Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Land Use Case.1230 Cooper Ave.A73-96
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET - C OF ASPEN DATE RECEIVED: 10/1 ` CAS « 'A73 -96 DATE COMPLETE: STAFF: Bob Nevins` PARCEL ID # 2737 - 181' -26 -006 / �g T V � PROJECT NAME: 1230 Cooper Ave. Final P.U.D, GMQS Exemption Project Address: 1230 Cooper Ave. APPLICANT: Doug Michalowski, Address/Phone: 1230 Cooper Ave. Aspen 920 -2191 REPRESENTATIVE: Colombo International,Inc. Address/Phone: 623 E. Hopkins, Aspen 925 -7806 RESPONSIBLE PARTY: Applicant Other Name /Address: FEES DUE FEES RECEIVED PLANNING $2100 PLANNING $2100 # APPS RECEIVED 10 ENGINEER $0 ENGINEER $ - # PLATS RECEIVED HOUSING $0 HOUSING $ GIS DISK RECEIVED: ENV HEALTH $0 ENV HEALTH $ CLERK $0 CLERK $ TYPE OF APPLICATION TOTAL $2100 TOTAL RCVD . $2100 . Two Step "'Review' Meeting.Date ` Public Hearing, ■ MIMED . ❑ City Attorney ❑ City Engineer ❑ Zoning ❑ Housing ❑ Environmental Health ❑ Parks DATE REFERRED:' ❑ Aspen Fire Marshal ❑ City Water ❑ City Electric ❑ Clean Air Board ❑ Open Space Board ❑ Other: INITIALS: ❑ CDOT ❑ ACSD ❑ Holy Cross Electric ❑ Rocky Mtn- Natural Gas ❑ Aspen School'District ❑ Other: DATE DUE: f I L) APPROVAL: Ordinance/Resolution # Date: Staff Approval Date: �. fl - m= Plat Recorded: � �,��� Book ,Page CLOSED/FILED DATE: 2 INITIALS: ROUTE TO: '&—Ir Aw —** G;41 G/r/A ASPEN /PITIIN CON TX DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen Development Application Fee Policy The City of Aspen, pursuant to Ordinance 53 (Series of 1995), has established a fee structure for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. Referral fees for other City departments reviewing the application will also be collected when necessary. One check including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the Aspen /Pitkin Community Development Department. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required application fee. A flat fee is collected by Planning for Staff Approvals which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. The fee is not refundable. A deposit is collected by Planning when more extensive staff review is required, as hours are likelv to vary substantially from one application to another. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. After the deposit has been expended, the applicant will be billed monthly based on actual staff hours. Current billings must be paid within 30 days or processing of the application will be suspended. If an applicant has previously failed to pay-application fees as required, no new or additional applications will be accepted for processing until the outstanding =fees are paid. In no case will Building Permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. After the final action on the project, any remaining balance from the deposit will be refunded to the applicant. Applications which require a deposit must include an Agreement for Payment of Development Application Fees. The Agreement establishes the applicant as being responsible for payment of all costs associated with processing the application. The Agreement must be signed by the party responsible for payment and submitted with the application in order for it to he accepted. The complete fee schedule for land use applications is listed on the reverse side • ASPEN /PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and �F�j (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for �z cC)-,,;> PIF)2- ate- mss) (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). ?. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 53 (Series of 1995) establishes a fee structure for Planning applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or cope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties to allow APPLICANT to make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the Greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and /or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and /or City Council to make legally required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920 -5090 FAX# (970) 920 -5439 December 27, 1996 Jim Colombo Colombo International, Inc. 623 E. Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 _ Re: 1230 E. Cooper Subdivision, Rezoning & GMQS Exemption Case A73 -96 Dear Jim, The Community Development Department has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is complete. We have scheduled this application for review by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission at a Public Hearing to be held on Tuesday, January 21, 1997 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. Should this date be inconvenient for you please contact me within 3 working days of the date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and changes to the schedule or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at the Community Development Department. Please note that it is your responsibility to mail notice to property owners within 300' and to post the subject property with a sign at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Please submit a photograph of the posted sign as proof of posting and an affidavit as proof of mailing prior to the public hearing. If you have any questions, please call the planner assigned to your case, Bob Nevins at 920 -5102. Sincerely, Rhonda Harris Administrative Assistant FPOM PHONE NO. P01 -------------------- ------ ------------- -- --- - -- -- FAX TR NSMISSION DATE: 2/13/97 TO: PLANNING DEPARTMENT ATTENTION: CHRIS BEDON FROM: Jim Colombo NOTE: 1230 Cooper Avenue- request to table and reschedule P & Z hearing NO. OF SHEETS—___2__ COMMENTS: . SIGMA �'1e FROM • R-UNE hlCl. . P02 01 COLOMBO a 1 997 rrtias+w•_;ti�e i `t INTERNATIONAL, INC.�ar 623 E. HOPKINS ST. ASPEN, C0 81611 ` TEL: 970 925-7806 Bob Niven Chris Bendon Aspen Planning Department Feb. 13, 1997 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 RE: 1230 Cooper Avenue Affordable Housing Project Bob/Chris, Please acoept this request to table our scheduled planning and Zoning Commission hearing currently scheduled for February 18, 1:97 on the 1230 Cooper Avenue Affordable Housing Project . It Is also my request to reschedule a hearing before the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on April 1, 1997, which I have been informed is your next earliest opening. Should an opening beoorne available before this date we would like to schedule, for that earlier time. Thank you for your attention to this matter, Sinoerely, • _ i �G�� 3�'Aab '�Vyvl azl� v, � �� -� Qo IdVN'V{ W(, �• UV '�Mf�lL�j �,."� b 6 aWAy�, �, ��wu� y Fes- -�,► MEMORANDUM To: Bob Nevins, City Planner Thru: Nick Adeh, City Engineer From: Ross C. Soderstrom, Project Engineer . Date: January 10, 1997 Re: 1230 Cooper Avenue Subdivision: Affordable Housing Project 1230 East Cooper Avenue, City of Aspen, CO: (a.k.a. Lot B, Ferguson Subdivision Exemption and PUD, City of Aspen, CO) After reviewing the above referenced application and making a site visit, I ain reporting the combined comments made by the members of the DRC: [Site conditions at the time of site visit: 01/07/97; 2 ft snow pack with 4 ft drifts; ground surface and features indistinguishable under snowpack] 1. Eligibility of Development: In reviewing the previous subdivision actions which created this lot, it appears that this lot may only be developed as a duplex rather than a four -plex as this application has been submitted. This condition of development results from previous actions of the Board of County Commissioners and general conditions of a lot split (granted by the City of Aspen), both of which actions created the present lot. In January, 1980, the underlying Lot 4 of the Ferguson Subdivision Exemption was created by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners which body applied the condition that the property being subdivided may only be partitioned into a maximum of five (5) lots or parcels. In April, 1986, this Lot 4 was further divided by a lot split, creating the subject Lot B, approved by the Aspen City Council with the general condition that a. parcel created by lot split may not be further subdivided nor split and that the maximum build -out of the lots created by the lot split may be " ... a duplex and a single - family home." (AMC 26.88.030.A.2.g). Since there is already a single family home on the other lot created by the lot spbl, this property appears to be eligible for build -out as a duplex rather than the four -plex requested in the application. Given the apparent discrepancy between the permissible development and the requested development, this response is premised upon the property being developed with two buildings (either a duplex below and a detached garage above, or as two (2) duplexes, as proposed) located on. either side of the 1 OF 4 DRCM0197.DOC 111 W r� U ASPEN /PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1996 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES BASE FEE CATEGORY HOURS DEPOSIT Major 12 $2,100.00 Minor 6 1,050.00 Staff Approvals 450.00 Fiat Fes 235.00 Referral Fees- Environmental Health and Housing Major 160.00 Minor 6x.00 Referral Fees -City Engineer Major 260.00 Minor 105.00 Referral Fees - County Engineer Major _ 300.00 Minor 150.00 County Clerk Administrative Fees M ajor 310.00 Minor 105.00 Board of Adjustment 105.00 Hourly Rate 175.00 • w 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ which is for hours of Planning staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing. CITY OF ASPEN Bat.4hr +--- r---- uson Commu nity Development Director 2 APPLICANT 9-j WE MailiW Address: •9 .11m Colombo Colombo International 520 East Cooper Avenue. #205 ` Aspen, CO 81611 P F. Douglas Michalowski 1230 East Cooper Avenue ASPEN _ PiTKiw Aspen, CO 81611 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT April 14, 1997 Dear Sirs; Your application for land use approval, submitted October 16, 1996, has been closed. With this application you submitted a $2,100 deposit for the land use application fees. $1.097.50 of this deposit has not been charged and is available to you as a refund. To claim this balance, please address a letter to me explaining the discontinuation of the case and requesting the remainder of the deposit. If you submit an application for land use approval for 1230 East Cooper Avenue by April 30, 1997, and Staff determines that it is complete, you may apply this balance to the new application without submitting an additional deposit. You will, however, need to submit a signed fee agreement clearly stating that this balance is being used towards the new land use application fee and that any additional Staff time will be charged.the rate of $180 per hour. As in any land use application deposit, all debts must be settled before issuance of any permits. Any land use application submitted after April 30, 1997, will require a full deposit. Thanks, 0�' V 1 Christopher Bendon, City Planning Attachment: Billing worksheet City of Aspen Fee Agreement i �o+e- A 73 —94 'fh.