The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcoa.lu.ec.Adams Bonita Dr. 1987 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET " City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED: .:l-!tok-1 DATE RECEIVED COMPLETE: _ .;2,735 ~ I(J;( ~ 0 <( - OJs- ~~~F~O. O{i-81 ( ( ~ROJECT NAME:--L1clams Su.bcf,'I/i..s(on APPL lCANT:7?oh erTMtUn 5 Applicant Address/Phone: REPRESENTA'I'NE: -r l1/ch(lel )fan~esl('v- Representative l<ddress/Phone: .;:l 0 C. V.f>n-h-. 0" five. FxceO+IOh ( 1. Type of l<pplication: GMP/Subdiv ision/PUD /f..p.n.aJ t"/,t;// 9'..u> ""<:9.30 ;Z 1. Concep:ual Submission 2. preliminary Plat 3. Final Plat 20 12 6 $2,730.00 1 , 6 40 . 0 0 820 .00 II. Subdivision/PUD 1. Conceptual Submission 2. prel iminary Plat 3. Final Plat 14 - - '. --.-- $1, 90lr.Oi)' ... 9 1,220.00 6 820.00 11 $1,490.00 5 fl $ 6 80 .00 .1Jzfo S (/-cJ III. All "Two Step" Appl ications IV. All "One Step" Appl ications V. Referral Fees - Environmental Health, Housing Office ( ( 1. Minor Appl ications 2 $ 50.00 2. Major Applications Referral Fees- Engineering Minor l<pplications Major Applications 5 $ 125.00 80.00 200.00 -_:.:;,:- :.:..;.'=='=.===~'~ ~-==..~,;;;-~ ~::'';;=~ ~~.~ ::::;d:::u~~ ;::\:-=.~. ~.~.~::.. == == == =::: === === ==::: ==== ===:..;~:::: ;::::.;;:===- P&Z @ MEETING Dl<TE: ~~ l-? , !V"PUBLIC HEARING: . Dl<TE REFERRED: !/JIfJJ.IO.IQ&7 IN IT IALS~ G YES ~ --------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------.-------------------------------------- REFERRALS: i/ --'---" Aspen Conso!. S. D. School District Mtn. Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas Parks Dept. _ StateHwy Dept (Glenwd) Holy Cross Electric _ Statellwy Dept (Gr-Jtn) Fire Marshall _ Bldg: Zoning/Inspectn Fire Chief Other: Roaring Fork Transit _____ Roaring Fork Energy Center ~~==~=;~~;~:~~================~~;~=;~~;~~~~~)f~===~~;;~:~~~~~ City Atty I City Engineer Building Dept. Ci ty Atty v" City Engineer Housing DiL Aspen ~Iater City Electric EnviL Hlth. I ( Oth e r : i (\ -~./I J~. Other: IY. ~ DISPOSITION: Ad""" S,b,I,,,,,",, Eu.'{"l,C" (&'~3 -~DS::..Bo,:,t, Or. ) j,..k, ~ ~___I, Reviewed by: Aspen P&Z ~~~ 0", Ao""'nI1~7 (" (<.",,1 "1,#//,"" I' ,'IL 9JoJ-/..'v'l1J,,'" exception for the purpose of amending the duplex condominiumizat- ion approval for Lot 23, West Aspen Subdivision allowing the addition of a bedroom within a 990 square foot expansion subject to the following conditions: 1. A plat shall be submitted prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy meeting the standards of section 20-15 of the Municipal Code to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and specifically following the recommendations in the Engineer- ing Department March 20, 1987 memorandum. Included on the plat shall be a statement noting dedication of the triangu- lar parcel to the City with reference to the Book and Page Number of the deed recorded with the Pitkin county Clerk and Recorder's Office. 2. The conditions of approval of the Brinkman Exemption, approved December 13, 1976, listed and f shall still apply to this property .1bd1>~j Subdivision h, c, d, e, On December 13, 1976 City Council approved the Brinkman Subdivi- sion Exemption for condomiumization of Lot 23, West Aspen Subdivision subject to the following conditions: a. There shall be no additional bath or bedrooms con- structed in either dwelling unit. b. In the event the existing structure is destroyed, or replaced, the site shall not be considered available for construction of two individual residences, but there shall be permitted only the replacement of a duplex or construction of one single family structure, c. The applicant agrees to join any future improvement districts formed for the purposes of constructing street improvements (including sidewalk, curb, gutter or paving) or undergrounding of overhead utility liners, which include the subject property within the proposed district, d. The applicant agrees to reimburse the City for his proportionate share of the cost of the above improve- ments should the City elect to construct them without the formation of a special assessment district, e. Neither of the dwelling units shall be leased for a period of six (6) months, except for two (2) short term rentals, and L There shall be imposed a subdivision dedication fee calculated pursuant to Section 20-18. The applicant also dedicated a triangular piece of Lot 23 to the city for park space in lieu of paying a park dedication fee. $e'" rfv-t'J-'I fAj-( v ,-. /'" 1. Engineering Department: In a March 20, 1987 memorandum Jim Gibbard made the following comments with regard to the sufficien- cy of the plat: a. The survey information on the submitted plat should include a legal description. b. The site plan should existing utility sources disclosure of ownership. include common areas, and meter location, and a c. The recording information on the submitted plat should also include a certificate showing approval by the City Engineer and a certificate showing approval by the Aspen City Council. , , MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager~ steve Burstein, Planning Office ~ Adams Subdivision Exception Case Number 2735-122-09-035 - 05A-87 THRU: FROM: RE: DATE: April 22, 1987 ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- Summary: The Planning Office recommends approval of the request- ed subdivision exception subject to two conditions listed below. Applicant: Robert Adams Location: Lot 23, West Aspen Subdivision Filing #1, 803 and 805 Bonita Drive, City of Aspen. Parcel Size: 16,893 square feet. Maximum Allowed Floor Area (Duplex): 5,034 square feet. Zoning: R-15 Applicant's Request: The applicant requests to amend the condominiumization approval to add 990 square feet, including one bedroom, to one half of the duplex (803 Bonita Drive). site Description: The subject site is located along the northern boundary of the Municipal Golf Course and east of a small park (with basketball court) within the West Aspen Subdivision neighborhood. The flat topography and location within a develop- ed subdivision present no particular construction constraints. Applicable Sections of the Municipal Code: Section 20-23 of the Subdivision Regulations states the requirements for condomiumiza- tion. Amendments to a condomiumization plat are subject to review by city Council through the subdivision exception procedures of Section 20-19. Prior Council Action: At City Council's meeting of April 13, 1987, action was tabled to this meeting in order to give the Planning Office and applicant time to seek more information on the rationale for the "no additional bath or bedroom" condition placed by Council in 1976. On December 13, 1976 city Council approved the Brinkman Subdivi- sion Exemption for condomiumization of Lot 23, West Aspen Subdivision subject to the following conditions: .