Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ec.Mendenhall-Special Review.66-83 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen No. b0 - f3 Staff: KICM,vA:, ),kUl ~VY> " APPLICANT: ;OJ{l4({ T. ~-') REPRESENTATIVE: ciY:Jr, '" . PROJECT NAME: ((/fl7d"Ylhcz/'/ ~ 0/]Ptl'kU , )'/["" r. ,-Lwl; ,U:V /'/)(' f:u y / , uI J3uAN .;J Phone: Phone: ?c/5 -1f''Jt, TYPE OF APPLICATION: I. GMP/SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step) (Fee) 1. Conceptual Submission ($1,840) ($1,120) ($ 560) 2. Preliminary Plat 3. Final Plat II. SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step) 1. Conceptual Submission ($1,290) ($ 830) ($ 560) ($1,010) ($ 465) 1',/ 2. Preliminary Plat 3. Final Plat III. EXCEPTION/EXEMPTION/REZONING (2 step) X IV. SPECIAL REVIEW (1 step) ~ 1. Special Review 2. Use Determination 3. Conditional Use REFERRALS: V;ttorney ~ngineering Dept. Housing Date Referred: /.;/zil' .d Sanitation District School District Mountain Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat.Gas State Hgwy. Dept. Fire Chief Pa rks Water Holy Cross Electric City Electri c Fire Marshall/Building Dept. Other FINAL ROUTING: ./ V Attorney ./ /E' . ng1neerlng Date Routed: ~ Building Other , r r" , .....' ,-., ..-. DISPOSITION: CITY P&Z REVIEW: CITY COUNCIL REVmJ: -=ii.;O ~ A~rDw.&. I SU~.Q.Ct- -b -+G, ~(\fD.+iilN Jr CL p\Q+ ~Q.-t~NI -+k ::t1NaJ PlaT VO.1lA.\ ~fVY\.e~i S ~c.-t~ah... '2..cJ - \ ~ ~ \ * I ,.;J~y- r \fir + 0 C.o rei. \;,,) -\--hp ~C\l"'OI.-\.\O~ 6\ D- 1/S\-e.+~/YN'lVT OflSt.l~J.i\JiS\c;r...., f~(,pfa},/ +n \'0 C)..ffro~ In'l ~k C,+, Ottor~/ pYlar -+0 YQ.Loydi"''d' Ordinance No. CITY P&Z REVIEW: CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: Ord i nance No. DISPOSITION: CITY P&Z REVIEW: CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: -t}.30 ~ ~Dw.&. I SU~.Q.Ct- -b -+G, ~o.fCA+iilN Jr CL p\Q+ ~-t~>--JI -+k ::t1NaJ PlaT !J.. \ fVY\. rt s . Q..C.. -t ~ Oh... '2..cJ - \ ~ . ~ to ve.d. -+ ,* i,.;J~Y- riel'r +0 c.orel i'>J -\--hp ~ItfCl.Y"OI.-\.\O~ 6\ D- I{ S\-o.+e./YN'lVT OflSt.l~cl i vi S \ c;r...., f~(,pfaN \l +n \'0 ('~Wro~ In'l ~k C,+, Ottor~/ fr\ar -+0 YQ.Coydl"'d' Ordinance No. CITY P&Z REVIEW: CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: Ordinance No. ~..' '- MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office RE: Mendenhall - Subdivision Exception DATE: January 23, 1984 APPROVED AS TO FORM: The attached application requests a lot line adjustment between Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Red Butte Subdivision. Section 20-19(a)(4} of the Code permits lot line adjustments "to permit a boundary change be- tween consenting adjacent landowners or to address a specific hard- ship." In the case at hand, each of the two lots are owned by Kiefer Mendenhall. The application seeks to redraw the lot lines in order to accommodate existing improvements on Lot 2 and will result in no change in the total square footage, development rights or density permitted to either lot. Lot 3 is currently vacant. In order to protect the continued clarity of the public records, we recommend that approval be conditioned upon the preparation of a sub- division exception plat reflecting the change consistent with the Final Plat requirements of Section 20-15. A "Statement of Subdivision Exception" was requested by the City Attorney in order to establish the grounds for the exception. The appropriate motion is: "Move to approve the Mendenhall Subdivision Exception subject to the preparation of a plat meeting the Final Plat requirements of Section 20-15 to be approved by the City Engineer prior to recording and subject to the preparation of a "Statement of Sub- division Exception" to be approved by the City Attorney prior to recording." ~ Re: Lot line adjustment: Lots 2 & J, Block2, Red Butte Subdivision, Aspen, Co. Owner: Kiefer & Mary Mendenhall Zoning: R-JO Lot Size: Lot #2/ JJ,980 SF