HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.Heller, Lots R,S, Block 113io
ffl -X I C)
LOTS k S, BL IM
E
0
0
6 ( 141r�
o 6 T-V
,-v
0
11.0
•
Regular Meeting
Ashen City Counci 1
N cmhcr�1977
:)f a t,truct.ure. There were iwo concornf; voiced by thr, I, F. Z. Th(•re had been an extra
ani t in the: ha ;c•mcrnt. The hu i id i ng d(-p;tr•t_ment invc•:,t ignl.ed th i.::. 'There jr, a November 19
ucmnr.andum front Yrnjer llaken.,; (ad who i rlsf,cct c•d the bu.i l di ny . Tllc-re was a court older to
remove the third unit. Clayton Mcyrinq, building .i.u:;poctor, found that -all things had
i,evn dealt. with cxcupt the 220 e lectr:icity. '1'lre f,lanrring off ic,. recommender t.haL is
,pprovo the sul,cl.ivif;ion cxe•r,if,t ion-.ubjocL to tho three si iincbrrd c;r.it.oria, (I ) six month
.rinimurn least', (2) 90 clay f.i.rc,L right; of refusal., and (3) iurd furyment of thcr park dedica-
tion fee, and that prior to recording the 220 service be removed.
Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the subdi.vinion exception with the three standard
::onditions.as listed and ghat•thc• 220 he removed; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. All in
Eavor, with the exception of CauYlcilman Hershey. Motion carried.
5USDIVISION EXF:1411TION = lieller Triplex
Kane explained to Council this is a three unit triplex on the corner of Waters and West
End. City Engineer Dave Ellis inspected the site: and found the si.duwalk non-existent and
asked they install a sidewalk. The planning office rc+commends approval of the subdivision
exemption with six month minimum lease restriction, 90 day right of first refusal, and
Daymc:nt cf park dedication fees, and satisfaction of the City Engineer's requirement to
install a sidewalk-: —TCane tot. ouncil that all units were about the same size, 800 square
Eeet.
3idcon Kaufman, representing lieller, told Council that upon inspection of the premises, it
shows that no one has sidewalks within two blocks -of the place. Kaufman suggesting
joining a sidewalk improvement district.and not putting in a sidewalk until other people
90.
ouncilwoman Johnston moved to approve the subdivision exemption'wit}r the four conditions
s outlined; seconded by Councilman liershey.
'ouncilman Van Ness stated he had never seen anything beneficial. about sidewalks in a
residential area. Cement pavements is inconsistent with what Council stands for. Council-
Hornan Johnston withdrew the condition for sidewalks from her motion.
City Engineer Ellis told Council that generally he has not asked for sidewalks where there
are none or where it does not appear to be likely in the future. This is a very high
3ensity area, and the sidewalk is approved on the sidewalk plan approved in 1975.
111 in favor, with the exception of Councilman Behrendt.. Motion carried.
3UBDIVTSION EXEMPTION - Carter Duplex
Kane told Council this Duplex is located at 729 West Francis. The planning office
recommends approval with the three standard conditions; six month rental restriction,
90 day right of first refusal, and payment of the park dedication fee.
Councilwoman Johnston moved to approve tl:e subdivision exemption with the conditions as
3utl.ined; seconded by Councilman Hershey. All in favor, motion carried.
?UBLIC HEARING - Use of Revenue Sharing Funds
dayor Standley opened the public hearing.
?'ederal Government will accept a mid -census
nay enlarge Aspen's revenue sharing funds.
requirement to have a public hearing on the
Dart of the City's budget.
Mayor Standley closed the public hearing.
Councilwoman Johnston pointed out that the
figure, which is being done now, and which
Mayor Standley told Council it is a Federal
use of revenue sharing funds, which arc a
3RDINANCE 454, SF:RIE:S OF 1977 - Rio Grande SPA rezoning
0ayor Standley opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Standley closed
the public hearing.
Councilman Van Ness moved to read Ordinance #54, Series of 1977; seconded by Councilman
?arry. All in favor, motion carried.
ORDINANCE P54
(Series of. 1.977)
AN ORDINANCE HEZONING THE' APPROXIMATELY 1.1.50 ACRES OF LAND 011NED BY THE
CITY OF ASPEN AND FNOWN AS THE "RIO GRANDE'" PROPERIrY, ACCORDING 1'0 AN
APPROVED SPI.CIALLY PLANNED AREA MASTER PLAN FOR TUE' SI'1'F, THE ELEMENTS OF
WIfICII MASTER PLAN t1ILL CONSTITUTE. Till; DYV1;1.01'ME'NT REGULATIONS FOR THE AREA
ALL AS PROVIDED 13Y ARTICLE V1I OF CIIAPTE'R 24 OF THi; ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODL
was read by the city clerk
'ouncilwoman ,7ohnf;ton moved to adopt Ordinance 454, Series of 1977, on second reading;
;c•conded by CMnrCi.11llan Behrendt.. Roll call vote; Councilmcillbe:s HchrcndL, aye; Hershey,
iyc•; Johnston, ayo; Parry, ayt.4 Van Ness, aye; Wi.f,ha): L, aye; Mayor Standley, aye. Motion
;arricd.
