Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.pu.Holy Cross PUD Extension.A045-01,~ THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NiJMBER A045-OI PARCEL ID NUMBER PROJECT ADDRESS PLANNER Fred Jarmin CASE DESCRIPTION Holy Cross PUD Extension of PUD Plat Recordation REPRESENTATIVE Holy Cross Energy DATE OF FINAL ACTION CLOSED BY Amy DeVault ~„, .~.,, PARCEL !R`. DATA RCVD: 4/30/01 ~ ~"~;~ ~ A045-01 ., ~ s.:, - ' CAST= NAkNE. Holy Cross Extension of PUD Recordation Deadline 1?LNE1:~ ~ PROJ ADOR; Holy Cross PUD CASE TYP; Extension of Recordation Deadline S~PS~~ OWI4lAPP: Holy Cross Energy ADR PO Drawer 2150 GISt~: Glenwood Springs/C 'pHNi~ 945-4081 ~. REP: ADR; CIS2c F~EB bUE 500 F~ ~~ Need Fee 8~'~!i'T: ~. - ~ ~^_ ~.,r -:w; REFERRALS REF'! BY~~ QUE:~~ MTG DATE REV BaDY PH~ NQTICED ; •i; s> ' ~ .y ~" ~ '~ .~.. ^ ~ ';~r .r= .~~~ „~:`CfI~TE.©FINALAC?IC7F1s .REMARKS' CITY COUNCIL: P~: Bt}~t: CLOSED:~~ BY ~ : ' ORAL: . _~,..w .. _. PLAT SUBMITD: PLAT (F3 - . _ KPG~: ~ ADMlN~ GROSS ~ ~ ti~ O ~ 2 < ~ O d~ ~^ ~~ SSO~O May 4, 2001 City of Aspen Attn: Fred Jarman Planning Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 8161 1 Re: Holy Cross Energy Planned Unit Development Ordinance Number 21, Series of 2000 Adopted June 26, 2000 Dear Mr. Jarman: ``+ MAY :~ ~ ~ G 1 asPE~, ; ;~; I -unl ^OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Please find enclosed a $500.00 check for the deposit required to process our request fora 180-day extension in the filing deadline for the final Planned Unit Development Plat for our Castle Creek property. Please contact me at (970) 947-5414 if I can be of any assistance. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, HOLY CROSS ENERG Robert H. Gardner, General l~4arager - Suppor< Services RHG:sdj Enclosure 3799 HIGHWAY 82 • PO. DRAWER 2150 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 (970) 945-5491 • FAX (970) 945-4081 jarman2let J .'r ,~ 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: Fred Jarman, Planner RE: Holy Cross Energy -180 day PUD Plan & Plat Extension Request DATE: Apri120, 2001 APPLICANT: Holy Cross Energy LOCATION: Along Power Plant Rd., north of Hwy 82 and Castle Creek Bridge CURRENT ZONING: R-30/PUD Overlay CURRENT LAND USE: Vacant PROPOSED LAND USE: Residential LOT SIZE: 32,456 sq. ft. FAR: R-30/PUD Allowable: 3,581 sq. ft. Proposed Allowable: 3,200 sq. ft. ~~ Po~~rr Pl~urt Road. x 'i I~~~uil Il~lil ~ i~ ~. .r .,~ . ~ 'L . ,~ ~' _~~ ,', ~~~ :, ' -' ~•~ . J ~ ~y, arm; ~ ~ '-,..... ~ Y7 . ; ~k ~~ :~ ~~ h _ y,. `~~ ~*~~ ~ ~.Q.x~~s t 1, Y ,r ~ ~~, - .. :~ ~. ,,,~ -~. ., , . --_. _-.: The arrow points to the proposed location for a single family residence. The trail down to Power Plant Road would become the driveway; utilities would be located beneath a rebuilt trail in the foreground parallel to Hwy 82. SUMMARY: The purpose of this application is to preserve approvals of a rezoning and site specific Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan for the development of a single family residence. The property received land use approvals to rezone the property bringing the parcel into conformance with the land use code and a PUD overlay that established the building envelope and other dimensional requirements. The City was also provided with a permanent trail easement across this lot. 1 a,: REVIEW PROCEDURE In general and pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.070 "Recording a Final PUD Development Plan" , an applicant that has received certain land use approvals in the form of a Planned Unit development (PUD) may request to extend the recordation date established by the code and or City Council Ordinance. The Land Use Code specifically states, unless otherwise specified in the City Council Ordinance granting final approval of a PUD development plan, all necessary documents, as applicable, shall be recorded within one-hundred-and-eighty (180) days of the adoption date of the final Ordinance. Failure to file these documents within this time period shall render null and void the approval of a final development plan. The City Council may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant an extension of the deadline, provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the deadline. Reconsideration of the final development plan and PUD agreement by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council may be required before its acceptance and recording. STAFF COMMENTS: Holy Cross Energy Association (Applicant) is requesting a 180-day extension to file the PUD plan and final plat for land use approvals received pursuant to Ordinance 21, Series 2000 adopted by the Aspen City Council on June 26`"; 2000. The applicant submitted this request via a letter to the Community Development Staff on Apri120, 2001. Ordinance 21, Series 2000 adopted by the Aspen City Council on June 26"', 2000 specifically states, in Section 2, Condition #2, the following: 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 360 days of the final approval granted by the City Council and shall include: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements and parking spaces within City right-of--way, and location of utility pedestals. Ordinance 21, Series 2000 would expire on June 26, 2001. Thirty days prior to this date is May 26, 2001. Therefore, it is clear that the applicant has submitted a letter of request to extend the PUD Plat recordation date within the required timeframe which is at least thirty days prior to the expiration date originally established via Ordinance 21, Series 2000. The applicant has met this requirement. REASON FOR EXTENSION REQUEST The City Council may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant an extension of the deadline 2 ~e.,~, ...~ RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council approve this request by the Holy Cross Energy Association to extend the PUD recordation deadline for 180 days reestablishing a new PUD recordation deadline of December 26, 2001. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. _, Series of 2001, approving a request by the Holy Cross Energy Association to extend the PUD recordation deadline for 180 days reestablishing a new PUD recordation deadline of December 26, 2001.." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Letter from Applicant ~, MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: Fred Jarman, Planner RE: Holy Cross Energy -180 day PUD Plan & Plat Extension Request DATE: Apri120, 2001 APPLICANT: Holy Cross Energy LOCATION: Along Power Plant Rd., north of Hwy 82 and Castle Creek Bridge CURRENT ZONING: R-30/PUD Overlay CURRENT LAND USE: Vacant PROPOSED LAND USE: Residential LoT SIZE: 32,456 sq. ft. Power Plant Road. I r.r, The arrow points to the proposed location for a single famil residence. The trail down to Power Plant Road would become the driveway; utilities would be located beneath a rebuilt trail in the foreground parallel to Hwy 82. An aerial nhotoeranh is included at the end of this memorandum. FAR: SUMMARY: R-30lPUD Allowable: 3,581 sq. ft. The purpose of this application is to preserve approvals of Proposed Allowable: 3,200 sq. ft. a rezoning and site specific Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan for the development of a single family residence. The property received land use approvals to rezone the property bringing the parcel into conformance with the land use code and a PUD overlay that established the building envelope and other dimensional requirements. The City was also provided with a permanent trail easement across this lot. 1 REVIEW PROCEDURE In general and pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.070 "Recording a Final PUD Development Plan" , an applicant that has received certain land use approvals in the form of a Planned Unit development (PUD) may request to extend the recordation date established by the code and or City Council Ordinance. The Land Use Code specifically states, unless otherwise specified in the City Council Ordinance granting final approval of a PUD development plan, all necessary documents, as applicable, shall be recorded within one-hundred-and-eighty (180) days of the adoption date of the final Ordinance. Failure to file these documents within this time period shall render null and void the approval of a final development plan. The City Council may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant an extension of the deadline, provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the deadline. Reconsideration of the final development plan and PUD agreement by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council may be required before its acceptance and recording. STAFF COMMENTS: Holy Cross Energy Association (Applicant) is requesting a 180-day extension to file the PUD plan and final plat for land use approvals received pursuant to Ordinance 21, Series 2000 adopted by the Aspen City Council on June 26"', 2000. The applicant submitted this request via a letter to the Community Development Staff on Apri120, 2001. Ordinance 21, Series 2000 adopted by the Aspen City Council on June 26"', 2000 specifically states, in Section 2, Condition #2, the following: 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 360 days of the final approval granted by the City Council and shall include: a. A,f~nal plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements and parking spaces within Ciry right-of--way, and location of utility pedestals. Ordinance 21, Series 2000 would expire on June 26, 2001. Thirty days prior to this date is May 26, 2001. Therefore, it is clear that the applicant has submitted a letter of request to extend the PUD Plat recordation date within the required timeframe which is at least thirty days prior to the expiration date originally established via Ordinance 21, Series 2000. The applicant has met this requirement. REASON FOR EXTENSION REQUEST The City Council may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant an extension of the deadline 2 ~. „.: d RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council approve this request by the Holy Cross Energy Association to extend the PUD recordation deadline for 180 days reestablishing a new PUD recordation deadline of December 26, 2001. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. , Series of 2001, approving a request by the Holy Cross Energy Association to extend the PUD recordation deadline for 180 days reestablishing a new PUD recordation deadline of December 26, 2001.." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Letter from Applicant 3 GROSS F ~ ~F O P r < r 2 ~ O April 18, 2001 City of Aspen Attn: Fred Jarman Planning Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 8161 1 F1r~ ~ ~ 2UU1 ASP~w I ~ ~ ~ r,i~V CO'U!`rrlUir`iY .;cJc' ~JPNlENT Re: Holy Cross Energy Planned Unit Development Ordinance Number 21 ,Series of 2000 Adopted June 26, 2000 Dear Mr. Jarman: 3799 HIGHWAY 82 • PO. DRAWER 2150 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 (970) 945-5491 • FAX (970) 945-4081 I respectfully request a 180-day extension to the requirement that Holy Cross file a final Planned Unit Development Plat for our Castle Creek property. My request is based upon unforeseen circumstances delaying the construction of improvements to the property and that the Aspen City Council has expressed strong interest in purchasing the Holy Cross property. Shortly after Ordinance Number 21 was passed, Holy Cross began its pre-construction efforts. Holy Cross was asked by the Aspen Parks Department to delay construction of improvements until after Labor Day. After Labor Day, Holy Cross discovered an 8-inch KN Energy natural gas line crossing its property. The gas line did not have an easement. It appears that KN's predecessor, Rocky Mountain Natural Gas, built the gas line across the Holy Cross property based on permission given by the City of Aspen. The gas line needed to be moved to allow the construction of certain improvements to the property. Since the gas line was one of two major pipelines serving the City of Aspen, the line's immediate relocation would have created a hardship for KN Energy and its Aspen consumers, due to the onset of the heating season. Holy Cross elected to delay improvement until mid-April 2001. Holy Cross has also been talking with Jeff Woods and Rebecca Schickling of the City of Aspen, Parks Department about the possibility of the City purchasing the property. Rebecca Schickling has indicated that the City Council expressed interest in purchasing the property at their April 9`h Council meeting. Negotiations are to begin in early May. Please contact me at (970) 947-5414 if I can be of any assistance. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, HOLY C OSS ENERG Robert H. Gardner, General Manager -Support Services RHG:sdj ''~`~~-t l2'G~~~- ~s 111111 illll 111111 i~'~III IIIII 1111111111 illll IIII IIII 445443 07/2S/2000 11:02A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 1 of 16 R 60.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ORDINANCE N0. 21 (SERIES OF 2000) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE HOLY .CROSS ENERGY CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND REZONING TO R-30, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH A PUD OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Holy Cross Energy, represented by Alan Richman of Alan Richman Planning Services, for a Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD), and Rezoning to R- 30/PUD, Low-Density Residential, for a rectangular shaped property located above the Aspen City Shop; and, WHEREAS, the Holy Cross Energy property is approximately 32,456 square feet, is located in the Conservation and Public Zone Districts; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310 of the Land Use Code, the City Council may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District Map, during a duly noticed public hearing after considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public hearing after considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Fire Marshall, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City Water Department, City Engineering, City Parks Department, and the Community Development Department reviewed the Project and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 30, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, by a four to one (4-1) vote, to recommend City Council approve of the Holy Cross Energy Rezoning to R-30, Low Density Residential, and Consolidated Planned Unit Development, with conditions contained herein; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Holy Cross Energy Association property, which is a rectangulaz configuration and located above the Aspen City Shop, shall be rezoned from Conservation and Public to R- 30, Low Density Residential, with a Planned Unit Development Overlay. Section 2 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Holy Cross Energy Planned Unit Development is approved subject to the conditions of approval described hereinafter. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 360 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the following: a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 360 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements and pazking spaces within City rights-of--way, and location of utility pedestals. b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping, pazking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c. A drawing representing the project's architectural character. 3. Prior to an application for a building permit: a. The PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans shall be recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. b. A public utility easement shall be approved by the Parks Department and, if approved, utilities shall be installed and the trail along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek Bridge on the subject property shall be rebuilt in a manner approved by the Parks Department. c. A permanent and non-revocable trail easement shall be granted by Holy Cross Energy Association to the City of Aspen for the trail pazallel to and under Highway 82 and Castle Creek Bridge. 'III "~II' ~'II"III "I" IIII"I III "II' II'I I"I 111111 ~ 44'443 07/2S/2000 11:02A ORDINANC DAVIS SILYI 2 of 18 R 80.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO d. A conservation easement, deed restriction, or other similar mechanism acceptable to the City's Attorney's Office shall be placed on the portion of the property located below Power Plant Road to ensure that this azea remains open space and undeveloped in perpetuity. e. The applicant shall grant a permanent easement to the City of Aspen for the maintenance of the retaining walls and support structures below and around Castle Creek Bridge. The easement shall be approximately 15 feet to the sides and above the retaining walls and structures, and continuing to Power Plant Road. The easement shall be approved by the City Engineer. f. The Applicant shall meet the then current growth management requirements for the development of a new single family residence, which may include, but not be limited to, applying for and obtaining a GNIQS allotment or exemption, and providing affordable housing mitigation requirements at the then current standards. g. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. h. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve at a public hearing a detailed landscape plan showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and planned native vegetation on the portion of the parcel located above Power Plant Road. The review criteria for the landscape plan shall be the following (the existing PUD landscape review criteria in the Land Use Code): 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen azea climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve at a public hearing detailed architectural chazacter plans for the development of any structure on this site. It is the purpose of the architectural chazacter plans to demonstrate how the development will encourage architectural interest, variety, chazacter, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural chazacter is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final I I"III "III "III' I'II"III "I" Iili~ll III "I" ills I"I 443443 07/23/2000 11:02A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 3 of 16 R 80.