Lot #J/ J7,lJ5 SF Date: Nov. 28, 198J Pursuant to Article 20-19 (a)4 of the Aspen Code, the Owners, Kiefer and Mary Mendenhall submit a survey drawing showing the adjusted west property line of lot #J with twelve foot setbacks for the side yard. The lot line is adjusted so that the square footage of each lot remains the same, and the house on lot #2 will be in conformity with the ten foot side yard set back of the R-JO zone, and thus correcting a survey, engineering or building error. Both lots exceed the JO,OOO sf. required for the zone and are otherwize in compliance with the zoning regulations. Enclosed is a copy from ta title policy showing Kiefer & Mary Mendenhall as Owners of lot #2&J, blk. 2, Red Butte Subdivision as of Oct. 1, 1975. ,..... "..~,..... i :... "" MEMORANDUM ~. TO: Richard Grice, Planning Office FROM: City Attorney RE: Mendenhall - Special Review DATE: December 23, 1983. The referenced review request, and map of G. Pessman of November 18, 1983, have been reviewed for compliance with ~20-19. We recommend that you consider the following addi- tional matters: 1. The applicant claims a "survey, engineering or building error" as grounds for the lot line adjustment:"" The actual reason(s} for the existence of the problem should go on the record before council, as well as the actual purpose of the requested adjustment. (From the plat, it appears that the MendenhallS' house on Lot 2 has a concrete walkway that extends into Lot 3 - perhaps there are other encroachments.) 2. No structure (other than the MendenhallS' encroach- ment) is shown on Lot 3. The record should reflect whether there is a residence on Lot 3; and, if not, the plans for development of Lot 3 should be determinedjr Actually, the encroachment is probably an impediment to sale of Lot 3 by the Mendenhalls that they're trying to avoid "in advance." We see nothing wrong with this approach, so long as Lot 3 otherwise complies with zoning, area and bulk requirements, setbacks, etc. 3. A statement of exception will be required from the Mendenhalls, if the adjustment is granted by the council. 4. The application should be verified on the record by the Mendenhalls, under ~20-l9(a} (4) (d). And, council should state the grounds for the exception in its resolu- tion, if the exception is granted. ~20-l9(a) (4) (d). 5. The plat dards of ~20-l5. be revised before (4) (i) . should be revised to comply with It is not in compliance now, and council deals with the request. the stan- must ~20-l9(a} BDE:gms .~ ~21.'~~Y'f}/;i) '"'" ....,.J jU1~I-IIrl'I~(~rl' Richard Grice Aspen Planning Office Aspen, Co. Re: Mendenhall lot line adjustment. dtd: Jan.19,1984 Hand Delivered. This reply is in answer to questions raised by the city attorney relative to this application. 1. Since the existing house on lot #2 was already in place when the Owners purchased the property, we can only surmise that the house was placed incorr- ectly according to a building error. 2. Development rights for each lot will not be affected since there is no change to the area of either lot, merely a new configuration of the lot line between lots #2 & #J. J. Lot #J does not have a house on it. 4. Verification Form: Already submitted. Respectfully submitted By. J. R. McCarthy ARCHITECT A(fJ/h In/, UI(UUl><L--~~ ~I'~ / ~)q!-i"'I~)~"~ , << ;h '. MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Grice, Planning Office FROM: Chuck Roth, City Engineering Department ~~ DATE: December 28, 1983 RE: Mendenhall - Special Review Having reviewed the above application and having made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments: l. Pursuant to the Municipal Code section cited in the letter of application, 20-19(a) (4), this must be handled as a subdivision exception, not as a special review. A plat prepared for recordation pursuant to final plat requirements of section 20-15 is necessary. 