+s 0 CI ®,,.&.L b«.xu OWN '4v'�c of s. dos• -Q . D)ol , c,�.••�- �� � t I I,, r Q j�V. Imo. 130 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN, COW immimi I 0 � r\C ee 1J 40k rrye-'^*"j- of &' n'e&^x- 1 1C fVk4,,rvtP- wfcx-,.. Date 04/14/97 Aspen /Pitkin Community Development time 10:06 am . Application Billing Work '*te Page 1 Nickname 1 : 96 -AO73 Nickname 2 : 1230 Cooper Address : Douglas Michalowski 1230 Cooper Avenue Aspen„ CO 81611 In reference to : A73 -96 1230 Cooper Avenue Final PUD, GMQS Exemption Rounding : None Full Precision : No Last bill Last charge : 03/02/97 Last payment Amount $0.00 Arrangement : Time Charges: From slips. Expenses: From slips. Date /Slip# Description HOURS /RATE AMOUNT TOTAL 12/22/96 Bob / Case Admin. 0.50 87.50 #153 175.00 01/06/97 Bob / Case Admin. 3.00 540.00 #160 180.00 02/03/97 Chris / Meetings 0.50 90.00 #171 180.00 02/03/97 Chris / Case Admin. 0.50 90.00 #172 180.00 02/17/97 Chris / Case Admin. 0.50 90.00 #176 180.00 TOTAL BILLABLE TIME CHARGES 5.00 $897.50 Date /Slip# 10/16/96 #115 Description Engineer / $Engineer -Minor Engineer QTY /PRICE 1 105.00 105.00 TOTAL BILLABLE COSTS $105.00 TOTAL NEW CHARGES $1,002.50 PAYMENTS /REFUNDS /CREDITS 10/16/96 Land Use Review Deposit = 2,100.00 TOTAL PAYMENTS /REFUNDS /CREDITS - $2,100.00 NEW BALANCE New Current period - 1,097.50 TOTAL NEW BALANCE - $1,097.50 RESOLUTION NO: 2_ (Series of 1997) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, GRANTING A WAIVER OF LAND USE APPLICATION FEES FOR A 100% AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT LOCATED AT 1230 E. COOPER AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.52 of the Municipal Code, Doug Michalowski (applicant) submitted an application (development proposal) to the Planning Department on October 16, 1997; and, and, WHEREAS, the development proposal consisted entirely of affordable housing units; WHEREAS, the Planning Department and the Housing Board reviewed the development .proposal; and, WHEREAS, the development proposal was withdrawn without any approvals; and, WHEREAS, the applicant signed a fee agreement with the City and is responsible. for reimbursing the City for time City Staff spent reviewing the development proposal in the amount of $1,002.50; and, WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.08.010 of the Municipal Code, the City Council may take such other actions not delegated to the'Commission, the Historic Preservation Committee, the Board of Adjustment, or the Planning Director, as the City Council may deem desirable and necessary to implement the provisions of the Land'Use Code; and, WHEREAS, because the development proposal was never reviewed by the City Council, the applicant did not get the opportunity to request a waiver of the land use application fees during the land use process and is now making such a request; and, WHEREAS, the City Council found, in this instance; a waiver of the land use application fees to encourage the private sector to develop 100% affordable housing projects is desirable. Resolution No. of 1997 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: In accordance with Section 26.08.010 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, does hereby grant a waiver of the $1,002.50 land use application fee to Doug. Michalowski for a 100% affordable housing project at 1230 E, Copper Avenue that did not receive approvals, without conditions. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 27th day of May, 1997. Approved as to form: City Attorney Approved as to content: John Nennett, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk, do certify that the foregoing is a true --and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, .at a meeting held on May 27, 1997. A Kathryn S. Ko �/ dty • DOUGLAS MICHALOWSKI 1230 EAST COOPER AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 MAY 6, 1997 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: IN REGARDS TO MY APPLICATION FEE SUBMITTED OCTOBER 1996 FOR A 100% AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT LOCATED AT 1230 EAST COOPER AVENUE, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A WAIVER OF SAID FEE. IN THE INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY TO ATTRACT THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO HELP CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN ASPEN, THIS WAIVER HAS, AMOUNG OTHER FEES, BEEN APPROVED BY THE HOUSING ADMINISTRATION. . WITH YOUR HELP, I WOULD LIKE TO GO FORWORD WITH THIS PROJECT SING LY, DOUGLAS MICHALOWSKI Memo - 1230 Cooper Avenue Aision: Affordable HousingProject irrigation ditch in the general configuration of the proposed site plan. The general nature of the following discussion and recommendations will apply to either of these possible development scenarios however the higher density proposed by the two duplexes will constrict the site and in turn require more thoughtful attention to detail to accommodate the competing needs of vehicle movements, site drainage, utility services, landscaping and requirements of other reviewing agencies. If the applicant requests development or the development approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council will change the use, geometry or character of the development, the Engineering Dept. requests that the revised development plan, be re- submitted to the Engineering Dept. that we may confirm that this discussion and these recommendations remain appropriate for the final proposed development. 2. Driveway Configuration & Sidewalk Area: The property owner will -be required to construct of repair (as appropriate) curbs, gutters and sidewalks along part or all of the East Cooper. Avenue (Highway 82) frontage, as needed, at the time of construction depending upon the configuration of the final site plan and the condition of the existing improvements. Given the extensive width of the right -of -way created by Chipeta Avenue, the location of the sidewalk and landscaping may be separated from the curb along East Cooper Avenue and coordinated with. other uses, specifically vehicle access. Along the entire street frontage, a sidewalk or pedestrian area shall remain unobstructed by improvements including fences, landscape boulders, vegetation; e.g. any new trees must be located to provide space for and alignment of the future sidewalk with the neighboring sidewalk routes to either side. The pedestrian usable space shall be shown on the final subdivision plan and the final site plan set submitted for the building permit. Driveways are not permitted from private property on to Highway 82 where the property is served by alley access as is this property. If the property is developed as a single duplex, the access should be from the alley along the northeasterly side of the property thus avoiding the limited sight distance (southeasterly along Highway 82); vehicle movement conflicts (intersections of Aena Park to the southeast and Lacet Court and Midland Avenue to the west, all within 60 ft to 200 ft); and related conditions created by locating a driveway fronting onto Highway 82. If a driveway is to be constructed fronting onto Highway 82, a single curb cut of 18 ft may be made and the driveway may not exceed 18 ft in width from the curb cut to the front property line. This will necessitate reducing the proposed 24 ft to 57 ft driveway width shown on the site plan. The applicant will need to receive written permission from the Colorado Dept. of Transportation to create, use and maintain this driveway as an access onto Highway 82 (contact the Glenwood. Springs office of CDOT for a Driveway Access Permit). No improvements shall be constructed, erected nor maintained in the public rights -of -way without the prior written approval and permit of the appropriate city departments. 