Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ec.Curton Condominiumization , , ... , " .. - CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen ......./ PROJ Eel' NAME: APPL ICANT: Applicant dress/Phone: REPRESENTATIVE':~U~ )}fIr Il Representative ;cldresyhone: ~(1P' !I/Aut' Type of Application: / '- CASE NO. ('(9 A )i':;- STAFF: <::. 6 " DATE RECE IV ED: ll) in.Xc:) DATE RECEIVED COMPLETE: ) , / ,r:-yy tV /'{; r Cf)5 - fIg-OD 1. GMP/SUBDIV IS ION/PUD (4 step) Conceptual Submission ____ Preliminary Plat ____ Final Plat ($2,730.00) ($1,640.00) ($ 820.00) II. SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step) Conceptual Submission ____ Preliminary Plat ____ Final Plat ($1,900.00) ($1,220.00) ($ 820.00) ($1,490.00) ($ 680.00) III. EXCEPI' ION/EXEMPl'ION/REZ ON ING (2 step) L IV. SPECIAL REV IEW (l step) ____ Speciill Review ____ Use Determination --7/' Condi titllal Use , ; ---l,.L... Other: rr1V'1lI IAi/MI(l ,:meA.... -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- P&Z ~ MEETING DATE: 3,-,-",-1:.- L~I PUBLIC HEARING: YES CNOJ Dl\TE REFERRED: :'ii7Z)::' IN IT IALS: --(;pj;; =============================~=~=~===============~============= REF~ALS: ~City Atty ____ Aspen Consolo S.D. ____ School District ~ City Engineer Mtn. Bell ____ Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas Housing DiL ____ Parks Dept. ____ StateHwy Dept (Glenwd) Aspen Water ____ Holy Cross Electric ____ StateHwy Dept (Gr.Jtn) City E;lectric Fire Marshall ____ Bldg: Zoning/Inspectn Envir. B1th. Fire Chief Other: ;~~~=;;~;~;~~================~~;~=;;~;~~~==;;~~7;~==~~~~~~~=~~~= ,/ - \.,.... . /1. , -L City Atty ~ City Engineer +- Building Dept./ Other: I, J 1..1.----- Other: L~~' Ci.>>'F~ / FILE STATUS AND LOCAT ION: / Reviewed by: . - AspeJo..t'r.Z CURiOrv CONDOf>WIi'Ji....dZAiJf)N ~ty-co~'. SLiM. ~ L\, Jlr6l) CASE DISPOSITION: c.+ 'I (.ol1lhh~11> : I 2. The applicant shall submit a statement of subdivision exception through the City Attorney which shall include a requirement that the units be limited to six month leases with no more than two tenancies per year. The Condominiumization Occupancy and Resale Deed Restriction and Agreement shall be recorded through the City Attorney~s Office prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 1. A final plat shall be submitted which~ conforms to the requirements of Section 20-15 and the ~e~~changes noted in the Engineering Department memorandum dated June 12, 1985. -3-~e-f-G,ld-ElYr1:-n<:l e.n C.O!llffi-Brltc: an the plilttiRg: 3. 1.,6'. North arrOl'lS need to be labeled. t)6. It is unclear from the plat how many bedrooms are in each un it. The Bu il ding Depa rtment needs to confi rm the number of bedrooms in order .to verify the correct number of parking spaces supplied. Rev i el\ 3 t. Identify the adj acent Parcell subdivision name - Herndon , Subdivision. Y,t'l. A Title Certificate 'Certificate is suggested. neering Department. is also required, and a !,jortgagee's ,Language is available from the Engi- ~ 5,/. Please change P & Z and city Council certificates to read: "....approved on the __ day of ____, 19 Signed this day of , 1 9_. " 6.1. Indicate access walkway and stairs alongside Unit A as General Cowmon Element (GCE) in order for Unit B to have access. /( (' it: '> '~y (2 ," f, ~__ a.;f, . , ' , ,. .;i '/ . -~ ! J' ,....1:......-' c....( ( . " I .. '1,' ",-- r :~).t,!. ~ i,'...~: ("r,(l..~.. ",'1(,), . '... / ': {' , ., I. -, .' ",., I;:.,:.' . , I . . L t. r '.' '~..- " ,.' 1.:- .J lJ l,dl, I ?(-/1-', ~ ./" MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Chuck Roth, City Engineering Department ~~ DATE~ February 2, 1984 RE: Curton-Madsen Lot Line Adjustment ----------------------------------------------------------- Having reviewed the above application, and having made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. This property has been reviewed and platted on two previous occasions. There remain a number of matters that appear to be unresolved. 2. The width of the access is less than required by Sections 20-l7(b) (3) and (6). Both the Fire Marshall and the Water Department should be contacted for letters commenting on this subdivision exception. Perhaps the ingressjegress-emergency- water easement might be widened 4' in the other direction, on the adjacent property, to meet the Code 20' requirement. 3. Earlier reviews were for a single family residence. Water supply at that time was questionable. The current application is for a duplex, so the water s~oply and the emergency access width may be even more critical than before. Also, depending on the site location, a new fire hydrant may need to be installed. This application should be referred to the Fire Marshall, Water Department, Electric Department and the Sanitation District for comment. '~It has been suggested for consideration that the application ~~d plat amendment might be unnecessary if a different ingressj egress-emergency-utility easement configuration were applied. Then only a deed would be required. Namely, the lot configuration of the first amendment could be maintained if. the easement took an "L" shape around the existing residential structure. 5. To help avoid confusion, we would like to see the parcel designations changed for this second amendment to Lot 1 and Lot 2. 6. A final plat must be submitted which conforms to the requirements of Section 20-15. 7. The residential structure, driveway, parking spaces, and other improvements need to be shown. , ~ Page Two Curton-Madsen Lot Line Adjustment 8. The designation of the 16' water and access easement is unclear. The water-line easement should also be indicated on Parcel A. That easement on Parcel A is also called a parking easement.Dothe owners of Parcel A want someone parking on the ingress/egress .easement? would the Fire Marsnall permit parking on the emergency access easement? 9. The second amended plat does not show some of the utility easements which are on the previous plattings. In order to remove those easements, letters of release must be obtained from the appropriate utilities. lO. The language in the dedication. certificate needs to be reworked a bit, e.g. two parcels, not three, "rededicate," "resubdivide," second amendment, not first. 