Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sp.Rio Grande Appeal.0038.2010 THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0038.2010.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBER NO PARCLE PROJECTS ADDRESS Rio Grande RECYCLE CENTER PLANNER DREW ALEXANDER CASE DESCRIPTION APPEAL OF Rio Grande RECYLE CENTER REPRESENTATIVE TONI KRONBURG DATE OF FINAL ACTION 9.22.2010 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 9. 22.10 Olrfffti . 1111/111181 1 ' 111111111111111111111111=w O03g 2©t0..LA File Edit Record Naviga Form Reports Format Tab Help 2 3 - Clgar Routing Status !Fees I Fee Summary, Main Actions Attachments Routing History Valuation Arch /Eng Custom Fields Sub Permits Parcels °c Permit type laslu Aspen Land Use Permit * 0038 2010.ASLU 0 Address ! Apt/Suite O City State U x Permit Information Master permit Routing queue f aslu07 Applied 7/1 412010 Project I Status pending Approved G Description APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION - RECYCLE Issued CENTER Final • Submitted TONI KRONBERG 319 0771 Clod( Running Days 01 Expires 7/912011 Submitted via • Owner Last name LOT 1 OF THE RIO GRANDE 1st name RECYCLE CENTER 0 LOT 1 SUBDIVISION Phone I() ASPEN CO 81611 Address Applicant ❑ Owner is applicant? ❑ Contractor is applicant? Last name KRONBERG First name TONI PO 000 4554 ASPEN CO 81612 Phone (970) 319-0771 Cust # 25671 Address Lender Last name First name Phone O - Mess Displays the permit lenders address AspenGold5 (server) angelas • V".ec fi okki- C\O . AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS / OF ERT}l c /, Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: O>'? ' At[ Sr 6 grebe , 200 0 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) 1, G( (name, please print) being or repres ting 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 (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, 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 hearing a 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 (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of 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) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. • 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 shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The fore oing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ! 9 day of vJ 2000 , by Asa . c — .. , 1yi/ LI TIC WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL RE: APPEAL ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION +. (Insubstantial ally Planned Area amendment Y P xxll for the Lol 1 of e Rio Grande Subdivision) � e..e UB I (�j M� NOTICE IS H EBY GIVEN that a public hearing ee *Ca0 11, My commission expires: \ +1� l ?n will be held on Monday, August 9th, 2014 at e a I tC meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the ba . Asp S. p � x GiryCOUSt, Council ,o consider an of an htt�fl rvl, e / \ Galena St, Aspen,toval f o r an su x „, rv 2 1 D `, edminisir Planned approval Area val P for an Insubstantial , . , \ e i ( /r� /' M` Specially hCommunity an lO m nt Departmentg 1 b substa tial Am ndmment approved landscaping I otary Public l l 1 Insubstantial site wor k to the Rio Amendment ra ,,,< < , and site work Grande e Recycle r n a l d a � vy+ located in Lot 1 of eal was ubmitted by `+` + � ` � '. o Toni K r i o g n The e4D n, CO 31011. Toni K lher into P0. n, cont Alexander at Drew e the Git er In ormation, menl n Expires 0311911014 the City of 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, GO (970) De .2739, 1. d scertco.us. 429 2]39, d w.Md Cher Aspen City Connell ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: Published in the 2010. Times Weekly on July 18, 0. t5298725] —✓ PUBLICA TION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24 -65.5 -103.3 MEMORAND UM ‘11/4 TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council / I. THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Directo�S C ` V `=— FROM: Drew Alexander, Planner DA RE: Appeal of Administrative Decision DATE: August 23 2010 SUMMARY: This meeting was continued from the August 9 th City Council meeting. All materials included with the first packet have remained the same. If you need additional copies contact Community Development. (KO 4 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Drew Alexander, Planner RE: Appeal of Administrative Decision — Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande Subdivision /SPA DATE: August 9, 2010 APPLICANT /OWNER: Toni Kronberg its c. LOCATION: Rio Grande J le N Subdivision/SPA, Lot 1. ' F • ir b SUMMARY: - The Applicant is appealing • Ba an administrative decision issued by the Community rf Development Director, . N,„ .? which approved an A ; Insubstantial SPA . . Amendment for ` �4 ' ii improvements to the Rio ' n ' . _ 3 , Grande SPA. �1 ' ' .4115 ', STAFF F -_ ' t!T ..W " d RECOMMENDATION: Figure 1: Vicinity Map of Rio Grande Recycle Center Staff recommends City Council uphold the Director's decision by adopting the proposed Resolution affirming the Insubstantial SPA Amendment. 1 0 P150 SUMMARY: One of the jobs assigned to the Community Development Director is to authorize Insubstantial Amendments for Specially Planned Areas (SPA) and the associated development order for the final development plan. This is an administrative process where an applicant may request approval of an Insubstantial Amendment if the proposed scope of work does not include any of the following: 1. A change in the use or character of the development. 2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures on the land. 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development, or the demand for public facilities. 4. A reduction by greater than (3) percent of the approved open space. 5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off- street parking and loading space. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights -of -way for streets and easements. 7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. 8. An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the development. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's original approval or which requires granting of a further variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Once made, the determination by the Community Development Director is subject to appeal. Toni Kronberg has appealed the determination. Section 26.316.030, Appeal Procedures, sets forth the applicable standards of review that Council should follow in these matters and the actions available to Council following the hearing on the appeal. STANDARDS OF REVIEW: Section 26.316.030(E) reads as follows: Standard of review. Unless otherwise specifically stated in this title, the decision - making body authorized to hear the appeal [City Council] shall decide the appeal based solely upon the record established by the body from which the appeal is taken [Community Development Director]. A decision or determination shall not be reversed or modified unless there is a finding that there was a denial of due process, or the administrative body has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. The Applicant has submitted an appeal (Exhibit E) of the Insubstantial SPA Amendment granted; however, a reason for the basis of the appeal is not stated. Staff is assuming that the Applicant believes that it is not within the Community Development Director's authority to approve the proposed improvements for the recycling center. Staff's memo is written with that assumption in mind. 2 P151 The Land Use Code does not define the terms: "a denial of due process ", "exceeded its jurisdiction," or "abused its discretion" which are standards that Council weighs during the hearing. Court cases, however, have helped define these terms as follows and may be used by Council in its deliberation of the appeal: A denial of due process may be found if some procedural irregularity is determined to have occurred that affected a significant right of the appellant, or the administrative body otherwise acted in violation of the appellant's constitutional or statutory rights. Ad Hoc Executive Committee of Medical Staff of Memorial Hospital v Runyan, 716 P. 2d.465 (Colo. 1986.) A decision may be considered to be an abuse of discretion if the "decision of the administrative body is so devoid of evidentiary support that it can only be explained as an arbitrary and capricious exercise of authority." Ross v Fire and Police Pension Ass 'n., 713 P.2d 1304 (Colo. 1986); Marker v Colorado Springs, 336 P.2d 305 (Colo. 1959). A decision may be considered to be in excess of jurisdiction if the decision being appealed from "is grounded in a misconstruction or misapplication of the law," City of Colorado Springs v Givan, 897 P.2d 753 (Colo. 1995); or, the decision being appealed from was not within the authority of the administrative body to make. City of Colorado Springs v SecureCare Self Storage, Inc., 10 P.3d 1244 (Colo. 2000). STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Due Process — Insubstantial Amendments are permitted under Chapter 26.440, Specially Planned Area and may be authorized by the Community Development Director if the request does not exceed nine standards as outlined on page 2 of this memo. Staff determined that the improvement to the recycling center did not exceed these standards and could be reviewed administratively and was subsequently approved. As required by section 26.304.070, Development orders, publication of the approval was provided in the Aspen Times. As required by the Land Use Code, the appellant was provided notice of • tonight's meeting via mail and all other affected parties were noticed by publication in the newspaper, as required. (Please see Exhibit C). Assuming tonight' s meeting does not contain any procedural flaws staff believes that proper due process has been provided. 2. Discretion — With respect to abuse of the Director's discretion, the Director did need to use his discretion in determining whether the request to make certain improvements to the Rio Grande Recycling Center could or could not be considered an insubstantial amendment. The question is whether the Director abused that discretion. In considering the request, the Director evaluated the nine (9) criteria adopted to determine whether the review could be evaluated administratively or before a city board. 3. Jurisdiction — The Community Development Director's jurisdiction to grant administrative approvals is established in section 26.440.090 A, which note that an insubstantial amendment "may be authorized by the Community Development Director." 3 P152 0 ACTIONS BY COUNCIL FOLLOWING APPEAL HEARING: Section 26.316.030(F) reads as follows: Action by the decision- making body hearing the appeal. The decision - making body hearing the appeal may reverse, affirm, or modify the decision or determination appealed from, and, if the decision is modified, shall be deemed to have all the powers of the officer, board or commission from whom the appeal is taken, including the power to impose reasonable conditions to be complied with by the appellant. The decision shall be approved by resolution. All appeals shall be public meetings. Two RESOLUTIONS: Attached are two Resolutions. One fords that the Director acted correctly and affirms the interpretation. The second finds that the Director exceeded his jurisdiction, abused his authority, or failed to provide due process and reverses the interpretation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the Director's decision was rendered ethically and that no abuse of authority or exceeding of jurisdiction occurred. Staff recommends City Council uphold the Director's decision by adopting the proposed Resolution affirming the approval for an insubstantial amendment to the Rio Grande SPA. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: (all motions must be made in the positive) "I move to approve Resolution No. Series of 2010, [affirming or reversing] the Community Development Director's decision which approved an insubstantial amendment to Rio Grande SPA. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Notice of Approval, Development Order and Public Notice for SPA Amendment Exhibit B — Land Use Code criteria regarding Insubstantial SPA Amendments Exhibit C — Affidavit of notice Exhibit D — General background and History Report excerpt from the Rio Grande Master Plan Exhibit E — Applicant's appeal 4 l �'T l I P153 RESOLUTION NO. ( D J (SERIES OF 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AFFIRMING AN ADMNISTRATIVE DECISION BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGARDING AN INSUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE RIO GRANDE SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA. WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received a Land Use Application from the City of Aspen, requesting approval for an Insubstantial Special Planned Area (SPA) Amendment for the Rio Grande SPA, specifically the area containing the Rio Grande Recycle Center; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.440.090 — Amendment to development order, the Director rendered a decision of approval; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant, Toni Kronberg appealed the Directors decision; and, WHEREAS, the City Council., pursuant to Chapter 26.316, has the authority to affirm the decision of the Director or modify or reverse the decision upon a fording that there was a denial of due process, exceeding of jurisdiction, or abuse of authority in rendering the decision; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has taken and considered written and oral argument from Applicant and the Community Development Director, and has found that the Director provided due process and neither exceeded his jurisdiction or abused his authority in rendering the Interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council fords that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council affirms the Community Development Director's decision to approve and Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande SPA, specifically for the Rio Grande Recycle Center. This Resolution 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. 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 Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on , 2010. {Signatures on following page} Resolution No. - -, Series of 2010. Page 1 P154 0 ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attomey Resolution No.