~ ,,"'- a. There shall be no additional bath or bedrooms con- structed in either dwelling unit. b. In the event the existing structure is destroyed, or replaced, the site shall not be considered available for construction of two individual residences, but there shall be permitted only the replacement of a duplex or construction of one single family structure, c. The applicant agrees to join any future improvement districts formed for the purposes of constructing street improvements (including sidewalk, curb, gutter or paving) or undergrounding of overhead utility liners, which include the subject property within the proposed district, d. The applicant agrees to reimburse the City for his proportionate share of the cost of the above improve- ments should the City elect to construct them without the formation of a special assessment district, e. Neither of the dwelling units shall be leased for a period of six (6) months, except for two (2) short term rentals, and f. There shall be imposed a subdivision dedication fee calculated pursuant to Section 20-18. The applicant also dedicated a triangular piece of Lot 23 to the City for park space in lieu of paying a park dedication fee. Problem Discussion: A. Referral Comments: 1. Engineering Department: In a March 20, 1987 memorandum Jim Gibbard made the following comments with regard to the sufficien- cy of the plat: a. The survey information on the submitted plat should include a legal description. b. The site plan should existing utility sources disclosure of ownership. include common areas, and meter location, and a c. The recording information on the submitted plat should also include a certificate showing approval by the City Engineer and a certificate showing approval by the Aspen City council. 2 ...., ." B. Planning Office Comments: At Council's direction, the Planning Office and applicant further researched the rationale for city Council's 1976 restriction on adding a bath or bedrooms to this duplex. The former city Attorney, applicant's attorney, applicant's wife, former Mayor, and a P&Z member were all contacted. Minutes and dead files of other condominiumizations of that period were also investigated to determine if any other projects had this same condition. No one had a specific recol- lection of that condition, nor did the files of other cases reveal any general motivation prompting this. As recalled by the parties contacted, issues of 1976 included: (1) making residences in basically long-term residential neighborhoods into lodge or dormitory type uses; (2) increasing bulk of structures, especial- ly duplexes, and (3) parking problems resulting from intense use of residential properties. It should be noted that the six month minimum lease restriction was just formulated in 1976 and was imposed on this structure to address short-terming. The bulk issue has been addressed by FAR calculations first adopted in 1977. Other structures in the neighborhood have been built that are equally large or larger. Finally, parking for this expansion has been determined to be adequate for the six (6) bedrooms in the duplex structure. The applicant's representative has argued that the existing two- bedroom 2010 square foot unit is inadequate in size for the present owners. Staff is still inclined to believe that making a two bedroom unit into a larger three bedroom unit is not out of character with the intensity of use or bulk of structures in the neighborhood. All the other conditions of approval for the 1976 Brinkman condominiumization should still apply. The plating requirements stated by the Engineering Department should also be met. Additionally, included on the plat should be a note regarding the dedication of the triangular parcel to the city. staff discussed with Michael Manchester, the project architect, the situation where this unit would be over twice the size of the other half of the duplex. A letter from the owner of 805 Bonita Drive accepting the expansion has been presented. Recommended Motion: "Move to approve the requested subdivision exception for the purpose of amending the duplex condominiumizat- ion approval for Lot 23, West Aspen Subdivision allowing the addition of a bedroom within a 990 square foot expansion subject to the following conditions: 1. A plat shall be submitted prior to issuance of a Certificate of occupancy meeting the standards of section 20-15 of the Municipal Code to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and specifically following the recommendations in the Engineer- ing Department March 20, 1987 memorandum. Included on the plat shall be a statement noting dedication of the triangu- 3 ""',,", ,.","" lar parcel to the City with reference to the Book and Page Number of the deed recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 2. The conditions of approval of the Brinkman Exemption, approved December 13, 1976, listed and f shall still apply to this property. Subdivision b, c, d, e, city Manager Recommendations: (lh fD';/"((o,J ~l~ sb.ad 4 r ~ D @@~D~_:~:~~.l' . , J...';::I _ L 1; I I' , FEe , 0 1987 'Y\ -,!/ . T. Michael Manchester yrckitecv February 3, 1987 City of Aspen Planning Department Steve Berstein RE: Amended Subdivision Exception Lot 23 West Aspen Subdivision Filing #l Dear Steve, The final design changes for the Robert Adams residence have been completed and I am ready to proceed with the expidited review for a Subdivision Exception, to amend the original agreement of December 14, 1976. As we have discussed, ther are two primary areas of change. First the Adams' would like to remodel the existing structure to enlarge the Living Room. This would require a change in the footprint. I have enclosed a drawing which indicates the magnitude of the change. Since we have been unable to find a plat of the original footprint on file, it is my understanding that we would submitting a new drawing to show the revised building footprint. Secondly, the Adams' would like to put a new Master Bedroom over the new Living Room. In the Statement Of Exemption, (enclosed), provision 'A' says: "there shall be no additional bath or bedrooms constructed in either dwelling unit,". There is no information in any of the minutes of City Councilor the Planning and Zoning Commission to indicate the reason for this provision, nor is there any indication as to the number of bedrooms and baths which were present at the time the original submission was granted. The building is presently designed to have one Master Bedroom and two secondary bedrooms, which we feel is appropriate. I have also enclosed the check for $ 485.00 as you had indicated earlier. It is my desire to proceed with this process as expeditiously as is possible, so please do not hesitate to call me if you need any more information. ;re\iZdt~ T. Michael Manchester Architect . 