)RDINANCE 1156, S1:1CI1;R OF 1977 - Water plain F�xt.en+ion Outside City Limits
Standley el)rned tilt' Inrt+lic hoar.ing. T110r'e wort, 110 comment:;. Mayor Standley closed
.hc public. heari ug.
FJ
40
TO:
FROM:
MEMORANDUM
Aspen City Council
Planning Office (KS)
RE: Subdivision Exemption Applications:
Moore Duplex
Heller Triplex
Carter Duplex
DATE: November 9, 1977
Over the last several weeks, the Planning and Zoning Commission has
considered several subdivision exemption applications involving two
duplexes and one triplex. Each of them requests permission to condo-
miniumize. Because City Council has not acted on the proposed condo-
miniumization ordinance, the City Attorney has advised us that we may
not consider any factors regarding the conversion's impact on the
supply of low and moderate income housing other than adopted Council
policy to condition such conversions on a 90 day right of first refusal,
six month minimum lease restriction, and payment of the appropriate
park dedication fee. The details of each application are summarized
below. The Planning Office will bring copies of the improvement
survey to.your meeting.
MOORE DUPLEX
This duplex owned by Barabar McLaughlin Moore is located at 810 West
Smuggler, Lots P and Q, Block 8, of the original Aspen townsite. The
lot constitutes 6,000 square feet, which in the R-6 zone district, is
substandard in size by 3,000 square feet.
It has been the practice of the City not to look to zoning compliance
when reviewing subdivision exemption for condominiumizations of existing
buildings. The standard rather has been compliance with subdivision
design standards such as (1) roads, paving, and curbs; (2) land surveys,
and (3) proper utilities access and easements. The City Engineer, by
memorandum dated October 11, 1977, has certified that the improvement
survey shows such conformance. He noted, however, that the second story
balcony is built at the property line in violation of the side setback
requirement of five feet. Planning and Zoning discussed this peculiarity,
but determined, again, that this was a matter of zoning non-compliance
of an existing structure and that it was not warranted or appropriate to
deal with it through the subdivision exemption procedure.
In view of the application's compliance with subdivision design standards,
full subdivision processing is not necessary. The change in form of
ownership does not have any additional land use impacts and thus
exemption from the full procedure is appropriate.
The Planning and Zoning Commission therefore recommended approval at
their October 18th regular, meeting subject to:
1. The 6 month minimum lease restriction.
2. 90 day right of first refusal to existing tenants.
3. payment of the appropriate park dedication fee (which the
City Manager and the Planning Office have checked and
certified).
Memorandum
Page Two
November 9, 1977
One final condition attached by the Planning and Zoning Commission was
to correct any single family deed restriction pertaining to the property.
One P&Z member pointed out that he believ(,d there was such a deed
restriction. Ms. Moore's attorney, however, has not found such to
exist and we are checking further with the City Attorney.
We have also asked Clayton Meyring to inspect the premises and certify
that an illegal third unit in the basement has been removed.
In summary, then, there are 5 conditions that might be attached to any
approval.
_11::�HELLER TRIPLEX
Nick Heller requests subdivision exemption to condominiumize a triplex
located on Lots R and S, Block 113, Aspen, just northwest of the corner
of Waters Avenue and West End Street. Zoning for the area is RMF. The
lot is 6,9UO square feet; if zoning compliance were an issue here, the
lot would be only slightly deficient as three.2-bedroom units would
require 6,300 square feet.
The City Engineer has reviewed the plat and indicates that most engine-
ering concerns are satisfied. Dave Ellis does ask that a condition of
subdivision exemption approval be construction of a sidewalk along the
West End Street frontage.
The applicant has provided us additional information regarding disposi-
tion of the units, each of which is 800 square feet. Mr. Heller
currently resides in one and will continue to do so, he plans to rent
long term the second. The third unit will be sold at the price of
approximately $65,000.
Inasmuch as the intent of the subdivision regulations have been met,
the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval at their October
18th meeting subject to:
1. 6 month lease restriction
2. 90 day right of first refusal to existing tenants
3. payment of the park dedication fee
4. Satisfaction of the City Engineer's requirement of a
sidewalk
CARTER DUPLEX
The Carter duplex is located on a6;000 square foot lot in the R-6 zone
district at 729 West Francis Street. Annie and Harvey Carter are
asking subdivision exemption approval in order to condominiumize the
seven -year -old two story structure. Dave Ellis has made a site inspec-
tion and reviewed the improvement survey and makes favorable con111ent.
