feet of the westerly line of Lot 0,
Block 24, City of Aspen townsite which agreement is
included in a deed attached hereto and made a part hereof'
by reference,
_ `' ' _ `�.-.-- �. ` �.._ =� +='�"". --- .-. -- _ _ ..•-r,, r--._ _asp. -- — �-_ - _.:.-_.: _.... .. �- i
Special tlectinc
-2-
Aspen Board of Acliustment rebruary G, 1979
Now, therefore, we, the Board of Adjustment hereby
issues a variance from the lot area requirements of
a single family dwelling in the O-Office district from
6,000 to 3,000 square feet provided that said deed as
attached hereto is signed and recorded as made a part
hereof in the record.
Whitaker moved to adopt Resolution 111, 1979, Colestock
seconded. All in favor, motion approved.
Stock noted that if the house burns down, they will
still have the variance but they will lose the exemption
from the setback requirements.
The Board then discussed a drafted Ordinance amending
Section 2-22(c) of the Aspen Municipal Code providing
for the posting of public notice on the premises for
which application has-been made for a variance.
Paterson felt they should require that the sign be
posted on a sign in the front yard. If the applicant
posts the sign on their door, it is in a "conspicuous
place" but not necessarily noticeable by people passing
by. Lavagnino felt this would create more problems
than it would solve since each case is unique. The
board asked the Building Department and the Clerk's
Office to explain the wishes of the Board in posting.
Lavagnino then asked the status of Gil Colestock.
Colestock has moved out of the city and must resign
from the Board of Adjustment. Stock said he would be
sending a letter to Colestock requesting his resignation
Lavagnino asked if one of the alternates would move
into a member position. Stock said this would be up
to the City Council.
Mann moved to ad]ourn the meeting, Paterson seconded.
All in favor, motion approved. Meeting adjourned
at 4:50 PM.
r
• 0
CITY OF ASPEN
130 south galena street
aspen, colorado 81611
MEMORANDUM
'SATE: March 8, 3-979
TO: City Council
FROM: Ron Stock
RE: Frost Subdivision Exemption
FACTS:
Application is made by Mona Frost on behalf of the Eva
Jenkinson Estate for an exemption from the definition of
subdivision for the purpose of dividing Lot N, Block 24,
Original Aspen Townsite, from Lots 0 and P. The granting
of the subdivision exemption will allow the estate to sell
each parcel (and the single-family house located on each
parcel) to Eva H. Robison and William Levin respectively.
The property is currently zoned R-6 Residential. 7'he minimum
lot size for a single family dwelling is 6,000 sq. ft. '7he
minimum lot size for a duplex is 9,000 sq. ft. 'the total area
in Lots N, O and P is 9,000 sq. ft.
The second home (located on Lot N) was moved to the site in
1970 pursuant to a permit issued by the City. At the time
that the permit was issued the applicable zoning ordinance
required a 6,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size for a single family
dwelling.
On February 6, 1979, the Board of Adjustment granted the appli-
cant a variance from the minimum lot area requirements of the
zoning code.
QUESTION SUBMITTED: Does Section 24-12.7 of the Municipal Code
prohibit the granting of a subdivision exemption?
OPINION: No.
Section 24-12.7 states in part that "no ... 2arcel of land ...
shall be ... subdivided ... so as to create a new non -conforming
0 0
Memo to City Council
March 8, 1979
Page 2
use ... or so as to leave remaining any lot ... or area below
the requirements for a legal building site as described in this
code... ."
The granting of a subdivision exemption will not create a new
non -conforming use within the provisions of Section 24-12.7, since
the existing situation of two single-family dwellings on a 9,000
sq. ft. lot is currently in non -conformity with the zoning code.
Hut a subdivision exemption, without a variance, would have
created a remaining lot (Lot N) below the requirements for a
legal building site (3,000 sq. ft. rather than 6,000 sq. ft.).
However, with the granting of the variance there is no violation
of Section 12.7 for the effect of a variance under Colorado law
is to give a landowner a license or permit to use his property
in a manner otherwise violative of the zoning ordinance. When
a variance is granted the use permitted thereby becomes a con-
forming use.
RWS : ric
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dave Ellis, City Engineer
FROM: Karen Smith, Planning Office
RE: Frost Subdivision Exemption
DATE: December 6, 1977
This is an exemption request made by Mona Frost on behalf of her sister
involving Lots N, 0, and P, Block 24 on 1ain Street. While the lots
are now owned jointly under the Jenkinson estate (Mona and her sisters
and brother), her sister Eva Robinson wishes to separate off Lot N
on which her house is located. The house was moved there in 1970.
The Jenkinson house sits on Lot P. A Board of Adjustment variance
(see attached) has been approved on November 17, 1977.
