The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcoa.lu.ec.Shaw Condominiumization.13-821 Shaw Condominiumization C J 1 1. DATE CERTIFIED COMPLETE: 2. APPLICANT: 3. REPRESENTATIVE: CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen - STAFF: I,C—s— �,J i 5 4. PROJECT NAME: 5. LOCATION: I�07�s 7� 1.1 6. TYPE OF APPLICATION: 4 Step: GMP PUD ( Subdivision 2 Step: Subdivision Exception (_�! GMP Exception ( Rezoning SPA 1 Step: Use Determination Conditional Use Special Review (_ HPC No. of Steps: Other: v 7/atorney FERRALS Sanitation District School District ngineering Dept. Mountain Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas Housing Parks State Highway Dept. Water Holy Cross Electric .,_fire Chief City Electricll,,,, v Fire Mars}gal/Building Dept. _V Other 4 _ 8. DISPOSITION (`� ��`t. MAI I—� #Y'k P & Z_Approved_j_ Denied Date Maq q-L�' % Cordi4 ions • CD 011,net rn LA- s-� en( n-)a- nmerA (i c nx r 4L2, LU±N.�r Lodi �.r<<ML'1& 0— 16V -�hP publi� r,oFu T A iCao rrj5� prouidear 66 c A r t cm wrrtuni(Aor.) ea5emey+ 0,- Hof d _ aS 5Crt l Gl n Y p fJ� 's �Jr.� 4}lam m�my l_ Plst 51no�td bQ pd }0 f OL.-_(�l s �c�a1L P urh��A-itt( f t'�lo��VP. fro r�u 1kn ; N)1�4kli+t, mar loca-kons^ .�o� us�abLt 10ns o� . .T C Alcor �A 1 P.ercbvc Last u n¢" from �' 41,JQT � rr0, W 40M 1-0+ Q Act W1 Ti PAi i (arty mus IL-FDur�d in -the 15 101 pe�S • I �l-kh� Safe inSpsecl-ion �f•�c okr� Its+� l 4b� peG�s AQ. ' S1' } '4Z rrttrr� ©�i0iCart4 m� ,abrnr} a J�c�#ernBtlt D{- C!C,Q 04- tofu -to r rta`I Counci 1 ✓ Approved_ �' Denied — Date___ 9. PRELIMINARY PLAT REFERRALS: Attorney Sanitation District Engineering Dept. Mountain Bell Housing Parks Water Holy Cross Electric City Electric Fire Marshal/Building Dept. 10. PRELIMINARY PLAT - PUBLIC HEARING P & Z Approved Denied Date School District Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas State Highway Dept. Other 11. FINAL PLAT Council Approved Denied Date _ 12. ROUTING: ✓ Attorney \J Building __Engineering Other MEMORANDUM TO: Planning File FROM: Alice Davis, Planning Office RE: Shaw Subdivision Exception (Condominiumization) DATE: May 11, 1982 An application was submitted to the Planning Office on March 9, 1982 for a subdivision exception - lot split for the purpose of selling the Mother Lode Restaurant to its current leasees. The application was referred to the Attorney's and Engineering Offices. At the time the application was reviewed, it was discovered that the parcel (Block 81, Lots N, 0, P and Q with the Mother Lode Restaurant located on Lot N) was not eligible for a lot split since there was no development allocation for the vacant parcel (Lots P and Q) which would have been created. Section 20-5(b) of the Code prohibits any subdivision without first having a development allocation. In light of Section 20-5(b), the Planning Office considered the parcel ineligible for a lot split and the application was not to proceed further. Allowing a lot split would set a bad precedent by allowing the formation and possibly the sale of a lot with no development rights. This could be an especially negative precedent in residential zone districts. The representative for the Shaw Estate, Chuck Brandt, held a meeting with Paul Taddune, City Attorney, Sunny Vann and Alice Davis, Planning Office, in order to find a method of allowing the Shaw Estate, the owner of the four parcels, to sell the Mother Lode Restaurant to its current leasees. The parties agreed that a subdivision exception for the purposes of condominiumization was the proper method which would allow the Mother Lode to be sold. The Shaw application was then revised to request the condominiumization and was taken to the P & Z on May 4, 1982. The applicant, due to time restraints regarding the closing of the sale of the Mother Lode, was allowed to go to P & Z without comments on the condominium plat, but with comments on the conceptual plat submitted for the lot split. When the condominium plat was submitted on May 3, 1982, the day before the P & Z meeting, the Planning Office discovered the applicant was requesting a condominiumization of land by dividing the four city lots into two parcels through phased condominiumization. Both the Planning Office and the Attorney's Office felt a condominiumization such as this was inappropriate and was an attempt to circumvent the intent of the subdivision regulations. The Planning Office and Attorney's Office were under the understanding that the Mother Lode structure was being condominiumized with the four lots held in common ownership• In thelight of a possible denial of the application by P & Z, the applicant agreed to this type of condominiumization. The application then received P & Z approval May 4, 1982 and Council approval on May 10, 1982, both approvals subject to several conditions regarding plat changes recommended by the Engineering Department and deficiencies to be corrected which were identified through the Building Department's fire, health and safety inspection. The City of Aspen, simultaneously, has been condemning the easterly nine feet of Lot Q for the expansion of the Wheeler Opera House. The City is also nego- tiating the purchase and/or condemnation of Lots N and 0 from the Shaw Estate. If this purchase/condemnation is made, the condominiumization may be nullified as a result of the sale of Lot P and Q to the Mother Lode leasees. MEMORANDUM • TO: Planning File FROM: Alice Davis, Planning Office RE: Shaw Subdivision Exception (Condominiumization) DATE: May 11, 1982 An application was submitted to the Planning Office an March°9, 1982 for a subdivision exception - lot split for the purpose of selling the Mother Lode Restaurant to its current leasees. The applicatton was referred to the Attorneys and Engineering Offices. At the time the application was reviewed, it was discovered that the parcel (Block 81, Lots N, 0, P and Q with the Mother Lode Restaurant located on Lot N) was not eligible for a lot split since there was no development allocation for the vacant parcel (Lots P and Q) which would have been created. Section 20-5(b) of the Code prohibits any subdivision without first having a development allocation. In light of Section 20-5(b), the Planning Office considered the parcel ineligible for a lot split and the application was not to proceed further. Allowing a lot split would set a bad precedent by allowing the formation and possibly the sale of a lot with no development rights. This could be an especially negative precedent in residential zone districts. The representative for the Shaw Estate, Chuck Brandt, held a meeting with Paul Taddune, City Attorney, Sunny Vann and Alice Davis, Planning Office, in order to find a method of allowing the Shaw Estate, the owner of the four parcels, to sell the Mother Lode Restaurant to its current leasees. The parties agreed that a subdivision exception for the purposes of condominiumization was the proper method which would allow the Mother Lode to be sold. The Shaw application was then revised to request the condominiumization and was taken to the P & Z on May 4, 1982. The applicant, due to time restraints regarding the closing of the sale of the Mother Lode, was allowed to go to P & Z without comments on the condominium plat, but with comments on the conceptual plat submitted for the lot split. When the condominium plat was submitted on May 3, 1982, the day before the P & Z meeting, the Planning Office discovered the applicant was requesting a condominiumization of land by dividing the four city lots into two parcels through phased condominiumization. Both the Planning Office and the Attorneys Office felt a condominiumization such as this was inappropriate and was an attempt to circumvent the intent of the subdivision regulations. The Planning Office and Attorney's Office were under the understanding that the Mother Lode structure was being condominiumized with the four lots held in common ownership. In thelight of a possible denial of the application by P & Z, the applicant agreed to this type of condominiumization. The application then received P & Z approval May 4, 1982 and Council approval on May 10, 1982, both approvals subject to several conditions regarding plat changes recommended by the Engineering Department and deficiencies to be corrected which were identified through the Building Department's fire, health and safety inspection. The City of Aspen, simultaneously, has been condemning the easterly nine feet of Lot Q for the expansion of the Wheeler Opera House. The City is also nego- tiating the purchase and/or condemnation of Lots N and 0 from the Shaw Estate. If this purchase/condemnation is made,ithe condominiumization may be nullified as a result of the sale of Lot P and Q to the Mother Lode leasees. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Alice Davis, Planning Office RE: Shaw Estate Subdivision Exception - Condominiumization DATE: May 4, 1982 APPROVED AS TO FORM: tl L Location: 314 East Hyman Avenue; Block 81, Lots N, and Q, iginal Aspen Townsite Zon4 ng ; CC Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting a subdivision exception for the purpose of condominiumizing the Mother Lode Restaurant which is located on four city lots. The restaurant is located in Block 81, Lots N and 0 while Lots P and Q are currently unimproved except for minor improvements relating to the summertime use of these lots by the Mother Lode. The purpose of the Condominiumization is to permit the Dorothy Koch Shaw Estate to sell the Mother Lode Restaurant to the present lessees, with the land held in common ownership. Engineering: The Engineering Department has the following comments regarding the application: 1. The following amendments must be made to the final plat prior to recordation: a. Sidewalk, curb, and gutter relative to property line. b. Indicate utility meter locations. c. Show usable portions of the second floor (adequate ceiling height, etc.). d. Show electric/communications easement on Lot Q as specified in the May 4, 1982 memorandum from Engineering to the Planning Office. 