11. In the subdivision exception agreement statement, the appl- icants need to consent to join improvement districts in accordance with current language from the City AttorneY's office. CR/co cc: Jay Hammond, Assistant City Engineer Louis Buettner, City Surveyor ~ ~, MEMORANDUM TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office FROM: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department ~~ DATE: February l6, 1984 .~ RE: Curton-Madsen Lot Line Adjustment This memo is in response to a request for further information. l. A topographic map is attached. The entire building site is at a slope of 64%, plus and minus. 2. The site is within 100 feet of the high water line and will therefore be subject to stream margin review pursuant to Sec. 24-6.3 of the Aspen Municipal. 3. The proposed parking would require a large cut in the bank, resulting in at least a twelve foot high cut. The stability of such a cut would have to be verified by a registered professional engineer. Retainage would probably be needed. This might be an instance where a tied-back retainage structure would be appropriate. 4. Within the stream margin review criteria, this development is subject to implementation of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan, and this could impose aesthetic/architectural considerations on the nature of the cut in the bank and any technique of retainage proposed and the final appearance of all work. 5. Reference to Parcel C should be deleted from the plat. 6. The parking spaces as shown are larger than required. Sec. 24-4.2(a) requires a minimum of B~ feet x IB feet. . 7. Please provide copies for Engineering of fire access and water supply and sewer service comments. CR/co Enclosure cc: Jay Hammond . '" ", ~../ !?J~k.9 ~ ~fr7'?le.r d ~ ~~ 94= !i8~, 5$(7rfftZJt~ Jhed. STMdST~ ~~. ~ok~ J'/O'// (8tl8) .P.?5-d'd'tltl 3'~ /' (8tl.J) N5-.P.J.Pd' Re: Curton Condominium i( \~:. 'N~'" ,L- \ .... \ /. -,;-*,w,/ ~ /:' " . 'fp. ' ~!.."I 0 ,;/ ~'-l.I" .,.. .~ :,pril l~~) 1985 Hr, Jim llilson Chief Building Official and Fire Marshal Pitkin County Building Department 506 East Hain Street Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Jim: In order to comply with the requirements of your department and the subdivision agreement relative to the above condominium we would propose to do the following in connection with revegetat'fon:- I, Remove cobbles greater than 10 inches in diameter from the area excavated (I will personally be doing this evenings and weekends so I would like to have 60 days after C.O. in which to complete this work) ; 2, Spread topsoil in that area and then spray mulch the same area tlith nati.ve grasses; 3. Irrigate the areas until germination is achieved. hould you please indicate your approval of this plan either on the enclosed copy of this letter or by separate communication, Thank you. verY't>f"lY yours~ 77;~ :'------..:.;/?<?/ -1 :~.......--'--- 'Douglas P. "/::llen / DPA/pkm \ THE ABOVE PROPOSEll REVEGETATION PLAN IS HEREBY APPROVED. JIH WILSON /. " /N",.,. HE HORANDUll FROll: Jim Wilson, Chief Building Official Jay Hammond, City Engineer * Hay 6, 1985 TO: DATE: P.E: Curton Condoninium Landscaping ___._ _ ___ _ __ ...._~_.___ _____ __ __._ _H_'_. ._.___...__._ .~_, n. _ __ _ _ - - -- - - -. - -- - - - -- - - - -. _.~ -- -. - --. -- -. .-. --- ---------------...---.---------.----.--------- -'- - -- -- -.-.- -, -- - -- - -_._.~ - -- - -- - --- -- - - -- I!aving reviewed the attached letter from Doug Allen regarding proposed revegetation of the hillside adjacent to the Curton duplex I \lOuld offer the follo\'1i:1Cj comnents: 1. Item 1 should probably be reviseu to indicate that all loose surface cobble is to be removed, not just those over lO inches. Loose material that has accumulateG on the lO\ler slope or material that threatens to migrate down the slope should be removed down . to about a 5 inch diameter. 2. There has still been no effort to place fencing across the lower slope to prevent material from rolling into the roadl'1ays. We remain concerned that this site poses a hazard to the roads beloH. - 3. It \'/ould appear that there has been considerable settlement on the hillside in the area of the se\~er service. This portion of the slope should also be restored to grade as part of the letter agreement. Pending cor.1pliance with the rema~n~ng items in my memo to Patsy Newbury of April 5, 1985, I would recommend the project remain on hold. JH/co/CurtonCondoLandscaping tv (te' ~-~5.~5 OOUj Ala. tol,l C+) {.1,~J +~.+ tb n<VCjetA+i", flA"ifu 1~'ll,,,,,,,,,,t, I ;l'l.e".: ''''fk,*,t# -ikn-'~h" i( C :n),'(,,\\~," (~~,~"J ~) , l...., , r"- ,",,.-' ,....'" " fg~9~ ~d~ ~9'r~t+, .f'Stlrffa.<< ~./~ Y'Md Y'~ ~,~~ d'/~// (/!(J/!) .9.?5-d'dW !T.n!J{ /' (/!(J/!) .9.?5-.9/!.9d' May 21, 1985 Mr. Alan Richman Acting Planning Director City of Aspen Planning Office 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Condominiumization of duplex constructed on Parcel 2, Herndon Subdivision Dear Alan: Enclosed is the Land Use Application form, together with my check in the amount of $680.00, as well as three blueline copies of the two-page condominium plat for the above. I think you will recall that this duplex was allowed City Council action taken at their June 27, 1983 meeting providing that one of the units be restricted to Middle-income Price and Occupancy Guidelines for 1982. We would now like to process the condominiumization of this duplex. The subdivision improvement agreement for the Herndon Subdivision required by Council has previously been approved by the City Attorney's office and recorded in Book 471 at Page 277 in the office of the Clerk and Recorder. This application is made pursuant to City Code and the requirements for a condominium plat under the Subdivision Exception procedure as outlined in Jay Hammond's memo of July 11, 1980 to Sunny Vann. /:)UlY your~m ~ {f1:;l? DOUgla~llen ~ DPA/pkm Enclosures / "'''''''> .. ,~., CITY OF'ASPEN 130 south galena street aspen, colorado 81611 303-925 -2020 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM DATE SUBMITTED MRY? 1. 1985 FEES $680.00 NAME DONNA LEE CURTON TRUST ADDRESS c/o Douglas P. Allen, 530 East Main Street; First Floor, Aspen, CO 81611 PHONE 925-8800 NAJoIE OF PROJECT CURrON CONDOMINIUMS PRESENT ZONING R-6 -' LOT SIZE ? 