--, Series of 2010. Page 2 P155 RESOLUTION NO. _ (SERIES OF 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REVERSING AN ADMNISTRATIVE DECISION BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGARDING AN INSUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE RIO GRANDE SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA. WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received a Land Use Application from the City of Aspen, requesting approval for an Insubstantial Special Planned Area (SPA) Amendment for the Rio Grande SPA, specifically the area containing the Rio Grande Recycle Center; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.440.090 — Amendment to development order, the Director rendered a decision of approval; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant, Toni Kronberg appealed the Directors decision; and, WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 26.316, has the authority to affirm the decision of the Director or modify or reverse the decision upon a finding that there was a denial of due process, exceeding of jurisdiction, or abuse of authority in rendering the decision; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has taken and considered written and oral argument from Applicant and the Community Development Director, and has found that the Director did not provide due process or either exceeded his jurisdiction or abused his authority in rendering the Decision; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council reverses the Community Development Director's decision to approve and Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande SPA, specifically for the Rio Grande Recycle Center. This Resolution 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. 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 Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on , 2010. (Signatures on following page) Resolution No. - -, Series of 2010. Page 1 P 15 6 0 ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attomey • Resolution No.--, Series of 2010. Page 2 ;frtlr:3iY ' P157 NOTICE OF APPROVAL For an Insubstantial Specially Planned Area (SPA) Amendment for the Rio Grande Recycle Center, located within Lot 1 of the Rio Grande Subdivision /SPA Parcel ID No. 2737- 07 -3 -66 -85 APPLICANT: City of Aspen REPRESENTATIVE: Lee Cassin, Environmental Health Director SUBJECT & SITE OF AMENDMENT: Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande Recycle Center, located within Lot 1 of the Rio Grande Subdivision/SPA. The property lacks a physical address at this time. SUMMARY: The Applicant has requested an Insubstantial Amendment ont inthhRio Grande e Recycle cle Center, a Specially Planned Area (SPA). The site that served a multitude of uses since the Rio Grande property received SPA approval in 1977. Some of these uses include a towed car impound lot, a snow retention and melting center, and the existing recycling center. For a more detailed history on the subject site, see Exhibit A. The Recycle Center is accessed off of Rio Grande Place and consists of a dirt parking and drop -off area. The site includes six large storage bins that the various recyclables are deposited into. Once full, these bins are loaded onto trucks and taken to the Pitkin County Landfill or a separate processing facility. The site also includes smaller drop -offs for yard waste and paper products. There is no sort of enclosed office space at the Recycle Center or an employee dedicated to facility upkeep. The Applicant has planned a number of changes to the Recycle Center to increase the overall performance of the site. Asphalt has been proposed for driving areas to assist with mud issues, drainage, and cleaning. Curb, gutter, and concrete bases for the bins are ing also included with this plan to assist with drainage and cleaning. reduce Vegt visibility n om has been designated around the perimeter of the property to neighboring properties (see Exhibit B). Smaller elements of the application include ADA accessible containers, designated snow storage, and a surveillance camera for security. STAFF EVALUATION: Staff supports the proposed SPA Amendment to the siR i G e de Recycle Center - a facility that has been a valuable community address elements of the facility that have been a burden to both users and operators of the Recycle Center. Hardscaping will eliminate problems with mud and assist with the Page 1 of 4 P158 cleaning of debris. Curb and gutter installation will aid site drainage. The landscaping and vegetative screening will reduce the facilities visibility from neighboring properties and enhance the appeal of the property. DECISION: The Community Development Director finds the Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande Recycle Center to be consistent with the review criteria (Exhibit C) and thereby, APPROVES the amendment as specified below. The approved Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the Rio Grande Recycle Center, Lot 1 of the Rio Grande Subdivision/SPA, allows for site improvements to the subject property. APPROVED BY: k i4/6 (, 20tP Chris Hendon ate . Community Development Director Attachments: Exhibit A — Site History Exhibit B — Site Plan Exhibit C — Review Standards • Page 2of 4 "as, C , ...41 _ 1 5 9 W Dp Epic/0 'uadve 7 5 — ____------------; SIN31/43AOH &AI t : 1 i1 24 31N33 313A32 • , i I I: I I .1 rif• , ..12. =i ix 2 '±i - i . . , a. 0 Lu m E E w tu til i '2 i * ar; 4 ic? k *,- rs , , - - ... .. _ . •-s-nt - N at Ar. ,„ . A 4i , , -----. f N iwriaarel,tr e- ei - , ;IX r owar ..---:•-if , ailpi :rag , 1 coaR,,. _lie - .. a we", - '•,, lersacwit , -_-03-:..-noinft. _ ' - ariet ,, to .„ -7°7-*---,-..-:-A,- 0 0 e ., „ ... • .. ef .s. ,*47 p , 4 1 r:2 mi fAh ;' 10 As Off .1 ' S et ) 4 ...- , _. 2 ..... . ..„... , , 4 .2 0 . • At 3 ‘ .1 /4. ;:eA /0 1 ii all Atif I , 1 k c,' 14...,/,/ • s ebla Allastras SI I t e ,p, OP Ala 4 akiL _ fk ' Voldrat+11: 1 844 -- II • N II Sot ( V ,,,‘ zotoyt,,,ziltea.,--444-- / ,i,, •••‘siro, , - ---„ IT ; 0 , -,L=Nt .....,,,- t i, ) • /40 , '. • va \ __J °, ( \ . • g 4., ,-Y ti it ' 2 ID 3 L O E 1 ... a .._ P160 DEVELOPMENT ORDER of the City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order ", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders ", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights ", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three -year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. City of Aspen, 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, CO 81611 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address Subdivision: Rio Grande Lot: 1, Rio Grande Park — Recycle Center (No physical address for this property) Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property Site and operational improvements to the Recycle Center, including hardscaping, concrete bases for the recycling bins, and landscaping around the property. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Approval by the City of Aspen Community Development Director for an Insubstantial Specially Planned Area Amendment. Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) June 13, 2010 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) June 13, 2013 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) lssn d , his 2" day • June, 2010, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. X11 C7' s Ben. on, Community Development Director P161 • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306 ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ZO C ' • •1 Aspen, CO STATE OF COLORADO ) • ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I v_ ,04- (name, please print) being or represe ting 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) or Section 26.306.010 (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 no later than fourteen (14) days after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. 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 no later than fifteen (15) days after an Interpretation has been rendered. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this /4 day of J v 2_ , 204L, by • t ¢T1r - y?CCv WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL • Pt,RbiQOTICE My commission expires: 1,11 ` DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL , Notice Is hereby given to the general publk of the • approval of a site specific development plan, and - / "�� the crea tio l/s n a e vested e o/ he Clly of Aspen n and Ties 24, Article 58, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertain- Notary Public ing to the following legally described property: Subdivision: Rio Grande Lot 1, Rio Grande Park, espe, , Coldo 81611, the propp� edy coRecycle Centmmonly r, A known as lire ora Ru- Graibe Reetycyole Center (no.physital atltlress.for this propertyl; by • • 'rent 'tree o of Aspen 2 010. Py DeveIdp- ATTACHMENTS: meet Director June p ca t received Paed a Id R '3] -0-068 1. a a The o r a ns Insubstantial P A n nd mtive ppr ent The approvals ovr sit rntd f SPA .neopmentThe r ve s were granted a recycle e f site and or rl r fu e i improvements c con me w Al fadll- at he rhityofiAspenfiComnunlyDeAlexander, COPY OF THE PUBLICATION a t the City of Galena St, Aspen, Colorado Aspen Community oeralo (970) 42 ) 4 9 - 130 5. G 2 aln [9]D&2 39. y Crty of Aspen Publish in The Aspen Times Weekly on June 13. 2010 [5143559] - - !^ ^. Exfit13ir P162 Sec. 26.440.090.Amendment to development order. A. An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order for a final development plan may be authorized by the Community Development Director. The following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment: 1. A change in the use or character of the development. 2. An increase by greater than three percent (3 %) in the overall coverage of structures on the land. 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development or the demand for public facilities. 4. A reduction by greater than three percent (3 %) of the approved open space. 5. A reduction by greater than one percent (1 %) of the off - street parking and loading space. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights -of -way for streets and easements. 7. An increase of greater than two percent (2 %) in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. 8. An increase by greater than one percent (1 %) in the approved residential density of the development. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's original approval or which requires granting of a further variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. B. All other modifications shall be approved pursuant to the terms and procedures of the Final Development Plan, provided that the proposed change is consistent with or an enhancement of the approved final plan. If the proposed change is not consistent with the approved Final Development Plan, the amendment shall be subject to both conceptual and the final development review and approval. C. During the review of the proposed amendment, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council may require such conditions of approval as are necessary to insure that the development will be compatible with current community conditions. This shall include, but not be limited to, applying to the portions of the development which have not obtained building permits or are proposed to be amended to any new community policies or regulations which have been implemented since the original approval or taking into consideration changing community circumstances as they affect the project's original representations and commitments. The applicant may withdraw the proposed amendment at any time during the review process. City of Aspen Land Use Code Part 400, Page 94 • C • 0 ExftlerT F163 Ln c • Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Piticin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. 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 shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The fore Ding "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 17 day of i ,20Q0,by :W - a `3CC' • NB I N ICE RE: APPEAL F ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL y for 0,e 1.011 o RIo G Subdivido^) ntlmenl � y AU 1 T1 ii NOTICE IS N EBY GIVEN That a public hearing •, lr1 My commission expires: c'� �`L�1 C�'17 �'��( will be held on Monday, p.m. b p 91h, 2010, al a cc ee f meeting to begin ¢1,5:00 p.m. before Hall, 130 S. ^ L�t1 YI. :i F Galena Ga St. .., Counol o c anY appeal el .an 4 , s i� • • \ . ��� (... j,{. " administrative S raive Aspen, r v a l f o r an su n t YY ug `.�•yt adminislr la ne approval for an Insubstantial i ;y.n•! U Specially Planned Area (SPA) amendment ias ; o ° ,- ' l by the Community Development Department. The VS! �'(O}onr p insubstantial Amendme Rio t Grande Recycle ycle Oenter, landscaping •u ^N located in Lot 1 of the .' _p "" J and she work to the Rio rande eycle C Lr w ssubmitted by � Subdivision /SPA. The a4PSal 0061611. Toni rl r i to P t i le Drew Alexander al n Expires 0312912014 the City of Aspen C ommunity Development CO, (970) Del711en41305. Galena 51.,Aspen, L gs. _ 4292Y39,tl R h II C Aspen Cry COUncll Chai ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: Published 0 (A spen Times Weekly on July 1 B. 2010. 1529872 _ PUBLICATION • • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REO UIRED BY C.R.S. §24- 65.5 -103.3 • P 16 4 `f r^., Exhibit D BACKGROUND: As mentioned previously, this appeal is in response to an administrative decision which approved certain site improvements to the Rio Grande Recycle Center. The scope of work included landscaping around the site, an installation of a hard surface, and a reconfiguration of the recycling bins. The recycling center has been at this location for some time and in 1993 a Master Plan was ultimately developed and was intended to serve "as a tool to guide future development on the site," for the Rio Grande parcels. The Master Plan addressed two specific areas, referenced as Site A and Site B (see Figure 1 below). Site A included "the area between the river and bike path next to the snow melter" and Site B included "the recycle site (Old Impound lot) and the playing field." � SiteA \ . • *� ` / Q .. Th.m.', , S 4 a / S ite B \ \ l: N. • ti ' ( N '. Recycle Center site, Tnn....uU.M1..ntti.. + 3 ' _ A • called for / 0 !�` ,, '. 0 "transporta or $. a essential community boa�'ew +- , services." t I va c- \ u 1 ,7 Itil /•.. , `.