2. This comment is not intended to be presented as a requirment but merely as a muncipal engineering judgement. It is suggested that the boundary adjustment as shown on the submitted map is a poor design. The boundary could be simpler, namely two lines instead of five. Such would result in less expense to monument, simpler fences to build, easier lawns to mow, and so on. Of course the boundary shown is more organic and cutesy. 3. Perhaps it should be pointed out that the driveway and parking space shown would become improvements apputenant to "the other" parcel. (The lots will no longer be 2 and 3, block 2, Red Butte Subdivision, but will become lots land 2 of the Mendenhall, or whatever, Subdivision.) In the other case, an easement for ingress and egress would be required. However there are no problems for the Menden~ halls to create new driveway and parking on their lot. 4. We would like to see a note on the final plat calling out the new boundary corners and witness corner, stating that these corners must be mon~mented within one year of the effective date of the sales contract, pursuant to section 38-51-10l(2}, C.R.S. 1973. cc: Jay Hammond, Assistant City Engineer Louis Buettner, City Surveyor Gary Esary, Assistant City Attorney ,. , '. .... ., MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Grice, Planning Office FROM: Chuck Roth, City Engineering Department (?~ DATE: December 27, 1983 RE: Mendenhall - Special Review ---------------------------------------------------------- Having reviewed the above application and having made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. Pursuant to the Municipal Code section cited in the letter of application, 20-19(a) (4), this must be handled as a subdivision exception, not as a special review. cc: Jay Hammond, Assistant City Engineer Louis Buettner, City Surveyor f. 'S. - I CM_U;-D B>WG "DBPT """R:> TA~ f<P.>OuT S re-T F.>A-Q::.-s D'D ~ GEO-T /tt(.S" OIJ~ 7 , ~~._~- " VERIFICATION Kiefer & Mary Mendenhall being first duly sworn deposes and says that he and she have read the foregoing Application for Expedited Review of ~xception from Subdivision Regulations :..;,c; that the facts contained therein are true of their own best knowledge and belief. ~\~~~WLQ m&:U( ~hAJu;YQ Mary Mendenhall STAT: ..F _C2~_ORADO COUNTY OF PITKIN The fo'egoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 6th da: of January., 1984, by '<iefer & Mary Mendmhall. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Feb. 10. 1987 ,. , ,. /'/; I ~/ /f-< k. O~: No1!ary Pub 1 i c Address: P. O. Box 7657 . Aspen, Colorado 81612 .-'-',-,.-. ~ -,..' . VERIFICATION Kiefer & Mary Mendenhall being first duly sworn deposes and says that he and she have read the foregoing Application for Expedited Review of Exception from Subdivision Regulations and that the facts contained therein are true of their own best knowledge and belief. ~i:"~jLlo0 fhGNj Yvl;A'I~ Mary Mendenhall STA,~ OF COLORADO COUNTY OF PITKIN The foregoing instrument was 6th day of January Witness my hand and official My commission expires: Feb. acknowledged before me this , 1984, by ~iefer & Mary Mendenhall. seal. 10, 1987 ~(./ "--/} / // . (('/ /I~" Notary Public Address: P. O. Box 7657 .(;6~ Aspen, Colorado 81612 .:) j-\e(~I-IIrl"I~(~rl" Nov. 28, 198J Ms. Colette Penne, Planning Office lJO S. Galena St. Aspen, Co. 81611 Re: Lot line Adjustment, Lot #2 & #J, Red Butte Drive. Dear Colette, Enclosed is a brief summary outlining the lot line correction that is requested along with two prints of the adjusted survey drawing, and proof of title. Please schedule this as soon as you can. Thanks. Very truly yours, \\J ~.~ / ~'(l!