HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sr.320 W Main St.62A-88
~
!"""'\(
'4
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
city of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 1~28?8
DATE COMPLETE: L_/(L!?g
PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
2735-124-41-005 62A-88
STAFF MEMBER: IfE
PROJECT .NAME: Elisha House GMOS
Parkinq Reduction
Project Address:
Legal Address:
Exemption & Special Review for
320 W. Main Street
Block 44. Lots N. 0 & P
APPLICANT: Alan & Jacqueline Shada
Applicant Address: 110 Escondido vista. CA 92084
REPRESENTATIVE: Welton Anderson
Representative Address/Phone: P. O. Box 9946
Aspen. CO 81612 5-4576
PAID:
YES
NO
AMOUNT: $810.00
0!ip;:)fG..-
2 STEP:
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
P&Z Meeting Date .:1in J1 PUBLIC HEARING:
v. ) VESTED RIGHTS:
/'
CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING:
YES
.---.-....,
.. NO .
.,-....
.-,.;:.~~
/NO
YES
YES
NO
VESTED RIGHTS:
YES
NO
~
Planning Director Approval:
Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption:
Paid:
Date:
REFE~LS:
/~y Att~rney
~y Eng1neer
Housing Dir.
Aspen Water
City Electric
Envir. Hlth.
Aspen Consolo
S.D.
Mtn. Bell
Parks Dept.
Holy Cross
Fire Marshall
Building Inspector
Roaring Fork
Energy Center
School District
Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
State Hwy Dept(GW)
State Hwy Dept(GJ)
Other
DATE REFERRED:
/;2.-/9/J>8
INITIALS:
c/9~
INITIAL~=
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: 5-J9,-'iS"I
___ City Atty ~ity Engineer ___ Zoning
___ Housing Other:
Env. Health
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
~
~
.-k
CASE DISPOSITION
To:
File
From:
Roxanne Eflin
Re:
320 W. Main st. the smith-Elisha House, GMQS
Exemption (Change in Use) and Special Review (Parking
Reduction)
Date:
May 4, 1989
================================================================
On January 17, 1989, the P&Z approved both the GMQS Exemption for
the Change in Use of the Smith-Elisha House and the Special
Review application for parking reduction. The approved
conditions were based off staff's memo, with exceptions, and are
as follows:
l. That the applicant satisfy the requirements by the
Engineering Department with regard to sidewalk
inspection and approval prior to the issuance of a CO;
OR that a written agreement be provided to Engineering
that any necessary upgrade and/or repairs will be
performed during the construction season of 1989.
2. That the two parking spaces directly to the north of
the main structure's rear stairs be designated for
compact cars only, eliminating the need to demolish
this historic architectural feature, and that the
action not be taken before the Board of Adjustment.
3. That the parking requirement for the bedroom be waived
pursuant to section 5-213(E).
4. That the applican~ provide payment-in-lieu for
affordable housing J.n the amount of $56,376.00, to
minimize the cost to the development of the historic
landmark.
5. That the applicants be eligible for obtaining a rebate
of the affordable housing payment-in-lieu provided
current pending legislation providing additional
incentives to historic landmarks is approved by City
Council. (Note: Refer to Ordinance 16, Series of
1989)
cd.320WM
"'.,.1
~
,....,.
,-.,
CITYM"OFA. SPEN
"~<~;';'::">' ",', , '" "
130 south galena street
asp t.c'olo;ra1l6<<*S1611
~~g.;:'~'f?\"':"'!~' ~"";;,r.'h'iJ.:',').'~"',<'
3(j3-'925-2020
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 26, 1989
TO: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office
FROM: City Attorney's Office
RE: Proposed Code Amendment with Respect to HPC Development and
Employee Housing Impact Fees
Pursuant to our meeting of January 25, 1989, I have the following
thoughts on the proposed code amendment with respect to employee
housing impacts on HPC development:
l. It appears to me that the Elisha House has several options
with respect to the proposed code amendment. The Elisha House
could pay the employee housing impact fee and make a subsequent
request to Council to refund it if and when the proposed legisla-
tion is passed.
2. The developer could sit on the application, pending the
change in legislationp and submit an application in furtherance
of it.
3. The developer could submit either a letter of credit, escrow
the funds, ()lr e;omeh()w secure the commitment of the monies, in a.
manner satisfactory to the City Manager and the City Attorney.
As I understand the process., the Planning Office has submitted a
proposed code amendment to the Planning and Zoning commission for
review which would have the effect of altering the manner in
which employee h()\l~ing! ,fees are paid with respect to commercial
development on HPCdesignated sites. The proposed legislation
contains a Sliding scale in which employee housing impact fees
are paid in proportion to expansion of the existing site.
With that concept in mind, and with the added knowledge that the
proposed Elisha development creates no new bulk or FAR, it seems
appropriate to me that the City fashion an administrative remedy
with respect to the current employee housing fee due on applica-
tion for a building permit.
<-
~~
~.
-.
Memorandum to Roxanne Ef1in
January 26, 1989
Page 2
I suggest that the applicant obtain a letter of credit in the
amount of the current employee housing dedication fee and desig-
nate the city as a co-payee along with the developer. Further,
the applicant should provide a covenant to release obligating
both sides, in the event the proposed legislation is either
adopted or rejected, that the monies are refunded in whole or in
part to the appropriate party. In addition, I suggest that the
letter of credit be in force up and until June 30, 1989, with an
extension, if necessary, for an additional sixty days upon
written application.