202 C Ventnor Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 303.920.2302 . " o April 8, 1987 City of Aspen Planning Department City Council 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 To Whom It May Concern: I am the Owner of the north half of the duplex on Lot 23, West Aspen Subdivision, Filing #1. The architect and the owners have shown me the drawings and the model of the proposed addition to the north half of the building and I do not have any concerns with allowing the Adams' to modify the existing building to better suit their needs. I think that the addition will be an asset to the entire building. Sincerely, /1 JLrtr I /-..-;; /4" f <.-I41! /, -< - .II >./ r-v Ruth Hanrahan 805 Bonita Aspen, Colorado 81611 " '" MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: 9.-1- .,;,- Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager ~ steve Burstein, Planning Office ~ Adams Subdivision Exception Case Number 2735-122-09-035 - 05A-87 THRU: RE: DATE: April 8, 1987 ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- summary: The Planning Office recommends approval of the request- ed subdivision exception subject to two conditions listed below. Applicant: Robert Adams Location: Lot 23, West Aspen Subdivision Filing #1, 803 and 805 Bonita Drive, City of Aspen. Parcel Size: 16,893 square feet. Maximum Allowed Floor Area (Duplex): 5,034 square feet. zoning: R-15 Applicant's Request: The applicant requests to amend the condominiumization approval to add 1540 square feet, including one bedroom, to one half of the duplex (803 Bonita Drive). site Description: The subject site is located along the northern boundary of the Municipal Golf Course and east of a small park (with basketball court) within the West Aspen Subdivision neighborhood. The flat topography and location within a develop- ed subdivision present no particular construction constraints. Applicable Sections of the Municipal Code: Section 20-23 of the Subdivision Regulations states the requirements for condomiumiza- tion. Amendments to a condomiumization plat are subject to review by city Council through the subdivision exception procedures of Section 20-19. Prior Council Action: On December 13, 1976 city Council approved the Brinkman Subdivision Exemption for condomiumization of Lot 23, West Aspen Subdivision subject to the following conditions: a. There shall be no additional bath or bedrooms con- structed in either dwelling unit. b. In the event the existing structure is destroyed, or replaced, the site shall not be considered available for construction of two individual residences, but "., - there shall be permitted only the replacement of a duplex or construction of one single family structure, c. The applicant agrees to )ol.n any future improvement districts formed for the purposes of constructing street improvements (including sidewalk, curb, gutter or paving) or undergrounding of overhead utility liners, which include the subject property within the proposed district, d. The applicant agrees to reimburse the City for his proportionate share of the cost of the above improve- ments should the city elect to construct them without the formation of a special assessment district, e. Neither of the dwelling units shall be leased for a period of six (6) months, except for two (2) short term rentals, and f. There shall be imposed a subdivision dedication fee calculated pursuant to section 20-18. The applicant also dedicated a triangular piece of Lot 23 to the City for park space in lieu of paying a park dedication fee. Problem Discussion: A. Referral Comments: 1. Engineering Department: In a March 20, 1987 memorandum Jim Gibbard made the following comments with regard to the sufficien- cy of the plat: a. The survey information on the submitted plat should include a legal description. b. The site plan should existing utility sources disclosure of ownership. include common areas, and meter location, and a c. The recording information on the submitted plat should also include a certificate showing approval by the City Engineer and a certificate showing approval by the Aspen City Council. B. Planning Office Comments: Following a check of all available city records, we find that rationale for city Council's 1976 restriction on adding a bath or bedrooms to this duplex is not at all documented. The applicant's representative has argued that the existing two-bedroom 2010 square foot unit is inadequate in size for the present owners. Staff is inclined to believe that making a two bedroom unit into a larger three bedroom unit is not 2 ,.-, ,...... out of character with the intensity of use or bulk of structures in the neighborhood. Through the provision of a proposed new driveway turnaround, adequate parking spaces would be provided to meet the one space per bedroom requirement. According to the applicant, a total of six bedrooms in the two units would exist after the addition. No other impacts pertinent to condomiumization review have been identified. All the other conditions of approval for the 1976 Brinkman condominiumization should still apply. The plating requirements stated by the Engineering Department should also be met. Additionally, included on the plat should be a note regarding the dedication of the triangular parcel to the city. staff discussed with Michael Manchester, the project architect, the situation where this unit would be over twice the size of the other half of the duplex. He stated that the owner has verbally agreed to the addition and a letter from the owner accepting the expansion will be presented at your meeting. Recommended Motion: "Move to approve the requested subdivision exception for the purpose of amending the duplex condominiumizat- ion approval for Lot 23, West Aspen Subdivision allowing the addition of a bedroom within a 1540 square foot expansion subject to the following conditions: 1. , () l. . A plat shall be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit meeting the standards of Section 20-15 of the Municipal Code to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and specifically following the recommendations in the Engineer- ing Department March 20, 1987 memorandum. Included on the plat shall be a statement noting dedication of the triangu- lar parcel to the city with reference to the Book and Page Number of the deed recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 2. The conditions of approval of the Brinkman Exemption, approved December 13, 1976, listed and f shall still apply to this property. Subdivision b, c, d, e, City Manager Recommendations: sb.ad 3 r-. MEMORANDUM I;! ' "V. r,r' ~~ .:-:(J-i! (\\.',7 is ~:, I -- '",_/ L::_,~J '~.. - ;,:.'Z I)" ._~-- ---:,l!i! '; Ii MAR 191981 .