2. The applicant should obtain an encroachment license for that portion of the Mother Lode which protrudes into the Hyman Avenue right-of-way. Attorney's Office: The Attorney's Office has stated that the proposed Condominiumi- zation should be reviewed in accordance with section 20-22 of the Code entitled "Condominiumization." Building Department: The Building Department conducted a fire, life and safety inspection on the Mother Lode, a code requirement for all condominiumizations. Numerous problems were found during this inspection, all of which are listed in the attached April 29, 1982 and May 4, 1982 memorandums from the Building Department. Four of the situations dealing with safety must be corrected before the restaurant is re -opened. The electrical deficiencies listed in the May 4, 1982 memorandum must be corrected by the applicant and inspected by the Building Department prior to July 1, 1982 or electrical service will be disconnected. Planning Office Review: Section 20-22(a) of the Code requires the owner of a structure being condominiumized to give the existing tenant the right of first refusal to purchase the structure. Since the purpose of the proposal is to allow the present lessees to buy the Mother Lode, this requirement is being met. The other requirements of Section 20-22 regarding employee Memo: Shaw Estate Subdivision Exception - Condominiumization Page Two May 4, 1982 housing and six month minimum leases do not apply since this is an application for a commercial condominiumization and the applicant has stated that there have been no employee units on the subject property in the past 18 months. The subject property consists of the four lots located between the Wheeler Opera House and the Crystal Palace. The easterly nine feet of Lot Q, immediately east of the Wheeler Opera House is currently being condemned by the City of Aspen for the expansion of the Wheeler. This condemnation does not affect the proposed condominiumization. P & Z Action: In order to clarify the type of condominiumization proposed, P & Z recommended that the plat be amended with the following changes: 1. "Unit 2" on Lot Q should be eliminated and replaced with "G.C.E." 2. "G.C.E." on Lot 0 should be eliminated and replaced with "L.C.E." 3. "Phase One" should be removed from the plat's title. These changes are to insure that the four lots are still held in common ownership with Lot 0 limited to the use of the owners of Unit 1, the Mother Lode. Planning Office and P&Z Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office recommends the approval of the request for condominiumization of the Mother Lode Restaurant which is located at 314 East Hyman Avenue, Block 81, Lots N, 0, P and Q, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to recordation, the condominium plat must be amended to include the following: a. Sidewalk, curb, and gutter relative to property line. b. Utility meter locations. c. Usable portions of the second floor (adequate ceiling height, etc.) must be indicated. d. Electric/communications easement on Lot Q as specified in the May 4, 1982 memorandum from the Engineering Department. e. The elimination of "Unit 2" and the addition of "G.C.E." on Lot Q. f. The elimination of "G.C.E." and the addition of "L.C.E." on Lot 0. g. The elimination of "Phase One" from the plat's title. 2. The owner must obtain an encorachment license for the portion of the Mother Lode which protrudes into the Hyman Avenue right-of-way.. 3. The applicant must agree to correct any deficiencies found through the Building Department's fire, life and safety inspection prior to the City Council's review of the application. 4. The applicant must submit a statement of exception document to the Attorney's Office in a form acceptable to that office. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Alice Davis, Planning Office RE: Shaw Estate Subdivision Exception - Condominiumization DATE: May 4, 1982 APPROVED AS TO FORM: !/ Location: 314 East Hyman Avenue; Block 81, Lots N, and Q, 9inal Aspen Townsite Zoning; CC Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting a subdivision exception for the purpose of condominiumizing the Mother Lode Restaurant which is located on four city lots. The restaurant is located in Block 81, Lots N and 0 while Lots P and Q are currently unimproved except for minor improvements relating to the summertime use of these lots by the Mother Lode. The purpose of the condominiumization is to permit the Dorothy Koch Shaw Estate to sell the Mother Lode Restaurant to the present lessees, with the land held in common ownership. Engineering: The Engineering Department has the following comments regarding the application: 1. The following amendments must be made to the final plat prior to recordation: a. Sidewalk, curb, and gutter relative to property line. b. Indicate utility meter locations. c. Show usable portions of the second floor (adequate ceiling height, etc.). d. Show electric/communications easement on Lot Q as specified in the May 4, 1982 memorandum from Engineering to the Planning Office. 2. The applicant should obtain an encroachment license for that portion of the Mother Lode which protrudes into the Hyman Avenue right-of-way. Attorney's Office: The Attorney's Office has stated that the proposed condominiumi- zation should be reviewed in accordance with section 20-22 of the Code entitled "condominiumization." Building Department: The Building Department conducted a fire, life and safety inspection on the Mother Lode, a code requirement for all condominiumizations. Numerous problems were found during this inspection, all of which are listed in the attached April 29, 1982 and May 4, 1982 memorandums from the Building Department. Four of the situations dealing with safety must be corrected before the restaurant is re -opened. The electrical deficiencies listed in the May 4, 1982 memorandum must be corrected by the applicant and inspected by the Building Department prior to July 1, 1982 or electrical service will be disconnected. Planning Office Review: Section 20-22(a) of the Code requires the owner of a structure being condominiumized to give the existing tenant the right of first refusal to purchase the structure. Since the purpose of the proposal is to allow the present lessees to buy the Mother Lode, this requirement is being met. The other requirements of Section 20-22 regarding employee Memo: Shaw Estate Subdivision Exception - Condominiumization Page Two May 4, 1982 housing and six month minimum leases do not apply since this is an application for a commercial condominiumization and the applicant has stated that there have been no employee units on the subject property in the past 18 months. The subject property consists of the four lots located between the Wheeler Opera House and the Crystal Palace. The easterly nine feet of Lot Q, immediately east of the Wheeler Opera House is currently being condemned by the City of Aspen for the expansion of the Wheeler. This condemnation does not affect the proposed condominiumization. P & Z Action: In order to clarify the type of condominiumization proposed, P & Z recommended that the plat be amended with the following changes: 1. "Unit 2" on Lot Q should be eliminated and replaced with "G.C.E." 2. "G.C.E." on Lot 0 should be eliminated and replaced with "L.C.E." 3. "Phase One" should be removed from the plat's title. These changes are to insure that the four lots are still held in common ownership with Lot 0 limited to the use of the owners of Unit 1, the Mother Lode. Planning Office and P&Z Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office recommends the approval of the request for condominiumization of the Mother Lode Restaurant which is located at 314 East Hyman Avenue, Block 81, Lots N, 0, P and Q, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to recordation, the condominium plat must be amended to include the following: a. Sidewalk, curb, and gutter relative to property line. b. Utility meter locations. c. Usable portions of the second floor (adequate ceiling height, etc.) must be indicated. d. Electric/communications easement on Lot Q as specified in the May 4, 1982 memorandum from the Engineering Department. e. The elimination of "Unit 2" and the addition of "G.C.E.- on Lot Q. f. The elimination of "G.C.E." and the addition of "L.C.E." on Lot 0. g. The elimination of "Phase One" from the plat's title. 2. The owner must obtain an encorachment license for the portion of the Mother Lode which protrudes into the Hyman Avenue right-of-way. 3. The applicant must agree to correct any deficiencies found through the Building Department's fire, life and safety inspection prior to the City Council's review of the application. 4. The applicant must submit a statement of exception document to the Attorney's Office in a form acceptable to that office. 0 • MEMORANDUM TO: Alice Davis, Planning Office FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Department DATE: May 4, 1982 RE: Shaw Condominiumization, Lots N, 0, P and Q, Block 81, O.A.T. ------------------------------------------------------------- Having reviewed the above application for condominiumization of the Mother Lode restaurant and made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended to include the following: line. a. Sidewalk, curb, and gutter relative to property b. Indicate utility meter locations. C. Show useable portions of the second floor (adequate ceiling height, etc.) d. Show electric/communications easement on Lot Q. 2. The Engineering Department is requesting that the applicant provide an electric/communications easement on Lot Q described as follows: The Northerly 7 feet of the Easterly 19 feet of Lot Q, Block 81, Original Aspen Townsite, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado except the Easterly 9 feet thereof. 3. The applicant should obtain an encroachment license for that portion of the Mother Load which protrudes into the Hyman Avenue Right -of -Way. JH/co MEMORANDUM TO: Alice Davis, Planning FROM: John Ostwald, Building Inspector DATE: April 29, 1982 RE: Motherlode Fire, Life & Safety Inspection Below is a list of what was found during a Fire, Life & Safety Inspection made by the Building Department of theiotherlode: (1) Mechanical needs work (2) Fireplace chimney flue asbestos pipe illegal (3) Glass in exit doors not the right type (4) Change floor level at kitchen needs a sign (5) No handrail on stairs ' (6) Fire extinguishers for range expired (7) No ventilation for laundry facilities (8) Water pipe undersized (9) Flex lines on water heater unprotedted (10) Apartment lacks safety features and heat (11) Hood vented to°close to doors (12) Illegal exit through kitchen (13) Exit doors -have deadbolts - require a sign stating these doors must remain unlocked during business hours Items highlighted will require correction before re --opening. MEMORANDUM TO: Alice Davis, Planning FROM: Stan Stevens, Building Dept. DATE: May 4, 1982 RE: Fire, Life & Safety Inspection of Mother Lode Restaurant On April 30, 1982, an electrical inspection was made at the subject property. The following is a summary of deficiencies noted during that inspection. (A) Service 1) Service disconnect capacity to be recalculated and resized to meet the connected load. 83. 2) Service grounds to meet Article 250-71, 72, 81 and (B) Wiring 1) All wiring to meet Aspen Code Section 7-159 (all wiring to be enclosed within armor raceway) 2) All appliances to be grounded. 3) Recepticals to be provided at each cord and plug (no extension cords allowed). 4) All damaged cords and plugs to be replaced. (C) Grounding 1) All 'flex' to be limited to six feet or separate ground wire provided. 2) In back unit, provide ground circuit at each receptical. (D) Other 1) GFI recepticals required in bathroom of rear unit. 2) Switched exit light and switchable light in each room of rear unit is required. 3) All branch wires must be protected with a circuit breaker when fed from a larger size feeder conductor. • E Alice Davis May 4, 1982 Page 2 4) All motors to be within sight of their disconnects or controllers. These items must be corrected and inspected for compliance prior to July 1, 1982 or electrical service will be disconnected. • • MEMORANDUM TO: Alice Davis, Planning FROM: John Ostwald, Building Inspector DATE: April 29, 1982 RE: Motherlode Fire, Life & Safety Inspection Below is a list of what was found during a Fire, Life & Safety Inspection made by the Building Department of the Aotherlode: (1) Mechanical needs work (2) Fireplace chimney flue asbestos pipe illegal (3) Glass in exit doors not the right type (4) Change floor level at kitchen needs a sign (5) No handrail on stairs (6) Fire extinguishers for range expired (7) No ventilation for laundry facilities (8) Vlater pipe undersized (9) Flex lines on water heater unprotected (10) Apartment lacks safety features and heat (11) Hood vented to close to doors (12) Illegal exit through kitchen (13) Exit doors have deadbolts - require a sign stating these doors must remain unlocked during business hours Items highlighted will require correction before re -opening. EJ MEMORANDUM TO: Alice Davis, Planning FROM: Stan Stevens, Building Dept. DATE: May 4, 1982 RE: Fire, Life & Safety Inspection of Mother Lode Restaurant On April 30, 1982, an electrical inspection was made at the subject property. The following is a summary of deficiencies noted during that inspection. (A) Service 1) Service disconnect capacity to be recalculated and resized to meet the connected load. 83. 