This process would insure that the monies are set aside for the
benefit of the city in the event the proposed legislation is not
passed or is not passed as currently composed. However, it also
enables the applicant to avoid' escrowing the full sum, while
insuring that a third party, such as Pitkin County Bank and
Trust, has obligated the full amount in the event it becomes
necessary to pay it.
jmc
cc: Jim Adamski
Bob Anderson
Welton Anderson
.JAN 3 0
1"".
~
MEMORANDUM
From:
Aspen Planning and Zoning commission
Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office
Public Hearing / smith-Elisha House GMQS Exemption
(Change in Use) and Special Review (Parking Reduction)
To:
Re:
Date:
January l7, 1989
================================================================
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Exemption from the Growth Management Quota
System for the change of use of a historic designated landmark,
to convert the existing residential space to office use, and
adaptively renovate the carriage house into office (first floor)
including a one bedroom dwelling unit on the second floor. In
addition, the application requests a Special Review for a
parking reduction.
APPLICANT: AlanJ. Shada
LOCATION: 320 West Main st., Lots N, 0, and P, Block 44, City
and Townsite of Aspen.
ZONING: "0" Office; H, Historic Overlay (landmark designated
within the Main Street Historic District)
DESClUP'l'ION OF THE PROPOSAL: This project is eligible for
exemption from GMQS due to its designated landmark status.
Section 8-104 (B) of the Aspen Land Use Code allows for the
Commission to exempt "the enlargement or change of use of an
Historic Landmark which deve10ps more than 500 sq. ft. of
commercial or office space or which increases the building's
existing commercia1 or office space by more than 50% n provided
that the applicant demonstrated that the development will
mitigate community impacts (see staff comments):
OTHER COMMITTEE/COUNCIL ACTION: On January 9, 1989, city Council
approved on second and final reading Ordinance 56, securing
landmark designation for the Smith-Elisha House. On January lO,
1989, the HPC reviewed and approved the applicant's final
development plans, with conditions.
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
1.
Engineering:
Roth of the
comments:
In a memorandum dated January 6, 1989, Chuck
Engineering Department makes the following
a.
Sidewalk:
time of
condition
The presence of snow on the sidewalk at the
inspection made a determination of the
impossible. Engineering is requiring that
~
"'"'
prior to a CO being issued, an inspection for
conformance to City code shall be made and accepted by
the Engineering Dept., OR an agreement shall be
provided to the City that any necessary upgrade and/or
repairs will be performed during the construction
season of 1989.
b. Parking Reduction: Engineering states the application
does not adequately address the need for the parking
reduction, and states that due to the community's need
for parking, a reduction cannot be supported by this
department. A cash-in-lieu payment is suggested.
In addition, Engineering states it is possible to
designate the two spaces immediately to the east of the
transformer for compact cars, which required approval
by the Board of Adjustments. This is in lieu of an
encroachment into the alley of approximately two (2)
feet, which cannot be permitted due to the need to
maintain the minimum 20' width for emergency vehicles.
c. utilities: It is possible to relocate the transformer
which is currently located at the western-rear of the
site, at the applicant's expense, to provide for an
additional parking space. This is provisional upon the
City Electrical Department and electrical engineer
accepting an alternative location.
2. Housing Authority: The renovated net leasable square
footage of both the main house and carriage house combined
is 2,784. In a memo dated January 11, 1989, Janet Raczak of
the Housing Authority has determined that the applicant's
generated-employee calculations are correct, however,
disagree with the use of the middle-income category for
determining payment-in-lieu. Instead, they recommend the
moderate income category as follows:
2,784 sq. ft. x 3 emp10yeesj1,000 sq. ft. = 8.352 amp.
8.352 x 60% = 5.01 emp. x $16,750 = $83,918 CIL
The Housing Authority suggests that the income level of the
employees generated would more reasonably be projected to be
in the moderate income category.
3. City Attorney: Fred Gannett states he has no concerns about
the proposal at this time.
2
,,-.
/-."
STAFF COMMENTS:
GMQS EXEMPTION:
section 8-104 (B) (1) (c) of the Land Use Code gives the Planning
and Zoning commission the authority to grant an exemption from
GMQS if it is demonstrated that impacts are mitigated and the
following criteria have been adequately addressed:
CRITERIA: The applicant shall demonstrate that the development
will mitigate its impacts on the community by providing employee
housing at the level which would meet the threshold required in
section 8-l06 for the use.
RESPONSE: The applicant has agreed to the payment-in-lieu
provision for deed-restricted affordable housing based upon the
middle income standards, however, strongly supports any future
code amendments allowing the waiver of this and other city
exactions as it relates to the development of historic landmarks
(please refer to Staff's comments under "Special Review", page
five of this memo). The 839 sq. ft. one bedroom dwelling unit
proposed for the second floor of the carriage house will not be
deed restricted, and will be occupied by the owner a few months a
year.
Currently, no guidelines are in the system for determining Low,
Moderate or Middle income standards for the payment-in-lieu of
affordable housing in commercial applications. The Housing
Authority has based their rationale for recommending the moderate
income category on the potential income of any support staff in
this project. It may be practical to look at the kinds of
practices that will occupy the office space to determine the
income-level standard. Staff feels that in a response to the
nature of the project and the Historic Landmark status of the
Smith-Elisha House, that the Middle income range is appropriate
to determine the total payment-in-lieu.
CRITERIA: The applicant shall provide parking according to the
standards of the code.
RESPONSE: The following are review standards for parking-
Special Review in the Office Zone district:
Residential Uses: One (1) space per bedroom; fewer spaces
may be provided by Special Review for historic landmarks.