1 q,n J=;ql1Arp.: feet LOCATION 935-939 West Francis, (indicate street address description. A vicinit Aspen, Colorado (See attached Condominium Plat) lot and block number. May require legal map is very useful.) CURRENT BUILD-OUT 3,720 sq. ft. 2 units 3,720 sq. ft. 2 units PROPOSED BUILD-OUT DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING USES never used, new construction'pending issuance of certificate of occupancy. DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE PROPOSAL ~"hiliviRim1 into two condominiums units. TYPE OF APPLICATION APPLICABLE CODE SECTION (S) Section 20 PLAT AMENDMENT REQUIRED YES . ,__NO DATE PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE COMPLETED - Mav 21. 1985 ATTACHMENTS: 1. All applican'ts must 'supply PrOOT 'm :OWnership in the form of a title insurance commitm~'~ or statement.xrom an attorney indicating ,that he/she has research~d the title an~ verifies that the applicant is the owner of the prop' ny (free of ' lien", and eucumbrances.) 2. If the process requires ,. public hearing, a Property Owner's List must be supplied which g 'es all. owners within 300 feet in all directions in some cases and adjacent owners in some cases. 3. Number of copies required (by code and/or in pre-application conference. ) 4. Plat by Registered Surveyor x Yes No ~ , MEMORANDUH FROM: StevE Burstein, Planning Office JUN - 4 is;;. I ) -.JI.... Cl'O : ;;:(:ity Attoney /" City F.ngir.eel FE: Curton Condominiumization DATE: May 29, 1985 ========~~=~:~~~~~::=~~~~~==:~~====================~~=~=~r~=:=.:~~=:== Attached for your review is an application submitted by Doug Allen on behalf of his client Donna Lee Curton, requesting approval for the condominiumization of the Curton duplex located at 935-939 "'est Francis in Aspen. Please review this material and return your referral comments to the Planning Office no later than June 10, 1985, in order for this office to have adequate time to prepare for its presentation before the Aspen City Council on June 24th. Thank you. ~C' <i-JO CV\;lA..f('\~" L " -- -- '>. MEMORARDUM XI TO: Aspen City Council Hal Schilling, City Manage~ Steve Burstein, Planning Office TBRU: FROM: ~ RE: Curton Condominiumization DATE: June 24, 1985 ====================================================================== LOCATION: division. 935-939 West Francis Street, Parcel Two, Herndon Sub- ZONIR;: R-6. SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of this condominium- ization with three conditions stated below. APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant requests to replat the recently built duplex into two condominium units. PREVIOUS COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Parcel Two was formed by a lot split in 1980, known as the Herndon Subdivision. This lot was created with the provision that it be restricted to a single family residence. In 1983 an exemption was granted from the growth management allotment procedures for the construction of a deed restricted employee unit as the second unit of a duplex. Council's approval on June 27, 1983 included the following conditions: 1. The unit be restricted to the middle income price and occupancy guidelines for 1982. 2. The unit be offered either for sale or for rent provided that if the unit is rented, it not be for less than a one year period. 3. The applicant be allowed to select her tenant if for rent or purchaser if for sale, provided that all tenants or purchas- ers be qualified by the Housing Office prior to their occupancy. 4. Deed restriction be recorded through the City Attorney's Office. It should be noted that the approval was for a duplex unit that could be rented under the conditions above, but not be sold without condomi- niumiz ation. .' ,.>, ,. .", ""' ;, ......" , MEHORANDUH To: Steve Burstein, Planning Office From: Chuck Roth, Assistant City Engineer e 1C.-.. Date: June 12, 1985 . .. Re: Curton Condominiumization ------------------------------------------------------ Having reviewed the above application, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. Comment (2) of this department's memo of February 16, 1984, was not responded to. This development was/is subject to stream margin review. The most salient element of that review which would ,pertain to the project is Section 24-6.3(c) (3) which requires compliance with and implementation of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan. This project clearly has not as yet complied with this stream margin review criterion. 2. Also, comment (2) of February 2, 1984, and comment (7) of February 16, 1984, have not been responded to. Specifically, we do not yet have the 20 foot emergency access required by Section 20-l7(b)(6). Did the fire marshall not require this? 3. The following are comments on the platting: a. North arrows need to be labeled. b. It is unclear from the plat how many bedrooms are in each unit. The Building Department needs to confirm the number of bedrooms in order .to verify the correct number of parking spaces supplied. c. Identify the adj acent Parcell subdivision name - Herndon Subdivision. d. A Title Certificate Certificate is suggested. neering Department. is also required, and a Mortgagee I s ,Language is available from the Engi- e. Please change P & Z and City Council certificates to read: "....approved on the ___ day of ____, 19 Signed this day of , 19_." f. Indicate access walkway and stairs alongside Unit A as General Common Element (GCE) in order for Unit B to have access. g. As to the allocation of the parking spaces, in the public '" Page 2 Curton Condominiumization June 12, 1985 interest and equitable treatment of the property owners, the Engineering Department would like each unit owner to be assigned a "near" space and a "far" space, and futher that the nearest "near" .~nd nearest "far" spaces be assigned to the furtherest un it, un i t "B". ec: Building Department CR/cr/curton.condo (/ MEMORANDUM ,... " TO: Hal Schilling, City FROM: Chuck Roth, Assistant City DATE: June 24, 1985 RE: Shiney, Galvanized Metal Roofs -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- r was interested to see in Steve Burstein's memo to Council June 24 re Curton Condominiumization, on page two, the comment the metal roof. It has been brought to the attention of the Planning Office by members of the Planning Commission and the public that the present metal roof of the Curton Duplex creates a glare visible from the Castle Creek Bridge. Although this matter cannot properly be a subject to condominiumization approval, _it would be very much "pprpC!iated if the a;>;>licant would paint the roof -using an earth toned color. When I was investigating geologic hazards on the face of Aspen Mountain with Jim Blanning, I noticed that there was terrible glare from such metal roofs, which included City Hall and St. Mary's. The glare was hard on the eyes and would not enhance any photographs from up there. Perhaps there should be an ordinance to prohibit such roofs in town. CR/co/MetalRoofs cc: Jim Wilson Planning and Zoning Commission Steve Burstein, Planning Office ~~q~~ A~~" . \\~;' "'......) \-, \\" \. /:>;'\.' b') \~ .' /~',,>\ ~}/ ~ /~~'<J \,. '\ > /., ,G'V '"\'1>\,; ,. ,,~ ,/ c ;;~'(')~'t " \:;),~,~~/~//,;;;, '" \. ~'''''''.i' __'- \. '...