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ~. development plan an architectural chazacter plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The review criteria for the architecture plans shall be the following (the existing PUD architectural character plans review criteria in the Land Use Code): 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed azchitecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. 3. accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. 4. The building permit application shall include: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Pazks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of removed trees. e. A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement, if necessary. f. A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of--way. g. Copies of the public utility, trail, conservation, and retaining walls and structures maintenance easements. 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Pazks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. 6. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of the approved building envelope and access envelope. I I"III "III "III' I'II"II) "I" (III"I III "III'~'I I"I 44'3443 07/25/2000 11:02A ORDINANC DAMS SILVI 4 of 16 R 80.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ''~ ,~°~4 . ~.,a, 7. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-of--way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. All vehicle parking, including contractors' and their employees', shall abide by the 2 hour residential parking limitation of the area. The applicant shall inform the contractor of this condition. 8. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 9. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 10. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 11. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 12. The building plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the entire structure. The Aspen Fire Marshal shall also approve access to the property. 13. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. 14. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be implemented before, during, and after construction. 15. No other landscape improvements or changes to the parcel, except those approved by the Community Development Director, are approved outside the established building and access envelopes, excluding all necessary trail and retaining wall work. 16. The Applicant has represented that an old storage tank has been removed from the site and that a soils test has been completed which shows no contamination of the site, and that no future liability would accrue to the City of Aspen. The Environmental Site Assessment is attached as Appendix 1. Section 3: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 4• I'II"III "~" IIII"I III "I'I'III I"I I I"III "III "III 000 11:OZA ORDINANC DAYIS SILVI 445443 07/2S/ S of 16 R 80.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO ~, This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12~' day of June, 2000. Attest: Kathryn S. ch ity Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 26~' day of June, 2000. Attest: athryn S. Ko ity erk Approved as to form: orces ,City Attorney I I"III "III "III' I'II"III "I" IIII"I III "V"III I"I 445443 07/2s/2000 11:02A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 6 of 16 R 80.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO TABLE OF CONTENTS OF SERVICE ' ....................... 1 1.0 ............................... I ION AND SCOPE INTRODUC ............... 1 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION .......................................................................... ...................................... ........................ 1 0 3 RECORDS REVIEW .......................................................................... .............. . 1 1 Historical Use Information ........................................................ 3 ...................................... . 1 1 Ownership Information ................................................ 1 3 ...................................... . . 2 Review of Aerial Photographs ...................................... 1 3 ...................................... 2 . . 3 1.3 Historical Map Review ................................................. 3 ...................................... . 3 4 Historical Interviews ..................................................... 1 3 ...................................... . . 4 5 Historical Summary ...................................................... 1 3 ...................................... . . 4 2 Physical Setting Information ..................................................... 3 ...................................... . 4 1 Topography 2 3 ................................... . . 4 2 Soil Conditions ............................................................. 2 3 ................................ . . 4 . gy ................................... 3 Site Geolo .............................. 2 3 .... .. ................................ . . 4 Regional Groundwater Conditions ............................... 2 3 ...................................... 5 . . ....................... 5 3.3 Regulatory Review ................................... ................................. ............... 6 4 0 SITE INVESTIGATION .................................................................... ....................................... . 6 1 Site Observations ...................................................................... 