HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sp.Rio Grande Appeal.0038.20100038. 010;ASLU RIO GRANDE APPEAL
LOT lJRIO GRANDE RECYCLE CENTER
O
QP�A4 V-111,6
1]
THE CITY OF ASPEN
City of Aspen Community Development Department
CASE NUMBER
PARCEL ID NUMBER
PROJECTS ADDRESS
PLANNER
CASE DESCRIPTION
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE OF FINAL ACTION
0038.2010.ASLU
NO PARCLE
Rio Grande RECYCLE CENTER
DREW ALEXANDER
APPEAL OF Rio Grande RECYLE CENTER
TONIKRONBURG
9.22.2010
CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 9. 22.10
003� • Zo � � • �s�..�-1
File
Edit Record NavotE Form Reports Format
Tab Hey
—-
D
Routing Status Fees Fee Summary Main Actions Attachments Routing History Valuation ArchjEng Custom Fields Sub Permits Parcels
Par* type lasu Aspen Land Use pvt ♦ F038.2010.ASLU
a
Address
AptjSu�te j
H
°o
City
5tete z
iT
X
--
Permit Information
D
Master permR
Raitrg queue sIu07 Applied A 4E10
b
x
Project
Stat e ntl ng Approved
_z
o
m
.. I
Descriptpn APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION -RECYCLE Issued
ENTER
Final
Submitted ITONI KRONBERG 319 0
Cb& unning pays [70 Expires 92011
Submitted via
Owner
Last name LOT 1 OF THE RIO GRANDE Fret name ECYCLE CENTER _� LOT 1 SUBDIVISION
Phone O _
ASPEN CO 81611
Address
Applicant
❑ Owner is ap*ant? L Contractor is applicant?
Last name RONBERG First name ITONI DO BOX 4554
SPEN CO 81612
Phone 970) 319-0771 Cust # 5671 Address
Lender
Last name First name
Phone O Address
Displays the permt lender's address , �..: ._. a ..�..d��:..� ..� ,, �.,,y� AspenGold5 (server) arias
No
vj C" v-K S c z CV
� ti�
0
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF
Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
ttyo 41i) 1 v,ty--, , 2046
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
1, A (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.) oftheAspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
y 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
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)
r- 0
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 foregoing "Affidavit of Notice' was acknowledged before me this P7 day
of , 20QL, by Ao ty a c�CF31�
OUBLIC NOTICE
RE: APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
Ilnsubstan!iai Specially Planned Area amendment
for the Lot 1 of the Rio Grande Subdivision)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
will be held on Monday August 9th. 2010, at a
meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen
City Council, Council Chambers. City Hall, 130 S.
Galena St., Aspen, to consider an appeal of an
administrative approval for an Insubstantial
Specially Planned Area (SPA) amendment issued
by the Community Development Department. The
Insubstantial Amendment approved landscaping
and site work to the Rio Grande Recycle Center,
local ad in Lot 1 of the Rio Grande
Subdivision/SPA. The appeal was submitted by
Toni Kronberg, P.O. Box 4554, Aspen. CO 81611.
For further information, contact Drew Alexander at
the City of Aspen Community Development
Department, 130 S. Galena SL, Aspen, CO, (970)
429.2739, drew alexander®ci awn co.us.
My COIINI n O!? Exoires 03/2912014
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires: 2� ?C ; i Lf
otary Public
a/Michael C. Ireland Chair
Aspen City Council
Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on duly,6. ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:
2010. [5296725j •
• COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
• 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
0 0
MEMORANDUM % %\ jo
TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Directo&S V, C� -
FROM: Drew Alexander, Planner L�A
RE: Appeal of Administrative Decision
DATE: August 23`d, 2010
SUMMARY:
This meeting was continued from the August 9`h City Council meeting. All materials included
with the first packet have remained the same. If you need additional copies contact Community
Development.
• • 1)(0
49
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
LOCATION:
Rio Grande
Subdivision/SPA, Lot 1.