@..:I' 'lJ i' TO: Steve Burstein, Planning Office FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department ..:j:J DATE: March 20, 1987 RE: Adams Subdivision Exception ========================================== The Engineering Department has reviewed the above application and has the following comments: 1. The survey information on the submitted plat should also include a legal description. 2. The site plan should also include common areas, existing utility sources and meter locations, and a disclosure of owner- ship. 3. The recording information on the submitted plat should also include a certificate showing approval by the City Engineer and a certificate showing approval by the Aspen City Council. jg/adamsexc , cc: Jay Hammond ( ~ --c,d j , --.U " V. ~/(o: fL/ fJ IA~ r.&all ( " ! en \ {i .;C.::t, \_' (1.11 /)L) U u j I ~ - ''',' (f' Ie RE: )'ifJ.^ h Dear/Vi) II 0 ~ rlu1ii / : I"" ",. , ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, 0) 81611 (303) 925-2020 '--1Ji' '1- Date: ft/\C.n f(.:t I q ~ /~ (' - fJ./JJl.--J This is to inform you that the planning Office has completed its preliminary review of ~ captioned application. We have determined that your apPlication~ NOT complete. Additional items required include: ~. Disclosure of OWnership (one co~ only needed) Adjacent property OWners List/Envelopes/Postage (one co~) Additional copies of entire application Authorization by owner for representative to sutroit applica- tion Response to list of items (attached/below) demonstrating compliance with the applicable policies and regulations of the Code, or other specific materials A check in the amount of $ Your appl ication 'i . u ed it for review by the '. We will call you if we nee tion prior to that date. Several days prior to your hearing, we will call and make available a co~ of the memorandum. Please note that it IS NOT your responsibility to post your property with a sign, which we can provide you for a $3.00 fee. B. Your application is incomplete, we have not scheduled it review at this time. When we receive the materials we have requested, we will place you on the next available,agenda. If you have any questions, please call c(rf:& L( /!/lD1.)ki 11..-) the planner assigned to your case. . , Sincerely, PLANNING OFFICE ) (/ - MEMORANDIJM TQ: City Attr'Jrn"y City FnginE'E'r FF:QM: St ~ V~ 81] r c; t ~ 1. n:o PI >1 n n 1. n 3 Of f i. r: ~ F:F: Ad~ms Subdjvisinn Fxceptinn OATF:: March "l, 1"l87 ------.----------------------------------------------------_._--- --------------------------------------------------------------- Attach"r:I fr'Jr Yr'Jur r"vi"w anr:l '~r'JrRl""nts is an appli'~atir'Jn sllhmitt"r:I hy T. Mich~E'1 ManchE'stE'r on hE'half of his cli€'nt, F:ohE'rt Adams r"qu"sting suhr:livisir'Jn ,,><c"ptir'Jn tr'J am"nr:l pr"vir'Jus apprr'Jval whi,~h E'stahlishE'd conditions affE'cting an E'xisting structurE' locatE'n at W"st Asp"n Sllhr:livisir'Jn, 1_r'Jt 1, BIr'Jd /:3. Th" appl icant wish"s tr'J rE'mf'VE' thE' limitation on thE' footprint of thE' structurE' E'st~h- I ish"r:I in th" prir'Jr r"vi"w. PIE'as€' rE'viE'w this matE'rial ann s€'nn your commE'nts to this officE' nr'J lat"r than March 30,1'387 Sr'J this r'Jffic" has ar:l"quat" tim" tr'J pr"par" fr'Jr its pr"s"ntatir'Jn h"fr'Jr" City Cr'J'Jn,~i.1 r'Jn April Pl. Thank you. 130 asp DATE: March l8, 1987 MEMORANDUM TO: steve Burstein, Planning Office FROM: city Attorney RE: Adams Subdivision Exception PEN @ fJi-@ I --- s: l c., ., II ~r~~f/~ ~hlf Wn J;\ U U j '7Wf I 9 1987 . ."..1f I; ~2J1 ------.J We have no comments regarding this application at this time. PJT/mc ~~~--.. STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION I], I' ~11ki -~, . Jrf t'1 00 ~;~. . \tjS~ FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION WHEREAS, PETER BRINKMAN, is the owner of a parcel of land located in Pitkin County, Colorado, more particularly des- cribed as: Lot 1, Block 23, West Aspen Subdivision, Pitkin County, l1HEREhS, there exists on said property a duplex structure in which the applicant wishes to separate interest without parcel- I / ( ing the land on which said structure is situate, and WHEREAS, there has been made an application for exemption from the definition of subdivision for such conveyance of interests pursuant to Section 20-19 of the Aspen Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, at its ./" meetinq held in July, 1976, has determined that such exemption is appropriate provided that: // a. there shall be no additional bath /" constructed i.n either dwelling unit, / , or bedrooms' b. in the event the existing structure is destroyed, or replaced, the site shall not be considered available for construction of tw~ individual residences, but there ~. shall be permitted only the replacement of a duplex or construction of one single family structure, c. the applicane agrees to join any future improve- ment districts formed for the purposes of constructing street improvements (including sidewalk, curb, gutter or paving) or undergrounding of overhead utility lines, which include the subject property within the proposed district, d.~ the applicant agrees to reimburse the City for his proportionate share of the cost of the above improvements should the City elect to construct them without the formation of a special assessment district, and e. neither of the dwelling units shall be leased for a period of six (6) months, except for two (2) short term rentals, f. that there be imposed a subdivision dedication fee calculated ~ursuant to Section 20-18, the ~~eFtioR 1~/;Q of-subseetioR JO-l~+a~{S) to-the eo~~;~twithstand- ln9~ and WHEREAS, the city Council has found the proposed division of interest in the existing structure to be without the intents and ....-..- '. '" ! '\ ) purposes of subdivision regulation provided that the' constraints -~ imposed in subsections a,b,c,d,e, and f, above, proposed by the . . . + ..'