2) Service grounds to meet Article 250-71, 72, 81 and (B) Wiring 1) All wiring to meet Aspen Code Section 7-159 (all wiring to be enclosed within armor raceway) .2) All appliances to be grounded, - 3) Recepticals to be provided at each cord and plug (no extension cords allowed). 4) All damaged cords and plugs to be replaced. (C) Grounding 1) All 'flex' to be limited to six feet or separate ground wire provided, 2) In back unit, provide ground circuit at each receptical. (D ) Other 1) GFI recepticals required in bathroom of rear unit. 2) Switched exit light and switchable.light in each room of rear unit is required. 3) All branch wires must be protected with a circuit breaker when fed from a larger size feeder conductor. • Alice Davis M May 4, 1982 Page 2 • 4) All motors to be within sight of their disconnects or controllers, These items must be corrected and inspected for compliance prior to July 1, 1982 or electrical service will be disconnected. MEMORANDUM TO: Alice Davis, Planning Office FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Department DATE: May 4, 1982 RE: Shaw Condominiumization, Lots N, 0, P and Q, Block 81, O.A.T. ------------------------------------------------------------- Having reviewed the above application for condominiumization of the Mother Lode restaurant and made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. Prior to recordation, the plat should be amended to include the following: a. Sidewalk, curb, and gutter relative to property line. b. Indicate utility meter locations. C. Show useable portions of the second floor (adequate ceiling height, etc.) d. Show electric/communications easement on Lot Q. 2. The Engineering Department is requesting that the applicant provide an electric/communications easement on Lot Q described as follows: The Northerly 7 feet of the Easterly 19 feet of Lot Q, Block 81, Original Aspen Townsite, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado except the Easterly 9 feet thereof. 3. The applicant should obtain an encroachment license for that portion of the Mother Load which protrudes into the Hyman Avenue Right -of -Way. JH/co • • MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Alice Davis, Planning Office RE: Shaw Estate Subdivision Exception - Condominiumization DATE: April 29, 1982 Location: 314 East Hyman Avenue; Block 81, Lots N, 0, P and Q, Original Aspen Townsite Zoning: CC Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting a subdivision exception for the purpose of condominiumizing the Mother Lode Restaurant which is located on four city lots. The restaurant is located in Block 81, Lots N and 0 while Lots P and Q are currently unimproved except for minor improvements relating to the summertime use of these lots by the Mother Lode. The purpose of the condominiumization is to permit the Dorothy Koch Shaw Estate to sell the Mother Lode Restaurant to the present lessees, with the land held in common ownership. Engineering Department: The Engineering Department had the following comments regarding the submitted plat: 1. The plat submitted is not sufficient for recording and should be redone for final plat review in order to include the items required in Section 20-15 of the Code entitled "Final Plat - Contents." The applicant will have submitted the final plat by the May 4 1982 P & Z meeting and the Engineering Department will have further comments on the plat at that time. 2. The Mother Lode structure will need to obtain an encroachment license for the encroachment into the public right-of- way. 3. The Engineering Department requests that the applicant be required to grant a multi -purpose easement for electric and communication utilities. The easement's location is described in the attached memorandum from the Engineering Department. Attorney's Office: The Attorney's Office has stated that the proposed condominiumi- zation should be reviewed in accordance with Section 20-22 of the Code entitled "Condominiumization". Building Department: The Building Department has scheduled, but has not yet been able to complete a life, health and safety inspection on the Mother Lode. This inspection is required by the Code prior to P & Z's review of a condominiumization. Comments regarding the inspection will be available at the Tuesday, May 4, 1982 meeting. Planning Office Review: Section 20-22(a) of the Code requires the owner of a structure being condominiumized to give the existing tenant the right of first refusal to purchase the structure. Since the purpose of the proposal is to allow the present lessees to buy the Mother Lode, this requirement is being met. The other requirements of Section 20-22 regarding employee housing and six month minimum leases do not apply since this is an application for a commercial condominiumization. The subject property consists of the four lots located between the Wheeler Opera House and the Crystal Palace. The easterly nine feet of Lot Q, immediately east of the Wheeler • • Memo: Shaw Estate Subdivision Exception - Condominiumization Page Two April 29, 1982 Opera House is currently being condemned by the City of Aspen for the expansion of the Wheeler. This condemnation does not affect the proposed condominiumization. Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning Office recommends the approval of the request for Condominiumization of the Mother Lode Restaurant which is located at 314 East Hyman Avenue, Block 81, Lots N, 0, P and Q, subject to the following conditions: 1. The owner must obtain an encroachment license for the Mother Lode structure for the encroachment into the public right-of-way. 2. A multi -purpose easement (described in the attached, April 8, 1982, memorandum from the Engineering Department) for electric and communication utilities must be granted by the owner and shown on the final plat. Other conditions may be appropriate after further information is obtained from the Engineering Department regarding the adequacy of the final plat which has not yet been submitted. Also, conditions pertaining to the Building Department's inspection may be necessary. This information will be available at the May 4, 1982 meeting. • • DENVER, COLORADO OFFICE 555 SEVENTEENTH STREET SUITE 2900 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 TELEPHONE (303) 575-8000 TELECOPIER (303) 575-8261 BILLINGS, MONTANA OFFICE SUITE 1400 175 NORTH 27TH STREET BILLINGS, MONTANA 59101 TELEPHONE (406) 252-2166 TELECOPIER (406) 252-1669 HAND DELIVERED HOLLAND & HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW 600 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE (303) 925-3476 April 21, 1982 City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Attention: Mr. Sunny Vann Ladies and Gentlemen: WASHINGTON, D. C. OFFICE 1875 EYE STREET, N. W. SUITE 1200 WASHINGTON, D. C. 2OOO6 TELEPHONE (202) 466-7340 TELECOPIER (202) 466-7354 LARAMIE, WYOMING OFFICE HOLLAND 6 HART 6 KITE 618 GRAND AVENUE LARAMIE, WYOMING 82070 TELEPHONE(3O7) 742-8203 TELECOPIER (307) 792-7618 This letter is in amendment to our letter of March 9, 1982, requesting a subdivision exception to divide Lots N, 0, P and Q of Block 81, Aspen Townsite into two parcels, each containing two lots. Because of the problems that have been uncovered as to a subdivision exception, request is hereby made, rather, for subdivision exception approval to condominimize the Mother Lode Restaurant on Lots N and 0 as well as the undeveloped Lots P and Q. I hereby make specific reference to the second page of our letter of March 9 which explains my reasons in support of this request. These reasons apply equally to this request for condominization of the entire parcel and subsequent conveyance of the Mother Lode Restaurant as a condominium unit and, further, a conveyance of buildings to be built on the remaining lots. Please refer to the Title Commitment enclosed with our letters of March 9 and April 14 as to title of the property. Please also apply the $475.00 enclosed with that letter toward the fees required for this application for condomini- zation and inform me whether there is an excess or an additional fee is required. Thank you for your attention. CTB:go Enclosure cc: Michael D Mr. C. A. Mr. Harry Martin, Esq. S awl Very rulZyo :s, Charles T. Brandt for HOLLAND & HART • • IJOLLAND & HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW DENVER, COLORADO OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. OFFICE 555 SEVENTEENTH STREET 1875 EYE STREET, N. W. 600 EAST MAIN STREET SUITE 2900 ASPEN, COLO RADO 816141 (15 � 00 DENVER, COLDRADO 80202 I G.20006 TELEPHONE (303) 575-8000 TELEPHONE (303) 92576 E 466-7340 TELECOPIER (303) 575-8261 Ff TELECO PI 466-7354 BILLINGS, MONTANA OFFICE • PR 1 c IE, O NG OFFICE SUITE 1400 _ HO�LLAN RT 6 KITE 175 NORTH 27TH STREET ASPEN / Pjji(�N �/}GRAND AVENUE BILLINGS, MONTANA 59101 P /�NNIN^ �rrl /� ICE TELEPHONE (406) 252-2166 ^ (� p • '•./lt` (�f r&44' IE, WYOMING 82070 TELECOPIER (406) 252-1669 April 14 19 82 TELEPHONE (307) 742-8203 TELECOPIER (307) 792-7618 Ms. Alice Davis Planning & Zoning City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Shaw Subdivision Dear Ms. Davis: Please find enclosed the title commitment from Colorado West Title showing ownership of Lots P & Q, Block 81, in the Estate of Dorothy Shaw. This, with the commitment for Lots N & 0 that I sent, should sufficiently prove ownership. Thank you for your attention. Yours truly Philip R 4/tJamues for' -HO AND & HART PRJ:go Enclosure • • MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Louis Buettner, Engineering Department )�e DATE: April 8, 1982 RE: Shaw Estate Subdivision Exception --------------------------------------------------------------- After reviewing the application and inspecting the site for the above exception, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. The plat submitted is not sufficient for recording. 