I've tentatively scheduled the matter for the December 20th P&Z meeting.
lmk
enc.
CDvu�. hdYi �/
/1"& Ph&t
Regular Meeting Aspen Board of Adjustment November 17, 1977
Case No. 77-30
Lavagnino read the application. Application is made for a variance to
Eva Robison
permit an existing one family dwelling by changing the legal descrip-
tion to be located on a lot that has 3,000 square feet of area. The r
minimum area for a one family dwelling is 6,000 square feet.
Eva Robison explained that she wants to purchase the lot that her house
is on. She is an heir of the Jenkinson property. She moved the house
e
onto the property five years ago. The property is all owned by thq
same family.
Meyring explained that his records show a different placement of the
4
!`
houses as they actually exist. Smith asked for an improvement survey.
Robison did not have one. There was a confusion as to where each
house sat; Robison clarified the problem. Lavagnino said the question
t
is whether Lot 0 will go with Lot P or Lot N.
Col.estock asked if there was a written agreement with the family to do
I�
this rearranging. Robison's two sisters were present to confirm their
verbal agreement. Robison said they rent the larger house which was
their parent's. Paterson said it made more sense for the bigger house
to have the bigger lot. Lavagnino asked if the two houses would meet
setback requirements. Meyring said he did not know, lie would need a
survey. Paterson said a measurement from the Building Department would
be sufficient for him since the survey stakes are still in the ground.
Lavagnino said they would need a survey verified by Meyring but that
Meyring need not do it himself. Smith suggested that they grant the
variance conditional upon a survey that shows all setback requirements
are met.
f.
Lavagnino asked for comments from the public.
Mike Hunter
Hunt asked if any of the houses were nonconforming. Lavagnino said
according to the old Building Department records, both houses were
conforming but when the house was moved it was moved on to one lot /
S
when it needed two lots to do so. This created a nonconforming lot .v
>f
Michael Behrendt
Behrendt asked the definition of a duplex and if this was a duplex
in effect. Lavagnino said no, it must have a common wall.
{
Lavagnino closed the public portion of the meeting. R:
The Board members had a brief meeting to word this variance. 4
Lavagnino reopened the public meeting. /
Smith moved to grant the requested variance conditional upon the ap-
plicants supplying an improvement survey of Lots N, 0, and P, that ✓✓✓ i
indicate both houses meet all setback requirements when the requested t
subdivision is accomplished because of the practical difficulties ,
caused by the need to assign the greater land area to the larger house
and since this will not adversely affect the general purpose of the CCP, ;t
Paterson seconded. All in favor, motion approved.
Case No. 77-31 Lavagnino read the application. Application is made for a variance to
Larry Carter use an above ground propane tank until the second week of January, 1978.
All fuel storage tanks shall be completely buried beneath the surface
of the ground. Mrs. Larry Carter was present.
Case No._,,-,,(,
BEFORE TILT A OF ASPEN BOAI;D OF ADJUSEVE
TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS' AFFECTED BY TIII; REQUESTI D ZONI'NIG OR USE VARIANCE
DESCRIBED BELOW:
Pursuant- to the Official Code of Aspen of June 25, 1962, as amended, a
public hearing will be held in the Council_ Room, City hall, Aspen, Col-o-
rado, (or at such other place as the mc:eti-ng may be then adjourned) try
consider an application filed with the said );oard of Adjustment requesting
authority for variance from the provisions of theZoning Ordinance, Chapter
24, Official Code of Aspen. All persons affected by the proposed variance
are invited to appear and state their views, protests or objections, If
you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state.
yotr viev,s by letter, particularly if you have objection to such variance,
as the Board of Adjustment- will give serious consideration to the opinions
of- surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to
grant or deny the request for variance.
The particulars of the hearing and of the requested variance are as f011oWs:
Date and Time of Meetin�L
Date : November 17, 1977
Time: 4: 00 PM, City Council Chambers
Name and address of Pntlicant for Variance:
Name: Eva H. Robison
Address: 616 West ,Main St., Aspen, Colorado
Location or de.-=2 Lion of roper-ty-
Location; 616 West Main St.
Description: Block 24, Lot N
Variance R eouest:ed•
Ms. Robison wants to purchase only the lot the house is on'(Lot N). The heirs of the propert\
who own Lots N - 0 & P wish to sell Lot N to her on which her house is located and retain
Lot 0 (vacant) to go with the Jenkinson house Lot P to meet zoning code if sold.
Duration of Variance: (Pli>aso c:ro:::; out one)
3 t i #fYj Perninilent-
THE CITY Oi
lid' ,_ �r�nC _L `�'12:v?rl.�'. •✓_ _ - ---- - - - -- --
�, 0--t- ru�,r)zo V('?(Art PILc
�:It.t 1.1-�li,itl