.. Planning' and Zoning Commission, be maintained, THEREFORE, the City council of the' City of Aspen does - hereby determine that the proposed division of interest in the duplex structure situate on the above-described land is without the intents and purposes of subdivision regulation, and does, for . such reason, grant an exemption from the definition of subdivision for such action, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that this grant of exemption shall at all times _b~ condi tioneq on ,c:ompl,iance by the applicant, his heirs, :assigns and successors in int~rest,. with the conditions with respect :to .e.xtension" replacement and contribution to the cost of public improvements and leasing, itemi~l!!d in subparagraphs a through e ~above; which conditions shall be deemed a covenant running with '.C the land and burden the same, PROVIDED, there shall be imposed a ,/ " /' subdivision dedication ./' .. -.' : . . . ~._,. fee for such proposed conveyance of separate interests, the same being payable,in,full by the dedication to the City of Aspen by _... -.. ... - +. , , Peter Br1.nkI1tan- or ;~is successor- of- a 'p~~cel of land comprising 871 square feet which is into the Aspen Municipal Golf Date:. !A.j1~~ /~ /9zb f l~nd protruding .~ / - -;;;7- I, KA'I:'HRYN S..HAUTER, do ..~TArY STA~, III, certify,that the fo . ------. .' StatemeDt of Exemption from_the~definition of Subdivision was considered and approved by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting held MondaYJ- December 13" .1976.,. at which time the Mayor, - -. "-.. . __ __ _ h.. = - ~ . -. -. ... ..' . . . . STACY STANDLEY, III; was' authorized 'to execute the same on behalf of the City of Aspen." :: ;---e-_:'='-::~""'.-=-':' -.. -. _. ... - --. ---.-- " ... .-.,- _. - y. -.. :- ~".' '. --. . .....--. -- -' - - '. . -... - ..-- -.... - -2 --. .. - '" ...~ -----"--.---.-. ---_._~_._..------ dnyof DcCClrUx:r ,1976 ,hctWCf!tl ;"115 DEED, ~Ia,k}~:;~ <IS of th~ 3Cl.!;.h l'J::l'J~R 11. BIZIN!\JI!',N, an wur.arric.{l .m l,fthe 'no; crl'Y OF l'-SPEN, Cl rtlll.'licipnl corporation, OJ:ganizecl uncleJ: the la'tJs of: the Cl1l1ot)'of pitkin .... hull Stlllc! of Color~do-. or llH~ finjt p:\rt, nnll x:;.'J~JC 11'11:\ l:~S CTII. Th" tthe ,;aid part y of the first part, for nnd in con;ide,..,tion ofth.. SUII' of Ten lXillars ($lO. 00) ___.,_.,___________________________________;..____ DOLLAI\S, to tho ,aid p"rtY of the first p"rt in hand pnid by the suid party of the second part, the receipt where"f i< heroby confo55ed ;>rill acknowl<.d~ed, has grnnted, baq:nined, sold and conveyed, and 1,y those presents . . oIc'. [:rant, baq:nin, seIl.conve)' and con fir",'. Clnto the said I"ut y . of the second part. its h,';'" alld a"iglls forever, ullthe following descri"ed lot or parcel otland. situlltc, lying.and "eing ill the County r.f pitkin and S,ate of Colorado, to wit: . I, parcel of: land being part of: Int 23, I--Test J\sjX'J1 St1bc1ivision, Filing ):\0. 1. Said parcel is ITDre fully describscl as follcr:l5: J)8qinnina at the soutbernrrost oomsr of said Lot 23, thence 147.69 feet alano a curve to the left having a T.adius of: 189.90 feet (the choT.d of: ,.;l;ich l>2ars N 290 29' 07" \'1,144.00 feet); thence S 520 06' E, 91.95 feet; thenc:e 68. '/0 feet along a curve to the left having a T.2c'lius of 236.63 feet (the. cl1o,-d of. \'lhich bears S 00 f:.7' 52" \'1. 68.47 feet) to th-= pOint of.: '. b2~in.'1in9' Said pared c;ontains 1, O?-Z\~g. ft. JroT.~'. or less. .. ,,,, '" - ) .C 1 d 'al- be a/A". ' ~ .1Dl~ pa):ce ,o~ Wi 51l .L _ use ".IU':; a,\'>r~vate .:r.oce( and other uses c1Pourtenant Dn:1.n~cCssary for: the cr,u:e a~-...'-..O:iJ;r'~.d't\C m\.ll1~9{pal parks, includin7 the rmm:ccJ.pal golf course, ).11 t,t;e 0l~X f"Z'.s?~n ' ...." ~~~';' "-.;. ' r:~,:!\ ,'<"" ~'\, t1:;~'>~~~~>::~~'~ :'<~\:'-'.~/ ~) If;',\ -.'" -:~ 'v.' ',' \~;'\. - ,-", \.. :." . '<:.!\. \(\~~\'V .': "".' <::::.) '<:"~'--!. /,,<;, '.'''' ~~~'G X}m~~~~~~~~;D:~~~:n~~;;~':i::e~.~~~~ents and appurtenances thereunto belon~il1(;. or in an)' wise appertaining. and tb, reversion and re~0.'i>~Vemainder and remainders,rents. issues. and profits thereof; and al\ the estnte, right. interest, claim and dem"nd w,,"'soe\"er of the said part Y of the first part, either in law or equity, of, inand to the lIbove bargained premises, '~'ith the hereditaments and appurtenanccs, (lCo;)[};><J! );m{Sl~lte of Colofndo, of the: second p~rt: TO H,\ \'E ,\:\D TO IIOLD the said premises abo,'e bargained and.described, with the appurtenances unto the said p,ar' y of the second part, its heirs and llssigns forever, And the said pllrtY ,of the fir.' part, for hill1 self his heirs, executors, and administrators, do es covenant. grant. bargain and agree to and with the said part y of the second part. its heirs llnd assigns, thllt at the time of the enseating and deli,'cr)' of these presents he is wellsoized 0; ~he premises above con~'e)'ed. as of goc,d. sure. perfect, nbsolute and indefel\Sible estate o[ inheritance, in Inw, in fee silllple, lInd "" S good right. flll\ power lInd lawfullluthority to grant. ""rgain. sel\ a,;d conve)' the same In m,ll\ner and formll; afores;,id. and , that 'the sallle are free and clear from ull former and othor ~rnnts, uur~uins, sales. liens, taxes, as'cssm.nt, und I .nc"!Hunrnce, c.f whatevorkind or nat"re soe,'er., except general taxes for 1976 payable in \ 1977, and subject, to all reservations, restrictions, oovenants and utility ! eascrrents of record in the records of the Clerk and County Hcoorder of Pitkin I: County, State of Colorado, includinCT, but not limited to the !"rotectivc \1 CoVE'nDnts rccord2d in J3OO;~ 229, at Page 78, as a~;1ded bv instrurrent reoordcd .i in p.o::>k 229, a.t pasre 507 and in p.o::>k 309, at PaCT, C 1\99. .. :\ " " " i\ 'I nntl't!,e al"",' 1,,,..~ainctll'n'!Hise' in the qeid und 1""",.,,1>10 I",~,.ssi"n "f till' sahl part Y oCthe ".coml PaI't, its Ilei,., und a"i~,,,.,,~ui'lSt ull a"oI..\"..r~' i,,'rM.n t'r 1"'"'''''' luwf"lIy ri"i",i,,\:o,.to claim ,he wh"le Ii ..,. any I,an 11......"..[, tI,e saioll'a..t y "ftll,' fi,.~t I'an ~hall unol will \L\IU~,\ST ASD rORE\'i:f< DI.:FESD. !i I. 1:\ \\"1'1'\:1.::-::-; \\'l1El\EOF. T\w :,:\itl part Y (lftllL' ril':,t part lH\ S ~l \1;11111 anti :<1',\1 tilt' dn)' ami )'t':\1" fll':"t ;lh(l\'l' \\"l"illl'll. i :\ " :\ II '1 Ii :t ht.'l"l'llntU:::l!t his .-..- ,..~- .-. -\ . ". ..,...._. ..__...._. ..' ,u__ ___...___._,_..,_..I~Er\LI pf'mr. 1\. !VmE",V~l, it:1 lU1lT'."lrried n1:\!1 .:...,._._.. _u __..._____' ..' ..__.--...----.I,-;r:A1.1 Si:":IWII. ~,.;th:11 ;lllll.P,'!:Vl'L't'll in till' !'II':'l'IWl'ld , -.,..-. .-~ . ., ..' .. ...________._--'-' _lgf:.\ \.1 '_..~~-.- .-- ;...._:~-:...::...~...;:..." ;;,.;:"':"'- _...:...-....;... ;-.---.... - -:..... _...;.. - .-;: .:.:.::.::..;:::':=~._:_: :..:-:.:...=.-..;;..:.;:...-::;.:::::,:=:':'" , '-1 ,...,""" A'tVI'OICN";YR ,\'1' LAw VJn'OIllAN SQUAI.."n: nUH..tHMJ ftOJ 1::. IlYMAN S'J'rU!:wr ASP1!;N, COLOI(AOO 81(111 1~J r/J' l't ')' '\ \~ ~V l ~ 0._____ GAHFH:J.\) .'V:. HI':CIl'l' /.'V X' .x.' C.~~ J.snooJ~J:; A, r'{';'l'KHHON ~b q?