(' ;.,.~ Iv,,"''\- ~..... \"~. .<" ,--, '- ~ v PEN v>, ~~ 130 asp ME IDRANDU M DATE: July 8, 1986 TO: City Clerk FRCM: City Attorney RE: Curton O:>ndominiums Attached for execution by the Mayor please find the Statement of Except ion for the Curton Condom ini lIllS. D:J ug Allen will ret urn the Declaration of O:>venants to you after his client has signed it. PJT/mc Attachment MEMORANDUM TO: THRU: Aspen City Council ~ Hal SChilling, City Manage~ Steve Burstein, Planning Office ~ FROM: SUBJECT: Roofing on Curton Duplex DATE: July 9, 1985 ===================================================================== The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously passed the attached Resolution No. 85-14 finding the Curton Duplex metal roof a nuisance and recommending City Council action. Planning Commissioner White would like to present this resolution to City Council at the July 22nd meeting during your citizen participation section. On June 24, 1985 City Council approved condominiumization of the Curton Duplex. The Planning Office memorandum stated that it has been brought to the attention of the Planning Office by members of the Planning Commission and the public that the present metal roof of the Curton Duplex creates a glare visible from the Castle Creek Bridge. Although we noted that this matter cannot properly be a subject of condominiumization approval, we also stated that it would be very much appreciated if the applicant would paint the roof using an earth toned color. The matter was not acted on. The applicants' representative, Doug Allen, has defended the right of Donna Curton to place the roofing material on the structure, however, Ms. CUrton has been unavailable to discuss whether she would be willing to paint or replace the roof. CITY ~~ A~~_EN .A... JI/J} III !~'Z) - OwHJJ ~ rf' LF t~iJuJ ~~ 1J~ CMic~ D~.() ~ rrriJ'{ro~ ~ PerL. 6J;~~. J~ {JlQ.~ ~ 1 "f\0 c~wfl'.fftf" . - ^ L.~ 11,' CVOf1!J/r'f I u 'wr1.JVWV~ Vr~;):;~ L~-wn +L r4 ~~ ~ ~~ n,..-J ~ CA}. H JY arrJ ~"Ac~ {A !2r~ p1J't "'O;j d 1 i c/ i fH~f 11 !~e!t~ () rtl~c~,~ n~ .~fI~~ r,1I'j wi}", ,j;<t.;, ,1'"'$,,).:; "J,'''' tb c,,d;;, D~.f~w 2~1iJ Ifr~Mrhit~ ~jr~_i ~ {~ i,f~tt;;:;:'}~~ io-r~=t~)-; t!~ Cd~ {Mdt. WI ~ t,j,! ~- ' .. tf!' ~ ~ tw 6 w;Ji{A~ ~)C -""'-'~""""'."'-._~~" r . .", "....."..,'__.._.< , -'--"'~-__'_""~~_'_','n~.~,_.,__~,~.,.",_.., ,...-"-.., ~ ~tV~~ ;0 ~ ~~~ ~ ~ t!-b7c,<t..,.".~- r 'S' ~~~'c.e ~ ~ ~~~ a- ~/~ ~~.~~ ~~~~Jt4 ~~~~ ~~. ;;k#7~~ t#~~d~~ tut/h~ tfU!t:1~ ~~2I-do . rwtJ. ~ ~ ., ~ (7rV ~~ ~ ~/~ {,I}-( do, C:#v- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~. ~ -","..~._-",-..~~-"","'""-~"-'-'"-"~~"" STATEMENT OF EXCEPI'ION FROM THE FULL SUBDIVISION PROCESS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDCMINHMIZATION FOR THE CURTON CONDCMINIUMS WHEREAS, the Donna Lee Curton Trust (hereinafer "Applicants") are the owners of a parcel of real property in the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, described as follows; and WHEREAS, pursuant to an application dated May 21, 1985, appl ication and the representations set forth therein, Appl icants requested an exception fran the full subdivision process for the pur]X)se of condominiumizing the dwell ing s to be constructed on the subject property to be known as the Curton Condominiums; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission at its meeting held May 17, 1983, determined that such exception W)uld be appropriate and recomended that the same be granted, subj ect, however, to certain conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council determined at its regular meeting held June 27, 1983, that such exception was appropriate and granted the same, subject, however, to certain conditions as set for th below; NCM, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colo- rado, does hereby determine that the appl ication for exception from the full subdivision process for the pur]X)se of condominiumi- zation of the above-described property is proper and hereby 9 ranted an ex cept ion from the full subd iv ision process for such condominiumization, PROVIDED, HONEVER, that the foregoing excep- tion is expressly conditioned u]X)n: (1) The Applicant's recording with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, contemporaneously herewith, that certain "Declara- tion of Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions" for the Curton CondominilJl\s dated July .____, 1986, and (2) The Appl icant' s strict compl iance with the prov isions contained therein and all other binding conditions of approval on this matter set by the Planning and zoning Commission and/or the City Council, for itself, its successors and assigns. Dated this /~day of __~-------' ~'SfIc{' 1986. . APPROVED AS TO FORM: Paul ~~addune~-City-Attorney I, Kathryn S. Koch, do hereby certify that the foregoing Statement of Exception from the Full Subdivision Process for the purposes of condominiumization of the Curton Condominiums, a condomini \.Ill, was considered and approved by the City Council at its regular meeting held , at which time the Mayor, William L~tirli;:;g;-was-authorIzerto executed the same on behal f of the City of Aspen. ~ /~ ~--- Kathryn Koch, City Clerk 108 2 ." ."