HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.100 N 8th St.21A-88 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
L/ City of Aspen
1
DATE RECEIVED: /4e6 / PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
DATE COMPLETE: Oc i3J - fl3 -o O(I -2 -n
STAFF MEMBER: '' - - g-
PROJECT NAME: LA GL O' . / � M U /
._ � 1 ILP OVA CU - i / L_[
Project Addre s: / - -
APPLICANT: d i fL c X/ ,Ol, i� f -
Applicant ddress ,1. Vg/ ( i
REPRESENTATIVE: ■
'1b b- ar.,pzvo,
Representative Address /Phone:
PAID: NO AMOUNT: #/i S7O.00 -- ^ -_ - - -- —A
1) TYPE OF APPLICATION:
1 STEP: 2 STEP: ./
2) IF 1 STEP APPLICATION GOES TO:
P &Z CC PUBLIC HEARING DATE: :S 4 -4... 1 5 .
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO _
3) PUBLIg HEARING I8 BEFORE: 01?,44f
&Z F CC p N/A
DATE REFERRED: (" ) -// - A 7
O Q INITIALS ( II- �'
City Attorney Mtn. Bell School District 'z'
City Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn Nat
Housing Dir. Holy Cross State Hwy Dept(GW
Aspen Water Fire Marshall State Hwy Dept(G3)
City Electric Fire Chief B1dg:Zon /Inspect
Envir. Hlth. Roaring Fork Roaring Fork
Aspen Consol. Transit Energy Center
S.D. ] 1 p.7 Other
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: /`!J( INITIAL:
J City Atty ✓ / J City Engineer Bldg. Dept.
Other: /J /�rn� /
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: C /&th 1 'W�/ft . `f �/ I (.4)f )"`
t YF
C.• 4: ' _
CASE DISPOSITION
Villas of Aspen Townhouses' PUD Amendment- approved with the
following conditions:
o Any landscape material destroyed during construction
will be replaced with comparable or better material.
o Prior to the issuance of a building permit the
applicant shall, to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Department, submit a Final .Plat which
conforms to the requirements of the Municipal Code.
o Prior to issuance of a Building Permit the Applicant
shall provide a resolution of the Board of Directors
approving the Plan as submitted.
o The proposed carports are not approved and must be
deleted from the amended plat.
S
ki
f ro
C 3
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 25, 1988
condominiumization plat and #3 that the applicant will join in an
improvement district and that the impact fee for employee housing
is being waived; seconded by Councilman Tuite. All in favor,
motion carried.
PUD AMENDMENT - Villas of Aspen Townhouses
Tom Baker, planning office, told Council this is a PUD amendment
for the Villas located between Hallam, Main and Eighth streets.
This amendment is for the old Villas. Baker told Council P & Z
approved the PUD amendment, deleting the carport aspect of the
proposal. P & Z is concerned about potential highway alignments,
especially the direct alignment coming in Main street. Baker
pointed out the city attorney's office prepared a waiver allowing
the owners on the south portion of the site to sign so that if
the highway were to come through there and there was compensa-
tion, these owners would waive the added value of these improve-
ments. Baker said the P & Z also wanted to make sure the
condominium owners as a whole are in favor of this proposal.
Baker told Council this PUD amendment is done in total, rather
than piecemeal like the Aspen Club. Staff reviewed the charac-
ter, visual impact, landscaping, FAR, density, potential impacts
to open space, and transportation. Staff found that the proposal
was compatible with what exists. P & Z has recommended approval
with conditions that any landscape material destroyed during
construction be replaced with comparable or better material; that
prior to the issuance of building permit the applicant shall, to
the satisfaction of the engineering department, submit a final
plat which conforms to the requirements of the Municipal Code;
that the applicant shall provide documentation that the Board of
Directors are acting with the support and knowledge of the
homeowners, as indicated in the Association rules; that the
proposed carports be deleted from the proposals; and that units
31 through 36 be required to sign the attached waiver in case the
highway requires compensation on a direct connection.
Welton Anderson said they have no problems with the first
condition regarding landscaping. Anderson told Council there are
3 options; one is doing all the units at once and does not
involve an increase in square footage; the other two are options
of individual owners adding a small amount of square footage.
Depending on what option is chosen is what can be submitted to
the building department. Anderson said the third condition
involves the knowledge of the homeowners. Anderson told Council
there was a meeting held July 12 which was duly notified by
registered mail; proxies were sent in. the meeting was continued
until the Villas could get the required 85 percent of the
homeowners to verify the change to allow this amendment.
Anderson said he feels this is sufficient for the city to
14
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 25, 1988
acknowledge there is authorization from the Association as a
whole, with the Board acting in their interest.
Anderson said the fourth condition is that the carports be
deleted. Anderson showed pictures of what the carports would
look like from across the street. Anderson told Council this
would be a horizontal line that is transparent. The applicants
want to get east light into the carports. Anderson said he does
not feel P & Z's recommendation about the carports was based on
enough information.
Anderson said he does not feel there is any way to convince the
owners in units 31 through 36 to sign the waiver. Anderson said
P & Z's intent was to let the owners know there may be a highway
coming through and the city does not want to be liable for
approving this amendment. Anderson told Council the prices for
that block of units has always been 25 percent lower than the
rest of the units in the complex because of the possibility of
the highway location. Fred Gannett, city attorney's office, said
P & Z was going to deny this application if there was no atten-
tion paid to the fact these six units may be effected by the
highway alignment. Gannett said P & Z wanted the owners of these
units to waive any increase in additional value. Gannett said he
does not feel this has to be done, but it was a concern of the
majority of P & Z. Councilman Gassman said he cannot see why the
city would require this waiver. Gannett recommended that the
waiver is not necessary.
Mickey Herron, representing the condominiumium association to the
east and Herb Klein, said the reason they are against the
carports is the majority of the trees lose the leaves during the
winter and the carports would be visible from all around. Herron
said the nice thing about both of the Villas is that people can
see through them. Herron said the particular carport area is
elevated and putting a structure on top of this would be blocking
the view. P & Z was unanimous in not approving the carports.