-~ . ~U1T~ 201 T"',~;rIlONF: '3D:U OIG'IO:lO I?o~~^',n (;A!H'J1;LO ^N[)nl~W V. I!Jo.:CIIT February 24, 1977 Mr. MLck Mahoney Ci ty Manager, City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Pete_ Park - -:::::::::::--, Brinkman.-/ aLlan Dear Mick: Enclosed please find a copy of the Deed I have sent to Peter Brinkman for his signature. You will note it contains the provisions we discussed on the telephone. Upon the return of the Deed to llspen and its recording, I will have the original returned to you for your records. Please contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, GARFIELD & HECH'r ~f '. Brooke A. Peterson BAP/kjk Enclosure ~ n nntl th'l' ahuVl' harJ::-aillctl Jln'lllisl'~ in the CJuiet .1111IIH?:1l'l'nLle I'CI:::tt'~sion uftlle $&Iid p.trt y or the ~t..('ond part. its Iwit':' nml as~is:n~. n~Hill:,t :dl 011111 t'\'t:l'r I'l'r:::Cln (\1' Ill'l'snns lawrtllly daiminf! or to claim the whole Ii UI".\I1r I,al'llhl.'n'ur. thl' ~uitl part y (,ftlll' fil':,t part ::IWJlIUlll will \\'.\ltn:\:\T .-\:\D FORE\'J::R ~EFE:\D. 'I I. :1 :\ " 'I 1:'\ \\'1'I'~ESS wln:ra:nr. Tlw ~lllilll'al't y ufthl' fil':l.t part 11ll S hUlltl IIntl :-,'ul tht' tilt)' Ullll )'\'.'U1' fil':-:t nhon' wl'illt'n, hen'lllltu ~~t his Hh:'IIl'I1. ~t'all'll ulld.f)l,li\-l'n'(l ill thl' 1'll':>t'IH'''' tlf . _ _. ___ .,__u_,__ _ ._, ..__ _________.____,_.___._I::1~:ALI Pf'I:EP. 1\. !Jlml!O't~J, an unnurried ma!}. L .___,__..._,.. _._..__,_____.._____1"".,\ J _.,._ .., , ,... _____.,__.__.__. -.I~I;.\L) Ii " II :, . '---. ._::....-.__:_:.~...:-.....::..:-..:-=---..::-,._.~,.~-_.__._._-;...~._, - -_...:.::=.-:... :....::~~;..:..:.::...-..:~.::;,;:-;:.:,;==: , /. I \ \ ",i County of Pitkin ) ) ) - STATE OF COLORADO ss. The foregoing was acknowledged before me this l~rrJday of fl., f'tIlJ~,,'l) " 1976, by STACY ~TANDLEY, III and KATHRYN S. HAUTER, personally known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Aspen. . , Witness my hand and official seal. . My. Commission expires: J-.z..1... /7j 1919 _ ." ~U~iU} Vl{J/Il(.CLw..L-(.L . Nota~ Public .0 - - -- - - - - -. .-. - - - - - , . -_. - - - - - - - - -- -.'- . _.- ---- .. . .-.--'------ - -------.. -. . - - . ...- -. - ----.---.. _ -- .-.--..... ~~ .' ~.:..~--- . /' / ,./" ,/...- - .' o -- - .. . . _._-- - - .. . .' -- -" - - - -- -.- - _.. P'. '0 . . -". ._--- - . . - - --- - - - ...- -_.-- -- - ---..- , . ' - - .-- '.-. - . -- -- - ---- .--..----.-------------- -.- . - -.... ,- . .. -... -- . ... . ' "-'P - _.. . - - - - . - - ..-" d_... .._. .. --. --. .' .. - - .- - - . - - -... - -.. - - -. - - . . - ...~:.._~~-~.:. ." ----- ..... - -. ._- - 3 .~ - -",.- 0,. ~ ('l !'! Ul ~ ~ :z So;,o"4':>"r" L.,CO' ?9.28~ 71." ~E.' ~f!>b.R'" CAP II.. I I I \ . ,'" \ \ \ \ ........rl?oF0"7G l> ,~ A1>D.-rWN 9: I I It 1-:, I' lOS, It,: I f I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I ~ ~; .. I Pb.RCI::L 1 ,. 77450 . I ~ I 10 I ~ ~W~:~::~:':':~A~e.:;~-l.- ------------ <;..&..qs' 91.7";-- N SZGO"o'W <C8.~' ~ 52:0(g; ,oJ \'FWt)~li>\\'(E:. . ,~.:a'", o N ~ ~ 2 .,. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~...!..:~5' \ p,i;::QCc.L 3 ',," lO2.I3o'" f\. ~ ~ 'S.?' i-? ~ . in' <9 ~ III pL;.Q.CEL '2. ~\48Q- ':!Z,.;L' "- FNON:.e.o.Rr...~ R*\B~.'9O' L" 1",,\7./09' LOT '2. 3 wE:ST A5PE.l-.l SUBDIVI510N ~1L.INC. No.' I, Harold N. Johnson (,Johnson-TJongfello\, & Associates), a registered S'Jr'ie~'or in the state of Cclorado, do hereby certify that on the 13th day of October, 1976, a survey \Vas made under my direct supervision of the pro~erty sho,,;n hereon and a two-story frame duplex was found to be located entirely Nithin the lot lines. Corners "ere found or set as shown on this plat. All easements or encroachments in evidence or knO\,n to me are ShOI'.'n. Said survey :.S true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief. Johnson-Longfello\V & Associates By :?/~vU,~ Harold \~. Joh~ LS 9018 December 10, 1976 --~~ VJ J .... . . 0.......0111 ~ O~:~~\SiC~C.~ ~~~x { /j-. 0.""' a .. c; '\\ / . " , MEHORANDUH TO: Aspen City Council FROH: Planning Staff (HC) RE: Subdivision Exemption.- Duplex owned by Peter Brinkman DATE: December 9, 1976 This is a request for subdivision exemption by Peter Brinkman on Lot 1, Block 23, Aspen Townsite to condominiumizc an existing duplex. The property is contiguous to the Aspen Golf Course and children's park. The request was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on July 20, 1976 conditioned on the following comments of the Planning Office: 1. We have contacted the Parks Department concerning possible land dedication for children's park. They recommend public dedication of certain land contiguous to the park as fulfillment of the open space dedication requirements. This request is precipitated by the unusual configuration pro- truding into the Golf Course and park area; The application has agreed to this request and for this parcel of approximately 871 square feet in size will submit a deed to the 'City. 2. We suggest requiring appropriate restrictions on the units for limiting use ho a minimum of six (6) month leases. 3. The Engineering Department has no comments on the reques t. The Planning Office recommends approval of the Subdivision Exemption conditioned on the above requirements. A survey of the property and land to be deeded to the City will be available for inspection at your December 13, 1976 meeting. I 'I , .'''' H ~f 1\ ..i- ;,' , , \ . J ~ i ~ ~. , , \, ., , ~ t 1 ~ f t ~ !f lhl~; :c:'" -~J ~"'l~ , r ,"C'ilteR stilted they felt that to put tillS re~'(;,lJ.CL.Ll.)ll UJI l-lIJ.O u.....l~..L'-..... "'-''-'..~ ..-, ul;--- -' !lone of the neighbors )- ~e this ,restriction on their propc~- y. Coates stilted they would I . happy _to' go along', _ the nClghbors want to impose thif. mdition on the neighborhood. :1"" s additional restriction was not part of the zoning and was not even contempla-ted when '11 b '1 l he structure was Ul. t. ii 1'0111 Har5!li1ll, resident of the neig!lborhood, had gotten 20 signatures of people in the I: nci<jhborhood. 'fhe residents feel ~hat this unit will become a SilturU<lY t~o Svturday rental.: The neighbors have no \-Jay of stopplng this. Marshall stated if t:he residents could get: 11 '"omC commitment that the duplex. would not tu+.n into short-term rental, fine. Otherwise Iii it will become tourist zone. H.Jyor standley said the neighbors concern is legitmate and Council is sympathetic. 