4 ....................................... ~. . 1 Current Use of the Site .....................:........................... 4 1 .............. ......................... 6 . . 6 2 Description of Specific Site Features ........................... 4 1 ....................................... . . 7 4.2 Adjoining Property Observations ............................................. ................. ............:. •--..... .......................... 7 5.0 ............................... CONCLUSIONS ................................................. ............. 6.0 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF ASSESSMENT .......................... ....................................... 7 FIGURES Figure 1 Site Map Figure 2 USGS Map 1960 Figure 3 USGS Map 1987 ~ Figure 4 USGS Map 1972-Mining Activities in Aspen ATTACFIMENTS Sanborn Fire Insurance Map Coverage 1 Photographs EDR Report i ll ~~~ ~~~ M V ~ ~ Paz ~ Y _V H M ~ z °' ~~A Boa ~NZ mm _ ~..A ~~m ~m o ~N a ~N m r~ ~~ ~~~ ~n o ~r i ,. Environmental Site Assessment Holy Cross Property Aspen Lot, Aspen, Colorado 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICE This report has been written to comply with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Phase I Site Assessment Standard E1527-97. This site assessment includes, in the following sections: • site description • limited review of the historic use of the site and adjacent properties • review of regulatory agency records and environmental databases • conclusions Waste Engineering, Inc. (WEI) observed the site (Site) in the field on December 21, 1999. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The Site is generally rectangular in shape and consists of approximately 0.75 acre, as shown on the attached Site map (Figure 1). The Site is located on a steeply sloping hillside with vegetation consisting of native grasses and scrub oak. At the time of WEI's reconnaissance, the Site was not developed. Approximately six to eight inches of snow covered the Site at the time of WEI's visit. Access to the Site is via Power Plant Road, which bisects the Site, or by a pedestrian bicycle path An approximate 1,000-gallon aboveground storage tank (AST) was located in the south-central portion of the Site. Underground utilities including telephone and gas lines were observed along the southern Site boundary. The Site is bordered to the north by Castle Creek. Residential development borders the Site to the west. Highway 82 forms the Site's southern boundary. The City of Aspen's Maintenance Facility is located east of the Site. 3.0 RECORDS REVIEW 3.1 Historical Use Information Historical use information for the Site and adjoining properties was obtained by reviewing reasonably ascertainable sources such as ownership information, aerial photographs, and interviews listed below. 3.1.1 Ownership In, formation WEI obtained Site ownership information by reviewing public documents at the Pitkin County Assessor's Office and by interviewing Site owners. According to the county records, the Site is currently owned by Holy Cross Electric. WEI was unable to trace previous transactions involving the Site at the Pitkin County Offices and, as an alternative, performed interviews as discussed below. Waste Engineering, Inc. I I"III "III "III' I'II"III "I" ~III"I III "I'I I'II I"I 446443 07/2S/2000 31:02A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 8 of 16 R 80.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Page 1 ~.- Environmental Site Assessment Holy Cross Property Aspen Lot, Aspen, Colorado WEI interviewed Robert Gardner, with Holy Cross Electric, by phone December 28, 1999. Mr. Gardner indicated that, to the best of his knowledge, Holy Cross purchased a lazge tract of land including the Site in 1953 from Mountain Utilities Company. According to Mr. Gardner, the original tract of land included property located east of the Site, currently owned and operated as a maintenance facility by the City of Aspen. Mr. Gazdner was not familiar with how long Mountain Utilities had owned the Site but indicated that the City of Aspen's power plant had been located on the adjacent property to the east of the Site as faz back as the early 1900's. The ownership information did not reveal past owners of the Site whose company titles or individual names suggest activities typically associated with the use, generation, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials. ' 3.I.Z Review of Aerial Photographs Available aerial photographs depicting utilization of the Site were reviewed at both the Aspen Historical Society archives, and at the United States Forest Service (CJSFS) office in Lakewood, Colorado. Photo ID Date Site Description CDL 33-87 10/23/39 The Site and adjacent properties to the north and west are not developed. A rectangulaz structure (power plant building) is located east of the Site, and Highway 82 borders the Site to the south. -V 1-91 21/5 The ite is not eve ope .Power ant Roa traverses a eastern portion of the Site and a rectangular structure (power plant building) is located on adjacent propertrtyy to the east. AddJ'acent properties to the north and west aze undevetopthe northwest of the structures are located on adjacent property o Site and Hi wa 82 forms the Site s southern boon -1 1 1 1 2 those noted in the 1958 hoto a Iac~ent properties appears az to - J-110 1 2 on tions on a ite an on ~acent properties to a no west, F-14 and south appear similar to th to men has occurred on adjacent photographs. Additional de ro to the east of the Site P 1 _ 7 73 on tions on a ite an ~acent properties appear suns az to 1273 285 those noted in the 1968 hoto h. A 24 9 24 2 e ite is not eve ope An unmiprov pa traverses e 612150 1081- central portion of the Site and also runs parallel to the southern Site 169 boundary. Conditions on adjacent properties appear similar to those noted in the 1968 and 1973 hoto hs. A- 1 8 25 0 on tions on a ite an ~acent properties pears az to t 612150 890-129 present-day conditions; the Srte is not developed and has paths traversing the central and southern portions; Power Plant Road traverses the eastern portion of the Site, and Highway 82 borders the Site to the south. Residential development is located on adjacent properties to the west of the Site. The City of Aspen's maintenance facihty iss located east of the Site. A review of available aerial photographs indicates that, with the exception of a roadway and footpaths, the Site has not been developed since 1939. Adjacent property to the east has been Page 2 .