-;"II~,~.t. , MEMORANDUM TO: City Attorney City Engineer FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office RE: Mendenhall - Special Review DATE: December 2, 1983 Attached for your review is an application submitted to the Planning Office by J.R. McCarthy on behalf of Kiefer and Mary E. Mendenhall for special review approval of a lot line adjustment on their pro- perty located at Lot 2 and 3, Block 2 of the Red Butte Subdivision (on Red Butte Drive just off of Cemetary Lane). This is a one-step special review which will go before City Council on January 9, 1984. We would appreciate having your referral comments no later than December 26, 1983 in order for this office to have adequate time to prepare for its presentation. Thank you. sr SCHEDULE A , ~~v~/ A " '\., " AMOUNT $100,000.00 Date of Policy: October 1, 1975 at 8:00 A. M. POLICY NO.O 1 007295 75-07-10 1. Name of Insured: KIEFER MENDENHALL and MARY E. MENDENHALL 2. The estate or interest in the land described herein and which is covered by this policy is: (a fee, a leasehold, etc.) Pee simple 3. The estate or interest referred to herein is at Date of Policy vested in: The insured named above - in joint tenancy. 4. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: Lots 2 and 3 Block 2 RED BOTTE SUBDIVISION Pitkin County, COlorado. ( ~ Aopen % t'.f~ i ,p Form 1M !llsert A HI'" 67!H -.-- .. SCHEDULE B ,~ .,,", PtJc,CY NO. 0 1 007295 75-07-10 This Policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following; 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 inspec. tion of the 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 theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. The lien of all taxes and assessments for the year 1975, and thereafter. 6. Reservations and exceptions as contained in United States Patent recorded August 17, 1889 in Bool< 55 at Page 5 as follows, right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefZ'Olll, should the s__ be found to penetrate or intersect the pr8llli..... 7. Terms, conditions, reservations and restrictions, which do not contain a forfeiture or reverter clause, as set forth in Protective Covenants of Red Butte Subdivision recorded September 23, 1960 in Bool< 191 at Page 598, incorporated by reference in instrument recorded April 3, 1963 in Bool< 201 at Page 547. 8. Any tax, aasea81118nts, fees or charges by reason of the inclusion of the subject property in the A..pen Fire Protection District, Aspen Metropolitan Sanitation District, and Aspen Valley Hospital District. 9. Deed of Trust from Kiefer Mendenhall and Mary E. Mendenhall to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County, Colorado, for the use of Aspen Savings and Loan Association to secure $75,000.00 dated September 30, 1975 and recorded September 30, 1975 in Book 303 at Page 625. Form. 1M (CO) wert B 10N: 1I7SR sr SCHEDULE A " \Y'\ 2<07 ~ ~~ , \MOUNT $ 75,000.00 Effective Date: October 1, 1975 at 8:00 A. M. POLICY NO, .,~ '''I 945429 75-07-10 . Name of Insured: ASPBII SAVDIGS lUlD I.OIJI ASSOCIA'l'IOIIl ~. The estate or interest in the land described in this Schedule and which is encumbered by the insured mortgage is:(a fee. a leasehold, etc.) Fee s1.lllp1. i. The estate or interest referred to herein is at the Effective Date of this Policy vested in: ................ JIBIII).......T.T. aDd MAR!' E. KEIlDERHALL - in joint t:_"'<l'Y. ~_. The mortgage, herein referred to as the insured mortgage, and the assignments thereof. if any, are described as follows: Deed of Traa1: fJ:Olll D..fer HeDd_hall aDd Mary E. Meadenh.all to ~ Public ~ of Pitkin COtmty, COlorado, for the _ of Aspen sariDqs and LoaD ..~..tiOD to II4ICllIh $75,000.00 dated Sept-Ntr 30, 1975 aDd reeorded Sept8aber 30, 1975 in Book 303 at Paq. 625. }. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: Lots 2 and 3 Block 2 RED BOT'1'B SOBDIVISIOIIl pitkin COtmty, COl.orado. ..~: .I ( .~ -- SCHEDULE B-PART I ....."...... .- POLICY NO II 9C5429 75-07-10 This Policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following: t..__..................ln 1>0 ...._--tly..pdliII:- ... . 