All other Uses (except Lodge Use): Three (3) spaces per
1,000 sq. ft. of net leasable area; fewer spaces may be
provided by Special review, but no fewer than 1.5 spaces
per 1,000 sq. ft. of net leasable.
3
""""
..-,
The proposed project generates the following parking needs:
Net leasable:
2,784 x 3/l,000 = 8.35 (8)
Required Parking:
8
New Bedrooms created:
Required parking:*
Special Review Reduction:
1
1 (waiver requested)
2,784 x l.5/1,000 = 4.17 (4)
The applicant is requesting special review for parking reduction
from eight (8) to five (5) on-site spaces, one more than would
be allowed by the Special Review reduction of 1.5/1,000.
The applicant is also requesting a waiver of the parking
requirement for the single one-bedroom dwelling unit (carriage
house) as allowed by Special Review for historic landmarks. The
applicant states that they have provided on-site parking for the
project to the highest degree that is practical. Please refer to
staff's comments under "Special Review", page five of this memo.
The renovation project will provide office space for
professionals, consisting generally of sole proprietors. It is
reasonable to expect 5-8 individuals working on site. We feel
the five parking spaces proposed adequately meet the needs of the
project. The 6th parking space, made possible with the
relocation of the transformer, is strongly recommended by staff
and the Engineering Department to further meet the on-site
parking needs.
CRITERIA: The project's water supply, sewage treatment, drainage
control, transportation, fire protection and solid waste disposal
needs shall be met.
RESPONSE: The applicant states that the impact in these areas is
very minimal, as no significant physical changes are taking place
on the site.
Water is supplied by a 6" galvanized water main in Main
street to a 3/4" line feeding the house which serves the existing
1 1/2 baths. The addition of another 1 1/2 baths can, according
to the water department, be served without upgrade to the water
system.
Sewer needs are served by an 8" line in the alley, large
enough for the additional demand.
The historic site drainage will not be
altered. The parking will be gravel, new paving is
there are additional buildings or expansions
buildings.
significantly
minimal, and
of existing
4
"....,.,
,.-,
The site is very well served by mass transit, immediately
adjacent to ALL but two bus routes.
The site is six
response time is less
shall be installed in
unit.
(6) blocks from the fire department and
than three (3) minutes. Smoke detectors
each office space and in the residential
Solid waste
located in the
property line.
removal shall
alley between
be handled by a new dumpster
the transformer and the west
CRITERIA:
design is
the site.
It shall be demonstrated that the project's site
compatible with surrounding project and appropriate for
RESPONSE: Final Development approval for the alternations to
both structures has been granted by the HPC. The proj ect is
primarily restorative, with very few changes taking place. staff
finds the proposal strongly meets the criteria, as well as the
Historic Development Guidelines and the State Historical
Architect's review. Architectural details and exterior materials
which have decayed past the point of reasonable repair are being
duplicated during restoration. All surfaces will be painted.
The carriage house will receive five new windows along secondary
facades to allow for light and egress, and a slightly enlarged
(approximately 40%) south elevation gabled dormer. Very little
change will occur to the site's historic grading.
SPECIAL REVIEW
Review standards for the reduction in off-street parking
requirements are found in section 7-404 (B) of the Aspen Land Use
Code. The staff has recommended, in the Code Correction
Ordinance, and P&Z has concurred, that the payment-in-lieu
provision is appropriate for the Office zone district as well,
though this zone district was inadvertently left out of Sec. 7-
404(B) (1) when the land use code was revised. Engineering also
supports the payment-in-lieu provision for reducing required
parking in this project.
"Approval of the payment-in-lieu shall be at the option of
the Commission. In determining whether to accept the
payment or whether to require that the parking be provided
on-site, the commission shall take into consideration the
practical ability of the applicant to place parking on-site,
whether the needs of the development have been adequately
met on-site and whether the city has plans for a parking
facility which would better meet the needs of the
development and the community than would location of the
5
,~,
.-
parking on-site."
STAFF'S COMMENTS: It is not physically practical to provide
more than the proposed five spaces on this site, due to the
historic configuration of the principal structure and carriage
house. The one exception is the sixth space which may be
provided should the transformer box be relocated, as staff and
Engineering have both suggested.
staff has received inquiries from two immediate neighbors
concerned that 1) the change of use of the Smith-Elisha House
will increase the parking problems which already exist in this
block, and 2) the parking situation is being further aggravated
by the corner Log Cabin restaurant. That project also received
approval under Special Review for a reduction in parking.
SUMMARY: The commission should also be aware that the Planning
Office is currently processing an application submitted by the
owner of Berko (a/k/a Lilly Reid) Building for land use code
amendments involving positive incentives for historic
preservation, which proposes to allow the waiver of some or all
of the payment-in-lieu provisions for the development of
designated historic structures. staff supports the applicant's
request that the project be eligible to reduce or waive
requirements if and when this code amendment is adopted by City
Council. However, at that time it should be recognized that we
have already reduced the payment-in-lieu requirement from the
moderate to the middle income guideline and have waived three (3)
parking spaces otherwise required for the project.
We find that the proposal presents a good adaptive
use/rehabilitation alternative, utilizing a historic resource to
its fullest potential. staff finds that the applicant has
mitigated impacts according to the code requirements.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the Planning
and zoning Commission grant approval for the GMQS exemption for
the change of use of the Smith-Elisha House, and approval for
Special Review for parking reduction with the following
conditions:
1. That the applicant satisfy the requirements by the
Engineering Department with regard to sidewalk
inspection and approval prior to the issuance of a CO;
OR that a written agreement be provided to Engineering
that any necessary upgrade and/or repairs will be
performed during the construction season of 1989.