SUMMARY:
The Applicant is appealing
an administrative decision
issued by the Community
Development Director,
which approved an
Insubstantial SPA
Amendment for
improvements to the Rio
Grande SPA.
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City
Council uphold the
Director's decision by
adopting the proposed
Resolution affirming the
Insubstantial SPA
Amendment.
Figure 1: Vicinity Map of Rio Grande Recycle Center
1
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 RmEw:
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'sauthority to
approve the proposed improvements for the recycling center. Staff s memo is written with
that assumption in mind.
4
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. 1.986); 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 Q. 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
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 finds 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. �5 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
rd
0 •
P153
RESOLUTION NO. 0
(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 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 provided
due process and neither exceeded his jurisdiction or abused his authority in rendering the
Interpretation; 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 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 52010.
{Signatures on folio« ing 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 Attorney
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 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 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
P156 0
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
John Worcester, City Attorney
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Resolution No.--, Series of 2010. Page 2
• P�tIr51r A
P157
N;O T ICJ 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 III No. 2737-07-3-06-851
,APPLICANT: City of Aspen
REPRESENTATIVE: Lee Cassin, Environmental Health Director
ent for
SUBJECT & SITE OF AMENIIMEN Insubstantial of he Rio SPA Grande Subdivsion/SPA eThe
Grande Recycle Center, located within Lot l
property lacks a physical address at this time.
SUMMARY:
The Applicant has requested an Insubstantial Amendment to the Rio Grande Recycle
Center, a Specially Planned Area (SPA). The site that contains the Recycle Center has
served a multitude of uses since the Rio Grande o lotpro,
a nov✓ retention and melting center,
received SPA approval in 1977.
Some of these uses include a towed car imp
and the existing recycling center. For a more detailed history on the subject site, see
Exhibit A.
f a
irt
nd
The Recycle Center is accessed off of Rio Grande
e Place
bms that thelsts var�o sr ecabl parking are
drop-off area. The site includes six large g
deposited into. Once full, these bins are loaded onto trucks and taken to the Pitkin
County Landfill or a separate processing faiel s no sort tof also
enclosed offireelspaler ccoat he
for yard waste and paper products. 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 b randsed conc�ete blasegforethe bins are
as to assist
with mud issues, drainage, and cleaning. Curb, gutter,ive
also included with his plan to assist with drainage and cleaning. erty o r Ve etvtisi screening
from
has been designated around the peri Smaller elements of the o the application include ADA
lity
neighboring properties (see Exhibit B).
accessible containers, designated snow storage, and a surveillance camera for security.
STAFF EVALUATION:
Staff supports the proposed SPAu y Amendment nefto itesince he 1980's.cyTheseechang s
facility that has been a valuable c ty
address elements of the facility that have ben aburden with mud and oassi towith the
rs of the
Recycle Center. Hardscaping will eliminateproblems
Page I 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:
Chiis Bendon
Community Development Director
Attachments:
Exhibit A — Site History
Exhibit B — Site Plan
Exhibit C — Review Standards
rc >
ate
Page 2of 4
0 (1 W--
z.
SIN3lN3AM:IdVll
d3IN303-10,k33'd
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 provisions 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)
June13 2010
Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.)
June13 2013
Expiration Date of Development Order (Tile extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and
revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.)
Issued This 2"d day of June, 2010, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director.
unity Development Director
• 0
P1 61
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306
ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Z,10
Aspen, CO
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
I �[�( (name, please print)
being or represeViting 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 acknowled ed before me this Ltf day
o, 20W, by S -
v -
�c1
PUBLIC NOTICE
of
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the
approval of a site specific development plan, and
the creation of a vested property right pursuant to
the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title
24, Article 6B, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertain-
ing to the following legally described property:
Subdivision: Rio Grande Lot: 1, Rio Grande Park,
Recycle Center, Aspen, Colorado 81611. the prop-
erty commonly known as the Rio Grande Recycle
Center (nonphysical address -for this property), by
order of the City of Aspen Community Develop-
ment Director on June 1, 2010. Parcel Id #
'37.073-06-851. The Applicant received an ad-
nistrative approval for an Insubstantial SPA
.nendmenL The approvals were granted for site
and operational improvements to the recycle facili-
ty. For further information contact Drew Alexander,
at the City of Aspen Community Development
Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970)
429-2739.