~. n ----~.... Tnn ~ ~.. c°~ ~N Z _~~~ ~o~ ~~ ~z H ~ = n. ~~m mom Paz m~ ~..~ . ~ ~• m ~~ o ~Nm ~N ~ r- ac ~~m ~ ~, ~~ o ~ a~ Environmental Site Assessment Holy Cross Property Aspen Lot, Aspen, Colorado developed as eazly as 1939, while residential development occurred on adjacent properties to the west prior to 1958. 3.1.3 Historical Map Review Historical maps for the Aspen area including the Aspen Times' 1893 map of Aspen and the Willits map of Aspen, Colorado 1896 were reviewed at the Aspen Historical Society to evaluate potential impacts to the Site from past development. The Aspen Times' map doPS not depict development on the Site. The Roaring Fork Electric Light Company's building is located east of the Site, and Highway 82 is located south of the Site. Two smelters and a lixiviation building are located further south of the Site, upstream along Castle Creek. Similar Site and adjacent property conditions are depicted on the 1896 Willits map. - WEI requested Sanborn Fire Insurance map coverage of the Site and adjacent areas from Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) of Southport, Connecticut According to EDR's map database, there is no Sanborn coverage for the Site. A copy of the EDR Sanborn Map Coverage statement is included in the attachments of this report However, WEI observed a 1904 Sanborn map (not available for reproduction) at the Aspen Historical Society which offered partial coverage of the eastern portion of the Site and adjacent properties to the east The Sanborn map did not depict development on the eastern portion of the Site. The Roaring Fork Electric Light and Power Company's building was depicted on adjacent property to the east of the Site, and Highway 82 was shown to the south of the Site. 3.1.4 Historicallnterviews Interviews with persons familiaz with the Site were conducted to obtain information pertinent to the environmental evaluation of the Site. In addition to the ownership information provided above in Section 3.1.1, Mr. Gardner provided information on the,historic use of the Site. According to Mr. Gardner, Holy Cross never developed the Site during their years of ownership. Mr. Gardner indicated that Holy Cross provided an ~~„~ easement across the Site for a bicycle path in the mid-1970s, but he was unawaze ~ of other ~ ; ~ improvements made to the Site. Mr. Gardner stated the AST located in the south-central portion of ~ a c the Site was on the Site at the time of Holy Cross' purchase in 1953. According to Mr. Gazdner, the ~~ ~ AST was used as a fuel source for the diesel generators formerly located at the historic power plant . c Y facility east of the Site. The AST was utilized to gravity feed fuel to the generators located ~ downhill. Mr. Gazdner stated that the power plant continued to utilize the AST for generator fueling ~ a °- purposes after Holy Cross had purchased the Site, but he was unaware as to how long the AST c m stayed in use. . o = ~a Mr. Gardner stated that, to the best of his knowledge, there were no pending, threatened, or past ~ litigation, administrative .proceedings or governmental violation notices relevant to hazardous ~.. c substances or petroleum products in, on, or from the Site. ~ m m ~ ~N~ • ~ m ~ rf c0 ~N ~~ r ~m~ ~ r~ ~w ~~ o ~~m Waste Engineering, lnc. Page 3 `t'' `rr+' Environmental Site Assessment Holy Cross Property Aspen Lot, Aspen, Colorado WEI contacted Orrin Moon, with the City of Aspen's Fire Department, on December 28, 1999. Mr. Moon stated that he was not aware of reported spill events of petroleum products or potentially hazardous substances on or in the vicinity of the Site based on Fire Department records. 3.1.5 Historical Summary A review of historical information revealed no recognized environmental conditions associated with the Site. 3.2 Physical Setting Information 3.2.1 Topography The 1960 7.5-minute United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Quadrangle Map (Figure 2) of Aspen, Colorado indicates that the Site ranges in elevation from approximately 7,900 to 7,840 feet. Surface water resulting from storm events or snowmelt would flow generally to the north/northeast towards Castle Creek. No structures are shown on the Site. One structure is shown on adjacent property to the east, and two structures are shown on adjacent property to the northwest of the Site. Power Plant Road traverses the. Site, and Highway 82 is located south of the Site. The 1960 (photograph revised in 1987) USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map (Figure 3) of Aspen, Colorado indicates that the Site is not developed. Development in addition to that shown on the 1960 quadrangle is depicted on adjacent property to the east The 1972 USGS "Map of Mining Activities in the Aspen Area" (Figure 4) indicates that the Site and adjacent azeas aze not located in former areas of significant silver, lead, or zinc production. 3.2.2 Soi! Conditions Based on a review of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) publication "Soil ~ Survey of Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado," the predominant soil type at the Site is the Uracca, ~~ r moist-Mergel complex, 1 to 6 percent slopes, extremely storry. This soil unit was derived from ~y mixed igneous, metamorphic, and glacial material and is typically found on alluvial fans, benches, ~ ~„ ~ and valley slopes. Permeability is moderate, while the hazard of water erosion is considered slight. ~ o Y The soil survey indicates that large stones and boulders are typically found on or just below the ~ ground surface in this soil unit. ~ z ~ ~m ~ 3.2.3 Site Geology ~ ~ ~ Paz According to the "Geologic Map of the Aspen Quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado,'ompiled in = m 1971 by Bruce Bryant, surficial geology at the Site is dominated by glaciofluvial d osits which ~.