Anderson said the height of the carport is 8 to 10 feet and will
be built into the berm that currently exists. Herron said cars
are much less intrusive than seeing a solid wall along Eighth
street.
Councilman Gassman said the carports do not bother him, but if
P & Z and the neighbors feel they are a problem, he will go along
with deleting them. Baker requested clarification on condition
t3. Anderson told Council the Association did an information
mailing to see if they should proceed with this amendment. The
feedback was overwhelmingly in favor. There is a rather lengthy
formal process to change the declarations and by -laws to allow
this. Anderson said at this point, there is no written documen-
tation they can give the city showing they have a majority of the
15
Regular Meeting Aspen City Council July 25, 1988
Association behind the proposal. Anderson suggested a time
factor be put on the third condition that prior to the issuance
of a building permit, documentation be provided to staff to
illustrate that the Board is acting with the approval of the
homeowners. Gannett said this should be a resolution of the
Board that they have had a vote and whatever the by -laws require
for an amendment.
Councilman Tuite moved to approve the Aspen Villas PUD amendment
with conditions 1 and 2 as outlined in the memorandum; condition
3 with the amendment that prior to the issuance of a building
permit it be shown that the PUD is be acted upon with the consent
of the Board of Directors of the condominium association; 4 as is
and condition #5 be withdrawn; seconded by Councilman Isaac. All
in favor, motion carried.
RESOLUTION #20, SERIES OF 1988 - Marolt Ranch Exhibit
Tom Baker, planning office, said this is a request for endorse-
ment for an amendment to the existing parks /recreation /open
space /trails element. Baker told Council Carl Bergman and the
historical society have been working with the planning office for
the last 18 months on the idea of renovating the Marolt barn and
having some historic exhibits. This has been refined in a work
session with Council. This would be a historic ranching exhibit
including the barn and 1.9 acres.
Carl Bergman, representing the historical society, told Council
they have gone before the HPC. P & Z's only major concern was
that the highway may come straight through the Marolt property.
Bergman said the city can come up with a solid decision that the
highway will not effect this project. P & Z otherwise favors
this project. Bergman told Council there has been a lot of work
on this project. One point was to have to no cars in this area.
Bergman agreed it would be a good thing not to have automobiles
on this property. Bergman said it would be better to have the
entrance to this off of Castle Creek.
Mayor Pro Tem Fallin asked if the historical society will take
the responsibility for maintaining this exhibit. Mayor Pro Tem
Fallin said she would like to see a formal agreement between the
city and the historical society regarding this maintenance.
Bergman said they would agree with this. Councilman Isaac said
according to the sixth penny ordinance, this project has to be
taken to a vote of the electorate. Fred Gannett, city attorney's
office, said the exceptions for this are, the city shall not
permit the change in use of real property acquired for open space
purposes other than recreational, agricultural and undergrounding
easements. Gannett said if a museum falls into recreational or
agricultural definitions, this does not to be taken to a vote.
16
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Tom Baker, Principal Planner JB
RE: Aspen Villas PUD Amendment
DATE: June 29, 1988
SUMMARY: Staff recommends approval of the requested amendment
with conditions.
APPLICANT: Aspen Villas Townhouse Condominium Association
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: C. Welton Anderson
LOCATION: Eighth Street between Hallam and Main,(see exhibit 1).
ZONING: R -MF PUD, (see exhibit 1).
PARCEL SIZE: 100,188 square feet, excluding the steep slope and
valley floor.
NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: This development is part of
Aspen's west end neighborhood. The neighborhood is essentially a
mix of single - family and multi - family residential with nearby
lodge and restaurant uses along the SH 82 /Main Street corridor.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: PUD Amendment, (see exhibit 2). The
applicant proposes to update the design of the Villas, to remedy
some existing design flaws and to provide the opportunity for
modest expansions at the option of individual owners. This would
include enclosing of existing balconies and expanding existing
bedrooms and living areas; new decks may also be added and
carports similar to the type found in Snowmass Village are
proposed.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Engineering Department states that the
plat must conform with the Municipal Code, (see exhibit 3).
STAFF COMMENTS: The criteria which the staff will use to
evaluate this amendment as provided in the new Code, is whether
the amendment is consistent with the basic intent of the original
PUD. The record of the original intent of this PUD is
incomplete; however, the staff feels that the intent was to
cluster the housing and parking to create a multi - family
environment which takes best advantage of open space associated
with the development. More specifically, staff will review the
amendment's effect on character, visual impact, landscaping,
FAR, density, open space and transportation impacts.
Character- The staff finds that the proposed changes to the
PUD do not compromise the general character of the
development, that is the development will still be a multi-
family, clustered, residential development similar in scale
to what currently exists.
Visual Impact- Staff feels that the view from Hallam Street
provides the greatest exposure to people travelling through
the area and, therefore, the Hallam units have the greatest
potential for visual impact. The staff feels that the
architectural changes to the residences will not be negative
and that since carports are not proposed for the Hallam
Street parking lot there will be no negative visual impact
created by this development.
Landscaping- This proposal will not effect existing
vegetation, although it is possible that plant material may
be damaged during construction. The applicant also proposes
to construct a carport on the east property line which will
require variance in the side yard setback. Staff suggests
that the applicant provide the Engineering Department with
drawings of this proposal, including topography, to
determine if the right -of -way is negatively effected.
FAR- Even with full buildout of this proposal the
development would be under allowable FAR. Under Plan C the
floor area (including basements) would increase from 63,360
to 71,280, a 12.5% increase. This seems like a significant
increase, however, it is still considerably below the FAR
of 1:1 allowed in the R -MF zone.
Density- The applicant is proposing no expansion in unit
count, so there is no effect on the development's density.
Open Space- In staff's opinion the applicant's proposal does
not significantly reduce the development's open space.