` 1 - IF_ --I ...t.,-... ' ii a L ., %;: , ifiji i 0 _ \._ 1 taws 0 s WI V t Figure 1: Master Plan Site A and Site B 5 r^ ^. P165 • development. The Group concluded this level of review was necessary to ensure that future uses were not:only appropriate but were compatible with each other: With development information provided by organizations, such as rail and trolley advocates who hope to utilize the property in the future, the Group was able to consider several land use scenarios. A phased build out of the property and two full build out programs identified the range of possibilities for the property. In order to preserve the Group's work, three different. approaches to development are presented on the maps in Appendix A. Again these maps are to be used as guides and were not adopted as the land use maps for this master.plan. ., . Although the Group considered facility needs for specific projects, it was not their purpose to make recommendations on community -wide . issues such as the valley -wide rail or across -town' trolley system. There are other decision - making arenas that will decide the fate of those projects.. • The Rio Grande Group met approximately 16 times over an eight month period. One of the £irst.task.s: of the Rio Grande Group was to review existing and proposed land uses for this vital piece of community property. ' Initial meetings were.. devoted to a presentation and discussion of particular land uses on each section. of property. • The property was divided into two manageable discussion sites for which primary .land use goals and recommendations for development were made: . . • Site A: the area between the river and bike path next to the snow melter (page 6); and Site. B: the recycle site (Old Impound lot) and the playing, field (page 13). • HISTORY This is a" brief summary of . the planning review history of the property. For a more thorough history refer, to Appendix B. • In 1967, the Denver Rio Grande Western Railroad began discussions with the City and County regarding redevelopment.of their property and right -of -way. Since those initial discussions there have been many plans regarding this 1 acre parcel:. • * 1973 - The' City used 7th penny transportation funds t� purchase a majority of the Rio Grande property. • 3 '.P166 • • * 1975 - A Performing. Arts Center for the property was 1978 . studied. * 1981 -. A non - specified 1.5 acre site was set aside for a future Performing Arts /Conference Center and the City' moved the snow dump from the • Sanitation. District property to the Rio Grande • property ... * 1982. - The City and County.exchanged the Aspen One, Oden and stable properties. • * 1987 - The City installed the snow melter. • * 1988 - A conceptual SPA .master plan was adopted by council identifying a parking garage, the library,. the Spring Street extension, a snow melt facility and an arts usage area. * ' 1989 - A final SPA plan Was approved by Council for the parking garage and. the Pitkin County library. * 1990 - A final SPA plan was approved by Council for the Youth Center.. * 1991 - Council denied conceptual SPA approval for. the trolley, Theatre in•the Park, recycle.facility' and snow melt operation and instead directed staff to prepare a master plan for the entire .site. • ASSUMPTIONS The Group identified several assumptions with regard to the . property. From the basis of these assumptions the Group began their review of existing land uses and proposed land uses. • 1. Rather than completely replan the parcel, the Group began their review of the property from the perspective of existing uses and past plans. 2. The Group considered why. and how the different pieces of property were purchased. .Some of Site A and all of Site B were purchased with'transportation funds and most . of the river frontage • • was purchased with open space funds. 3. The extensive work on the whitewater course and initial regrading of Site A, has required adjustments to. the traditional . method of dumping snow on Site A. In .1991, the City Council • • 4 • 3 `_' a + �✓ P167 RECEIVED NOTICE OF APPEAL jUN 1 6 2010 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT According to Sec. 26.316.030. Appeal procedures. A. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director and with the City office or department rendering the decision or determination within 14 days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed. I, hereby, file this NOTICE of Appeal within the fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed regarding the Approval of a site - specific development plan and the Creation of a Vested property right by The community Development Director for an Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the following legally described property in Exhibit A ( 4a ltrL�' ,1 - i J dic P1 6 8 so ht Rio Grande Pubic Notice Public Notice Of Development Approval RECEIVED Notice is hereby given to the general public of JUN 16 2010 the approval of a site - specific development plan, CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following legally described property: Subdivision: Rio Grande Lot: 1, Rio Grande Park, Recycle Center, Aspen, Colorado 81611, the property commonly known as the Rio Grande Recycle Center (no physical address for this property), by order of the City of Aspen Community Development Director on June 1, 2010. Parcel ID # 27 -37- 073 -06 -851. The Applicant received an administrative approval for an Insubstantial SPA Amendment. The approvals were granted for site and operational improvements to the recycle facility. For further information contact Drew Alexander, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 5. Galena St., Aspen, Colorado (970) 429 -2739. Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on June 13, 2010. (5143559) P169 RECEIVE �` JUN 1 2010 _ CITY OF ASPEN et 4 CAMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • O cY F' co) O n P a 0 trl O O CD CD N co (q ° CD C ° O h CD 0 C 1 0 0 ,---, P x N 4 O r a o CD o x 2 n iw g N p n n cD (1 � N ep o �� � < w n o AD t Cr d w co 0 . s co CD n �' C ' . C co v, P' C n < a' N G.. N 1-0„ 1-0„ v) p M � C • - 4 - P E' CD 'O C .y .=. .. i w Cr Et CD ' ' C C . Q t r+ O rp or CD � • - - 0 c ! 0 es- C -. t! ... 0 G p- C n • N . .• La i O c LS n can C7 . C C 0 0 P .. • P Cr G O CD �C 0 G ' O C C D a., C O ' co P M O 6 I -0 UO ." 3 .O Q, P 4 . 0 C 00 O G P +' r+ ,=, ) c a o cn p P o o n ? o -. P P cD a 1--y O � • . ci n •1 CD 't a n p O O 0 .ti 'h ' O O cn P .y r r+ N C . (D P O. �• C � . CY O o .-• O Q.. G. ° w o o a CD O 0 to PP O E. o ccil ° a. . O' CD a CD r+ p '+ O CD ` G C P P • � DP co - P � z a � `p O n .O 0 O C N r� N CD 0 " .. S n hi N 0 ° �? . y ( D CD 0 co b ' P `C O R N `O o N g n 't .. ..•. to) O '� rr •-. '+ - �•• .+ O t 0 \O 0 M t.' C C - C . C W CD ❑County Courtt istrict Court °Denver Juvenile Court DDenver Probate Court PI+Ki0 County, Colorado Court Address: Sob E, 01 A■►J SIR - A -C94N\ Co(pKMO $ lot I Plaintiff/Petitioner. VIA Aft( Q Atifiii0 ¥-- gntAn -e l v. c /o/0 R COURT USE ONLY Defendant /Respondent/Co-Petitioner: Af'OR. -t? R Ida LP Ac.,-�itJ (� hiS Off kJ IrL CA ut `S AS P2tS0u Case Number`o & RtPReSeN' k'ttJE ko(y't teAte o4 wiurmMR i,Jlthou Division Courtroom FINDING AND ORDER CONCERNING ❑PAYMENT OF FILING FEES ❑APPOINTMENT AND PAYMENT OF INTERPRETER COSTS Name of Party' filing Motion: COMP A%`Y(a i d P Ke OltifiDJ on ¶R b a V 1 ? Dtt (Date). Upon review of the attached Motion, the above party is: li le to proceed without payment of the following filing fee(s): complaint ❑petition ❑answer ❑response ❑motion to modify pother: ❑ Eligible to have an interpreter for the following language appointed and fy such costs to be paid by the State. C - ❑ Not Eligible to proceed. Party is responsible for payment of the filing fees and /or interpreter costs. Date: 2 b / i i T ,,,,, S ig lure of Eligibility Investigator, Clerk of Court, Judge/Magistrate /j // ORDER The Court has reviewed the Motion (JDF 205) and so orders: As indicated above. The specified party is ordered to pay $ by (Date) to cover filing fees or interpreter costs. ❑ Other Pursuant to §13 -16 -103, C.R.S., in the event the party who receives a waiver of costs prosecutes or defends an action or proceeding successfully, there shall be a judgment entered in his/her favor in the amount of the court costs and the party shall, upon collecting such court costs, remit them to the Court. Date: 2 / Z- f j �1 • ✓ " / ! a dage UMagistrate / JDF 206 R9/08 FINDING AND ORDER CONCERNING PAYMENT OF FILING FEES /APPOINTMENT AND PAYMENT OF INTERPRETER COSTS RE ^EIV . Ill JUN 2 5 2010 Fee Waiver Request Form CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEtity of Aspen THE CFR OF ASPEN Community Development Department This form should be completed and submitted to the Community Development Director for review. You will be notified when a decision has been made to waive or not to waive the fees regarded in this request form. For what fees are you requesting waiver? C. BUILDING ❑ PLANNING 0 atrak— i Applicant Name: 10 N) t k. 'Lora h tt ejt Contact Ph.# q1 a-3 1 q- n Mailing address: 9.(�. 4 S5 1 4 t t o a , (0(0 8(6 6la– E-mail address: l'O i o 03 1t E b A b ieS `J o P _ r Cplyl Project name & address: \ �t �Q /: Fee Breakdown: BUILDING & PLANNING FEES Original Fee Requested Original Fee Requested Fee Description Fee Description Amount Waiver Amount Waiver Energy Code Fee REMP Fee Excavation Foundation Fee Zoning Review Fee X72 7Y r Inspection Fee Planning Application Fee - 73 J r [ a 6O Permit Fee HPC Application Fee �l1 /� Plan Check Other: ( O,ttV t&-t TQ iNI -11/ TOTAL O WAIVER REQUEST $ (1t -ALe#7 Reason for Waiver: L! General Fund Department C Waived or decreased by City Counci (specify ordinance or other decision document) ■ �' ether— Please explain: ♦ er.. �� i L.. . . u. - .- .�� a in.:— 4r I 41 t , e l��SINPA nom. _ �:�� (�tcliff .�� �_.� l_ �.�1� ti Aa k e p p �, ! a. .! vo-b,` l .0�4"" I oA (r ( bed/ s I _ ._ 0 pllcant signal / Date For office use only: , Type of fees waived: L.(4r 76. n c#t. „Fee s / Total fees waived: $ 7 3 re• t� `4 9-PROVED DISAPPROVED O AAA ip DISAPPRO ( tii (r - T 1a. /?`) 1n Co r r nity Development Director 1?� k°,.,1.4„-\ Date OA ■ 1 w 11j • R 1 0 ri Cr 0 Q ft I 3 i r CT RECEIVED NOTICE OF APPEAL JUN 1 6 2010 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT According to Sec. 26.316.030. Appeal procedures. A. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director and with the City office or department rendering the decision or determination within 14 days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed. I, hereby, file this NOTICE of Appeal within the fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed regarding the Approval of a site - specific development plan and the Creation of a Vested property right by The community Development Director for an Insubstantial SPA Amendment for the following legally described property in Exhibit A 744 L . tr 1 j ' } i _C Y / ; ; tv / . p = r" ( Rio Grande Pubic Notice Public Notice Of Development Approval RECEIVED Notice is hereby given to the general public of JUN 1 6 2010 the approval of a site - specific development plan, CITY OF ASi-'EN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following legally described property: Subdivision: Rio Grande Lot: 1, Rio Grande Park, Recycle Center, Aspen, Colorado 81611, the property commonly known as the Rio Grande Recycle Center (no physical address for this property), by order of the City of Aspen Community Development Director on June 1, 2010. Parcel ID # 27 -37- 073 -06 -851. The Applicant received an administrative approval for an Insubstantial SPA Amendment. The approvals were granted for site and operational improvements to the recycle facility. For further information contact Drew Alexander, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, Colorado (970) 429 -2739. Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on June 13, 2010. (5143559) A F P "'7 ► ° E N 9 - ,� August 9, 2010 Appeal Hearing of Community Development Director's Administrative Approval for an Insubstantial Amendment to the Rio Grande SPA Approvals granted were for site & operational improvements to the recycle facility 1_ Appeal Standard of Review: Sec. 26.316.030.(E) A decision or determination shall not be reversed or modified unless there is a finding of: DUE PROCESS • Following all the correct legal procedures including right to notice & public hearing - DISCRETION • Occurs when the correct law is not applied or if a decision is based on a clearly erroneous finding of a material fact. Also when the record contains no evidence to support its decision JURISDICTION •Authority & power to approve What was actually approved? Insubstantial SPA amendment? Site - specific development plan? Vested property right? Recycle center or improvements? Established upon Approved by approval of a Ordinance Site - specific development Adopted by plan Approved by Comm. City Council Dev. Director Discretion of Director 3 0 0 Is this "insubstantial amendment" the first approval for the recycle center within the Rio Grande Sub - division SPA? If so, then Chapter 26.440 Specially Planned Area (SPA) Sec. 26.440.040. Procedures for review. would apply Any development within a Specially Planned Area shall be reviewed pursuant to the procedures and standards in this Chapter and the Common Review Procedures set forth in Chapter 26.304 with public hearings before P & Z and City Council. What started this current process for the recycle center? City Council work session on April 27, 2010 Staff requested authorization from Council to proceed with maintenance improvements to the Rio Grande Recycling Center to improve the appearance and cleanliness of the facility 1. Paving 2. Grading 3. Landscaping Surveillance camera 4. ADA parking Council approved the request at work session Documents of Approval Issued by Director 3. PUBLISHED PUBLIC NOTICE of Development Approval 1. NOTICE OF APPROVAL Aspen Times, (issued by Com Dev) for a for an site - specific development SPA Insubstantial plan and Amendment creation of a vested for the property right Rio Grande Recycle Center, for the located within Lot 1 of the Rio Grande Subdivision /SPA Rio Grande Recycle Center asphalt, curb & gutter, landscaping with berm PURSUANT June 1, 2010 to Aspen's Land Use Code and 2. DEVELOPMENT ORDER Title 24, Article 68, (issued by Com Dev) Colorado Revised Statutes for Vested Property Rights, Applicant received site - specific development administrative approval plan, for an for the Insubstantial SPA Rio Grande Recycle Center amendment. including hardscaping, asphalt Approvals were granted for concrete bases, landscaping site and operational Approved by an improvements to the Insubstantial SPA amendment recycle facility June 13, 2010 June 13, 2010 6 Has the recycle center ever been approved for the Rio Grande property ? History of Rio Grande Property...approved subdivision (10 Tots) Zoned Public with an SPA overlay, many SPA amendments *1989— Final SPA plan approved for library and *1967— Denver Rio Grande Western Railroad began parking garage discussions for rail with City of Aspen *1990— Final SPA approval for Youth Center *1973 — 7th penny transportation funds used to *1991— Memo Request from staff for conceptual SPA review for the purchase Rio Grande property for 1.75 million dollars. recycle center because the 1988 conceptual SPA plan approval did not address specific projects for the Rio Grande *1975? Transportation funds re- appropriated with property. 