2. The plat submitted is an improvement survey for the structures on Lots M, N and 0 showing footprints only. 3. The following information should be shown on any plat for review. a. Title of project. b. Adjoining properties. C. Locations of curb, gutter, and sidewalk from property line or centerline of the street right-of-way. d. Utility service locations on existing structures. e. All other information required for a complete subdivision plat. 4. All approval certificates as required on subdivision plats. The structure located on Lot N will need to obtain an encroachment license for the encroachment into the public right-of-way. The engineering does hereby request the applicant to grant a multi -purpose easement for electric and communication utilities. The easement should be located as herein described: The Northerly 7.00 feet of the Easterly 19.00 feet, of Lot Q, Block 81, Original Aspen Townsite, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, except the Easterly 9.00 feet thereof. LB/co • • CITY OF ASPEN 130 south galena street aspen, colorado 81611 303-925 -2020 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 8, 1982 TO: Alice Davis FROM: Gary Esaroc RE: Shaw Estate Subdivision Exception (Lot Split) I assume this four -lot parcel merged pursuant to Section 20-4(c). A Section 20-19(b) exemption application is consistent with what we've done in the past with these lot splits. You've explained to me that the prohibition contained in Section 20-5(b) has been interpreted as not applicable to cases soh as this wherein GMP-exempt development rights are *applicable (6,000 sq. ft., single-family). There are no other issues or problems that I can see. GSE:mc CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation of Missouri, herein called the Company, for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedule A and R and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By -Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." Issued by: COLORADO WEST TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 818 Colorado Avenue, Suite 101 P. O. Box 925 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (303) 945-2271 or 945-2272 By: I' \NS� President. o tt16PONATf`=.o `• )'i'f :'� ATTEST: * ::•� CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Secretary. A thorized Officer or Agent F. 2880 CTIRB: 5-1-75 CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS 1. The term "mortgage," when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included. under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions, the Exclusions from Coverage and the Conditions and Stipulations of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the insured mortgage covered hereby, or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and Conditions and Stipulations of this Commitment. I f j 1. Effective Date: march 31, 1982 j 8 : 00 A.M. j j 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: A. ALTA Owner's Policy Proposed Insured: B. ALTA Loan Policy Proposed Insured: Bank of Aspen J 1 :F1�)' 'Ii 1 f. SCHEDULE A�+ P-02-58-82 Case No. -- Premium: Loan $1,212.00 Amount $ Amount $ 6001000.00 Amount $ 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is a fee simple, and title thereto is the effective date hereof vested in: Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw t 4. The land referred to in the Commitment is described as follows: ! Lots Lettered P and Q Block Eighty -One (81) Town of Aspen County of Pitkin State of Colorado i r 1 ( Page 1 2/18/82 gSV SCHEDULE A —PAGE 1 — NO. g F. 2881 SCHEDULE BM SECTION 1 P-02-58-82 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for fhe estate or interest to be insu Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to wit: 1. Deed of Trust from the estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County securing Bank of Aspen. 2. Release of the Colorado Inheritance Tax Lien upon the land described in Schedule A in the Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw, Deceased. 3. Order of the Court in Probate No. 79PR4 of the District Court of Pitkin County authorizing the within contemplated transaction. NOTE: This Documentation seems necessary since documents now of record appear to limit the actions of Harry F. Shaw as personal representative of the Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw to other property belonging to the estate. Item (c) Payment of all taxes, charges or assessments, levied and assessed against the subject premises which are due and payable. No Tax Certificate ordered Item (d) Additional requirements, if any, disclosed• below: 1. Release of a Deed of Trust from harry E. Shaw as Personal Representative of the Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County securing the Bank of Aspen, said deed dated January 14, 1982 and recorded January 19, 1982 as Document No. 238437 in Book 419 at page 979. NOTE: If the above Deed of Trust is not released it will appear as an Exception under Schedule B of the Final Policy. 2. Release of a Lien by Building Components against the City of Aspen purporting to affect Lot Q of Block 81, City of Aspen, said Lien recorded March 291 1982 as Document No. 240217 in Book 424 at rage 220. SCHEDULE B -SECTION 1 - PAGE 1 - NO. Page 2 F. 2882 R. 9/76 �.-... �...__�o_i...-.+. - .._e:.___•x*..._a�...,� _ _..es�ee....w...:it:.,:.:.. �' - ..ice - - ` :.rt .a.-`..�.+..a.:a�ei+.�.e�+d.a.�+a�.a SCHEDULE P-02-58-82 SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction c the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of th premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the publi records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequen to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgag thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes or special assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the public records. 7. In addition, the oNvner's policy will be subject to the mortgage, if any, noted under item one of Section 1 of Schedule B hereof. 8. Reservations and exceptions contained in United States Patents to the described property including: No title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper, or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws; and provided further, that this deed is hereby made and declared to be subject to all the conditions, limitations and restrictions contained in Section 2366 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, so far as the same is applicable thereto, all as common to the land contained in the original Townsite of Aspen. 9. Rights or claims of any parties in possession of parts or portions of the described property under leases or rental agreements on either long term or month to month agreements and any and all assignments thereof including Book 415 at Page 887. 10. Taxes or special assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the public records, and possible liens, if any, for taxes or special assessments which are not required to be certified to the County Treasurer to become liens on the land described herein. 11. Any unpaid taxes and 1981 taxes, a lien not yet due NOTE: In the event of payment of any unpaid taxes, Tax Receipt must be furnished to the Company issuance of any Final Policy. and payable. a copy of the prior to the SCHEDULE B -SECTION 2 -PAGE 1 - NO. Page 3 F_ 9RA3 R_ 9/76 HOI.LAND & MART ATTORNEYS AT LAW DENVER, COLORADO OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. OFFICE 555 SEVENTEENTH STREET 1875 EYE STREET, N. W. SUITE 2900 600 EAST MAIN STREET --rN SUITE 1200 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 WASH INGTON, D. C. 2OOO6 TELEPHONE (303) 575-8000 TELEPHONE (303) 925-3476 E (202) 466-7340 TELECOPIER (303) 575-8251 R (202) 466-7354 BILLINGS, MONTANA OFFICE WYOMING OFFICE M 3C(rRAMIE, SUITE 1400 D 5 HART S KITE 175 NORTH 27TH STREET �N. PA RtNE .- BILLINGS, MONTANA 59101 RAND AVENUE TELEPHONE (406) 252-2166 ASPEN / PITKIN WYOMING 82070 TELECOPIER (406) 252-1669 E PHONE (307) 742-8203 PLANNING QFFLUELECOPIER (307) 792-7618 April 12, 1982 Ms. Alice Davis Planning & Zoning City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Shaw Subdivision Dear Ms. Davis: Please find enclosed the title commitment for Lots N & 0 of the Shaw Subdivision dated February 9, 1982. The commitment for Lots P & Q is underway at Colorado West and I will send it as soon as we receive it. Thank you for your help over the phone today. Yours t�uly, p4il-i =,,D �=t James f 6x H & HART PRJ:go Enclosure i 01 I i 1. Effective Date: Februaryy 9, 1982 8:00 A.F4 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: SCHEDULE A Case No. P-•10-519-81 Revised A. ALTA Owner's Policy Proposed Insured: Gordon L. Whitmer and Howard F. Ross B. ALTA Loan Policy Proposed Insured: C. AmountS 300,000.00 Amount S _ Amount $ } 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is a fee simple, and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw 4. The land referred to in the Commitment is described as follows: Lots Lettered 14, O Block Eighty -One (81) Townsite of Aspen County of Pitkin State of Colorado 2/18/22 gsv SCHEDULE A - PAGE 1 - NO. Page I F. 2831 SCHEDULE B SECTION 7 P-10-519-81-Revised REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to wit: 1. Release of the Colorado Inheritance Tax Lien upon the land described in Schedule A in the Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw, Deceased. 2. Order of the Court in Probate No. 79PR4 of the District Court of Pitkin County authorizing the within contemplated transaction. NOTE: This Documentation seems necessary since documents now of record appear to limit the actions of Harry E. Shaw as personal representative of the Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw to other property belonging to the estate. 3. Deeds or evidence of proper legal proceedings, approved by an attorney for Chicago Title Insurance Company, disposing of the interests of the following named parties with regard to Lots N and O, Block 81, Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, to wit: Jno. McKenzie, John MacKenzie, John McKenzie, John Mckenzie, John Mackenzie; Archibald McKenzie, Mary Baer, John Baer, John Thorn, Clavel & Company, Louisa Post, Louisa Fort, S-_C. Stinemeyer, Estate of Wm. R. Shaw also known as William R. Shaw, Robert Shaw, A. McKenzie. MARKETABILITY: If a quiet title suit is necessary, the policy issued will guarantee fee ownership and possession in accordance with its provisions, but will not insure the title as marketable until the decree has been procured and remained of record for six months during which no action has been initiated to set it aside or otherwise impair its effect. 4. Personal Representative Deed from the Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw to Gordon L. Whitmer and Howard F. Ross conveying the property described in Schedule A hereto. Item (c) Payment of all taxes, charges or assessments, levied and assessed against the subject premises which are due and payable. No Tax Certificate ordered. Item (d) Additional requirements, if any, disclosed below: SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 - PAGE 1 - NO. Page 2 F-. 2882 R. 9/76 -<..-._.�-.._:—:.�..........�._.�..,-....e_._�.�.-�....,;.� s«._.3rrr..�ra. .. .•�,- �... 3!u'_..-1^0.�e...�±.—�:�.�,.: - .: :.:sue...,... - tr1.W.,..� - ... SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 P--10-519-81-Revised EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: I. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to alien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records- 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by- this Commitment. 6. Taxes or special assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the public records. 7. In addition, the owner's policy will be subject to the mortgage, if any, noted under item one of Section 1 of Schedule B hereof. 8. Reservations and exceptions contained in United States Patents to the described property including: No title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper, or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws; and provided further, that this deed is hereby made and declared to be subject to all the conditions, limitations and restrictions contained in Section 2366 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, so far as the same is applicable thereto, all as common to the land contained in the original Townsite of Aspen. 9. Rights or claims of any parties in possession of parts or portions of the described property under leases or rental agreements on either long term or month to month agreements and any and all assignments thereof including Book 415 at Page 887. 10. Financing Statement from Whitmer--Ross, Ltd to First National Rank in Aspen recorded October 8, 1981 as Document No. 236296 in Rook 415 at Page 653 affecting Lots N and O. 11. Taxes or special assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the public records, and possible liens, if any, for taxes or special assessments which are not required to be certified to the County Treasurer to become liens on the land described herein. 