Transportation- This proposal will not create additional
automobile trips.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the PUD Amendment
for the Aspen Villas with the following conditions:
o any landscape material destroyed during construction
will be replaced with comparable or better material.
o the applicant provide the Engineering Department with
construction drawing of the carport, retaining wall and
berm so that the Engineering Department can determine
that no impacts to the r -o -w will be created.
o Prior to the issuance of a building permit the
2
applicant shall, to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Department, submit a Final Plat which
conforms to the requirements of the Municipal Code.
3
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City /County Manager
FROM: Tom Baker, Principal Planner
RE: Aspen Villas PUD Amendment
DATE: July 6, 1988
SUMMARY: The Planning Office and the Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends approval of the Aspen Villas PUD Amendment
with conditions.
BACKGROUND: At the regular P &Z meeting of July 5, 1988, the P &Z
approved this PUD amendment without the carports due to the
neighborhood concerns regarding views and the visual enclosing of
the open space from east of Eighth Street. Further, P &Z had
concerns regarding the increased value of the southernmost units
and how the improvements would effect the decision regarding
future highway alignments. Due to these concerns the P &Z
required a condition of approval which called on the City
Attorney to develop language which would require the owners of
those southernmost units to waive the increased value of the
improvements in case a new highway alignment caused compensation.
Additionally, the P &Z wanted the applicant to document that the
Board of Directors are acting with the support and knowledge of
the homeowners.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The following information was part of the
P &Z packet which led to their recommendation.
APPLICANT: Aspen Villas Townhouse Condominium Association
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: C. Welton Anderson
LOCATION: Eighth Street between Hallam and Main,(see exhibit 1).
ZONING: R -MF PUD, (see exhibit 1).
PARCEL SIZE: 100,188 square feet, excluding the steep slope and
valley floor.
NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS: This development is part of
Aspen's west end neighborhood. The neighborhood is essentially a
mix of single - family and multi - family residential with nearby
lodge and restaurant uses along the SH 82 /Main Street corridor.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: PUD Amendment, (see exhibit 2). The
applicant proposes to update the design of the Villas, to remedy
some existing design flaws and to provide the opportunity for
modest expansions at the option of individual owners. This would
include enclosing of existing balconies and expanding existing
bedrooms and living areas; new decks may also be added and
carports similar to the type found in Snowmass Village are
proposed.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Engineering Department states that the
plat must conform with the Municipal Code, (see exhibit 3).
STAFF COMMENTS: The criterion which the staff will use to
evaluate this amendment as provided in the new Code, is whether
the amendment is consistent with the basic intent of the original
PUD. The record of the original intent of this PUD is
incomplete; however, the staff feels that the intent was to
cluster the housing and parking to create a multi - family
environment which takes best advantage of open space associated
with the development. More specifically, staff will review the
amendment's effect on character, visual impact, landscaping,
FAR, density, open space and transportation impacts.
Character- The staff finds that the proposed changes to the
PUD do not compromise the general character of the
development, that is the development will still be a multi-
family, clustered, residential development similar in scale
to what currently exists.
Visual Impact- Staff feels that the view from Hallam Street
provides the greatest exposure to people travelling through
the area and, therefore, the Hallam units have the greatest
potential for visual impact. The staff feels that the
architectural changes to the residences will not be negative
and that since carports are not proposed for the Hallam
Street parking lot there will be no negative visual impact
created by this development.
Landscaping- This proposal will not effect existing
vegetation, although it is possible that plant material may
be damaged during construction. The applicant also proposes
to construct a carport on the east property line which will
require variance in the side yard setback. Staff suggests
that the applicant provide the Engineering Department with
drawings of this proposal, including topography, to
determine if the right -of -way is negatively effected.
FAR- Even with full buildout of this proposal the
development would be under allowable FAR. Under Plan C the
floor area (including basements) would increase from 63,360
to 71,280, a 12.5% increase. This seems like a significant
increase, however, it is still considerably below the FAR
of 1:1 allowed in the R -MF zone.
2
Density The applicant is proposing no expansion in unit
count, so there is no effect on the development's density.
Open Space In staff's opinion the applicant's proposal does
not significantly reduce the development's open space.
Transportation This proposal will not create additional
automobile trips.
ALTERNATIVES: The City Council can approve, approve with
conditions or deny this application.
RECOMMENDATION: The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends approval of the Aspen Villas PUD Amendment with the
following conditions:
o Any landscape material destroyed during construction
will be replaced with comparable or better material.
o Prior to the issuance of a building permit the
applicant shall, to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Department, submit a Final Plat which
conforms to the requirements of the Municipal Code.
o Prior to issuance of a Building Permit the Applicant
shall provide a resolution of the Board of Directors
approving the Plan as submitted.
o The proposed carports are not approved and must be
deleted from the amended plat.
PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve the Aspen Villas PUD
Amendment with the above conditions.
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS:
aspenvillascc
3
EXHIBIT 2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Villa of Aspen Townhoues Condominium Association
DATE: 25 April 1988
RE: PUD Amendment to Villa of Aspen Townhouses
PURPOSE: The owner's of the Villa of Aspen Townhouses have been
in the process of developing a set of designs that would update the
image of the Villas, remedy some existing design flaws, and provide
the opportunity for modest expansions if individual owners wish to.
Problems identified by owners include upstairs bedrooms that are
very dark and have severly restricted views because of the 4' deep
and low (6' -3 ") overhangs as well as high railings. In addition,
48 bedrooms (half of the total bedroom count) are 9' -5" x 10' -7 ",
100 sf) which they feel are much too small and should be enlarged
out onto the balconies which are themselves too small and dark to
be used for anything but storage. Downstairs, in the 2- bedroom
units, the living /dining rooms are only 16' x 17' with views and sunlight
restricted by the overhangs of the bedroom balconies. Additionally,
many owners want some sort of covered parking similar to several
of the condominium complexes at Snowmass.
SOLUTION: Through the course of numerous meetings it was agreed
that there would be three levels of exterior remodeling: Plan A (the
base level plan) would be undertaken and paid for by the whole association
and done to every unit as a complex wide upgrade to solve the
above mentioned problems. Plan A does not involve any additional
square footage but can easily accommodate future expansion (Plans
B or C). Plan A will cut back the roof overhands at the upstairs
bedrooms about 3 feet by the width of the sliding glass doors to
bring in more Tight and views. The rest of those balconies that are
typically used for outdoor storage) will be walled in for ...outdoor
storage. Balcony railings on both levels will be lowered about a
foot and steel pipe rails will be added. All entry porches receive
a glass windbreak.
