HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.Annan/Snell, Lots 15-17
,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Planning Staff (HC)
RE: Anna/Snell Subdivision Exemption
DATE: October 6, 1976
This is a request by John Annan and Nancy Snell for a subdivision
exemption for the condominiumization of an existing duplex on
Lots 15, 16 and 17 Block 2, Riverside Addition to the City and Town-
site of Aspen.
The Engineering Department has reviewed the application; inspected
the building site; and by separate letter recommends approval of the
request.
The application incorrectly cites the relevant subdivision regulation
sections. The governing rules for Subdivision Exemption are found in
Section 20-19(b) which requires the Planning and Zoning Commission and
Council to find that the "division of land is not within the intent
and purposes" of the subdivision regulations.
On September 15, 1976, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval of the request conditioned upon payment of the Park Dedication
Fee.
The Planning Office recommends approval of the exemption.
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION
FROM SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
Pursuant to Section 20-10 of Chapter 20 of the Municipal Code of
the City of Aspen, John W. Annan and Nancy Lee Snell (hereinafter
collectively referred to as applicant) hereby apply for an exemption
from the definition of the term "Subdivision" with respect to the real
property described as:
Lots 15, 16 and 17. Block 2
Riverside Addition to the
City and Townsite of Aspen,
Pitkin County, Colorado
The applicant submits that the exemption in this case would be appropriate
for the following reasons:
1) The application involves subdivision of an existing duplex. The
owners of the separate portion of the duplex structure will own the common
elements of the duplex-condominium as tenants in common. Said common
elements shall not be subject to partition. The applicant will, at
condominiumization, file a declaration with the Pitkin County Clerk & Recorder
which will state that the land use impact of the property will not be
increased over its present use by virtue of said condominiumization.
2) The applicant submits that such an exemption in the instant case
would not conflict with the intent and purpose of the subdivision regulations
which are directed to assist, among other things, orderly, efficient and
integrated development of the City of Aspen; to insure the proper distribution
of population; to coordinate the need for public services; and to encourage
well planned subdivision. They are directed to considerations of subdivision
design and improvements and to restrict such building where it is inappropriate
after considering its land use impact. The duplex presently exists and its
impact upon the aforementioned requirement will not be increased in any way
by its condominiumization.
3) Pursuant to the provisions of Section 20-10 (c) of the
Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, a property which is being
condominiumized shall be exempt from the definition of subdivision
as set forth in Section 20-2 (c) of the code as long as said property
"fulfills all pertinent design requirements contained in Section
20-7 of this chapter. The duplex which is the subject of this
application fulfills all pertinent design requirements contained in
Section 20-7.
It is the contention of the applicant that the granting of an
exemption to the subdivision regulations is proper in the situation
and is indeed required by Section 20-10 (c) of the Municipal Code
of the City of Aspen. The applicant would appreciate your consideration
of this application at your next regular meeting.
D"'djlU'if.l- d.~ h I.
by
Nanc
.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen PlaRRiug ~gmmiaei8n
C':-7 G~
FROM:
Planning Staff (HC)
RE:
Anna/Snell Subdivision Exemption
DATE:
September 9, 1976
This is a request by John Annan and Nancy Snell for a subdivision
exemption for the condominiumization of an existing duplex on
Lots 15, 16 and 17 Block 2, Riverside Addition to the City and
Townsite of Aspen.
The Engineering Department has reviewed the application; inspected
the building site; and by separate letter recommends approval of the
request.
The application incorrectly cites the relevant subdivision regulation
sections. The governing rules. for Subdivision Exemption are found
in Section 20-19(b) which requrJejthe P & Z and Council to find
that the "division of land is not within the intent and purposes"
of the subdivision regulations.
. T . -R:;; I? /'.' /l.i...r
() ...... SL-<-n t'S p~ r Q 2 ~ ......
'a, ~:::;J. ~.~--fl (~.--
~p' ~
' ,-,- / ===
~-..t ~
/,cy---t "1' ~
o i j},Jl-
, VI>- ' -
pJ rL~
F'e{
,
/4
/c..
or.
A----tc
~.-e c;/d
.P-/-""7 ~.
.
MEMO
TO: HAL CLARK
FROM: DAVE ELLIS~
RE: ANNAN/SNELL SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION REQUEST
DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 1976
Having reviewed the above request and inspected the site I
would recommend that the exemption be granted.
DE/pab
TO:
Dave Ellis
FROM:
Planning Staff (He)
MEMORANDUM
RE:
Anna/Snvll Subdivision Exemption
DATE:
September 3, 1976
Attached for ~our review is a
by John Anna and Nancy Snell.
review on September 21, 1976.
request for subdivision exemption
We will schedule this for P & Z