1."1' . .ardlllla4lll nat __..... pUIID ,'" .. a. ...._....~ it bu..ndwy ~ tIIloIUIgs 111 ...... ~ _ ..., __ "'*" . CllIIlIlIt..... ad' [1 - .. III .. ,... . "WIllIIIl--_aJIIIwNeb 81elllllsbotunllr IIle IllIIlDc NClIIdI. ......u.,.. _ ..... .. _, r _ 1IIIIIr. <<1IlIll8riaI _""""1& er 1 JliI1IIk II . -..... 'La... ___........._...__ N01E:~....-,"" 4 'I bellllrt Ir"' I 5. '11aa u- or. all taxes afI4 __ts ~or the year 1975, aD4 t:lIereaftar. 6. "T-Ih-tf_ aD4 ezceptJ.cma as acmt&iDed ill United S~ Pat:est reoar4e4 A'agwt 17, 1889 iD llooIt 55 81: hq. 5 .. foll_, rl9h1: of 1:he pmpr!etar or. a ftiD or lode to ext:raCl1: aDd r_ ~ ore ~, aIIDu14 the _ be foUD4 to ~t:e or interMlc1: the pr_f__. 7. 'l'enUI, ooa41tJ.co., reaexvatJ.cma _d ~, which de _t _....f.. 8 forfeit:ure or nverter CllaUlle, .. Bet forth iD Prot:ac1:i_ c...._t:a of -.d Bt:Itt:a Subdi'Yuioa rec:o:cded ~ 23, 1960 iJa Book 191 at PIIilJ8 598, iDaorporat:ed br ntereDCe iJa ~ ~ April 3, 1963 iJa Book 201 at PIl9'I 547. 8. Ally t:u. __t:a, f_ or cbarq_ by r..- of the iJacl~ of the IRIbj8Cl1: pzopert:y iJa t:he &lII*l rir. ~ DiRriot:, A&l*l .L.._li1:aD SaDitaUoD Diatrict;, _d A8pcl Valley ao.pit&1 Diet:ri.ct.. SCHEDULE B-PART II In addition to the matters set forth in Part I of this Schedule. the title to the estate or interest in the land described or referred to in Schedule A is subject to the following matters. if any be shown. but the Compeny insures that such matters are subordinate to the lien or charge of the insured mortgage upon said estate or interest: Form 2M lZIsert B WK 313H Regular Meeting ~1lM~\Q,. ~ Aspen City Council January 30, 1984 All in 3642 Ms. Penne told Council the applicant is asking, for three employee. rental ~nits that w' Ili.1 be part of the free mar~et structure7. There lS no employee houslng req~lrement for ~1;!111; property. Ms. Penne sald part of thls parcel lS In the county and part In the city h_~.Hf applicants did not count de~si ty for a~y property in the county or any property abo~e 'I"'~ ,lll 8040 line. The appllcants lntend to glve a trall easement to connect wlth the Aspen ci"',111 trail. The applicant,has preliminary geological st~dies and is working on more detail uqul One of the questlons lS that there wlll not be any lmpact of old mlne shafts, the qu . ..!Iilj of the toxic nature of these mine tailings. These items will come out at preliminaryest}~11 p-~, M7' Penne said the basic question in subdivision is the suitability of the la~d for sUbd,iii" Slon. Ms. Penne sald the appllcant has been very senSl tl ve to the people II Vlng on th' .-31' land, and some of them have indicated interest in the employee units. Ms. Penne said lStfl access will be from Ute avenue and from Aspen Alps road. Ms. Penne said access and pa,., JI~ for the Aspen Alps tennis courts should be formalized through agreements. The apPliCa~~i!I' plans parking ,:-t one space per b,;,droom, which meets the Code re9uirement. ,There will ~ "': small lots dellneated and extensl ve common areas. Ms. Penne sald the appllcant has.~l addressed the purposes of the PUD, has done some innovative site planning, and the stru ,. will fit well on the site. Ms. Penne told Council the structures will be sheltered, the majority of trees will be The utilities will be underground. Councilman Blomquist said he would like to consider~ annexation for the parts of this property not in the city. Councilman Blomquist said b~' would also like dedication of the land above the 8040 greenline as a park. Councilman." Blomquist said he would like the city to begin acquiring small parcels of land around ~. the 8040 area as a green belt. Ms. smith said the applicant has no problem with annexat.V would like to do it subsequent to this subdivision as they would like to construct this ill summer. Ms. Penne told Council the planning office and P & Z recommend approval of the ~I conceptual sugdivision with l6 conditions. rn