Plans B & C are the expansion plans that are to be undertaken by
individual owners. They differ only in size and degree of structural
alterations. For both plans upstairs, the balconies get enclosed with
a greenhouse treatment that fills in the openings created for Plan
A. Downstairs, Plan B encloses about 2/3 of the exisiting living
room deck (91 sf) with a greenhouse; and plan C encloses the whole
deck (140 sf). In limited locations, where no vegetation would be
disturbed, where no walks or views would be encroached upon and
with the (written) approval of the Board of Directors, deck space
that is lost to new enclosure may be replaced.
About 1/3 of the owners have expressed a desire to do Plan B or
C immediately, and we are expecting more conversions from Plan A
to Plans B or C in the future.
•
Page Two
To avoid the case by case, piecemeal approach that you are familiar
with on the additions to the Aspen Club condos P.U.D., we are re-
questing to have the full buildout (Plan C) for all units approved.
In this fashion, the City can look at the impact of the maximum potential
at buildout at once, and individual owners (most of whom are local
employees) won't have to make individual applications to the City
at a cost of $1570 each to add 140 square feet to their living room.
Carports: In the parking lot off the 8th street loop there is an ideal
location for providing covered parking for approximately 18 cars.
On either side of the entrance off of 8th street is a berm approximately
4' high that now shields the parking lot from the street. The berm
is entirely in the public Right -of -Way but has been landscaped, sprinklered,
and maintained by the Villas for 16 years. We propose to construct
a 4 to 5 foot retaining wall along the east property line between the
existing pavement and the berm. Approximately 2 to 3 feet above
the retaining wall and supported on columns, a shed roof will extend
20 feet to the west and cover 6 cars on the south and 12 cars on
the north of the entry. The berm will be slightly recontoured to
rest against the retaining wall and additional landscaping provided
to screen the carport roof.
This approach will require a variance in the side yard setback to
allow construction of the east wall of the carports on the property
line which can be granted as part of the P.U.D. amendment. In
reality, the perceived side yard along 8th street (which is 35 feet
deep at its minimum) will be essentially unchanged.
VISUAL IMPACTS: The area of main concern is the view of the Villas
from State Highway 82. Currently the complex looks like a group
of very uniform and rather boring structures that look vaguely
threatening with their pill -box gun slot balconies perched on the
edge of the Castle Creek bluff. The homeowners wish to update
the look of the complex with the plan A up grade and add visual
interest and variety by providing standards for Plans B and C. The
visual impact on the Castel Creek Bluff is already there. We feel
these alterations and small additions will provide a more positive image
of the Villas as one enters Aspen.
Carports: The area where these would be visible is the one block
segment of 8th street that connects the west ends of Main and Bleeker
Streets. All one would see is the fascia of the shed roof 2 to 3 feet
above the berm and screened by mature landscaping.
F.A.R.: Not counting the land owned by the Association of the steep
slope and in the valley floor of Castle Creek, the flat area above
totals 2.3 acres or 100,188 square feet. Counting basements at 100$,
the total existing floor area is 63,360 square feet. The full Plan
C addition adds 80 square feet upstairs (fully enclosing both balconies)
and 140 square feet downstairs for a total of 220 square feet. If
all 36 townhouses opted for Plan C, it would add 7920 square feet
for a total of 71,280 square feet, well below the 1:1 allowed on a
100,188 square foot RMF lot.
Carports: Total square footage of covered parking is 3360 square
feet. Even if parking is counted in F.A.R., it will not exceed what
is allowable.
Page Three
EFFECT ON EXISTING LANDSCAPING: Since all additional square
footage is to be located where there currently are decks, and new
decks are prohibited where they disturb existing vegetation, there
will be no effect on existing landscaping.
Carports: The only area being covered is already asphalt. Any
disruption to the berms will be restored and new landscaping will
be added.
CREATION OF ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS: The addition of a 7'x20'
greenhouse enclosure in the primary view area of the living room
doesn't seem a logical location for a new bedroom. Upstairs, adding
4 feet to the depth of the existing bedrooms doesn't provide enough
space to create any new bedrooms. In fact, in at least 2 of the
3 bedroom units the wall between the 2 small (9' -5" x 10' -7 ") bedrooms
has been removed to create one larger bedroom for an overall reduction
in bedroom count.
EFFECT ON PRIOR CONDITIONS OF APPROACH: At this time there
appears to be no record of any conditions of approval in existence.
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS: At this time there is not change
in the siding materials which is a textured grooved plywood called
T 1 -11. The greenhouse enclosures are annodized dark bronze aluminum
cladding over wood frames. Glass will all be insulated double glass
(the Villas are all single glass now). All new construction is 2 x
6 to allow for insulation up to current requirements.
Carports: The carports will be open on all sides except the portion
that is bermed. The shed roof will be covered with shingles (to
match the townhouse roofs). Framing will be post and beam.
PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY Li- 7
PROJECT: VI11as4 Aspen 11101 P UD Arotoirm,,i
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: 14 . ) € 1-4, AALPA rn
REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE: 935-4576
OWNERS NAME: Ullla-, !' r1so'n CDnrlom', in. Owned AsJPIIAflon
SUMMARY
1. Type of Application: P (JD Amcn /mcnt" , Sechoi, 14- $•9 6 �
2. Describe action/type of development being requested: aw"-e"
Bock tokoAbvN' Hr 6✓p1�-c ik-PH t (;rh�wcJ 0.4. a '' %DATA
sn I encjDt2 At k /rceonii rink's to A4J v� 4 .VAJAAF 1 'ILi Pr.AP t{ p t.r�fr }
i
QQ DD G
3. Areas in which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of
reports requested:
Policy Area/
Referral Agent Comments
En <ec , n) — (') ;±re t AAY '1 � pv nDt#.p�X nAAAwsov w✓ h e1hi IDD�'f,
lit lost A Q44, 4 ' l JJ Gus , Q :t -fo,r ..
