Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ec.Otte/Melton Condominiumization , ~. .. '~ \-'(!~ \IJe-J " = g'I 1)(" - --- No. 5f-1I CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen ! :tt1l". Need pia ts /}. If /1{ ,_ 7), 1. DATE SUBt1ITTro: AVjtJJf .;21', r1Y/ .- STAFF: G8-(/~Jl rfJllt2~ 2. APPLICANT: If!;#.?Jfte 'if.-- tXJ/J;d.ffW~) &13~/SI 4,pwt, CtJt!'lb/~ As~ J CtJ qO)S-~9'~ 3. REPRESENTATIVE: (lI,'/(e Olle or .bau/eI /1Jl"lIhJ 4. PROJECT NAME:#jlklkL llJhrl,'/JIJih' J [;Yt'er/,'d71/ ('lry7t:14) 5. LOCATION: J35!1I 1J(i?/I1" Aspe--n/ lotJ 1Ia-/3, 'f,/CifkS9 I 6. TYPE OF APPLICATION: Rezoning P.U.D. Special Review Growth Management HPC X Subdivision -2L.Exception Exemption 70:30 Residential Bonus _____Stream Margin " _____8040 Greenline _____Vi ew Pl ane _____Conditional Use _____Other Crm chm;tI;uml 'l-11/,'/-rJ ,~ ? --j() (?tfy I~f 3 &n ./ld. &1 /9t1 7. REFERRALS: .i-Attorney ~Engineering Dept. _____Hous i ng Water _____City Electric Sanitation District ____School District _____ Mountain Bell _____Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas Parks State Highway Dept. .Holy Cross Electric ~Other ~Fire Marshal/Building Dept. 8. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS: .. 9. DISPOSITION: P & Z j (~I, Approved / Denied Date !olml!?, L+f (; J .f :'~ ,w:J-. ( , ,~ Ilc__ I. ",.<'d.;", n 6. t i ),'X-' ~ b,-~o,"c c\ councilL 'APprOVed-CL// Denied 'I",~-\"l,' C,::I, ,c ..' ",s..... \,"\ u .- _.~. Date 10 /Z{> /R I (:"UI \'...Q ( \ (~~". a1" ~:') 10. ROUTING: /Attorney ~lding ~ngineering Other PEN 130 asp MEMORANDUM DATE; September 4, 1981 TO. COlette Penne ~ Paul Taddunr'~ I FROM. REi Otte/Melton Subdivision Exception (Condominiumiza- tion) Generally, it would be n~ opinion that the requirements of Section 20-22 are applicable to all condominiumiza- tions. However, I believe that the-P&Z, as a matter of policy and historical precedent, has determined that commercial condominiumizations do not fall within the intent of Section 20-21. Could you please check into this for me. PJ'l';mc .. ;if" " """".... '.~L. "-1/:::. MIKE DTTE P. O. BOX 3715 'i;INVESTMENTS : \~3~~p~ ASPEN, CO 81612 Augus t 26, 1981 Planning Commission City of Aspen Aspen, Colorado To Whom It May Concern: Request We hereby respectfully submit this letter as application of Subdivision exception according to the provisions of Section 20-19 of the Aspen Code. Location The subject property is located at 135 W. Main, Aspen, Colorado and it's legal description is Lots A & B, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen. Grounds There are special circumstances affecting the subject property which we feel make strict application of the Code an undue hardship. The granting of the exception will not, in our opinioJl, be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area of the subject property. The applicants, David Melton and Mike Otte, who formerly practiced together in a partnership providing services as Certified Public Accounts and in that pursuit utilized the entire space of the property. Since January 1, 1981, the CPA partnership has been dissolved and David Melton presently continues to occupy approximately one-fourth of the space in the property, still engaged in providing accounting services. The remainder of the building is occupied by other tenants who have various office-type uses. The applicants seek the exception from subdivision so that the building can be condominiumized and separate ownership patterns can be developed. ff....., -- -- ~ "'",....... Planning Commission Ci ty of Aspen Page 2 Augus t 26. 1981 The building is an existing structure where residential use has not been made for well over 5 years. The granting of our request would provide us with a way to enjoy ownership of portions of the building more desirous to us. The use of the property and its' impact on the neighborhood and local service would remain the same. We hope you will find our application acceptable. Yo rs truly. . (".~,-1} (~U'l-. Mike Otte ~~~ David Melton MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: OttejMelton Subdivision Exception (Condominiumization) DATE: October 26, 1981 APPRDVEO AS TO FORM: /IJo~ ,,' Location: 135 W. Main Street, Lots A and B, Bloq 59, City and Town- site of Aspen Zoning: o - Office Lot Size: 6000 square feet Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting subdivision exception for the purpose of condominiumizing an office building at 135 W. Ma in Street. Referral Agency Comments: City Attorney Generally, it would be my oplnlon that the requirements of Section 20-22 are applicable to all condominiumizations. However, I believe that the P & ~as a matter of policy and historical precedent, has determined that commercial condo- miniumizations do not fall within the intent of Section 20-22. Building Department On Friday, September 25, 1981, an inspection of the subject property was made. The following is a list of problems noted during that inspection. 1. Service disconnect not properly grounded as per National Electric Code, Section 250. 2. Subpanel neutral is connected to ground. 3. Lower east unit missing cover plates on all switches and receptacles. 4. Insufficient number of receptacles on all first floor offices. Engineering Department The Engineering Department reviewed the above application along with a site inspection and has the following comments: 1. The application (plat) shows nine (9) units, three (3) being located in the basement, four (4) units located on the first floor, two (2) units on the second floor. The Building Department will need to comment on the health and safety of units located on each floor. 