6th penny funds open space funds In addition, the continuation and /or expansion of the recycle center is a revision of that original approval. *1977— Ordinance #54 rezoning Rio Grande property Property Ownership: Since the 7th penny transportation (10 LOTS), according to an Specially Planned funds which were used to purchase the Rio Grande property Area Master Plan, the elements of which were reappropriated by the use of the 6th penny open space Master Plan will constitute the development funds the City staff is currently researching the issues regulations for the area all as provided by involved with development of land that was purchased for a Article VII, Chapter 24 of Aspen Muni Code public purpose and the funds that were used for that purpose. A preliminary conclusion is that a change in use of *1977— Rio Grande Specially Planned Area Master plan & plat land that is used for a public purpose would require VOTER recorded with an interim SPA plan & plat also APPROVAL. recorded schematically identifying land uses on the entire property *1991— Rio Grande (Recycle Center)Materials recreation & parking key uses Recovery Facility Conceptual SPA NO INCLUSION OF RECYCLE CENTER Application ..closed and staff directed Conceptual plan expired as final not adopted to Master Plan for entire Rio Grande *1987— Council adopted the Aspen Area Property Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Element which identified appropriate concepts for *1991— Council did not approve conceptual SPA the Rio Grande property approval for the Art Park/Theatre and NO INCLUSION OF RECYCLE CENTER Trolley Car Barn, snow dump /melter *1988— Resolution # 37 of City Council approving the operation, recycle center, and, instead, Conceptual SPA Plan for Rio Grande Parcel directed staff to prepare a new NO INCLUSION OF RECYCLE CENTER conceptual SPA *1989— Aspen City Council approved a temporary but *1993 - Ordinance #10 (recorded)granting indefinite exemption from the Special Use subdivision for the Rio Grande Property Review Process to allow the placement of with CONDITIONS ...( #3) Any future recycling containers next to the Rio Grande development of the newly created Parking Lot/ Shortly thereafter, City Council parcels shall be reviewed by the passed a Resolution generally supporting Commission and Council recycling efforts but failed to commit to *1993 - Subdivision Statement (Agreement)and plats (recorded) specific actions. of Subdivision Approval for Rio Grande Memo from Leslie Lamont to P & Z Subdivision with CONDITIONS RE: Recycle Center— SPA amendment ( #1) Any future development shall be reviewed and approved by the Commission and Council Recycle Center not included *1993 - Resolution #42 approving Rio Grande Master Plan with a WHEREAS, development review for site specific projects for the Rio Grande parcels shall • be reviewed through the SPA development review 7 Has the recycle center ever been approved for the Rio Grande property? History of Rio Grande Property...approved subdivision (10 Tots) Zoned Public with an SPA overlay, many SPA amendments *2002 — Ordinance #26 approving an *2000 — Ordinance #14, approving the Amendment to the Rio Grande Specially Planned Area Review Specially Planned area to install four to build a skateboard park and parking spaces, landscaping, and a to relocate the existing new curb cut off of East Bleeker St basketball court *200 - Hauler Ordinance mandates haulers REVIEW PROCEDURE outlined of trash also provide recycling in memo for Ord. #14, 2000 service at curbside *200 - City Council approved This two step process requires Ordinance # , 200 approval of a development approving a rezoning for the Rio plan by the P & Z and CC, Grande Park Recycle Center with public hearings occurring *200 - Referendum Vote repealed the Rio at both. Grande Recycle Center rezoning The Rio Grande master plan was developed as a *2010 Memo for joint BOCC & CC meeting conceptual SPA plan. With trash haulers providing these services at the curbside some for the Following its adoption, free operations are redundant. new development Landfill fees can no longer support or significant alterations must current level of recycling service in be consistent with this addition to other priorities. conceptual SPA plan and *2010 April 27 City Council work session be reviewed pursuant to approved the final SPA development "Maintenance Improvements" review process. for Recycle Center 8 1993 Rio Grande Master Plan Page 14. 1. Existing Conditions The community's recycling drop -off center has temporarily occupied the eastern portion of Site B for several years. Other than the goal posts, and temporary recycle containers the parcel is void of any structural development. 2. Goals Because the site was purchased with 7th penny transportation funds the basis of future development goals is transportation oriented. Because of the close proximity to the SCI district and to downtown, a variety of land uses, including essential community services, are considered appropriate for this site. The Rio Grande has identified the following Goals for the redevelopment of Parcel B: a. Locate essential community services in eastern portion of Site B. b. Ensure that existing and future uses on the eastern portion of Site B are compatible with surrounding land uses because of this area's location and visibility. c. Satisfy transportation related needs first when considering the use of Site B. d. Retain and optimize park /recreational uses in this area and replace the active park and playfield only with a regional rail facility. e. Preserve view planes to the river and Independence Pass with low- profile development. III. Recommended Land Uses /Activities for Parcel B This parcel can be divided into several different elements for DISCUSSION purposes: 1. Recycle Center The recycling center is in critical need of an enclosed space for collection of material. Blowing trash has been a problem and inclement weather reduces the site to mud. Pitkin County Public Resources propose to construct a facility that is partially below grade. The upgrade of the recycle facility should consider relocation possibilities to City land across the street on the corner of Spring & East Bleeker. 9 1993 Rio Grande Master Plan 2. Trolley Barn 3. Access Road 4. New Walking Trail 5. Snow Melter 6. Additional Activities (page 16) In the event either the Trolley Barn, recycling center or the snow melter are not built on the eastern portion of the site, other essential community oriented services may be located on the site. A SPA review would be required. 7. Active Park Increased recreational activities should be installed on Site B...basketball court, skateboard ramp, rugby field Park and recreational uses should exist on this site only to be replaced by a regional rail facility. 8. Rail IV. Recommended Action Plan Summary for Site B To achieve the goals and proposed and uses for this site, the Rio Grande Group recommends the following actions for Site B: 5. Any development of the eastern portion of the Site B should not intrude into the Independence View Plane 6. The City and County should review the recommendations of the Roaring Fork Forum study relating to a regional -wide recycling program and other remedies that are being considered for the County recycling program. If this recycling operation is considered necessary at this location then the recycling site should be contained. 10 Jurisdiction of Community Development Director Sec. 26.440.090.Amendment to development order. A. An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order for a final development plan may be authorized by the Community Development Director. The following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment: 3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development or the demand for public facilities. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's original approval or which requires granting of a further variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. B. All other modifications shall be approved pursuant to the terms and procedures of the Final Development plan, provided that the proposed change is consistent with the approved Final Development Plan, the amendment shall be subject to both conceptual and the final development review and approval. 11 Jurisdiction for approval of SPA amendments, site - specific development plans and creation of vested property rights. City of Aspen Land Use Code Part 300, D. Actions by decision - making bodies. Depending upon which decision - making body has final approval authority over a given development application, a site specific development plan may only be approved by written resolution of the planning and zoning commission or HPC or by ordinance adopted by the City Council. Any land use approval which places any burden upon or limits the use of private property shall be by ordinance. All resolutions and ordinances granting final approval for a site - specific development plan shall: 1. Be preceded by a public hearing following public notice Chapter 26.440 Specially Planned Area Sec. 26.440.040. Procedures for review. A. General. ...the procedure requires review and approval of a conceptual development plan and final development plan by the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council. C. Steps required. Public notice and public hearing City of Aspen Land Use Chapter 26.208 Sec. 26.208.010. City Council Powers and Duties. E. To hear, review and adopt a conceptual development plan and a final 1 development plan for specially planned areas (SPA), after recommendations of the Planning & Zoning Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.445 • 12 DEFINITIONS City of Aspen Land Use Code, Part 100, Development. The use or alteration of land or land uses and improvements inclusive of, but not limited to: 1) the creation, division, alteration or elimination of lots; or 2) mining, drilling(excepting to obtain soil samples or to conduct tests) or the construction, erection, alteration or demolition of buildings or structure: 3) the grading, excavation, clearing of land or the deposit or fill in preparation or anticipation of future development, but excluding landscaping. Site Specific Development Plan (SSDP). A development plan that has obtained final approval from the City after review and evaluation as provided for in this Title, including notice and public hearing and which describes with reasonable certainty the type and intensity of use for a specific lot(s), parcel(s), site(s) or other area(s) of land and which incorporates all the terms and conditions of approval. A SSDP may include or take the form of a PUD, subdivision plat, development and /or subdivision improvement agreement, a use or activity permitted on review or such instrument or document as identified and agreed upon by the City and landowner or developer. A license, map, variance, easement or permit shall not constitute an SSDP. 3 SUMMARY DUE PROCESS DISCRETION JURISDICTION 1993 Resolution #42 approving Rio Grande Master Plan with a WHEREAS, development review for site specific projects for the Rio Grande parcels shall be reviewed through the SPA development review VOTE necessary? 0 6 P ?Pp/toy/ft. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves ORDINANCE NO. Sy (Series of 1977 AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE APPROXIMATELY 11.50 ACRES OF LAND OWNED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN AND KNOWN AS THE "RIO GRANDE" PROPERTY, ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA MASTER PLAN FOR THE SITE, THE ELEMENTS OF WHICH MASTER PLAN WILL CONSTITUTE THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE AREA ALL AS PROVIDED BY ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 24 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, the City of Aspen has presented to City Council a request to rezone approximately 11.50 acres within the City of Aspen according to the specially planned area (SPA) procedures of Article VII of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the proposed Master Plan presented and wishes to approve the same all as provided in said Article VII; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That it does hereby rezone approximately 11.50 acres known as the "Rio Grande" property according to the SPA Master Plan submitted, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. The area rezoned is more specifically described as: A tract of land situated in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 7, _Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado, being more fully described as follows: 3eginning at a point on the East side of Mill Street whence the West one - quarter corner of said Section 7 bears N38 °06'14 "W 1,542.42 feet; thence S56 °06'43 "E 120.33 feet; thence N33 °53'35 "E 78.32 feet; thence S75 °51'14" 67.25 feet; thence N84 ° 34'25 "E 121.34 feet; thence N81 ° 39'30 35.44 feet; thence SOO °17'28 "W 130.87 feet; thence 589 °28'55 "L 184.09 feet; thence S00 58'09 "'J 109.72 feet; thence 937 feet ;E thence 574 °37'31 "E 141.49 feet; thence 412.35 feet; thence S43 °10'38 "E 89.04 feet; thence 233.41 feet along the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 309.26 feet andnaech0rd2wh00h.7 bears S64 56 02 227.91 feet; the arc of 100.08 feet; thence 309.38 feet along a curve to the right having a radius of 409.34 feet RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves and a chord which bears N64 °54'19 "W 302.07 feet; thence N44 °54'27 "W 66.04 feet; thence N75 °12'56 "W 15.36 feet; thence N75 ° 11 1 28 "W 25.48 feet; thence N16 °49'23 "E 83.76 feet; thence N73 °19'31 "W 271.88 feet; thence S16 °37'11 ": 90.78 feet; thence N57 °36'26 "W 10.54 feet; thence 584 °21'32 "W 164.64 feet; thence N87 °31'46 "W 88.97 feet; thence S14 °26'08 "W 75.82 feet; thence N43 °12'17 "W 408.87 feet; thence N19 °50'59 "E 495.73 feet to the point of beginning containing 11.50 acres more or less. All development in the above - described area shall be in con- formance with the elements of the approved Master Plan, and the defines= regulatory and other general provisions of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code shall, when not in conflict with the approved plan, continue with equal force and effect within such area. Subsequent to the effective date of this ordinance, a copy of this approved Master Plan shall be recorded in the Office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and remain of public record; and constitute the development regu- lations applicable to the Specially Planned Area unless and until amended by authority of the City of Aspen. Section 2 If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable. Section 3 That a public hearing on this ordinance be held on , 1977, at 1:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen days prior to which hearing public notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. -2- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its Aspen on the // day of regular meeting held at the City of As P , 1977. Stacy St dley II J Mayor f / ATTEST: Kathryn S f.Iauter City Cler' 'L/ �j FINALLY adopted, passed and approved on the /T day of / ' , 1977. _ 9 Stacy Standley III.. Mayor ...Cc�. ATTEST: _. Kathryn SA/Neuter City Clerk -3- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100. Leaves STATE OF COLORADO ) CERTIFICATE ) ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) 1, Kathryn S. 