s/ City of Aspen
Publish in The Aspen Times Weekly on June 13,
2010 [5143559] --
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires:�G
Notary Public
ATTACHMENTS:
COPY OF THE P UBLICATION
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
•
• F-xHfr317-C
P163
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 cling "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this IT day
of , 200L, byIF
. a
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
l
S eciADMI I nedA,reaEam DECISION
�)rr
(Rinsubstantial
for the Lot 1 of a RioGrubdivision)ublic
hearingjvjy
IS H EBY GIVEN t uast Sir 2010, al awill
commission expires:NOTICE
be held on Monday,ug beforthe Aspen
meeting to begin at 5:00 p.
CHy Hall,
.Peel
eCity Council, Council Camers,
I of
of an/Galena St., Aspen, to consider an app
an Insubstantial
Aa x,
royalfor
edministrative appa n Specially planned Area,,enl Depamna I. Theo
Develop
y public
by the Commundy
oved landscaping Insubstantial Amendment append
to the Rio rande Recycle Caner
sHe work
located in Lot 1 of the Rio Grande
locatedi n L was submitted by
c a l
isro The appeal
Ton KronbeTrp� P.O. Box 4554,Araw s ndet1.
contact Drew Alexander at
Ex6res MEN
.
For further inMnnation,
the City of Aspen Community Development
130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970)
Department,
4292739 d� Iexander®ci ashen co. ri_s.
IMiehael C Ireland Chas
gspen City Council
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:
Published in the Aspen rimer Weekly on July 18,
_PUBLICATION
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
• LIST OF THE O WNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
• APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3
P164
•
E
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."
� �°► �---- jam•_ �`' � ' ��
Site A
Them
/ - I ♦ be. =Orr
Site B ' � `•� ,1. C
`I I TrarupeR�'JenlRecre.tiin ` ` \ \ '�� ��• ���
tr.rmW«, 4.
JJ� r A \ Tramp J
Lft. TM j' ra roves
Figure 1: Master Plan Site A and Site B
,
Recycle Center site,
called for
"transportation or
essential community
services."
5
•
•
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 Is 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 melter (page 6); and
Site. B: the recycle site (Old Impound lot) and .the
playing.field (page 13).
ffiSTORY
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
to purchase a
property.
3
7th penny transportation funds
majority of the Rio Grande
•.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 wasapproved by Council for
the parking garage. and, the Pitkin County
library.
* 1990 - A final SPA plan was approved_by Council for
the Youth Center..
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 tothe traditional
method of dumping snow on Site A. In .1991, the City Council
4
P167
RECEIVED
NOTICE OF APPEAL JUN 16 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
Rio Grande Pubic Notice
Public Notice Of Development Approval
Notice is hereby given to the general public of
the approval of a site -specific development plan,
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:
RECEIVED
JUN 16 2010
CITY OF A6PEN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
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)
O O�
O O
d cH O 4- G� O p • U' � c
cd
cd
CI
cn
c��C � -b s-. O � O U � • O O .ti Q c�i a) � c
cn
42,
O •� U v O vUi dj
ol 1-4
cl
cd s • cCi cd .0 cd • > y a)
cn 'b V)ct
ct
ct
4) a� cd U�-- 3 +-' cd a' 7-
CA
1-4
•�-'�' >, �'�' o ;z)
VI ,� � � ,
cn
ct
> -
oc
' N ^" cd O
U
c
ly3"7M34
ul9d(iY�iNO� v�
N-3dS`d d4 AIIO
OtOZ 9 I Nnr
691d
0
❑County Court;3istriet Court ❑Denver Juvenile Court ❑Denver Probate Court
NiKi o County, Colorado
Court Address: � -T ,'ee -
SOb E, N At
ASagL-, 0106LAdD 91611
l
Plaintiff/Petitioner:
V.