2. That the transformer be relocated at the applicant's
expense, subject to approval of the City Electrical
Department, to provide for an additional parking space.
6
-.
-.
3 . That the two parking spaces directly to the north of
the main structure's rear stairs be designated for
compact cars only, eliminating the need to demolish
this historic architectural feature.
4. That the parking requirement for the bedroom be waived
pursuant to section 5-213 (El.
5. That the applicant provide payment-in-lieu for
affordable housing in the amount of $56,376.00.
We recommend that the Planning and Zoning commission include in
its motion a statement that the applicant shall be eligible for
consideration of a reduction of city exactions specific to the
development of historic landmarks, subject to the potential land
use code amendments which are currently proposed, and subject to
recognition of the housing and parking impact reductions already
granted this project.
memo.pz.320wm.GMQS
7
r',
-,
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Roxanne Efline, Planning Office
Janet Raczak, Housing Office
TO:
RE:
Elisha Change In Use
DATE:
January II, 1989
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
APPLICATION SUMMARY: The applicant indicates in its memo that
they are removing a residential use and incorporating a commercial
use within a historic structure, and continuing to use the upper
portion of the carriage house as a residential unit consisting of
839 s.f. and one bedroom.
The applicant states that the employee generation
in use will have an employee generation of 5.01.
calculations are:
of this change
The applicants
2784 s.f. x's 3 employeesjl000 s.f. = 8.352 employees
60% of 8.352 employees = 5.0l employee generation
The applicant intends to meet their employee generations with a
payment-in-lieu indexed to the Employee Housing Guidelines - middle
income category of $11,250 per employ or a payment-in-lieu of
$56,376.
HOUSING OFFICE REVIEW: The Housing Office concurs with the
applicants employee generation calculation of 5.01, but disagrees
with the use of the middle income category to calculate the
payment-in-lieu amount. The Housing Office suggests that the
income level of the employees generated would more reasonable be
projected to be in the moderate income category. The moderate
income category payment-in-lieu amount per employee is $l6,750.
Therefor the payment-in-lieu amount would be $83,918 ($16,750 x's
5.01 employees).
HOUSING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION:
approval of the Elisha Change
the following:
The Housing Office recommends
in Use application conditioned on
l. The applicant shall pay a payment-in-lieu in
the amount of $83,918 prior to the issuance of
a Building Permit for any portion of the
project.
,......,
""'"
MEMORANDUM
To: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office
From: Chuck Roth, Assistant City Engineer c:~
Date: January 8, 1989
Re: Elisha House GMQS Exemption & Special Review for Parking
Reduction
Having reviewed the above referenced application and having made
a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following
comments:
1. The presence of snow on the sidewalk made it impossible to
inspect the sidewalk for dimensions and condition. The certifi-
cate of occupancy should not be issued until the sidewalk can be
inspected for conformance to City code and accepted by the
Engineering Department or until an agreement is provided to the
City that any necessary upgrade and/or repairs will be performed
during the construction season of 1989.
2. The application does not present any discussion of why a
reduction in required on-site parking should be granted. There
is no indication that fewer than the code required ten (10)
parking spaces will be needed by the project. Given the need for
parking in town, the Engineering Department cannot support.the
granting of a reduction in on-site parking requirements. It is
suggested instead that the applicant pay cash-in-lieu for parking
spaces not provided on site with five spaces minimum required on
site.
As has been discussed with the Planning Office, it is possible
for the applicant to relocate the transformer. at the applicant's
expense if the City Electric Department and electrical engineer
accept an alternative location, and it is possible to accept two
of the parking spaces as designated for compact cars, although
this would require approval by the Board of Adjustments. An
encroachment into the alley cannot be permitted because a twenty
foot wide emergency access width must be maintained. Twenty feet
is the width of alleys.
cc: Jay Hammond
CR/cr/memo_89.2
,-,..
~,
,
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130S. Galena street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 920-5090
December 9, 1988
Welton Anderson
P. O. Box 9946
Aspen, Colorado 81612
RE: Elisha House GMQS Exemption and Special Review
Dear Welton,
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of the captioned application. We have
determined that your application IS complete.
We have scheduled your application for review by the Planning and
zoning commission at a hearing to begin at 4:30 P.M. on Tuesday,
January 17, 1989. The Friday before the meeting date, we will
call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to your
application is available at the Planning Office.
If you have any other questions, please call Roxanne Eflin, the
planner assigned to your case.
sincerely,
LJ~~
Debbie Skehan
Administrative Assistant
~~
,~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
city Attorney
city Engineer
Housing Director
FROM:
Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office
RE:
Elisha House GMQS Exemption & Special Review for
Parking Reduction, Parcel ID# 2735-124-41-005
DATE:
December 9, 1988
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Attached for your review and comments is an application from
Welton Anderson on behalf of his client Alan Shada requesting
GMQS Exemption for the Change in Use of an Historic Landmark and
Special Review Approval for Reduction in Parking. The house is
located at 320 West Main street.
Please review this material and return your comments no later
than January 4, 1989 so that I have time to prepare a memo for
the P&Z.
Thank you.
\
-
-
MEMO RANDOM
TO: Planning Office, Historic Preservation Committee, Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Welton Anderson
RE: Elisha House, Historic Development Review, GMQS Exemption, Special Review
for Parking Reduction.