'tauter, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ordinance was introduced, read in full, and passed on reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Aspen on ,tl_ / , 197;2_, and publish- ed in the Aspen Times a weekly newspaper of general circul- ation, published City of Aspen, Colorado, in its issue of (12-LA) /•3 , 1977 , and was finally adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council on Ln„, /7 , 197 7 , and ordered published as Ordinance No. 5.9 , Series of 1977 , of said City, as provided by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of said City of Aspen, Colorado, this day of n ' ' , 197 7 . L,i____, _ a se f Kathryn S / auter, City Clerk MA5 A Al CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED: 12/16/92 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. DATE COMPLETE: 2'137- —643 A71 -93 STAFF MEMBER: LL PROJECT NAME: Rio Grande Subdivision Project Address: Rio Grande property Legal Address: APPLICANT: City of Aspen, John Worcester & Chuck Roth Applicant Address: REPRESENTATIVE: Representative Address /Phone: Aspen, CO 81611 FEES: PLANNING $ # APPS RECEIVED ENGINEER $ # PLATS RECEIVED HOUSING $ ENV. HEALTH $ TOTAL $ TYPE OF APPLICATION: STAFF APPROVAL: 1 STEP: _ 2 STEP: P &Z Date o?P PUBLIC HEARING: NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO CC Meeting Date 11S ' PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO y/Z(a 2 t g. VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO DRC Meeting Date REFERRALS: City Attorney Parks Dept. School District City Engineer Bldg Inspector Rocky Mtn NatGas Housing Dir. Fire Marshal CDOT Aspen Water Holy Cross Clean Air Board City Electric Mtn. Bell Open Space Board Envir.Hlth. ACSD Other Zoning Energy Center Other DATE REFERRED: INITIALS: DUE: FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: 1Z [ZSST INITIAL: r _ City Atty _ City Engineer _ Zoning _ Env. Health _ Housing Open Space Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: CITY OF ASPEN RIO GRANDE MASTER PLAN 1993 Prepared by: Aspen /Pitkin Planning Office Technical assistance provided by: Rick McGill CREDITS The Planning Department would like to thank those individuals who donated their valuable time to this plan: Kirk Baker, Rebecca Baker, Sally Barnett, Fritz Benedict, Alan Bloomquist, Tom Bracewell, Jon Busch, Chris Churchill,. Hal Clark, Ed Cross, Patrick Duffield, Jim Duke, Suzanne Farver, Andy Freeman, Chris Hall, Roger Hunt, Julia Marshall, Carol Lowenstern, Lance Luckett, Ramona Markalunas, Bruce Matherly, Jack Reid, George Robinson, and Chuck Roth. TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page. Purpose of the Master Plan 1 Location Map 2 Process 2 Summarized History 3 Assumptions 4 Site A * Existing Conditions 5 * Goals 6 * Map 7 * Recommended Land Uses /Activities 8 * Recommended Action Plan Summary 11 Site B * Map 13 * Existing Conditions 14 * Goals 14 * Recommended Land Uses /Activities 14 * Recommended Action Plan Summary 18 Rio Grande Land Use Map 20 Appendix A - Potential Development Scenarios Appendix B - History of Parcel • PURPOSE OF THE MASTER PLAN • The Aspen City Council directed staff to create a master plan to guide-future development of the remaining "undeveloped" portion of the Rio Grande property. Council's intent fora new plan was to identify appropriate activities and land use patterns for the Rio Grande property. Council emphasized that all public interests should be considered in this. new planning effort. The Rio Grande master plan was developed as a tool to guide future development on the site. Following it's adoption, new development or significant alterations must be consistent with this plan and shall be reviewed pursuant to the Specially Planned Area development review process. The Rio Grande property is zoned Public with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) overlay. The purpose of a SPA overlay is to provide design flexibility for land which requires innovative considerations and allow for the development of mixed land uses. The document provides a land use map that is a general outline for proposed uses. Three land use plans /maps for the entire study area, depicting how the uses may be integrated, are also provided in Appendix A. The three maps are intended to : serve as guides for specific development scenarios but were not adopted as part of this plan. Timing and particular needs of future programs will dictate which of the three scenarios, or an alternative, is best to use. Specific development details accompany the maps in Appendix A. In addition to characterizing the Rio Grande parcel as two separate but interactive pieces, this document summarizes the history of the entire parcel, outlines existing conditions, identifies goals for each piece, proposes land uses /activities, and makes recommendations for future use. The Rio Grande master plan applies to the property bordered by Rio Grande Drive on the south,. the Roaring Fork River on the north, Mill Street on the west, and the Eagles Club /Patsy Newbury Park on the east. The parking garage and Chamber offices, library and Youth Center parcels are also zoned Public with a SPA overlay and could be considered as accessory or support facilities for future development in the master plan area. For example, the office space in the parking garage could be used as ticket or luggage facilities when valley -wide rail locates on the playing field. Similarly, the publically owned property surrounding the Bass /Obermeyer building on Rio Grande Drive.could be used to support other development in the master plan area. 1 d E - ' ' a . — N , -..s.. 9 1 el A% i O t elt > . ► _ re at S ` i _ 1 ;. • • i t � H�m d t Nelw .wn.C.w west r Nun GVnINpM ateerred c-, As et etembe Mr ea? be la � ._. iN ERI = :.... Aspen , ' a fs1 1�tt 4 ^�� i • Rio Grande SPA e Master Plan Sit Of Diesels lit t al fq I 1 1781 1. d I - V i ..n. 4 212 tala PROCESS Staff formed the Rio Grande Group (a citizens review group) and began the planning process in November of 1991. The following groups participated in the planning process: the Alternative Edge, Art,Park, Aspen Art Museum, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, Aspen Theatre in the Park, Aspen Trolley Group, Aspen Youth Center, City of Aspen Parks and Public Works Departments, Gentlemen of Aspen R.F.C., Pitkin County Parks Association, Pitkin County Public Resources, Roaring Fork Railroad Association, and Trout Unlimited. The charge to the Group was to work with staff to develop the master plan. The Group was expected to identify critical features of the property that should be enhanced and /or preserved, resolve . land use issues pertaining to the site and make recommendations regarding appropriate land use development. ' The Planning and Zoning Commission believed that the master plan should be flexible and'not exclude future possibilities- The Commission did not want to plan the site and wanted to avoid review of specific building locations and building sizes. However the Rio Grande Group did give careful consideration to potential site 2 development. The Group •concluded this level of review was necessary to ensure that future uses were not:only appropriate but were compatible with each other. With development information provided by organizations, such as rail and trolley advocates who hope to utilize the property in the future, the Group was able to consider several land use scenarios. A phased build out of the property and two full build out programs identified the range of possibilities for the property. In order to preserve the Group's work, three different approaches to development are presented on the maps in Appendix A. Again these maps are to be used as guides and were not adopted as the land use - maps for this master plan. Although the Group considered facility needs for specific projects, it was not their purpose to make recommendations on community -wide issues such as the valley -wide rail or a cross -town trolley system. There are other decision - making arenas that will decide the fate of those projects. The Rio Grande Group met approximately 16 times over an eight month period. One of the first tasks: of the Rio Grande Group was to review existing and proposed land uses for this vital piece of community property. Initial meetings were devoted to a presentation and discussion of particular land uses on each section of property. The property was divided into two manageable discussion sites for which primary land use goals and recommendations for development were made: Site A: the area between the river and bike path next to the snow welter (page 6); and Site B: the recycle site (Old Impound lot) and the playing field (page 13). HISTORY This is a brief summary of the planning review history of the property. For a more thorough history refer to Appendix B. In 1967, the Denver Rio Grande Western Railroad began discussions with the, City and County regarding redevelopment of their property and right -of -way. Since those initial discussions there have been many plans regarding this 18 acre parcel: * 1973 - The City used 7th penny transportation funds to purchase a majority of the Rio Grande property. 3 • * 1975 - A Performing. Arts Center for the property was 1978 studied. * 1981 - A non - specified 1.5 acre site was set aside for a future Performing Arts /Conference Center and the City moved the snow dump from the Sanitation District property to the Rio Grande property, • * 1982. - The City and County exchanged the Aspen One, Oden and stable properties. * 1987 - The City installed the snow melter. * 1988 - A conceptual SPA master plan was adopted by Council identifying a parking garage, the library, the Spring Street extension, a snow melt facility and an arts usage area. * 1989 - A final SPA plan was approved by Council for the parking garage and. the Pitkin County library. * 1990 - A final SPA plan was approved by Council for the Youth Center. • 1991 - Council denied conceptual SPA approval for the • trolley, Theatre in the Park, recycle facility and snow melt operation and instead directed staff to prepare a master plan for the entire .site. ASSUMPTIONS The Group identified several assumptions with regard to the property. From the basis of these assumptions the Group began their review of existing land uses and proposed land uses. 1. Rather than completely replan the parcel, the Group began their review of the property from the perspective of existing uses and past plans. 2. The Group considered why and how the different pieces of property were purchased. Some of Site A and all of Site B were purchased with transportation funds and most . of the river frontage was purchased with open space funds. 3. The extensive work on the whitewater course and initial regrading of Site A, has required adjustments to the traditional method of dumping snow on Site A. In .1991, the City Council 4 • directed the Public works Department to find an alternative to dumping snow on the parcel. In response, the Department is attempting to purchase land adjacent to the County Maintenance Facility for snow storage. The site will not be ready for approximately two years so the snow melter is still needed for that period. The Group is confident that the operation of the snow melter, if adjusted, can continue in the near future. 4. The Group realized that there were other decision making processes which could affect development of the two sites. The Group knew that a valley -wide rail system terminating on the Rio Grande, ultimately a tri- county decision, could use a significant portion of the property. The possibility of the Trolley System affecting the property is also beyond the Group's control and is . now in the hands of the Transportation Implementation Committee. However, the Group reviewed the two proposed land uses and made specific recommendations if the train and trolley were developed on the property. 