2OF4 DRC1\40197. DOC Memo - 1230 Cooper Avenu0vision: Affordable HousingProject 3. Irrigation Ditch: The proposed site plan indicates that the existing irrigation ditch would be relocated downhill from its present location, re- aligned at each side property boundary where it leaves and enters the adjoining properties, and would be relocated out of the existing dedicated ditch easement. This presents several technical and legal constraints which need to be. resolved prior to altering or relocating the ditch from its present alignment. In relocating and re- aligning the ditch, the hydraulic properties of the ditch would be changed which may affect the capacity of the ditch; the velocity and energy of the water conveyed; create or increase the erosion potential of the ditch; and alter the operation of the flow, control and diversion structures on the ditch (both upstream and downstream). As such, the applicant should have a hydraulic analysis of the ditch performed by a Colorado licensed civil engineer to assess the existing and proposed conditions to determine if and how the ditch may be relocated or re- aligned without adversely affecting the neighboring property owners and the owners of the irrigation ditch. The applicant should also secure the written permission of the neighboring property owners and the ditch owners prior to re- aligning the ditch since a new water course will impact the neighboring properties and affect the carrying capacity, operation and maintenance of the ditch. T'he irrigation ditch owners and probably the adjacent property owners will also need to approve any cbange and re- dedication of the ditch easement since these parties will again be affected by such action. Until a new ditch design and alignment acceptable to the ditch owners and the adjoining property owners is completed, the ditch should remain undisturbed in its present location. 4. Fire and Emergency Access: Given that the existing alley access is only 15 ft in width, is approximately 158 ft in length (most northeasterly property corner to the Aena. Park R -O -W) -_ -.- and lacks sufficient turning area for fire and emergency vehicles, mitigating measures would be needed to accommodate dwelling units located on the upper half of the property. Possible measures include re- dedicating a portion of the previously existing alley to widen the alley width, to a minimum of 20 ft. (would require consent and participation of the neighboring property owners to effect this change); and sprinklering the upper building. Depending upon the final approved plan these and other measures may be necessary to meeting building and fire code requirements and provide emergency services to the upper half of the property. 5. Water Service & Fire Sprinkling: The owner needs to meet with the City Water Dept. to discuss serviceability of the property with the existing water service lines, installation of individual metering for each proposed dwelling unit and whether an up- sized water line(s) will. be required to meet domestic service and fire sprinkler flow requirements. 6. Site Drainage and Erosion and Sediment Transport Control: The new development shall not release more than historic storm run -off flows from the site and any increase ir), I:).istoric storm run -off flows must be first routed and detained on the site. A copy of the soils report must be 3OF4 DRCM0197.DOC Memo - 1230 Cooper AvenueOvision: Affordable HousingProiect submitted with the final site development plans for the building permit. A drainage plan shall be included in the site development plans submitted for the subdivision approval. (Not shown on submitted application drawings.) . Prior to issuance of the building permit, the developer of this property will be required to submit a construction plan detailing the construction techniques to be used to control erosion and sedimentation transport during and after construction. Due to the proximity of the proposed improvements to the existing irrigation ditch, a sediment barrier located immediately above the irrigation ditch for demolition, regrading, construction and revegetation of the upper slope will be necessary. The non - disturbance line shall be established with continuous construction fencing and sediment barriers prior to constriction and shall be securely maintained until issuance of a C.O. for the project. See further discussion of the irrigation ditch above. 7. Trash & Utility Areas: Water and electric utility meters and service connection points must be accessible to service personnel in the completed project and not obstructed by garbage or recycling containers, other structures or vegetation. Any new surface utilities requiring a pedestal or other above ground equipment must be installed on an easement provided by the property owner and not located within the public rights -of -way. All prescriptive easements for existing utilities (aerial, surface and subsurface) will be properly and fully described and dedicated on the final subdivision plat if they lie outside of a newly dedicated easement. Any required easements for utilities shall be shown on the final subdivision plat submitted for recording and shall also be shown on the plan set submitted for the building permit. 8. Improvement Districts: The property owner shall be required to agree to join any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights - of -way. The agreement shall be executed and recorded concurrent with the final subdivision plat. 9. As- Builts: Prior to C.O. issuance the building permit applicant will be required to submit to the Aspen/Pitkin County Data Processing Dept. as- builts drawings for the project showing the property lines, building footprint, easements,. encroachments, entry points . for utilities entering the property boundaries and any other improvements. 4OF4 DRCM019TDOC taw V// �JJ�/fj� i� Ego-L9 44 OF- AV 47P "tA Y-A.WO, • �6� vvl tx i - 11 V✓ ,C� ilia i 1A — (G d LAW OFFICES OF OATES, HUGHES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 EAST HOP K NS AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 LEONARD M. OATES TELEPHONE (970) 920 -1700 RICHARD A. KNEZEVICH FACSIMILE (970) 920 -I 121 TED D. GARDEN5WARTZ e -mail ohkgQrof.net DAVID B. KELLY RICH ORMAN OF COUNSEL: ROBERT W. HUGHES JOHN THOMAS KELLY February 4, 1997 FEB 12 1997 WAW M r.1 F E B 9 ���7 Robert Nevins Staff Planner Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 HAND DELIVERED Re: Land Use Application /Douglas Michalowski /Lot B, Ferguson Subdivision Exception and PUD Amendment Plat Dear Bob: This letter will confirm that at a meeting on February 1, 1997, I delivered to you a copy of that certain Substitution of Easement Agreement recorded in Book 431 at Page 824 of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado, which purports to create an access easement for the benefit of Lots 2 and 3 of the Ferguson Exemption Plat across the Southwesterly side of Lot 3. As is reflected in that Easement and as I advised you, it is the position of my client, Jack A. Robinson, the owner of Lot 2, that that easement is exclusive and may be used only by the owners of Lots 2 and 3 for access to their respective properties. Apparently as a part of the Land Use Application by Mr. Michalowski, he proposed to use that easement for access to one of the residential dwelling units to be situate on his property. On the basis of access only, Mr. Robinson objects to the Application. I would appreciate it if you would include me on the mailing list for adjoining property owners as I have been asked to represent Mr. Robinson in this matter. Very truly yours, GATES, HUGHES, II(NEZEVICH &t GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. By Leonard M. Oates LMO /amc Enclosure cc: Jack A. Robinson C:IDATAICIien1s1ROBl NSONILtr.0203.wp d 06; 01!95 t' 09:23 0252895 r' " CR4V M1-11p SUBSTITUTION Oi' E:j EMENT C ' 1 i ;►.liar. �� 1_....� �)�.,.: -n WHEREAS, Loma Alta. Corporation, the ,►�ccessor i��, finest to: Loma Alto Corporation, is the record title h er�Im£ ,t h6'' l Pitkin County, Colorad fol.lcwing real property it:?: Iri t �; and 4, Ferguson Exerption Plat, Plat Book 11, at Pagan -••I q REAS, an a•�cess road has been i�1 place a since P�C Lcr� eo 1964 which provides access to Lot 2, Ferguson Exemption PT.�*,, =::1I h-� a pl.atte9 and unpla.tted portion of Lot . 3, FergusF5-nmption Plat; and, WHEREAS, ,:here .is designated on the Ferguson.Exemption Plat a certain acceF,s easement to Lot 2 through a portion of Lot 3; and, WHEREAS, the physical access in place does not fall within the acce:_,s easement provided on said Plat; and WHEREAS, the I undersigned as owner of. all the real property invov.led, desires to clarify and correct the discrepancies between the physical access and legal access, so as tc vacate the existing Pas,�-k:er_t on said Plat and to grant an easement ;which is consistent -riti► the physical access in place since prior to 1964; NOW, ,THEREFORE, in consideration of the clarification and correction of sL:ch discrepancies, Loma Alta hereby vacates the existing easement and substitutes a new easement as follows: I. Vacation of Faist-inq Easement._ Loma Alta Corporation hereby. vacates that certain easement encumbering Lot 3, Ferguson Exemption Plat, for the benefit of 1�_-t 2, . Ferguson Exemption Plat, as more. fully set forth I on the plat for. the 'Ferguson Exemption Plat reror "ca in Book 11 at Page 59 of the records. of Fitkin County. II. Substitution of Easement. Loma Alta Corporation as the owner of Lot 3, Ferguson Exemption Plat, hereby grants to Loma Alta Corporation, owner of Lot 2, Ferguson Exemption Plat, and, owner of Lot 3, Ferguson Exemption Plat, .their heirs, successors and assigns an exclusive easement for ingress and egress to said. Lots 2 and 3 an or Installation for utilities to be placed urdergro :►nd and for access for installation., .'maintenance,. removal, replacement. and repair of said utilities over an existing road in place as more specifically described in Exhibit A attached hereto an(3 inccrE+orated by reference. III. bSaint?nance ReS L oL£.'