11 wlcthcr Coates gets the exemption or not, or goe5 through full subdivision revie\V, the end:\ .."cult will be the same. There is little reason to not a~low the condominiumization. i. 1'llis has reached an impass as the project is already done. The only thing the Council can Ii do is entertain and support a letter of agreement to do whatever the rest of the neighbor- hood agrees to. Nayor Standley said he felt the council. had probably done as much as possible trying to help out the residents. I I' I I' ,. , i I ~l Ii II, city Attorney Stuller suggested that if the neighborhood was going to put a rental restriction on their homes, that ,it should be by restrictive covenant so that the City is II not involved at all. Hs. Stuller pointed out that the difficulty is defining the neigh- " Lorhood, and what to do about the one person who refuses to sign. If this is the ncigh~ \i horhood Objective, they could satisfy this independent of the City Council. Coates I stated he would agree to go along with what the other neighbors agree to, any restrictions \~ to be placed on the whole neighborhood. Coates stated they did not feel they should be 'I' singled out in the neighborhood. City Attorney St,uller said this should be a private I matter which should be resolved among the participants. The council cannot solve all the i weaknesses in the plan. ,I councilman Behrendt moved to approve the exemption frrnn subdivision by Mr. Coates and to incorporate with it the general body of paragraph 3 in the letter from Garfield and II IIccht~ seconded by Councilman Parry. Councilwoman Pedersen asked Councilman Behrendt to I: reconsider the motion to incorporate the whole letter; Councilman Behrendt agreed; so did !l ~ouncilman Parry. All in favor, with the exception of Councilwoman Johnston. t>totion 11 carried. I ,I , f, EXEMPTION FROM SUBDIVIS10N - Peter Brinkman .L )n I lIal Clark, planning office, told Council this was a request for subdivision exemption from Peter Brinkman for property located adjacent to the golf course. This was reviewed by the P & Z in July 1976 and approval was recommended. The planning office recommends that rather than a fee dedication, a land dedication be given to the City. The lot is ~haped with a piece sticking out into the golf course. The planning office had asked the npplicant to square off the land and give the land to the City for the children I spark j, and the golf course. The applicant agreed to this and to the six month rental restriction ':i I, Councilman Behrendt moved to approve the exemption from subdivision; seconded by counCilma~;,' t Wishart. All in favor, motion carried. I , Ii 1\ 1\ ,,- ,\ HOTEL JEROME - Conceptual Subdivis"ion Presentation ',,1 Uill Kane, Director of planning, told Council this is a review of conceptual presentation for PUD for the proposed expansion of the Hotel Jerome. Council should give a clear reading of the overall suitability of the project. The project has been on-going for a long time as a result of the initial investigation of the fire marshal finding that the second and third floors of the building are unsafe. Due to inadequate access, plumbing 1: and wiring deficiencies, the building is in a position to be condemned. The owner of I'I!' the hotel came back with a proposal for expansion. The property in consideration, whi.ch is north of the existing hotel, is zoned office which permits. 75:1 in office space. i\ The planning office has identified several key issues in the development of this project. Ii (1) At a general level, expansion of tourists accommodations in the City is not a desirable! objective.-. (2) Expansion of the Hotel Jerome would involve a very massive structure. :j These negative issues are counterbalanced by encouraging the development of a first class :! tourist hotel in Aspen. It is the feeling of the planning office that the Hotel Jerome represents the best opportunity for this by virtue of its location, its deteriorated condition, and the opportunity to fix up a building that should share a prominent role in the City. The building should be preserved and enhanced. t';f\ The existing hotel is 44,~00 square feet; the proposed expansion is 60,000 square feet. Kane showed Council a"mode1 of the proposed expansion. 6,000 square feet of the expansion would be accessory hotel commercial use. The applicant is basically requesting a rezoning from Office to Commercial/Lodge. Councilwoman Johnston asked about the possibility of the City purchasing the Hotel Jerome to preserve the building, pe~haps use it for employee housing. Councilman Wishart pointed out the cost of renovating it for the City would be great; and if the City owned the building it would (1) put the City in the hole financially and (2) change the flavor of I; the hotel. \' John Gilmore" owner of the Hotel, told Council that at this point, he had approximately \ ~;OO~OOO in' the .property. It will cost approximately $50 per foot to remodel the building.!: ,..~,__.u 0.-__..1_1_..1 ~"'n h,,;1r'1;nrT. h... wOl1ld have a 3ls million dollar building and 35 !. '. I '~ ,- NOVEMBER, 1974 ASPE~ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION EXEMPTION FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS WHEREAS, Peter Brinkman has made application for an exemption from the definition of subdivision regulations pursuant to Section 20-10 (c) of the subdivision regulations, and WHEREAS, the request is to allow condominiumization of an existing duplex on already platted Lot 1, Block 23 of West Aspen Subdivision, and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed said request and finds that the design require- ment of 20-7 of the subdivision regulations have been met, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Aspen . Planning and Zoning Commission exempts said duplex on Lot 1, Block 23 of West Aspen Subdivision from the definition of sub 'ivision. r V DATED THIS COMMISS N ~ DAY o,1,J/..it1U1 , 1974. e.., "r'. surveyon; found several discrepancies. , Barnard lI\oveu that Uw l3enc(1ict exemption be grante'd on the grounds t.hat t.hey are not ~li.thin the intenl!; :lm1 purposes of !;ubclivision. John~;!Jl1 seconueu. 1\11 in favor, IllOti0l1 eiJn:icd. .ion Muddaloncs, located next to the Denedicts, were also in need of an exemption to correct the deed. :~Lion Johnson moved that the Maddalone exemption'be granted on .the grounds that they are without the purpose of the definition of subdivision. Jenkins seconded. All in favor, motion cari::~ed. Request ~I<IS maue to condominimize an existing duplex on 'L-ot.-l, BloCK 23, Nest 1\spen SUbidivision. Hojo felt that ~'it should b2 exempt from the definition of'subdivision because of platted lots and blocks. Drinkman Duplex - r, .::J , .( .oLion Barnard moved to grant an exemption from subidivision and Jenkins seconded. 1\11 in favor, motion carried. 