Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.Front Yard Setback Eastwood Dr McSkimming Rd.0004.2005THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER PARCEL ID NUMBER PROJECTS ADDRESS PLANNER CASE DESCRIPTION REPRESENTATIVE DATE OF FINAL ACTION 0004.2005.ASZ0 XXX XXX XX XXX EASTWOOD DRIVE TODD GRANGE/SARA OATES CODE AMENDMENT SARA OATES 6/24/2006 CLOSED BY Angela Scorey on 03/25/2009 .., ~,7 _ .. ~. _ ~ Fes' Qecsd aavwMe Fgm 0.euarS- r-~ id, txb _ _ _. _... _.._ _.... _.. -r_aoadeFldp.... .............. _ - _ _ _. 3: sn~ '.~ `~ s Cab :.~ . L.orr~tion:... ~ ..sub Pumis7 ( valuation ). Camiem..... ~ AttactanerJs ! Man ~ Ro1Ang Stakus ' luchiErg I Parcels I Custan Fjelds I Fxg ~ Fee 9u~mary ~ ~clions ~ Routirg }~atsY I Perrtet Tyye aaz .°..Aza5ih92fkYd Psrrotp 000d.20~A520 ,~ Adders 02ER0 ~ Apt/S~e~-~7 Cxy ASPEN _ ~ Statel`A' .~I 2p 81611 PmmtlMamalan ---.: .- _. _. _. Masts Pamk ~ ~ Rutig 0!ueua eszo0l Ap{ded ~~J29/2005 Propd. J Status Pendig Approvad~~®~ Ocsaiption EASTVJOOD OR CODE AMENDMENT Issued ~~ ~ Fnd ~~__l SubrrrRted SARAH GATES d232767 CM;Ic Rurming Days i V Expses O6l2dl2006 1" Vis31e an tFb wa67 Perrrt ID; 9 0 39805 -_ Ovens _.:: :., .~::: .,, .::__ ~. :::: ~ _ .:.:. Last Name CITY OFASPEN~~~~~ FirM Name Pfwna' [97oJ 9205000 v I ~', Record 8 of 19 C(~~ ~. ~~ 3~zs~o~ ~~~o~ 130 5 GALENA ST SPEN 0081611 ~$ . MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission ~~ THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Director FROM: Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer ~ RE: Code Amendment-Front Yard Setback for Eastwood Drive and McSkimming Rd. (aka Skimming Lane) DATE: November 1, 2005 SUMMARY: Community Development Staff is pursuing a code amendment to allow for a less restrictive setback requirement for properties located between Highway 82 and Eastwood Drive and for properties located on the portion of McSkimming Road known as Skimming Lane (a map of the affected properties is attached as Exhibit A of the attached resolution). The properties currently have a thirty (30) foot front yard setback requirement and this code amendment would allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback. The proposed change is due to several factors, including topography of the lots, current built conditions, and language in the land use code that has created many non- conformities on these streets. APPLICANT: City of Aspen Community Development Department. PROCEDURE: Pursuant to Section 26.310.020, Procedure for Amendment, a development application for an amendment to the text of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at a public hearing. D15CUSSION: All lots in what is the R-15B zone district (Knollwood, Eastwood and Aspen Grove Subdivisions) aze subject to a thirty (30) front yard setback. These subdivisions were annexed into the City in 1987 and at the time the Planning Department researched the existing conditions of each lot to make sure no non-conformities were being created. Separate conditions for the houses along Eastwood Road and Skimming Lane have created non-conformities for these lots. These conditions are outlined below: Eastwood Road: When Eastwood Subdivision was annexed Eastwood Road was a private road. Per regulations at the time, the setback was taken from the property line, which was located on the north/northeast side of the properties (see Exhibit C for an example). Eastwood Road changed from a private road to a public right-of--way in 1991. Since the road was dedicated the property line shifted thirty (30) feet from the north side of the Eastwood to the south side of Eastwood. This shift has created non-conformities along the street, several vaziance requests to Board of Adjustment and an undesirable development pattern which pushes the development to the steeper portion of the lots. • Skimming Lane: Skimming Lane is a portion of McSkimming Lane which is accessed from a private access easement thirty (30) feet wide that is split fifteen (15) feet on the east lots and fifteen (15) feet on the west lots (see Exhibit D for an example). The requirement for measuring setbacks from such easement is as follows: Required Yards Adjacent to Private Roads. All required yard setbacks under zone district regulations are based on distance measured from the right-of- way line ~f a dedicated public way. Where there is no public dedication and the lot line extends to the centerline of the right-~f--way, the required yard setback shall equal the distance specified under zone district regulations, plus an additional dlstance equal to one-half (1/2) of the right-of-way width as if~such private way were dedicated for public use. In plain language, the code requires that the setback be taken from the edge of the road versus the property line. As with Eastwood Drive, this has created non- conformities and an undesirable development pattern by pushing the development into the steepest, undisturbed portion of the lots. Staff is proposing the setback be changed from thirty (30) feet to ten (10) feet for these lots so that re-development may occur in areas that have are already disturbed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval to the City Council amending Section 26.710.070(D)(4) to allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback for properties situated between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 and for lots located on the northwest section of Skimming Lane as depicted in Exhibit A of Resolution No. ~, Series of 2005. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "1 move to approve Resolution No3~Series of 2005 amending Section 26.710.070(D)(4), Moderate Density Residential (R-15B), as proposed in the Exhibit A of said resolution." Q~~ S ~ ~~ Attachments: Exhibit A: Map of Affected Properties Exhibit B: Review Standards Exhibit C: Survey of an Eastwood Road property Exhibit D: Survey of a Skimming Lane property ~. RESOLUTION N0. (SERIES OF 2005) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CODE AMENDMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING SECTION: 26.710.070(D)(4), SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-15B) ZONE DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department initiated code amendment changes to the above cited sections; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310.040, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Code Amendment application for Amendment to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, after recommendation by the Community Development Department pursuant to Section 26.430.020; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the Code Amendments to the above cited sections pursuant to Section 26.310.040 and recommended approval; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted aduly-noticed public hearing, considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director and took public testimony for the Code Amendments cited above; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that Code Amendments meet or exceed all applicable amendment standards and that the approval of the Code Amendments, are consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. WHEREAS, during a public hearing on November 1, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, by a _ to _ L-~ vote, the City Council approve the amendments to Section 26.710.070(D)(4), setback requirements for the Moderate Density Residential (R-15B) zone district, as proposed by the Community Development Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION as follows: ,-~ , Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Code Amendment sections initiated by the Community Development Department are approved as noted below: Section 26.710.070(D)(4): Minimum front yard setback (feet): 30. For properties located between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 [Lots 6-19, Eastwood Subdivision] and properties located on the northwest portion of Skimming Lane [Lots 8-11, Block 1, Aspen Grove subdivision] (feet) 10. The affected properties are shown in Exhibit A of this resolution. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the Code Amendment approval as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such Code Amendment approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution 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 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution 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. Approved by the Commission at its regular meeting on November 1, 2005. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 2 ~~ o ~9LF q~fi oy 9~ o',A Boa ~i ~ a~ F~ ~ } ti r~ ~~ 3 ~-~ G ` ~J` 'L I "' ", -~-.- ~ ~ ~1'~~ ; o -_~~ ~~: ~: o A #~~ ~- ~ ~ '~i- , jl` v ~ARDMORECT. i-- < m ~ ~ ~ ;~°, F /~ 'c E COOPER qVE ) _ ~ ~ r ~ '~ ~' ~/ ~~ ~ , ~ i ~ ~~'1 ~' ti 1 ~ ~, O Q~~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ^~ ~_ '~LLr.- ~\ ~ m ~ I m ~ N ~ ` _,\ ~~ ASPEN GROVE LN Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~! ~'~ ~ : m ~~~. i o r~ ~ - ~/ 7. ~..... - _-T .. a ~` ~ _ ;' awp ~ ~ ' RIVERSIDE OR s - I H WESNIEW DR O a w ~ ~ 1 ~ t ~ ~ ~' ~^, -+---" ,+' ~,. ROARING RK r t ' .~ 6 ' fe FO DR ._~ _ ~_ - ~ I Zo r, ~/ ~ G ~ ~ ~ T ~ ~ l_ ~.. ~ `, ~P A .. P~\~ ~~~ r __ U - {F~ ,~, ~ m o i ,~ ~P ~Z j ~ p' ! r ~ 0~ tt! g --. - -. - - .. v \ \ ~ - i ~~ yK'!: 3e ~ ..,~ ~ :~- ~ ,` NDRZHS'SPR.OR~~/ ~~~ .. ,~ EXHIBIT B: REVIEW STANDARDS FOR CODE AMENDMENTS REVIEW STANDARDS: Chapter 26.92, Amendments To The Land Use Regulations And Official Zone District Map, at Section 26.92.020 provides nine (A-I) standards for City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of proposed amendments to the text of the Land Use Code. These standards and Staffs evaluation of the potential amendments relative to them are provided below, with the standard in italics followed by the Staff "response." A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions ofthis title. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any applicable portions of the Aspen Municipal Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. RESPONSE: The code amendment proposed will not affect compatibility of existing land uses. The proposed amendment takes into account neighborhood characteristics. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have any effect on traffic generation or road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public ,facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public .facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, wa[er supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an impact on infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. F. Whether and the extent [o which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an effect on the natural environment except to preserve and enhance. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. ,--. RESPONSE: These code amendment will be consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. K Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. RESPONSE: Staff's goal is that the proposed change will create more compatibility within the neighborhood. L Whether the proposed amendment would he in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. RESPONSE: Staff believes the proposed amendment will not be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. 2 _. ~_ _ _, goad o~ ~dSus,-rr,eYr4 /~~Pli ca-l-;o~'l ~o r ce by Nerh ar~d ~-orra.w~e, i'~aCK uLar ian 4,.~~ ~~~~k' Pages ~ o.~ ~{ ,~ ~ ~„ f:_. ~. ,,~ . ~. o~ ~ ~' - - ? N~~ ~~~ I I ~~ K 0 Q~ ~+d9,1~y ~~~P~ ~ A ~~ ~~ O ~ ~~ \~ V A a ~ ~ ~~ ~ .~...~_ ~ti ~~ ~? cQ ~~. F 1N3W~Sb'~ ~ (I ~~ ~~ k~ ~pW ~~ ~a~ „o-,~ W Z /'~I1l~ ~:. n~ r- `~ ~ ~~ ~, l~ v ~~ n A i 4 r~ ~~ yM F 'd. o ~" ~, '~ ~ ~ + ~` Q `~ ~~ ~ ~ q v ~ o °~ ~~ N ,~ M N~ ~ ~~ s -7fliyi~i~ a~-or~ ~-~ds~.~9s~Cv~ „o-,~~ „, " ~ ' ,_ ,° % ~ c' ~. ~ ~ ~ ~~ / e ~ H 101 ; f / "~ 001 Wal / / ~^il~ J.~~~ rh 1 .tic ~ 4\ ll~ be / ~ d~ \ ,5 WW / ~~ ~ S~ / ~`y~ ~ ~ 110X / / / ~ r / / r~ 96 LO ~ f ,. / °° ~ ~ r- ~- ~/~,~ spa o / sa / t /~ H~~ ~ ~ \ ~~ SvE i/ _ _ / ~ / °.999 ~, ~ y J Nl/ V zo \\ ~ \ f~¢e ~ / / ~ / ~4rp ~ of / 1 seals 'is / ~ ~ °~'~~~ .. / 4 ~ y ~ Y / ~ .. / ~ '~ ' ~ \\ z1 '~ sdals 69,i ~ . r ~ ~ ~;< ~ ~~i. \ ~~ ~ tol ~ ` 4 / h ~ S 6 425. l4l / DA/ 1 ~ ~~~ 4 FS 60. / ~ S ~, S 1 90 tObr ~ / r '~ / \% serfs eo r /~~ ~ /~% „ a~ {, F A,9)-I91~ ~ .~O ad31 94/ ~L LO~. ~r~ )A / \ Sd3 13tl 1 3G TOl1" f 4[ I. ~ : ra1~ / o d 1\ ~ X11 /. - 3Sf10H,. t. / /~0 ~ / ~ ,~ P r" '~ x '101 ~~ ..96 N^30 ~ IS /~ i~ ~ /~ ~~ ~ y ~1 ( /. ~ " / P i i i 13v ~ % /// i J F / / Lv / ~ 've l/ ,~y ~ seals b fe~ ! s Lf 1 a, oI 46 " ~''.. ~/ / / / > / / /. / \ p` °1,'6pt13791d ~ / ~ / 35N 6 j ~ / ~ .t i ~° \ ~t / / i 6~ 1ii - A //9 06/ / 9a / / // / ~ ~ ~ ~\ `~ / / / - ~ ,,,r-fr ~ - ~ / I / / ,, II ; I / / / / ~ Ye / ~ i 1 / \\`/ 4 a ` I / f ~'~ ~~ 19/ / / / / ~~, ~~ ~/ // '/ ' t ,,} ~ / / / / i / i ! orl ~ , 1 / f i ~ ~. 'r9 / l ~ / / / i ~~ `~~CC / °` n /N' ` 2` -s ~ / / / / ~ / / / r ,~6~J ~rs~ I~d~ zap I /~~~~ta~ / / i ~~~\1~~-~// ~,~,P I I { ~ ~ I / / ~ ° oti ~,kf , I I ~ I ~ / v'vl •~ ~ ~ ~ I J / /l F' vz ~ ~' ~e - 0~61 I I ~ I ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ :~~ N101 1 ~ G ~ I I ~ / f~ / J~ Y d0 /\\ / ~ ~y 33tl1 N3d5V 3YI~t ~ /\ I ~ / ~ `~ ~ z" ~ ''~ a ! / ~ ~ ,° e ~ y? °° ~ F ~~;~ ~ o /' `~ ~ ',d ¢`' 33u1 rv33a0a3n3 'y ~° ~~ i - o ~-zv ~ ~ :'~~-,~ i ~ ~ ~ ~~ 1~ 0 3lOd ual~.ln (? i y z 1904 ~s o ' 'L~ ~' 'M.91 ff.SS 5 1Cl SIHI d0 AtlVI]Nf108 Oy ~~ A18318v3H1N05 3M1 NO S1N3ui NOU ONn03 NO 03SV8 59N1 tlV38 0 jyy9N t• 03WOS SY tl0 031Y1l1lVJ ~OBlYJS M83M $llYl NV 1183) 3tl03383H1 $IIVJ ANVN SYJVI lVld NOISIAIOBOS O80J38 R °y NNONNNO 3WVN 1a3tl 1> ' Salll ll ll'~ VY3Htl ]M1U ---- -- 3lOHNVW ® - 1NV8VAN 3tl 13 ~ ' lOtll NOa A3A8N5 3N1 d5 ^361 tlJ530 SV 1N3NONOW A3Atl05 ONOOi Q S~lON QNV UN~J3 1 ~ ., } `.3 'i .'i. Tune 9, 2005 Dear Homeowner: As you may have noticed there have been several recent variance requests for houses on the south side of Eastwood Drive that are unable to meet setback requirements. Following the 1987 annexation of the Eastwood Subdivisions, the City of Aspen dedicated Eastwood Drive as right of way so that the City could provide maintenance such a snow removal and road repair. When the property was annexed, the thirty (30) foot front yard setback was taken from the property line (which on most properties extends to the north of Eastwood Drive) and most parcels were able to conform to the setback requirements without seeking variances. When the road was dedicated, due to requirements in the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the setback shifted to the south edge of the right of way dedication, effectively moving the required setback approximately thirty (30) feet to the south, making many of the existing houses along Eastwood Drive non-conforming. City staff is contemplating perusing a code amendment that would allow for a less restrictive setback requirement, perhaps ten (10) feet, for affected lots along Eastwood Drive and would like to get feedback from those property owners. Please give me a call (429-2767) or email me (saraho(a~ci.aspen.co.us) if you have comments, concerns or any additional ideas. Regards, Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer City of Aspen m. D , 3 ~ ~ ~~ ~ - r ~.,~ i _. '- ~ ~~. REGENT ST B-MASCOTTE•L•N~ j / j :; A 2 5 O 6 ~ m~ - a D! ~ 9 .9d ~ F` ~ _ ~ ~~~~ I ~~ I^ KATHRVNS WY ~°~' i{ -L~pq~E`~'~ t ,`'" J t ._ (e, ARDMORE CT ~ ---^- f ~ lam. ~ '„~qVE 4 ~ ~~{~ L~ ~ \ ~ ~3'i 4 ~ ~ ~~ ' p t ~q ~~ 4 ~~~ ~Fa f s G< ~ .' A'~ N I /~ I ~I '~` ~ Q ~ ~c. _ t ~''i` , ,s p" ' ~S ~ ``.`~\~,~ air C~'I ~' i ~ d~ € : J - m~ $-~ ~ ~-`' y ~ ~ gyp; o~ - -• ~ ~ 3-~ ~ t - 9~ ~ \ } -N'~-- i Z ~~i °~" ~-~i `~S t, ( .~ ~ I ASPEN fiROVE LN~-'IH t. r c ..... 0.NERSIDE DR N r . I ®L ~ g~' ! ~ ~~' "..r9 I • c: ~ ~• ~ ~ ~::fi~gg ~ t y Y-.•, I > g~~ J ~ WESNIEW DR c ;~ E~°$ ~ ,\ •T "3• ?tea ..~ ~ e I ., _ ~ ~ ,. - .~ / \ ~~.1 ROARI ORKK R / / ~ ~~ ~: 'gym ~ ~ -. _ er~ ~ ~ ~ `_ ~ I i~~ e ' ~ r~ ,~ ,. \\ f~ I ~_ j/l { i ~~' i'` I Lp i • - a ~ ~ ._ 5`r`+P Q%~ P~, \aP yy -1 _..... ,, d ... ~~ .~ _~ :- 1~ A ~~~ ~: .~ ~'~~> ~., ~~ U' bl mod, ~'~ t/ I•• i. ~u ti~ ~~ti ~~ , O~ '~~ A p~ ~_ ~ F P t ~ / ~ Sn ~, ~.~ ~ ~~.~~m~_.