/ MEMORANDUM 111r - THRU: Aspen City Council Hal Schilling, City ~+- Manager ~ '1'0: FF.OM: Steve Burstein F.E: Roofing on Curton Duplex DATE: August 12, 1985 ========~===~~~=~==~====================,~~r~~=~:===================== The Planning and Zoning Conlndssion vl1al1imovsly passed the attached F.esolution No. 85-14 finding the Curton Duplex metal roof a nuisance and recommending City CovndJ action. Planning Commissioner White presented this resolution to City Council at the July 22nd meeting during your citizen participation section, and Council asked that it be put on tonight's agenda so that it could be acted upon. On June 24, 1985 City Council approved condominiumization of the Curton Duplex. The Planning Office memorandum stated that it has been brought to the attention of the Planning Office by members of the Planning Commission and the public that the present metal roof of the Curt on Duplex creates a glare visible from the Castle Creek Bridge. Although we noted that this matter cannot properly be a subject of condominiumization approval, we also stated that it would be very much appreciated if the applicant would paint the roof using an earth toned color. The matter was not acted on. The owners representative, Doug Allen, has defended the right of Donna Curt on to place the roofing material on the structure; however, he and Mrs. Curton have indicated a willingness to alleviate the problem. Mr. Allen has noted that galvanized roofs lose much of their shine after weathering for a few years, and an acid treatment has been initially identified to accelerate the aging process. The owner requests 45 days to further investigate this treatment process and report to t.he Planning Office wbether or not it works. It was also noted that the most glare comes from the ridge cap and, if necessary, tbis covltl t,e painted. 8B.l .:,., i , I i I 1 1 1 i I t1 !, RESOLOTIOOF THE ASPEN PLANNIffi AND ZONI>""'''ICOMMISSION """" RECOMMENDIffi THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL TO DIRECT TIlE BOILDIffi DEPARTMENT TO NOTIFY THE CURTON DUPLEX OWNERS OF THE OFFENSIVE ROOFIffi AND REQUIRIffi THE CORTON DUPLEX OWNERS TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION Resolution No. B5-~ WHEREAS, the Curton Duplex, 935-939 West Francis street, is located within 350 feet of the Castle Creek Bridge on the hillside and is visible from this heavily trave11ed bridge; and WHEREAS, the present metal r< f of the Curton Duplex creates a .' glare visible from the Castle Creek Bridge; and WHEREAS, the glare is a safety hazard to passing motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians; and WHEREAS, many residents of Aspen and visitors to Aspen have complained about this unsightly and offensive roof found in a beauti- ful setting; and WHEREAS, the metal roof is an eye sore as it is discordant with the natural hillside vegetation as well as with the building materialS of the residential neighborhood of which the Curton Duplex is a part; and WHEREAS, the metal roof constitutes a public nuisance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Aspen planning and Zoning Commission that it does hereby recommend that the Aspen City Council direct the Building Department to hotify the property owners of the 'i Curton Duplex of this offense an. require appropriate actions to rectify the situation, such as painting the roof an earth toned color i i I \ i , \ I I I I 1 I , i or replacing the galvanized roofing with a non-reflective, earth toned roofing material. APPROVED by the Commiss ion at its regular meeting on July 2, 1985. ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 1/;- ATTEST' ~1:U IA } I e./{l/ tc Kim Wilhoit, Deputy city Clerk 5B.12 , /,', '" " MEMORANDUM. THEU: AEpen City Council Hal Schillir'g, City Manager ,* '}'C: FFon: Steve Burr<teir; FE: Roofing on Curton Duplex ['f,_T[; }\_ugust 12, 1985 =:::==:.:::::.::::.:::;=c';::-:: :-::C::.: ::C::::.:::' =::::-: ==:::::::c::.::::.=-:::::::' :::.-:-:::.::::::-:::::-::: ~=,=:::=:':::-.::O:-: =:-c:. ::::===:-. Trle Flanning clne1 Zordns Ce,riir"jf,f-icl' u.,<,rdmcl'f,li' l:,:f,flee, the at.tached Feso] uti on "'0. 85-l4 finding the Curton Duple>: n,etal roof a nuisance onc1 recon,n,enclir'9 City COliPC:j) octic,/'. Florlni/:g (m:nd r<sioner vihite presented this resolution to City Council at the July 22nd meeting during your citizen porticipation section, and Council asked tho.t it be put on tonight's agenda so that it could be acted upon. On June 24, 1985 City Council approved condominiumiz ation of the Curt on Duplex. The Planning Office memorandum stated that it has been brought to the attention of the Planning Office by members of the Planning Commission and the public that the present metal roof of the Curton Duplex creates a glare -' 'hIe from the CastlE' Creek Brioge. l\lt,hough we noted tbot. thilS n",cc<=r cannot properly. be:a subject of condominiumization approval, we also stated that it'would be very much appreciated if the applicant would paint the roof using an earth toned color. The matter was not acted on. The owners representative, Doug Allen, has defended the right of Donna Curton to place t.he roofing material on the structure; bowE'ver, be and Nrs. Curton have indicated a willingness to alleviate the problem. !Cr. AllE'Ti ho.1S Ti(,tec' tl-'ct Si:]vordzed roofs lose much of their shine after weathering for a. few years, and an acid treatment has been initially identified to accelerate the aging process. The owner requests 45 days to further investigate this treatment process and report. to t_hl' Flopr:ing Office whetber or not it. works. It was also potea that the most glole cones from the ridge cap and, if necess8ry, tld S ((ll']e] I c' pcdnted. SB.l N D A,i'J;;I~ T. re~ '(; j, l i " . RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNHI; AND ZONIlI; COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL TO DIRECT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO NOTIFY THE CURTON DUPLEX OWNERS OF THE OFFENSIVE ROOFING AND REQUIRING THE CURTON DUPLEX OWNERS TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION Resolution No. 85-~ WHEREAS, the Curton Duplex, 935-939 West Francis Street, is located within 350 feet ~f the Castle Creek Bridge on the hillside and is visible from this heavily travelled bridge: and WHEREAS, the present metal roof of the Curton Duplex creates a glare visible from the Castle Creek Bridge: and WHEREAS, the glare is a safety haz ard to passing motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians: and WHEREAS, many residents of Aspen and visitors to Aspen have complained about this unsightly and offensive roof found in a beauti- ful setting: and WHEREAS, the metal roof is an eye sore as it is discordant with the natural hillside vegetation as well as with the building materials of the residential neighborhood of which the Curton Duplex is a part: and WHEREAS, the metal roof constitutes a public nuisance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission that it does hereby recommend that the Aspen City Council direct the Building Department to notify the property owners of the curton Duplex of this offense and require appropriate actions to rectify the situation, such as painting the roof an earth toned color or replacing the galvanized roofing with a non-reflective, earth toned roofing material. APPROI7ED by the Commission at its regular meeting on July 2, 1985. ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION &c;- ATTEST. . ~~~ LL)" _d~< ~ Kim Wilhoit, Deputy City Clerk SB.12 On March 20, 1984, City Council approved a lot-line adjustment for the purpose of the formation of an east-west lot alignment. A series of conditions was attached regarding the plat submitted, water line connection, and the suitability of the land for the construction proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission granted a requested parking exemption. BACBCROUND: The duplex is located at the end of West Francis Street on the steep hillside descending to Castle Creek. There are single family residences to the east of and across Francis Street to the north east of the Curton property. Power Plant Road and an access easement road (lie at the bottom of the applicants property; to the south 350 feet is the Castle Creek Bridge. Secti on 20-22 states the requirements that must be complied with in condominiumization. Paragraphs (c) and (d) are most relevant to this proj ect, requiring demonstration "that approval of condominium- ization will not reduce the supply of low and moderate income housing" (Section 20-22 (d)). PROBLEM DISCUSSION: One of the main concerns at this time is that the unit for sale (Unit 8) be restricted to the price range set by Council in the approval of an exemption from the GMP on June 27, 1983. A Condominium Occupancy and Resale Deed Restriction and Agreement has been drafted by the applicant; and it appears that this document meets the intent of the City Council's conditions for an exemption. The Housing Authority has received this agreement and given it a favorable review. Following up on Council's 6-27-83 conditions, the deed restrictions must be recorded through the City Attorney's Office. In a memorandum from the Engineering Office dated June 12, 1985, several comments were made: a. The plat submission is deficient in certain areas and should be corrected as indicated. b. The Engineering Department recommends that each unit owner is assigned a "near" parking space and a "far" parking space, rather than locating Unit A's two parking spaces in the "far" area, and B's two spaces in the "near" area. It has been brought to the attention of the Planning Office by members of the Planning Commission and the public that the present metal roof of the Curton Duplex creates a glare visible from the Castle Creek Bridge. Al though this matter cannot properly be a subj ect to condo- miniumization approval, it would be very must appreciated if the applicant would paint the roof using an earth toned color. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that this condominium- ization be approved by Council subject to the following conditions listed in the suggested motion. The appropriate motion is: "I move to approve the requested condominiumization subj ect to the following conditions: ~ "' 'J 1. The applicant shall submit a statement of subdivision exception through the City Attorney which shall include a requirement that the units be limited to six month leases with no more than two tenancies per year. 2. The Condominiumization Occupancy and Resale Deed Restriction and Agreement shall be recorded through the City Attorney's Office prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 3. A final plat shall be submitted which conforms to the requirements of Section 20-15 and the seven changes noted in the Engineering Department memorandum dated June 12, 1985. SB.lO . 1. SB.lO ("""\ "co" " .J 2. The applicant shall submit a statement of subdivision exception through the City Attorney which shall include a requirement that the units be limited to six month leases with no more than two tenancies per year. The Condominiumization Occupancy and Resale Deed Restriction and Agreement shall be recorded through the City Attorney',s Office prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 3. A final plat shall be submitted which",conforms to the requirements of Section 20-15 and the ~enXchanges noted in the Engineering Department memorandum dated June 12, 1985. -- - ' I JIYl 15); I \ M~tlD>lOi , ~ CURTON CONDOMINIUM OCCUPANCY AND RESALE DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into effective , 1985, by and between DOUGLAS P. ALLEN of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado (hereinafter referred to as Owner) and the HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AND PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO (hereinafter referred to as Authority); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Owner has purchased Condominium Unit No. B, of the Curton Condominium according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book , Page , of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder (hereinafter referred to as Unit), and, WHEREAS, it is acknowledged by the Owner that the Unit is subject .to the control of the Authority for the purposes of addressing middle income housing needs of the area.and that the parties hereby wish to insure that on resale, the Unit is again made available to satisfy the need for middle income housing within Pitkin County, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants of the parties hereto, and other good and valuable consideration, it is agreed and understood aa follows: 1. In the event that the Owner shall deaire to sell the Unit, which is described above, or any interest therein, the Owner shall notify the Authority, in writing, of Owner's intention to do so and deposit with the Authority an amount equal to one (1%) percent of the estimated value of the Unit. The Authority shall immediately advertise the Unit for sale by competitive bid submitted by qualified purchasers (as hereinafter defined). Except as provided in Paragraph 8 hereof, the Owner may accept any bid, or in the alternative, reject all bids and retain ownership of the Unit provided that the Owner continues to occupy the unit as the Owner's sole and exclusive place of residence. (If the Owner rejects all bids the Authority shall retain the deposit until the Unit is eventually sold). If the Unit is sold. there will be an additional fee paid to the Authority of one (1%) percent. An adjustment will be made at the time of closing, so that the Owner shall ultimately pay to the Authority two (2%) percent of the actual selting price. In the event of a partnership, joint tenancy or co-tenancy transfer or transfer in which one Owner buys the other Owner's interest or a new partnership is created, a fee, as may be from time to time established by the Authority in its guidelines (but not in excess of 2% of the value of the interest being sold), shall be paid by the selling party. 