U
— A ' f i t 4 /Slope redo /pod za)•l dito4t, in, in D v 7 ) .
;5011 I Alp ftS I eldr t 011 bvik> p ilki�
C r,41kb. 1 l r D OnJvtyl a , "{,p y )
_ ) �� cf n' L¢Y,�/./�iA�Dwi� �GL IH
_ (6` Ef(e<t p, a ny py or cpprovAls 1 cone 4 1pprb 4I
A +y f orst St.tc r o,t q Pvn A n.n1»cw'
4. Review is: (P &Z Only) (CC/BOCC Only) (P &Z then to C /BOCC)
5. Public Hearing: (YES) (NO)
6. Did you tell a•• cant to submit list of ADJA EN ROPERTY
OWNERS? (YES) (NO) Disclosure of Ownership: (YES) :(NO)
cl.rfir,+i,„ a.t (crJD.Artn,
7. What fee was applicant requested to submit: � is're -e-4 . 3110 ^zr
rep v a,< .t.t∎a +D
8. Anticipated date of submission: DxJv ✓t +14 ,prix „ +r,
9. COMMENTS /UNIQUE CONCERNS: �'`
A ptII La I l is Yi i�DVIJ 11, IL •,Aketter ell " 61 p " D e<�,` o v' ft option ankat 4P.y�•�
'//' j' + � . un ' � ` IvntD �/ DJ, cloy�y'1�C ILO FA R axd un (DVnt 1Iofr, `expatn:,,;n t /11.1; LA Vek
1 f FAR a I�
��!+vnntldks 51{- o
1 tJ FA
A �ie>;I�;�,,� 6,+�- �- o�� I k Aw.
owL O )Jn. /;1 („km. l t,M v? ,,,Lkt ”) Wrtecon, l8) 0), 6 }kLtm 4 /
i v
�w I. a; )L ✓f aA,vuw
� A , tl,„- i >nt / .. �le"y2 )114,HFAT - eSrrf 5` itiM .frilk f tl m Nrtny
c S t 4Q p Q h / LAH�JeA t { PI Rh 7
D. Pi f or .
MIN44. W. MaJot LM4 JA Haag HUM Oa&NLV4 �� _
44.44.14 44.44.14
OP'W4 'A • O1'IIa'I G• JM 0Mal `S' )
•
7 nista cuss;
K 4•
( u * K«• _ O'04•
E iT&TI
I��l
}
• t .'-a
WI tair2
i 0/N[ta e.4t . ,
' J c••4
u PPEe Isva(- Ft.w
aPoON A' (newel bpic 00 4 (Maio 4 I opno J Y MtpIMl
Spite -4I motets, n'L
LN MVIV Ia.+t/wu40
/ Y
d aaw DbK
IK w4is Jfl -Nose uta ALt S- ceSeZeflK 1 - - 1 Q4 L•
oibMN4 AVtatgv of •41001A1b1'i NYSLe 1 - '"'qL
we TMLVIUA a' *WOW 'f.4; Ileitis AND a a4 5uutmi(CLh vm 11
OHW mu. K PF/OdtiT a Oa TaM to II .0
aa+B+ a /M ovusds pgg9lt aet 4 weer, K _ _ _ _ _ -
N all +tart
• -__ - - -__ Q1 1
an. AS tI
as M 0.1111104 A Gang Of WM, bip114 -_ (WTU W l . IP.L• It•
-ass, 7YA•CL 7D /MK NNAM4S,eK. TareNPE e.6u.�KyL�t =__
AM_ teww-nnl! t ALL 7G was taunt' se Sate° 1: rd. (4Z - - 3 7
at Tds 14...t.. OF MAWJ. 114. fl' t L WS, 1 Sri ' - u a i ii a 2 1 =1 ' pp td
of nsPOGa1 i AK Aa ryL.at' : (I 1 .. I— CgiRre
- P-A N a' MtN[): "awl 0042 ° anal a t. at1 1 I
[Auto/4.)w WO: IFi..tL4 Sit' Ma Nall HIV ..iL, I 1 ; 1 ^mo
sIt a...,se to rat at. a'f Sal :Is PS t II
Oa taw OW O/f PJN•1( a taaC AT s/:4t•l •
4....0.4 4.44s °Y Ii S - w° PI/O.. MI E*4&a LGy. I '� 1 f
J• .flU Mai 416 .a.d dAhLIi. I F I II I.1 I yL j
- 9 -v.11 •f : ere H Lien Kr !Peal - 1 X11 I i - -
tamotel _ r 3
AAa.41I,LY Vs oo WI by MS to __ -- I S • io) +oJte rfede'. n.t .,.P) a+...r4' - -, . • . I Y BOO
tow000y tot S woo ,s Ns
bUK(Yt2,4 ; i 1 _ _ _ 1 Z
AND Nei gar WW1 Weal Pali ON TL6.t
saa - •., _ _ -
"ty 0a'ItBM ww1'
b AAy 0e $". ?KT. Leff! .I! 1 t�j Q 0
uat.f. Sal Pea pee I TWW a(/4Ojit9LE l ^..::.�: I - ...� r • �-• - i_ f- F
t.•t ON SN° stir). 4t41+JKa iAt / IN ICnaeN - . 1 II 't I
. °tJ4J t• (OYJOi): •IWt La t' WT 6.1111•J .w 1
•+se pats Otto m6TU SO LMMS lebM ol... L ., o!a.ki'• T / _ . `�
AM° • v.Nt aii4N0.te Sag* AT morel � - _ I �. / • , t
itNltiY1. If 4N ONMtj veil. T ana..e `. . 61t.Lts 'na. .i )
N
T.e (.....0“ (...(.....0“ 0 Prof on•, Matte NW teen* eves-) ill a c
•/ILL. se cott[tSO. O Nav 1...A.,* lave POW*
2%214 K M re ei4s 2,1214 K Si weirs)
L J
Lee► -
-. 0 . 1-1..4 �I.rs ..1u. el Oil ane) (u.� -• HAW LE./�L PLP64.1-14 , r ...a n.M 1f Ate Oil slum) - o ,,, � flOL
m ITCPrri 1
,
( !