DATE: 25 November 1988
Historic Development Proposa1~ Main House: There will be no significant change
in character to the Elisha House. The primary work will be repair and repainting
of the exterior surfaces of the house, Exterior architectural elements that
are lost or are irreparib1y deteriorated will be duplicated exactly. Existing
windows are generally in very good condition and will be provided with new sash
cords where needed and new glass where broken, the wavy original glass being
preserved. Clear glass will replace the colored glass in the circular "pinwheel"
window in the uopermost south gable, and a skylight/roof window will be installed
on the west attic roof, invisible from the street.
Carriage House: The effect of the proposed development on the original design
of the carriage house will be as minimal as possible and still comply with the
light, ventilation and egress requirements of the building code, The applicant
realizes that the carriage house's importance is as an outbuilding and it's
character should remain that of an outbuilding, Consequently the elements that
contribute to it's character (dormers, double hung windows, carriage and 10ft
doors) will be modified or reproduced to allow more light inside. The north (10ft)
gable will be reproduced on the south side and will be flanked by smaller dormers
identical to the existing dormer. Single double hung windows will be joined
to make a pair or a triple window, consistant with the grouped windows on the
house. The carriage door and the 10ft door on the alley, those elements that
make a carriage house function, will remain in place. Some of the wooden panels,
however, will be removed and replaced with glass in both doors, allowing the
character to be maintained.
Site Plan, Landscaping, and Parking: Parking for 5 cars will be provided
between the carriage house and the transformer pad off the alley. The metal
shed and basement stair in this area will be removed (see Special Review for
Parking Reduction). The rubble stone retaining wall along the south property
line will be replaced with a coursed stone wall simi1iar to the foundation wall
of the house, The lowest portion of the site will be raised to approximately
sidewalk level and a sunny picnic area with benches on axis with the door to the
carriage house installed there. New landscaping replaces most of the small
diameter trees and shrubery that have so overgrown the house. New soecimen
shrubery will be installed.
GMQS Exemption-Change in Use for Histotic Landmark, Special Review for Parkinq
Reduction: Pursuant to Section 8~104 B,l.c. the applicant proposes to change
the use of the Elisha House to office use and the carriage house to office
below and residential above. Net leaseable square footage is approximately
2784 square feet of office and a 839 square foot LbedXQom apartment.
J~;a} ~tH'-
28
-...,
----.
~
~ E1 i sha House
Page two
The applicant is requesting an interpretation from City Council as to their
intent and the applicability of the requirement for employee housing meeting
the threshold required in Section 8-106 for a change in use of an Historic
landmark where there is no expansion to the landmark.
If Council determines that it must meet the employee housing requirement, the
employee generation is as follows: 2784 SF x 3 employees/lOaD SF=8.3 employees
x 60% = 5.01 employees x $11,250 / employee (middle income)= $56,383 cash in
lieu.
All parking can be provided on site off of the alley with a Special Review
approval for a reduction from 3 spaces / 1000 SF to 1.5 spaces / 1000 SF.
The requirement would be 2784 SF x 1.5 spaces / 1000 SF = 4.1 + 1 space for the
1 bedroom residential = 5 spaces.
Water is supplied by a 6" galvanized water main in Main Street to a 3/4" line
going to the house which serves the existing It baths, The addition of another
It baths can, according to the water department, be served without upgrade to
the water system.
Sewer needs are served by an 8" line in the alley which is large enough for
the additional demand.
Historic site drainage will not be significantly altered, Parking will be gravel,
and there no additional buildings and new paving is minimal.
The site is immediately adjacent to all but two bus routes.
The site is
3 minutes.
residential
6 blocks from the fire department and response time is less than
Smoke detectors shall be installed in each office space and in the
unit.
Solid waste removal shall be handled by a new dumpster located in the alley
between the transformer and the west property line.
-.
NOV 8 '88 15:35
NO,COUNTY SHIPPING
NOV.... 9. ~8
11Q Escondi4o
Vista, CA 92084
November 4, 1988
Ks.'Roxanne !l:fl1n
Historic Preservation Coordinator
City of AspOIn
130 S. ~alena Straet
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear MfJ. Ef1in,
Re: 320 W. Main Street
Aspen. co 81611
AKA tots N, 0 and P, Block 44, .
City and Townsite of Aspen.
Ve are tn. owners of the above descrihed property, which is known locally as
~be '.ttn-Elisha house, an Exceptional category structure i~ tne Aspen
Lnventory of Historic St~uctures. The Smith-Elisha House is one of Aspen's
test Queen Anne style residences with a multi-gAble front elevation, ,
wrap-around porch and a massive two story side bay topped by a gabled roof
~rmcr. the carriage house remains in its orig1nal condition.
10 reViewing the Standards for Landmark Designation, we fin~ the Smith-Elisha
nousemeets Standards A, 8, c, E and F, a~d we request designation of the
house 4nd estriage house. We also wtsh to apply fOr the necessary fO~8 to
have the hou$Oil plaeed on the National bsiseer of HistoriC Places, and we wish
to apply for the. designation grant in the amount of $2,000.
My authorized representative hI Ramons MatkalW181
601 EO' Hyman Ave. #101
Aspen, CO 8161 303-920-1234
.1 ama'ttaching het'eto a copy af the Warranty Deed by whieh I received cit1t
to subject property and will forwurd a copy of the Title Insur~nce Policy
as soon as I receive 1t; we closed on this property October 14. 1988, and 1
have not yet received all documents.
Also enclosed is a viCinity map on which we have outlined the property.
Please let uS know if you require additional documentation.
b
cJI f,~.tr.?\~' : t"#;.~, ~.:::.;~~~,~;,;..?~:ft'i!;lt;:~ ~" ;~'.
e.c1'51'''~''''& \VA(..I....
l2.I?.o.lU"
>
o
B
, .".