Defendant/Respondent/Co-Petitioner: (S'POzcr�'o
, AJ103 i tJ hi S o V;c, kL CA ct t As PeQsou L-
9,P OA-esear�*t'top fort U � A,te o4 1,,1 l' R 1,) (1D
COURT USE ONLY
Case Number:
'Ioew4
T- i AM A W I Division Courtroom
FINDING AND ORDER CONCERNING
❑PAYMENT OF FILING FEES ❑APPOINTMENT AND PAYMENT OF INTERPRETER COSTS
Name of Party filing Motion: M KiC a1,Ab'. A ate ) )bPittk on 2-0110(Date).
C-7BN i
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 ❑other:
❑ Eligible to have an interpreter for the following language
such costs to be paid by the State.
appointed and fdr
❑ Not Eligible to proceed. Party is responsible for payment of the filing fees and/or interpreter costs.
Date:
S' "ture of Eligibility Investigator, Clerk of Court, Judge/Magistrate
i•
i
ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Motion (JDF 205) and so orders:
-dl
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:
,'sludge ❑Magistrate
JDF 206 R9/08 FINDING AND ORDER CONCERNING PAYMENT OF FILING FEES/APPOINTMENT AND PAYMENT OF INTERPRETER COSTS
R % E I V E V, 0
J` N 25 2010 Fee Waiver Request Form
CITY OF ASrtN
- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMELity of Aspen
THE C(I Y 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?
Applicant Name:
Mailing address:
E-mail address:
Project name & address:
Fee Breakdown:
I BUILDING
l PLANNING >] ate ac
Contact Ph.# 9-U --? I ci- cn/
Fee Description
BUILDING
Original Fee
Amount
& PLANNING
Requested
Waiver
FEES
Fee Description
Original Fee
Amount
Requested
Waiver
Energy Code Fee
REMP Fee
Excavation Foundation Fee
Zoning Review Fee
Inspection Fee
Planning Application Fee
�3 J
Permit Fee
HPC Application Fee
Plan Check
Other:
TOTAL OF WAIVER REQUEST $
Reason for Waiver:
General Fund Department
F Waived or decreased by City Counci (specify ordinance or
� their—�Please explain:
(_ A ZZ 0 C Ll o A_ A�)-r Al 4 a
icant Si
For office use only:
Type of fees waived:
I
VED __I DISAPPROVED
m nity Development Director A
er decision document)
it
Date
Total fees waived: $ _23 5—' a
��/ I �i /7- Z) I -t-)
J /�i Date
0
•
•�1
1
�
I
•
iF
�
•
•
•
■
•
ai Ti
�a
AM
m
NOTICE OF APPEAL
According to Sec. 26.316.030. Appeal procedures.
• f—�x I•t l i3 1 T
RECEIVED
JUN 16 2010
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
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
� � f
CT
•
Rio Grande Pubic Notice
Public Notice Of Development Approval
Notice is hereby given to the general public of
the approval of a site -specific development plan,
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:
RECEIVED
JUN 16 2010
CITY OF A,, -HEN
COMMUNITY DEYELOPMENl
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)
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
0 Appeal 0
Standard of Review: Sec. 26.316.030.(E)
A decision or determination
shall not be reversed or modified
unless there is a finding of:
• 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
Insubstantial SPA amendment?
Site -specific development plan?
Vested property right?
Recycle center or improvements?
Approved by Comm.