4 ,
1 ,
. .
E.Ne-rik14,_04 yley _
.. ..
•
10 00 O
s . Iiiiiti .,
, W4101.0a
1■111.
\
i
gk, * ii a' „,.,K . • \ ti t
':ii!o.:1 iii, • 0 • of _.,. . ,
5 . r
I eine VI E
te r in
\,
\
14
■ - 0 -
\,, I ; .0 fi
, „.:•---"-
1 1 j � t - , i - A ,,-
\ EX16711‘161 , _
\ Ze44 \ACV ,
.,''.
. ,
•
Ib
. .
. 41.
•
. i Sited
. •
. • w l o
' I • ' ' - =926456
' \ A
A.,:: _ ni t .„,, ___„--- ; ,4-0- - i-• 0 1/4
<rn
;!1, „. , ..., • Lik -0 ti
, 1: ,.. 0 4 * \
f...trtp:
(, .10101 P II i
A , ,
„ .
•
...
4 ::-
-;/. ..-:1-‘ ,fr 4. .4 c. ■ 7
-b.. O "
e - .:•tr '" 'c .
`f•
fail
. , ' 'e b rIAP Vlev./ sheet ra
rt In ci m r 3
'A
1 l )
`
v
F y
r iik I r
4t � 111 t �� ��` � A[
o 1� _ . ail 'l
m
\: Z P :
g m F , V% _
i o
t
z
i
n
ri
,
A E .
z --
I
F `
,.. ti1/4 , 1/4;:mt. ,,,_ 1 , . .
py
' 30.'�b !VILLA OF As�nl i 9 v '�
t^, dde u MUM? § f
m cheered
T r �/ c�V 'TAVNN:susss
revised G42P o¢Tyy i1
EXHIBIT 3
MEMORANDUM
T0: Tom Baker, Planning office
FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department `2
DATE: June 14, 1988
RE: Villa of Aspen Townhouses PUD Amendment
The submitted plat must conform to the requirements listed in
section 24 -8.12 of Municipal Code.
jg /villapud
,\ --____-
BTµ STroPE
i
\ (1
f ' .-� y. �' 113
% S W w' 9B S7 fi -_ O
/ 1.- I ` \� , x rtocC l)NEr -
•
r T
-� __ „a : I I uN T 36 Z
f 1
fit-` 1�/ , .
uNrt 35
1 J r C ' at
r `' � , I _ _L_ ( Z 10 th
■ -- / -- -- c
21 1 UNrt ?q uPC, 25 : uNA u ', ' i 1- • - 1 Z Q 11,1 1
N
1 - •( - 1 . 1 'JN!'T 33 _ t LL
{
/1%-., J J . ' uNrr 3Z -
u
_l
�J C) uN R El uNrr3o uN_?1 ■
\
> ` -
r f Qry 0 FASPEN
1,1 irri Inc/ tase.-4vcr
EXHIBIT 1
SUBJECT PROPERTY/ZONING
- d I 3 f , - 4 -, L3 - 0 ' ft; I • - : - 13",:.'fi",;E:
, — . r, 1 : f .i't L. .1, . rt- •f.,,, -
, ..., ;-,,,- ' - ' 1 , . i- 1 i n
sr 1 ,1 L A I - 4 t , t I '
. i ,4i ; 4 , - i: ' '• ! : 1 ' • t.' * p
-1•:"4 4.1 ti ' ,. 1 : , i i...-4u , ,
,... , R , 7 j , 3 33 : '-• I fiz g 71; ktf iiii): tgi . :4
-/ ''• .; ; ..... t `t • ; 4 :•: ; 'I 1 1,' i -. % ill I a 14 k -? - )
" t - 14 lee-4 F' 4'1/4;3: r%.: 4 ' t}' t-:-):" 4,-4-7:-:iii}17:714k•
ft . 3:ft 4 ti ';;;-, Z
77 ?- --ft: : . !..';', .11 t a'S.: i.S.i-.411.4.z
i
7...:4 r ilk: ‘ ..„-awii; 4. itto 9 , 1 -7 1 i 4,4‘,4 At' i7 t
1
AA1 ' ..' !1.tarii..4 -Ill ttt 7, .:i ;1-1":3. 1,1 NI ):
,:f • : "!: . 1::' ', ti if. ' fic- i .`.• 4 :` 4 t 1 ...i i 4; 1 ni. 1'k
A 4' -!•• i ils4 L wi t; 4, i 4 ‘.,) . ":41- . -..fi %giFify: : ,
' - *II' " ?::.; :;; t:::•4 it: li . l'. IN 44, , ''''i: ".;;.,: `j - .4a --- .'1'.1.;:!•- 4 ., t- ..,'_ L :I- Ntii. .
, ... 4ii ii .. t . , i ,:i1144, , • • • . . . !, •,14,'.p„tr,_; '44 i
4 ' 4
Is 1 _ . - A ,, n. i " • ,•., kr -i 4, r4 *, ..„.„.