~""c. I!uH
"
,. ...~.
"
.UJ
0-
Il
f}.~
, ~'
'to
'2
. . .~
'.
.~~....
~ ,.' .; .
~ ~1~11'J(,. .;
~ " ~.
.... '~
i ..l
"'~\\~
L.o'T N
4;:01,0 ,Ill le
"lOr'" I
, !
,I ,I
f.l ,a.IC'~ G, I i
"),".2..= I ~ [ 4 i ~ I
1'.1 ---;--.'::-~r'-:-I. '.-T.Lr-.--,
'-:':'1' ~:i r . '- 'I'j,-,:
I, . __ . __ ;.,! t r..-
~~'~'1 ,i " ~" :11111:'1'1'. ."
:'--: ! -~ i ,'(.
1 1 '. _ L : . : d ,
"""'"7,.t-. -"-'11 t...._ "t"' '- =._. ;,' _1
~'-"~.ll.. ''''I ..
I 'I ~ ~ ; l . '. .
, ','1' 'O.
re., ;.:...+. . ~. ,/
..;
l .'
::~~; i. {?,_~
..... ";,'";,:',, / . q~' ---tji-I~' _......_J " --,' tf:?6P';'1
L-! III --"~'~~.".' .,.'
; ! .
"-....;
i !
,
r--j
1--'1
, I
~" ~
H
"J
1=..1
ITI_J.::,i
..AI~E.y
e;,LC::i::/iL
"
., I
.,
,,\
',il
"
:lju,
"\',
';,
v..i'~
, , , I, .'
. -..", 'I:. ,'..
. . .~. i
IlliljlW
!,i1il!
,Iii" I
'::1\1!'11
"I ".,
iI ;i,:i!
1::::'11
"\, :\i,';\\'11
" :l\,!j
, ,1,'\'1..'
"'11 '.;1
" ~:':','.1~~
...,.:':'.::.:"'...
'.
"
.,
"
'.,.. a
L.oTO
1t?t'.lt:l'
.. .,...., ;':..'i." ......~i,.;..,..(,' , .
.;'.f.._...':....
Glc.j
,. .
,-.
c
..... - .... .
::.,.,..,::.-=::-:,;:7.' ':...~.
'--1
u
8
>
/
~'--_.._.- .:.-;
';~:-""~""""~""i
',;. .:......~~~ C .'
(J-
Q
~
.
o;t
VI
~
.\
\
j~.,.'S:>1'""ON.E
~NG~'e<;.
I
\ NE?-.v .:oN"'c)~
'- ;l"~e "i'lL"
i
.,'''''!.t
o.-oP~
'.
wrf
, '. ,,...'
. ,,,,,,,,-,,, "Nt """-'-
I ~II. llaLv
.,! ';'-~"'" ,~.. ~ .,',.:, ~("
.'1-
N7SU04' II",V
.~Nc.-e.J<O.""e.. ?!O,e.'VAL.Ir'-
I_IN"'-
3,zO(vl}MAIN
...._~~:;r.~"f2L-AKL
~____,_ ~..~_.._. . ..R~___.__".__
-* <s-reer
c>".
~u,l2~
0ieE.ET
t?,
.:". .-
~)
'..."".'.
~~
)
--""
,
t"">
t"">
PZMl.l7.89
to move that we table this--let's look at these problems with the
setbacks. I am concerned about that.
Jasmine seconded the motion with all in favor.
Welton: I will continue the public hearing until the 2lst of
February.
SMITH/ELISHA HOUSE CMOS EXEMPTION
Welton and Jim stepped down from this due to possible conflict of
interest.
Vice Chairman Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing.
Roxanne made presentation as attached in record.
Jasmine: On GMP projects there was a time when it was
established that all applicants be prepared to provide for low
income or restrict any housing that they creAted to low income
guidelines until or unless advised otherwise by the Housing
Authority.
This is a different situation but in the absence of other
information as to what kind of--we don't really know what kind of
office it is going to be or what kind of employee generation. It
seems to me there should be some kind of standard way to apply
this for change in use. I think there should be some kind of
criteria established for this so that we are not just saying we
think they are going to be hairdressers or brain surgeons.
Because we really don't have any rational for making those
decisions.
Roxanne: We pretty well know from the type of the project and
the renovation project that it is going to be professionals that
are going to be occupying the space.
That is something that we recommend in here is that maybe we need
to look at the kinds of office space instead of as the Housing
Authority was suggesting what their income category as the type
of support staff. In other words they were looking at all of the
employees that would be generated by the project in the lowest
level income and basing their calculations on that.
Since there is no standard right now in place that is something
we need to be looking at.
Jasmine: There is also a difference between what happens when an
applicant provides employee housing and is going to deed restrict
it as opposed to when they are going to make a payment of cash-
l7
<
.
I""'.
I""'.
--J
PZMl.l7.89
very concerned. The other 2 properties are rental units that I
rent out to the locals here year around and some of them have
children so I am very concerned about the traffic from that
property. I hope you consider the neighbors.
Joe Wells: The first condition is fine as written.
members have really touched on the issues in regard to the second
condition. Obviously we were concerned about the cost of
relocating the transformer. Apparently there is a need to
maintain at least 3ft of clearance all the way around the
transformer. The Engineering Department described on
alternative being a buried vault as a way to find a location fo
the transformer. It seemed as if this could get to be aver
expensive kind of solution.
The minimum requirement with special review would be 4 spaces.