5. Specially Planned Area review will be required for site specific development. Depending upon how the land was originally purchased, future permanent development may require voter approval which is also out of the Group's purview. Using the considerations mentioned above the Group reviewed the potential land uses of each site. SITE A I. Existing conditions Site A is generally described as the land between the bike path or row of large cottonwoods that edge the playing field, and the river. However, it also encompasses the existing snow melter and the drainage pond closest to Mill Street. Please refer to Map 1. The property is 2.213 acres. Site A consists of the snow melter, and sand filter and sedimentation pond necessary for this operation. Traditionally, the site has also been used as a "snow dump" for melting on site or dumping into the snow melter. , For seven years, the Aspen Theatre in the Park has set up its theatre tent on this site for live performances between June and September. For the summer of 1992, the theatre received a temporary use permit to set up a larger tent with increased back stage capacity. The Art Park group has been very active and generous in its efforts 5 to reverse a trend of neglect towards this portion of the Rio Grande property. The group has rejuvenated the westerly portion of Site A near the Ron Karagian bridge and the berm adjacent to the theatre tent. The Art Park has evolved into a beautiful garden showcasing local artist's work. The Art Park and Theatre groups have been the catalyst for the City to reconsider their stewardship of this community property. They first rallied the community to enhance the riverbank emphasizing the river and park interaction. As a result, City Council allocated approximately $60,000 to excavate the high water channel, adjacent to the main river channel, for a whitewater course. As part of the development of the course, the. City created a pedestrian path along the river and revegetated the river bank and slope of the property down to the whitewater course. The walking path is intended to enhance the river experience and meander along the river's edge changing elevation as it follows the white water course. The path will not be paved because the existing paved bike path at the edge of the park is intended for multi -use. Finally, Site A is an important pedestrian connection between downtown, the Art Museum, Herron Park and the dense Hunter Creek neighborhood. The Karagian bridge became a strong link to the Museum with the Art Park revitalization. II. Goals The basis of the goals identified for this Site are the funding sources for the initial purchase and the unique characteristics of the Site. The majority of the Site is comprised of the Aspen One Property (acquired with Sixth Penny Open Space Funds in 1978) and the parcel the City traded with Pitkin County in 1982. A smaller piece of the parcel was purchased with 7th Penny Transportation Funds. The parcel contains prime public river frontage and was identified as a key piece in the 1973 Roaring Fork Greenway Plan. The Greenway Plan promotes preservation of indigenous species and maintenance of the riparian environment along the Roaring Fork River and its tributaries. The Greenway Plan also supports an extensive trail system throughout the " Greenway" for "maximum possible recreational and educational potential." The site is also an important hub in the bikeway /pedestrian trail system.and is consistent with future plans to extend the pedestrian and bike paths upriver. From this point, one can go up or down river, into downtown, to the Art Museum, or over to the post office- retail center on pedestrian /bike paths. 6 .T. • • Map 1 - Site A Sp ► -- ,••,.r pier ■ � ' I O S iia , , if ' / 4r .: 1 t • S *s 7t4. C.1167111171 a *IS '- �� • McFARLANEA 4 ,. • �• �• " �,\ ART PARK � _ _ _ • ` ` - i �. C Pass'w p ` � �� a 4 k/Art Theme ` ` $ ' ` ` transition zone '^— •�•'.".�.� u',p_y ` _ ' gs ■ 7 r .` ♦ ` r 1. •i .. ■ Ntt \ �.� • l ey: r F. li • S II Transportation/Recreation ' \ \ \1 t ♦ , • , transition zone . 1 ` i w -� - / ■ N . /OO bb oa A �'_ �'V i ` j � /y0�� Trans '�; _ �� -9 p rOUth Recrea , / ' ` , 3 n ♦ • „ �� ``�o- - O`er- - po i , � 1 , �` . i re ns{iort a tio , nti l C ■ c..4.44 i- - r.a w , 7 The following Goals were established for redevelopment of Site A: a. Develop a passive park offering a quiet open space for the community. b. Visually and physically connect the river with the park. c. Support the Art Theme connecting various art oriented elements such as the art park, Theatre in the Park and Aspen Art Museum. d. Discourage permanent development except for structures which support the Art Theme or enhance the edge of the river as a people place. e. Discourage employee housing as an inappropriate use for this site. f. Provide a venue for local artists in support of the Art Theme. g. Limit vehicular access except for theatre delivery /service and parking for the disabled at the theatre. h. Coordinate park activities with the Art Museum. i. Maintain pedestrian /bike paths throughout the site I1I. Recommended Land Uses /Activities for Site A This site is divided into several elements for discussion purposes: 1. Site Enhancement The whitewater course is almost completed. The river bank has been regraded and recontoured to create more of a visual and physical connection to the river's edge. The banks of the channel have been revegetated and stabilized. A river walk has been established at a lower elevation from the park with the intent of being more remote from activities of. the City and more restive for the pedestrian. A small bowl- shaped sitting area has been carved into the bank above the river walk to afford viewing of the new whitewater course. The sitting area remains unfinished. More dirt should be removed from that area to sculpt the curve of the bowl 8 and reduce the steepness of slope so people can sit comfortably. However, further regrading of the rest of the site is unnecessary because it will eliminate the flat surface and inhibit park use. Irrigation should be considered along the slope for growth and as well as water features. Some revegetation and channel work have yet to be finalized, including the land surrounding the pond near Mill Street. Native wildflower mix and irrigation ditches will be integrated into the landscape. Other footpaths may be needed in the future and should be considered as park use evolves. Revegetation of the park shall include the theatre tent. The landscaping should help screen the tent's stored trusses, storage shed and wood floor in the off season. It is important to note that the regrading and recontouring of the site does not impact the temporary use of the snowmelter or sedimentation pond. It does, however, require an alternative site for the dumping of snow. The City has begun to accommodate snow dumping in other locations and is attempting to purchase another site for dumping snow. ' The Group has concluded that snow melt activity is inappropriate in the long -term view of the park. The snow dump should be relocated immediately and the snow melter relocated from Site A as soon as feasible. An alternative location may be considered on the recycle site integrated with an expanded recycle facility, Trolley Barn, and /or another transportation or essential community service land use. As long as the existing sand filter remains integral to the operation of the snow melter it will remain on Site A. However, it should be reshaped into a water feature for the summer. The edges of the sedimentation pond will be reworked to give a more landscaped finish. Without compromising it's function, the inside and outside of the pond should be sloped to provide a more gentle finish and reduce the water depth. 2. Art Park Theme A strong Art Theme should be promoted as an important use for the Rio Grande parcel. The Art Theme is already supported by a variety of existing uses: the Theatre in the Park, on -site sculpture and flower gardens introduced by the Art Park group and direct access to the Art 9 Museum. Continued support for the Art Park group's efforts will provide local artists a venue for their work. Art will be located in the park on a revolving basis and maximum flexibility can be achieved by variety of spaces. This is important to accommodate different works. The Art Park group also proposes to continue to maintain the flower gardens, sponsor and encourage outdoor sculpture, and expand irrigation and lighting systems. To ensure, maintenance and management of program responsibilities the Art Park group must work with the City to define policies or agree on .a contract. • Aspen Theatre in the Park is a key component of the Art Theme. The theatre recently installed a new wood floor with an improved drainage system. The company. also received a temporary use permit to put up a larger tent. This permit will be reviewed on an annual basis unless the company receives SPA approval. Aspen Theatre in the Park runs from June through August performing four nights a week. Currently, the theatre is required to take down the tent at the end of the season. Support beams, the wood floor and some equipment will be stored on -site. The storage shed will also provide locked storage during the summer. At this point, Aspen Theatre in the Park is not considering a year round facility. If the need for a year round facility is supported by the community, then future development at this site should be reviewed at that time. Review should consider the proposed • improvements, infrastructure needs, and impacts on the passive park use. The theatre has considered on -site housing for personnel. The Rio Grande Group does not support housing for theatre personnel finding the use inappropriate on this site. Housing would conflict with the "passive- park" use identified for the site. In addition, housing in the park sets a bad precedent for other City and County parks. 3. Level of Activity Other land uses pertaining to food or commercial uses have been 'discussed for this area. The anticipated argument for locating these uses on the river's edge is the creation of more activity along the river within the urban'setting of the City. Food booths along the paths could encourage a festive gathering place in the park. 10 • However, careful evaluation must be given to future vending along the river. The character of the Rio Grande parcel, although not void of structured activity or development i.e. the Theatre in the Park, should focus primarily on the river. The visual and physical connection to the river is the fundamental goal for land use on this site. The Art Theme and other improvements are to support. and compliment the river as the primary amenity. Any commercial venture must not detract from that goal. Thus, small vending booths or food stands cannot block visual access to the river. Physical access to and through the parcel or use of the footpath or kayak course cannot be diminished by vending operations. Potential impacts generated by these types of uses: vehicle related deliveries, trash, fumes, noise, power lines, must also -be contained and kept at a minimum at best. Given the above constraints, the Art Museum appears to be a more 'suitable location for these types of proposed uses. In addition, the Museum side receives more sun than the Rio Grande side, a retail venture is more consistent with the commercial orientation of the Art Museum, and the Museum has the water and sewer services for food oriented activities. 4. Access to the Site There is a service drive that currently accesses the site (Art Park Way). The road will be eliminated and merged with the existing pedestrian/bike path forming a 12 -14 foot wide concrete pedestrain /bike path. The path may be used by theatre service /delivery and park maintenance vehicles only. The access may also be used by the disabled when attending.. the theatre. Two handicapped parking . spaces, that will double as delivery space, will be provided at the tent. To alleviate the impact of only one access point to the park and to encourage less traffic on the access road, another point of access for pedestrians has been identified. Between the Eagles Club and the recycle site access will be upgraded, to include a sidewalk and gutter. A pull -out area, will be provided at that portion of Rio Grande Drive for drop -off. IV. Recommended Action Plan Summary for Site A To achieve the goals and proposed land uses for this site, the Rio Grande Group, recommends the following actions for Site At 11 • 1. The regraded site, should be revegetated and ditches should be added throughout the park area adding water features and park irrigation. 2. Pedestrian paths may be developed in the future if warranted. 3. Pond and irrigation ditch leakage should be corrected. 4. The snow melter should be relocated out of Site A within two years from the purchase of an alternative snow dump site. 5. The sand filter should be reshaped for use as a summer water feature and more efficient operation unless the eventual relocation of the snow melter no longer requires the filter in which case it should be eliminated. 6. The pond closest to the snow welter (sedimentation pond) should be recontoured to compliment the surrounding park landscape and revamped to improve its function as a settling pond for the snow welter. 7. A small turn around for service /delivery combined with two disabled parking spaces should be designed next to the theatre tent at the end of new pedestrian /bike path. 8. The small bowl- shaped seating area should be finished. 9. Access will be upgraded at the path between the Eagles Club and the recycle site. Drop - off will be provided for access to Patsy Newbury park and Rio Grande. 10. A 20 foot transition zone has been delineated on the site maps. This is the boundary between Site A and Site B. The zone lends protection for Site A from encroachments and inappropriate uses from Site B yet provides site development flexibility for Site A and B taking into account vegetation and topography. . • SITE B Site B encompasses the existing recycle site on the eastern portion of the parcel, publically owned land on the corner of Sleeker and Spring Streets, the access road down to Site A, the small triangle of open space between the access road and bike /pedestrian path, and the playing field. This piece of the master plan is bordered by Rio Grande Drive, Mill Street, and a row of Cottonwoods and a pedestrian /bike path to the north (please see Map 2). 12 • Map 2 — Site S S • oloh.8.,;:-. s I ` i • ' r ti • - - _- 1 •` • ARrPAR• - .over e r � . !TE • _. - `� \ q Ppsa' k/Art Theme ' • \` rt , - transition zone r.�.� �� �°.Y - _. St i i SITE B ` ` .` - \ \ i .L N • • � .\ r � � �� - 1' � g • ; �� Transporta /Recreation . >, ! ' -, • ‘ •• p . ` . ,a . 4t transition ¢one r . % :. / a 1 0 0 o�.� \ l 'e 1 4 .S.,. , � � �i it 1 PARKING : d - 4ti ° p 1 • :-'16-41-' \ .. 40 . O . Tramp. 