---;;;;. 3 - .. 1.. • - v- A.. :-. - . 4 „.. 4 r,3 ' • 4 .-,,4 . •., c;', ': , ifr, )0 , 4, -,•,,- i • - d e. ,,t
im195.:1*. - . ••• r .. t t! . - IP '9. Ob '4 giit .4 ,'. Oi 45: 41
4
„:. ,•, p I 4404 '.4 I 'A I . .q.," , -- - -": , f
:kr
. iiit 1 ..'.i) .:- ' frtoiiiii V'? ''''', ' - 1 ' Yell ketigtne-i''P%-l% re%! tHt'e
0 ti .: , i:u;',4 - ii]. ' ii ' . • , iviliffi th
44?4, 4 0 . 4- 47.64,- - .: 4 4 .4 '''' ' - m
3.,,
, tit 4, ‘. ts • •- '44.- -......4,411/4, .. iattvgi.Af rc----41::•i44,'''''‘.4A1 ' li•;14.Pt...4"'i+L;t7;:
k ,thitini tlff n: . ,,._, -., ,,,, -- t.in ktr- f' k i l bfl...'47,:i.';r:km -:-
t
s
, ... I:4r%! :7: .... , - - ! - 1 ' i its.7, , . ,i.:01, tit 1 :$:?{*x.',, i'....0,
• . - "'. - ' `1 ,4 .}: iiir:t ki'-i I tr' t .- c-'-: •; .. ' ' 4 ' '^ii tt it
— •—• "i'AlAtt 1.4 A . '^ t-T :64 Lti •l• 41 `r i Cfli 41p, e 1' f . '4 . , 7, . -' ;
k b, •"- -,. :, ., _ ' c .i iii.: .i• : . -.: Li. -,i.z.-,.:a.-4,g1 i - . ',, .. .
. i,tick ,.-,4??4,tir P L ' • . --',::'-'1-• "33 ' C . 3- , '3 .• ;A: „,: ztici, ,v_,,,,.,• . .., ! 4
•, 0- , .,-- , -. „ ._, • ,‘: ,. . , •..! ,, • 4.542ii.,Thi:-??.•iy...,,,,pf,-,f y.-•:.,,, i., „.„4--•!17.4,
. ,, ,-.... , ,,4 , !.4,-,i,; .it-c-,_ ;.- . . , r, :•.! - . , '& •
CT 41 5 . ...4 • „,,,,,,y„.„4,!..• ;F:i.",,,f;:..1%•%,34-„:.-t:w...vc-,„:;,,...-.i..„-,;4,-..... %! - %e-ff -
! 7. - :l [%; %; r %:?'• %%2' :1-
i iiy - ,i . - ) - - , - ' i i i"iiiit4)-i" , - - , ' ... -4-,...i.iii‘ti - ;-'1"- 4 -i- -4 "i 'Th • - ',.•
' ' 4 , )'•) - •i 1 ;i k•-• : , i:Tlit .4 ;.;,. 4 : ') • '. ;.' ' -' ..; : i . -(414 4
"-- , - - ,i, ' '.. - ii"i'''' ''•!-1 •i ".; h. ;;',i ;; .: :•
,i. 4:: :••• ' ' ' -i. r i * .i i: 4 :4` 14 •4":-. : ) • :•4-"P-4 llVk ; ,' -) !'fri".. it ii '•:- i -. .; - -; t i'' J 3433 t . : 1 t C :t I tt ! [•It ' 1 ' ' i . i ...I • E VI ;7
I•• 1 41, ‘311 \ - C ':- '1 . 33;33'l.q 3 ., ?.:.. 1 3 / 1 4: 4 41:r 4 , i.. 1 :, :t
fli i';.:-•fiit..). 'i."' ' ' . - -- ."' •.-.- , i .. -. i
,p
.ii. )-4: ..-:. -„ii ` r ‘L.,..i7:(7):, ' • ,...:"..,:: : : tAit; is 14;;....? iipt 1 4 'i •11,-r.3!.,).4,,,•.•..
*•.:„. it.. . , ... „ ., . , .. . ....., , t , , .. .., r t i;,:.t..
„totiLH' :•' ty -: : - , - ,vti - ,i', 4 ' ;3-E .j. 4 P: ii' •-• • t 4. . 44-'..wi!, ': '. c .k... -. - ..."/4 , ..."•: .5 ;- ,3 .. , . ' .
. „ 4...
,
34 - . - - - ; , .4 -: ti !_- "r* " -. • 4 A- ,fa.:{ i ',, '' .
, • !: . \ -. -4&mtift44 Ifet;Mi2;fiti, Lte ' `A.t. • : "7- 'I s ;. , .' . t ' - ` 4%% : %/4 ‘ 4,.! : H '%% %4Y % ' 4 %
-e i.i144.,
■ I ' ' 3 3 ' . . . 4: j,;,744.114,11f).•qi; — .t..- ' , .,.. - .'i. ji "'J.-4 2 :34 - 4 iti ft HI :4: ;3C-1 . C 3
3 ' • . • -i 3r.4.3-:e'• .
i,,144: ,, *i3SY-41,,k331-4,4,311kii443;4 PI-
3 ; 3 r : -43. ', '• - . ,CV13:4' f aiAt. Ft, -...-.. `‘, 19 :::i4 , 1-4.f i . ;;;-*--, '.:: •-
- let! iv, - -iii7-' ,- - ; , :ii:e r ; :'. , r , i'..;. :z k : -', "it'.. 4--r. .:. 44 ; p i
-
t
- • - , ,
A l ,, • -AI 4;iiiiki'n .I ,-A' •it:hfriv4
• • : - A ,C1 . - ' ' ". :14i)., '-.7:0;.1?-i., ',,i4::,1/4111::': i.1'4.1." „ .44 ,- 44;,‘1;„•rt,,,„,,, , -„.x„..,!,
.ilii.:4
' I 1 - i . ' .' 4 . lit V.S45 .. rtk. : 2: '. ' .;.:":::ittic:i'..?.. " 1 ..14 0 i- :.•-.1.,..W..4.,N,I-Ar.4? t !", •:.<, •:4-4311 .
; ; - I .-I, iti.::•-•,..44p4. ., :: Vtirt,';?;; . ' ii,„ it§tiz ot: si .'..:: itt t=„41.4. tri 1 .
, 1 ..1. i . „".• -i-, ;:.•••.; 4-,,,, . , ;& ,. .tt:• . :• ,. 1 mr.,s r ,c 4 , :d , st•-4,41,:..., piter.4 •,,,-.4 , •• •• f• .* , •
. i : 4 4,•„..,,,,t.. - : , ,fro.p.•&1,,,J., , ,„, .. - -., . ...„ )4,-,:h.7.411.144:ts,,- - , 2,4 .....:, : t .
r 4
.i.