12. Any unpaid taxes and 1981 taxes, a lien not yet due NOTE: In the event of payment of any unpaid taxes, Tax Receipt must be furnished to the Company issuance of any Final Policy. and payable. a copy of the prior to the SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 - PAGE 1 - NO. P'.age 3 F. 1863 R. 9/76 March 9, 1982 liAND DLL'IVERED City of Aspen Planning and. Zoning Cor,=ission Cwty/County Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 istte tion : :Mr. Sunnv Vann Ladies and Gentlemen: This firm revresents the z state of Dorothy Noch S.1haw, owner of four z:spen Townsite lots located cn t1he north sic;e of Last Flvman iivenue i t",'te_dia rely ea Ft of the W:2eel r Opo--ra Kouse. This property consists of Lots N, 0, P and 1 , Block 81. Five p rants of ;.lpine :surveys' 1riproverien t : iirvey covering the. se e: our lots accompany this letter. A,.i excerption from the definition of subdivision is hereby re4oested pursuant to Section 20-19 (h.) of the City of As --t n Subdivision Regulations to permit the division of these four Aspen Townsite lots into two separate parcels, each consisting of two Towas .t e lots. The two desired parcels are: (1) Lots 14 and c, upon which is situated th Mo-t- her Lode estaurant and (:') Lots P and k which are presently uninproved except for minor ir-Provem-eats re.le.ting,. to the sui:vertiwte use of thes-F-! lots by the Not'her Lode Restaurant. The purpose cx this division :is to permit the Shaw Lstate to convey the 1•_other Loose Rest%-kura.nt to the present lessees. I furtizer enclose a Titlr, insurance Coo, Lmitment coverin these four lots issued by Colorado Pest Title Insurance Coh ,_:}ashy . The C.oTCmitI-.1ent shows that title to this pror.-erty is vec-ted in the t:.rte of: Dorothy .,f%ch f;ha , (k;ec^: paracrar 3, Schedule ":} . Also enclosed is our check in the amount of $4 i5.00 to cover the City of Asper, Exception Frme. City of Aspen Attn ! Mr. unnlr Vann March 9, 19C2 Fane Two in support of the exception, Z offer the fC!"'O yin cgt 1. The proposed division, of land (four I.Pownsite Lots into two separFte and divided parcels) is not within the intent and purpose of the Aspen Sub- division Regulations as set forth in Section: 20-1, et seq. he division Goes nothing in and of itself to violate the oreerly, efficient and integrated deve lorpm ent of the City of hspen, cause public services to be provided by governmental improver -tent procraias, nor goes it violate ant- of the other stated purposes of said subdivision .Regulations. 2. Since the proi�erty involved ccnsists of lots within the original hspen Townsite, no good purpose would be served for requiring the onner of the proL>erty to coni-ply with the strict applicati o: of the provisions of the City of Aspen Subdivision Regulations. 3. Other owners of Townsite lots si_:ailarly sit- ated heave_ been perraitte6 to convey adjacent and con- tiguous lots following exemption or exception; to deny this application would deprive the ov..n3er of the reaso,aable usQ of its land Gnd: corny a su:sstantial property right, the right to convey a r)ortion of its property for development consistent with the City of Aspen `.onina Code. 4. The granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area for any su?;SEgu.ent development of Lots P and Q (following such excetition) will be in conformity, inclur7inc1 obtaining approval under the Growth t'anagement Quota Syste.ra, with the provisions of the City of Aspen 'Zoning Code. Should you require any additional information or have any questions about cie application, please contact rie at your earliest convenience. CTB::`.w Enclosures cc: r.iichael . Martin, �:r. C. A. Vidal Mr. Harry Shaw Esc. Very truly, yours, Charles Bral.ut for & %Ai i • • DENVER, COLORADO OFFICE 555 SEVENTEENTH STREET SUITE 2900 DENVER, COLORADO 60202 TELEPHONE (303) 575-8000 TELECOPIER (303) 575-8261 BILLINGS, MONTANA OFFICE SUITE 1400 175 NORTH 27TH STREET BILLINGS, MONTANA 59101 TELEPHONE (406) 252-2166 TELECOPIER (406) 252-1669 HOLLAND & HAFT ATTORNEYS AT LAW 600 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE (303) 925-3476 CHARLES T. BRANDT March 9, 1982 (303) 925-3476 HAND DELIVERED City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission City/County Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Attention: Mr. Sunny Vann Ladies and Gentlemen: WASHINGTON, D. C. OFFICE 1875 EYE STREET, N. W. SUITE 1200 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20006 TELEPHONE (202) 466.7340 TELECOPIER (202) 466.7354 LARAMIE, WYOMING OFFICE HOLLAND 6 HART 6 KITE 618 GRAND AVENUE LARAMIE, WYOMING 82070 TELEPHONE (307) 742-8203 TELECOPIER (307) 792-7618 This firm represents the Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw, owner of four Aspen Townsite lots located on the north side of East Hyman Avenue immediately east of the Wheeler Opera House. This property consists of Lots N, 0, P and Q, Block 81. Five prints of Alpine Surveys' Improvement Survey covering these four lots accompany this letter. An exception from the definition of subdivision is hereby requested pursuant to Section 20-19(b) of the City of Aspen Subdivision Regulations to permit the division of these four Aspen Townsite lots into two separate parcels, each consisting of two Townsite lots. The two desired parcels are: (1) Lots N and 0 upon which is situated the Mother Lode Restaurant and (2) Lots P and Q which are presently unimproved except for minor improvements relating to the summertime use of these lots by the Mother Lode Restaurant. The purpose of this division is to permit the Shaw Estate to convey the Mother Lode Restaurant to the present lessees. I further enclose a Title Insurance Commitment covering these four lots issued by Colorado West Title Insurance Company. The Commitment shows that title to this property is vested in the Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw (see paragraph 3, Schedule A). Also enclosed is our Check in the amount of $475.00 to cover the City of Aspen Exception Fee. . 0 HOLLAND & HART 0 City of Aspen Attn: Mr. Sunny Vann March 9, 1982 Page Two In support of the exception, I offer the following: 1. The proposed division of land (four Townsite Lots into two separate and divided parcels) is not within the intent and purpose of the Aspen Sub- division Regulations as set forth in Section 20-1, et seq. The division does nothing in and of itself to violate the orderly, efficient and integrated development of the City of Aspen, cause public services to be provided by governmental improvement programs, nor does it violate any of the other stated purposes of said Subdivision Regulations. 2. Since the property involved consists of lots within the original Aspen Townsite, no good purpose would be served for requiring the owner of the property to comply with the strict application of the provisions of the City of Aspen Subdivision Regulations. 3. Other owners of Townsite lots similarly situated have been permitted to convey adjacent and con- tiguous lots following exemption or exception; to deny this application would deprive the owner of the reasonable use of its land and deny a substantial property right, the right to convey a portion of its property for development consistent with the City of Aspen Zoning Code. 4. The granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area for any subsequent development of Lots P and Q (following such exception) will be in conformity, including obtaining approval under the Growth Management Quota System, with the provisions of the City of Aspen Zoning Code. Should you require any additional information or have any questions about the application, please contact me at your earliest convenience. Ver truly yours, arles T. Bra t CTB:mw for HOLLAND & HART Enclosures cc: Michael D. Martin, Esq. Mr. C. A. Vidal Mr. Harry Shaw MEMORANDUM TO: Paul Taddune, City Attorney City Engineering Department Fire Marshal/Building Department FROM: Alice Davis, Planning Office RE: Shaw Subdivision Exception (Condominiumization) DATE: April 26, 1982 Attached is a revised application submitted by the Estate of Dorothy Koch Shaw for Block 81, Lots N, 0, P & Q of Aspen (the Mother Lode Restaurant). This item is to be reviewed for a Subdivision Exception (Condominiumization) instead of a Lot Split as formerly referred to you. The previously -scheduled date, May 4, 1982, still holds for the P & Z meeting. Please respond as soon as possible with referral comments, due to the late date of this request. The condominium plat will be forwarded to you when it arrives. Note to Building Department: Since this is an existing building, life, health and safety inspection must be done prior to the presentation of this item to the Planning and Zoning Commission. John, I will be in touch with you regarding this request. ORDINANCE NO.. _-- (Series of 1978) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIIE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION 20-5(b) WHICH PROHIBITS APPROVAL OF ANY SUBDIVISION REQUEST IN THE ABSENCE OF ISSUANCE OF A DEVELOPMENT ALLOTT%ENT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE X (GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM) OF THE .ASPEN ZONING CODE. WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council did, with the enactment of Ordinance No. 48 (Series of 1977) adopt an annual quota system for new residential, lodge and commercial development within the city of Aspen, and further providing that no building permit shall issue unless and until an applj,-ant shall have been awarded a development allotment pu.i- t to the procedures therein established, and WHEREAS, said Ordinance 48 (Seriesof 1977) did exempt from its application, the construction of one single family or duplex structure on a subdivided lot only if subdivided prior to the effective date of the Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to further implement the objectives of Ordinance 48 by insuring that subdivision activity occurs only if and when an applicant for sub- division approval has been awarded a development allotment so as to preclude the creation of subdivision lots (or other separate interests) with no development potential, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended by the addition of a new subsection (b) of Section 20-5 to read as follows: 0 (b) Development Allotment. No subdivision shall be approved (nor exemption or exception granted) pursuant to the provisions of phis Chapter 20 unless'or until the applicant shall have been awarded a development allotment pursuant to Article X of Chapter 24 hereof (Growth Management Quota System) whenever such allotment- is required for the proposed development of the subdivided land. On receiving a development allotment the applicant for subdivision approval may be deemed by the planning office to have satisfied the conceptual presentation requirements of these subdivision regulations, and the office may authorize the applicant to proceed dir-ctly to preliminary plat review, all as provided in Section 24-10.3(f). Section 2 That the Municipal Code to the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended by the renumbering of the existing subsection (b), (c) and (d) of Section 20-5 as subsections (c) , (d) and (e) respectively. Section 3 If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Ordinance which can be given effect within the invalid provisions of