Dev. Director
Discretion of
Director
Approved by
Ordinance
Adopted by
City Council
Established upon
approval of a
Site -specific
development
plan
•
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
0
0
Documents of Approval Issued by Director
1. NOTICE OF APPROVAL
(issued by Com Dev)
for an
SPA Insubstantial
Amendment
for the
Rio Grande Recycle Center,
located within Lot 1 of the
Rio Grande Subdivision/SPA
asphalt, curb & gutter,
landscaping with berm
June 1, 2010 J
2. DEVELOPMENT ORDER
(issued by Com Dev)
for
Vested Property Rights,
site -specific development
plan,
for the
Rio Grande Recycle Center
including hardscaping, asphalt
concrete bases, landscaping
Approved by an
Insubstantial SPA amendment
June 13, 2010
3. PUBLISHED PUBLIC NOTICE
of Development Approval
Aspen Times,
for a
site -specific development
plan and
creation of a vested
property right
for the
Rio Grande Recycle Center
PURSUANT
to Aspen's Land Use Code
and
Title 24, Article 68,
Colorado Revised Statutes
Applicant received
administrative approval
for an
Insubstantial SPA
amendment.
Approvals were granted for
site and operational
improvements to the
recycle facility
June 13, 2010
•
0
Has the recycle center ever been
approved for the Rio Grande property ?
History of Rio Grande Property... approved subdivision (10 lots)
Zoned Public with an SPA overlay, many SPA amendments
*1967— Denver Rio Grande Western Railroad began
discussions for rail with City of Aspen
*1973— 71h penny transportation funds used to
purchase Rio Grande property for 1.75 million dollars.
*1975? Transportation funds re -appropriated with
6th penny funds open space funds
*1977— Ordinance #54 rezoning Rio Grande property
(10 LOTS), according to an Specially Planned
Area Master Plan, the elements of which
Master Plan will constitute the development
regulations for the area all as provided by
Article VII, Chapter 24 of Aspen Muni Code
*1977— Rio Grande Specially Planned Area Master plan & plat
recorded with an interim SPA plan & plat also
recorded schematically identifying land uses
on the entire property
recreation & parking key uses
NO INCLUSION OF RECYCLE CENTER
Conceptual plan expired as final not adopted
*1987— Council adopted the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Element
which identified appropriate concepts for
the Rio Grande property
NO INCLUSION OF RECYCLE CENTER
*1988— Resolution # 37 of City Council approving the
Conceptual SPA Plan for Rio Grande Parcel
NO INCLUSION OF RECYCLE CENTER
*1989— Aspen City Council approved a temporary but
indefinite exemption from the Special Use
Review Process to allow the placement of
recycling containers next to the Rio Grande
Parking Lot/ Shortly thereafter, City Council
passed a Resolution generally supporting
recycling efforts but failed to commit to
specific actions.
Memo from Leslie Lamont to P & Z
RE: Recycle Center — SPA amendment
*1989— Final SPA plan approved for library and
parking garage
*1990— Final SPA approval for Youth Center
*1991— Memo Request from staff for conceptual SPA review for the
recycle center because the 1988 conceptual SPA plan
approval did not address specific projects for the Rio Grande
property.
In addition the continuation and/or expansion of the recycle
center is a revision of that original approval.
Property Ownership: Since the 711 penny transportation
funds which were used to purchase the Rio Grande property
were reappropriated by the use of the 61h penny open space
funds the City staff is currently researching the issues
involved with development of land that was purchased for a
public purpose and the funds that were used for that
purpose. A preliminary conclusion is that a change in use of
land that is used for a public purpose would require VOTER
APPROVAL.
*1991— Rio Grande (Recycle Center)Materials
Recovery Facility Conceptual SPA
Application ..closed and staff directed
to Master Plan for entire Rio Grande
Property
*1991— Council did not approve conceptual SPA
approval for the Art Park/Theatre and
Trolley Car Barn, snow dump/melter
operation, recycle center, and, instead,
directed staff to prepare a new
conceptual SPA
*1993- Ordinance #10 (recorded)granting
subdivision for the Rio Grande Property
with CONDITIONS...(#3) Any future
development of the newly created
parcels shall be reviewed by the
Commission and Council
*1993 - Subdivision Statement (Agreement)and plats (recorded)
of Subdivision Approval for Rio Grande
Subdivision with CONDITIONS
(#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 lots)
Zoned Public with an SPA overlay, many SPA amendments
*2000 — Ordinance #14, approving the
Specially Planned Area Review
to build a skateboard park and
to relocate the existing
basketball court
REVIEW PROCEDURE outlined
in memo for Ord. #14, 2000
This two step process requires
approval of a development
plan by the P & Z and CC,
with public hearings occurring
at both.