2. Qualified purchasers are those meeting the qualifications of the Authority, which qualifications shall be established annually by Resolution of the Authority, taking into consideration length of employment, length of residency, financial stability, net worth and maximum income and all other criteria adopted by the Authority reasonably calculated to determine eligibility for middle income housing and ability to finance the same. In no event shall any qualified purchasers submit a bid for an amount which would result in the purchaser assuming obligations in excess of any liability/income ratio established by the Authority. 3. In no event shall any Unit be sold for an amount in excess of the total of the following (hereinafter "maximum resale price"): (a) The maximum square foot purchase price in effect at the time of sale in accordance with Authority's middle price guidelines and if none exist at such tliiie.;..t:l1e...own,ir+S-purchase price plus appreciation equal to an amount equal to six (6%) percent of the purchase price for each year from the date of purchase to the date of the notice of intent to sell (pro-rated at the rate of one-half [.5%] percent for each whole month from the date of purchase). (b) The cost of capital improvements made to the Unit, determined by cost according to methods established in the Authority's 1982 guidelines, plus ~ (c) The Owner's actual improvements made to assessedto the Owner cost of the COfTlTIlon by the Unit Owner's pro-rata share of capital elements of the condominium and Owner's Association, plus (d) The Owner's assessmentR governmental ownership. actual were agency cost of any public improvements for which imposed by any governmental or quasi- and which have been paid during the period of NOTHING HEREIN SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO CONSTITUTE A GUARANTEE BY THE AUTHORITY THAT ON RESALE THE OWNER SHALL OBTAIN HIS MAXIMUM RESALE PRICE. RATHER, IT SHALL CONSTITUTE, ONLY, THE MAXIMUM PRICE FOR WHICH THE UNIT MAY BE SOLD BY OWNER. ---- 4. In the event that a bid is received equal to the maximum resale price herein established, the Unit may be sold to such bidder at said maximum price. In the event that two or more such bids equal to the maximum resale price are received, the purchaser shall be selected by Owner. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the Owner from rejecting all bids and retaining ownership of the Unit provided the Owner continues to occupy the Unit as Owner's sole and exclusive place of residence. 5. No Owner shall permit any purchaser to assume any or all of the Owner's customary closing costs nor accept any other consideration so as to increase the purchase price above the bid price or maximum sale price or so as to otherwise induce the Owner to sell to. said purchaser. 6. The following transfers of interest in the Unit shall (unless designed to avoid the provisions of this Agreement) be exempt from the restrictions on transfer contained herein: (a) A tranafer by operation of law of a deceased person's interest to the surviving joint tenant. (b) A transfer of an interest by will or inheritance. (c) A transfer by genuine gift without any consideration therefor. (d) A transfer of an interest to a trustee for the benefit of the Owner or the Owner's wife or issue. (e) A transfer of an interest by Treasurer's Deed pursuant to a sale for delinquent taxes or by a Sheriff's or public or private Trustee's Deed pursuant to a judgment of execution or foreclosure sale. (f) A transfer, either by foreclosure or by deed in lieu of fore- closure, to a lender holding a deed of trust on the Unit; or (g) A transfer of an interest to the Unit Owner's Association of the Condominium by action to enforce the Association's lien for assessments. In the event the Unit is transferred in any manner described in Paragraph 7(a) through (g), the transferee, transferee's grantees or successors in interest, shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement notwithstanding the prior exemption. 7. In the event that any Unit subject to these restrictions is sold and conveyed without compliance herewith, such sale shall be wholly null and void and shall confer no title whatsoever upon the intended purchaser provided, however, that the Owner is entitled to rely on the determination of the Authority as to the qualifications of a potential purchaser and any sale or conveyance made in reliance thereon shall be valid. Each and every conveyance of the Unit shall conclusively be deemed to include and incorporate by this reference, even without reference hereto, the covenants herein contained. '" 8. The Owner agrees that, in the event that Owner ceases to utilize the Unit as Owner's sole and exclusive place of residence, Owner will offer the Unit for sale pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. The Owner shall be deemed to have ceased to use the Unit as Owner's sole and exclusive place of residence by accepting permanent employment outside of Pitkin County, or residing in the Unit for fewer than nine (9) months out of any twelve (12) -2- .' ., , \ months. IN THE EVENT THE OWNER IS REQt11RED TO SELL THE UNIT PURSUANT TO THIS PARAGRAPH EIGHT, OWNER AGREES TO ACCEPT THE HIGHEST BID [in excess of the purchase price plus the total of 3(b), (e) and (d)] AND SELL THE UNIT EVEN IF SAID BID SHALL BE LESS THAN THE MAXIMUM RESALE PRICE PROVIDED FOR IN PARAGRAH 3(a)-(d). In the event no bids are received equal to the Owner's purchase price the Authority shall continue to offer the Unit for sale until an offer is received equal to or greater than said purchase price provided in Paragraph 3(b)-(d), and during this period (a) the Authority shall make a good faith attempt to rent the Unit for a rental equal to the rental formula described in Paragraph 11, and (b) no ap.predation [as described in Paragraph 3(a)] shall accrue. 