•i q Y Zm 4". i p P ~; '. Y ~ ~\` ~' ,, PUBLIC NOTICE RE: CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE AMENDMENT -SETBACKS IN THE MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-15B) ZONE DISTRICTS FOR SECTIONS OF EASTWOOD DRIVE AND MCSKIMMING ROAD (AKA "SHIMMING LANE") NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, January 9, 2006 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider amendments to Section 26.710.070(D)(4), Moderate Density Residential (R-15B) front yard setback requirements of the Aspen Municipal Code. The change is specific to lots located between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 and to lots located on the portion of McSkimming Road known as Skimming Lane. For further information, contact Chris Bendon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429- 2765, saraho@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Helen K. Klanderud, MaVOr Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on December 24, 2005 City of Aspen Account MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~~ FROM: Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer RE: Code Amendment-Front Yazd Setback for Eastwood Drive and McSkimming Rd. (aka Skimming Lane) ls` Reading of Ordinance No.~, Series of 2005 DATE: December 12, 2005 SUMMARY: Community Development Staff is pursuing a code amendment to allow for a less restrictive setback requirement for properties located between Highway 82 and Eastwood Drive and for properties located on the portion of McSkimming Road known as Skimming Lane (a map of the affected properties is attached as Exhibit A of the attached resolution). The properties currently have a thirty (30) foot front yard setback requirement and this code amendment would allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback. The proposed change is due to several factors, including topography of the lots, current built conditions, and language in the land use code that has created many non- conformities on these streets. APPLICANT: City of Aspen Community Development Department. PROCEDURE: Pursuant to Section 26.310.020, Procedure for Amendment, a development application for an amendment to the text of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at a public hearing. DISCUSSION: All lots in what is the R-ISB zone district (ICnollwood, Eastwood and Aspen Grove Subdivisions) aze subject to a thirty (30) front yard setback. These subdivisions were annexed into the City in 1987 and at the time the Planning Department reseazched the existing conditions of each lot to make sure no non-conformities were being created. Separate conditions for the houses along Eastwood Road and Skimming Lane have created non-conformities for these lots. These conditions aze outlined below: Eastwood Road: When Eastwood Subdivision was annexed Eastwood Road was a private road. Per regulations at the time, the setback was taken from the property line, which was located on the north northeast side of the properties (see Exhibit C for an example). Eastwood Road changed from a private road to a public right-of-way in 1991. Since the road was dedicated the property line shifted thirty (30) feet, from the north side of the Eastwood to the south side of Eastwood. This shift has created non-conformities along the street, several vaziance requests to Board of Adjustment and an midesirable development pattern which pushes the development to the steeper portion of the lots. Skimming Lane: Skimming Lane is a portion of McSkimming Lane which is accessed from a private access easement thirty (30) feet wide that is split fifteen (15) feet on the east lots and fifteen (15) feet on the west lots (sea Exhibit D for an example). The requirement for measuring setbacks from such easement is as follows: Required Pards Adjacent to Private Roads. All required yard setbacks under zone district regulations are bused on distance measured from the right-of- way line of a dedicated public way. Where there is no public dedication and the lot line extends to the centerline of the right-of--way, the required yard setback shall equal the distance specified under zone district regulations, plus an additional distance equal to one-half (1 /2) of the right-of--way width as if such private way were dedicated for public use. In plain language, the code requires that the setback be taken from the edge of the road versus the property line. As with Eastwood Drive, this has created non- conformities and an undesirable development pattern by pushing the development into the steepest, undisturbed portion of the lots. Staff is proposing the setback be changed from thirty (30) feet to ten (10) feet for these lots so that re-development may occur in areas that have are already disturbed. The Planning and Zoning Commission added to conditions to their recommendation. First, due to the narrosnmess of Eastwood Road, staff is to review the proposed setback with the City Engineer, Streets Superintendent and the Fire Marshall to confirm adequacy of the existing right-of--way. Second, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended the rear yard setback be established as thirty (30) feet for the lots on Eastwood Drive and Skimming Lane so that the building envelope does not increase for these lots. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a code amendment to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6) to allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback and a thirty (30) foot rear yard setback for properties situated between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 and for lots located on the northwest section of Skimming Lane as depicted in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. _, Series of 2005. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No._, Series of 2005, upon first reading." CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: Attachments: Exhibit A: Map of Affected Properties Exhibit B: Review Standards ~, ~ . ORDINANCE N0. (SERIES OF 2005) A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING CODE AMENDMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING SECTION: 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6), FRONT AND REAR YARD SETBACKS FOR THE MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTAL (R-15B) ZONE DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department initiated code amendment changes to the above cited sections; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310.040, the City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Code Amendment application for Amendment to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, after reconunendation by the Community Development Department pursuant to Section 26.430.020; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the Code Amendments to the above cited sections pursuant to Section 26.310.040 and recommended approval; and, WHEREAS, during a public hearing on November 22, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Cormnission recommended by a three to one (3-1) vote, the City Council approve the amendments to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6); and, WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing, considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director and took public testimony of code amendments to Section 26.410; and, WHEREAS, the City Cow~cil finds that Code Amendments meet or exceed all applicable amendment standards and that the approval of the Code Amendments, are 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 OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL as follows: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Code Amendment sections initiated by the Community Development Department are approved as noted below: Section 26.710.070(D)(4): Minimum front yard setback (feet): 30. For properties located between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 [Lots 6-19, ~.,. Eastwood Subdivision] azid properties located on the northwest portion of Skimming Lane [Lots 8-11, Block 1, Aspen Grove subdivision] (feet) 10. Section 26.710.070(D)(6): Minimum rear .yard setback (feet): 10. For properties located between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 [Lots 6=19, Eastwood Subdivision] and properties located on the northwest portion of Skimming Lane [Lots 8-11, Block 1, Aspen Grove subdivision] (feet) 30. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the Code Amendment approval as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such Code Amendment approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: . This Ordinance shall not affect 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 4: 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 this 12th day of December 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 9~' Day of January 2006. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Attaclunent: Map of affected properties 2 <: \/ c ~ ~ / : W m \\\\V;/\\ I L ,~,~~~ *~ N ~h~1Jt~ 0 _~~ q 3 ~F <+ ~ . ~_ .6 ~ -~ ~~ away ~ / r ~E J ~`~ s c / 1 J r ~ ~i4a~ "! i~~REG NT S'iT'+. o~'MAS{Fy~C07rt7E.pN~ ~yy p~[O ~O ~ F: ti _ ~-Lµ.D i P~~~~' ~~~byea~-.. A ~0 ALEgV~ y<~~ I k ~ ~ '~ AROMOREE . o-, k*i -w Y'ry - ~ ~' F ei.r. A'~~ FC' e~~ / ~ b. f~ Y(~ ~ ~ k ~° ~ a ~ ~~ ~ 1 ~~ sMMMMG~ . ~ z _. ... f~' F. ' r ~ ~ ~. . y Ti i I o,+ ~ ~`~ ~~, '~ ` ~ _ - ASPEN GROVE IN ~ w a ~ ~ I ~,i ~ 11 ¢ ¢ I 4 ~ p ~~ ~ I I ~I '~ ~ o ~ ~, I~ _ ' _ RryERSID ~~ ~ ~~ ~ , ~' i ~ ~;~'i~ <r ~r t_ ~ ~ yyr ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~y ~ __.~.... ~ ,1 _~ *~ WESNIEW DR ~ ~ ~~$ / ~;,. ~~ ~ ~' I ,g ... \-',.. 6 ROARING FpRKD I ~ J~~ / \ e y~. / ~ fir'" ~~pp~ ~~ ,'~j Ae :,,. ~ ~ n;, - ~P~~ CRYS7 ERD 7 .,,. ... `' u' S.+..~. ¢LJ. _.. -_ ~ t-.~... __ _ ~ ti ~ ter. ~_ ag .~ op .ra Am ~. ~" r y;. ~kx.~ ~~..,~ Q, rF °'A ~ ° a ~~e~~. ~~r L ^ W". ~~ pP, f° E ~ tPrfii yK ~..'fQ e ~ ~ 4~ 6°=~' ~ a5.~ ~P P €}< m ' ~~\ A .". ' \ .~. EXHIBIT B: REVIEW STANDARDS FOR CODE AMENDMENTS REVIEW STANDARDS: Chapter 26.310, Amendments To The Land Use Regulations And Official Zone District Map, at Section 26.310.020 provides nine (A-I) standards for City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of proposed amendments to the text of the Land Use Code. These standards and Staffs evaluation of the potential amendments relative to them are provided below, with the standard in italics followed by the Staff "response." A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any applicable portions of the Aspen Municipal Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. RESPONSE: The code amendment proposed will not affect compatibility of existing land uses. The proposed amendment takes into account neighborhood characteristics. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on taff c generation and road safety. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have any effect on traffic generation or road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an impact on infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. F Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an effect on the natural environment except to preserve and enhance. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. ..,, RESPONSE: These code amendment will be consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. H Whetl2er there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. RESPONSE: Staffs goal is that the proposed change will create more compatibility within the neighborhood. 1. YVhether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. RESPONSE: Staff believes the proposed amendment will not be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. 2 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE AMENDMENT -SETBACKS IN THE MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-15B) ZONE DISTRICTS FOR SECTIONS OF EASTWOOD DRIVE AND MCSKIMMING ROAD (AKA "SKIMMING LANE") NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, November 1, 2005 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider amendments to Section 26.710.070(D)(4), Moderate Density Residential (R-15B) front yard setback requirements of the Aspen Municipal Code. The change is specific to lots located between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 and to lots located on the portion of McSkimming Road known as Skimming Lane. For further information, contact Sarah Oates at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2767, saraho@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Jasmines Tv re Chairperson Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on October 15, 2005 City of Aspen Account ~~ tfi~ ~ ~~~~~5 ~~ `~ m ~,~ ~ )act / Semis ~ )~-~-5 i •w~~ C1 t ~. ,1~.~-~,~, ~' S~~ ,-~->~ T 30 ~~-Y- 3 - ~ ~~ ~ o Dan Martineau, 07:00 AM 6/7^'?005 -0700. Your 6/9/letter Page 1 of 1 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-shalt q=dns; c=nofws; ~~ s=s1024;d=yahoo.com; h=Message-1 D:Received:Date:From:Subject: To:Cc:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=MaggsuLGOSbIpjnf VyvFy/HU4RtJhyvw3 FFnGiLRvTVuwRS HU4tXMBoxzlEyEv WZYS/i+ChmGxOEYnN V aWeASb97~ Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 07:00:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Dan Martineau <djmartineau@yahoo.com> Subject: Your 6/9/letter... To: saraho@ci.aspen.co.us Cc: Dan Martineau <djmartineau@yahoo.com> X-Spam: [F=0.0001451514; B~.500(0); BMI=0.500(none); S~.O10(2005051801); MH=0.500(2005062901); R~.014 (s23/n 1621); SC=none; spP=0500] X-MAIL-FROM: <djmartineau@yahoo.com> X-SOURCE-IP: [66.218.78.179] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Hi Sarah, Thank you for your letter. I own one of the affected lots on Eastwood Drive (#64). 1 am in the process of remodelling my home, and recently decided against some changes I had wanted to make to the exterior of the home, primarily because of the restrictive set- backs and the time and expense that would have been involved in seeking a variance. The location of the road and the slope of the properties, make any kind of set-back off of the road extremely difficult to engineer and build, not to mention expensive. 1 fully support your efforts to make changes that will benefit other owners.... Very truly yours, Daniel Martineau Daniel James Martineau 26024 North 104th Way Scottsdale, Arizona 85255 Home - 480-563-5527 Printed for Sarah Oates <saraho@ci.aspen.co.us> 6/29/2005 ATTACHMENT? AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ~,S l W ~~ ~~C~r{~ f-l'VV I ~Iferj, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: ~' ~DS , 200_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, ~1 (!t 1/I~( `~ C~ ~ _t ~(-~'7 (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (I S) days prior to the public heazing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained fr~n the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials;. which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches~,vide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch, in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public heazing and was continuously visible from the day of 200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ~ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described inaSection 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public heazing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class po~3tage. prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public heazing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise; the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. ' nature The forego'ng "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged fore me ) ~ay of~~" , 200 ~bY~-¢S ~~"tn WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: /~3~~- PUBIJC NO ICE .-. ,~ RE: CITY OF ASPEN LAt USE CODE AMEND- Q .. ~' MENT-SETBACKS IN TH j MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTW. (R-I6B) ZOtV~DISTRICIS FOR SEG T~ Notary L ub1rC TIONS OF EASTWOOD DRIVE AND MCSKIMMOVO S,. ROAD (AKA SKIMMING LANE) NONCE IS HEREBY GIVEN the[ a public QI-.T~. ~ • N hearing will be held on Tuesday. November 1, ~•t 2005 at a meeting to begin a[ 4:30 p.m. belore the • 9 Aspen Plannin8 antl Zoning Commission, Sister ~~~••.... ....~'~ Cities Room, City Hall, 130 5. Galena ac, Aspen, to onsider amend t OF ^ 0~.. men s to Sec[lon V 26.]10.0]0(D)(4), Moderate Density Residential cR-ISB) IrUnl yara aetbaek reyuimmenta nl the ATTACHMENTS• Aspen Mmduval cnae. Tne mange is scecmc to lots located behveen Eaztwootl Drive antl High- way s2 ane m mts located nn me vorunn or MBkimming Read ~,nwn az sltlmming I~ne. COPYOFTHE PUBLICATION For further Inlormation, lon[acl Saran Ogles at the CLLy o[ Aspen Com nity Development Da sareho®ci.azapen.c azAapen, CO, (0]0) 423 'GRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) s/Jas~ines Trgre, Cnairperson Aspen Planning and Zonng Commission Pnmisnetl m me Ascen Timu weeny pa ontnber ~~ AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIE IQ 2005. (3147) S NOTICED BYMAIL ~. o ~.o ~ c7~ , ~p 0~~ ~ ~ ~5~' 0~-,~2~ -~`~~-r-,~ ~ ~~,n~, a ____ --~ ~~~~ ~~ ,-~ .~~ J AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COM1 REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, November 1, 2005 4:30 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL I. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public II. MINUTES --) III. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Holiday House, Conceptual PUD, Continued to I/3-Jennifer Phelan B. Land Use Code Amendment (re. Eastwood/McSldmming Road)-Sarah Oates C. Land Use Code Amendments (Miscellaneous)-Jennifer Phelan V. BOARD REPORTS VL ADJOURN 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 8161 ~ '(970) 920-5090 -- (970) 920-5439 FAX www.aspenpitkin.com Fax ~, n To: ~ From: Fax: Pages• Phone• Date: Re: ~ CC: ~ t Urgent ^ For Review ^ Please Comment ^ Please Reply ^ Pleases Recycle • Comments: ~~. ~ cam. ~ ~ Vllc.. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council ,l THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~1 FROM: Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer RE: Code Amendment-Front Yard Setback for Eastwood Drive and McSkimming Rd. (aka Skimming Lane) ls~ Reading of Ordinance No.~, Series of 2005 DATE: December 12, 2005 SUMMARY: Community Development Staff is pursuing a code amendment to allow for a less restrictive setback requirement for properties located between Highway 82 and Eastwood Drive and for properties located on the portion of McSkimming Road known as Skimming Lane (a map of the affected properties is attached as Exhibit A of the attached resolution). The properties currently have a thirty (30) foot front yard setback requirement and this code amendment would allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback. The proposed change is due to several factors, including topography of the lots, current built conditions, and language in the land use code that has created many non- conformities on these streets. APPLICANT: City of Aspen Community Development Department. PROCEDURE: Pursuant to Section 26.310.020, Procedure for Amendment, a development application for an amendment to the text of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at a public hearing. DISCUSSION: All lots in what is the R-15B zone district (Knollwood, Eastwood and Aspen Grove Subdivisions) are subject to a thirty (30) front yard setback. These subdivisions were annexed into the City in 1987 and at the time the Planning Department researched the existing conditions of each lot to make sure no non-conformities were being created. Separate conditions for the houses along Eastwood Road and Skimming Lane have created non-conformities for these lots. These conditions are outlined below: Eastwood Road: When Eastwood Subdivision was annexed Eastwood Road was a private road. Per regulations at the time, the setback was taken from the property line, which was located on the north/northeast side of the properties (see Exhibit C for an example). Eastwood Road changed from a private road to a public right-of--way in 1991. Since the road was dedicated the property line shifted thirty (30) feet, from the north side of the Eastwood to the south side of Eastwood. This shift has created non-conformities along the street, several variance requests to Board of Adjustment and an undesirable development pattern which pushes the development to the steeper portion of the lots. • Skimming Lane: Skimming Lane is a portion of McSkimming Lane which is accessed from a private access easement thirty (30) feet wide that is split fifteen (15) feet on the east lots and fifteen (15) feet on the west lots (see Exhibit D for an example). The requirement for measuring setbacks from such easement is as follows: Required Yards Adjacent to Private Roads. All required yard setbacks under zone district regulations are based on distance measured from the right-of- way line of a dedicated public way. Where there is no public dedication and the lot line extends to the centerline of the right-of--way, the required yard setback shall equal the distance specified under zone district regulations, plus an additional distance equal to one-half (1/2) of the right-qf way width as if such private way were dedicated for public use. [n plain language, the code requires that the setback be taken from the edge of the road versus the property line. As with Eastwood Drive, this has created non- conformities and an undesirable development pattern by pushing the development into the steepest, undisturbed portion of the lots. Staff is proposing the setback be changed from thirty (30) feet to ten (10) feet for these lots so that re-development may occur in areas that have are already disturbed. The Planning and Zoning Commission added to conditions to their recommendation. First, due to the narrowness of Eastwood Road, staff is to review the proposed setback with the City Engineer, Streets Superintendent and the Fire Marshall to confirm adequacy of the existing right-of--way. Second, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended the rear yard setback be established as thirty (30) feet for the lots on Eastwood Drive and Skimming Lane so that the building envelope does not increase for these lots. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a code amendment to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6) to allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback and a thirty (30) foot rear yard setback for properties situated between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 and for lots located on the northwest section of Skimming Lane as depicted in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. _, Series of 2005. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "1 move to approve Ordinance No._, Series of 2005, upon first reading." CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: Attachments: Exhibit A: Map of Affected Properties Exhibit B: Review Standards 2 ORDINANCE N0. 5~ (SERIES OF 2005) A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING CODE AMENDMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING SECTION: 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6), FRONT AND REAR YARD SETBACKS FOR THE MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTAL (R-15B) ZONE DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department initiated code amendment changes to the above cited sections; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310.040, the City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Code Amendment application for Amendment to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, after recommendation by the Community Development Department pursuant to Section 26.430.020; and> WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the Code Amendments to the above cited sections pursuant to Section 26.310.040 and recommended approval; and, WHEREAS, during a public hearing on November 22, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended by a three to one (3-1) vote, the City Council approve the amendments to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6); and, WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing, considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director and took public testimony of code amendments to Section 26.410; and, WHEREAS, the City Cowlcil finds that Code Amendments meet or exceed all applicable amendment standards and that the approval of the Code Amendments, are 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 OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL as follows: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Code Amendment sections initiated by the Community Development Department are approved as noted below: Section 26.710.070(D)(4): Minimum front yard setback (feet): 30. For properties located between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 [Lots 6-19, Eastwood Subdivision] and properties located on the northwest portion of Skimming Lane [Lots 8-11, Block 1, Aspen Grove subdivision] (feet) 10. Section 26.710.070(D)(6): Minimum rear .yard setback (feet): ] 0. For properties located between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 [Lots 6-19, Eastwood Subdivision] and properties located on the northwest portion of Skimming Lane [Lots 8-11, Block 1, Aspen Grove subdivision] (feet) 30. Section 2• All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the Code Amendment approval as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such Code Amendment approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect 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 4• 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 this 12th day of December 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 9~' Day of January 2006. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Attachment: Map of affected properties 2 EXHIBIT B: REVIEW STANDARDS FOR CODE AMENDMENTS REVIEW STANDARDS: Chapter 26.310, Amendments To The Land Use Regulations And Official Zone District Map, at Section 26.310.020 provides nine (A-I) standards for City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of proposed amendments to the text of the Land Use Code. These standards and Staffs evaluation of the potential amendments relative to them are provided below, with the standard in italics followed by the Staff "response." A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any applicable portions of the Aspen Municipal Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. RESPONSE: The code amendment proposed will not affect compatibility of existing land uses. The proposed amendment takes into account neighborhood characteristics. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on tall c generation and road safety. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have any effect on traffic generation or road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities. water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an impact on infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an effect on the natural environment except to preserve and enhance. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. RESPONSE: These code amendment will be consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. K Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. RESPONSE: Staffs goal is that the proposed change will create more compatibility within the neighborhood. L Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. RESPONSE: Staff believes the proposed amendment will not be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council % `' i THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ` ~,~~ FROM: Sazah Oates, Zoning Officer50 RE: Code Amendment-Front Yard Setback for Eastwood Drive and McSkimming Rd. (aka Skimming Lane) 2"a Reading of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2005 DATE: December 12, 2005 SUMMARY: Corrununity Development Staff is pursuing a code amendment to allow for a less restrictive setback requirement for properties located between Highway 82 and Eastwood Drive and for properties located on the portion of McSkimming Road laiown as Skimming Lane (a map of the affected properties is attached as Exhibit A of the attached resolution). The properties currently have a thirty (30) foot front yazd setback requirement and this code amendment would allow for a ten (10) foot front yazd setback. The proposed change is due to several factors, including topography of the lots, current built conditions, and language in the land use code that has created many non- conformities on these streets. APPLICANT: City of Aspen Community Development Department: PROCEDURE: Pursuant to Section 26.310.020, ProceduLe for Amendment, a development application for an amendment to the text of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at a public hearing. DISCUSSION: All lots in what is the R-15B zone district (Knollwood, Eastwood and Aspen Grove Subdivisions) are subject to a thirty (30) front yazd setback. These subdivisions were annexed into the City in 1987 and at the time the Planning Department reseazched the existing conditions of each lot to make sure no non-conformities were being created. Sepazate conditions for the houses along Eastwood Road and Skimming Lane have created non-conformities for these lots. These conditions are outlined below: Eastwood Road: When Eastwood Subdivision was annexed Eastwood Road was a private road. Per regulations at the time, the setback was taken from the property line, which was located on the north/northeast side of the properties (see Exhibit C for an example). Eastwood Road changed from a private road to a public right-of--way in 1991. Since the road was dedicated the property line shifted thirty (30) feet, from the north side of the Eastwood to the south side of Eastwood. This shift has created non-conformities along the street, several variance requests to Board of Adjustment and an ,~_ undesirable development pattern which pushes the development to the steeper portion of the lots. • Skimming Lane: Skimming Lane is a portion of McSkimming Lane which is accessed from a private access easement thirty (30) feet wide that is split fifteen (15) feet on the east lots and fifteen (15) feet on the west lots (see Exhibit D for an example). The requirement for measuring setbacks from such easement is as follows: Required Yards Adjacent to Private Roads. All required yard setbacks under zone district regulations are based on distance measured from the right-of- way line of a dedicated public way. Where there is no public dedication and the lot line extends to the centerline of the right-of--way, the required yard setback shall equal the distance specified under zone district regulations, plus an additional distance equal to one-half (1/2) of the right-of--way width as if such private way were dedicated for public use. In plain language, the code requires that the setback be taken from the edge of the road versus the property line. As with Eastwood Drive, this has created non- conformities and an undesirable development pattern by pushing the development into the steepest, undisturbed portion of the lots. Staff is proposing the setback be changed from thirty (,0) feet to ten (10) feet for these lots so that re-development may occur in azeas that are already disturbed. The Plaiming and Zoning Commission added two conditions to their recommendation. First, due to the narrowness of Eastwood Road, staff is to review the proposed setback with the City Engineer, Streets Superintendent and the Fire Mazshall to confrm adequacy of the existing right-of--way. Second, the Planrring and Zoning Commission recommended the reaz yard setback be established as thirty (30) feet for the lots on Eastwood Drive and Skirmming Lane so that the building envelope does not increase for these lots. Staff has reviewed the proposal witlr the agencies listed above and there are no issues with a ten (10) foot setback, as the structures in the narrowest area of Eastwood Road will not be permitted any closer to the road. Additionally, staff supports the establishment of a thirty (30) foot rear yazd setback so that the building envelope will not increase. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a code amendment to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6) to allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback and a thirty (30) foot rear yazd setback for properties situated between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 and for lots located on the northwest section of Skimming Lane as depicted in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2005. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2005, approving a code amendment to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6) to allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback and a thirty (30) foot reaz yard setback for properties situated between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 and for lots located on the northwest section of Skimming Lane as depicted in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2005." 2 CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: Attachments: Exhibit A: Map of Affected Properties Exhibit B: Review Standards EXHIBIT B: REVIEW STANDARDS FOR CODE AMENDMENTS REVIEW STANDARDS: Chapter 26.310, Amendments To The Land Use Regulations And Official Zone District Map, at Section 26.310.020 provides nine (A-I) standazds for City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of proposed amendments to the text of the Land Use Code. These standards and Staffs evaluation of the potential amendments relative to them aze provided below, with the standard in italics followed by the Staff "response." A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this rule. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any applicable portions of the Aspen Municipal Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. RESPONSE: The code amendment proposed will not affect compatibility of existing land uses. The proposed amendment takes into account neighborhood chazacteristics. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation dnd road safety. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have any effect on traffic generation or road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an impact on infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. F Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an effect on the natural environment except to preserve and enhance. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. ~. RESPONSE: These code amendment will be consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. K Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. RESPONSE: Staffs goal is that the proposed change will create more compatibility within the neighborhood. L Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. RESPONSE: Staff believes the proposed amendment will not be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. s 2 .~. ORDINANCE N0. 51 (SERIES OF 2005) A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING CODE AMENDMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING SECTION: 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6), FRONT AND REAR YARD SETBACKS FOR THE MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTAL (R-15B) ZONE DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITHIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department initiated code amendment changes to the above cited sections; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310.040, the City Council, in accordance with file procedures, standazds, and limitations of this Chapter; shall by resolution approve,, approve with conditions, or deny a Code Amendment application for Amendment to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, after recommendation by the Community Development Department pursuant to Section 26.430.020; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the Code Amendments to the above cited sections pursuant to Section 26.310.040 and recommended approval; and, WHEREAS, during a public hearing on November 22, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Conunission recommended by a three to one (3-1) vote, the City Council approve the amendments to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6); and, WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing, considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director and took public testimony of code amendments to Section 26.410; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that Code Amendments meet or exceed all applicable amendment standards and that the approval of the Code Amendments, are consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council fords that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL as follows: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and staudazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Code Amendment sections initiated by the Community Development Department are approved as noted below: Section 26.710.070(D)(4): i Miiumum front yard setback (feet): 30 For propert es located between Eastwood Drive and Highway . 82 [Lots 6-19, ~i L.e., ATTACHMENT? AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OFPROPERTY: - ~ O Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: C , 200 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, ~ Get L~L~1C~ ~ ~~~ I ~~ ~'~ f (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements_of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Puhlication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public heazing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtainr~d from the Community Development Depaztment, which was made of suitu~nle, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public heazing and was continuously visible from the day of 200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (,5) days .prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first cl~s postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal ~vernment, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing.on such amendments. ature The f{o~regoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ~ day of I/P.(,~iI~I~V~ , 2005 , by ~~ame5 I i ndt WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL PUHLIC NOTICE RE: CITY OF AS N LAND USE CODE AMEN0. MENT My commission expires: ~ ~ ~' 1~U0 - SETHAC M THE MODERATE DENSITY RESNENTIAL (R- H) ZONE DISTRICTS FOR SEC- D MCSKIMMMG S ~ /J^ ~ I 1 /~J ~ U l / /J` '~ ~ L 7 ~ V ROAD (Al;p q MINC LANE'~ ~/h ^ ~ y O V J I///VV ~V ~'~ J VV /V r NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN Ihat a public he i g III b held n M nday le uary 9 2006 Tt Notary L nbhc ~A at meet nq [ begl t 5~ W p,m. b !ore the qs pc C ly C il, C n 'I Ch mbe CTy Hall 13p S G I aSl w /- "yq `~\' 1 ~Q y' 6 . , Asp t ons'der amendments m Sect'o 16'IQ090(D)(q), Modetale Deneily 1 ft ~ ,~j ~ - ~-~ "~ (,% " Residential (R-ISB) Iron yard setback require meets o(Ih A , rl .. - '<"S I e spw MUniclpal Code_Thechagge ' is Pec ~ ' t I Is to at d betty en Eastwood Drl e d H-qh y A2 a d t I ~ ' I I ~aletl on the Lan I M ~Sk' nh g R ad k ns Skmm~'ng ~ ' ° Pnr mom, m m ti o I, 16 rah Dates at the Gty f Apen Co ATTACHMENTS: .o u ty Devolopmuit Ua Partrn t 130 S. G lem SL, AaPe i, CQ (990) 429 296] ar h p .a pen n _ ereelen K. Niandernd, Mayor ' Y OF THE PUBLLCATION Published in [ qs Aspen CityCOUncil pen'pmes Weekly on Decem b ^~, p "'1 ~~R1R11$^w~ ~ ~L.. _.~. ~~i"..i2OOJ er 15, 2IXI5 ( 1I) ~_~_ f OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) CPAXLP GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL r. s MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~'~ FROM: Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer50 RE: Code Amendment-Front Yard Setback for Eastwood Drive and McSkimming Rd. (aka Skimming Lane) 2id Reading of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2005 DATE: December 12, 2005 SUMMARY: Community Development Staff is pursuing a code amendment to allow for a less restrictive setback requirement for properties located between Highway 82 and Eastwood Drive and for properties located on the portion of McSkimming Road known as Skimming Lane (a map of the affected properties is attached as Exhibit A of the attached resolution). The properties currently have a thirty (30) foot front yard setback requirement and this code amendment would allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback. The proposed change is due to several factors, including topography of the lots, current built conditions, and language in the land use code that has created many non- conformities on these streets. APPLICANT: City of Aspen Community Development Department. PROCEDURE: Pursuant to Section 26.310.020, ProceduLe for Amendment, a development application for an amendment to the text of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at a public hearing. DISCUSSION: All lots in what is the R-15B zone district (Knollwood, Eastwood and Aspen Grove Subdivisions) are subject to a thirty (30) front yard setback. These subdivisions were annexed into the City in 1987 and at the time the Planning Department researched the existing conditions of each lot to make sure no non-conformities were being created. Separate conditions for the houses along Eastwood Road and Skimming Lane have created non-conformities for these lots. These conditions are outlined below: Eastwood Road: Wlien Eastwood Subdivision was annexed Eastwood Road was a private road. Per regulations at the time, the setback was taken from the property line, which was located on the north/northeast side of the properties (see Exhibit C for an example). Eastwood Road changed from a private road to a public right-of--way in 1991. Since the road was dedicated the property line shifted thirty (30) feet, from the north side of the Eastwood to the south side of Eastwood. This shift has created non-conformities along the street, several variaucc requests to Board of Adjustment and an 4,1 undesirable development pattern which pushes the development to the steeper portion of the lots. • Skimming Lane: Skimming Lane is a portion of McSkimming Lane which is accessed from a private access easement thirty (30) feet wide that