The Rio Grande master plan
was developed as a
conceptual SPA plan.
Following its adoption,
new development
or significant alterations must
be consistent with this
conceptual SPA plan and
be reviewed pursuant to
the final SPA development
review process.
*2002 — Ordinance #26 approving an
Amendment to the Rio Grande
Specially Planned area to install four
parking spaces, landscaping, and a
new curb cut off of East Bleeker St
*200- Hauler Ordinance mandates haulers
of trash also provide recycling
service at curbside
*200 - City Council approved
Ordinance # , 200
approving a rezoning for the Rio
Grande Park Recycle Center
*200 - Referendum Vote repealed the Rio
Grande Recycle Center rezoning
*2010 Memo for joint BOCC & CC meeting
With trash haulers providing these
services at the curbside some for the
free operations are redundant.
Landfill fees can no longer support
current level of recycling service in
addition to other priorities.
*2010 April 27 City Council work session
approved
"Maintenance Improvements"
for Recycle Center
•
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.
W,
•
0
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 land 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
•
0
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.
• 0
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
development plan for specially planned areas (SPA), after recommendations
of the Planning & Zoning Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.445
•
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.
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?
S FA Ppxo y.4 L
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
ORDINANCE NO. S
(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;
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
110W, THEREFORE,
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
West
of Section 7, Township 10 South,Range
of the 6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County,
Colorado, being more fully described as follows:
beginning at a point on the East side of Mill
Street whence the West one -quarter corner of said
Section 7 bears N38006'14"W 1,542.42 feet; thence
S56006'43"E 120.33 feet; thence N33°53135"E 78.32
feet; thence S75°51114 --- 67.25 feet; thence
N84034'25"E 121.34 feet; thence N81039130
35.'?4 feet; thence S00°17'28"W 130.87 feet;
thence S89028155"!] 184.09 feet; thence S00°
58'09"".4 109.72 feet; thence N16°34'56"E937 feet;
thence S74037'31"E 141-49 feet; thence S09°26126"E
412.35 feet; thence 4arc0of8aEc89.04urve tfeet; thence
233.41 feet along the
left
having a radius of 309.26 feet and a chord which
bears S64156'02"z 227.91 feet; thence the°arc0of.]
100.08 feet; _hence 309.38 feet along
a curve to the right having a radius of 409.34 feet
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 leaves —
o,., .... L. Cs
and a chord which bears N64054'19"W 302.07 feet;
thence N44054'27"W 66.04 feet; thence N75°12'56"W
15.36 feet; thence N75011'28"W 25.48 feet; thence
N16049123"r 83.76 feet; thence N73019'31"W 271.88
feet; thence sl6037'11""7 90.78 feet; thence
N57036'26"W 10.54 feet; thence S84021'32"�l
164.64 feet; thence N87031146"W 88.97 feet;
thence S14°26'08"W 75.82 feet; thence N43°12'17":1
408.87 feet; thence N19050'59"P. 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 definitional, 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.:1. 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
regular meeting held at the City
of Aspen on the //%% day of
1977.
Stacy St dley II Mayor
ATTEST:
Aathr�yns .?auter
City Cler
p on the day of
FINALLY adopted, and approved p
1977.
ATTEST:
Kathryn S iiaater
City Clerk
Stacy Standley III.