1\ttorney Jon Mulford represented the Redwood Condominiu~s and Anthony Castellack who would like to be exen~tcd .from Subdivision regulations because the building hus existed for years and has utility and waler hookups. There would be two potential owners, John Prosser and Dwight Shellman, who would use it for employee housing. Barnard questioned whether it was on platted lots and blocks and Nr. l-Iulforcl explained that the portion Castellack ovms he purchased from the Railroad years ago. Barnarel stated tha the law was clear that if i~ is not on lots and block~c then it comcs under Subdivision. Nulford argued that the definition refers to concerns over access and utilities and they have taken care. 'of both of those problems. . ~c\'iOod Condominiums .; 110jo said t,hat the Planning Office didn' t really undersU::;( ,about the access of the road. Johnson asked if there was an easement to the road and Hulford said that there Hasn't one. ,,,, .. Mojo said that the Planning Office couldn't recommend approval since it is ,~i thout the intents and purposes of Subdivision and Stanford said that the purpose of those regulations is to lOake sure any devlopmenl that happens happens according to certain standards. Schiffer suggested tabling the action until the road ease- ment problem is l~orked out \Vith the Planning Office. , .cion Barnard moved to tnble the mot,ion until the Planning Office has a chance to research the road access problem. Jenkins seconded. All in favor, motion carried. tion Barnard moved that they have,a s~u~y session problems for nftcr the next regular n1eeting. seconded.. 1\11 in favor, motio~ carried. on the parking Johnson ' Stanford !,aiel that anothe!: ~~ubject the Conunission shoulcl discuss ~ould be the housing problem. ,ll'llkins moved to aeljl)Urn .\llld J6hnson5econelecl. 1\11 in Llvor, meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.lI1. ,/ . I . l.....~ I' ... . ..' I.. 'j l... __.._-._______l.:..... __..._ .._.._.._____ Deputy City Clerk - ~:- (f ')01'" 0- scu...:wy O-~~ luo-." UJ-LJO-. .:be- <:J^-' O():J-fl\.C~)^:u,'*0 . . . Motion to Table Action Brinkman Subdiv- ision--request tor sUbcllvisi on exemption Dedication fee i I i i I I I I , I . i , "t.F.HOECKElI...lIl.C.1. ul,...<..llIU.!..'11':1 .....11(,:tL- ,L ..LlllJ_1LJ.ll'j <...4Jl...' t"..Jl1J.JJ~ ",""."...L ..........L.....L......... ,.... >--''-LV..L.!':).> <.111\1 loan ~o operate on the peoperty Collins said that the othG. uses in the area must be lown before that decision could be made. Collins said that the more definitive in- formation that was available, the more intelligent decisiol' could be made. lie suggested tabling any action until this information was available. Collins entertained a motion to table action. Michae 1 McVoy s ugges ted .g(%t.i~1g-some-.Bor I buffer as a business, rather than a less appropriate use. Bunt moved to table the item until further plans could be obtained. Keinast seconded. All in favor, motion carried. !3rinkman Subclivision--RE:CJuest for subdivision exemptio!l:____ Hal Clark gave the recommendations from the Planning Offic., Planning requests that. the leasing provision be applied to the appl~cant as a condition for the subdivision exemp- tion, with a 6 month minimum leasing condition. Planning had talked with the Parks Dept. regarding land dedication as the open space dedication reqlliremant. 'I'he Parks Dept. encouraged the developer to do this. The Planning Office recommends that the dedication fee be the 436 sq. ft. set aside as open space. Brooke Peterson was present to represent the Brinkman Subdivision. He added that the own- er had no objection to the dedication fee being in the fan of land. The Commission discussed the plans with Mr. Peterson. Clark explained the fotmula used to derive tie dedication fee. He said that ususlly the fee is in the form of money, but that Planning specifically requests that this one be in the form of land dedication. -4- '<1:> () RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Continued Meeting Planninq adZ . Clark l' d n on:U1Q July 27, 1976 from f~~l alne ~hai the e::e~ption entailed exempting the applicant c~ncep ua , prellmlnary, and final plat requirements. The rec~~~aendatlon from Planning and approval by Council is all the app lcant has to go through if the exemption is granted. Dick Keinast moved to grant subdivision exemption conditional on the con~aents from the Planning Office describ d' th d July 15 1976 d .... e ln e memo ated -,' ~ ~n <;:oncntlonal on the squaring off of the lot'\; he> UflC", as tl1.e aeC+:ieatl"n T<?e.. n~.. $c. la-I<..- t!n//' .n'..J.'~' 0 1",,,,,,, ru-sa'i;;d. I. (I, 't ::.-;-"(j- 7i '0"-:. -"'-~.LUA.<C(Ml0,,\ 'h> k _....,-n U--r~ tJ-l-<t.-.u.a' S,^ ('-c~c ~<l...L-' +z> k ~VL, ,,_,If: c: Clark corrected the figuI'e of 436 Sq.ft. to 871 Sq. ft. --o--'(j-q-c<<.( fiotion to : grant Hedstrom seconded. All but Bunt were in favor. Motion carried. Revision to Office Zone Revision to Office Zone John S~anford of the Planning Office said that if P&Z was in agree- m7nt ':"J.th. tl1~ mem,? in the prE;vious packet regarding the historic d'Rt,...,~... h,:lr.<<='''''n~+-''''" n'.............:..._ __...,~ .. .. .... /--\ \ i '-_/ ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street C;;l735 -/;/.;J,-o'l-()35 Aspen, Colorado 81811 05/1- 8'7 (303) 925-2020 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES City 00113 - 63721 - 47331 - 47332 - 63722 - 63723 - 63724 - 63725 .63726 .63727 - 63728 . 47333 - 47341 - 47342 - 47343 - 47350 - 47360 GMP/CONCEPTUAL GMP/PRELIMINARY GMP/FINAL SUB/CONCEPTUAL SUB/PRELIMINARY SUB/FINAL ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS ALL 1-STEP APPLlCATlONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS LlO.500 REFERRAL FEES: 00125 .63730 - 47380 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 - 63730 - 47380 HOUSING 00115 - 63730 . 47380 ENGINEERING ~f 'X'd, 0(') SUB-TOTAL <-; :?~.<S 00 County 00113 - 63711 - 47431 GMP/GENEAAL - 63712 - 47432 GMP/DETAILED - 63713 - 47433 GMP/FINAL - 63714 - 47441 SUB/GENERAL - 63715 - 47442 SUB/DETAILED - 63716 - 47443 SUB/FINAL - 63717 - 47450 ALL 2-STEP APPLlCA liONS - 63718 - 47460 ALL 1MSTEP APPlICATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS REFERRAL FEES: 00125 - 63730 - 47480 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 M 63730 - 47480 HOUSING 00113 M 63731 M 47480 ENVIRONMENTAL COORD. 00113 - 63732 - 47480 ENGINEERING SUB-TOTAL PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 - 63061 - 09000 COUNTY CODE - 63062 - 09000 COMPo PLAN - 63066 - 09000 COPY FEES - 63069 - 09000 OTHER Name 7ff/;)nd NClnchf.s!pr Add,esa Ie Q Box V(;lq ~ _ /~p ,)"-I (, :i'L I. /,J Check # /43/ Additional Billing: SUB. TOTAL ;;# TOTAL '1/'"LlY"6.0n Phone, 'I;;:{ -L/ 7f-, / 2fQ 0-;<3 U( Project: Ar-;/n frJ c> '-~~/A I;'J"./) v'I~/'{}rl ;;;:XC PA)1/~'lJ Oate ~/ /u/g7 # of Hours: -:::s'