2. The two (2) units on the second floor have extremely low ceilings. The Building Department should comment on this also. 3. The following information is missing from the plat: A. Scale, North arrow B. Basis of bearings -" - Memo: Otte/Melton Subdivision Exceptt~n OCondorntnturoizqttonl Page Two October 26, 1981 Planning Office Review: Planning Offi.ce Recommendation and P & Z Action: C, Street and qlley wi,dtlis, curb. /lnd gutter loci:1tion from street center ltne, D. Zone district of the property E., Sheet index F. Legend for symbols i:1nd i:1bbreYiations 4, As tnis /lpplication is located in the first block West of tne existing underground po~~r. it is logical tlie applicant agrees to join any underground power improve- ment district. 5. Following final approvals, the mylars should be submitted to this office with the surveyor's signature and seal, In discussion with the applicant, the Planning Office was informed tnat the nine units outlined will more than likely be sold in combinations. The logical division of these will probably be four units. due to the fact that there are four entrances, In checking the question raised by the City Attorney, the provisions of Sec. 20-22 are not applied to the condominiumization of a commercial building. There also is not a definite size parameter to comply with. The exception is allowed under Sec. 20-19. The building conforms with area and bulk requirements also. The Planning Office recommends approval of this request for subdivision exception for the purposes of condominiumization with the following conditions: 1. The requirements of the Building Department as a result of their inspection be met. 2. That mylars of the final plat be submitted with surveyor's signature and seal to the City Engineering Department with the information required in #3A-F of their memo. 3. Applicant agrees to join any underground power improve- ment district that may be formed in the future. . & MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: OttelMelton Subdivision Exception (Condominiumization) DATE: October 6, 1981 Zoning: 0 - Office Lot Size: 135 W. Main Street, Lots A and B, Block 59, City and Town- site of Aspen 6000 square feet Location: Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting subdivision exception for the purpose of condominiumizing an office building at 135 W. Main Street. Referral Agency' Comments: City Attorney Generally, it would be my opinion that the requirements of Section 20-22 are applicable to all condominiumizations. However, I believe that the P & ~as a matter of policy and historical precedent, has determined that commercial condo- miniumizations do not fall within the intent of Section 20-22. Bui19ing Department On Friday, September 25, 1981, an inspection of the subject property was made. The following is a list of problems noted during that inspection. 1. Service disconnect not properly grounded as per National Electric Code, Section 250. 2. Subpanel neutral is connected to ground. 3. Lower east unit missing cover plates on all switches and receptacles. 4. Insufficient number of receptacles on all first floor offices. Engineering Department The Engineering Department reviewed the above application along with a site inspection and has the following comments: 1. The application (plat) shows nine (9) units, three (3) being located in the basement, four (4) units located . on the fi rst f1 oor, two (2) units on the second floor. The Building Department will need to comment on the health and safety of units located on each floor. 2. The two (2) units on the second floor have extremely low ceilings. The Building Department should comment on this also. 3. The following lnformation is missing from the plat: A. Scale, North arrow B. Basis of bearings Memo: Otte/Melton Subdiyision Exceptten O:ondominiuroiz~tionl Page Two October 6, 1981 C, Street and alley ~tdtQs, curb and gutter location from street center line, D. Zone district of the property E. Sheet index f. Legend for ~bol~ and abbreYlatlons 4, As this appl i,cation is located in the first block West of the existing underground po~er, it is logical tbe applicant agrees to join any underground power improve- ment district. 5. Following final approvals, the mylars should be submitted to this office with the surveyor's signature and seal. Planning Office Review: In discussion with the applicant; the Planning Office was informed that the nine units outlined will more than likely be sold in combinations. The logical division of these will probably be four units, due to the fact that there are four entrances. In checking the question raised by the City Attorney, the provisions of Sec. 20-22 are not applied to the condominiumization of a commercial building. There also is not a definite size parameter to comply with. The exception is allowed under Sec. 20-19. The building conforms with area and bulk requirements also. Planning Office Recommendation: The Planning Office recommends approval'of this request for subdivision exception for tne purposes of condominiumization with the followi ng conditions,: 1. The requiremen1;s of the Building Department as a result of their inspection be met. 2. That mylars of the final plat be s~bmitted with surveyor's signature and seal to the City Engineering Department with the information required in #3A-F of their memo. 3. Applicant agrees to join any underground power improve- ment district that may be formed in the future. ,,, . r-"f '), IE ,........ MEMORANDUM TO: ~l Taddune, City Attorney ~!Y Engineering Department ~re Marshal/Building Department FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office RE: OttelMelton Subdivision Exception (Condominiumization} DATE: September 1, 1981 Attached is an application requesting approval for subdivision exception for the purposes of condominiumizing an existing office building located at 135 W. Main, Aspen (Lots A & B, Block 59}. The applicants are Mike Otte and David Melton. This item is tentatively being,scheduled for the October 6, 1981 meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Please review and return comments to me by Wednesday, September 16. Thank you! /""', './ ........ '-..,.;' P. O. BOX 3715 ASPEN, CO 81612 Augus t 26, 1981 Planning Commission Ci ty of Aspen Aspen, Colorado To Whom It May Concern: Request We hereby respectfully submit this letter as application of Subdivision exception according to the provisions of Section 20-19 of the Aspen Code. Location The subject property is located at 135 W. Main, Aspen, Colorado and it's legal description is Lots A & B, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen. Grounds There are special circumstances affecting the subject property which we feel make strict application of the Code an undue hardship. The granting of the exception will not, in our opiniop,bedetrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area of the subject property. The applicants, David Melton and Mike Otte, who formerly practiced together in a partnership providing services as Certified Public Accounts and in that pursuit utilized the entire space of the property. Since January 1, 1981, the CPA partnership has been dissolved and David Melton presently continues to occupy approximately one-fourth of the space in the property, still engaged in providing accounting services. The remainder of the building is occupied by other tenants who have various office-type uses. The applicants seek the exception from subdivision so that the building can be condominiumized and separate ownership patterns can be developed. ......-.,~ /", Augus t 26, 1981 Planning Commission Ci ty of Aspen Page 2 The building is an existing structure where residential use has not been made for well over 5 years. The granting of our request would provide us with a way to enjoy ownership of portions of the building more desirous to us. The use of the property and its' impact on the neighborhood and local service would remain the same. We hope you will find our application acceptable. Yo rs truly, ilu1<- ~~ 1w.lh.- Davi d Melton MEMORANDUM "5(nr'JDr::::'> 1 <;"l ill'" ','- Ii' n cr. \l'i 11;-~i~ jl I .L,__,~, : 1 SEP 171981 l\i I _.---__ /'L.-/ ASPEN I PITKIN CO PlANNING OF('ICE TO: Collette Penne / Planning Office FROM: Louis Buettner, Engineering Department DATE: September 17, 1981 RE: Otte/Melton Subdivision Exception (Condo) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Engineering Department reviewed the above application along with a, site inspection and has the following comments: 1. The application (plat) shows nine (9) units, three (3) being located in the basement, four (4) units located on the first floor, two (2) units 'on the second floor. The Building Department will need to comment on the health and safety of units located on each floor. 2. The two (2) units on the second floor have extremely low ceilings. The Building Department should comment on this also. '3. The following information is missing from the plat: A. Scale, North arrow B. Basis of bearings C. Street and alley widths, curb and gutter location from street center line. D. Zone district of the property E. Sheet index F. Legend for symbols and abbreviations 4. As this applicatio~ is located in the first block West of the existing underground power, it is logical the applicant agrees to join any underground power improvement district. 5. Following final approvals, the mylars should be submitted to this office with the surveyor's signature and seal. ASPEN.PITKIN ~EGIONAL BUILDII\tG DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Stan Stevens, Building Department RE: Otte/Melton Subdivision Exception (Condominiumization) DATE: September 28, 1981 On Friday, September 25, 1981, an inspection of the subject property was made. The following is a list of problems noted during that inspection. 1. Service disconnect not properly grounded as per National Electric Code, Section 250. 2. Subpanel neutral is connected to ground. 3. Lower east unit missing cover plates on all switches and recepticals. 4. Insufficient number of recepticals on all first floor offices. 506 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/925-5973 o r' , ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen. Colo,ado 81611 City 00100 - 63721 09009 - 00000 Conceptual Application 63722 Preliminary Application 63723 Final Application '63n4-!t37,;(7- '173S0 -EKemption'JIiJJ. 'Z.'iCetf, 63725 5;; /60 Rezoning 63726 Conditional Use Name: O!'j h C+l e.. .Jtte ~ metl&-M-J Address: ~ "l'3 LJ 7 f\ \ ~n Cb J' /h/.:L Check No. 'iH'1 LAND USE APPLlCA TIDN FEES County 00100 - 63711 09009 - 00000 63712 63713 63714 63715 63716 63717 PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00100 - 63061 09009 - 00000 63062 63063 Subdivision/PUD Special Review P&Z Review Only Detailed Review Final Plat Special Approval Specially Assigned Is: O. d(J County Land Use Sales GMP Sales Almanac Sales Copy Fees Othe, Project: JJ I II/Uft- ~ ~ 'JUC' 'vllvl X(l t't' '. ' (('c'r1cfr. ) '1;)S -;)979 / tit" d. [ /9r I J Phone: Date: Receipt No. P