applications, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable. Section 4 That a public hearing on this Ordinance shall be held on AI aAe-1,) I/„3 , 1978 at 5 P.M. in the City Council I' Chambers, City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the Aspen City Council at its meeting held ATTEST: KathrynA. . Hauter City Clerk BY: i:. Michael Behrendt Mayor Pro Tem FINALLY APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Aspen City Council Cy on / ll eZ - e— L /� - ► 1978. ��_ ATTEST: ,Stacy Stan ey, f I' �- r Mayor Kathryn 9f. Hauter City Clerk 0 0 Regular Meeting Rspr�n City Council Sept:embei 24, 1979 Councilman Collins said the purpose here is to preserve the integrity of the tourist zone. The tourist zone has been watered down, in the 11;t. few years; it has been amended to permit residences. Councilmar. Collins said if this: lodge is condominiumized, the city will lose the type of activity associated with the tourist. The end result will weaken the accommo- dations the city wants to sec at the bottom of the hill. Muller pointed out that putting in kitchens would be a violation of GMP, and this will keep the Tipple short term. Councilman Isaac moved to approve the subi.vision exemption for the Tipple with the follow- ing conditions; (1) enter into a contract stating the 10 units will be short term and be registered with a central reservations agency, (2) there will be on -site management, (3) no building permits be issued for kitchen additions, and (4) next meeting look at writing up an ordinance to control lodges; seconded by Councilman Parry. Ms. Faulkner pointed out that the lodge is too small to have on -site management. Councilman Isaac said one of the units could be for on -site management. Councilman Isaac changed condition (2) to be local management, not on -site. Councilman Isaac said not all units had to be under one manager. Councilmembers Parry, Isaac, and Michael in favor; Councilmembers Van Ness, Collins and Mayor Edel opposed. Motion NOT carried. Councilman van Ness moved to approve the exemption from the definition of subdivision with no restrictions; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. Councilmembers Parry, Van Ness, and Michael in favor; Councilmembers Isaac, Collins and Mayor Edel opposed. Motion NOT carried. Councilman Van Ness moved to approve the exemption from the definition of subdivision with the conditions that they register with Aspen Reservations or any other duly accredited reservations bureau located in Pitkin County, Colorado; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilmembers Van Ness, Parry, and Michael in favor; Mayor Edel, Councilmembers Isaac and Collins opposed. Motion NOT carried. Councilman Collins moved to table. Motion DIES for lack of a second. Councilman Isaac moved to approve the subdivision exemption with the condition:: original motion; seconded by Councilman Van Ness. Councilmembers Van Ness, Is:: Parry in favor; Councilman Collins, Mayor Edel opposed. Motion carried: SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Beriro -Richard Grice told Council this request is to divide three lots on Hopkins street; these are improved with a brick Victorian and some shacks. The HPC has given permission. to Subdivisio remove the shacks. Grice said this application does not affect the GMP because :tingle Ts:cr2>ption family residences are not allowed in the CC zone; commercial space is not allo%nd without. Deriro a development allotment. This approval will not result in development without additional review. The engineering department has recommended approval subject to the condition there be an agreement that the applicant either construct an 8 foot sidewalk or a - tree to do so within 12 months. City Attorney recommends approval without condition. After much discussion, P & Z decided there should only be a sidewalk over the middle lot as it is already developed, and the other two might be developed separately. The planning office feels sidewalks are a standard part of subdivision regulations and do feel it is appropriate. Grice recommended a sidewalk be developed on all three lots either immediately or within 12 months in the event they anticipate development. Peter Van Domelin, representing the applicant, told Council the applicant wishes to sell the lots perhaps separately or together and wants to keep his options open. van Domelin told Council he dial not feel the planning office should be given a carte blanche in setting conditions on subdivision exemptions. Van Domelin pointed out Beriro is only requesting to be able to sell the lots; not to develop. The paving of a sidewalk has no relationship with the request to sell the lots individually. There is no sidewalk on either side of the developed lot. Stock suggested they be asked to add a covenant to the property that if the city creates a sidewalk improvement district, they would enter into that district. Van Domelin said he felt that was fair. Councilman Van Ness moved to approve the subdivision exemption with the only condition that in the event a sidewalk district is formed that this property would agree they would join in a binding covenant; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried - SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Hibberd Grice told Council this is a.request for a subdivision exemption for a duplex at North Subdivision Sevent and North streets. The property is zoned R-6 with 9,000 square feet. The engin- Frerlption Bering department requests an easement for drainage and that both units have water meters Hibberd installed. City Attorney Stock reviewed this application, and P &'Z reviewed this and recommended approval subject to engineering's conditions and that the property be deed restricted to six month minimum leases, and that the north unit be deea restricted by covenant limiting price and occupancy for a period of five years. Councilman Behrendt suggested that a street, sidewalk and curb improvement agreement be added. Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the subdivision exemption bay.od upon the restrictions outlined by Grice, and the applicant would agree to join any improvement districts for street, sidewalk, gutter and curb; seconded by Councilman Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Collins asked that the building department check out the duplex for an extra third unit. Councilman Collins said this unit was advertised this summer, and he would like a report from the building inspector. SUBDIVISION F.XEhiiPTIOPl - Horizons III Grice told Council this property is located at the intersection of Snowbunny and Cemetery Lana. Engineering department recommends zpproval having only one curb cut; there are fi:ilxlivision prer..ent.ly two. Also sop:,..rat.e c'_cc.tric r_ncl water meters he relu.irc:0 !'c-lr each Unit, and that they enter into a curb, ar.6 :?i ('C-.:i lk iI;tprovement agr�ei--;ent. This Lave never I: izons 1!T Regular Meeting Aspen City Council oune 9, 1980 r-� VENDING SERVICE APPLICATION - Chip Chip Hoori,y Polly Daily, representing Chip Chip llooi'ay, told council they )lave, moved to Hymart Street. Vendin t They feel they have a unique product for tourists and locals alike and would like to apply application for a limited permit to vend at baseball ga;r:c!:;, malls, rugby gages. Chip Chip Hooray doE:: Chip Ch.: p supply cookies to the music tent and the Design Conference. Ms. Daily presented a render- Hooray ing of the push carts to by used by Chip Chip Hooray, and this w-ould be a colorful thing to be going through the mall. Ms. Daily said they would take care of their or:n litter. They would be selling only cookies from the carts. City Attorney Stock pointed out that vending on public rights -of -way is not allo-weed unless Council gives a license for that. Council can give a year contract with certa.in restrictions; the question to Council is a policy matter. In the past Council has tried to avoid a proliferation of these and has wanted the community to remain unique. Council must decide whether this type vending is consistent with policy in the past or is inappropriate for the mall area. Councilman Behrendt said historically Council has turned down people who want to vend in the mall. The only person with a vending license vends only from the streets. Mayor Edel" agreed Council is trying to give unique preference, and in the time Chip Chip Hooray has supplied a unique atmosphere to Aspen. Councilman Behrendt pointed out this contract will allow vending in the parks and in the malls. City Attorney Stock told Council they would be making a specific finding of fact on the reputation of this business. This contract does not create a situation where Council would have to approve every vendor before them. There is a provision that Council could charge a fee if they wanted. If Council wants to stay consistent with their philosophy, not vending on the mall, the document could be amended. Ms. Daily told Council they have had many requests to have cookies at the various games; the malls are not particularly important. They would like to go around with their carts and not block traffic. Mayor Edel suggested being restricted to the alleyway .:Il.ong Wagner park. Ms. Daily said there and the Rio Grande would be all right. Councilwoman Michael said if Council is going to give the ability to sell, they should give the flexibility on where to sell. Councilman Isaac said he would prefer somewhat stationary rather than pushing the carts around. Stock told Council they can review these contracts yearly. Councilman Isaac said he would prefer to have this contract up the end of October. Councilwoman Michael moved to approve the vending contract between Chip Chip Hoory and the City of Aspen until October 31, 1980, deleting in the contract under #1(a) and (b) and prohibiting Chip Chip hooray from using the mall and adding under #3 indemity insurance to the limit of $400,000; seconded by Councilwoman Collins. All in favor, motion carried. LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWAL - Paragon Parlor Liquor license City Clerk Koch brought up one after hours drinking report from the police dep- reneBuilding Inspector Meyring submitted a memorandum describing a zoning violatir e Para Jon di existing. Meyring told Council the basemenet is being used in violation of t': ;.,)!:t_t U ordinance and a signed agreement between the owner of the Paragon and the c 0.y. Joe Edwards, representing the Paragon, told Council what Meyring is trying to do through the liquor license procedures is not appropriate and is not a criteria for granting or denial of the liquor license. Edwards told Council the owner of the Paragon went to construct a sub- basement below the existing basement. The zoning code says one is not allowed to expand the usable business floor area of the operation. This space can be used for mechanical equipment, air conditioning, heaters, etc. A building permit application was filed which delineated a use for the sub -basement is a mechanical device to pump up liquor to dispense alcohol and drinks for a computer machine at the bar. Edwards told Council they have spent money installing the equipment. Meyring decided this was storage of liquor and a violation of the zoning. By reliance of issuance of a permit by Meyring, the Paragon spent a lot of money. Edwards said the city attorney had. -agreed with their position that the issuance of the permit by the city and the applicant's reliance on it, bound the city so that they could not come back and argue this point. i! City Attorney Stock told Council the criteria