�•the heeasement f including1lany responsible for maintenance additional. improvements to the same, regular maintenance, special imErroveme►Zts, and snowplowing• RJT/11:08/24/82 730.3310 /d4 /SubstEase Q 003 F 06/01!95 09:24 252895{x;!;;, i CRW 004 .�•ai u, .[. h: �'.I��r.Nd..L'.•. ,=' '�r•:.l +ml�i�••�:'4�{�I!'i4.�ri lY7!rDi:�M, •. IV. Covenant of Access. The owner -of Lot 3 shall not At any. time impede the access over the above - described easement, however, the owner of Lot 3, Ferguson Exemption Plat,. Pitkin County, Colorado, shall have the right. to require the owners of Lot 2 to remove any encroachment or expansion of the easement beyond its described location onto Lot 2, Lot 3 and /or Lot 4 to the extent such adjoining Lots are then owned by the owner of Lot 3. Removal of any such encroachment or expansion sh,: ;Il be perEormed within fi!'.teen (15) days of receipt of written notice, and, if not removed within such time the owner of Lot 3 or its agents may. enter upan Lot 2 as !nay be required, and remove same at will. All cost: of removal shall be borne by and he the. liability of the owner of Lot 2. V. Notice. . Notice, as provided in Article IV preceding, shall be given to the addressee and d is ignated party at the address of said party se's .forth in the Assessor's Office at Pitkin County, Colorado. Such notice shall be by U. S. mail, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested, and shall be deemed received on the third day aft::r date of post,nark unless received earlier as evidenced by the date on ,the return receipt. VI. Binding Effect. This tiocument' shall be binding on the transferees, heirs, successors and assigns of Loma. Alta Corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned execute this Substituticn of F'asement tho jo_ day of August, 1952. ATTEST: Secretary, -i LOMA ALTA CORPORINTION —2— iv? r y Pre i rguson t � f 06/01/95 09:25 252895 rS .. CRW 005 STATE OF COLORADO § COUNTY OF PITKIN y Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of August, _r 1982 by Larry Ferguson, President of. Loma Alta Corpor.ati4�. 1 ,9 . Witness my hand and official seal.. •� My commission expires: Notary Public Address: YC ). %7)4 ':Z. Cl' PJ . •- 3- nwsn�. rWV4F! 4r�1'• vA ^'.u•n,rrx�.::. »( + ^�w}.•:,a': ,..,.r.: .. ,..:�•: ,.....v....,.. ...... . ..... .... .. .........,..... .. _...... ... ... .. ... ....... ......... _. _ �'✓ 06,101195 ' 09.20 ^925'2890 ., CRIV W1 006 EXHIBIT "A" Beginning at a .point; being N 5211 02 E 95.60. ft, from the corner of Lot 22, Block 17, Riverside Addition, such corner of Lot 22 being N 18° 10' 40" W 1628.57 ft. from corner No. 1, MS 3905 AM., Riverside Placer. 1954 Brass Cap thence N 370 30' W 165.34 ft. thence angling to the right N 010 10' E 49.35 ft. to a point intersecting the east lot line of Lot 2, Ferguson Exemption Plat, thence left following the east line of Lot 2, S 4111 131 W 45.98 ft. thence southeast following the 'North open p -ice easement line of. Lot 4, Ferguson Exemption Plat 46.00 ft. to a corner fence post , thence S 371 26' 13" E 73.45 ft. being a fence line established by the President of Loma Alta Corporation in 1964, thence .S 35° 131 38" E 76.10 ft. continuing along said fence to an 8" x 8" railroad crosstie, thence S 3511 13' 38" E 11.4 ft. to the west street line of Aene,Park, Woerndle Subdivision, thence N 520 02' E 18.10 ft. to the point of .beginning. RJT/11:08/2.5/82 730.3310 /d8 /EXA- GrntEa r ";?."_.T 196 35 : Qe°Ai °I TKIN COUNTY ,. � +�``.rwwr.e++w.s'... .. •�� � r? e,+.- - ��--:::.- 1rr�gn .gro�'�.iwM�n�'yM�.'CI!![3� .•M 904 c"CV►•d .it 1,1' 11 A„q, srr+,Ir;. 040 Geniis fiamnrr N.*cvrd*r Reception a= � n lit 'till �74.� Rk.80GLTION Or T111r 80ARn OM Co-J9TY CL'.• 11S5410NERS for PITRIN Cotm%TY, COLOlfl•ffOr GRA..ITTMG M EXZMPTIDN rUM TEM at IM2'i'xon or, SVBDIvisi 5 FOR THE ?ARC .IZ kM, AND aALE OP LO'rs L -LT OF BLOCK L7, R1V MIRE aGCITIDM Razolution t;o. .7,f -1 Ito WHEIMAtl. Larx-f rergusnn (Applicant')_ is the ortner 'af 1 -17; 131nvh 17, ft".- arsida Addition to the City of aspen, Cola ado, and wishas to parcat and convey theac lots facoording to Pxioting lcmt iinam). and i6iE1Ri'AS, Appi i eztat and the 904rd of County Coimeissioners are unabis to agree, to their satisfaction, as to whether or not the Parcht'ling 'AM sal: ? ioto within Lt:a Riverside Aiuition caltstitutes subdLv!-iian set:vity within intents and purpose of state and Weal ssb9ivtai.on roqulation, and wish to resolve the same oy the action haritrafter taken, NOW, Tfp&FlMRI, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissionerr of I+ltk£rt County, color'3do., that ursuent to C.° S 1973. .tee•...>r. 30- 2R- 101(10)(d) it does horeby. grant an exemption from the definition of Subdivision for the parcelling and sale {alonq oxistina t0whAtt^ lines] of LatS I. :, 3, 4. S. S. 7, 3, 9, 10. 11, 12, 13, ,14,, 15, 15, and Ili Block 17, Riverside Addition to the City of Aspvn. ;.ato no more than five such lots and oareel.a,_subjject to the following :imitations and roru3ltiona: 1. :ho Pla,-inittg Office, sr,d County Engineer {prior to any convoYahret shall review the site and datermine than it . iai provides adeggate utilities, access, traffic circulations and 1b1, if it lies within Any designated natural hazard and resource aroma Gha. Spe:iat. Review approval is applied for and granted. 2. Tho Applicant shall enlarge the rxisting residence on the site into a four badromsjtuo bath unit and the same sha.ilf t� Post -)t" brand fax transmittal memo M F1 paw ► ';� Ib { s Gat Dept, qe i iii 0 WHEIMAtl. Larx-f rergusnn (Applicant')_ is the ortner 'af 1 -17; 131nvh 17, ft".- arsida Addition to the City of aspen, Cola ado, and wishas to parcat and convey theac lots facoording to Pxioting lcmt iinam). and i6iE1Ri'AS, Appi i eztat and the 904rd of County Coimeissioners are unabis to agree, to their satisfaction, as to whether or not the Parcht'ling 'AM sal: ? ioto within Lt:a Riverside Aiuition caltstitutes subdLv!-iian set:vity within intents and purpose of state and Weal ssb9ivtai.on roqulation, and wish to resolve the same oy the action haritrafter taken, NOW, Tfp&FlMRI, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissionerr of I+ltk£rt County, color'3do., that ursuent to C.° S 1973. .tee•...>r. 30- 2R- 101(10)(d) it does horeby. grant an exemption from the definition of Subdivision for the parcelling and sale {alonq oxistina t0whAtt^ lines] of LatS I. :, 3, 4. S. S. 7, 3, 9, 10. 11, 12, 13, ,14,, 15, 15, and Ili Block 17, Riverside Addition to the City of Aspvn. ;.ato no more than five such lots and oareel.a,_subjject to the following :imitations and roru3ltiona: 1. :ho Pla,-inittg Office, sr,d County Engineer {prior to any convoYahret shall review the site and datermine than it . iai provides adeggate utilities, access, traffic circulations and 1b1, if it lies within Any designated natural hazard and resource aroma Gha. Spe:iat. Review approval is applied for and granted. 2. Tho Applicant shall enlarge the rxisting residence on the site into a four badromsjtuo bath unit and the same sha.ilf t� Post -)t" brand fax transmittal memo M F1 paw ► ';� Ib { FMM o. Gat Dept, FW94 iii 0 ex *q e 1 1 II rI I �9 ... © :02-O 1'PITKI��I- CLb "I"ft( xlT..._. .. .�... r r.•,,. ?rT;; s- -1, :� , 'P.�. tai :era 9014 at MH resale prioes %'with the Applicant providi.iq financing;% or fH he retaiac.d as a rental ur.!t qi ►_h rental rakes astazliefted by tbo Housing Authoritya Cr fe) ba leased to the Authority fee a Sang tarm to,be apibLet by the Autherityr or 441 ary other alternative autaally agrsed to by tha Board and Acplicant. uE _t' r'V9r -I91t i.BdOLV6, as additional condl-L•iona aq the exemption herein granted, than: t, T}ifg gr =nt CE exemption S2hall ;n no way `JhOtit'aty d aaivsr of any County regulations ameopt those ampressly cxenptad heraby. i. M* reatrictiona Set ft: 11h 4areir. shall run with the laud and be binding upon any n•�bsequer.l purchaser or successor in ihtcroAt. i.• the Appiicanar. aiv—i, by deed restriction, restrictive covenant, or other appropriate instrument. takes such action as r•.ay bs :ecuuzzri to inware that t`.e reetriCtiWtta set forth herein run with the lard 4nd are bindinq ripen subsequort purchasers and successors in interest. Ai'FROV'cii by they Hoard of County Comixafbno,rs of Pitkxe L'oorkty, Colorado, at its regular neetlttg held January 14. 1960. ATTjtSTo 8ST_ s a ar.4L_ t0puty. county Clerk APPWIPED AS me POW13 sands■ n. seuLxer County Attorney e = . THE BOARD 'OF I -IMHT3 i OMISSYr3NERS OF PrTICiH C4rJ14T4, COWRA O Chairthan • s PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 1230 E. COOPER SUBDIVISION, REZONING & GMQS EXEMPTION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, January 21, 1997 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Douglas Michalowski, requesting approval to remove an existing 1200 square foot category 4 deed ristricted unit and construct 4 affordable housing units (3 Resident Occupied & 1 Category 4). The following land use approvals are requested: • Subdivision • Rezoning from R -15B PUD to AH PUD • GMQS Exemption The property is located at 1230 E. Cooper Avenue, and is described as Lot B, Ferguson Subdivision Exception and PUD Amendment Plat. For further information, contact Bob Nevins at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920- 5102. s /Sara Garton. Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on January 4, 1997 City of Aspen Account 0 0 Aspen. Housing Department Alpine Lodge 1240 E. Cooper Aspen, CO. 8161.1 Re. Expansion of 1230 E. Cooper, McClosky Project To Whom It May Concern, F E 8 2 G 9997 We are writing this letter to voice our concern regarding the proposed expansion of the McClosky property located at 1230 E. Cooper St. It is our understanding that Mr. McClosky has proposed placing 4 open "affordable" units on his property expanding the existing structure from approximately 1200 sq ft to a structure of 5200 sq ft.. Our concerns regarding this project are manifest and I shall list the most glaring below 1. If there were no structure on the current property of approximately 7500 sq ft, as zoned there is not enough land to build one structure let alone expand the existing structure by five times. 2. As we understand the current zoning if we chose to revert to the underlining zoning we would be limited to one 5000 sq ft single family residence with no option to erect multi family residences no matter what their designation. To allow Mr McClusky to erect 5200 sq feet on one fifth the land area would unalterably change the density of the area and require the board to reconsider the entire single family zoning requirement for this part of Cooper. 3. Mr McClosky can not accommodate parking for the current residence, it is therefore, doubtful that adding an additional three units would increase his ability to accommodate additional traffic. 4. An irrigation ditch bisects the property which would require relocation or structures covering the ditch. 5. The existing grades on the property would require massive excavation with the destruction of numerous trees which due to the size of the structure could not be relocated. 6. Lastly does the board wish to set a precedence of turning a deed restricted property into a developers dream and a financial windfall for the owner. Si y ames Martin vice president ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone (970) 920 -5090 FAX (970) 920 -5439 MEMORANDUM TO: City Engineer Housing Director Parks Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District FROM: Bob Nevins, Planner RE: 1230 Cooper Avenue Affordable Housing Project Parcel ID No. 2737 - 181 -26 -006 DATE: December 18, 1996 Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by Doug Michalowski. Please return your comments to me no later than January 14, 1997. Thank you. • Memorandum TO: I Bob Nevins, Community Development FROM: Rebecca Schickling, Parks Department DATE: December 31, 1996 RE: 1230 Cooper. Ave. Affordable Housing Project 0 We have reviewed the application submitted by Doug Michalowski on behalf of Colombo International and offer the following. comments. There is no existing site survey and the survey should be required prior to the application proceeding further. The improvement survey should include all trees on the lot over four (4 ") caliper inches. The applicant requests a waiver of all fees due to the fact that this is a 100% affordable housing project. However, traditionally in the past, park dedication fees and tree removal impact fees have not been waived for affordable_ housing projects. A tree removal permit will be required regardless. It appears from the site plan (sheet no. 1) that.there are numerous trees surrounding the property, however, few actually are within the property boundaries. It shall be a requirement of the building permit to fence the property boundary and no excavation to occur outside of the property boundary and no excavation within the dripline of the trees proposed to be saved. If the spruce trees shown at the southeast corner, the southwest corner and the two trees shown along the eastern boundary of the property are to be saved, then no excavation should occur within the driplines of these trees, including overdig necessary to construct the foundation. If the overdig necessary to construct the foundation will impact the trees then the applicant may wish to request the trees to be moved temporarily until the foundation is constructed and then replanted in the fall. If the trees are moved in the early spring, prior to the growing season, and then balled and burlapped by a tree moving expert, their chance for survival is increased. There are several tree movers within the valley who provide guarantees on moved trees. The applicant should be required to construct a six(6) foot sidewalk with a six foot buffer zone to encourage pedestrian flow. This east Aspen/Cooper St. corridor has been identified by the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan as needing sidewalks and pedestrian connections. Two new developments in this area have had similar requirements, including the Lacet subdivision which was also an affordable housing project: The driveway off of Highway 82 has an exaggerated flair both. east and west that should be reduced. If any trees are proposed to be removed as a part of this application, the right- of- way(ROW) buffer zone may be used for mitigation, however, some trees (deciduous only) should be planted in the buffer zone whether trees are removed elsewhere on the property or not. A revised landscape plan-must be submitted along with the ROW permit prior to any work within the City ROW. The final comment is, if the driveways are not proposed to have a snowmelt system, then an area for snow storage must be provided within the property boundaries for both driveway entrances. MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Bob Nevins From: Chuck Roth Postmark: Oct 23,96 7:42 AM Status: Previously read Subject: Reply to: 1230 E. Cooper; Lot B Ferguson Subdiv. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Reply text: From Chuck Roth: Come on down some time today. I think that most of your questions are ones that you can find the answers to, and I'll show you how. Preceding message: From Bob Nevins: Does the City have any records showing the vacation of Chepita Ave. and 15 feet of an alleyway? Also, as part of the Ferguson Subdivision is there an access agreement with the City for access to the lots from Hwy. 82 / East Cooper Ave.? Can the owner of Lot B in the Ferguson Subdiv. "quiet title" the portion of Chepite Ave. directly adjoining their property? Any further questionsor information, please contact me at Ext. 5102. Thanks. 0 MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Bob Nevins From: Cindy Christensen Postmark: Oct 22,96 1:42 PM r� u Subject: Reply to: 1230 E. Cooper Ave.(Lot B, Ferguson Subdivision) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- Reply text: From Cindy Christensen: Yes this is a deed restricted, Cat 4, 3 -bdrm, 1239 sf unit. Our Board talked about this earlier when the applicant wanted a 100% RO project. The main concern was how the unit was used for mitigation in the past. This was to be looked into before the Board would consider the application. The other main concern before was losing a Cat 4 unit for an RO unit. They might be okay with keeping the CAt 4, but losing a bedroom (from a 3 to a 2 -bdrm unit). Need to know, first, how the original approval was used for mitigation! Preceding message: From Bob Nevins: Does the Housing Office have a recorded deed - restriction for this single - family residence? The applicnt's representaive, Jim Colombo, states that it's a Category 4, 1200 sf unit on a 6,000 sf lot. Also, if it is deed - restricted, can the current owner redevelop the property to include: (2) 3- bedroom RO units; (1) 2- bedroom RO unit; and (1) 2- bedroom Category 4 unit? It's possible in terms of rezoning the property to AH 1 /PUD, but what is the Housing Authority's position or policy? If you have questions or need more information, please contact me at Ext. 5102 or CEO. Thanks. 4 1n 1Jo12Sol o�Qfeo�cSQ121fQf1 �ISflICf 565 North Mill Street . Aspen, .Colorado 81611 Tele. (970) 925 -3601 -FAX- #(970) 925 -2537 Sy Kelly • Chairman Michael Kelly Albert Bishop '. Treas. Frank Loushin Louis Popish Secy. Bruce Matherly, Mgr. -January '10, • 1997 Bob'Nevins Community Development, 1.30 S, Galena. .,Aspen, CO 81511 -Re: 1230 Cooper- Ave. :.AHP " Dear Bob: The 'Aspen ConsoI- i,dated Sanitation! District' currently has suf.f icient l ine' and tr.,ea,tment 'capacity 'to serve th,i's, proj,ect., The old , cabin current's y on the s i-te i s, not served by ' u.s, and 'i s probably on a septic ,'system. , If a septic,'s'yst.em i.s. currently in' place then its abandonment should. be coordinated with env i:ronmenta.l health-. We would suggest that t.he, project be served, by.,a .common si.x inch. service line, which wi 1 1' require. the,,., exec ,u•tion, .:of a shared ser -vice ag- reement. It `.appears as . though, the project wouId,res,ult 'in , co_ndomihium style o,f housing that' would, 'pr `obabIy require, protective 'covenants. We' would' suggest that,'the commonly awned Improvements* such'as . the.s :ewer service. line, be discussed 'in the: covenants•, so%that.each' owner is: away -e of their joint ownership And 'responsibi l it.