0 ` '' , s PARKING mac ` '�.. - / i , n / - . / I ' . ervi ils1 ! o semi I • t � e�,. ' ` ` lrrrrt Iv. rr MTr , to MISS 1r L esift. S 4 CWNry JP4 Q a/ , _,/ a r5 L-■ % lir at I/ Silit 47"44%. . 41 ,, 0 0 _ .> 4. 4,4,fiti, 41....___.a..9 pi _ mks_ ,,, i 13 I. Existing Conditions The community's recycling drop -off center has temporarily occupied the eastern portion of Site B for several years. The facility accepts the widest variety of materials, and because of its central location, is one of the most accessible drop points within Pitkin County. The materials accepted at the site are: aluminum, tin, glass, plastic, newsprint, cardboard, low grade paper, high grade paper, green bar computer paper, and used dry cell batteries. There is a 20 yard roll -off dumpster for glass, a 100 yard trailer for cardboard, twenty -five 90 gallon containers for aluminum, tin, . plastic, and all grades of paper, and a .small container for batteries. An employee of Pitkin County Public Resources monitors collection of materials at the site. Recently, the berms surrounding this area have been increased in order to shield the recycle activity from view, to prevent blowing trash and to reduce haul costs during the construction of the white water course. The access road (Art Park Way) used for the snow melter and the theatre is approximately.40 feet wide. The playing field, which occupies the majority of this parcel, was established as a temporary use until such time that the field is converted for transportation uses. Other than the goal posts, and temporary recycle containers the parcel is void of any structural development. II. Goals • Because the site was purchased with 7th Penny Transportation funds the basis of future development goals is transportation oriented. The parcel is also across the street from an assortment of land uses including the Bass /Obermeyer building,' which is zoned Service /Commercial /Industrial (SCI). Because of the .close proximity to the SCI zone district and to downtown, a variety of land uses, including essential community services, are considered appropriate for this site. The Rio Grande Group has identified the following Goals for the redevelopment of Site B:, a. Locate essential community services in the eastern portion of Site B. b. Ensure that existing and future uses on the eastern portion of Site B are compatible with .surrounding land uses because of this area's location and visibility. c. Satisfy transportation related needs first when considering the use of Site B. 14 d^"aR d. Retain and optimize park /recreational uses in this area and replace the active park and playfield only with a regional rail facility. e. Preserve view planes to the river and Independence Pass with low- profile development. III. Recommended Land Uses /Activities for Parcel B This parcel can be divided into several different elements for discussion purposes: 1. Recycle Site The recycling center is in critical need of an enclosed space for collection of material. Blowing trash has been a problem and inclement weather reduces the site to mud. Pitkin County Public Resources propose to construct a facility that is partially below grade and will make collection, bailing, and hauling of material more efficient. Enclosed bins and bailing will eliminate unsightly conditions and blowing trash. Enlarged collection areas and more storage for material will reduce the number of trips made to haul the material off -site. Efficient drop -off will encourage residents to continue to use the site. The upgrade of the recycle facility should consider relocation possibilities to City land across the street on the corner of Spring and East Bleeker Streets. 2. Trolley Barn • The Trolley Group proposes to develop a trolley rail system. The system includes a car barn facility; tracks and poles, and several- trolley cars. Review for this plan only considered operation and routing that would occur on the Rio Grande parcel. Depending upon the location of the barn it can be incorporated with the proposed expansion and enclosure of the recycle facility or integrated with a future rail terminal on the playing field. The structure is proposed to be one story in height. This is consistent with the recommendation for low - profile development on the parcel to avoid blocking views of the river or Independence Pass. The building could also be designed to enable affordable 15 • housing on a second level. The Trolley Group cannot fund the cost of the housing but is willing to make the structure available for future housing development. . Although the Group believes that housing associated with the theatre was an inappropriate land use, housing on top of the trolley barn may be more suitable if developed on the eastern portion of the site. The site's proximity to the street, S /C /I zone district and location on the edge of the park lend a more urban feel for a multi -use development. Impacts to the river and Independence Pass view planes would have to be considered. 3. Access Road The access road to the snow melter and theatre (Art Park Way) is 40 feet wide. Vehicular access into the park should be eliminated. A new pedestrian /bike path should replace the existing pedestrian /bike path and access road. It should be 12 -14 feet wide and could be located either next to the playing field or recycle site. If the path were located next to the playing field the eastern portion of the site could be unified creating more land area for proposed uses. The new path is intended for pedestrian and bikes but the width can accommodate theatre service /delivery and park maintenance vehicles. Two accessible parking spaces will also be provided for the disabled attending a production at the tent. 4. New Walking Trail A new walking trail has been roughed -in above the snow melter. The trail is approximately halfway up the berm surrounding the recycling lot. The trail should be graded and improved as a walking path connecting to Patsy Newbury Park. The trail should not encroach into the recycle site. 5. Snow Melter The snow melter will be removed from Site A. The current recycle site should be considered as a relocation alternative for the snow melter. Integration with other transportation /essential community services should be considered. 6. Additional Activities In the event either the. Trolley Barn, recycling center or the snow miter are not built on the eastern portion of the site, other essential community oriented services may be located on site. However, a SPA review would be 16 • required. Because transportation funds were used to purchase this piece of property, transportation related services should be given priority. - Publically owned land adjacent to the Obermeyer building may also be considered for the location of essential community oriented services. 7. Active Park Although the . eventual development of a valley -wide rail system will use a majority of Site B for a rail terminal, it may be years before a rail system is implemented in the Roaring Fork Valley. Therefore, the Group identified interim uses which are considered appropriate for Site B. • Increased recreational activities should be installed on Site B. A full- court basketball court and half -pipe skateboard ramp:can fit on Site B. • The rugby field (390' x 225') should be squared off to enhance the playing area. Park and recreational uses should exist on this site only to be replaced by a regional rail facility. • 8. Rail The valley -wide Rail Task Force has been actively pursuing a valley -wide rail that will terminate at Site B. This master plan did not address the rail question in detail because decision- making will involve a broader forum. Initially commuter rail would not require the loss of the playing field. Recreational activity can still be accommodated if the commuter and trolley tracks are installed at the northern edge of the playing field. A ticket kiosk, located next' to the new pedestrian /bike path, could service both the trolley and commuter rail • passengers. If rail develops from commuter to regional rail service, the rail terminal may be developed at the far end of the field thus preserving some open space for park purposes. The trolley barn could also be incorporated into the rail terminal to preserve space. • However, the majority of the playing field will be lost when the rail becomes fully developed. A terminal, passenger platforms, and possibly three sets of tracks would be necessary for regional rail. The existing transportation center, under 17 • the parking garage, could be used for ticketing, baggage, and passenger services. The trolley tracks on the north side of the field will remain and a trolley stop will be tied into the rail terminal. IV. Recommended Action Plan Summary for Site B To achieve the goals and proposed land uses for this site, the Rio Grande Group recommends the following actions for Site 8: 1. The City of Aspen should decide whether a City -wide trolley system is appropriate in Aspen. If the Trolley is approved as proposed, the, eastern portion of Site B is the recommended site for the Trolley barn. However, the barn may be integrated with a regional rail facility when developed. 2. A height limit of one story should accompany any development on Site B unless housing is approved for the Trolley barn on the eastern portion of the site. 3. Development on the eastern portion of Site B should be screened from the playing field and Site A. 4. The slope and berms on the eastern portion of Site B should be revegetated to blend into the park on the rest of Site B and Site A. 5. Any development on the eastern portion of Site B should not intrude into the Independence Pass view plane. 6. The City and County should review the recommendations of the Roaring Fork Forum study relating to a regional -wide recycling program and other remedies that are being considered for the County recycling program. If the recycling operation is considered necessary at this location then the recycling site should be covered or contained. A facility up to a maximum of 5,200 square feet is recommended in order to integrate with other uses. The recycling facility should be incorporated into the Trolley barn structure and /or snow melt facility, and should front the street for easy public access. 7. The access road (Art Park Way) and the existing pedestrian /bike path should be eliminated. A new pedestrian /bike path should be created connecting Rio Grande Drive to Site A. It should be 12 -14 feet wide and able to accommodate theatre service /delivery and park maintenance vehicles only. The new path may also be used by the disabled to. park at the theatre during a 18 performance. 8. The walking path should be improved at the higher elevation along the slope that forms the edge of the recycle site. 9. The City should work with the Youth Center to develop more recreational activities on Site B. 10. The City should consider extending recreational activities onto Patsy Newbury Park. 11. The temporary active park and playfield should be maintained on Site 8 only to be replaced by a regional rail facility. 12. If a transportation use is developed on the playing field, then an equivalent parcel, in the City, should replace the playing field. 13. A rail terminal and accessory facilities, if developed on the Rio Grande property, should be developed only on Site B. 14. Development of rail facilities should not block -off access, both visually and physically, to Site A. • 15. The Youth Center and the City should build a full -court basketball court in the open space between the recycle facility and the playing field. • 16. The Youth Center and the City should install a.half -pipe skateboard ramp in the open space between the recycle facility and the playing field. 17. The City should realign the playing field. 18. The City should continue negotiations with the property owners of the Bass /obermyer building to settle the use • of the publically owned property that is adjacent to'the building and being used by customers and tenants of that building. • 19 • • • 7 __ i 40 f »d/PArJ� �� ' � m- 1 -,� ii �o% ilk i )ii 94.b.:-.. . , • 1 _.- i - 0 D / " " "�. , .1-,a,. : 4 <>4, -?' r ) . � • ( '''l bc, .. „? i$ 1 yr iv 1 / I a: ...4 f. : ,/ fr. - :i / ,i :„ <*.........) It : -."`r V---....) , A 1./. - l i C4p, ,... alig St .. / . er • ® Ai t oo d� • F x Ufl g 23 D to Ia T o1 o: Z m O 8 ITI O a $ Z 4 ^ \ • APPENDIX A POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS* *These maps are provided as future land use guides. They were not adopted as part af'the conceptual SPA Rio Grande master plan. • . .... ,. 7--,...„ .,.. , , .4„ lo it ; r Y e r te . � "( 1 1.......41V ,,,,t1 / 4/ ,:: ___, illf 1 It ear 1 : 1 :7 1 ‘ . L ' e' i I : / . 4 0 7 . . / , k i • : i . ,. 1/11 , : . < . . 3: ::1 , ! 1 le - - - (-I 1 44 t __ lit 4 E i f - . 4 i iM/ a_ ® �o°I C AI 17.• �€ fsr € 3 z i t c i 8 _l m o a m I i l l I I ' i ; O �Z o R o O tUI 1 . t 1 J n Z ; 0 q H • a Crl r le D • . /a driter? r 4, `` ` _ems ,ie•-.. /(% --"-- • ..: , {� • /Ql. - , ,� � - *Wil t ,, 1414g-441.-- _-/ - I . 1-' N ---- - al + `. N IHIlki -A _ AI,01(_, : ; te `'' a -.... 7 ..., .:„..„ • r a \ _ . , . , _... 0 ay ICJ D (D oo Nei - 449 r*,/ i. 44 , ,..1..,• • , i I ".:• 177 . J 4:::' b ilik. , - , „. _ ,- >°' ` f ; 1 (/ y 1 1 1 - • f, I t L _, , 4 4 Ig . gi • 4 3 a roZ t a e 2 t i r � R° N D O Z o { n m a c � tp z c a a m m m a ® o m m . IFS. . „ ,, - ,..J. w , :--) n .,.... air 441 __a V / i k • r , kt/i -.:. --' k - ... ,i, III ( 4 t -- 1 %_ M A s litt.ive..\,,, ,‘ . „_,_7 7 ,./ i pi ..: , , ; ---___I s% -, 0 -, ill ,.• , It c 0. , I ii. x p 4::„:1 i -...., jig Ian C `-.../ : , i - .".".--. 1" i f , - \ \ \ ''- >-- tl::1 i 7 r,-„, 111. t 0 til 40/ IPA - ® `0 0 0 0 0 , II $° fit E pp ,ODI 1 .