is split fifteen (] 5) feet on the east lots and fifteen (15) feet on the west lots (see Exhibit D for an example). The requirement for measuring setbacks from such easement is as follows: Required Yards Adjacent to Private Roads. All required yard setbacks under zone district regulations are based on distance measured,from the right-of- way line of a dedicated public way. Where there is no public dedication and the lot line extends to the centerline of the right-of-way, the required yard setback shall equal the distance specifted under zone district regulations, plus an additional distance equal to one-half (1/2) of the right-of-way width as if such private way were dedicated for public use. In plain language, the code requires that the setback be taken from the edge of the road versus the property line. As with Eastwood Drive, this has created non- conformities and an undesirable development pattern by pushing the development into the steepest, undisturbed portion of the lots. Staff is proposing the setback be changed from thirty (30) feet to ten (10) feet for these lots so that re-development may occur in areas that aze already disturbed. The Planning and Zoning Commission added two conditions to their recommendation. First, due to the narrowness of Eastwood Road, staff is to review the proposed setback with the City Engineer, Streets Superintendent and the Fire Marshall to confirm adequacy of the existing right-of--way. Second, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended the rear yard setback be established as thirty (30) feet for the lots on Eastwood Drive and Skimming Lane so that the building envelope does not increase for these lots. Staff has reviewed the proposal with the agencies listed above and there are no issues with a ten (10) foot setback, as the structures in the narrowest azea of Eastwood Road will not be permitted any closer to the road. Additionally, staff supports the establishment of a thirty (30) foot rear yard setback so that the building envelope will not increase. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a code amendment to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6) to allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback and a thirty (30) foot rear yazd setback for properties situated between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 and for lots located on the northwest section of Skimming Lane as depicted in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2005. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2005, approving a code amendment to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6) to allow for a ten (10) foot front yard setback and a thirty (30) foot reaz yard setback for properties situated between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 and for lots located on the northwest section of Skimming Lane as depicted in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2005." 2 r~ CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: Attachments: Exhibit A: Map of Affected Properties Exhibit B: Review Standards ,~.. ., EXHIBIT B: REVIEW STANDARDS FOR CODE AMENDMENTS REVIEW STANDARDS: Chapter 26.310, Amendments To The Land Use Regulations And Official Zone District Map, at Section 26.310.020 provides nine (A-I) standards for City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of proposed amendments to the text of the Land Use Code. These standards and Staffs evaluation of the potential amendments relative to them are provided below, with the standard in italics followed by the Staff "response." A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any applicable portions of the Aspen Municipal Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. RESPONSE: The code amendment proposed will not affect compatibility of existing land uses. The proposed amendment takes into account neighborhood characteristics. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have any effect on traffic generation or road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an impact on infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an effect on the natural environment except to preserve and enhance. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. ~ / RESPONSE: These code amendment will be consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. H Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. RESPONSE: Staffs goal is that the proposed change will create more compatibility within the neighborhood. L Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. RESPONSE: Staff believes the proposed amendment will not be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. 2 ORDINANCE N0. 51 (SERIES OF 2005) ., A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING CODE AMENDMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING SECTION: 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6), FRONT AND REAR YARD SETBACKS FOR THE MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTAL (R-15B) ZONE DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department initiated code anrendment changes to the above cited sections; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310.040, the City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter; shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Code Amendment application for Amendment to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, after recommendation by the Community Development Department pursuant to Section 26.430.020; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the Code Amendments to the above cited sections pursuant to Section 26.310.040 and recommended approval; and, WHEREAS, during a public hearing on November 22, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended by a three to one (3-1) vote, the City Council approve the amendments to Section 26.710.070(D)(4) & (6); and, WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing, considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director and took public testimony of code amendments to Section 26.410; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that Code Amendments meet or exceed all applicable amendment standards and that the approval of the Code Amendments, are consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is uecessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY'I'HE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL as follows: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Code Amendment sections initiated by the Community Development Department are approved as noted below: Section 26.710.070(D)(4): Minimum front yard setback (feet): 30. For properties located between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 [Lots 6-19, ,. ~~+ Eastwood Subdivision] and properties located on the northwest portion of Skimming Lane [Lots 8-11, Block 1, Aspen Grove subdivision] (feet) 10. Section 26.710.070(D)(6): Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 10. For properties located between Eastwood Drive and Highway 82 [Lots 6-19, Eastwood Subdivision] and properties located on the northwest portion of Skimming Lane [Lots 8-11, Block 1, Aspen Grove subdivision] (feet) 30. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the Code Amendment approval as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such Code Amendment approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect 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 4: 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 this 12th day of December 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 9's Day of January 2006. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Attachment: Map of affected properties 2 A^\ F` /UGH /G9 TT VU/ /JCllq~ ~ ~i Ci~C'.~ lilZoYl CcGa~ ~+^ ~~ ~ °G+Y/7~~1.~ ~S~/!Z~ C~~1 ~~.-~ G~d~~ ~`~+i~lS~" G~I~iH7,c~ G`~~lf S -~F ~kli~Q_• \~^h Sr~ ~~~c,v~s , __--_ ~~ ~~ . 11 ARD ORE•CT 1 ti ~'," ~ A~ X ,/ ''~. i~S ~~ .~ __ ~ s r `i z 0 ~ ~ ~ 1 / ~~ .` i ~'~ J ": A W Q ...~.~.--_- __ :~ ~! ~ ~k., ~:+ ~ ~ ~; 1' ~ P d ~ i ~f ~, { ' 4 ~, ~~ ~ ~ i~ ~i I~ `.. ~..~ ~ •I 1 `` .. ~ ICI I ' i ~ i y~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~_~ ~ I~ ASPEN GROVE LN J f 1 .'~ ~ '~ + J 11 ` I `` • ~ r 4 ~ i _~ lL~ 1 ~ ._ ,_ ,. _ _ _ , , __. I, ~i( i~ ~ ,._ i ~ ~ + f !!! .; ~ k ` - ~ I 1 t 1 ~ ~ . ~ ^ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~~ i ~i