We again find that the change in ownership has no additional land use
impact, and inasmt:ch as the intent of the subdivision regulations have
been met, the Planning and Zoning Conunission recommended approval of
the exemption at their November lst meetint subject to:
1. Six month minimum lease restriction
2. 90 day right of first refusal to existing tenants
3. Payment of the appropriate park dedication fee
/NY7i0
•
`len4�,n; ww W;3,3
OF ---jau�k --
;14 A it a, �Yip*
2 Po law( au. a
0 •
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
,, SSwj al �tw
BOX 10001
1280 LITE AVENUE
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
(303) 925-8166
October 17, 1977
City Planning Department
Aspen City Hall
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Attention: Karen Smith
Re: Heller Condominiums
Dear Karen:
This letter is being written to address the issue of the Heller
Condominiumization's compliance with the condominium policy about
to be adopted by the City of Aspen.
The Heller buildings contain three two -bedroom units of approximately
800 square feet each. Mr. Heller resides in one of the units and will
continue to do so. The second unit is currently under a long term lease
and a copy of that lease is attached to this letter. It is Mr. Heller's
present intention to continue the long term rental of that unit. It is
the third unit which will eventually be sold. Its present occupant is in
the process of building a home and will be moving upon its completion.
This proposed condominiumization, therefore, adheres to the tenant dis-
placement guidelines sought by the P&Z and City Council. In fact, the
proposed condominiumization will not displace a single tenant. In addi-
tion, rental restrictions will now cover three units that heretofore
have been in both the long term and short term rental pool.
Mr. Heller will be selling the 800 square foot unit three for $65,000.00,
a price which is certainly not exclusionary and well within the mans of
Aspen's moderate income group.
I hope I have answered any questions or concerns you might have had on
the Heller Condominiumization's compliance with the new City Guidelines.
I will be more than happy to answer any questions or respond to any in-
house comments. Of course, I will be attending any hearings held on this
matter.
Sincerely,
Gideon Kaufman
GK/cr
Encl.
cc: Nick Heller
•
MEMO
TO: KAREN SMITH
FROM: DAVE ELLIS D�7_
DATE: October 12, 1977
RE: Subdivision Exemption Request (Heller)
Lots R & S, Block 113
The engineering department has reviewed the above exemption request
for an existing triplex and finds that most engineering concerns
are satisfied. We recommend granting the exemption subject to con-
struction of sidewalk along the West End Street frontage.
•
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Planning Office (KS)
RE: Heller Triplex - Subdivision Exemption
DATE: October 14, 1977
The attached application requests subdivision exemption for property
on Lots R and S, Block 113, of the City of Aspen, located just north-
west of the corner of Waters Avenue and West End Street. The property
is said to be a triplex, although it is actually two different structures,
one with one dwelling unit and the other with two. The applicant,
Nick Heller, wishes to divide the property into two ownerships.
Zoning for the area is RMF.
Dave Ellis has reviewed the application for conformance with subdivision
design standards and finds no problem. However, he requests that any
exemption be conditioned on the construction of a sidewalk along the
West End Street frontage.
This application was submitted prior to Council's adoption, on first
reading, of an ordinance governing condominiumization applications.
We will ask the applicant to present further evidence relevant to
that ordinance. The applicant does represent that one unit will
remain aslong term rental and that, if confirmed by evidence of a long
term lease, is at least partially meeting the goal of non -reduction
of the supply of low and moderate income housing.
The exemption, at a minimum, must be conditioned on the granting of
a 90 day right of first refusal to existing tenants, 6 month minimum
lease restrictions, and payment of the appropriate park dedication fee.
lmk
enc.
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION
FlUM SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
Request is hereby made on behalf of NICK HELLER (hereinafter referred
to as applicant) under Section 20-19(a) of the Aspen, Colorado Subdivision
Regulations, for an exemption from the definition of the term "Subdivision"
with respect to the real property described as:
Lots R&S Block 113
City of Aspen
Pitkin County
It is submitted that an exemption in the case would be appropriate.
The application involves an existing triplex. A subdivision of one
lot with a triplex on it creates conditions whereby strick complicance with
subdivision regulations would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use
of his land. If an exemption is granted, one unit will eventually be sold
at a reasonable price to a local working rrember of our ccnmunity. The
owner will continue to live in one unit, and intends to continue renting
the other unit long term. There will not be any increase in the land use
impact of the property. An exemption in this case will not conflict with
the intent and purpose of the subdivision regulations which are directed
to assist the orderly, efficient, and integrated development of the City
of Aspen, to insure the proper distribution of population, to coordinate the
need for public services, and to encourage well -planned subdivision.
The granting of this application will not undermine the intent of the
subdivision regulations as it is clearly within the area intended for
exemption under 20-19. The building is already in existence, and there
will be no change in density which is presently in line with the desired
population density for the property.
The applicant would appreciate your consideration of this application
at your next regular meting.
Very truly yours,
Gideon I. Kaufman
Attorney for Nick Heller, Applicant
DATED this 26th day of August, 1977.
6v
pi P- V6-4�
rr,�wc(a tr c. «e& � TIol"f
J
?� Z�+ , �-t�-
U
9