� L i } Z 1 l a q a ' ' � ^ 1 11 1 f[E m m m # t 1 s xD m a W n 0 m m 1 n I 1 Zm o r r. W ' 3 m a zzi m 2 0 • • These specific development details were used t6 ensure that the proposed land uses could be accommodated on the property. Theatre Tent The tent is approximately 60 feet x 80 feet and 26 feet high and seats approximately 100 patrons. The storage shed is 12.9' X 12.9'. , Recycle Facility The proposed facility is approximately 5,200 square feet. This _ option eliminates several bins and moves part of the floor plan below grade for increased efficiency. Customer access to the recycle site should be directly off of Rio Grand Drive. Haulers should access off of snow dump road on the west side of the site. If the trolley barn is located on the site the cuts into the embankment, necessary for trolley access to the trolley barn, can also provide truck access to the recycle facility. Trolley Barn • According to the plans, a trolley will leave the barn, cross the pedestrian /bike trail and Rio Grande Drive and travel in between the Youth Center and Jail to Main and Galena Streets. The Trolley Group proposes to run track along the north side of the ball field providing stops at the Art Park then Mill Street. The Trolley would continue across Mill Street and utilize Puppy Smith right- of -way for a stop at the post office. The Group proposes to develop a car barn approximately 7,000 square feet which includes 1,000 square feet for accessory. office, storage, and related uses. The barn will house the trolleys and provide a garage for light maintenance. The second floor of the 'building could accommodate 5,700 square feet of affordable housing. Basketball Court and Skateboard Half Pipe ' A 52' x 90' basketball court can be located in the open space between the playing field and current recycle site. A 42' x 24' skateboard ramp can also fit in this space next to the basketball court. Location of these activities in this area requires trolley access to the barn to be. moved down to the 20 foot buffer separating Site A from•Site B or eventual relocation to the field if the barn is integrated with the rail terminal. s^ APPENDIX B • In 1973, the majority of the Rio Grande parcel (Parcels B & C and some of Parcel A) was purchased from Jim Trueman with 7th penny money thus preserving the land for future transportation needs and limiting commercial development on the parcel. Between 1975 . - 1978, City files indicate that planning sessions were held between the, Council, Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Planning Department to determine the most appropriate use of the Rio Grande parcel. A 1978 memo from the Planning Department outlines the evolution of the Performing Arts Center concept for the Rio Grande. The memo concludes with a Wheeler Task Force determination that the Wheeler "appears to offer the best solution to the requirement for establishing a performing arts facility in Aspen..." but maintain "the option to expand the performing art facilities to the Rio Grande when demands for a larger space become an obvious and economically viable need. " In 1977, a Rio Grande SPA Plan was filed with an interim SPA plan schematically identifying land uses on the entire property. However, a conceptual plan expires if a final plan is not adopted. Council Resolution (80 -6) in 1980 established a task force to review and make recommendations for the Rio Grande property. Subsequently, a 1981 Council Resolution (81 -20) recognized the need for. a year round Performing Arts Center and the task force recommended that a non - specified one and one -half acre site be set aside for a future Performing Arts /Conference Center. An employment agreement with Benedict - Mularz was initiated in order for the architects to prepare a site plan for the Rio Grande. In 1982, the City and County entered into a land exchange agreement. The exchange included the stable property west of the Courthouse, the Aspen One Property (a piece adjacent to the river) and the Oden Property (site of the new library). City Council granted conceptual SPA approval in 1986 for the Roaring Fork Railroad Proposal which included a terminal building, passenger platform, baggage handling, parking and trackage on the Rio Grande site. However, a conceptual SPA approval expires within two years if a final plan is not adopted. • In 1988, a second conceptual SPA plan was approved. This plan was more site specific and the plan consisted of a parking facility, library, new access road connecting Mill and Spring Streets, and paving of the remaining surface parking on the southern portion of the Rio Grande. A snow melt facility and area for "Arts Usage" was • also included in the plan. The center of the site remained 1 unprogrammed with the playing field undisturbed. A trail system and shuttle corridor extended through the site. The 1988 conceptual plan had many recommendations regarding the entire site. Galena Street should be a pedestrian corridor to the Rio Grande parcel. A shuttle should travel north on Galena'and on the east side of the parking facility to decrease traffic congestion on Mill. A snow melt machine was proposed to help the snow dump operation but relocation was encouraged. However, the snow dump area should be reserved for "Arts Usage ". And, if the Library had not been developed on it's new site, the Arts Groups would retain the right to use the site 'instead of the snow dump area. The .1988 conceptual SPA plan was amended to locate the snow melter on the Rio Grande property and the Land Exchange Agreement was amended to facilitate the library and parking garage development. A Final SPA plan was approved in 1989 for the library and parking garage and final SPA approval was granted for the Youth Center in 1990. In 1991, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to Council conceptual SPA approval for the Art Park /Theatre and Trolley Car Barn, but denied the continued use of the Rio Grande for the snow dump and melter operation. Council did not approved conceptual SPA approval and directed staff to prepare a new conceptual SPA plan. • 2 • • #362273 10/20/9 12:24 Rec $40.00 727 PS 609 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Cler4, D c x.00 STATEMENT OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION This Statement of Subdivision Approval is made and entered into as of the , „_day of , 1993, by the City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corporat n and home rule city (hereinafter, "the City "). RECITALS WHEREAS, the City owns certain real property located between the Roaring Fork River, the Pitkin County Courthouse and the Alley in Block 86, a draft piat,of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the property is zoned Public (PUB) with an Specially Planned Area (SPA) overlay; and WHEREAS, on December 16, 1992, the City Attorney's Office submitted to the Aspen Planning Office an application for subdivision; and WHEREAS, the City has deemed it necessary to subdivide the Rio Grande property in order to convey to Pitkin County the "library parcel" and the property north of Pitkin County Jail for future expansion of the Jail, to accept from Pitkin County property upon which the municipal parking facility has been constructed and the portion of land within the County Courthouse Subdivision upon which the Youth Center has been constructed; and WHEREAS, certain City -owned land area of the Rio Grande parcel is being used for parking by the tenants of the Bass /Obermeyer buildings and the City may wish to .either exchange, sell or lease the property; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter "Commission ") on February 2, 1993, to consider the subdivision; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council, having considered the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendations, granted subdivision approval on April 26, 1993, with conditions, as set forth in Ordinance 10, Series of 1993. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and the terms and conditions contained in Ordinance 10, the City states as follows: -T♦ # 12 :24 Rec $40.00 BI( 727 PG 610 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 I. CONDITIONS 1. Any future development of the newly created parcels shall be reviewed and approved by the Commission and Council. II. ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL PLAN Upon execution of this Agreement, the City shall approve and execute the Rio Grande Subdivision, and cause the final plat to be filed in the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO a munic' al corporation By: Jo n Bennett, Mayor • -it 'WO* 1 .eki>. r .: ./.2.2 .‘,`21, . t a . ;;;•2 . • //7,- i ! .cr.. ..2 1 1 - 4 , $ - EXHIBIT A ' --. . #362273 10/20/93 12 24 Rec $40.00 BK 727 PG 611 ' 9 ....:- - Silva Davis, Pltk1n Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 MILL • 82.113 a * • •- 4., rs t i /A.A.. 44 ,99'991 r,69,09 el i Pa 1 r -• .., • : ea •• el w" .11 • O • ./ 4. IP 0 • 0 " * a • a - I • .. ....... .. r4 P74r " Pt - 21; 2 -I re 0 o 0 2 u• 4 20 OC a : a lit. eb • fr..., .. a = 0 ; 9, •• ••••••••••-•..13.. - • •/••• • • • 14 4 , 40 • 4e. 4, - - .... i z .41p N- v .• 1 I- git • • CM • 4 ..4 a * 2. r, 0 o t V ../ r . . id• 0 0 11 44 0 -/ , 2,. • 50.26 C • • • , so 2 IP o . r 0 2 °I 4 • ,' 4 4 11 I* 1114 1 o ft ? . 1 4 ' • 5 4.04•• at 0 II - l • 4 . a CI. ( Z . 0 • ...-K att I •I , ........ ' • /4 al 0 se 0 c; l a 4,_. 4* • 24 N 40 / * p • (21 44 ..... . J • Ir. 0 • -1 r .. 0 0 • . • • -4 la • ' a • • . 0 ... • 6 i 71 -I b 0 ... p • O. o.. • a e • t 0 • •:. b / ' 2 • 4 .. 0 0, i a s t - • ... • as / / 0 • ; •6 .; ; • lia _ 0 / • t t • r; 1 •-• t: at,' ; 'a • 0. r isit / .. .4 i 7,* .• • . p 4 • 0 # ..14 • • e / i 0. A A 0 4 4 w 0 4 A e / / • / r -.I o / / • 1* VC* 2 pg 041S . .Y 13 0 .4 / -/ • 4 / / • 4; j: 1 / 1 N 0 0 r• 4 , / / - a • - a / 2 - 1 •• / is N ' 9 a 4 I+ - ;.0 a i / a • • . PC 1 / 0 4; 1 / * / / ' ss eopzetis It / 1 / I , 9 6:99,19•2 l ( ( I • i —me- ILWII • •• 4 ..... 0 14, e - • 2 1 \ i • */•01. I • PAT,/ • • _ • • % • t 1 '.* • 12 e - NM * 1 ,• °11 .411S ims • \ ... 2 \ • z \ l"... mi / ) t C 0 0 • • • ... • / co c a \ \ • / . o z V \ • Z -, N % att 0: S 0 LT, ' . . 11 t E 5 n . . * • f• i :LI; g . . m % A, • ,/ - #362273 10/20/93 12:24 Rec $40.00 BK 727 PG 612 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 `, • 11-1-1: 0 4r e z • SI ' O � Y * y ` 2 as on 4 t • • Y2 ,S£156 . . 'Q • m - Y ^ 0 Q + ZZ - • q p• G �( , 0 W -1 * 1' 00 L0L Lm m0 1 u e i . .4 4 - A , Z 2 o C z C 1 S £ _ n 2 L Y 2 00 = O p y A22 AAY 0 '�? • b . 4 c al C-12 yC wy�AO = i1 0 0: . e .}} Y z L i < pm . r e 0 m 00.400 Y z Y i! M09 'II 2A Y. i i z o w c o 0Y Z E < 2 1 2 a -1 to 0 ro00 0 ,2 mY <x 1 •, • u N.Y WC c 1 11 • W W A 0 0 2 2 Z Z • 0 - O r la < .41 i o o a i • z c m „ 2 m o w L 2 L z •r p m m 4 g H r A.1 it p L" m Go D p C 1 4 415, - .00. Ym 0 _ L A - P-10 m • is m s W A 1• n • N 75•It . at Ym 29.17' _ r ps Y Ear 1 0 x rn 0..0 \et11Me Ill , � 2 0 x 4. a • ri $+ 0 • y •• . ►,1 9 3 q n 0002• e 40 N pA • :y4z N pP l•w, 0 y z 4Y • a •e n n y ` 6 S • • • p o N 4 \ CZ O _ S ° ___ _.-a , b l sr 0 , im r V Q2411.✓ _ Vi (' • 6.73'.. •O • •� • r • [ 713.711 '' •. 11OVC 1--, : • a 4 S 1 r tJ • c. ILA • C7 2 F of r+ f Y' NJ N N w u 01 4.1 er U ' %i W •. rt • 2 • .. 4. o � . rt 73 a . w a ' • ; 8 •; n • t. ° .O •' . p V N w $ w = T e. • O 1 • I a ♦ w .4 J 0 O w 1 •. t < y O O: • a - i. z NE '1e{ .. • V - • 4 :. 'j o • ar o 084 Y •% O ,\ 1 \ . • • 0. Q 1 • m o o. • 0 •. D M • z • � . 4 : Ow •.a er1a . :. �, ,srz• .0 LosPo sa p • y 4 . / JB h n. eOP n 4 Z J O • #362 10/20/93 12:24,0ec $40.00 BK 727 PG 614 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 City Council Exhibit - - - - - --_ ...- - - - - -- - Approved r 19 _ By Ordinance ORDINANCE 10 SERIES OF 1993 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING SUBDIVISION FOR THE RIO GRANDE PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN THE ROARING FORK RIVER, AND THE PITKIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE AND THE ALLEY IN BLOCK 86, ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24 -7 -1004 C.1., of the Aspen Municipal Code the applicant, the City of Aspen, has submitted an application for subdivision of the Rio Grande property; and WHEREAS, the City has deemed it necessary to subdivide the Rio Grande property in order to convey to Pitkin County the "library parcel" and the property north of Pitkin County Jail for future expansion of the Jail, to accept from Pitkin County property upon which the municipal parking facility has been constructed and the portion of land within the County Courthouse Subdivision upon which the Youth Center has been constructed; and WHEREAS, certain City -owned land area of the Rio Grande parcel is being used for parking by the tenants of the Bass /Obermeyer buildings and the City may wish to either exchange, sell or lease the property; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter "Commission ") on February 2, 1993, to consider the subdivision; and WHEREAS, the Commission having reviewed the application and considered the representations and commitments made by the applicant found that the subdivision complied with Section 24 -7- 1004 and is not in conflict with any applicable portions of Chapter 24 or the draft Rio Grande SPA master plan; and WHEREAS, the Commission has recommended approval to the City r ,, - ,3 #362273 10/20/93 12:24 Rec $40.00 MC '$Z. FG 615 Silvia Aavis f i , tk:in Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 _ __ Council of the subdivision for the Rio Grande property; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council; having considered the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendations, does wish to grant subdivision with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1: That it does hereby grant subdivision of the Rio Grande property, such subdivision to be called the Rio Grande Subdivision consisting of 10 lots and further identified by the draft plat attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit Al, with the following conditions: 1. A subdivision agreement and plat consistent with the approval granted herein shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and Planning Departments. 1 2. A subdivision agreement and plat shall be filed with the Pitkin County. Clerk and Recorder within 180 days of final approval. 3. Any future development of the newly created parcels shall be reviewed and approved by the Commission and Council. 4. Monumentation of the property shall be completed by Spring of 1993. Section 2: 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. Section 3: 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. #362273 10/2 12 :24 Rec $40.00 BK 727 P6 616 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 -• Section 4: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the � day of L -' 1993 at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, b the City Council of the City of Aspen on the / Z- day of 1993. "¢-- 9./Z • John Bennett, Mayor 2;;; )14,c_ : KathrynKoch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this c day of c 1993. John B nnett, Mayor Att 1 ir _ / ,/ Kathrynf Koch, City Clerk •