~ consist of poorly sorted glacial outwash gravels. ~ ~mm .m ~_ n ao ~ N~ n ~B ~ ~~ ~ w ~~ O ~ at .-~ ~~ Page 4 Waste Engineering, Inc. ~^" ,. Environmental Site Assessment Holy Cross Property Aspen Lot, Aspen, Colorado 3.2.4 Regional Groundwater Conditions Groundwater at the Site was not measured during WEI's reconnaissance of the Site. Based on the proximity of Castle Creek to the Site, groundwater at the Site is expected to be found at elevations close to that of Castle Creek, an average of 100 feet below ground level. 33 Regulatory Review The purpose of the records review is to obtain and review reasonably ascertainable records that will help identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Site. For this review, records were obtained from Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) of Southport, Connecticut. The EDR report is attached at the end of this report. Our investigation included, but was not limited to, a review of the following lists prepared and maintained by environmental regulatory agencies for the area around the subject Site. The most recent list update completed by the respective agency in control is identified in the following section. • Underground Storage Tank (UST) list, October 12, 1999, from the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, Oil Inspection Section • Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) list, October 12, 1999, from the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, Oil Inspection Section (OIS) • ~ Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS), August 26, 1999 list from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) • Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) Generators list, September 1, 1999 • National Priorities List (NPL) sites, Colorado, July 22, 1999 ~.. c°a ~~~ J 1- • RCRIS Treatment, Storage and Disposal Site list, September 1, 1999 a ~ ~N V M No mapped locations were found in EDR's search of available government records on the Site. ~o x F- (,~ M The Smuggler Mountain site, located approximately one mile east of the Site, is listed in the ~ a ~ CERCLIS, RCRIS, FINDS, NPL, CONSENT, and ROD databases. This location is on the opposite c m side of the Roaring Fork River from the Site and is not considered a recognized environmental . o z condition in regards to the Site. . N m mm The EDR report identified a UST location registered to Dooger Diggins at 1080 Power Plant Road. ~ ~ m In addition, the EDR report identified a RCRIS Small Quantity Generator, a FINDS listing, and four . m m° USTs at this same address registered to the City of Aspen. The City of Aspen's listing (Location ~ N No. 5 on EDR maps) is incorrectly located on the EDR maps and should be at the same location as ~ N ~ the Dooger Diggins listing (Location No. 2 on the EDR maps). The 1080 Power Plant Road ;. z ~ m ~o ~ ~+ c~ ~w ~n o Waste Engineering, Inc. Page 5 ~~ Environmental Site Assessment Holy Cross Property Aspen Lot, Aspen, Colorado address is on adjacent property east of the Site. This location is inferred to be down gradient from the Site and does not represent a recognized environmental condition in regards to the Site. The EDR report identifies a registered UST for the Aspen Ranger Station located at 806 West Hallam Street This site is located beyond minimum ASTM search distance from the Site and is not considered a recognized environmental condition in regards to the Site. The EDR report included three off-site listings that were incorrectly located on the EDR-generated maps. The correct location of the Roaring Fork Transit Agency (Location No. 1 on EDR maps) is approximately 2.5 miles northwest of the Site, which is beyond minimum ASTM seazch distances from the Site. Similarly, the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport and Rental Car Fuel Facility (Location A on EDR maps) are both located approximately two miles northwest of the Site, beyond minimum ASTM search distances from the Site. The third incorrectly mapped listing is for the Buttermilk Upper Shop; the correct location is approximately one and a half miles north of the Site, beyond minimum ASTM search distances from the Site. The EDR report indicates a list of orphan sites that were un-mappable due to incomplete address information (page 1~. WEI has reviewed this list of orphan sites, and the listings appear to be beyond the required minunum search distance from the Site and are not considered recognized environmental conditions in regards to the Site. 4.0 SITE INVESTIGATION 4.1 Site Observations The Site and adjoining properties were visually observed on December 21, 1999.by WEI personnel. Due to approximately six to eight inches of sand surface fog the resencetof surface ostaining. reconnaissance, WEI was unable to evaluate the gro P Site photographs are included in this report 4.1.1 Current Use of the Site At the time of our reconnaissance, the Site was not developed. Power Plant Road traverses the central portion of the Site, and a paved pedestrian bicycle path is located in the south-central portion of the Site. 4.1.2 Description of Specific Site Features WEI observed an approximate 1,000-gallon AST located in the south-central portion of the SLtE, adjacent to the pedestrian/bicycle path. Historical information on the AST was discussed earlier, in Section 3.1.4. The AST was not in use at the time of WEI's reconnaissance and was Partly covered. with snow. As noted above, due to the snow cover, WEI was unable to observe the ground surface in the vicinity of the AST to evaluate the potential for release events from the AST. The AST observed on the Site December 21, 1999 was scheduled for removal on December 2'2, 1999 and the results are discussed under a separate letter report. Page 6 Waste Engineering, Inc. 0 M -~ } J H _ Yl ~ ~ a c°a ~_> z ~ Y ~„~ M ~ = d. ~zm M ~ ~o~ _~ _ mm ~ ~; m ~~ 0 ~mm ~m ~ n ao ~N~ .mm M ~~ ~~ o ~ ~ r~ ~ r. Environmental Site Assessment Holy Cross Property Aspen Lot, Aspen, Colorado WEI observed a buried metal pipe that was partly exposed in the southem portion of the Site, running parallel to the bike path. A chain-link fence and a wooden fence were observed along the bike path traversing the Site. Reinforced rock walls were observed along the steep slopes above and _, below Power Plant Road. ~~ Chemical odors, sumps, or pits were not identified around or near the Site that would suggest a release event or recognized environmental conditions. 