9. In the event that the Housing Authority believes the Owner is violating the provisions of this Agreement, the Authority by its authorized representative, msy inspect the Unit between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, after providing the Owner with 24 hour advance, written notice. 10. .Any notice which is required to be given hereunder shall be given my mailing the same, certified mail, return receipt requested, to any addre.ss provided herein or given as the current mailing address of the party. \~ 11. During. the time an Owner has offered the Unit for sale or in the event the Unit continues to be the Owner's sole and exclusive place of residence as defined in Paragraph 8, but the Owner desires to lease the Unit, Owner may undertake to do so at a rental not to exceed the Owner's monthly expenses for the costs of principal and interest payments, taxes, property insurance, condominium assessments, utilities, plus an additional Twenty ($20.00) Dollars and a reasonable (refundable) security deposit, to any person or persons approved by the Authority and Owner as meeting the qualifications for occupancy of the Unit. Nothing herein shall be construed to require the Authority to indemnify the Owner against any losses attributable to the rental including, but not by way of limitation, non-payment of rent or damage to the premises, nor to require the Authority to obtain a qualified tenant for the Owner in the event none is found by the Owner. 12. In the event a co-owner who does not meet the ownership qualifications of the Authority shall have been permitted to acquire an ownership interest in the Unit solely for the purpose of obtaining financing, said co-owner agrees that (a) co-owner shall not occupy the Unit or acquire sole ownership of the same unless or until qualified by the Authority and (b) co-owner will join in any sale of the Unit whether the same be a voluntary or involuntary (pursuant tn Paragraph 8) sale of the Unit and execute any and all documents necessary to do so. 13. The provisions of this Agreement shall be covenants running with the land, be binding upon the Owner and the Authority, Owner's or Authority's heirs, successors, and assigns (and be enforceable by any of them) and shall run for the period of the life of the survivor of the present Board of Commissioners of the Authority plus tji'enty-one (21) years. If the Owner sells, transfers, or otherwise relinquishes Owner's ownership interest in the Unit, Owner shall be relieved of Owner's obligations under this Agreement with respect to such Unit and these obligations shall be imposed on the person to whom title to the Unit is transferred. 14. (without the Unit The term Owner as used herein shall regard to number or gender) or entities which is the subject of this Agreement. refer to any and all persons having an ownership interest in 15. There is hereby reserved to the parties hereto any and all remedies provided by law or in equity, in the event of a breach of any of the terms of this Agreement. 16. The Owner acknowledges that Owner has read and fully understands and accepts the terms and conditions of this Agreement limiting the rental and resale of the Unit and further acknowledges that Owner is relying upon no oral representations qualifying or limiting the terms hereof. -3- '.\ ."".,.... IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on the day and year above first written. DOUGLAS P. ALLEN Owner Owner 530 East Main Street. Aspen, CO 81611 (Mailing Address) STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this . 198....;. by day of WITNESS MY hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public Address: ACCEPTANCE BY HOUSING AUTHORITY The foregoing grant and its terms are accepted by the City of Aspen and Pitkin County Houaing Authority. THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY By: (Title) (Mailing Address) STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this . 198_. by day of WITNESS MY hand and official seal. My commiasion expires: Notary Public Address: 03/REAL2/5.8.85 -4- i""'" 'I' . ;'/"~~,~i\'~" . V~ ~ r:"I:~""~O.t'''''' .)...~~~ l~::".~" ,r'\ ':':-'~1~~': '~.' r.' L , ; .( -~.t . ':~ , :,. ~tlW"';5 , DOUGlA ,AllEN - TRUSTEE FOR CLIENTS 530 EAST MAIN ST. - 1ST FLOOR ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 00185 '., r. 4 ~. i r , CJ-oZ/ 1~ 82-237 1521 $6~ _~'r~_ Alpine Bank Snowm... Vmlg.: Color~81815 Dollars J! ~ For ': ~O 2 ~O 2:i 7 21: . .-.~.~...<....~;r.;;. - :,,",.(l ,'..,.~;"'....r.",~-""r .. ~ ...... - >I ..: ..',(,~ ~-~, ~ . , l-~ ~ ... ~............t. \IIrf'A'""IlIr\.... ""..) _~ . " . ',. ~......... - ~. "'I:,~ ., ..1~-:...."",.,~..........j;;, ~~ "'......... '0 ~~":::...~"..:.1..?i~.~..f..~.......: ~~~~' "'l-~.' .~\. ~' ..... ~ _ .......,~,......,... r '. , ..~. .... 1;.. ..., ..... . " 1lIW/':. . :~~ ,'. ~ ~.' Phone: /l Project) 'II Ii?;r {/ ~'Irr' / fr..ill 'oJiJ Jf(1{ IAfli/Oi( Date: ,h -r-9~- ~ I No, of H'D'u,,: l F\ ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-2020 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES City 00113 . 63721 - 47331 . 52100~ GMP/CONCEPTUAL 63722 . 47332 . 52100 GMP/PRELlMINARY , 63723 - 47333 . 52100 GMP/FINAL 63724 .47341 . 52100 SUB/CONCEPTUAL 63725 . 47342 . 52100 SUB/PRELIMINARY 63726 .47343 . 52100 SUB/FINAL 63727 . 47350 . 52100 EXCEPT/EXEMPTION 63728 . 47350 . 52100 REZONING 63729 .47360 . 52100 SPECIAL REVIEW SUB.TOTAL County 00113 . 63711 .47331 . 52200 GMP/GENERAL 63712 . 47332 . 52200 GMP/OETAILEO 63713 . 47333 . 52200 GMP/FINAL 63714 .47341 . 52200 SUB/GENERAL 63715 . 47342 . 52200 SUB/DETAILED 63716 . 47343 . 52200 SUB/FINAL 63717 . 47350 . 52200 SPECIAL REVIEW 63718 . 47350 . 52200 REZONING 63719 . 47360 . 52200 SPECIAL APPROVAL SUB.TOTAL PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 . 63061 . 09000 . 52200 COUNTY CODE 63063 . 09000 . 52200 ALMANAC 63062 . 09000 . 00000 GMP 63066 . 09000 . 00000 COpy FEES 63069 . 09000 OTHER ~Gu?fu-;~ Namer-llllJ)JlJU! (jJj LA^-- ,.../ Address: 7;A{'l,!':; , V (I JUS. ' /001 v.J ,(/"\ 'i(//r,/I Check Nd. I q r::;- , , Additional Billing: SUB.TOT AL TOTAL on f}- - g,gr- 1j.t3~^ N\ III (J, ~- t bf(), 00 I I ~hx(h /y\ v