We think that at 5 spaces you may be able to find that. Tha
would be acceptable. #4 obviously we need the waiver given th
number of spaces that we have. And on #5 we would simply like to
strengthen the language to make it clear that if there is a code
amendment to grant exaction waiver on certain provisions for
historic landmarks. We would like to be eligible for it if it is
adopted up until the time that we get CEO for the project.
t, ~oui~~, :r;efo~n~e~~t~~Ve ItodO~~ t~eee f::; r:ar~~;b~neo: ;~~~
that myself. But you would have to pay at the time the building
permit is issued. It is an administrative policy.
The key to you folks is to agree that they be eligible because
normally they would be subject to the rules in affect at the time
that they are approved at the time they that they get a building
permit this kind of retroactive provision I think is appropriate
here.
Roger: That should be included in your final paragraph. Or our
recommendation that is included in your final paragraph to
minimize the exactions.
/)
..,p
Alan: By the action that we are recommending. That really does
minimize in every way. It is the minimum number of parking
spaces, no cash-in-lieu of the parking, the minimum level of
cash-in-lieu for housing that we can apply. So we have
accomplished that.
Roger: But your final paragraph we recommend that they P&Z
Commission include in this motion the statement that the
applicant shall be eligible for consideration in a reduction of
City exactions specific to and so on and so on.
20
t""':
'-'.
J
PZMl.l7.89
Jasmine: We have already done that.
MOTION
J
I move to approve the GMQS exemption for the for the
in use of the Smith/Elisha House and approving the special
rev~ew for parking reduction with the following conditions: n
being the same as in Planning Office memo dated January l7, 1989.
#2 being deleted. #3 which will be the new #2. #4 which will
be the new #3 being the same as in the memo. #5 being the new #4
being the same with the addition of the notation that it is to
minimize the cost on the historic landmark. Then a final
paragraph including the sentiments of the final paragraph in the
Planning Office memo dated January l7, 1989 more or less verbat'
ichael: One suggestion that we add to condition # new 2 that
there be no requirement to go to the Board of Adjustment
regarding the compact cars.
Roger: Add to the new condition #2 which is that the 2 parking
spaces directly to the north of the main structure's rear stairs
e designated for compact cars only eliminating the need to
emolish this historic architectural feature and further that
there is no need to go to the Board of Adjustments in pursuit of
this.
seconded the motion.
Jasmine asked for explanation of the final paragraph.
Alan: If the code amendment goes through and it turns out that
the project like this will be eligible to be lOOt exempt from the
housing fee at all, normally since they have already gotten the
building permit, it is like "Well; you should have waited. If
ou would have waited for the code amendment to be processed the
you would have been eligible under that new code." What we ar
suggesting is because these things are kind of simultaneously
tracking then we recognize that this applicant should be eligible
in effect for a rebate. ~ouncil would have to formally grant
that rebate because the applicant wants to go forward within the
next month or two. The code amendment won't go to Council until
the end of March.
eme: Asked Mrs White if she had any suggestions regarding h
concern about the parking.
,)
-
Mrs. White: That there be as few as possible. It is very
difficult especially with the build up of snow to get in and out
of that alley. And now that it is designed to go straight
instead of at an angle. Coming out of there at a straight angle
2l
~. ~ .... "
J
~C):;
.;.,..'.-'
::,:/".
.,.-
J
,-.,
is just going to be--already
which I have had to repair.
and I would like to avoid it
,-,
PZMl.17.89
I have had people know down my fence
We have just had a lot of problems
as much as possible.
now eliminated some parking on the
stopping out there. We just need
Unfortunately the City has
Main street because of RFTA
that space on Main street.
Jasmine as for further discussion on the motion.
All voted in favor of the motion.
Meeting was adjourned. Time was 6:15pm.
J~~i~~-M~-car~~y~-citY-D~puty-clerk
22
~
().",
l'f)
~
\
I-
{
Receflllo. No.
Recorded at
1q
$0
.
Recorder.
o'clock _r--,.,
,-.,
,
.:
WARRANTY DEED
THrs DEED, Made Ihis 11th day of October
between THE FCXJRrH PARTY, IN:::.
,1988
a corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the Stale
of California , graolor, and Alan J. Shada and
Ja~line G. Sh..'1da, Husband and Wife, as Coom.mit
Property, as to an undivided 58.4108%; and, Warmlan
Highlands, a General Partnership, as to an 1,Il'\c;li vid
who~~~?a?~~\isr.ndp~6:1~~ ~61~~a~~s~,t8a~n u9~b~3ded .9935%
of the
'Counly of
, Stale of Colorado, granlee:
wrTNESSETH, Thatthc granlor, for and in eonsider.lion of Ihc slim of :.ren Dollars and other good
and valuable consideration DOLLARS,
the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted, hargained. sold and conveyed, and by these presents does
grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever. all the real property. together with
improvemenlS, if any, siluale. lying and heing in the Counlyof Pitkin
Slale of Colorado. descrihed as follows:
Lots N,O and P, Block 44, City and T=nsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin,
State of Colorado.
also known by Sfreel and numher as: 320 West Main Street, lIspen, Colorado
81611
TOGETHER with all Bnd singular the hereditaments nnd appurtenances thereto helonging. or in anywise appertaining. and the
reversion and reversions.. remainder and remainders. rents. issues and profits thereof, and all the estate. right, title. interest. claim and
demand whatsoever of the grantor, either in law or equily. of. in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and
appurtenances.