on renewal is the reputation of the operator of the business. A continued course of conduct which was iv violation of the law would have some merit. Stock said he does not agree with the building inspector's position on this particular item. Stock said there is no clear cut mechanical definition in the code.' This mechanical drink dispensor is a new type of device, and when Stock reviewed this, he felt the computer pump was a mechanical device and use of the subgrade basement for it is an appropriate use and not in violation of the city's code. However, this area can not; be used for storage of liquor bottles. Tom Dunlop told Council this plan review has gone on since 1977; there are constant revisions. Everytime a set of plans is approved, something changes and invalidates that approval. Dunlop said he had, hopefully, a final set of plans. Councilman Van Ness said the only issue is whether the equipment fits into the definition of mechanical, which is not a very good definition. Councilman Van Ness said he felt this fit into the definition although not very clear cut. Councilwoman Michael moved to approve the liquor license renewal for the Paragon; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor., Councilman Collins abstained. Motion carried. Councilwoman Michael said she would like to see this get cleared up soon. PECIAL EVENT PEM4IT - Aspen Rugby Club Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the events permits for June 21, 28; July 5, 19; August 2, 9; September 2, 21, and 22 at Wagner Park; with the prevision the permits are continnent upon them policing Lhe field to the satisfaction of the city manage; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All in favor, motion carried. St1tiY.1VAS�.Cn ?'r opo s a 1 . :\c3;Yti c• to acr.uirc �.a:ss Cl- llets SUBDIVISION FXEMPT1011 - Swiss Chalets Councilman Behrendt asked if tl,is were the other half of the Cantrup housinc., Chuck Brandt, repro::enting tho applicant, told Council Cantrup has a contras 7 of the 9 lots anti they nec.0 lot split to break off the lo'.i. Special Lve_nt Pe''.nait Rugby Club •e I 0 .0 .. i Regular :"e,cating :•.^pen City COUrlCil June 9, 1980 Richard Gr.ice,pIanning office, told Council this is a request for exception from the subdivision procedures. This ha+s bcen to P & 7, who granted them an exception from subdivision subject to the conditions of the city engineer department. The proposal is to subdivide 9 lots, take out the 7 that contain the Swiss Chalet and leave the two that contain the single family re:*idence. Both planning office and engineering recom~and; approval subject to the two memoranda in the packet dated May 15 and May 30, which is the final. plat review memo. . Brandt stated the applicant did not have any objections to the conditions. Councilwoman Michael moved to approve the Swiss Chalet subdivision exception with the engineering department provisos in memos of May 15 and May 30; seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilman Isaac asked if the developer of the 7 lots would be going through the whole process. Grice said any development on those lots would go through growth management approval. jl All in favor, motion carried. Subdivision SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION - Bill Clark Fbumption Bill Clark ;, Richard Grice told Council this requests subdivision exemption for property which contains two single family detached residences. There is no historical rental history. The engineering department recommends approval on a resubmission of the improvement survey i and an agreement to enter into an approvement district for sidewalk, curb and gutter. ,I The attorney recommends approval with the minimum six month lease restriction. The P & ij Z recommended approval with the six month lease restriction and compliance with the engineering department's memo. Councilman Collins moved to approve subdivision exemption subject to the conditions of ; `j engineering and six month minimum lease restriction; seconded by Councilman Behrendt. All in favor, motion carried. �j HIGHWAY 82 P & Z RESOLUTION Highway 82 alternative 1Karen Smith, planning director, told Council this resolution comes to then from P & Z alignments at the instigation of Iians Gramiger who appeared before P & Z urging that now is the time to deal with the issue of alternative alignments of highway 82 into town. The implications for the community are more immediate now because of things like the Marolt development. A decision heeds to be made where the alignments ,:re going to be made so developments affected by the decision can plan the development. P & Z's resolution urges li Council to do what they can to facilitate the process in deciding the aligrment; this process will involve the City,.Pitkin County and the state highway department. ! Ms. Smith reported the state highway department has agreed to do an engineering fcasibilitl study which is the last phase in determining alternative alighnments. There has been a battery of studies leading up to this. j Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the P & Z's resolution; seconded by Councilman II Parry. Councilman Collins asked how this fit into the master plan. Ms. Smith said there are several transportation plans suggesting various alternatives. This engineering feasibilit) ,i study is a detailed implementation of the previous studies. it All in favor, motion carried. !I+ Councilwoman Michael moved to place Aspen Institute up on the agenda; seconded by Council- man Parry. All in favor, motion carried. Council recessed for 10 minutes jl ORDINANCE #21, SERIES OF 1980 - Aspen Institute SPA Approval i Ord. 21, 1980 ' Aspen Institute Olof Hedstrom, Chairman of P & Z, told Council they had recommended approval and a sub - SPA approval Sequent action was a resolution which places some restrictions on the approval. Hedstrom told Council there was not uniformity nor agreement amongst the members of the P & Z. I The P & Z recognizes the value and contribution and benefits that the Institute affords this community, and wanted to encourage a favorable resolution of the problem. At the (� same time, the Commission is charged with the responsibility of weighing land use j community impacts of any development whether favorable or unfavorable and they should point out restrictions to minimize as fas as possible any adverse effects of development. 1; i Hedstrom said this resolution did not reflect the unanimous opinion of any member. The vote was not unanimous; -it was close. This is not exactly a compromise but perhaps a medium position and is to call to Council's attention items of serious concern expressed by Commission members. Lee Pardee, P & Z member, had said he was not going to participate in Institute discussion: because he was being sued personally. Prior to the second meeting, the Institute filed a release of that personal liability. Pardee said he was not informed of the release or the meeting. Pardee was active in the following meeting, however, he was told he could ' not vote on the Resolution because that had been voted upon a` the previous m^eting but could be active in the discussion. Pardee told Council Commission members arc most concerned about full -day tourist use and deleting the wort primarily from that discussion. Council decided to go through the P & Z resolution along side of Council's ordinancO. to see if Council wanted the changes included. M'. Smith told Council _the P & Z resolution represent an attempt: to recooniZe a negotiated settlement and to perform their fur.0 ion to r.e;iew lard use impacts. The P & Z has l-ricd to mitigate. coming up the changing nature of the SPA; they have taken acknowledg.i aspects of that Settlement Regular Meeting Aspen Piannina and Zoning Commission September 4, 1979 Peppermint Tree, Smith introduced the application. She stated the applicant Use Determination wishes to locate a candy store/ice cream shop in the C-1 district. The C-1 zone includes uses that are not primarily tourist oriented. The P&Z must find that a candy store is so similar to the list of permitted uses that it ought to have been on the list. Smith noted that candy stores are listed in other zones and she felt it was not ignored in the preparation of this list. She also noted the applicant stated in their letter that they wish this location because of the prospect of tourist traffic. They estimate their percentage of business as 65% tourist, 35% local. She noted their previous location was in the Commercial Core and their percentage of business would be based on that location. The use is generally acknowledged as a local oriented business. Based on all this information, the Planning Office recom- mends against this use in this zone. Hunt questioned their rationale in approving the Chocolate Soldier. Smith said the minutes note that it is not a sit- down restaurant facility. Mabel Macdonald said their business caters to locals as well as tourists. Hunt also noted the Chocolate Soldier is just up the street from this proposed location. Klar did not feel they could deny this application when they had approved the similar application a few years ago. She felt they must keep a better eye on this type of application. Pardee moved to allow the Peppermint Tree as a conditional use in the C-1 zone with the reasoning being that this is not food service but retail sales and things that are pack- aged (candy, etc), are much more similar to a retail sale and the conditional use does not include the retail sales of cones and that this is established as a precedent for future applications and further move to set a conditional use hearing for as soon as possible, Hunt seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Beriro Subdivision Grice introduced the application. The applicant wishes to Exemption separate three 3,000 square foot lots. Two lots are vacant, the third and middle lot is occupied by a Victorian. The minimum lot size for the zone is 3,000 square feet, single family residences are not allowed in the C-C zone. The gran Cj this exemption wi L .zesilt in no develoQment. The City Engineer is concerned that there is no sidewalk: and requests an 8' sidewalk. The City Attorney recommends approval. The Planning Office recommends approval subject to the construction of an 8' sidewalk across all three lots or, in the event that the property is developed in the next 12 months, the owner agree to enter into an agreement for the construction of the sidewalks. Klar noted that, if they require a sidewalk now, if there is construction in the future, they would have to tear it up for utilities, etc. Buettner agreed that they would have to tear it up and noted this was the reason for the sidewalk4 improvement agreement. Harvey felt it an undue hardship that they construct a sidewalk that will be torn up. Peter Van Domelen, representing the applicant, noted there will always be a gap in the sidewalk since the sidewalk across the parking lot of Bu oc s is not Paved. The a ant wishes to sell the two its surruunuing tFe' Vic- torian since a ear own t is structur fine building is nnot-in suitable condition for relocation. Hunt moved to recommend exemption from strict application subdivision regulations applied to the Beriro subdivision of Lots D, E, and F, Block 24, City and Townsite of Aspen, provided that the owner construct an 8' sidewalk across rn Ma BRAD►ORD PUBLISHING CO., DENVER RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission September 4, 1979 Lots E within 12 months of Council approval of this exemp- tion, Pardee seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Hibberd Grice introduced the application. The property is located Subdivision at the corner of North 7 and North Street. The applicant Exemption requests condominiumization. City Engineering recommends approval subject to the granting of an easement for drainag, and the installation of water meters by April 1, 1900. The rent is .47/square feet. The Planning Office recommends approval subject to the conditions of the City Engineer, the property being deed restricted to six month minimum leases, the notice and option provisions of Section 20-22(a and further that the north unit be deed restricted by covenant limiting both price and occupancy of the north unit for a period of five years. Harvey moved to recommend exemption from strict application of the subdivision regulations as applied to the Hibberd Subdivision of a duplex on Lot G, H, and I, Block 8, City of Aspen, provided that 1) both units comply with the six month minimum lease with no more than two shorter tenancies per year and is so deed restricted, 2) the granting of a 10' drainage easement along the westerly boundary of Lot G between North Street and the alley, 3) that individual water meters are installed prior to sale of either unit in any case no later than 90 days after Council approval of this exemption, 4) that the north unit be deed restricted by covenant limiting both price and occupancy for a period of five years to the moderate and middle income guidelines as set by the City of Aspen, Pardee seconded. All in favor motion approved. Horizons III, Grice introduced the application. City Engineering notes Subdivision that they propose two driveways which is not consistent wit Exemption the City code. They also wish the applicant to install separate electric and water meters and to enter into an improvement district for the construction of curb, gutter and sidewalks, Since this is a new unit, it cannot fall under the rental guidelines. The City Attorney and Plannin office recommends approval subject to the six month minimum lease restriction with no more than two shorter tenancies per year and subject to the City Engineer's comments. Pardee moved to recommend exemption from strict application of the subdivision regulations as applied to the Horizons III subdivisions subject to the property being held deed restricted for six month minimum lease term, no more than two shorter tenancies in any calendar year and subject to the comments of the City Engineer in his memo of August 14, Harvey seconded. All in favor with the exception of Hunt, motion approved. Tipple Lodge Hunt asked that they add that this subdivision may poten- Resolution tially reduce the number of tourist units and place adverse pressure on surrounding zones for tourist accommodation. Mrs. Faulkner read a formal statement to the commission appealing to them for the approval of this subdivision. The Commission thanked her for the statement and for their honesty in the deliberation of this very important issue. Klar apologized for confusing the Tipple Inn and the _'ipp': Lodge. Hunt felt his main problem with the application w_ the disintegration of management. Harvey was disappointed that they could enforce on -site management but could not force an owner to short-term his unit. Uiin t- mnvoA +-n annrnva Rc,anlntinn 74-1 d ac Puri f-f-e n wi i-h t-hn RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM )E C. Nor-K e. H. A . " —� ORDINANCE NO. �� (Series of 1981) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 20-14(e) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, BY ADDING A NEW ` SENTENCE EXEMPTING FROM THE NINETY (90) DAY RECORDATION REQUIREMENT CON- TAINED THEREIN THE RECORDING OF CONDO- MINIUM MAPS, DECLARATIONS OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS REQUIRED TO ACCOMPLISH A CONDOMINIUMIZATION IN THE CITY OF ASPEN. WHEREAS, at the request of the City Council, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission considered and has recommended amending Section 20-14(e) of the Aspen Municipal Code so as to add a new sentence providing that the ninety (90) day recordation requirement con- tained therein shall not apply to the recording of. condominium maps, declarations or any other documents required to be recorded to accomplish a condominiumization in the City of Aspen, and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to accept the recommendation of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission and amend Section 20-14(e) of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen by adding the sentence recommended by Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 81-4. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 Section 20-14(e) of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended by adding the fol- lowing sentence at the end of that section: "The ninety (90) day recordation require- ment contained herein shall not apply to the recording of condominium maps, de- clarations or any other documents required to be recorded to accomplish a condominium- ization in the City of Aspen". RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM •a C. F. H 11'NFI R. R. R L. C'. Section 3: If any subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid -or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. e--�,-- n A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the // day of '//i !/ , 1981, at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its regular meeting held on the day of 1981. ATTEST: Kathryn . Koch City Clerk passed and approved on the �IiJ 81. H. Michael dt Mayor Pro Tem FINALLY adopted, day of 1 ATTEST: Kathryn . Koch City C1^rk Her an Edel Mayor -2- FORM % C. F. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves STATE OF COLORADO ) CERTIFICATE ) ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) I, Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ordinance was introduced, read in full, and passed on reading at a regular meeting of the City QCouncil of the City of Aspen on o?"/ 19 4/, and published in the Aspen Times a weekly newspaper of general circul- zxtion, published in the City of Aspen, Colorado, in its issue of 19.&, and was finally adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council on . 19 OV, and ordered published as Ordinance No. �� Series of 19.97' , of said City, as provided by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of said City of Aspen, Colorado, this<� day of SEAI, i Kathyrn S. '.och, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk LJ 0 *' 0 SHAW CONDOMINIUMS MOTHER IAODE R STAURA 0 5 10 20-- _ 30 40 Fr Il' o F.E.T SCALE 101 DA515 OF 5EARlNG5 : X IN GONC.RErE N.E. GORN6R 5l-oc.K Ito TO CITY OF A5PEN MONUMENT N.W. CORNER DL.noK 7Co. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE _, JAMES F RE5ER, A REGI5TERED LAND SURVEYOR, HERELhY CERTIFY TL(AT 1-1-415 MAP REPRE5ENT5 AN ACTUAL FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED UNDER MY DIRECTION AND 5UPERV151C•N IN FEGRUARY AND APRIL 1g82 of LOTS N,o P CZ FjLt�K 51 CITY I OF A\5PEN, PITKIN COUNTYy G�OLORADO. "fHE Woot7 13L,x, AND SHEET METAL 5UILDING5 WE KE FOUNO TO 13E LOCATED ON 5AID -. Ls1r5 AS 5HOWN HEREON. 'R-IE LOCATION AND DIMEN510NS OF THE fj'OUNDARY LINES, j 0>u1LDlNG5, IMPROVEMENTS, EA5E4ENT5, RIGHI"5 OF WAY IN EV106NC.E OR KNOWN lb ME , AND ENCROACHMENT-5 15Y OR ON THESE PREMt5E.5 ARE ACc-UPSHOWN ON TH15 MAP. TH15 MAP I AGGURATEL-Y AND 5U65TANTL4LLY DEPICT-5 THE LOCATION AND HORIZANTAL AND VERT(CAL MEA5UREMENT5 OF THE 50IL-DING, 74-�- CONDOMINIUM UNIT THEREIN, THF= UNIT' DE51GNATION THEREOF UNDER THE IN5T"RUCTION5 PROVIDED ME C3YTHE OWNER THE I DIMENSIONS OF 5AtD UN1T5, AND THE El.-EVATIONS OF T+-IE FLOORS t AND CEILINGS. I EXECUTED THIS _. .... ... DAY oF... ............. 19b2. I ................................................ JAMF,S F RESEFL, L.5. 91b4 STATE OF Co L✓`JRApO j 55 CpUNrY OF PIT -KIN 'THE FOREGOING 5URVEYOR15 GE.RTIFICATE WAS AGKNOWL.EDGED 6EFORE ME TI'4t5..... _.........DAY of .......... ...... (9b2 SYJAME5 F. RE5ER L.5. 9185-,. WITNE55 MY NAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. MY COMM15510N EXPIRE5 FE(32UAIZY 2-7, 19b-4. NOTARY PU3UG Al -I NORTH MILS SrRE.ET A5PEN, c-oLoRAOo NOTE ; G.C.E., GENERAL- COMMON ELL-MENT L.C.E.' LIMITED COMMON ELEMENT 21-£5 L FIRST FLOOR PLAN SOUTH ELEVATION NOTICE : ACCORDING To C.OLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED URDN ANY DEFECT IN TN15 SURVEY WITHIN 51X YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST 015CAVER 50C1-4 DEFECT, IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION 6A5ED UPON ANY DEFECT IN TH15 SURVEY 5E COMMENDED MORE THAN TEN YEAR6 FROM THE DATE OF T)-tE CEPTIFICATON 5HOWN HEREON - PREPARED OY ALPINE 5URVEY5 - JOI5 NO. bZ, 19 41A NORTH MILL STREET ASPEN, GOLORADO bl(oll 305 925 2(cb8 7929. 04 792b.0-4 _ 791o.5ti SECOND FLOOR PLAN CROSS SECTION IL U T CC 1 IL O °IT D I L _ 1 NT- LL ll' F IL O T IHI 1 1 .5ET CORNER- X Ct-u56L�D IN 0.55 INTO STREET O.'�2 INTO 57REET N75' 09' 11" W 120.56 .-'DEW,L-K 55 TO q--- of HYMAN AVENuE HYMAN AVENUE 7g24. 1c CITY ENGINEER'S APPROVAL OWNER'S CERTIFICATE TH15 CONDOMINIUM MAP OF THE 5LIAW CONDOMINtUM5 MOTHER L-ODE RESTAURANT, WA5 HARRY E. 5HAW A5 PERSONAL REPRE5ENTAT)VE OF THE E5rAFE OF DOROTHY KoGH 5HAW, APPROVED DY THE CITY ENGINEEROF THE CITY OF ASPEd TH15 . ....... _...... DAY OF .. ..............I I9$2. DECEASED, OWNER OF LOTS N, O, P AND 4. I3 LOCK 81 GF /A try, OSPEN , PIrKIN COUNTY � HYMAN GOLORADO, HEREDE Y CRTIFIES T1--IAT TF-{15 MAP OF THE 5HAW GONOOMINIUM5, mor"EK AVENUE LODE RE57AURANT-HA5 13EFN PREPARED PU250ANT TO TF-IE PURP05E5 STATED IN THE 7917.24 CONDpMlNIUM DECLARATION FOR THE 514AW CONDOMINIUMS MOTHER LODE I2E5TAUF2ANT, ..........__................._..........-........ DATED AND RECORDED IN Oo0k- .................AT i'AN"...........-OF- THE RECORD5 GI T1' ENGINEER OF THE CLERK AND IRECORDER OF TT-IE COUNTY OF PITKINI COL.ORADO. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APPROVAL HA .RY . . HARE. 5HAW , AS PERSONAL. REPRE5ENTA-nVE 71-4I5 CONDOMINIUM MAP OF THE-5HAW CONDOMINIUMS/ MOTHER LODE RE5TAURANT, WA5 OF Tr+E E5TATE OF DOR.OT-HY koGH 5HAW, DECEA5ED. APPROVED DYTHE GIrYOFA5Pt=N PLANNING ANDZONING CoMM(551ONTH15.__....... ..DAYOF, ................ 1962, -- -7916.221 ............................... CHAIRMAN CITY OF ASPEN APPROVAL -rRI5 CONDOMINIUM MAP OF T+-IE 5HAW CANDOMINIUM5 MOTHER LDDE FZE51-AURANT, WA5 APPROVED 13YTHE GITYUJUNGILOFTHE CITYOFASPEN,CIOLOFR-A00THIS- .......... .. DAY OF.............I9Y2. .......... _.. __........_ ........ MAYOR CITY CLERK 7g15.�o2 CLERK & RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE 11-115 CONDOMINIUM MAP OF THE 5HAW 6ONDOMINIUM5, MOTHER LADE RE5TAUFZANT, WA5 Acc,EPreo FoR FLUNG IN -THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK ANo RECORDER OF THE. COUNTY OF PITKIN STATE of ----7`IIO.24 c'.oLD RADo,AT._......_.... .... O'CLOCK .-..,,M., THIS ........ DAY OF ........ ....... 19b2, AND WAS DULY FILED IN 1300V ........... AT PAGE-... RECEPTION N9................... 5rATE OF COR LOAOO COUNTY OF PIT -KIN THE FOREGOING OWNER'S CrRT-lFICAI7E WA5 ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME TH15..... _... DAY OF ............... 1952- 15Y HARRY E. 51-4AW A5 PE.R50NAL. REPRE5ENTATIVE OF THE E5TATE OF i3O2OTHY ItoCH 5HAW , OECEA5E D, WtTNE55 MY HAND ANO OFFIGlAL5EA1--. MYCOMM551ON EXPIRES.S.......... EAST ELEVATION ........................................... PIT -KIN .'' -UNTY CLERK 4 REtARDER ................................................. NOTARY PUDLIC ADDRESS. _.. _................ ... .... _................ . _.