•y. Based upon' the floor plans submitted, a',rou,gh estimate of the 'ti.ohages is apprxma eYy,$1'000. It is <egal connec for us, t'o'' waive connection charges, f:or _af;fordable housing, projects._• The.: app 11ca•nt' will - -need to obtain a tap permit- from our' office -when final'pl -ans are. available.. Service' •is contingent upon, compl ianee'.with the D� i's trict Rule's, Regulations,,and Line 'Specifications whIch.'are on•file' at the District .6-ffice. Sincerel Bruce.. Mather.ly .:. District Manager EPA• Awards of Excellence .1976 •' 1.986 1990 Regional and National c MEMORANDUM r/.I TO: Housing Board FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office THUR: Dave Tolen, Executive Director DATE: February 19, 1997 RE: 1230 Cooper Avenue Affordable Housing Project ISSUE: Doug Michalowski has resubmitted a revised application for an affordable housing project to contain four units -- three units proposed are to be Category 4 and one unit Resident Occupied. BACKGROUND: The applicant has provided site plans, a general description of the project and a pro forma for the project. The applicant's pro forma shows expenses of $876,119, which include $46,684 of fees that could be waived and 1 $90,000 property note payoff, and. projected gross income of $1,058,800. The bottom line of the pro forma is that the applicant will gain a new unit out of the project, plus a possible net profit of approximately $320,000 (this includes the $90,000 property note payoff). The applicant is proposing the following: Category 4 Studio 600 sq. ft. of living space $175,500 Category 4 1- bedroom 700 sq. ft. of living space $186,300 Category 4 2- bedroom 1,000 sq. ft. of living space $197,000 RO 2,200 sq. ft. of living space $500,000 There are still some outstanding planning issues that need to be addressed. The major issue relates to rezoning of the property. RECOMMENDATION: The Board has the option to recommend the following: 1. agree that the mix is appropriate for the applicant to continue the process for rezoning; 2. recommend a different type of mix of units, possibly adding lower category units; 3. recommend denial of the application to the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council. FROM .. PHONE NO. P01 o i i/ � CO o INTERNATIONAL, INC. 623 E. HOPKINS ST. ASPEN, CO 81611 TEL 970 925 -7806 FAX: 970 925 -3972 REVISED N DESCRIPTION PROJECT The revised 1230 Cooper Avenue Affordable Housing project would consists of the - removal of an existing 1200 sq. ft. catagory 4 deed restricted unit In poor condition and the subsequent construction of 4 affordable housing unit on a 6,000 sq. ft. lot located at 1230 Cooper Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. The project is currently zoned R- 158 PUD and the applicant is requesting a rezoning to AH PUD. The make -up of the revised affordable housing project is proposed to be 3 Catagory 4 units and 1 R.O. unit. The three catagory 4 units would be accessed from Cooper Avenue, which provides easy bus and transportation access. The single R.O. unit would be accessed from the north side of the property off a public right -of -way. 1 1 J- 3- catagory 4 units : 2 bedroom with 2 baths 1.000 sq. ft. of living space each Price: $195,000.00 1- Resident Occupied unit 3 bedrooms with 3.5 baths 2,200 sq. ft of living space 250 sq. ft garage Price: $450,000.00 zptv • PERFORMA • 1230 COOPER AVENUE Project Expenses Hard Cost Construction 4500 square feet of living space @ $120 /sq. 836 square feet garage space @ $65 /sq. 262 square feet of deck space @ $40 /sq. ft. Planning & Design Fees Engineering Fees Legal Fees Building Permit Fees Zoning Fees Park Dedication Fees Tree Replacement Fees Water Tap Fees Sewer Tap Fees Planning Application Fees Construction Loan Interest Appraisal Services Survey work Advertising Budget Property Note Payoff Title Transfer Fees Title Commitment Fees Contingency TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST ft 540, 000.00 ft. 54, 340.00 10,480.00 40, 000.00 10, 000.00 10,000.00 8,873.00* 538.00* 10, 000.00 6,000.00 35,173.00* 13,215.00 2,100.00* 24, 000.00 1,000.00 1,400.00 2,000.00 90, 000.00 /— 1,500.00 1,500.00 20, 000.00 Protected Income Unit A= --600-sq —ft: C— atagory-4 °Studio — Unit B- 700 sq. ft. Catagory 4- 1 bedroom L- Unit C- 1000 sq. ft. Catagory 4 2 bedroom w/ 2 car garage Unit D- 2200 sq. ft. Resident Occupied w/ 2 car garage PROJECTED GROSS INCOME Projected Net Profit (Waived fees) $876,119.00 175, 500.00 :414k 186,300.00 G-VI 17 197, 000.00 500, 000.00 $1,058,800.00 $182,681.00 46,684.00 100% PI�Auf;�o"e ,, $229,365.00 FROM • PHONE N0. : • P02 REVISED GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The revised 1230 Cooper Avenue Affordable Housing project would consists of the removal of an existing 1200 sq. ft. catagory 4 deed restricted unit in poor condition and the subsequent construction of 4 affordable housing unit on a 6,000 sq. ft. lot located at 1230 Cooper Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. The project is currently zoned R- I SO PUD and the applicant is requesting a rezoning to AH PUD. -Unit Dlmenslens and Prl Ina 1- Catagory 4- Studio 600 sq. ft. of living spac Price: $175,500.00 1- Catagory 4- 1 bedroom 700sq. ft. of living space Price: $186,300.00 1- Catagory 4- 2 bedroom 1000 sq. ft. of living space 2 car garage Price: $197,000.00 1- Resident Occupied unit 2200 sq. ft. of living space 2 car garage Price: $500,000.00 4 FROM � PHONE N0. . P03 PERFORM 1230 COOPER AVENUE Project Expenses Hard Cost Construction 4500 square feet of living space @ $120 /sq. ft 540,000.00 836 square feet garage space Q $65 /sq. ft. 54,340.00 262 square feet of deck space @ $40 /sq. ft. 10,480.00 Planning & Design Fees 40,000.00 Engineering Fees 10,000.00 Legal Fees 10, 000.00 Building Permit Fees Zoning Fees 8,873.00'-- tA)Q Vj-. 538.00= — tNu Park Dedication Fees 10,000.00 Tree Replacement Fees 6,Q00.00 Water Tap Fees 35,173.00— Sewer Tap Fees Planning Application 13,215.00' Fees 2,100.00 WA' Construction Loan Interest 24,000.00 Appraisal Services 11000,00 Survey work 1,400.00 Advertising Budget 2,000.00 Property Note Payoff 90,000.00 Title Transfer Fees 11500.00 Title Commitment Fees 1,500.00 Contingency 20,000.00 TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST $876,119.00 $829,435 Projected Income Unit A- 600 sq. ft. Catagory 4 Studio 175,500.00 Unit B- 700 sq. ft. Catagory 4- 1 bedroom 186,300.00 Unit C- 1000 sq. ft. Catagory 4 2 bedroom w/ 2 car garage 197,000.00 Unit D- 2200 sq. ft. Resident Occupied w/ 2 car garage 500,000.00 PROJECTED GROSS INCOME $1,058,800.00 Projected Not l roflt J $182,681.00 $229,365 + 90.0004 $319,365 plus new unit r1 Project Expenses Hard Cost Construction PERFORMA 1230 COOPER AVENUE 4500 square feet of living space @ $120 /sq. ft 836 square feet garage space @ $65 /sq. ft. 262 square feet of deck space @ $40 /sq. ft. Planning & Design Fees Engineering Fees Legal Fees Building Permit Fees Zoning Fees Park Dedication Fees Tree Replacement Fees. Water Tap Fees Sewer Tap Fees Planning Application Fees Construction Loan Interest Appraisal Services. Survey work Advertising Budget Property Note Payoff Title. Transfer Fees Title Commitment Fees Contingency TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST Projected Income 540;000:00 54;340:00 10,480.00 40, 000:00 10;000:00 10,000:00 8;873;00* 538:00* 10, 000.00 6,000:00 35,173:00* 13;215:00 2,100:00* 24,000.00 1,000:00 1,400:00 2,000;00 90;000:00 1,500.00 1,500.00 20,000:00 $876,119.00 Unit A- 600 sq, ft: Catagdry 4 Studio 175,500.00 Unit B- 700 sq-. ft. Catagory 4- 1 bedroom 186;300:00 Unit C- 1000 sq. ft. Catagory 4 2 bedroom w/ 2 car garage 197;000:00 Unit D- 2200 sq. ft. Resident Occupied w/ 2 car garage 500;000:00 PROJECTED GROSS INCOME $1,058,800.00 Projected Net Profit $182;681:00 (Waived fees) 46g684M $229,365.00 FEB 25 '97 12 :07PM ASPEN`HOUSING OFC P,2 Tai: Bala Nevins, Community Development Department FROM- Cindy Christensen, Housing Office DATE: February 25, 1997 RE: 1230 Cooper Avenue Affordable Housing Project ISSUE: Doug Michalowski has resubmitted a revised application for an affordable housing project to contain four units -- three units proposed are to be Category 4 and one unit Resident Occupied. BRCKI;ROUNO: The applicant is proposing the following: 1 Category 4 Studio 600 sq. ft. of living space $175,500 1 Category 4 1- bedroom 700 sq. ft. of living space $1 56,300 1 Category 4 2- bedroom 1,000 sq, ft. of living space $197;000 1 RO 2,240 sq. ft. of living space $500,000 There are still some outstanding planning issues that need to be addressed, The Board also is concerned that the project be developed by a bonded contractor. RECOMMENDATION. After a thorough discussion by the Housing Board on February 19, 1997, a mix a majority of the' Board approved in a motion was to recommend approval for three units — two Category 4 units and one RO unit_ The Housing Board recommended the elimination of the studio unit, as a Category 4 studio unit is not a top priority for the Board and this would decrease the density of the project. 00 J "'T C ; , 4-q, v , i 1 i 4A, 7 y 4 y j cAk,:e C ; l l L4-�. l V I�v�z N �Al r: j Zrvi dl • � �, �� - a����•'s21!y "T-°A� L � 9 [ 4/ .:- �$� 0�' \eil� ������(i"§ �:. 1 1 a i Lall k*m �7 Le 17 I t / 9 7� sla- ,rNpw- x, Yw, r- Z.ob 2- ; All- � t A- (� off, i i� �i ��I r Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department Code Interpretation JURISDICTION: City of Aspen APPLICABLE CODE SECTION(S): Section 24 -3 -101 Definitions - Lot Area, specifically the method to calculate Slope FAR Reduction, Ordinance 30, Series of 1995 EFFECTIVE DATE: November 2, 1995 WRITTEN BY: Leslie5mont, Deputy Director APPROVED BY: DATE: (, S _l \2 k BACKGROUND: Ordinance 30, Series of 1995, created a Slope Floor Area reduction that applies to the lot area of a parcel when calculating allowable floor area for a parcel. The purpose of the Slope Floor Area reduction was to reduce the amount of available floor area for a given parcel due to topographical constraints. However, several questions as to the interpretation of the slope reduction and application of the have been raised during implementation of Ordinance 30, Series of 1995. INTERPRETATION: Slope Floor Area reduction is not intended to reduce the available lot area for the purposes of determining density,,the number of residential dwelling units on a parcel as permitted in the zone district. For example, the R -15 zone district requires 15,000 square feet of lot area for the development of a duplex that was subdivided as of April 28, 1995. If application of the slope floor area formula reduces the lot area below 15,000 square feet this would only affect the allowable floor area for the parcel and not the ability to develop a duplex on the parcel. Secondly, the Slope Floor Area reduction, as adopted by City Council ,limits the reduction of allowable floor area, for slopes, to a maximum of 25 %. However, this limit only affects the allowable floor area. The lot area may be reduced by more than 25% as long as the allowed floor area, based upon the reduced lot area, is not reduced by more than 25% of what is permitted in the zone district. Finally, when Slope Floor Area reductions are applied with other lot area reducing _ formulas, such as a reduction in lot area based upon surface easements, calculations shall be figured separately and each calculation shall be based upon the original lot size. For example, an applicant shall first deduct the amount of lot area based upon slopes then again calculate the amount of lot area lost due to other reduction formulas (based upon the original lot size), finally combine the amount reduced for a final lot area from which to determine allowable floor area. Although Ordinance 30, Series of 1995, limits the amount of Slope Floor Area reduction to 25 %, the combined affect of slopes, surface easements, etc. may reduce the available floor area greater than 25% of the allowable. 