TO HAVE ANbro lIoLn rhe said premises above hargained .md dcscrihcd with the Rflpurtenances. unto the grantee. his heirs and
assigns forever; And the grantor. for Itself. and Its successors, docs covenant. grant, h~\rgain and agree to and with the granlee, his heirs
and assigns. Ihat at the time oflhe ensealing and dcli\'Cry of these presents. il is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good.
sure, perfect. absolute and indefeasible estafe of inhcrit;.lOce, in law. in fee simple, :md has good right, full power and authority to grant.
bargain. sell and convey the same in manner and roml as lIforcsaid. and that the same are free and clear from all former and other granfs,
bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessmenls, encumbrances and restrictions of whalever kind or nature soever, excepl
The granlor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND Ihe above-bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable
possession of the granlee. his heirs and assigns, agilinsl all and every person or persons hlWfully claiming the whole or any part Ihereof.
The singular numher shall include the plural, the phmd the singul:lr, and Ihe use of uny gender shall he applicable (0 all genders.
IN WITNF..sS WHEREOF. The gr.nlor has callsed ils eorpoMe name 10 be hereunlo subscrihed by its =ent
Presldenl. and its corporate seal 10 he hereunlo affixed. all"'i9<YWYs filytpljrj. Ihe day and year firsl
above writlen.
Attest:
TheJ!1
SeC"lary
By
~
P~'ty,
STATE OF tN-Irl.M.6 California
C,,"r.ty of San Diego
} ss.
The foregoing insfrument was acknowledged before me this
Parrela A. Murphy .
11th
.19 88
Presid~;H
'f#Ny
day of October
as current
N
by
/djl
of The Fourth Party, Inc. .
... .......
My commission expires March 29, 1991
Witness my hand and official seal.
a corporal ion.
mu
Mary
Sharin6~bJiC
,
OFFICIAL SEAL
MARY 8. SHANNON
Notary Publlc-Callfornla
-.. sert 66t1fllli.\lG COUNTY
- .... - ..---.---.. .-.--......
My Comm.-exp; -Miir.2lf19!ll
.dLIt..N~KD4IJ. J l-
n,adfUld Puhlishing. 5825 W. 6lh Ave" l.lIkewood. co SOUt _ (30l) 2)].69(11)
.." ~
)'
:..ALt- e(
d~
,. I
e uz/"-
UMM 'He#!...
_._, ....W
EJ
...j'.
o
, .""
CDlJc. e.JH
,uJ
<:r-
~
iX~
" 8'
'l'~
'2
,\
~~"
~ '
~ r;..t\~HJ6.
~ .1!!:.
_. . .~
i. . ....~.
. '~l!lWM\~~
l.OI
:u'e,
I
i
,
4P'1 !7.
"'lOf'"
.1
I'"~
I. .,.'
\,., I
. I I. --1, \
, 1!i]I:
11 .."
_.....
-~=---- -..-
-... -..--
f.'
, !
..=
~
~ . . '
4
.--
_.... ,....-.....~
--- -- .
.- ,
.'. - -...
-... .".".~..__... -. ....." .
--"': .::--.":-;-
, I
r'~"~'i'
'''--1
I
'.'
~"'i
;'
II' ..'
;--"1. il' {//] ~
,,^,:.~_.I: 11 (~
. . ~'---h-'~" _...."J.. . f:('iC--
'i "',LlJJl.--- :. \:SO '~;1~2j':~'" ' .
~,l "'..'
, I
L......j .
, \
I .
, '
'_'N'_~
!" I
i"'''1
I ,
, ,
~_., ~
H
t:":1
i~-~
'. I., In.' ~:i j j
: J ,. ',1, '
it' J ':\ j ~~ ~ !'-':~-
'.' l~II=Lj.:-.~t
i
.i~-r -p.,.-,:>..U"
e>eJoJc.>I'ei>
;
,
.....', ,"
,
,
;>'--_.._"-~ .:...~
.'......,-...,~""..."....
.~.~' ':,;'~~:-~,S-.. r.: ~,)
\.
" ~
t
.\
i
I
\
\ Ne-.V .::oN1'c~
. - ~~ie "NL.y
'.'\.<>f.e.
....;;
~.~
0'.
I' '
I-
,.
1..:..-.
r
,
t.....
h. .:
.! '
lfff '0
LQff'
N
'!><'':'T'~ 'T,I"Nt~,..A
I .u;,. iU';"
'\~,~.
,.\','~.l,'F~l,jl",1i-l' '..J"Jj 4-'.,"'~.r.~.:,;ro: ::.n.~" .~'
(1f.., ,~i,' . "~.'~:'. .~~;,:~:....~,. 'r.''i'~>:;;"!'':''.'''' ~~.
i, <. "':.4, ;.~' !io"';......,,:.i..:..'...~:"" :.~:. ~'...
. :::' :"0;., ,Ii- .....!..,~~.,
~ '.. .0'
"~" ':.:..",. ;'::.... . ':"-.'~."
\!:l(1'Sll.:::r<:>>Jt \VAU..
~"'IU" .
N7S.04' II'\.V
.~cP N?e",,.,.e,. ?,>.J~'V4L.1C-
.-,
o
'.
...-,
I
1 ,
I
l
I
..
~.
-
v
8
-
:>
-'"
it'
:0
~
0
o:t
I/l
r""""\
.
4-
----_..,,-,~-,.~--,..,._--------_.,...__.._-_.__.,-
1_IN!f:.
,
-
OF'
.;:::.uJ2.P->
3J.O(Vl}MAIN
:s-rl2:E.E..T
.....SJ:I~...J2l-AtJ.
. 1 \\0.10' .' f;::;;.. . .
~
* <S. .~r;-
~