Mayor . t4-.t
=is
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100_ Leaves —
N
STATE OF COLORADO ) CERTIFICATE
) ss
COUNTY OF PIT:CIN )
I, Kathryn S. Hauter, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado,
do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ordinance was
introduced, read in full, and passed on y
reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Aspen on &f_0- 197� , and publish-
ed in the Aspen Times a weekly newspaper of general circul-
ation, published in the City of Aspen, Colorado, in its
issue of �� , 197 Z , and was finally adopted
and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council on
197Z, and ordered published as
Ordinance No., Series of 197of 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 w�-1 •C-�
day of /i `'d i'✓ , 197 '
Kathryn S cuter, City Clerk
PLAA1
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 12/16/92 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
DATE COMPLETE: ri3?-677,00 -tq3 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 Meeting Date d z PUBLIC HEARING: E NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
CC Meeting Date
DRC Meeting Date
PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
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:
r
FINAL ROUTING: _ DATE ROUTED: Jz Z� 3 INITIAL: "
City Atty City Engineer
Housing Open Space
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
Zoning Env. Health
Other:
CITY OF ASPEN RIO GRANDE
MASTER PLAN 1993
Prepared by:
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
Technical assistance provided by:
Rick McGill
0 9
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
g
* Recommended Action Plan Summary
11
Site B
* Map
13
* Existing Conditions
14
* Goals
14
* Recommended Land Uses/Activities
14
* Recommended Action Plan Summary
1s
Rio Grande Land Use Map
20
Appendix A - Potential Development Scenarios
Appendix B - History of Parcel
PURPOSE OF TEE 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 for a 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
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
Commissiondid 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
K
• 0
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 f irst 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 melter (page 6); and
Site B: the recycle site
playing field (page 13).
HISTORY
(Old Impound lot) and the
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
to purchase a
property.
3
7th penny transportation funds
majority of the Rio Grande
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.
11
Map 1 - Site A
�YGil
as
trgQ
`wr`r�
,
cFARLANE 1� - [ �---_ . .............. i
ONDOS -
KfYek
r ART PARK
c `� /TE �, z
pgss'we P
Q `
k1Art Theme 0.
' ` •` transition zone •�•— 6ch•�_Y
\
• _ n • N.
Transportation/Recreation
transition one t
O% _
� bQ0 O Transp./
O� O�llouth Recrea 'on
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.
III. Recommended Land-ITS-es/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 groups 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 ma'ntain 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 areawill 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 A:
11
• 0
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 melter (sedimentation pond)
should be recontoured to compliment the surrounding park
landscape and revamped to improve its function as a
settling pond for the snow melter.
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 Bleeker 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).
1.2
•
•
Map 2 - Site B
13
I. Existincr 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 welter 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
• 0
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 melter 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
•
0
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 2251) 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. B:
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 B 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
m
�
� h
h
UJ Z
8
Z 07
of a s
O b ... h
Z a
CC CC
8
C a
o
G Q
mO.o
og
i D p
0 0
•
E
APPENDIX A
POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS*
*These maps are provided as future land use guides. They were not
adopted as part of'the conceptual SPA Rio Grande master plan.
m
z
c
m
�
O
C m
v
o
4
tLU
m
OC
8
v
8
000
op
ea:
a
V
V
1
s
t
V
to
\
�
a
q
s
Z a.
m
w
cc Cuj
8
jjo
0o
00
0
V
J
4
�
�
§
$
$
$-
cm
. LIJ z
■ ,
2
J
%
■
LU
!
_
,�
• � �
[�
[2%
_.
LV
These specific development details were used to 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
12.91.
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.
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
G
0
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 10/20/93 12:24 Pec $40.00 BK 727 PS 609
Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00
STATEMENT OF SUBDIVISION
APPROVAL FOR RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION
This Statement' of Subdivision Approval is made and entered
into as of the ,.2(. _day of A a j, 1993, by the City of Aspen,
Colorado, a municipal corporate nnand 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 plat 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:
#36227010/20/93 12:24 Rec $40.00 BK: 727 PG
� 610
Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk;, Doc $.U(-)
I. CONDITIONS
1. Any future development of the newly created parcels shall
be reviewed and approved by the Commission and Council.
II. ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL PLAN
Upon execution of this Agreement, the City shall approve and
execute the Rio Grande Subdivision, and cause the final plat to be
filed in the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO
a munic' al corporation
By; �3
Jo n Bennett, Mayor
1 1
1 � 1 •� �` ` s3 R
H1yd
3�fg
1 t in
\ 1
1 : t 1 � ♦ :3
1
y•iil 1 m ~O O ��
� f•V 'y
Z 1 �
/ 1 _ NB7°31 46 M 18.95"
S1402COB W
/ 75.82
G LEN ST.
S14°5049'W 83.19
cc
00
40
ev
/ •MI
/ � 0 O ♦ i � � Y � ♦• t'D
�Y =4r Ivy ♦ + xJ _ (_..__- coO
O ~
j0. 1 3 ta =
o wr W 60e 00.94 1 ,: _ o IL
vs- .e rl ti 3 sr,ot.►1 K
,0eQ}t•. ,OZ'os
UOW r h+ i < ( •w1 ~►1* WM
y •� a -W 1 �oac
Q
_ O 0 1to
r T Y JJ
M W 1 N JW
i U• � O N W W t - J N
U r n Q •0. l7 1 I
1
oo
2 1
1 j Mf 1•F O O /
I, A 1
r P. ` so 1 140 50" 49" 183.68"
«— 2/ = Z
., ,Qt•av
iota°$ _JOC Aqua uz. 'sane Mtn
o O u
r
-
ouowc
�
y
o
s000�
ST.
W W
SPRING
SPR
n
♦
N
t0hn-
N `N O
is it
aim^�
�
7p
NO�O OI
♦'o Ooo
< C d U U f
W
,^
V J
S
ti
r
0
J
rya
W
w Fw
p\ZW�
M-,pZ,11pS1N
W
W
W
N
s�
�.
�O
O� h
T
�
W
Y
W
1
IZ
3
10
s
O
N
S
LJ
r
A
O
fx+IiG�s
N
a
0
p
Z
w
1
r _
4
F O
(
b
1 �
/ 'dW
J •w
�p f
Y
J
I
I
is w
W
La
pi
tl
Z � U
O tr 3
1' O ai
� tl Q t0
N
=
ZO N 2 ¢
W N = �
¢Z mbW 100
O U W U¢ W
W{ W Z W Z
O J TWO IZ-
¢
Zyaj ¢L I-O
W¢ Q N¢ W U
¢ W a W O W
Kim►-00 W
y ►- z
W
W Or yF� =1-
j
W Z
1'
O w u. 2z
2-4 Ni'a O W
W
y Fa- y7EN �>
azI-�
z
O >f Wi 0 W W�
x K
Zvi ¢(�
= z = d � z a
O O O¢ W 04
ma zU2 up
• e
fso•2t'?d'w
42 16
W .a
On o
n In.
NO
o Z
e
r
Q
of . ,� Bf •ti • Sao
• oa
\ �4
u W
m
J •
y
N n
n
r
♦
N
A A
N
P p
7�tb.
t
.DO• �
ai
►y
O% Cj
1oi
O
3•rc.rr•rfM
c i
a ?
:
*
�
O
� O
3 T
n
O
O V
T
t
y
=
♦
o
e
K r •
W i
Z Or
A �
W N j�
ra.
_==o
e
c W
##36227 3 lo/2O/43 12: 2410ec $40. 00 BK 727 PG 614 •
Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 City Council Exhibit—L
Approved 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 2.4-7-1004 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
•
#362273
1 /20/93
12: 24 Rea
$40- 00 Bl' �`l� PG 615
Silvia
Davis,
Pitl.::in Cnty
Clerk_, Doc $.00 ___... -_
l 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.
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.
40
#3622 i 3 10/20/93 12.24 Rec s4U. oo BK' 727 PG 616
Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Floc $.0(-)
Section 4: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the
day of 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.
John Bennett, Mayor
Atte t:
Kathryn' . Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of
1993.
t3
John B nnett, Mayor
Att st:
Kathryn . Koch, City Clerk