7 VA _ " � 7 6 j G l a 6. Y-6, .0 ?,-, ° Xo I A VArA-1 W � c' ~� � �� D'•��.��— �141G�17�' Bla' �� o, asp, lll,onsv tg,�OXP S�E- SZ55,776N _ i A •r 1 -- ISRME-?�N1 / ysy, X 5,- M ICY r— i1/10r &� ALI -, r 10 0 �° �az� e�V- *F/ No a4v, Aer) vv p Iao' 1, ";,?,0, 3 1 , s� 76 72�� All 1pkp e �1.�'�- I, 106 s,-- 2 6 i L-or APO- 7 7-0 AcOew 7W7 1,,-too - (Sr-0) 0 /, 7,00 l r 1 1 1230 COOPER AVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING DEPARTMENT 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO PRESENTED BY COLOMBO INTERNATIONAL, INC. 623 E. HOPKINS ASPEN, COLORADO 0 C ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1) PROJECT NAME: 1230 COOPER AVE. 2) PROJECT LOCATION: 1230 COOPER AVE. ASPEN, COLORADO LOT B FERGUSON SUBDIVISION 1 3) PRESENT ZONING: AH -1 4) LOT SIZE: 6,000 SO. FT. 5) APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE: DOUG MICHALOWSKI 1230 COOPER AVE. ASPEN, CO. 970 920 -2191 6) REPRESENTATIVE'S NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE: COLOMBO INTERNATIONAL, INC. 623 E. HOPKINS AVE. ASPEN, CO 970 925 -7806 7) TYPE OF APPLICATION: FINAL PUD, GMQS EXEMPTION 8) DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING USES: DEED RESTRICTED CATAGORY 4 AFORDABLE HOUSING. 1,200 SO. FT. - 2 BEDROOM UNIT. 9) DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: APPLICANT REQUEST A PUD REZONING TO ALLOW 3- RESIDENT OCCUPIED UNIT AND 1- CATAGORY 4 UNIT TO REPLACE THE EXISTING CATAGORY 4 UNIT. 10) APPLICANT ATTACHMENTS: RESPONSE TO ATTACHMENT 2 RESPONSE TO ATTACHMENT 3: RESPONSE TO ATTACHMENT 4. I 1 1 w GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The 1230 Cooper Avenue Affordable Housing project consists of the removal of an existing 1200 sq. ft. catagory 4 deed restricted unit in poor condition and the subsequent construction of 4 affordable housing unit on a 6,000 sq. ft. lot located at 1230 Cooper Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. !� It should be noted the project developers have choosen to present a project of lower density than allowed and of much higher quallity than may be usually found in a !� project of this type. The reasoning for this approach is to provide to the community a l� different type of AH project that strides to present a greater pride of ownership and quality of construction residence for many local residents who have not been able to bridge the difference between a $300,000.00 AH unit and a $1,000,000.00 "fixer- upper" in the free market . l� It is the developers belief that allowing locals who have either had to move out of the downtown area to find higher quality housing or who now occupy Catagory 4 AH projects to benefit from these higher quality RO units, will as a result, open up current Catagory 4 units for residents in need. The project is a very attractive development from an aestheic view as well and will greatly improve the surrounding character of the area. Therefore, it is the developers belief that this project represents a win -win situation for the entire community. The make -up of the affordable housing project is 3 Resident Occupied units and Catagory 4 unit. Two of the units, units A & B will be accessed from Cooper Avenue. The other two units, units C & D will be accessed from the north side of the property off a public right -of -way. Unit A: 3 bedroom, 3.5 batth Unit B: 3 bedroom, 3.5 bath 2200 sq. ft. - total 2005 sq. ft.- total 2070.5 sq. ft. - countable F.A.R. 1814 sq. ft.- c. F.A. R. 276 sq. ft.- garage 252 sq. ft.- garage 182 sq. ft.- decks 250 sq. ft.- decks Catagory: Resident Occupied Catagory: Resident Occupied Price: $550,000.00 Price: $500,000.00 D Unit C: 2 bedroom, 2.5 bath Unit 'C, 2 bedroom, 1.5 bath j, 1721 sq. ft.- total 1296 sq. ft.- countable F.A.R. 1266 sq. ft.- total 900 sq. ft.- c. F.A.R. 369 sq. ft.- garage 240 sq. ft.- carport Catagory: Resident Occupied Catagory: 4 Price: $-400;000:00- Price: $190,000.00 ��3o�ooa, oa I REVIEW STANDARDS RESPONSE 1. General Requirements a. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan which provides for despersed Affordable housing throughout the general residential community. b. The proposed development is consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Affordable housing, multi - family use and lodge use as well as single family residential make up the exisiting character. Lacet affordable housing is directly across the street and the Alpine Lodge is an ajoining property. Single family and multi - family residential occur regularly up and down the street. c. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. d. The proposal is a GMQS exempted project. 2. DensityCSC 1 VVPV" 115 -, SF,_ a. General The proposed project does not exceed density restrictions for the underlying zone district. 4 total units are proposed with a total of 10 bedrooms for the project as a whole. 1. There is adequate water pressure and other utilities to service the proposed development. Water and utilities shall be provided by existing City of Aspen service. * 2. There are adequate roads to ensure fire protection snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development. 3. The land is suitable for the ro osed development and is incumbered b P P p Y the dangers of slope, ground instability, and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls and avalanche dangers. 4. The effects of the proposed development are not detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion or the consequent water pollution. 5. The proposed project will not have any deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. 1 6. The proposed location of structures, roads, driveway or trails in the 1 n 1 1 development is compatible with the terrain and will not cause disturbance critical natural features of the site. b. Reduction in Density for Slope Consideration 1. The proposed project has a site specific slope condition of between 0% - 20% and therefore shall adhere to the maximum density allowed as permitted in the underlying Zone District. 3. land Uses The proposed project is consistent with land uses permited in the Affordable Housing Zone district. The AH zone district is to provide for the use of land for the production of Category 1, 2, 3, and 4 affordable housing and resident occuped lots and units. The zone district also prmits a limited component o f free market lots /units to off -sets the cost of developing affordable housing. Land may also be subdivided in connection with a development plan. 4. Dimensional Requirements The proposed project meets the following dimensonal requirements: AH- requirements a. Min. distance between buildings.......... b. Max. heigh c. Min. front yard setback d. Min. rear yard setback e. Min. sideyard setback f. Min. lot widith g. Min. lot area h. Trash access area i. Internal flor area ratio j. Min. percent open space 5. Off- Street Parking 5 feet 30 feet 10 feet 10 feet 5 feet/5feet 30 feet 3000 sq. ft. by review 6600 sq. ft. by review 1230 Cooper 5 feet 37'6" 10 feet 15 feet 5 feet/4 feet 48 feet 6000 sq. ft. by review 6081 sq. ft. by review a. The probable number of carws used by those using the proposed development is between 4 and 8 vehicles. b. There should be no parking needs for non - residential use at the project site. c. The varing time periods of use not applicable to this project. 1 d. The project is uniquely situated geographically to allow residents to take full advantage of public transportation. The project is located on an existing public transportation route with access pick -up area readily near by. The project also supports the disincentive use of the personal automobile because of the proximity of the project to the downtown Aspen area. Residents are within walking and bike riding distance to downtown core area and have both Public transportation and taxi service availablefor use. e. The proposed project has close proximity to the comercial core and public recreational facilities. The project is 3 blocks from the downtown core area and 5 blocks from Aspen Mountain. Bedroom/ lot square footage requirements for project 1.1: 1 F.A.R. @ 6000 sq. ft. lot = 6600 sq. ft. IProposed bedroom make -up: (2) 3 bedroom units @ requirement of 1200 sq. ft. each = ................2400 sq. ft. (2) 2 bedroom units @ requirement of 800 sq. ft. each = ................1600 sq. ft. 4000 sq. ft. .1 DR. MT MM(NIAL CZ L12 ASPEN ALPS RD CT.