:.:,;:scl,r_.,
4 i
' : ' 4114-11-A,',4P4,44.4f. 3 s. *1 '4 -", ' r. ' C , ',7,;st• ---iiiti'y 'VW,1 : n .. ,;:tli l't.-=.4z %%r %%4C% ze
i
1 ,:;. „%:- :10 rf714%.7.,,,A%t.4% tl 4 e l‘ ' -c -e • I
%%•;, ? %
4 %%% I '
tt I"
C. Welton Anderson and Associates
Box 9946
Aspen, Colorado 81612
Dear Welton:
Upon reviewing your request for an "Insubstantial Amendment" to
the Villas of Aspen Townhouse PUD the Planning Office has
determined that your application qualifies. We will, however,
require that you address each of the criteria in Sec. 7 -907 A in
writing for our records. Additionally, the Planning Office will
require as a condition of approval that the homeowners and the
homeowners association agree to rebuild these units if the
Planning and Zoning Commission makes substantial changes to or
disapproves the PUD Amendment. I will be preparing the
appropriate documents between now and the time I receive your
letter.
Sincerely,
Thomas M. Baker
Principal Planner
cc: Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director
Fred Gannett, Assistant City Attorney
insub
w, ✓
C Welton Anderson & Associates Architects
Alan Richmann 6 May 1988
Planning and Development Director
Dear Alan,
Pursuant to Sec. 7 -907 of the revised code, the Villa of Aspen Townhouse
Association wishes to make an "Insubstantial Amendment" to the PUD in order to
build 5 prototype units identical to the plans A,B, and C shown in our PUD
Amendment application now in your office. By signing off administratively, this
will permit us to 1).anticipate potential construction problems in advance of
the construction of the full project, 2). provide physical examples for association
members to choose from (model houses), and 3). allow several owners to expand
their units now.
This request is in conformance with all provisions of Sec. 7 -907 A and will
not exceed 2% of the existing 63,360 SF FAR or 1267 square feet.
The association agrees to be responsible for rebuilding these units to conform
to the approved PUD if it is changed in any substantial way during the
PUD Amendment approval process.
Sincerely,
C. Welton Anderson
Planning / Architecture / Interior Design Box 9946 / Aspen ,Colorado 81612/(303) 925-4576
VILLA OF ASPEN TOWNHOUSE ASSOCIATION
C/O Computer Accounting Services
P.O. Box 9166
Aspen, Colorado 81612
May 2, 1988
City of Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission
Aspen City Council
130 S. Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Sirs:
This letter is to serve as a formal request for your
consideration of the PUD amendment for the Villa of Aspen
Townhomes. We are requesting the approval for additions to some
of our units as well as some minor exterior improvements which we
are hoping to complete this summer.
We've enclosed all the appropriate applications, proposed
building plans and other drawings which should be sufficient for
you to make your determination on our application.
We look forward to your approval of our plans and working with
you toward full compliance and approval as defined by the City of
Aspen Code.
Sincerely,
Villa of Aspen Townhouses
Association Directors
CF /jlp
N./ Lt. - s -� �, 4 " t1 -.
♦'L.AI - ' 1 G- tit/. 4-. -y_ roi_ FL... ? u b
/ z . / G fry A
^ na + a 2—e v uC f w " r� .A "f'a M.
t•7
Fri - tio —
•
acr- r ✓ 1,
VILLA OF ASPEN TOWNHOUSE ASSOCIATION
C/O Computer Accounting Services
P.O. Box 9166
Aspen, Colorado 81612
May 2, 1988
City of Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission
Aspen City Council
130 S. Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Sirs:
This letter is to serve as a formal request for your
consideration of the PUD amendment for the Villa of Aspen
Townhomes. We are requesting the approval for additions to some
of our units as well as some minor exterior improvements which we
are hoping to complete this summer.
We've enclosed all the appropriate applications, proposed
building plans and other drawings which should be sufficient for
you to make your determination on our application.
We look forward to your approval of our plans and working with
you toward full compliance and approval as defined by the City of
Aspen Code.
Sincerely,
Villa of Aspen Townhouses
Association Directors
CF /jlp
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
FROM: Tom Baker, Planning Office
RE: Villa of Aspen Townhouses PUD Amendment
DATE: May 9, 1988
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted
by the Villa of Aspen Townhouses, requesting PUD Amendment to
construct one of three remodel schemes so to enclose the deck as
part of remodeling and upgrade of the project.
Please review this material and return your comments no later
than June 9, 1988 in order for this office to have adequate time
to prepare for its presentation before P &Z.
Thank you.
d
ASPEN /PITRIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
� ,/� �/yt (303) 925 20
"\VI' v Date: 4o( (( 198 a
Sala /
1,00 ( (i Xlb iY"
RE:
' I l' \ \c' o f Pksra-. e`)o &_L1
Dear _ Wi �'`� /
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined
that your application IS NOT complete.
Additional items required include:
Disclosure of Ownership (one copy only needed)
Adjacent Property Owners List /Envelopes /Postage (one copy)
Additional copies of entire application
1( Authorizat by owner for representative to submit applica
tion - ' \ K-K Re- 4,.-L'- '1.0•Aw,. -s "5°" 0 2 6na-Q
Response to list of items (attached /below) demonstrating
compliance with the applicable policies and regulations of the
Code, or other specific materials
A check in the amount of $ vat. earm.s.mA
K A. Yodr applicatio is completenand we have scheduled it for
review by the ��� on •w S - We will
call you if we need any additional information prior to that
date. Several days prior to your hearing, we will call and
make available a copy of the memorandum.. Please note that it
IS NOT your responsibility to post your property with a
sign, which we can provide you for a $3.00 fee.
_
B. Your application is incomplete, we have not scheduled it
review at this time. When we receive the materials we have
requested, we will place you on the next available agenda.
Qb � AKe&
If you have any questions, please call
the planner assigned to your case.
Sincerely,
ASPEN /PITRIN PLANNING OFFICE
j ai{
we.A'C : YS ,nQ...J C Vic) e" A'T ` ` to
�pw S`.�o 6L WO 0.`-∎+( W.Vk 1..•-