4.2 Adjoining Property Observations Adjoining properties were visually examined from public access right-of--ways to make a cursory assessment of the current land use and its potential for recognized environmental conditions that may have an impact on the Site. Reconnaissance of adjoining properties was performed by viewing land use from legal boundaries or by walking upon the adjoining properties that were legally accessible. s The Site is bordered to the west by residential development. Undeveloped land and Castle Creek form the Site's northern boundary. The Highway 82 right-of-way forms the Site's southern boundary. The City of Aspen's Maintenance Facility is located on adjacent property to the east and down slope of the Site. The facility includes three structures, one of which is the original Roaring Fork Electric Company building that was constructed prior to 1893. WEI observed 55-gallon drurns, two ASTs, fuel pumps for both gasoline and diesel, two approximate 1,000-gallon vats containing an unknown fluid, and road maintenance equipment in the vicinity of the city structures. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS . Based upon the foregoing assessment and data obtained, this ESA has provided no evidence of recognized environmental conditions existing at the Site. An approximate 1000-gallon AST was removed from the Site after completion of the field reconnaissance portion of this environmental site assessment. Information on the AST removal is being provided under a separate cover letter. 6.0 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF ASSESSMENT This assessment is based on the information available to WEI at the time of the investigation and provides an indication of the status of the Site at that time. The opinions expressed concerning the environmental risks or migration of contaminants are based on the data in the report Additional data could change the opinions expressed. t The goal of the processes established by the ASTM practice is to identify recognized environmental conditions. The term "recognized environmental conditions" means the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an ~ existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the property. The term is not intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk of harm to public health or the environment and that generally would not be Waste Engineering, Inc. Page 7 0 . ~ w ~~~ ~N O ~ Y! V M ~~Z ~ Y („~ M ~a~ M ~ ~o~ ~ z ~mm ~~m ~~ 0 ~mm ANA ~~~ ~~~ ~ a ~o ~~ ~w ~~ o ~a~ ~ .y ~~~ "~ 'r"~s en Lot, As en, Colorado Environmental Site Assessment Holy Cross Property P P the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. This process is designed such that completion of the process, as described in this report, should constitute all appropriate inquiry into the Site and uses of the Site to qualify for the innocent landowner defense to Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) liability. A coin lete definition of the Site conditions would require substantial testing and a more detailed P investigation. Future conditions may change, and further investigation should be completed i contamination is suspected or if Site conditions sunbas~ off Sit ~conditions~t is not possible for related to subsurface conditions and the changuig WEI to provide guarantees with this assessment. t with res ect to radon, methane, asbestos-containing materials, This ESA did not include any inquiry P lead-based paint, lead in drinking water, formaldehyde, endangered species, wetlands, subsurface investigation activities, other services, potential conditions, or features not specifically identified erein. In those instances where additional services or service enhancements are and discussed h y cific limitations attendant to those included in the report as requested or authorized b the client, spe services are presented in the text of the report. Attachments c:~ i 94~ppU~a(RVS)wotyESARVS.doc .~_ Page 3 Waste Engineering, Inc. 0 ~ ~ ., ~> r J F- ra Z ~N O ~ U! V M ~> Z -O Y F- V ~ ~a~ Hm o ~~m ~Oz ~Nm m B ~~m ~ ~' 0 ~mm ~N ~ ~ m ~ n a~ ~N Z r ~~ ~ '~ n ~~n ~~ -- s~. REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL ACRONYMS ACMA Asbestos-Containing Material AHERA Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System AST Aboveground Storage Tank CDPHE Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System DOT Department of Transportation EPA Environmental Protection Agency ERNS Emergency Response Notification System ESA Environmental Site Assessment F'RP Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic LPST Leaking Petroleum Storage Tank LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPL National Priorities List PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl PLM Polarized Light Microscopy PST Petroleum Storage Tank RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act USDA United States Department ofAgriculture USGS United States Geological Survey UST Underground Storage Tank 0 • ~~ v ~~ ~ ~ J ~ - ~"~ Z _y0 N V _ M ~Q M D Y H (,~ M ~ T.. d Z ~ i ~"~ -Q _ Z ~Nm m m 1 ~.r m ~~ D ~mB ~ ~N ~ ~ m ~ 1[1 aD ~ N ~ ~ r ~ m 10 ~ ~ 1+! ~~ ~~ O ~~ m a .+