- S7. SAL LACE ' F� hv�- RIVERSIDE DR. DU CORP RD. H I I G"BRI ST. s ANS. RD- CLAIR cr. DR_ APSV 9,�OC. ST. WA7c AVE. it �Oc- a E. D AV_ H 7pRAhiAVE. MAYFLDWR COOPER Ave. x > COOPE2 AVE. Are LN. E. HYMAN AVE. AVE 0 HYMAN DAL: HOPKTNS v W. HOPKINS AVE. !2 !2 GROVE R MAIN S. QUEEN ST.. W. BL=—.C-R ST. MATCHLESS D R. KING S7. 4;F W. KvlAm ST. HERRON DR. PARK CR. BAY ST. W. ` FRANCE FRANCIS S. LA.C- RACE AV— W. NICHOLAS LN. K! SHORT ST. C-1 G1 cl. — 4 �,,�. HAROLD No CI INE c� ST. q Rp ROARING FORK FRF= SIL LT. HUNTER OFFS,--I RD. RIVER CR. SPRUCE COMMUNITY CASTLE AVE. WOOD SHADY LN. DUCK LN HUNTER CRE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY HUNTER cg_=x RD. SALVATION . CIL ZDr PL WILL!" m RESIDENTIAL OR COUNTY ROADS COLORADO STA—it HIGHWAY 92 RIVERS SEA RIDGE BEN waos 01995 Ryi v Coior Af- 7,: P klGHrt'AWK R CHADWICK WY. RD. Up WEST REDS RD. WIN DR. PHONE (970) 925-7806 FAX (970) 925-3972. August 16, 1996 I , Douglas Michalowski, authorize Colombo International, Inc. and James P. Colombo specifically to represent me in all aspects of my application for the 1230 Cooper Avenue Affordable Housing Project. Jim's offices are located at 623 E. Hopkins in Aspen, Colorado and his office number is 970 925 -7806. Please direct all inquires about the project to Jim at his office. ISincerely, DOUG G.'fOICHALOWSKI i 1 rAnwriew Land Title Association Commitment - Modified 3/78 IIICOMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, A Texas Corporation, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. Signed under seal for the Company, but this Commitment shall not be valid or binding until it bears an authorized Countersignature. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Chairman of the B a 3�Qr'�,� °�POq�A :ya Nik t9OB =p • * •TEXAS w Authorized Countersignature STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN, INC. Agent ID #0601 IA Order No. 00022940 1/7P r ' SCHEDULE A Order Number: 00022940 1. Effective date: May 21, 1996 at 7:30 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount of Insurance (a) A.L. T.A. Owner's (Standard) $ Proposed Insured: (b) A. L. T. A. Mortgagee's (standard) $ Proposed Insured: (c) Leasehold $ ' Proposed Insured: 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is fee simple 4. Title to the fee estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: DOUGLAS G. MICHALOWSKI AND THE EUGENE C. AND MARION A. MICHALOWSKI FAMILY TRUST S. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: Lot B, FERGUSON SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION AND P.U.D. AMENDMENT PLAT, according to the Plat thereof recorded April 30, 1986 in Plat Book 18 at Page 66 as Reception No. 277623. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. STATEMENT OF CHARGES ' These charges are due and payable before a Policy can be issued. SPEN, INC. E. )Xopkins, Aspen, Authorized Countersignature SCHEDULE B Section I Order Number: 00022940 REQUIREMENTS Tile following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be exectued and duly filed for 1 record, to wit: 1. Release of Deed of Trust dated November 5, 1986, executed by Douglas G. Michalowski and Eugene M. Michalowski, to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County, to secure an indebtedness of $130,000.00, in favor of Don McGill, Inc., recorded November 6, 1986 in Book 522 at Page 171 as Reception No. 282964. 2. Affidavit by a Trustee, setting forth the name of the THE EUGENE C. AND MARION A. MICHALOWSKI FAMILY TRUST , the names and addresses of all the Trustees who are represented by such name and the authority of the affiant to execute and record the affidavit, and the authority of the Trustees who are thereby empowered to convey or otherwise act on behalf of the THE EUGENE C. AND MARION A. MICHALOWSKI FAMILY TRUST. 3. Deed from vested owner, vesting fee simple title in purchaser(s). u C fl r� 4. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title Guaranty Company, furnished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen, that the following taxes have been paid, or that conveyance is exempt from said taxes: (1) The "Wheeler Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and (2) The "Housing Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990). 5. A. Certificate of non - foreign status, duly executed by the seller(s), pursuant to Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code AND B. Satisfactory evidence of the seller(s) Colorado residency (or incorporation) pursuant to Colorado House Bill 92 -1270. NOTE: Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code requires withholding of tax from sales proceeds if the transferor (seller) is a foreign person or entity. Colorado House Bill 92 -1270 may require withholding of tax from sales proceeds if the seller(s) is not a Colorado resident. Detailed information and Forms are available from Stewart Title. u C fl r� SCHEDULE B Section 2 Order Number: 00022940 EXCEPTIONS 'The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: I. Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. ' 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof, but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. i 6. Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents, or an act authorizing the issuance thereof; water rights claims or title to water. 7. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any unredeemed tax sales. 8. Any vein or lode of quartz or other rock in place bearing gold, silver, cinnabar, lead, tin, copper, or other valuable deposits claimed or known to exist March 23, 1885 and the right of the proprietor of any vein or lode of quartz or other rock in place bearing gold, silver, cinnabar, lead, tin, copper or other valuable deposits for the purpose of extracting and removing ' the ore from such vein or lode should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises, all reserved in Patent recorded June 17, 1949 in Book 175 at Page 246. 9. 16 foot 3, 1947 right of way for ditch as set forth in instrument recorded September in Book 171 at Page 315. 10. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions of Agreement as set forth in instrument recorded August 13, 1968 in Book 235 at Page 315. 11. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions of Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado as set forth in instrument recorded January 16, 1980 in Book 382 at Page 162. 12. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions of Resolution as set forth in instrument recorded September 14, 1965 in Book 215 at Page 337. 13. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions of Grant of License as set forth in instrument recorded August 30, 1982 in Book 431 at Page 820 as Reception No. 243776. 14. Terms, conditions, obligations, provisions and easements of Substitution Easement as set forth in instrument recorded August 30, 1982 in Book 431 at ' Continued on next page 11 Continuation of Schedule B - Section 2 Order Number: 00022940 Page 824 as Reception No. 243777. 15. Grant of Easement as set forth in instrument recorded August 30, 1982 in Book 431 at Page 828 as Reception No. 243778. 16. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions of Statement of Exception as set forth in instrument recorded April 30, 1986 in Book 509 at Page 876 as Reception No. 277621. 17. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions of Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions as set forth lin instrument recorded April 30, 1986 in Book 509 at Page 878 as Reception No.1277622. 18. Easements and rights of way as shown and contained in Ferguson Subdivision ' Exemption recorded June 1, 1981 in Plat Book 11 at Page 59 as Reception No. 233157 and as shown and contained in Ferguson Subdivision Exception and P.U.D. Amendment recorded April 30, 1986 in Plat Book 18 at Page 66 as Reception No. 277623. 19. Terms, conditions, obligations, provisions and easements of Easement Agreement as set forth in instrument recorded September 14, 1974 in Book 291 at Page 354. 20. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions of Occupancy and Resale Deed Restriction and Agreement as set forth in instrument recorded November 6, 1986 in Book 522 at Page 174 as Reception No. 282965. NOTE: Provided that Stewart Title of Aspen, Inc. records the documents of conveyance in the proposed transaction the status of title will be updated from the time of this commitment to the time of said recording. If said update reveals intervening liens or changes in the status of said title appropriate action(s) will be taken to disclose or eliminate said change prior to the recording of said documents. NOTE: Policies issued hereunder will be subject to the terms, conditions, and exclusions set forth in the ALTA 1992 Policy form. copies of the 1992 form Policy Jacket, setting forth said terms, conditions and exclusions, will be made available upon request. °oy / I \ f r � e', °�IRMI - Fzrtdsca sGB�tvtsuz / _a- -- 5- . io 15 20 26 30 r r / t t •� �- I ' �- "NMI �t`C.4, A9 F R9 Him Alt Li ��HwPY 82 5'�T E� LVA 0 W Z zo �o Cu w �O UO C) Ou oWa m Ca N � ri W G-: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 w Xx r alp AV� -�..- •. ice/' -,._ _` '` Ii�Oli�1IL A II��R�r_:— al t�h � �i' _i1111111W��'S _•► _ . a � :' `� �'-. Q) 44 W OO �. .N o0 00 M (� N � R; Ill aQ UO I. 31 r VW I-At-4r-P6' Al-n I II I -IfF I-At-4r-P6' Al-n 0 b. L3 lz� LT Pl. PO 1" -1 0 b. L3 lz� LT Pl. e -.- .- N Z'M F-L_-VA -nON - �-r•. �� =- . _ _ too . . -- -_LAG It, e� Jg aj— —715 b e 1! w z z� w 0 Q¢ q o O o a mq N � e t i e A i I �� . U =� Z s; 00 n G C a a c U � 0 W Q V) P4 0 ®�, / \l ?0� F