Councilman Blomquist moved to approve conceptual subdivision for the Aspen Chance subdi ., sion with the l6 conditions listed in the planning office memorandum of January 23, 198h".' seconded by Councilman Collins. All in favor, with the exception of Mayor Stirling. carried. Mayor Stirling said he would have liked to table this for all the Council to a site visit and to address some of the concerns. HANNAH DUSTIN CONDOMINIUMIZATION Councilman Collins moved to table this item; seconded by Councilwoman Walls. motion carried. I \'\S <>~""p ~ fl>iL<J.' fV...... , ~ MENDENHALL SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION Richard Grice, planning office, said this is a request for a lot line two adjacent lots owned by the Mendenhalls. At the time the house on there was a building error. The applicants would like to correct the situation on the<,'; public re CDrd and have proposed a lot line adjustment and a 628 square foot .. exchange between the two lots. Each lot will continue to be the same size. Council no potential development rights will be increased or decreased. Councilman Collins moved to approve the Mendenhall subdivision exception subject to the preparation of a plat meeting the final plat requirements of section 20-l5 to be appr by the city engineer prior to recording and sUbject to the preparation of a statement of subdivision exception to be approved by the city attorney prior to recording; seconded by Councilman Blomquist. All in favor, motion carried. REQUEST FOR ENCROACHMENT - Congdon Jay Hammond, engineering department, said the location of the fence has been staked and:":j the fence is behind the existing cottonwood trees. Hammond said he talked to the parkS 11' director, who has no problems with this. The city does have the opportunity to ask' fO;1 the removal of the encroachment. The staff recommends approval. Mayor Stirling said. people in the west end have encroached as their own risk. Councilman Blomquist sald 1n order to get a building permit, the applicant has to have encroachment permission. lij ,}, moved to grant an encroachment license at 202 West Francis subject'~i 3 in the engineering memorandum of December 20, 1983; seconded brecJ'l All in favor, with the exception of Mayor Stirling. Motion carrl .. Councilman Blomquist conditions l, 2, and Councilwoman Walls. CASTLE CREEK STOPLIGHT Jay Hammond, engineering department, told Council there was a request from Aspen Highl for a stop light at Castle Creek and Highway 82. City Manager Chapman said Highlands feels in the morning and during ski season people turning left onto highway 82 have a.ce difficul t time, and for safety reasons and ease of access, a traffic light would prov~i:Ii;; better flow. The state has concluded a traffic light is warranted, out they won't pu,. . a light unless there is a request from the municipality. Hammond said this used to.~':. the county's jurisdiction and they have been reluctant to put in a light. Mayor ~tlr pointed out the county has authorized a traffic study, and both P & Z's are studYlng the traffic question. Councilman Blomquist pointed out with the school people also uS the intersection, it does become dangerous. Councilman Blomquist moved the city request the state to install a traffic light at intersection; seconded by Councilwoman Walls. ~ouncilman Collins said he would like to see,other options.beside7 hug,;, traffic lig~~~~; ~ouncll agreed they would llke more lnformatlon before havlng a llght lnstalled. Ct'6. reques~ed accident data at this intersection, a copy of the state's warrant ififorma ~ and what types of signals are available. "l .il report to Council on the ~ion~.; ~~~~_ ~~~~ ...,~ ?ianal op 'I" Councilman Blomquist moved to ask engineering to submit a l;~,~~,",\.,-,~,/t~ ~,.~;c<y-.......c,,..,+- S+-11rJ,., "'""::"'~c.:: ro-C ~,_:::_,.c:.r:~,. ,..,,.......~,..,,,........C' ~..... -I--'~,.., -.